314 réponses à ce sujet

[Texhnolyze101]

i play other games than RPG's and im defiantly not a hardcore RPG player but i loved origins and found DA:RTP boring

[Scimal]

erynnar wrote...

Again *sigh* that assanine argument rears it's head.  The "the ones who don't like DA2 are afraid of change," or "they want to go backwards."

My argument was that the OP's plan was too expensive and EA won't return to DA:O's style because DA2's gameplay was generally praised over DA:O's (outside of two sub-forums here) and it'd be easier to take what you have and fix what you can instead of reconstructing an older version.

The rest of your post is taking issue with one word I said for convenience alone, and if you get upset to the point that you feel the need to swear and spout ill-formed opinions because of a single word, I would rather you debate with me in private. I will gladly do so in a civlized manner with references and proper logical arguments.

Until then, keep things on topic, please?

[Tommy6860]

Scimal wrote...


My argument was that the OP's plan was too expensive and EA won't return to DA:O's style because DA2's gameplay was generally praised over DA:O's (outside of two sub-forums here) and it'd be easier to take what you have and fix what you can instead of reconstructing an older version.

Exactly where do you get that DA2 was generally praised over Origins gameplay? Outside of here, would be media outlets and gaming sites (please clarify)? If going by their measures, DA2 is substantially lower than Origins was in the score aggregates.

[Scimal]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Exactly where do you get that DA2 was generally praised over Origins gameplay? Outside of here, would be media outlets and gaming sites (please clarify)? If going by their measures, DA2 is substantially lower than Origins was in the score aggregates.

http://www.destructo...ii-196964.phtml
"Each movement or attack feels more responsive, and each class' "closing attacks" -- designed to move in close to an enemy -- eliminate the trodding, shuffling combat of Origins..."

http://www.tentonham...s/dragon-age-ii
"Combat maneuvers and skill trees have been revamped and overhauled in fairly significant ways from DA:O resulting in a much more fluid and brutal combat system...."

http://www.cpugamer....n-age-ii-review
"The melee combat is far more engaging this time around. The abilities tend to come about faster and the combat animations are smoother in general..."

http://www.rpgamer.c...age2strev1.html
"The battle system is the absolute best part of Dragon Age II. It's a large step forward and the natural progression of Origins's console battle system..."

http://www.atomicgam...n-age-ii-review
"And fighting here is quite a bit more exciting, too, as you'll find that all classes have larger-than-life moves..."

I'm not going to bother with Metacritic user reviews because most of those are so blatantly and obviously biased that they don't even make attempts to elaborate on their viewpoints.

And before you go there; no, not all of the links I put up go to high-scoring reviews.

Modifié par Scimal, 10 mai 2011 - 02:39 .

[erynnar]

Scimal wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Again *sigh* that assanine argument rears it's head.  The "the ones who don't like DA2 are afraid of change," or "they want to go backwards."

My argument was that the OP's plan was too expensive and EA won't return to DA:O's style because DA2's gameplay was generally praised over DA:O's (outside of two sub-forums here) and it'd be easier to take what you have and fix what you can instead of reconstructing an older version.

The rest of your post is taking issue with one word I said for convenience alone, and if you get upset to the point that you feel the need to swear and spout ill-formed opinions because of a single word, I would rather you debate with me in private. I will gladly do so in a civlized manner with references and proper logical arguments.

Until then, keep things on topic, please?

No we can keep debating here. And I was civil, I apologize if my words were such that it appeared not to be. I am just tired of that being bandied about as one of the arguments or straw men as to why people who don't like the game, to be taken as trolls, or that our arguments are not valid. Again my apologies if I offended, but I don't suffer under that argument lightly without comment.

And your comment that DA2's gameplay style is praised over DAO's is not on topic with this thread really either. But I am willing to overlook that. I would love links to where DA2's gameplay is generally praised over DAO's.

Edited to say thank you! Scmial! I will read with relish, I mean excitement...not say pickle relish.

Modifié par erynnar, 10 mai 2011 - 02:40 .

[Scimal]

erynnar wrote...

No we can keep debating here.

No. We won't. It takes two to tango in a debate, and I'm not debating with you in this thread over the various interpretations of DA2's qualities.

I am just tired of that being bandied about as one of the arguments or straw men as to why people who don't like the game, to be taken as trolls, or that our arguments are not valid. Again my apologies if I offended, but I don't suffer under that argument lightly without comment.

It wasn't an argument. I was a convenient choice of words. I chose "back" because it's the easiest to visualize given that DA:O chronologically preceded DA2.

You mistook it for an argument.

And your comment that DA2's gameplay style is praised over DAO's is not on topic with this thread really either. But I am willing to overlook that. I would love links to where DA2's gameplay is generally praised over DAO's.

Which I have recently provided. Enjoy.

[DanConnors]

Hell, pay me enough money and I'll write a good review of Dragon Age 2 (followed by a long, hot shower and vigorous hand washing).

[neppakyo]

erynnar wrote...
Edited to say thank you! Scmial! I will read with relish, I mean excitement...not say pickle relish.

You into the alcohol again? <.<

I don't really like DA2's combat at all. I do admit its a bit more balanced in some aspects, but overall I think it blows.

I would of muched preferred to have DA:O's combat, but you know, with the collision bugs fixed, A little bit faster speed, especially for the two handers, nothing comical as DA2. Oh, and fix DA:O's crab walk with weapons drawn. (There is a mod to fix that for DA:O tho). I found the animations superior to DA2, and ofcourse those finisher moves

*backs slowly away from the thread*

[erynnar]

Scimal wrote...

erynnar wrote...

No we can keep debating here.

No. We won't. It takes two to tango in a debate, and I'm not debating with you in this thread over the various interpretations of DA2's qualities.

I am just tired of that being bandied about as one of the arguments or straw men as to why people who don't like the game, to be taken as trolls, or that our arguments are not valid. Again my apologies if I offended, but I don't suffer under that argument lightly without comment.

It wasn't an argument. I was a convenient choice of words. I chose "back" because it's the easiest to visualize given that DA:O chronologically preceded DA2.

You mistook it for an argument.

And your comment that DA2's gameplay style is praised over DAO's is not on topic with this thread really either. But I am willing to overlook that. I would love links to where DA2's gameplay is generally praised over DAO's.

Which I have recently provided. Enjoy.

I meant debate if you wanted to. Sorry, again I misinterpretted what you meant. And I like having discussions about things, agreeing to disagree and all too. So, no worries. And thanks again for the posts. I will read them.

[erynnar]

neppakyo wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Edited to say thank you! Scmial! I will read with relish, I mean excitement...not say pickle relish.

You into the alcohol again? <.<

I don't really like DA2's combat at all. I do admit its a bit more balanced in some aspects, but overall I think it blows.

I would of muched preferred to have DA:O's combat, but you know, with the collision bugs fixed, A little bit faster speed, especially for the two handers, nothing comical as DA2. Oh, and fix DA:O's crab walk with weapons drawn. (There is a mod to fix that for DA:O tho). I found the animations superior to DA2, and ofcourse those finisher moves

*backs slowly away from the thread*

Same here. I liked the animations, but the combat blew big bloody gibbet chunks...like the eniemies that swallowed grenades. DAO's combat (sans crab walk and the two hander problems) would have suited me just fine. DAO sped up with the new animations (especially the mages, no more poking the air with a stick).

[erynnar]

DanConnors wrote...

Hell, pay me enough money and I'll write a good review of Dragon Age 2 (followed by a long, hot shower and vigorous hand washing).

ROFL!!! True. And I would argue there are plenty of well thought out user reviews on metacritic for and against the game. Some are scored funny because I think the person failed to move the tab ( ie I have seen 10 scores on ones that people hated the game).

[marshalleck]

Meh, I think Bioware is done for. I've yet to see any sign of enthusiasm or anticipation for TOR outside of TOR-specific gaming communities, or MMO communities in general. This is a game that's seriously draining EA's coffers and if it flops it's really going to hurt the company. So OP's question is IMO moot--in the next one or two years I think we're going to see a dramatic down-sizing of the Bioware studios to the extent that they're only able to maintain a handful of TOR servers and minimal development via biannual content patches. Everything else related to the production of single-player games will be shut down. 

Modifié par marshalleck, 10 mai 2011 - 03:13 .

[Boiny Bunny]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Assuming they made a mistake is opinion. If I am not wrong Bioware is already broken into four development teams which are working on different projects. I do not see EA/Bioware making more teams unless they are working on new IP. Also what about the writers. It hard enough to write for one game. Now you want to spread the resouces even thinner. Becuase it is not likely EA will hire more writers and be able to keep story continuity. I do not see the return on investment either.

Actually, the writers do get shifted around at Bioware sometimes.  Drew Karpyshyn was the lead writer on ME1, but was then moved to writing the Jedi story in TOR.  As far as we know, he contributed some elements to the ME2 plot, and gave Mac an idea of where the trilogy plot was going to end up, and that's about it.

[KilrB]

DanConnors wrote...

     This may or may not have been said before, but I'll say it again.  THE BASIC MISTAKE IS TO TRY TO MAKE A GAME THAT WILL APPEAL TO COMPUTER GAME PLAYERS AND CONSOLE GAME PLAYERS.
     By and large the two groups of users are quite different.  It seems that developers have quit making games solely for PC users even though there are over a billion personal computers in use.  Microsoft is largely responsible for that with their constant release of new OS's (each one designed to make previous versions obsolete).  This effort shows up in DA2 which will not allow Windows XP users to upgrade their video, even though my quad core, 8 thread, 6 Gbyte RAM, 1 TByte HDD was perfectly capable of doing so.  It's had no trouble upgrading video for any other newly released game.  It might be interesting to check and see if EA got any money from Microsoft for this gesture.
     If developers have come to believe that it's a waste of money to try to develope games that will appeal to a potential market of one billion users, that's a sad commentary on the whole industry.  Another check that can be made relatively easily is to see what percentage of DAO sails were to PC users and what to console game players.  Then do the same to DA2.  If the check shows DAO had more PC buyers and DA2 more console game buyers, that's a clear indication, to me, that EA is beginning to abandon its PC user base.  If that's true they will continue to ignore the complaints from their former fans.

Interesting.

I had thoughts in a similar vein.

There are basically two kinds of gamers.

Those who play games to PLAY them, and those who play games to BEAT them.

DA:O is a game made for the former, DA2 for the latter.

[Realmzmaster]

DanConnors wrote...

     This may or may not have been said before, but I'll say it again.  THE BASIC MISTAKE IS TO TRY TO MAKE A GAME THAT WILL APPEAL TO COMPUTER GAME PLAYERS AND CONSOLE GAME PLAYERS.
     By and large the two groups of users are quite different.  It seems that developers have quit making games solely for PC users even though there are over a billion personal computers in use.  Microsoft is largely responsible for that with their constant release of new OS's (each one designed to make previous versions obsolete).  This effort shows up in DA2 which will not allow Windows XP users to upgrade their video, even though my quad core, 8 thread, 6 Gbyte RAM, 1 TByte HDD was perfectly capable of doing so.  It's had no trouble upgrading video for any other newly released game.  It might be interesting to check and see if EA got any money from Microsoft for this gesture.
     If developers have come to believe that it's a waste of money to try to develope games that will appeal to a potential market of one billion users, that's a sad commentary on the whole industry.  Another check that can be made relatively easily is to see what percentage of DAO sales were to PC users and what to console game players.  Then do the same to DA2.  If the check shows DAO had more PC buyers and DA2 more console game buyers, that's a clear indication, to me, that EA is beginning to abandon its PC user base.  If that's true they will continue to ignore the complaints from their former fans.

Yes there are over one billion personal computers, but a vast majority of those are owned by casual gamers. A great many are in businesses. Many are not used to play games. The market for PC games is smaller that console gaames. The market for CRPGs is even a smaller part of the PC game market.
For example DAO only sold 4 million or 4.5 million copies out of that 1 billion computers available which equals 0.4%.
The console market is bigger than the PC market. It makes no economical sense to develop a title just for the PC market. It does make sense to just develop for the console market which is bigger.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 10 mai 2011 - 04:45 .

[erynnar]

KilrB wrote...

DanConnors wrote...

     This may or may not have been said before, but I'll say it again.  THE BASIC MISTAKE IS TO TRY TO MAKE A GAME THAT WILL APPEAL TO COMPUTER GAME PLAYERS AND CONSOLE GAME PLAYERS.
     By and large the two groups of users are quite different.  It seems that developers have quit making games solely for PC users even though there are over a billion personal computers in use.  Microsoft is largely responsible for that with their constant release of new OS's (each one designed to make previous versions obsolete).  This effort shows up in DA2 which will not allow Windows XP users to upgrade their video, even though my quad core, 8 thread, 6 Gbyte RAM, 1 TByte HDD was perfectly capable of doing so.  It's had no trouble upgrading video for any other newly released game.  It might be interesting to check and see if EA got any money from Microsoft for this gesture.
     If developers have come to believe that it's a waste of money to try to develope games that will appeal to a potential market of one billion users, that's a sad commentary on the whole industry.  Another check that can be made relatively easily is to see what percentage of DAO sails were to PC users and what to console game players.  Then do the same to DA2.  If the check shows DAO had more PC buyers and DA2 more console game buyers, that's a clear indication, to me, that EA is beginning to abandon its PC user base.  If that's true they will continue to ignore the complaints from their former fans.

Interesting.

I had thoughts in a similar vein.

There are basically two kinds of gamers.

Those who play games to PLAY them, and those who play games to BEAT them.

DA:O is a game made for the former, DA2 for the latter.

I play games to play them. My husband plays to beat them, then play them. We're both PC gamers.

[Morroian]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

False statement, DAO has over 4 million in sold through sales, 

You got a link for that figure. I thought it was 3.2M and like the sales thread here its shipped.

[Anyroad2]

Ive said it a lot, and I'll say it again...

I love DA2. Its not as good as DAO was overall, but there were major improvements made in this sequel. DA2 also has its problems, many of which change on a player to player basis. Things like recycled maps, 90% of the gear being trash and less flexibility when specing your companions are a few of mine. However, DA2 is still a good game. I enjoy playing it and would rather be playing this then most anything else on the market right now.

Hopefully Bioware/EA will listen to its customers and make positives changes based on the criticism that DA2 received. That way, DA3 will be even better.

[DanConnors]

      DAO only sold 4 million copies--ok.  In the record industry you get a gold medal for selling 1 million copies of a record that sells for less than 20 dollars. Four million copies at 50 bucks a pop is 200 million dollars.  This is not chump change.  Assuming a team total of 200 people over 5 years, that equates to 1000 man years.  Assuming an average yearly salary of 50,000 dollars per person, that's 50 million dollars.  Production costs, advertising, shipping: another 50 million.  That leaves a 100 million dollar profit for the efforts of 200 people over 5 years, or about 100,000 dollars profit per person per year.  If the US auto industry, employing 2 million workers, did as well its profits would average 200 billion dollars a year.
     Last time I checked the US auto industry was about 3 steps away from going bankrupt, requesting government loans, trying to cut employees' salaries, etc.  So, I really don't see a problem with making a game that, only, sells 4 million copies.

[0x30A88]

Learn of what made their name so known are their games so good and stick to that. Action and over-the-top combat isn't what Bioware are good at. Try to follow the eaxmple of DA:O rather than DA2 in terms of gameplay mechanics.

[0x30A88]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Yes there are over one billion personal computers, but a vast majority of those are owned by casual gamers. A great many are in businesses. Many are not used to play games. The market for PC games is smaller that console gaames. The market for CRPGs is even a smaller part of the PC game market.
For example DAO only sold 4 million or 4.5 million copies out of that 1 billion computers available which equals 0.4%.
The console market is bigger than the PC market. It makes no economical sense to develop a title just for the PC market. It does make sense to just develop for the console market which is bigger.

I think I have to demand some kind of statistic proof explaining how the
console market is overwhelmingly large compared to the PC market, for
last I checked, PC had 50% of the market while all consoles shared the
other half.

Though console users aren't drooling zombies who wants an over-the-top simple game.

[Oban1961]

I just came across this article: BioWare: The Cracks Are Starting To Show.
It's a bit more about ME3 than DA2, but the author's worries are close to those expressed here and in other threads.

I never cared about Mass Effect myself - I prefer "full" RPGs to all these hybrids with some "RPG elements" in them. I thought of Dragon Age as Bioware's RPG franchise and of ME as their action-y money maker. DA2 proved me wrong - it's not an RPG at all (imho). ~suppressing urge to rant

My rambling gets more and more off-topic. Sorry.

I only wanted to present the following quote to OP. I think it's the only way to go.

BioWare, if you want to make a third person shooter, then do it. But do you have to mutilate your RPG franchises in the process of doing so? Do you think it is wise to neglect your fans and your games in favor of money? If so, I cannot fault you for being a company trying to make a buck. It just won’t be my buck anymore.

Modifié par Oban1961, 10 mai 2011 - 10:44 .

[AkiKishi]

I don't think you make RPGs to make money. Too much redundancy and waste in the design for a game that is played once, or not finished (in the majority).

You make them because that is what you want to make. Like the guys making the Witcher2 etc.
EA need big numbers to see them over the lean times, it's not enough to have a good quarter,you need to stay in the black yearly.
while 1-2 million sounds nice, it won't really cut it for EA year round.

[Redneck1st]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I don't think you make RPGs to make money. Too much redundancy and waste in the design for a game that is played once, or not finished (in the majority).

You make them because that is what you want to make. Like the guys making the Witcher2 etc.
EA need big numbers to see them over the lean times, it's not enough to have a good quarter,you need to stay in the black yearly.
while 1-2 million sounds nice, it won't really cut it for EA year round.

Well now I can only imagine what it costs them to make an RPG with everything for which goes into one of the games. So I highly doubt that those for which make them aren't looking to turn a profit. After all the've got bills and Salaries to cover. So don't think that they don't make them to make money as I and allot of others will fully disagree with you on.

Like I said in an earlier post the main thing that didn't do it for me not the game engine and how it was changed but the over all story or lack there of and nothing tied together with anything. It was like they took a bunch of  quest and threw them together with no ultimate goal in mind. That and given the fact of the lack of choices in DA2 was also a big let down.

In DAO you could choose between three races; noble or poor, male or female. And with the various combinations of  rogue, mage, warrior it made for more playability. Then you could dual wield, sword &Shield, bow and many others for the rogue or warrior. Than thats not counting the different ways for which you can do various quests like siding with the Dalish or the werewolves; and more. And than the different endings as well Making Alister King, marrying Alister, etc led to different endings as well.  So many options gave the game lots more replayability than that for which DA2 gives us.

Not to mention the fact that the gear for which you find is allot better and worth more. You don't get a few silver for things.

As you can see I'm looking at the over all of both games Not just one or the other.

[Tommy6860]

Scimal wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Exactly where do you get that DA2 was generally praised over Origins gameplay? Outside of here, would be media outlets and gaming sites (please clarify)? If going by their measures, DA2 is substantially lower than Origins was in the score aggregates.

http://www.destructo...ii-196964.phtml
"Each movement or attack feels more responsive, and each class' "closing attacks" -- designed to move in close to an enemy -- eliminate the trodding, shuffling combat of Origins..."

http://www.tentonham...s/dragon-age-ii
"Combat maneuvers and skill trees have been revamped and overhauled in fairly significant ways from DA:O resulting in a much more fluid and brutal combat system...."

http://www.cpugamer....n-age-ii-review
"The melee combat is far more engaging this time around. The abilities tend to come about faster and the combat animations are smoother in general..."

http://www.rpgamer.c...age2strev1.html
"The battle system is the absolute best part of Dragon Age II. It's a large step forward and the natural progression of Origins's console battle system..."

http://www.atomicgam...n-age-ii-review
"And fighting here is quite a bit more exciting, too, as you'll find that all classes have larger-than-life moves..."

I'm not going to bother with Metacritic user reviews because most of those are so blatantly and obviously biased that they don't even make attempts to elaborate on their viewpoints.

And before you go there; no, not all of the links I put up go to high-scoring reviews.

Oh, but I will go there and it doesn't matter if you chose low or high scores to make a point for good measure. That's why I don't bite on gaming site reviews. I could go ahead and pick some bad scores and throw in a good one as well for another view, but that isn't the correct overall picture. My contention to your claim is that you said DA2 was generally praised over Origins.

But since you're using gaming site scores, I have dismissed those claims. Seriously, they are subjective since those sites are ad-dollar supported (not all though). Give me independent sites or nothing. But, since you used that, I'll give you Gamerankings aggregate scores between the two games gleaned from all of the review sites, it isn't pretty.

Origins (PC) aggregate overall ranking among gaming site reviews: 90.50%

DA2 (PC) aggregate overall ranking among gaming site reviews: 78.92%

Using all platforms gives about the same result as an average.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 10 mai 2011 - 01:03 .