182 réponses à ce sujet

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

http://xbox360.ign.c.../1168985p1.html

I believe this article mirrors the sentiments of alot of rpg fans on this forum. Please discuss.

[Savber100]

"Somewhere during the two-year regeneration of Shepard between the first and second titles, the Mass Effect universe gave up on item-carrying and huge skill-trees in favour of simplified, dynamic levelling and looting. By reducing the choice players had in regards to levelling or loot selection, BioWare was able to create a more cohesive and uniform storyline for all players. While this shift worked for Mass Effect, it rang hollow when applied to Dragon Age II. After being sold as the modern re-imagining of the classic PC games of yore, its 180-degree refocus away from the elements that made it so special in the first case made the game feel empty and cold by comparison. "

THIS sums it all up perfectly. ;P

[inkjay]

^ Of course. It worked for Mass Effect because the game was born on the promise of a cinematic experience/action sci fi game in which you are essentially a space marine. The combat is based on shooting mechanics (which is the most popular genre of the generation) with the added stitch of biotic powers. When ME2 improved those combat mechanics to make it more "shooter like" it was in service of the game. I still don't like that they took away item customization and exploration, but I can't fault them for feeling that its third person shooter RPG needed better shooting and more action.

In contrast DA2 fell short on the promises of the first and removed core defining elements of the genre it was supposed to be referencing. I'd hate to be the idiot who had the brilliant idea of moving DA2 in that direction, honestly. He should be boo'ed into the building every day.

[bobspoland]

you know there are other RPG out there to play if you don't like DA:2. I for one enjoyed it. Im getting fed up with all this DA:2 and bioware bashing...not every game you play is going to please everyone i accept that, and others need to aswell.

And for the ones who can't accept all these changes to DA:2...simple solution trade your game in..ie GAME or gamestation here in the uk.

[Dr Bawbag]

Sad thing is, other games that don't try to be rpg's, but borrow certain elements from rpg's do it a lot better than DA2 did.

I really think BioWare had an idea in their head but executed it poorly. And like the article itself touched upon, DA2 would probably have been received better had it been a new title, but to suddenly steer away from what made the first game so compelling just beggars belief. That's not to say the first game didn't have faults, it did, but it wasn't trying to be something it wasn't if that makes sense.

[Travie]

Savber100 wrote...

"Somewhere during the two-year regeneration of Shepard between the first and second titles, the Mass Effect universe gave up on item-carrying and huge skill-trees in favour of simplified, dynamic levelling and looting. By reducing the choice players had in regards to levelling or loot selection, BioWare was able to create a more cohesive and uniform storyline for all players. While this shift worked for Mass Effect, it rang hollow when applied to Dragon Age II. After being sold as the modern re-imagining of the classic PC games of yore, its 180-degree refocus away from the elements that made it so special in the first case made the game feel empty and cold by comparison. "

THIS sums it all up perfectly. ;P

This, a thousand times this.

[Dr Bawbag]

bobspoland wrote...

you know there are other RPG out there to play if you don't like DA:2. I for one enjoyed it. Im getting fed up with all this DA:2 and bioware bashing...not every game you play is going to please everyone i accept that, and others need to aswell.

And for the ones who can't accept all these changes to DA:2...simple solution trade your game in..ie GAME or gamestation here in the uk.

Your post has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion.  Make your own topic if you're wanting to spout your irrelevant nonsense.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

bobspoland wrote...

you know there are other RPG out there to play if you don't like DA:2. I for one enjoyed it. Im getting fed up with all this DA:2 and bioware bashing...not every game you play is going to please everyone i accept that, and others need to aswell.

And for the ones who can't accept all these changes to DA:2...simple solution trade your game in..ie GAME or gamestation here in the uk.

i did not open this topic with the intention to DA2 bash. Merely to discuss flaws the game had. I personally loved DA2. but it was no where near a perfect game. In light of the success and critical acclaim of a recently released RPG i thought it could only be beneficial to discuss what made origins and DA2 tick and what they may have failed at.

[Dr Bawbag]

Edit

Modifié par Dr Bawbag, 20 mai 2011 - 04:42 .

[Beerfish]

This goes back the the age old argument and or discussion that no one has been able to agree on. What is an rpg, what are the most important elements to make something an rpg? Actual class, skill tree and such choices are a part of it but are not the primo aspect of what is an rpg or a good rpg.

Modifié par Beerfish, 20 mai 2011 - 04:43 .

[bobspoland]

Dr Bawbag wrote...

Edit

aw look i don't want to get into mud slinging here. Clearly this is a touchy subject for you...

[brgillespie]

However, earlier in the article:

According to an Xbox 360 achievement aggregator,
only an estimated 52% of players received the achievement for
witnessing the end of the game; whilst as many as 10% of total players
earned fewer than five achievements. Whilst these statistics are fairly
vague, they are representative of the hardcore audience. With such low
completion numbers and a sharp loss of players early in the game, it
implies a systematic problem exists within its core design. Further,
these statistics were from a website for core gamers, dedicated to
obtaining as many achievements as possible. If even the hardcore market
was turning off in the early stages, something must have been
fundamentally wrong. You can't fault EA for getting cold feet and
pulling back from the RPG influences.

reserved for changes

Modifié par brgillespie, 20 mai 2011 - 04:53 .

[tomorrowstation]

I find it strange that so many miss the item management of DA:O. When I am role playing as a quasi-medieval character, I would never carry 13 swords, 7 staves, 5 daggers, 8 suits of armor, and 42 potions of various flavor with me at all times. To each his own, I guess, but to me it goes against the spirit of playing the role.

I guess it goes back to my p&p days when our DM would actually use encumberance correctly.

[Addai]

Were ME1 skill trees "huge"? I don't think the ME2 ones were that much different. Maybe a few bars knocked out.

[brgillespie]

ME1's system was a mess.

[Addai]

tomorrowstation wrote...

I find it strange that so many miss the item management of DA:O. When I am role playing as a quasi-medieval character, I would never carry 13 swords, 7 staves, 5 daggers, 8 suits of armor, and 42 potions of various flavor with me at all times. To each his own, I guess, but to me it goes against the spirit of playing the role.

I guess it goes back to my p&p days when our DM would actually use encumberance correctly.

You would not be carrying all that on your back, it would be in your pack, probably with a pack animal.  Of course there are no horses and oxen are just in the toolset, so...

If it breaks your immersion to be able to switch out equipment anywhere but in camp, then just don't do it.  Use whatever weapons and armor you have on and don't touch the rest.

What's unrealistic is that you would walk and lounge everywhere in fancy full plate.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Addai67 wrote...

Were ME1 skill trees "huge"? I don't think the ME2 ones were that much different. Maybe a few bars knocked out.

they knocked out the bars inbetween the ones with noticeable effects.

[Addai]

brgillespie wrote...

However, earlier in the article:

According to an Xbox 360 achievement aggregator,
only an estimated 52% of players received the achievement for
witnessing the end of the game; whilst as many as 10% of total players
earned fewer than five achievements. Whilst these statistics are fairly
vague, they are representative of the hardcore audience. With such low
completion numbers and a sharp loss of players early in the game, it
implies a systematic problem exists within its core design. Further,
these statistics were from a website for core gamers, dedicated to
obtaining as many achievements as possible. If even the hardcore market
was turning off in the early stages, something must have been
fundamentally wrong. You can't fault EA for getting cold feet and
pulling back from the RPG influences.

It is fair to state that the development process of Dragon Age was untenable. It is also fair to state that while statistics supported that the core design of Dragon Age: Origins had to be changed, the changes that were seemingly borrowed from the Mass Effect games did not fit into this game's recipe.

In short, the game needed to be changed, but the changes provided weren't what the game needed.

I said this in another thread, but why does it matter that people didn't finish the game if they still enjoyed playing it and told their friends to buy it?  It seems an odd measure of "failure."

[Dr Bawbag]

bobspoland wrote...

Dr Bawbag wrote...

Edit

aw look i don't want to get into mud slinging here. Clearly this is a touchy subject for you...

Not at all, mate.  I just don't see the point to what you posted, so hence the irrelevant comment. 

No amount of condesending clap-trap is going to make your point any more relevant, so carry on if you must.

[bobspoland]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

bobspoland wrote...

you know there are other RPG out there to play if you don't like DA:2. I for one enjoyed it. Im getting fed up with all this DA:2 and bioware bashing...not every game you play is going to please everyone i accept that, and others need to aswell.

And for the ones who can't accept all these changes to DA:2...simple solution trade your game in..ie GAME or gamestation here in the uk.

i did not open this topic with the intention to DA2 bash. Merely to discuss flaws the game had. I personally loved DA2. but it was no where near a perfect game. In light of the success and critical acclaim of a recently released RPG i thought it could only be beneficial to discuss what made origins and DA2 tick and what they may have failed at.

sorry i don't mean to annoy anyone with my comment. Well are all clearly passionate about bioware, rpgs and Dragon age...we all have our own dislikes and likes of all games.

I played the jade emprie the other week and i didn't like it - others will disagree just the same with DA:2. And im not saying DA:2 was perfect but it was still a enjoyable game

Modifié par bobspoland, 20 mai 2011 - 04:55 .

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Addai67 wrote...

brgillespie wrote...

However, earlier in the article:

According to an Xbox 360 achievement aggregator,
only an estimated 52% of players received the achievement for
witnessing the end of the game; whilst as many as 10% of total players
earned fewer than five achievements. Whilst these statistics are fairly
vague, they are representative of the hardcore audience. With such low
completion numbers and a sharp loss of players early in the game, it
implies a systematic problem exists within its core design. Further,
these statistics were from a website for core gamers, dedicated to
obtaining as many achievements as possible. If even the hardcore market
was turning off in the early stages, something must have been
fundamentally wrong. You can't fault EA for getting cold feet and
pulling back from the RPG influences.

It is fair to state that the development process of Dragon Age was untenable. It is also fair to state that while statistics supported that the core design of Dragon Age: Origins had to be changed, the changes that were seemingly borrowed from the Mass Effect games did not fit into this game's recipe.

In short, the game needed to be changed, but the changes provided weren't what the game needed.

I said this in another thread, but why does it matter that people didn't finish the game if they still enjoyed playing it and told their friends to buy it?  It seems an odd measure of "failure."

one way to look at it is to say "if the game was such high quality then why does the fanbase not care much for actually completing it???"  however those statistics dont account for players who beat it multiple times.

[inkjay]

brgillespie wrote...

However, earlier in the article:

50% completion rate is well above the industry average. Epic boasted Gears of War games completion rate was at about 50% (a game with a 6-8 hour campaign) and said it was a good thing. When your average RPG is 35hrs long a 50% completion rate is godsend.

http://www.gamasutra...ck_.php?print=1

Games come out at an amazing rate, some people simply don't have the time or the energy to finish a game or simply move on to the next big thing. You don't adress thing by making worse games though, I'd venture to say completion rates for DA2 are not better than those of DA:O or ME.

Modifié par inkjay, 20 mai 2011 - 05:01 .

[bobspoland]

inkjay wrote...

brgillespie wrote...

However, earlier in the article:

50% completion rate is well above the industry average. Epic boasted Gears of War games completion rate was at about 50% (a game with a 6-8 hour campaign) and said it was a good thing. When your average RPG is 35hrs long a 50% completion rate is godsend.

http://www.gamasutra...ck_.php?print=1

Games come out at an amazing rate, some people simply don't have the time or the energy to finish a game or simply move on to the next big thing. You don't adress thing by making worse games though, I'd venture to say completion rates for DA2 are not better than those of DA:O or ME. If anything 50% completion rate for a 40hr game is an amazing number.

Took me about 45 hours to complete DA:2 and that was over 6 weeks

[rolson00]

this pic says it all

[LeBurns]

According to an Xbox 360 achievement aggregator, only an estimated 52% of players received the achievement for witnessing the end of the game; whilst as many as 10% of total players earned fewer than five achievements. Whilst these statistics are fairly vague, they are representative of the hardcore audience. With such low completion numbers and a sharp loss of players early in the game, it implies a systematic problem exists within its core design.

Well that's some interesting hard stats.  I would not have thought of even checking there.  I never bought the game myself (demo did it for me), but my brother is definately in the 10% crowd listed.

I wonder if BW/EA thinks they can do it again and cash in on a DA3 by having the 'Dragon Age' name on the game?