645 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

[quote]Dasher1010 wrote...
1. A three-act structure.
[/quote]

TW2 did better than DA2 as there was continuality in plot and progression as well as new areas and not crappy reuse of maps and bondage of one city and couple small maps outside it like in DA2.

[quote]Dasher1010 wrote...
2. The took a turned based system and made it hack and slash[/quote]
[/quote]

TW2 did better than DA2 and was never turn based in TW1, in fact neither was it in DAO.

[quote]Dasher1010 wrote...
4. A cliffhanging ending that sets up an expansion pack to nickle and dime players[/quote]
[/quote]

TW2 all DLC is free other than the major expansions, so continuing the story is not an issue and nickle and dime do not apply keyword "free" as opposed to nickle and dime of DA2 from paying for the remaining companion as day one DLC or paying for costume packs DLCs.

So yet again TW2 did it better than DA2.

[quote]Dasher1010 wrote...
5. Bugs at launch
[/quote]

TW2 is doing it faster (fixing) any that come up compared to the month+ took for DA2 first patch let alone the ones that followed.

[quote]Dasher1010 wrote...
6. Dialog system
[/quote]

TW2 resembles Origin style more but works extremely well and imho again wins hands down as someone who prefered the Origin style format of non extreme-paraphrased random guess work required on the part of DA2 aka "Ohh I wonder what smart ass Hawke will say here, or angry pew:pew Hawke would say here" going off those small cut down paraphrases.

TW2 is a better game, deal with it and move on and more importantly if followed in the footsteps of TW1 and improved upon it rather than a change of direction that the "sequel" DA(2) took over DAO.

P.s. Morroian ~ Stop grasping at straws.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mai 2011 - 12:32 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Dasher1010 wrote...

1. A three-act structure.
 
2. The took a turned based system and made it hack and slash
 
3. Too few abilities and too many upgrades
 
4. A cliffhanging ending that sets up an expansion pack to nickle and dime players
 
5. Bugs at launch


6. A Mass Effect-style dialog system

1. Witcher 1 had acts, so Witcher 2 followed in its footsteps. DA:O did not have acts, DA2 did not follow in its footsteps.

2. Witcher 1 was hack and slash, and Witcher 2 followed in its footsteps but the 'styles' of combat changed. DA:O was more tactics/pause and review combat, DA2 you could still pause and review but the style of combat changed here too.

3. Eh. So?
 
4. Witcher 1 ended on a cliffhanger, don't know about TW2 yet but if it does then that's no departure from the original. DA2 certainly didn't have as much closure at the ending as DA:O did, but I didn't find it to be a cliffhanger.

5. I've found more game-breaking bugs in TW2 than in DA2 so far (except for a bug in DA2's DRM that made it so I couldn't even launch the game--which still hasn't been officially fixed).

6. TW2 followed similar dialogue choices to TW1 and introduced new options (like magic). DA2 departed from DA:O's dialogue structure in MANY ways, including giving the PC a voice, paraphrases and mood icons.

Really, DA2 got backlash because it departed from what was in DA:O too much. It largely failed to re-establish and build upon what was in the first game, instead removing elements or outright changing them to something else completely.

TW2, from what I have seen so far, has been largely true to TW1. Some things have evolved and changed, but the sequel has mostly re-established what was in the original and so pleased the fans of the original.

DA2 and TW2 did not have similar style decisions. DA2
opted for change and was also probably forced to cut a whole lot of
corners to make deadline. TW2 on the other hand had a longer development time and opted to stay true to the original.

Fans like it when the game they loved is honoured by its sequel, and too many fans of DA:O feel like DA2 did not do this (even if they did not hate the game).

[PSUHammer]

GRX Dragon wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

GRX Dragon wrote...

I couldn't say, except to say if TW2 is anything like TW1, I'd rather play DA2 again. Clunky-as-hell and unrealistic-sword-swinging-over-your-head-while-devs-claimed-it-was-realistic-when-it-really-wasn't combat and controls really made me just delete it soon as I got two hours in the game.

Umm DA2 has realisitic animations? Right.

Witcher 2 animations are great Geralt's sword attacks were captured by someone using their fencing skills which gives us great realistic combat animations.

Nice straw-man argument, idiot.

I never said DA2 has realistic animations (and I'll give BioWare credit - they never claimed to be using realistic animations).

Difference is, the devs of TW claimed that him wielding that sword by swinging it around over his head the way he did was realistic. It was anything but realistic, and I would know - I've been trained. If he's still wielding it by swinging it over his head in TW2, then I see only more fail.

Interesting you pulling out "straw man" argument when you attack him with an ad hominem in the same sentence.  Just saying...

[Dragoonlordz]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...
Fans like it when the game they loved is honoured by its sequel, and too many fans of DA:O feel like DA2 did not do this (even if they did not hate the game).

Your spot on. The simple fact is almost all (if not all) who liked TW1 will like or even love TW2 because it is how a sequel should be. Bioware did not do this with DA2 following DAO, it was not a sequel even though it was named as one. They can't really call it "2" and a sequel then claim there are differences so pretend it's not tra la la. I'll put it a simple way as just one of many examples you wouldn't use an import feature from the prequel if it was not a sequel.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mai 2011 - 12:39 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

It's jealous girlfriend syndrome.

BioWare and the "old school" players were huggy buddies for years, all the way back to when computers were a novelty and you might have to ride your bike for ten minutes to watch your friend with a computer play a game.  Fast forward to today, and BioWare sees all these new players coming to games.  They're like "Hey, we should see if these new gamers might enjoy RPGs too!"  The "old school" players immediately threw their boobs out and brushed their hair back and said "But but but!  Aren't we good enough for you?"  BioWare was like "Yes, of course, but what if a couple tiny mechanic changes got more people into RPGs?  Isn't that good?"

The "old school" players were devestated.  They listened to Tom Waites for weeks.  They put on black nail polish.  Then, when DA2 cames out and had some notable flaws (recycled areas and no unified party management screen, FTL) the jilted players were ecstatic.

Go back through some of the old hate threads.  Many of them come down to "We sure taught BioWare their lesson this time!"

That's why people hate DA2.  The funny part is, DA2 actually takes some elements from the original Witcher.  Button=Awesome descibres Witcher perfectly.  A voiced character is also win.  Happily, the terrible crafting, UI, nonsensical story, and the embarassing adolescent masterbatory aids were not borrowed.

[Melca36]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...



Fans like it when the game they loved is honoured by its sequel, and too many fans of DA:O feel like DA2 did not do this (even if they did not hate the game).

:wizard:THIS!!!


   

[Khayness]

RinpocheSchnozberry on deck, man the popcorns!

[erynnar]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Dasher1010 wrote...

1. A three-act structure.
 
2. The took a turned based system and made it hack and slash
 
3. Too few abilities and too many upgrades
 
4. A cliffhanging ending that sets up an expansion pack to nickle and dime players
 
5. Bugs at launch


6. A Mass Effect-style dialog system

1. Witcher 1 had acts, so Witcher 2 followed in its footsteps. DA:O did not have acts, DA2 did not follow in its footsteps.

2. Witcher 1 was hack and slash, and Witcher 2 followed in its footsteps but the 'styles' of combat changed. DA:O was more tactics/pause and review combat, DA2 you could still pause and review but the style of combat changed here too.

3. Eh. So?
 
4. Witcher 1 ended on a cliffhanger, don't know about TW2 yet but if it does then that's no departure from the original. DA2 certainly didn't have as much closure at the ending as DA:O did, but I didn't find it to be a cliffhanger.

5. I've found more game-breaking bugs in TW2 than in DA2 so far (except for a bug in DA2's DRM that made it so I couldn't even launch the game--which still hasn't been officially fixed).

6. TW2 followed similar dialogue choices to TW1 and introduced new options (like magic). DA2 departed from DA:O's dialogue structure in MANY ways, including giving the PC a voice, paraphrases and mood icons.

Really, DA2 got backlash because it departed from what was in DA:O too much. It largely failed to re-establish and build upon what was in the first game, instead removing elements or outright changing them to something else completely.

TW2, from what I have seen so far, has been largely true to TW1. Some things have evolved and changed, but the sequel has mostly re-established what was in the original and so pleased the fans of the original.

DA2 and TW2 did not have similar style decisions. DA2
opted for change and was also probably forced to cut a whole lot of
corners to make deadline. TW2 on the other hand had a longer development time and opted to stay true to the original.

Fans like it when the game they loved is honoured by its sequel, and too many fans of DA:O feel like DA2 did not do this (even if they did not hate the game).

Very well said Shadow. I can't add anything. Well, I may run into game bugs when I finally get to play more than the first quarter of Act 1 (my PC crashed and laughed at me when I tried to play the game, it's 6 years old). Husband didn't run into any game breaking bugs, but I have heard others complain of several. I have just had to watch the hubby play Witcher 2 and I get to back seat play.

[PSUHammer]

nedpepper wrote...


As a fellow writer, I also know how DIFFICULT it can be, particularly when you are working in a team environment, to keep up with every detail of the lore.

And I hate to say this, but you come across as more of the whining type.  I CAN'T play Witcher, so I can't argue the details.  And I didn't name you personally.  Just an overall general feeling of the conversaton of the gaming community in multiple places.  And you know what?  I think I'm right.  It is a PC elitism/rebellious thing.   That doesn't mean YOU SPECIFICALLY, unless it hits a nerve and you take it that way.

Um, I own consoles and a gaming PC.  I liked both games but TW2 is clearly better so far.

What does that make me?  A PC elitist?  Granted there are people on both extremes (there are in any hobby:  Ford vs. Chevy, Linux vs. Windows, Mac vs. PC, etc.).  But there are a far greater majority who doesn't give a sh** as to which platform a game plays on but more about the game content, itself.

That, my friend, is the crux of this issue.

[PSUHammer]

shantisands wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

The Witcher 2 needs a storage chest. Seriously, the first game let you store things with innkeepers.

This is the truth!  Must have!

There is a mod to get rid of the weight limit so you can carry everything.  It is a good fix until a proper storage chest mod is created.

[Serpieri Nei]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Fans like it when the game they loved is honoured by its sequel, and too many fans of DA:O feel like DA2 did not do this (even if they did not hate the game).

Very well said Shadow. Sadly, DA2 is not a sequel to Origins and in no way does it honor its predecessor. It is what many have aptly named it "The Kirkwall Chronicles"

Modifié par Serpieri Nei, 23 mai 2011 - 12:46 .

[Ottemis]

Man, it's been said a million times now, between all the sheepish boo-ing.
DA2 would have been better if it had had more time, yes, agreed? Agreed obviously.
Is TW2 better for the time it got over DA2? Obviously.

Having said that: Should the two of them be compared? I still don't think so, no.

[Dragoonlordz]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

It's jealous girlfriend syndrome.

BioWare and the "old school" players were huggy buddies for years, all the way back to when computers were a novelty and you might have to ride your bike for ten minutes to watch your friend with a computer play a game.  Fast forward to today, and BioWare sees all these new players coming to games.  They're like "Hey, we should see if these new gamers might enjoy RPGs too!"  The "old school" players immediately threw their boobs out and brushed their hair back and said "But but but!  Aren't we good enough for you?"  BioWare was like "Yes, of course, but what if a couple tiny mechanic changes got more people into RPGs?  Isn't that good?"

The "old school" players were devestated.  They listened to Tom Waites for weeks.  They put on black nail polish.  Then, when DA2 cames out and had some notable flaws (recycled areas and no unified party management screen, FTL) the jilted players were ecstatic.

Go back through some of the old hate threads.  Many of them come down to "We sure taught BioWare their lesson this time!"

That's why people hate DA2.  The funny part is, DA2 actually takes some elements from the original Witcher.  Button=Awesome descibres Witcher perfectly.  A voiced character is also win.  Happily, the terrible crafting, UI, nonsensical story, and the embarassing adolescent masterbatory aids were not borrowed.

Most of the intial sales comes from those "old school players" if I was to agree with your way, way off assumption that it was old school players that liked DAO, but even that is a fallacy because not everyone who loves origins was from this pure fantasy "old school" you keep pointing fingers at.

The new players that you claim Bioware wants to attract come from two possible sources one of which is alternative genres (which they will not attract because if they were going to be drawn in the they would already be here with ME series). Maybe to assume they want the FPS crowd instead in which case they will fail on epic proportions as FPS players want FPS games, everyone else who owns multiple genres already would have been in the franchise and fanbase if RPGs interested them or if action/RPGs was liked by them aka in the DA or ME franchise fanbase. Could it be that this new playerbase instead means the younger gamer, you now the ones too underage to buy or play the game in the first place? Maybe thats the audience they targetted eh?

DA2 is epically bad due to it's own flaws on top of the fact its a sequel not just because of that.

I still find it hilarious your so diluded though that you believe the DAO fanbase was made up of "old school" players, sorry to break the news to you the same age groups liked that are same ones who like and hate DA2. The fact you use the DA2 button awesome to describe what is a more deep and less button awesome series like TW shows how incredably neive and stuck in a glass bubble world you really are.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mai 2011 - 01:07 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Ottemis wrote...

Man, it's been said a million times now, between all the sheepish boo-ing.
DA2 would have been better if it had had more time, yes, agreed? Agreed obviously.
Is TW2 better for the time it got over DA2? Obviously.

Having said that: Should the two of them be compared? I still don't think so, no.

Like I said 'would of, could of, should of' are completley pointless as it never was, is or will be since it has already been released.

[Khayness]

Ottemis wrote...

Man, it's been said a million times now, between all the sheepish boo-ing.
DA2 would have been better if it had had more time, yes, agreed? Agreed obviously.
Is TW2 better for the time it got over DA2? Obviously.

Having said that: Should the two of them be compared? I still don't think so, no.

With the Laidlaw interview released about the direction RPGs must take to avoid genre death, they should be compared.

Oh boy, very much so.

[erynnar]

Filament wrote...

erynnar wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Maybe because they couldn't even spell Fereld-EN (not Fereld-AN) in the subtitles right? At least TW2 didn't have a problem with the details and the spelling of it's own lore.

I was being wrong on purpose. And I don't think sarcasm means what you think it means either. And maybe I missed it because it sounded like an insult (like mine, which I had the balls/ovaries to apologize for).  Perhaps we should both stop trying to be sarcastic.

If you were being "sarcastic" by saying "this game is so bad it can't even spell its own words, unlike TW2," what you really meant is that DA2 can spell and TW2 can't... ergo TW2 SUCKS and DA2 is AWESOME! Is that what you meant? It must be, and I completely agree!

I'm kidding/being ironic/engaging in lighthearted banter about TW2 sucking, by the way, before anyone gets all indignant.

Ah, your take is much funnier! My lameness at humor and I failed...*hangs head*  Really funny, I had an argument with someone who edits my fanfic (they are and English major but don't play DA) and she kept changing my Fereldan (as in adjective) to Ferelden the country. 

@Shadow & Dragoonlordz yeah it rankles me still that it doesn't honor the original I was fine with a new story, new place, etc. But it just stripped out DAO too much (lore included, so hence my whining nedpepper:lol:).  And that really bothers me.

[Dragoonlordz]

Khayness wrote...

Ottemis wrote...

Man, it's been said a million times now, between all the sheepish boo-ing.
DA2 would have been better if it had had more time, yes, agreed? Agreed obviously.
Is TW2 better for the time it got over DA2? Obviously.

Having said that: Should the two of them be compared? I still don't think so, no.

With the Laidlaw interview released about the direction RPGs must take to avoid genre death, they should be compared.

Oh boy, very much so.

Oh please don't remind me of that incredibly stupid notion thats some people here have used to defend DA2, the action of acting to Pre-empt genre death by changing a system or title. I already had to facepalm those people already over 'action out of fear of stagnation' rather than 'acting as a result' of it. If they think for one second DAO was unsuccessfull or stagnating then they need to open their eyes.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mai 2011 - 01:06 .

[Boiny Bunny]

I have an ATI card - even on the absolute lowest settings of everything, except the resolution, I can't get a nice framerate. Just waiting for a hotfix from ATI before I actually attempt to play the game.

[Zanallen]

Khayness wrote...

With the Laidlaw interview released about the direction RPGs must take to avoid genre death, they should be compared.

Oh boy, very much so.

You mean like how both games aren't really what many people would consider a more traditional cRPG? And how both are pretty much action/RPGs?

[Boiny Bunny]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

It's jealous girlfriend syndrome.

BioWare and the "old school" players were huggy buddies for years, all the way back to when computers were a novelty and you might have to ride your bike for ten minutes to watch your friend with a computer play a game.  Fast forward to today, and BioWare sees all these new players coming to games.  They're like "Hey, we should see if these new gamers might enjoy RPGs too!"  The "old school" players immediately threw their boobs out and brushed their hair back and said "But but but!  Aren't we good enough for you?"  BioWare was like "Yes, of course, but what if a couple tiny mechanic changes got more people into RPGs?  Isn't that good?"

The "old school" players were devestated.  They listened to Tom Waites for weeks.  They put on black nail polish.  Then, when DA2 cames out and had some notable flaws (recycled areas and no unified party management screen, FTL) the jilted players were ecstatic.

Go back through some of the old hate threads.  Many of them come down to "We sure taught BioWare their lesson this time!"

That's why people hate DA2.  The funny part is, DA2 actually takes some elements from the original Witcher.  Button=Awesome descibres Witcher perfectly.  A voiced character is also win.  Happily, the terrible crafting, UI, nonsensical story, and the embarassing adolescent masterbatory aids were not borrowed.

I'd be most curious to know what aspect of The Witcher's story you found to be unsensical?

I found it to be genuinely beautifully crafted.  Drizzling in political intrigue too - which is something that DA2 promised but utterly failed to deliver.

They even managed to set up the plot such that people who haven't read the books would not be at any real disadvantage.

[Dragoonlordz]

Zanallen wrote...

Khayness wrote...

With the Laidlaw interview released about the direction RPGs must take to avoid genre death, they should be compared.

Oh boy, very much so.

You mean like how both games aren't really what many people would consider a more traditional cRPG? And how both are pretty much action/RPGs?

Getting into a debate over what cRPG is never ends well for either side. The fact is (for me personally) both DAO and TW1 & 2 felt more closer to cRPG than DA2 did. From the gameplay mechanics and methods in DAO to the to the fantasy setting and world created/shown in the TW titles.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mai 2011 - 01:12 .

[Khayness]

Zanallen wrote...

You mean like how both games aren't really what many people would consider a more traditional cRPG? And how both are pretty much action/RPGs?

More like cutting corners and wasted potential vs. attention to detail and as few compromises to your vision as possible.

[PSUHammer]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

I'd be most curious to know what aspect of The Witcher's story you found to be unsensical?

I found it to be genuinely beautifully crafted.  Drizzling in political intrigue too - which is something that DA2 promised but utterly failed to deliver.

They even managed to set up the plot such that people who haven't read the books would not be at any real disadvantage.

That's a good point.  DA2 did seem rather "accessible".  I remember reading the lore codex's and thinking you could get away without reading any of it.  TW2 seems to intertwine things pretty well, so far.  I have found myself reading all the books and journal entries.  Partly because I last played the Witcher about 3 years ago!

[Zanallen]

Khayness wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

You mean like how both games aren't really what many people would consider a more traditional cRPG? And how both are pretty much action/RPGs?

More like cutting corners and wasted potential vs. attention to detail and as few compromises to your vision as possible.

And I'll counter with development time. The goal of Laidlaw's changes obviously works, see TW2. However, 18 months isn't enough time to see those goals through to fruition.