262 réponses à ce sujet

[Ariella]

neppakyo wrote...

Ariella wrote...

To be fair, most of the OP's complaints were DA2 visa vi The Witcher not The Witcher 2.

Which is invalid imho. DA2 and TW2 are the two being compared. Not TW1. Now, if he said TW1 vs DAO that would be a more valid argument.

He compared what he played, which is fair, consider I've seen many who say that even TW was better than DA2.

[Lumikki]

MingWolf wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

My point isn't about what's RPG, but that customation and classes of character is part of general RPG and it's not in TW, it's missing. Also it's in DA2 so you have to count it.

I don't understand what you are trying to get at. True, a lot of RPGs have more customization of classes and character, but just because the Witcher doesn't have that doesn't make it any less of an RPG than DA2 nor does it necessarily indicate that something is missing.

Oxford definition of an RPG: "a game in which players take on the roles of imaginary characters who engage in adventures..."

mm.. okey, lets forget word RPG. It seem to missleading you people..

Let say one game has no story in same gendre than TW.. Now if you compare TW to it, then I could say, You can't compare because it doesn't have any story, story has no meaning because it's open world game. That's just stupid. So, my point has been that DA2 has customized character, so you have to compare it too with TW, because it's part of DA2 game. Meaning just because it's missing from TW, doesn't mean you can dismiss it from comparing the games.

DA2 has customated character
 - Appereance customation
 - Gender customation
 - Gameplay customation (class choise)

Gameplay customation means I can make character close combat character or I can make it range attacker. This is't just my character is archer, it's actually changing hole combat style how it feels for player. Then player can also customize the style inside that class too, like TW can do too, for it's one pre-define "class".

Why you have to compare missing part too?

Because if you don't, you can miss something in one of the game, what is it's strong points. Meaning you can make one game look better than it is and other weaker that it really is, if you don't compare all features. It's other ways like selective comparing based how you want to make some game look, not how it really is.

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juin 2011 - 11:36 .

[Dariuszp]

Ok :-) If you put it that way. Don't know what's your problem with the class system. There is one. Yyou got access to all 3 set of skills (mele, alchemy, magic) where in DA II you are fixed to one skill set (after selecting mage, rogue or warrior). So in DA II it's inferior to TW2 in my opinion. Just as some people love Elder Scrolls "better as you train them" system.
You can use range weapons (knives, magic, reflecting arrows, firecrackers), you can use alchemy to be some kind of healer/buffer who use traps and bombs or you can use mele. AND you are no limited only to one option.

You still bringing that character customization. Is there anything else ? Because you got boobs on your character but whole game is just a crap. You can switch hair after patch 1.2. Small thing but always something. Or you expect that "drug-addict-monster-hunter-who-kill-monsters-his-whole-life" will be pretty gay emo.
I'm sure than when they will release game that have no-name unknown hollow character that is not even interesting, they will give us ability to add boobs. Right now you must stick with Gerald. Switch his hair so he will be more like a women. Still, cannot remove scars. Monsters were not playing nice.
Yes, character customization is better because there is one So companions are better because they are present.

[Lumikki]

Yes, TW has customised skills or talents, doesn't matter what they are called. Same way any DA2 character has. Question is can you play totally different kind of character or is the sword glued to you hand? Can I play the hole game without ever using sword (melee weapon)?

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juin 2011 - 11:40 .

[Dubya75]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, TW has customised skills or talents, doesn't matter what they are called. Same way any DA2 character has. Question is can you play totally different kind of character or is the sword glued to you hand? Can I play the hole game without ever using sword (melee weapon)?

No, I mean Yes, I mean he always uses one of his swords in combat. Geralt is a sword wielding Witcher that can also cast spells and stuff. Neither the warden nor Hawke has any chance of survival against this guy!

Modifié par Dubya75, 07 juin 2011 - 12:04 .

[Corto81]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, TW has customised skills or talents, doesn't matter what they are called. Same way any DA2 character has. Question is can you play totally different kind of character or is the sword glued to you hand? Can I play the hole game without ever using sword (melee weapon)?

In short?

While I haven't tried Alchemy yet, Magic and Swordsmanship style of play are VERY different and definitely feel like two completely different classes.

I still don't understand what your problem with having Geralt as a character is, the only REAL difference in customization is the gender.

Hawke does have a default face and in the end, Hawke is still Hawke, not my toon (unlike Origins).
Also, everyone shoving Hawke down my throat every scene sucks.

Difference is, I expected the DA franchise to stick to the fully customizable character from DA:O.
I didn't expect that in TW2.
And the biggest problem is, it wasn't done in DA2 to improve gameplay etc., but merely because the VA severly limits your freedom in that aspect.

Modifié par Corto81, 07 juin 2011 - 12:05 .

[Lumikki]

It's not just gender, it's the hole consept and gameplay of Geralt what is wrong for me. Customation in TW's case means lack of apperance, gender and gameplay style choises. Not acceptable.

That has been you people problem all the time, you just don't understand why some person is not fine with character like Geralt and the gameplay style player is forced to do. You allways assume that everyone is fine with Geralt because you self are. I have tryed so long time here to say, some people aren't fine with the limitations of character and gameplay customation in TW.

You people keep saying how wonderful story TW has and how choise matters. What I think it's good thing. But nice choised story isn't everyting in the game, there is more too. You don't see the problem, because you are fine with Geralt style, but people who aren't see's it.

[Corto81]

Lumikki wrote...

It's not just gender, it's the hole consept and gameplay of Geralt what is wrong for me. Customation in TW's case means lack of apperance, gender and gameplay style choises. Not acceptable.

---

You people keep saying how wonderful story TW has and how choise matters. What I think it's good thing. But nice choised story isn't everyting in the game, there is more too. You don't see the problem, because you are fine with Geralt style, but people who aren't see's it.

No, I completely understand there are people who can't get passed the fact that their character is not fully customizable.

The problem is how you word it, when I read your posts.
You word it as fact (like the bolded above), when it's an opinion.

Fact is, Geralt is a set character.
Fact is, Hawke is a let's-call-it semi-set character.

My opinion is that Geralt feels more me because he responds to me.
Your opinion is that Hawke is better because he's more customizable and can wield different weapons.
And that's fine, we can agree to disagree there... On opinions. But neither are facts.

(I don't agree on the classes thing though, both games have 3 basic paths you can choose for your character..
And I'm not sure how far you got into TW2, but with enough points in Magic, you hardly have to use the sword at all)

[Cutlass Jack]

simfamSP wrote...

quoted.

Woo hoo! Mom always said if I spewed enough nonsense I might eventually say something interesting. Or maybe she was talking to all those monkeys she has typing Shakespeare. She always did love them best.

[Aaleel]

Lumikki wrote...

It's not just gender, it's the hole consept and gameplay of Geralt what is wrong for me. Customation in TW's case means lack of apperance, gender and gameplay style choises. Not acceptable.

That has been you people problem all the time, you just don't understand why some person is not fine with character like Geralt and the gameplay style player is forced to do. You allways assume that everyone is fine with Geralt because you self are. I have tryed so long time here to say, some people aren't fine with the limitations of character and gameplay customation in TW.

You people keep saying how wonderful story TW has and how choise matters. What I think it's good thing. But nice choised story isn't everyting in the game, there is more too. You don't see the problem, because you are fine with Geralt style, but people who aren't see's it.

I think the problem is that you think people don't understand or accept your views.  People understand what your saying, they just don't agree with you on the points.  No one is trying make you think like them, they're just saying they don't see things the same way you do.

[Dubya75]

Lumikki wrote...

It's not just gender, it's the hole consept and gameplay of Geralt what is wrong for me. Customation in TW's case means lack of apperance, gender and gameplay style choises. Not acceptable.

That has been you people problem all the time, you just don't understand why some person is not fine with character like Geralt and the gameplay style player is forced to do. You allways assume that everyone is fine with Geralt because you self are. I have tryed so long time here to say, some people aren't fine with the limitations of character and gameplay customation in TW.

You people keep saying how wonderful story TW has and how choise matters. What I think it's good thing. But nice choised story isn't everyting in the game, there is more too. You don't see the problem, because you are fine with Geralt style, but people who aren't see's it.

I only have one question for you: Have you played either of the 2 Witcher games?
If not, then your assessment is nothing but guess work.
Not acceptable.

[Lumikki]

Dubya75 wrote...

I only have one question for you: Have you played either of the 2 Witcher games?
If not, then your assessment is nothing but guess work.
Not acceptable.

Yes, I'm playing right now The Witcher. I have not played TW2 yet, because I haven't done the first one yet. I just have so many issues that I takes while to get pass TW1. I'm sure TW2 is better than TW1, but I want to play this one first.

That not acceptable was from my point of view. Like for you it seem to be no acceptable that DA2 story has not enough choises.

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juin 2011 - 02:06 .

[Lumikki]

Aaleel wrote...

I think the problem is that you think people don't understand or accept your views.  People understand what your saying, they just don't agree with you on the points.  No one is trying make you think like them, they're just saying they don't see things the same way you do.

Yes, of course, but that means I understand you too, but I disagree you estimate about The Witcher. So, The witcher may be better game for you, but that doesn't mean it's better game for me. Hard to say sure as I haven't yet finish hole game. So, I have to make estimate based what I have seen so far. If I ever finish this game at all.

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 juin 2011 - 02:10 .

[Dubya75]

Lumikki wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

I only have one question for you: Have you played either of the 2 Witcher games?
If not, then your assessment is nothing but guess work.
Not acceptable.

Yes, I'm playing right now The Witcher. I have not played TW2 yet, because I haven't done the first one yet. I just have so many issues that I takes while to get pass TW1. I'm sure TW2 is better than TW1, but I want to play this one first.

That not acceptable was from my point of view. Like for you it seem to be no acceptable that DA2 story has not enough choises.

Well good luck with that, personally I thought the gameplay in TW1 was rubbish, so I never even finished it.
One thing we can't really hold against DA2 is that the general gameplay is solid.

[erynnar]

Ariella wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

Ariella wrote...

To be fair, most of the OP's complaints were DA2 visa vi The Witcher not The Witcher 2.

Which is invalid imho. DA2 and TW2 are the two being compared. Not TW1. Now, if he said TW1 vs DAO that would be a more valid argument.

He compared what he played, which is fair, consider I've seen many who say that even TW was better than DA2.

Yeah, no. Witcher 1 wasn't better than DA2.

[erynnar]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

quoted.

Woo hoo! Mom always said if I spewed enough nonsense I might eventually say something interesting. Or maybe she was talking to all those monkeys she has typing Shakespeare. She always did love them best.

You are a pirate, way cooler than any room full of monkeys. Just sayin'.

[_Aine_]

erynnar wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

quoted.

Woo hoo! Mom always said if I spewed enough nonsense I might eventually say something interesting. Or maybe she was talking to all those monkeys she has typing Shakespeare. She always did love them best.

You are a pirate, way cooler than any room full of monkeys. Just sayin'.

It's true, and we don't just say that because of your maps, rum and rapier wit, either.    

[erynnar]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, TW has customised skills or talents, doesn't matter what they are called. Same way any DA2 character has. Question is can you play totally different kind of character or is the sword glued to you hand? Can I play the hole game without ever using sword (melee weapon)?

No, you do use swords because that's what Geralt is a sword wielder. But that is the expectation set up for the game, so no surprise. You can custom him with magic and alchemy, and armor.

Hawke has a default face. The voice never changes. You can't play anytihng but a human. You do have a choice to changes the face and gender. And you have a choice between sword wielders, daggers, bows, or magic.But Hawke is still Hawke. Played two different personality types, hubby played two the difference in personalities was minimal. Hawke was still Hawke. Which would be fine if that had been my expectation from the get go. But I expected to be able to play Hawke like my Warden and she would have been mine. *shrugs* 

[Dariuszp]

@Dubya75 it's because Aurora engine from Bioware. As CDPR explain, in The Witcher, combat is turn-based :-D Just like in old RPG games. They just try to mask it :-D Also they add combat stances and stuff so you dont even feel it turn based. And it's quite dynamic but on the begining - for some people it's hard to master.
Anyway, key point is to listen :-) When you end one swing of the sword and you should click to make another one, there is that "swing sound". In the same time your cursor will go orange (indication that you should click again). On hard lvl you can only depend on that sound because cursor never go orange.
Still It was something new and fun for me but for example my friend hate it why he play The Witcher 2 3rd time already :-D

@Lumikki, first and second parte are quite diferent. Graphic, combat, alchemy, and other stuff are nothing like in first game. Also except situation that you will not known characters from the first game - you can just start TW2 without problem. In journal they explain who is who :-D

And about customization. I would love to see one that was implemented in Fable: The Lost Chapters. Game and world is sugary (how you say it in english ?) but that one aspect I just love. You got character from young age that put on weight when you eat to much, is getting bigger when you add some str. Is sharper when you add dex and taller when you add int.
And he can have tatoos, hair change. And most important - he get old as game progress. In DA II you didn't feel that times i passing by. In Fable it just show on you.

From tiny little boy to strong old warrior. That was something i miss in recent games.

[Master Shiori]

erynnar wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, TW has customised skills or talents, doesn't matter what they are called. Same way any DA2 character has. Question is can you play totally different kind of character or is the sword glued to you hand? Can I play the hole game without ever using sword (melee weapon)?

No, you do use swords because that's what Geralt is a sword wielder. But that is the expectation set up for the game, so no surprise. You can custom him with magic and alchemy, and armor.

Hawke has a default face. The voice never changes. You can't play anytihng but a human. You do have a choice to changes the face and gender. And you have a choice between sword wielders, daggers, bows, or magic.But Hawke is still Hawke. Played two different personality types, hubby played two the difference in personalities was minimal. Hawke was still Hawke. Which would be fine if that had been my expectation from the get go. But I expected to be able to play Hawke like my Warden and she would have been mine. *shrugs* 

But is there really a big dfference between playing as Hawke and playing as Warden? I mean, the only thing you lose in DA2 is the choice of race and origin. Everything else is the same. You choose you class, you gender, customize your abilities, choose which weapons you want to specialize in and your character's personality.
I didn't see it as any different then being stuck with, say, human noble origin in DA:O. I could customize my Cousland to my hearts desire, same as Hawke, and the only thing that I couldn't change is that he/she is a human and a member of the Cousland family.

I'm sorry you felt restricted in ability to play your Hawke as you wanted. Hopefully, DA3 will add more customization choices, though I doubt we'll ever get as much variety in origins as we did in DA:O.

[Elhanan]

I do too, but only technically as I have not played TW or TW2....

What? Thought I would say something else?

Modifié par Elhanan, 07 juin 2011 - 04:53 .

[neppakyo]

Elhanan wrote...

I do too, but I love playing TW2, it makes me a complete man....

What? Thought I would say something else?

Elhanan! I never expected that!

[hoorayforicecream]

Master Shiori wrote...

But is there really a big dfference between playing as Hawke and playing as Warden? I mean, the only thing you lose in DA2 is the choice of race and origin. Everything else is the same. You choose you class, you gender, customize your abilities, choose which weapons you want to specialize in and your character's personality.
I didn't see it as any different then being stuck with, say, human noble origin in DA:O. I could customize my Cousland to my hearts desire, same as Hawke, and the only thing that I couldn't change is that he/she is a human and a member of the Cousland family.

I'm sorry you felt restricted in ability to play your Hawke as you wanted. Hopefully, DA3 will add more customization choices, though I doubt we'll ever get as much variety in origins as we did in DA:O.

I thought Hawke played very differently from the Warden. The ability to actually inflect when saying stuff made a huge difference to me. One of the things I disliked in DAO was how some of the more ambiguous choices weren't clear in the tone they used. A perfect example would be the post-sex talk with Leliana. She talks about how much she likes the Warden's eyelashes, and one of the responses is something like "That's creepy." I had a hard time figuring out whether the Warden meant it jokingly, or as a dismissal, or something in between. Leliana takes it as a joke, but my Warden might have actually felt it was creepy and wanted to not get into it like that with her. 

In DA2, aside from a handful of spots, the wheel allowed me to really choose Hawke's tone, and that made a huge difference for me. Admittedly, there were drawbacks to it (fewer responses to choose from), and it didn't always work. I think when it didn't work, it broke immersion much more than in DAO simply because it felt so much better when it did work.