738 réponses à ce sujet

[csfteeeer]

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Well, to be COMPLETELY fair, the game did have choices, is just that they hardly matter at all, that or they always end in the same place( EX: Grace)
You chose to send her to the Circle: Yay, she is in the circle now....*6 years later*.... what a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!
You chose to Free Her: Yay, she is Free now.....*6 years later*..... What a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!....
wait a minute...)

[the_one_54321]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...
Is this actually a thread bashing EA for saying they made a game not everyone liked?

Honestly?

No, this is a thread bashing EA for continuing to frame absolutely everything in an "we're AWESOME but..." terminology.

Semantics. That's simply just something to latch on to so you can continue to bash them, and quite frankly, I think you know that.

Perhaps. I could be bias in that I don't really care to avoid bashing EA at all, except in so far as it's against forum rules. EA, as a development suporter, games publisher and games sales group is absolutely horrible for the gaming community in general. No objective progress beyond the spending of money on better graphics and animation has come from them in at least a decade.

[the_one_54321]

csfteeeer wrote...
Well, to be COMPLETELY fair, the game did have choices, is just that they hardly matter at all,

What he's trying to say is that, "does the game really have choices when every choice results in the same outcome?"

Modifié par the_one_54321, 14 juin 2011 - 09:45 .

[Persephone]

csfteeeer wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Well, to be COMPLETELY fair, the game did have choices, is just that they hardly matter at all, that or they always end in the same place( EX: Grace)
You chose to send her to the Circle: Yay, she is in the circle now....*6 years later*.... what a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!
You chose to Free Her: Yay, she is Free now.....*6 years later*..... What a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!....
wait a minute...)

Except that her motivation, her dialogue and her reaction to you changes quite considerably. Clicking on her at the Gallows also explains quite a bit. She is bitter at getting caught, at the loss of Decimus, she has been in seclusion and likely been abused. (Alain even hints at rape in his case) So the "b*tch" has her reasons for losing her sanity in each case.

[csfteeeer]

Guns wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Probably. I noticed several choices on a personal scope as well as several quest choices that may lead to very interesting consequences in the next game. (Rather than MS Dos epilogue boxes I don't care for) I liked that. Would I have liked more ala TW2? Sure. But the "no choice" thing is just untrue.

Exactly. All of them affect the next game. None of the choices affected the current game which was rediculous. Especially since the game takes place over a decade. 

Exactly!!!!
i'm gonna sit there and make choices that are suppose to matter here and then think to my self "oh, then it will probably affect the sequel!", G*d Damn it i hate that, focus on your current product and then start thinking of something else.

[Persephone]

Guns wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Probably. I noticed several choices on a personal scope as well as several quest choices that may lead to very interesting consequences in the next game. (Rather than MS Dos epilogue boxes I don't care for) I liked that. Would I have liked more ala TW2? Sure. But the "no choice" thing is just untrue.

Exactly. All of them affect the next game. None of the choices affected the current game which was rediculous. Especially since the game takes place over a decade. 

You see some consequences in game. Very much so, in fact. I didn't see many IN GAME consequences in DAO. Who's the dwarven king? Doesn't matter, you get the same troops. Redcliffe? Same bunch of knights, no matter what you do. And again, Epilogue Dos Boxes do not matter to me. Esp. since they were bugged as hell.

[csfteeeer]

Persephone wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Well, to be COMPLETELY fair, the game did have choices, is just that they hardly matter at all, that or they always end in the same place( EX: Grace)
You chose to send her to the Circle: Yay, she is in the circle now....*6 years later*.... what a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!
You chose to Free Her: Yay, she is Free now.....*6 years later*..... What a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!....
wait a minute...)

Except that her motivation, her dialogue and her reaction to you changes quite considerably. Clicking on her at the Gallows also explains quite a bit. She is bitter at getting caught, at the loss of Decimus, she has been in seclusion and likely been abused. (Alain even hints at rape in his case) So the "b*tch" has her reasons for losing her sanity in each case.

Either way, she ends up attacking you, which you can defend all you want, but still makes the choices an illusion.

[Persephone]

csfteeeer wrote...

Guns wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Probably. I noticed several choices on a personal scope as well as several quest choices that may lead to very interesting consequences in the next game. (Rather than MS Dos epilogue boxes I don't care for) I liked that. Would I have liked more ala TW2? Sure. But the "no choice" thing is just untrue.

Exactly. All of them affect the next game. None of the choices affected the current game which was rediculous. Especially since the game takes place over a decade. 

Exactly!!!!
i'm gonna sit there and make choices that are suppose to matter here and then think to my self "oh, then it will probably affect the sequel!", G*d Damn it i hate that, focus on your current product and then start thinking of something else.

I felt that way in Origins until the Epilogue boxes popped up. No real difference in Awakening either. So I knew what to expect.

[magelet]

Wow...I just...wow.

They are ADMITTING that they know people didn't like it and that they are going to try to change things that people didn't like! I mean...why are you complaining about this? How does that translate to "horrible for the gaming community?"

[Persephone]

csfteeeer wrote...

Persephone wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Well, to be COMPLETELY fair, the game did have choices, is just that they hardly matter at all, that or they always end in the same place( EX: Grace)
You chose to send her to the Circle: Yay, she is in the circle now....*6 years later*.... what a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!
You chose to Free Her: Yay, she is Free now.....*6 years later*..... What a B**ch, she attacks Me!!!!....
wait a minute...)

Except that her motivation, her dialogue and her reaction to you changes quite considerably. Clicking on her at the Gallows also explains quite a bit. She is bitter at getting caught, at the loss of Decimus, she has been in seclusion and likely been abused. (Alain even hints at rape in his case) So the "b*tch" has her reasons for losing her sanity in each case.

Either way, she ends up attacking you, which you can defend all you want, but still makes the choices an illusion.

No, it doesn't, as the situation is a different one. It's realistic to me. No more of an illusion than anything in DAO. Or Awakening.

[Persephone]

magelet wrote...

Wow...I just...wow.

They are ADMITTING that they know people didn't like it and that they are going to try to change things that people didn't like! I mean...why are you complaining about this? How does that translate to "horrible for the gaming community?"

Not enough Mea Culpa and self-flagellation. :innocent:

[Cutlass Jack]

magelet wrote...

Wow...I just...wow.

They are ADMITTING that they know people didn't like it and that they are going to try to change things that people didn't like! I mean...why are you complaining about this? How does that translate to "horrible for the gaming community?"

Welcome to the BioWare Social Network.

[ink07]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Is this actually a thread bashing EA for saying they made a game not everyone liked?

Honestly?

No, people are bashing EA for rushing out the door a horrible sequel to a great game. People are bashing EA because they don't own up to their mistakes and instead they release half-assed apologies and statements in the vein of: "it is not that our game was bad, or rushed, or lacked everything that made its predecesor a good game, YOU GUYS just didn't get how INNOVATIVE it was" and people are bashing EA because they have -for too long now- been more concerned in market targets, financial quarters and streamilining for the lowest common denominator audience than putting some passion behind their products, all of which have destroyed companies with similar characteristics to Bioware's.

Honestly.

I'm sorry you and others here are too jaded to understand that. I guess for as long as people have their romance dedicated forums there is not too much to complain about.

Modifié par ink07, 14 juin 2011 - 09:55 .

[Xewaka]

magelet wrote...
Wow...I just...wow.
They are ADMITTING that they know people didn't like it and that they are going to try to change things that people didn't like! I mean...why are you complaining about this? How does that translate to "horrible for the gaming community?"

Because they pegged the wrong reason why the game was disliked.

Persephone wrote...
You see some consequences in game. Very much so, in fact. I didn't see many IN GAME consequences in DAO. Who's
the dwarven king? Doesn't matter, you get the same troops. Redcliffe? Same bunch of knights, no matter what you do. And again, Epilogue Dos Boxes do not matter to me. Esp. since they were bugged as hell.

I like how you dodged mentioning that, depending on your actions, you could get the support of either Templars or Mages, and Dalish or Werewolves. Those were real choices with real consequences in-game.

Modifié par Xewaka, 14 juin 2011 - 09:55 .

[alex90c]

I hate EA as much as the next guy, but we should at least give them a chance to turn DA3 in to something decent.

[Addai]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Some fans have to go. They games they love are dead.

The Jilted Girlfriend fans ("We'll teach BioWare to so much as look at larger audiences!") have to go.

The Game Mechanics Are Sacred fans have to go. ME2 got friend of mine playing RPGs that I never would have imagined would play one. Dragon Age just needs to find their analogue of that model.

I know without even looking when it's a Riposte Schnitzelheim post.

Fallout 3 was the first video RPG I ever played, but I still didn't like DA2.  Try again.

[the_one_54321]

Persephone wrote...
I felt that way in Origins until the Epilogue boxes popped up. No real difference in Awakening either. So I knew what to expect.

The Dalish camp and the Mages tower had distinct differences depending on the choices you made. A different Dwarven King could also be considered a lesser difference based on choice, except that apparenetly those don't cut it for you. Your relationship choices had a distinct effect on the pre-endgame and endgame, though DAII had that also. The difference to Redcliff, depending on your decision to help or not was massive. The town gets whiped out, or not.

But here's the big distinction:

In DA:O at the end of the game the blight is defeated because that's what you were working towards the whole game. You have a motivation and you work towards it and you see it happen.

In DAII the [end game result is IDENTICAL on both sides except they list which side you to; avoiding spoilers] because that is the ending that was intended to happen and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it. Not because of anything you tried to accomplish. It happens in defiance of any of your efforts.

[Persephone]

ink07 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Is this actually a thread bashing EA for saying they made a game not everyone liked?

Honestly?

No, people are bashing EA for rushing out the door a horrible sequel to a great game. People are bashing EA because they don't own up to their mistakes and instead they release half-assed apologies *Snips*

Honestly.

I'm sorry you are too jaded to understand that.

So those are facts written in stone now? 

WOW. Just WOW. Yes, Bioware should totally ignore those who loved the game by "owning up to their mistakes" ....

Interesting context for the word "jaded".......the irony.....

[the_one_54321]

magelet wrote...
Wow...I just...wow.

They are ADMITTING that they know people didn't like it and that they are going to try to change things that people didn't like! I mean...why are you complaining about this? How does that translate to "horrible for the gaming community?"

Because they still think they are awesome and churing out quality products when neither are true.

Persephone wrote...
WOW. Just WOW. Yes, Bioware should totally ignore those who loved the game by "owning up to their mistakes" ....

If you don't see the serious flaws in this game then your eyes are firmly shut and your fingers are shoved in your ears.

This is not "this game is horrible I want you all to die!" This is "did you guys seriously think this was going to be considered a quality game??" 

Because there are serious quality issues with the game. Not design choices. Not style or features. Quality. This game was of poor quality. It was rushed through in 18 months and it felt, looked and sounded like it was rushed out in 18 months.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 14 juin 2011 - 09:59 .

[Persephone]

Xewaka wrote...

Persephone wrote...
You see some consequences in game. Very much so, in fact. I didn't see many IN GAME consequences in DAO. Who's
the dwarven king? Doesn't matter, you get the same troops. Redcliffe? Same bunch of knights, no matter what you do. And again, Epilogue Dos Boxes do not matter to me. Esp. since they were bugged as hell.

I like how you dodged mentioning that, depending on your actions, you could get the support of either Templars or Mages, and Dalish or Werewolves. Those were real choices with real consequences in-game.

No. Just different pixels in the final battle.

[csfteeeer]

Persephone wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Guns wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

EA wrote...
We tried to innovate and do some different things with the combat system and some of the way we told story.

Awesome way to innovate rpg's storytelling by removing players' ability to make choices.

Except they didn't.

Oh? Then, I must have been unfortunate enough to receive the elusive 'no choice' edition of the game.
I will ask them to send me another one.

Probably. I noticed several choices on a personal scope as well as several quest choices that may lead to very interesting consequences in the next game. (Rather than MS Dos epilogue boxes I don't care for) I liked that. Would I have liked more ala TW2? Sure. But the "no choice" thing is just untrue.

Exactly. All of them affect the next game. None of the choices affected the current game which was rediculous. Especially since the game takes place over a decade. 

Exactly!!!!
i'm gonna sit there and make choices that are suppose to matter here and then think to my self "oh, then it will probably affect the sequel!", G*d Damn it i hate that, focus on your current product and then start thinking of something else.

I felt that way in Origins until the Epilogue boxes popped up. No real difference in Awakening either. So I knew what to expect.

You'll be here defending DA2 to death won't you?

ok, yeah, in terms of gameplay it didn't change much, but at least, Origins you truly feel like you are affecting a lot of peoples lives, there are multiple ways of how you can affect said lives (ex: Dalish), and i liked that, it only works in terms of story, but still feels like it matters.

in DA2, most end up in the same way in terms of story and gameplay, that is my biggest problem.

Awakening.... can't argue with you there.

[the_one_54321]

Filament wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
What this article amounts to is them saying "well, it's true that a group of our fans didn't want this game and have told us that they diddn't want the game. But we're still awesome."

They said it in the opposite order, which is kind of important. Your order indicates they've learned nothing from it, the opposite order indicates it's something they have to think about.

Here's hoping! But I'm not holding my breath for something good. Not until I see a new quality product come out. Not hear about, not read developer diaries, not read promises and suggestions in the forums. Actually see the final well made product.

[Mr.House]

csfteeeer wrote...
You'll be here defending DA2 to death won't you?

ok, yeah, in terms of gameplay it didn't change much, but at least, Origins you truly feel like you are affecting a lot of peoples lives, there are multiple ways of how you can affect said lives (ex: Dalish), and i liked that, it only works in terms of story, but still feels like it matters.

in DA2, most end up in the same way in terms of story and gameplay, that is my biggest problem.

Awakening.... can't argue with you there.

My choices in DA2 changed quest, addedv new quest or removed quest but made no diffrence in the end, my choices in DAO only affected the final battle.

Solution? Make choices matter for once in DA3.

Modifié par Mr.House, 14 juin 2011 - 10:02 .

[Persephone]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Persephone wrote...
I felt that way in Origins until the Epilogue boxes popped up. No real difference in Awakening either. So I knew what to expect.

The Dalish camp and the Mages tower had distinct differences depending on the choices you made. A different Dwarven King could also be considered a lesser difference based on choice, except that apparenetly those don't cut it for you. Your relationship choices had a distinct effect on the pre-endgame and endgame, though DAII had that also. The difference to Redcliff, depending on your decision to help or not was massive. The town gets whiped out, or not.

But here's the big distinction:

In DA:O at the end of the game the blight is defeated because that's what you were working towards the whole game. You have a motivation and you work towards it and you see it happen.

In DAII the [end game result is IDENTICAL on both sides except they list which side you to; avoiding spoilers] because that is the ending that was intended to happen and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it. Not because of anything you tried to accomplish. It happens in defiance of any of your efforts.

Eh....

DAO was borderline unrealistic with the super human influence a simple click could have. The outcome of DAII struck me as more realistic. Would I prefer a more polished, diverse Act III? Yes. But I can see why some things in Act III will happen, no matter what you do. Just how I feel.