143 réponses à ce sujet

[Khayness]

Friendship/Rivalry meter, CCCs and Phisycal Force in combat.

The rest, not so much.

[Feanor_II]

DA:O already had Approval/Disapproval meter, I don't see why Friendship/Rivalry is considered innovative

[Khayness]

Feanor_II wrote...

DA:O already had Approval/Disapproval meter, I don't see why Friendship/Rivalry is considered innovative

You don't have to metagame and shower everyone with gifts to know (and keep) your companions and get their missions.

It supports role playing your character. It's funny to praise the Circle when talking to Wynne and then bash everything when you run to Morrigan right after.

[Feanor_II]

Khayness wrote...

You don't have to metagame and shower everyone with gifts to know (and keep) your companions and get their missions.

But git became less effective the more you use them, anyway, I liked that "bribing" system.

It supports role playing your character. It's funny to praise the Circle when talking to Wynne and then bash everything when you run to Morrigan right after.

I think it may be a bit improved in DA2, but it still lacks of the same......

So still I don't see the innovate, maybe it's me that I havent investigate fully this feature

[psrugger]

I agree with Feanor. The way I see it, the "new" Friendship/Rivalry meter was a simplified, not in a good way, remake of the in depth conversations/ interactions with party members from DA:O. I like action in my RPGs, but not at the cost of the RPG elements.

[King Cousland]

I agree about the firendship/rivalry system. I see what they were trying to do, but like so many other "innovations", they ended looking solppy and felt dumbed down. The devs said that it was to give a sense that the companions always "respected" Hawke even if they didn't necessarily get along with them, but I don't think tha'd be the case. For example, after Hawke stepped on Merrill's plans for the Eluvian, she should have left the party IMO, the same goes for Anders if you refused to help him distract the Grand Cleric, as trampling over characters' core beliefs doesn;t leave a great deal of room for "respect", just like Wynne/Leliana walked out or attacked the Warden after defiling Andraste's Ashes. That, IMO, was a realistic reaction. For me the perfect system would the the approval system of Origins, but tweaked so that things such as romance would alter based on your relationship with characters in the style of DAII.

[King Cousland]

P.S I'd also love to see a return to companion conversations anytime, anyplace, not just during quests.

[Recycled Human]

Fenris will leave if you ask him to fight for mages, Sebastian will leave if you let Anders go unpunished, Isabella will leave to save her own skin (and if you weren't friends with her she doesn't really come back). Anders effectively uses you as a shield when you become champion, Merrill doesn't really have anywhere else to turn to so its no surprise either of them stay with you. Plus, Anders doesn't really seem to expect you to help him and manages to get the job done without your help and Merrill still has the demon on the back burner.

I don't see this innovation as sloppy or dumbed down at all. Unless you had another reason for thinking it was?

[quaresma_Pt]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

I am tempted to feel offense at comments that DA2 was "innovative", considering it took place in such a small location compared to the original, re-used maps over and over, dumbed down combat, took away choice and borrowed the set in stone character style of ME.

So other than the 3rd person storytelling (a story with no ending, mind you!), what was "innovative" about DA2?

 Some people, just love dragon age no matter what. Some guys says dragon age 2 is epic.lol.

 Be aware my friend.

 I have to agree with you, it s just a normal game.

[quaresma_Pt]

Dubya75 wrote...

- Friendship/Rivalry system
OK I've not seen any other games use this exact feature, but hardly revolutionary.

- Iconic Companion looks
This is NOT innovative. Not even a bit.

- Crafting system overhaul
Simplified. Again, not innovative.

- Dialogue Wheel with personality type
This would have been innovative if it actually worked. If it made the slightest difference to the outcome of the game.

- Day/Night areas
There are games out there with dynamic day/night cycles, so this is not innovative. More like cheap imitation.

- Faster paced, less front-loaded combat
Improved combat does not necessarily mean it is going to be innovative, and in this case definitely not.

 Very good post, by the way.

 And day, night areas, are just..more of the same.  Pretty boring. Like you said, a cheap imitation, it s alot more easy to do that way.

[blueruin]

I just now watched the E3 gameplay previews for Skyrim. Now that game is innovative -- and not once did Todd Howard have to use the word "innovative". He let the gameplay and features speak for themselves.

[bleetman]

psrugger wrote...

The way I see it, the "new" Friendship/Rivalry meter was a simplified, not in a good way, remake of the in depth conversations/ interactions with party members from DA:O. I like action in my RPGs, but not at the cost of the RPG elements.

"So hey, Morrigan, I know you object to my honesty and selflessness towards others, but I got you some jewlery. We cool? I've been wanting to unlock that next set of dialogue"

I actually prefered the new system, for the simple reason that rivalry points don't equate negative approval, and thus don't cause characters who disagree with your actions to verbally seize up until you get the points back. Had DA2 worked like Origins, my Fenris or half-way-through-Act-Two-Merrill wouldn't have said a word to my Hawke until the very end.

[Cutlass Jack]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

To put it bluntly, it wasn't. Though I think if they just said "borrowing elements from other forms of entertainment(like the dominant personality from Alpha Protocol)", rather than throwing the word "innovative" around so carelessly, people might understand that they mean change instead.

Terrible example since Alpha Protocol was not released during the game's design period, and borrowed more from bioware games than the reverse. And the personality system was quite a bit different anyway.

But 'Innovative' is never a great word to use when talking about your own work. Even if it's true.

[Seival]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

I am tempted to feel offense at comments that DA2 was "innovative", considering it took place in such a small location compared to the original, re-used maps over and over, dumbed down combat, took away choice and borrowed the set in stone character style of ME.

So other than the 3rd person storytelling (a story with no ending, mind you!), what was "innovative" about DA2?

DA2 has the following innovations (for a fantasy RPG game):

• Reinforcement-based dynamic combat.
• Friend-rival social system.
• Dialogue system (modified ME dialogue wheel).
• Character development system with optimized atributes and upgradeable abilities.

[Kasces]

Some of you need to understand that just because you didn't like the innovation, doesn't change the fact it is a new idea or method (in regards to the the Dragon Age series) and is therefore innovative ...it's just in the wrong direction in many of your opinions.

Also, if your basis is they didn't introduce anything that hasn't been done already in the gaming or entertainment industry somewhere, you might as well reserve the word

[Kasces]

Some of you need to understand that just because you didn't like the innovation, doesn't change the fact it is a new idea or method (in regards to the the Dragon Age series) and is therefore innovative ...it's just in the wrong direction in many of your opinions.

Also, if your basis is they didn't introduce anything that hasn't been done already in the gaming or entertainment industry somewhere, you might as well reserve the word"innovative " for how much crap we can fit into phones nowadays lol

[RangerSG]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

To put it bluntly, it wasn't. Though I think if they just said "borrowing elements from other forms of entertainment(like the dominant personality from Alpha Protocol)", rather than throwing the word "innovative" around so carelessly, people might understand that they mean change instead.

Terrible example since Alpha Protocol was not released during the game's design period, and borrowed more from bioware games than the reverse. And the personality system was quite a bit different anyway.

But 'Innovative' is never a great word to use when talking about your own work. Even if it's true.

Agreed. I think the marketing types are flooding the airwaves with "innovative" right now to try to tell the world the fans "just don't get it." Never mind the fact this has been the most lukewarmly received release CRITICALLY as well for a full game since the early days of Bioware. It is insulting, but it's a continuation of the play they made leading up to DA2, where they bashed Origins and told us all how the game needed to be different and more "button awesome and streamlined."

There are new features. And comparing this personality system to Alpha Protocol's is superficial at best. Some of the features even worked. But they don't make up for the depth of gameplay that was taken away, on the whole.

And insulting your fanbase is not a good marketing strategy. You would think after lower sales for DA2, this might have been a hint taken.

[Whammo]

It isn't innovative. But since innovation is a nice sounding buzzword publishers like to stick it on their marketing and rely on the ambiguity of the term to avoid getting called out.

Hence why you see people trying to list features like"faster combat", "using Mass Effect's dialogue wheel", and "using a wave mechanic to artificially lengthen the game" as innovation.

[KilrB]

The way in which they totally voided all that so many liked about Origins and badly implemented things copied from other games while not coming up with anything new of their own (unless you count butt-ugly elves) might be considered innovative.

Skyrim and AoD have been on my watch-list for some time now.

[RangerSG]

KilrB wrote...

The way in which they totally voided all that so many liked about Origins and badly implemented things copied from other games while not coming up with anything new of their own (unless you count butt-ugly elves) might be considered innovative.

Skyrim and AoD have been on my watch-list for some time now.

AoD does look interesting. But I doubt I'll ever hear about the release. I just don't have the time to follow all the indie games.

Skyrim looks...well, like another Elder Scrolls game. They made lots of promises about 'schedules' and 'new combat features' with Oblivion too, and honestly I thought the whole thing a serious step backwards from Morrowind. We'll see.

[Brwarner]

The only thing I would argue that is innovative is the idea behind the story (the implementation of the story is well... another story). So many games feature Black on White conflicts as their primary plot (even Bioware games, like KOTOR and ME, and DA1). Bioware however, has always had Grey on Gray side missions, where no side is right - just ideologically opposite (i.e. Kill Geth/Reprogram Geth). This was the first time (at least that I've played) where a game's primary conflict wasn't so clear cut. It was a conflict between idealism and realism. The mages represented idealism, everyone should have freedom no matter what; where the templars represented realism (i.e. freedom for all is nice, but mages are too dangerous and it wouldn't be realistically feasible). I found that aspect really interesting (see: http://tvtropes.org/...AndGrayMorality).

Of course, as I said originally - how this plot executed and flowed wasn't the best it could have been.

EDIT: Other forms of fictional media have done great things with these more interesting plot styles. I think we should too.

Modifié par Brwarner, 18 juin 2011 - 07:13 .

[Yrkoon]

Mr.House wrote...

PR talk.

Yep.   Also,  Another  common  PR catch-word   we're hearing a lot  from the Bioware suits   is:  "polarizing",  Ray Muzika said DA2 was Bioware's most "polarizing" game.  Which is  a borderline dishonest way of trying to say that there's 2 sides and they're equal  --  that just as many people loved the game  as hated it - or some other bizzare denial of reality.    No wait, More than that.  it almost seems like a praise when they say it  --  like they managed to release  a  scathingly  "controversial" game  that has  ripped the entire gaming world into 2 sides.


 But they did no such thing, and  lets cut the PR  crap now. DA2 was *not*  polarizing.  The OJ trial was polarizing.  The last few Presidents  of the USA   have been Polarizing.    By contrast, DA2 is a game that  has sold   less than  2 million copies... far, FAR less than expected.   And the fan reception across the board has been far FAR less positive than  any Bioware game EVER.  And  these two facts  are not "balanced" out by the  few good reviews that it got,  or the   few thousands of fans who thought the game was  "awesome"..


Edit:  and Innovative?  Give me a break.  If we're going to broaden the term  "innovative" so that DA2's features qualify, then hey,  praise   *Me*  Folks:  I sat down to take a ****** this morning.  I'm innovative.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 18 juin 2011 - 08:51 .

[Zanallen]

Well, let us examine the definition of the word "Innovative".

1. the introduction of something new
2. a new idea, method, or device : novelty

Now let us examine the context of the statement. I doubt that Muzyka was referring to video games as a whole or even just RPGs. So let's assume he was referring to Bioware games.

New to Bioware games: Friendship/Rivalry system as a revamp of the approval/disapproval system from Origins, the intent/tone icons, the personality system affecting dialogue, the static companion appearance with limited stat customization, cross-class combos, physical force in combat and, I believe, the framed narrative.

If we go with new to DA, we can also include the voiced protagonist as well as the fixed protagonist background.

All of these things are innovations depending on context. Remember, the word innovation has nothing to do with how well implemented said innovations were or if you like the innovations.

Modifié par Zanallen, 18 juin 2011 - 09:30 .

[Dubya75]

Yrkoon wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

PR talk.

Yep.   Also,  Another  common  PR catch-word   we're hearing a lot  from the Bioware suits   is:  "polarizing",  Ray Muzika said DA2 was Bioware's most "polarizing" game.  Which is  a borderline dishonest way of trying to say that there's 2 sides and they're equal  --  that just as many people loved the game  as hated it - or some other bizzare denial of reality.    No wait, More than that.  it almost seems like a praise when they say it  --  like they managed to release  a  scathingly  "controversial" game  that has  ripped the entire gaming world into 2 sides.


 But they did no such thing, and  lets cut the PR  crap now. DA2 was *not*  polarizing.  The OJ trial was polarizing.  The last few Presidents  of the USA   have been Polarizing.    By contrast, DA2 is a game that  has sold   less than  2 million copies... far, FAR less than expected.   And the fan reception across the board has been far FAR less positive than  any Bioware game EVER.  And  these two facts  are not "balanced" out by the  few good reviews that it got,  or the   few thousands of fans who thought the game was  "awesome"..


Edit:  and Innovative?  Give me a break.  If we're going to broaden the term  "innovative" so that DA2's features qualify, then hey,  praise   *Me*  Folks:  I sat down to take a ****** this morning.  I'm innovative.

Love your last sentence there, pretty much sums it up!