180 réponses à ce sujet

[xkg]

Wozearly wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

The direction for DAII was already decided ten months before Origins was released. That's why the lead designer from Origins declined to make the sequel with EAs vision. Laidlaw said he would do it their way. Hence, the "We are going after CoD fans" and "We''ll be more streamlined like the ME series". This was all done and set in stone before Origins became Bioware's greatest hit. So, no, they weren't listening to fans at all when it came to DAII.

You have anything to back that up? It'd be pretty freaking weird for a company to sink costs into developing a sequel before the first game was even finished, with no real indication of how successful it would be. 

From Lead Designer of DAO:

We were nearing the end of active work on design content for Dragon Age… there was still a lot more bug fixing/polishing/ and fill-content generation ahead but the core plot/writing and level design was finished. My work was rapidly shifting into that of reviewing what the team had put together.
Discussion on Dragon Age 2 began around this time and looking ahead I knew that I wasn’t going to be satisfied with what Dragon Age 2 would be.

http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

Modifié par xkg, 27 juillet 2011 - 10:20 .

[Morroian]

Wozearly wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

The direction for DAII was already decided ten months before Origins was released. That's why the lead designer from Origins declined to make the sequel with EAs vision. Laidlaw said he would do it their way. Hence, the "We are going after CoD fans" and "We''ll be more streamlined like the ME series". This was all done and set in stone before Origins became Bioware's greatest hit. So, no, they weren't listening to fans at all when it came to DAII.

You have anything to back that up? It'd be pretty freaking weird for a company to sink costs into developing a sequel before the first game was even finished, with no real indication of how successful it would be. 

DAO was essentially finished at that stage, the release of the PC version had to wait 9 months for the console ports to be done. I think at that stage they were in the planning for DA2.

[Morroian]

Aesieru wrote...

As I've said before... I like BioWare, but what they did with BioWare stole any amount of enjoyment from me because of the way they implemented the arguably poor story, and the implementation and style of art and gameplay itself.

I am not enjoying that experience and have no desire whatsoever to FORCE MYSELF to play through it again... especially with all the horrible boss fights and ridiculous moves or scripted events that were made.

This DLC itself isn't even all that good.

So you have no inclination to force yourself to play DA2 again yet you apparently bought and played Legacy on the day of release.

Modifié par Morroian, 27 juillet 2011 - 10:44 .

[Drasanil]

Morroian wrote...
So you have no inclination to force yourself to play DA2 again yet you apparently bought and played Legacy on the day of release.

There is such a thing as morbid curiosity. I hated DA2 and had no intention of replaying it but after hearing that Legacy addressed a lot of the problems I reinstalled (and downloaded a bunch of mods) and started a new game to see if I could stomach it before buying... the lack of proper-top down and being stuck with Hawke* still very much irk me to no end, but I don't quite hate it as I used to now that I have more mods for it. Still I probably won't be buying DLC.

*Really hope they reinstate some manner of origins (and top-down view) in DA3, even if they cut it down just to 1 per race.  Hawke was/is really killing my enjoyment, I'd likely have been able to stomach the game much better if I had some manner of character choice.

[Agamo45]

It's not a "loud minority", it is generally acknowledged that DA2 fell short of expectations, whether you liked the game or not. The devs would be foolish not to listen.

[Melca36]

Agamo45 wrote...

It's not a "loud minority", it is generally acknowledged that DA2 fell short of expectations, whether you liked the game or not. The devs would be foolish not to listen.

Exactly!

They would not have spoken if the game was performing better.

The effort made with Legacy was wonderful and I appreciate Bioware LISTENING to the fans.

[txgoldrush]

bEVEsthda wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Bioware needs to keep going the direction they want to go and innovate the series, and going back to Dragon Age Origins is the worst thing they can do. Its like giving up because everything didn't work out as they planned.

a) Let's see here, BW suddenly makes a completely different game, for a completely different audience, and publishes it as the sequel to their best received game ever, what was the plan? 

I agree with the OP. Developers need to have their own vision of the game and why it would be fun to play it. But there's a big problem with that in big corporations, and that is that where market research suggests there is a big market, is much more important. So the developers end up doing a game they don't have any personal understanding for anyway, on the assumption that it's what suits a large number of gamers.

Regardless, the big mistake this time was to release a new game as a sequel it wasn't. And that is actually dam stupid marketing. So stupid that it's completely mindboggling. If it weren't for that it's not the first time EA does something that is totally incomprehensibly stupid...

Plus, except for the repeating and recycled dungeons, DAII's flaws are simply exaggerated, while DAO's are glossed over. And really the #1 problem is that the game was rushed, far more than either gameplay or story problems. It was the world design that was responsible for 95% of the games problems.

Thankyou for stating this popular and rational misconception. I myself was one of those who first posted that the short development was to blame for faults. In my defense is that I used it to defend Laidlaw in threads that were unnecessarily
hostile. And also that it's actually true - many perceived flaws in DA2 really are there due to lack of time.

But here's the shocker: None of that was the #1 problem with DA2.
The number #1 problem with DA2 was that the DA:O fans didn't like the game. They hated it for what it was, and they hated it for what it did to DA.
They looked to DA to provide classic party-RPG. Regardless of any speculations in the general profitability of leaning towards JRPG or action games, that's not what the DA audience expected for a sequel. And a good deal of them actually utterly despise those kinds of games. On the basis of this, it doesn't matter if DA2 is a good game or not, or what flaws it has or has not.

DAO was so generic and so conservative that it would really kill the series to go back to it.

C) A rubbish statement void of substance. DAO was a unique game, so how can it possibly be "generic"? If there is anything that is generic, it's the ridiculous anime style of DA2. And what exactly is "conservative" about DA:O? And what is not "conservative" about Donkey Kong gameplay with emphasis on bosses, hitpoints and loot? Or Final Fantasy movies? Over the top animations? Quite old. Old, old, old!
...And quite bad as well.

Now, finally, there is the sheer success of DA:O. Let me ask you a question: Where would CoD or Sims be today, if the developers had figured that doing a sequel in the same spirit as the first game "would really kill the series to go back to it"?

A) news to BGII, KOTOR and ME2 that DAO is Bioware's "best" recieved game ever.....it wasn't.

And when was the marketing for DA games ever good...wasn't DAO's Marilyn Manson marketing criticized?

Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins who want the same things over and over again. The same conservative style, the same gameplay, the same style of characters, the same story. If Bioware listened to them, everything would be THE SAME. Why can't fans be open minded? I don't think Bioware should cater to fans that don't accept change.

C) And how is DAO "unique"? Its far from it. It follows Bioware formula strongly....lets see, you join or a part of a special organization (gee, Grey Wardens, are they like Jedi, Spirit Monks, or Spectres) you are chased by an evil organization or bad guy, your life is shattered in an attack early in the game, you have to do four main major quests in the mid game. Add on top the ridicoulous cliched storyline of save the world against the evil orcs, have the same Bioware style characters that resemble their characters from the past, and have a gamplay system that innovates nothing, and is done better before (FFXII's special edition for example). Hell, look a JRPG INSPIRED DAO's COMBAT!!!! Those stupid JRPGs...lol

How is DAII art style generic? How is it anime? Really what DAII's art is concept art coming to life without being mad e more realistic. Its fine and Legacy truly shows that its the way to go.

And where is CoD and The Sims today? Facing diminishing returns and backlash. Look at all the criticism Activisio is taking for styming innovation. Look at the Guitar Hero series. Why? Because its the same old same old. Look at Pokemon, while its still popular, its no where near as popular as the first two generations.

Really, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess proved how completely idiotic fan bases are. Remember the "Celda" controversey when cartoon Link was intorduced the first time. Because idiot fans wanted Ocarina of Time all over again. Then the games release shut them the hell up, especially about its art style. Then comes Twilight Princess, pure fan service. After incredible hype before and during release, the game truly showed what it was. A cliched by the numbers Zelda that didn't stand the test of time and was even surpassed by a more innovative Zelda style game in Okami in acclaim. Even the creator wasn't happy with Twilight Princess. And look which game won GameFAQs game of the decade....Majora's Mask, the most oddball and progressive Zelda game.

[csfteeeer]

txgoldrush wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Bioware needs to keep going the direction they want to go and innovate the series, and going back to Dragon Age Origins is the worst thing they can do. Its like giving up because everything didn't work out as they planned.

a) Let's see here, BW suddenly makes a completely different game, for a completely different audience, and publishes it as the sequel to their best received game ever, what was the plan? 

I agree with the OP. Developers need to have their own vision of the game and why it would be fun to play it. But there's a big problem with that in big corporations, and that is that where market research suggests there is a big market, is much more important. So the developers end up doing a game they don't have any personal understanding for anyway, on the assumption that it's what suits a large number of gamers.

Regardless, the big mistake this time was to release a new game as a sequel it wasn't. And that is actually dam stupid marketing. So stupid that it's completely mindboggling. If it weren't for that it's not the first time EA does something that is totally incomprehensibly stupid...

Plus, except for the repeating and recycled dungeons, DAII's flaws are simply exaggerated, while DAO's are glossed over. And really the #1 problem is that the game was rushed, far more than either gameplay or story problems. It was the world design that was responsible for 95% of the games problems.

Thankyou for stating this popular and rational misconception. I myself was one of those who first posted that the short development was to blame for faults. In my defense is that I used it to defend Laidlaw in threads that were unnecessarily
hostile. And also that it's actually true - many perceived flaws in DA2 really are there due to lack of time.

But here's the shocker: None of that was the #1 problem with DA2.
The number #1 problem with DA2 was that the DA:O fans didn't like the game. They hated it for what it was, and they hated it for what it did to DA.
They looked to DA to provide classic party-RPG. Regardless of any speculations in the general profitability of leaning towards JRPG or action games, that's not what the DA audience expected for a sequel. And a good deal of them actually utterly despise those kinds of games. On the basis of this, it doesn't matter if DA2 is a good game or not, or what flaws it has or has not.

DAO was so generic and so conservative that it would really kill the series to go back to it.

C) A rubbish statement void of substance. DAO was a unique game, so how can it possibly be "generic"? If there is anything that is generic, it's the ridiculous anime style of DA2. And what exactly is "conservative" about DA:O? And what is not "conservative" about Donkey Kong gameplay with emphasis on bosses, hitpoints and loot? Or Final Fantasy movies? Over the top animations? Quite old. Old, old, old!
...And quite bad as well.

Now, finally, there is the sheer success of DA:O. Let me ask you a question: Where would CoD or Sims be today, if the developers had figured that doing a sequel in the same spirit as the first game "would really kill the series to go back to it"?

A) news to BGII, KOTOR and ME2 that DAO is Bioware's "best" recieved game ever.....it wasn't.

And when was the marketing for DA games ever good...wasn't DAO's Marilyn Manson marketing criticized?

Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins who want the same things over and over again. The same conservative style, the same gameplay, the same style of characters, the same story. If Bioware listened to them, everything would be THE SAME. Why can't fans be open minded? I don't think Bioware should cater to fans that don't accept change.

C) And how is DAO "unique"? Its far from it. It follows Bioware formula strongly....lets see, you join or a part of a special organization (gee, Grey Wardens, are they like Jedi, Spirit Monks, or Spectres) you are chased by an evil organization or bad guy, your life is shattered in an attack early in the game, you have to do four main major quests in the mid game. Add on top the ridicoulous cliched storyline of save the world against the evil orcs, have the same Bioware style characters that resemble their characters from the past, and have a gamplay system that innovates nothing, and is done better before (FFXII's special edition for example). Hell, look a JRPG INSPIRED DAO's COMBAT!!!! Those stupid JRPGs...lol

How is DAII art style generic? How is it anime? Really what DAII's art is concept art coming to life without being mad e more realistic. Its fine and Legacy truly shows that its the way to go.

And where is CoD and The Sims today? Facing diminishing returns and backlash. Look at all the criticism Activisio is taking for styming innovation. Look at the Guitar Hero series. Why? Because its the same old same old. Look at Pokemon, while its still popular, its no where near as popular as the first two generations.

Really, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess proved how completely idiotic fan bases are. Remember the "Celda" controversey when cartoon Link was intorduced the first time. Because idiot fans wanted Ocarina of Time all over again. Then the games release shut them the hell up, especially about its art style. Then comes Twilight Princess, pure fan service. After incredible hype before and during release, the game truly showed what it was. A cliched by the numbers Zelda that didn't stand the test of time and was even surpassed by a more innovative Zelda style game in Okami in acclaim. Even the creator wasn't happy with Twilight Princess. And look which game won GameFAQs game of the decade....Majora's Mask, the most oddball and progressive Zelda game.

LAWL!

Modifié par csfteeeer, 28 juillet 2011 - 01:26 .

[txgoldrush]

csfteeeer wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Bioware needs to keep going the direction they want to go and innovate the series, and going back to Dragon Age Origins is the worst thing they can do. Its like giving up because everything didn't work out as they planned.

a) Let's see here, BW suddenly makes a completely different game, for a completely different audience, and publishes it as the sequel to their best received game ever, what was the plan? 

I agree with the OP. Developers need to have their own vision of the game and why it would be fun to play it. But there's a big problem with that in big corporations, and that is that where market research suggests there is a big market, is much more important. So the developers end up doing a game they don't have any personal understanding for anyway, on the assumption that it's what suits a large number of gamers.

Regardless, the big mistake this time was to release a new game as a sequel it wasn't. And that is actually dam stupid marketing. So stupid that it's completely mindboggling. If it weren't for that it's not the first time EA does something that is totally incomprehensibly stupid...

Plus, except for the repeating and recycled dungeons, DAII's flaws are simply exaggerated, while DAO's are glossed over. And really the #1 problem is that the game was rushed, far more than either gameplay or story problems. It was the world design that was responsible for 95% of the games problems.

Thankyou for stating this popular and rational misconception. I myself was one of those who first posted that the short development was to blame for faults. In my defense is that I used it to defend Laidlaw in threads that were unnecessarily
hostile. And also that it's actually true - many perceived flaws in DA2 really are there due to lack of time.

But here's the shocker: None of that was the #1 problem with DA2.
The number #1 problem with DA2 was that the DA:O fans didn't like the game. They hated it for what it was, and they hated it for what it did to DA.
They looked to DA to provide classic party-RPG. Regardless of any speculations in the general profitability of leaning towards JRPG or action games, that's not what the DA audience expected for a sequel. And a good deal of them actually utterly despise those kinds of games. On the basis of this, it doesn't matter if DA2 is a good game or not, or what flaws it has or has not.

DAO was so generic and so conservative that it would really kill the series to go back to it.

C) A rubbish statement void of substance. DAO was a unique game, so how can it possibly be "generic"? If there is anything that is generic, it's the ridiculous anime style of DA2. And what exactly is "conservative" about DA:O? And what is not "conservative" about Donkey Kong gameplay with emphasis on bosses, hitpoints and loot? Or Final Fantasy movies? Over the top animations? Quite old. Old, old, old!
...And quite bad as well.

Now, finally, there is the sheer success of DA:O. Let me ask you a question: Where would CoD or Sims be today, if the developers had figured that doing a sequel in the same spirit as the first game "would really kill the series to go back to it"?

A) news to BGII, KOTOR and ME2 that DAO is Bioware's "best" recieved game ever.....it wasn't.

And when was the marketing for DA games ever good...wasn't DAO's Marilyn Manson marketing criticized?

Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins who want the same things over and over again. The same conservative style, the same gameplay, the same style of characters, the same story. If Bioware listened to them, everything would be THE SAME. Why can't fans be open minded? I don't think Bioware should cater to fans that don't accept change.

C) And how is DAO "unique"? Its far from it. It follows Bioware formula strongly....lets see, you join or a part of a special organization (gee, Grey Wardens, are they like Jedi, Spirit Monks, or Spectres) you are chased by an evil organization or bad guy, your life is shattered in an attack early in the game, you have to do four main major quests in the mid game. Add on top the ridicoulous cliched storyline of save the world against the evil orcs, have the same Bioware style characters that resemble their characters from the past, and have a gamplay system that innovates nothing, and is done better before (FFXII's special edition for example). Hell, look a JRPG INSPIRED DAO's COMBAT!!!! Those stupid JRPGs...lol

How is DAII art style generic? How is it anime? Really what DAII's art is concept art coming to life without being mad e more realistic. Its fine and Legacy truly shows that its the way to go.

And where is CoD and The Sims today? Facing diminishing returns and backlash. Look at all the criticism Activisio is taking for styming innovation. Look at the Guitar Hero series. Why? Because its the same old same old. Look at Pokemon, while its still popular, its no where near as popular as the first two generations.

Really, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess proved how completely idiotic fan bases are. Remember the "Celda" controversey when cartoon Link was intorduced the first time. Because idiot fans wanted Ocarina of Time all over again. Then the games release shut them the hell up, especially about its art style. Then comes Twilight Princess, pure fan service. After incredible hype before and during release, the game truly showed what it was. A cliched by the numbers Zelda that didn't stand the test of time and was even surpassed by a more innovative Zelda style game in Okami in acclaim. Even the creator wasn't happy with Twilight Princess. And look which game won GameFAQs game of the decade....Majora's Mask, the most oddball and progressive Zelda game.

LAWL!

and how does DAII's environments not look like detailed concept art?

It sure as hell beats the hideously ugly DAO graphics that look worse than games released two years prior. The Witcher and Mask of the Betrayer beat DAO in more than just graphics as well.

[bEVEsthda]

txgoldrush wrote...

A) news to BGII, KOTOR and ME2 that DAO is Bioware's "best" recieved game ever.....it wasn't.

And when was the marketing for DA games ever good...wasn't DAO's Marilyn Manson marketing criticized?

Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins who want the same things over and over again. The same conservative style, the same gameplay, the same style of characters, the same story. If Bioware listened to them, everything would be THE SAME. Why can't fans be open minded? I don't think Bioware should cater to fans that don't accept change.

C) And how is DAO "unique"? Its far from it. It follows Bioware formula strongly....lets see, you join or a part of a special organization (gee, Grey Wardens, are they like Jedi, Spirit Monks, or Spectres) you are chased by an evil organization or bad guy, your life is shattered in an attack early in the game, you have to do four main major quests in the mid game. Add on top the ridicoulous cliched storyline of save the world against the evil orcs, have the same Bioware style characters that resemble their characters from the past, and have a gamplay system that innovates nothing, and is done better before (FFXII's special edition for example). Hell, look a JRPG INSPIRED DAO's COMBAT!!!! Those stupid JRPGs...lol

How is DAII art style generic? How is it anime? Really what DAII's art is concept art coming to life without being mad e more realistic. Its fine and Legacy truly shows that its the way to go.

And where is CoD and The Sims today? Facing diminishing returns and backlash. Look at all the criticism Activisio is taking for styming innovation. Look at the Guitar Hero series. Why? Because its the same old same old. Look at Pokemon, while its still popular, its no where near as popular as the first two generations.

Really, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess proved how completely idiotic fan bases are. Remember the "Celda" controversey when cartoon Link was intorduced the first time. Because idiot fans wanted Ocarina of Time all over again. Then the games release shut them the hell up, especially about its art style. Then comes Twilight Princess, pure fan service. After incredible hype before and during release, the game truly showed what it was. A cliched by the numbers Zelda that didn't stand the test of time and was even surpassed by a more innovative Zelda style game in Okami in acclaim. Even the creator wasn't happy with Twilight Princess. And look which game won GameFAQs game of the decade....Majora's Mask, the most oddball and progressive Zelda game.

(Umm,.. Relax. You come across as a child in a tantrum...)

A: It was the best received. I didn't say it is.
You also failed the comprehension test. I said DA2 was a different kind of game for a different audience. Your failure to grasp this point is probably because you belong to that different audience. This carries over to B.

B: Nobody said anything about exactly the same. You're just arguing against views you yourself make up and project on people. People expected a sequel, it's all. A sequel as in the same spirit and aimed at the same audience.  DA2 wasn't. It's a different game aimed at people like you.

C: DA:O is unique in that there isn't any other game like it. As for your attempts to contrieve a "formula" - even if it had been successful instead of pathetic, it wouldn't have proven anything. You see, neither "saving the world" nor being structured into four parts is anything bad or anything that makes anything bad.

Now as for "art style", If you mean the (sometimes sketchy) water color effect of the DA2 graphics, I kinda like that too, a little. I certainly don't object to it. But a lot of people don't like it. Anyway, what I don't like are the designs. Too nonsensical, too childish.

Everything has an end. That fact is hardly a viable argument, regarding CoD and Sims. They're still franchises that has been around a long time and made a lot of money, simply by understanding how NOT to do a sequel. We don't even have to consider if they really know how to make a good sequel. And still sell better than DA2. Frankly, you're not being rational here.

I'll refrain from commenting the last part of your outburst. Just as I won't further comment your: "Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins"  Seems unnecessary, somehow.

[bmwcrazy]

Listening to customers' opinions and making products that they want is part of the business.

Sure you can ignore all their complains and do everything your way as long as you know how to stay profitable, but it's all about balance in my opinion.

[Morroian]

bEVEsthda wrote...

C: DA:O is unique in that there isn't any other game like it. As for your attempts to contrieve a "formula" - even if it had been successful instead of pathetic, it wouldn't have proven anything. You see, neither "saving the world" nor being structured into four parts is anything bad or anything that makes anything bad.

No but it makes it cliche ie.
http://tvtropes.org/...hp/Main/BioWare
See the paragraph on recycled premise.

And in terms of gameplay its not really unique its like a combination of BG and Kotor.

If its unique now its only because no-one except Bioware makes party based tactical rpgs any more, mores the pity.

[bEVEsthda]

Morroian wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

C: DA:O is unique in that there isn't any other game like it. As for your attempts to contrieve a "formula" - even if it had been successful instead of pathetic, it wouldn't have proven anything. You see, neither "saving the world" nor being structured into four parts is anything bad or anything that makes anything bad.

No but it makes it cliche ie.

Which is a strange comment to make in this context (DA:O vs DA2) since a straight railroad and rags to riches is umpteen times as cliché.

[Morroian]

And here is the actual Bioware tropes chart:

http://img189.images...5/bwcliches.png

bEVEsthda wrote...

Which is a strange comment to make in this context (DA:O vs DA2) since a straight railroad and rags to riches is umpteen times as cliché.

Not if you take it as an examination of how powerless Hawke actually is.

Modifié par Morroian, 28 juillet 2011 - 03:08 .

[txgoldrush]

bEVEsthda wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

A) news to BGII, KOTOR and ME2 that DAO is Bioware's "best" recieved game ever.....it wasn't.

And when was the marketing for DA games ever good...wasn't DAO's Marilyn Manson marketing criticized?

Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins who want the same things over and over again. The same conservative style, the same gameplay, the same style of characters, the same story. If Bioware listened to them, everything would be THE SAME. Why can't fans be open minded? I don't think Bioware should cater to fans that don't accept change.

C) And how is DAO "unique"? Its far from it. It follows Bioware formula strongly....lets see, you join or a part of a special organization (gee, Grey Wardens, are they like Jedi, Spirit Monks, or Spectres) you are chased by an evil organization or bad guy, your life is shattered in an attack early in the game, you have to do four main major quests in the mid game. Add on top the ridicoulous cliched storyline of save the world against the evil orcs, have the same Bioware style characters that resemble their characters from the past, and have a gamplay system that innovates nothing, and is done better before (FFXII's special edition for example). Hell, look a JRPG INSPIRED DAO's COMBAT!!!! Those stupid JRPGs...lol

How is DAII art style generic? How is it anime? Really what DAII's art is concept art coming to life without being mad e more realistic. Its fine and Legacy truly shows that its the way to go.

And where is CoD and The Sims today? Facing diminishing returns and backlash. Look at all the criticism Activisio is taking for styming innovation. Look at the Guitar Hero series. Why? Because its the same old same old. Look at Pokemon, while its still popular, its no where near as popular as the first two generations.

Really, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess proved how completely idiotic fan bases are. Remember the "Celda" controversey when cartoon Link was intorduced the first time. Because idiot fans wanted Ocarina of Time all over again. Then the games release shut them the hell up, especially about its art style. Then comes Twilight Princess, pure fan service. After incredible hype before and during release, the game truly showed what it was. A cliched by the numbers Zelda that didn't stand the test of time and was even surpassed by a more innovative Zelda style game in Okami in acclaim. Even the creator wasn't happy with Twilight Princess. And look which game won GameFAQs game of the decade....Majora's Mask, the most oddball and progressive Zelda game.

(Umm,.. Relax. You come across as a child in a tantrum...)

A: It was the best received. I didn't say it is.
You also failed the comprehension test. I said DA2 was a different kind of game for a different audience. Your failure to grasp this point is probably because you belong to that different audience. This carries over to B.

B: Nobody said anything about exactly the same. You're just arguing against views you yourself make up and project on people. People expected a sequel, it's all. A sequel as in the same spirit and aimed at the same audience.  DA2 wasn't. It's a different game aimed at people like you.

C: DA:O is unique in that there isn't any other game like it. As for your attempts to contrieve a "formula" - even if it had been successful instead of pathetic, it wouldn't have proven anything. You see, neither "saving the world" nor being structured into four parts is anything bad or anything that makes anything bad.

Now as for "art style", If you mean the (sometimes sketchy) water color effect of the DA2 graphics, I kinda like that too, a little. I certainly don't object to it. But a lot of people don't like it. Anyway, what I don't like are the designs. Too nonsensical, too childish.

Everything has an end. That fact is hardly a viable argument, regarding CoD and Sims. They're still franchises that has been around a long time and made a lot of money, simply by understanding how NOT to do a sequel. We don't even have to consider if they really know how to make a good sequel. And still sell better than DA2. Frankly, you're not being rational here.

I'll refrain from commenting the last part of your outburst. Just as I won't further comment your: "Then the #1 problem is not DAII, but the fans of Origins"  Seems unnecessary, somehow.

A) Its not the best recieved, BG II has a higher critical acclaim and an even gretaer legacy, KOTOR has far more GOTY awards and was responsible along with Morrowind in bringing WRPGs to consoles in the first place. Mass Effect 2, one of the highest, if not the highest, critical acclaim in RPG history and a ton of GOTY awards. Last time I checked, DAO was smoked by Uncharted 2 in GOTY awards in 2009 and many places put Demon's Souls ahead of DAO for RPGOTY, I do too.

And DAII seems like the same style that DAO had, its just faster and more action oriented. Nevermind the fact that the console versions of DAO were different from the PC version.

The story is way different...but that does not mean its for s different audience. Hell, Ultima games have very different stories from one another.

No, thats what fanbases generally want, the same with very small differences. And it is a sequel, just like Ultima IV was to III. Even if a game makes drastic changes, doesn't mean its not a sequel. Hardcore fanbases just don't realize this. And game developers should try to expand their audience, not just cater to hardcore fans.

C) Do I have to bring out the Hellforge Bioware Cliche Chart? Its not bad until you overdo it and repeat the same style and formula over again. You cannot innovate that way.

And how is DAO unique? It borrows its formula from other Bioware games, has some of the most generic plotlines imaginable, plays like FFXII does, and borrows similiar Bioware character archtypes. Games like Bastion, and Fallout New Vegas, and The Witcher series, a JRPG gem this year called Radiant Historia, and even busted games like Alpha Protocol are far far more unique and innovative than DAO. They do something unique with either their settings, their characters, their gameplay, etc. DAO does nothing innovative (even the Origins stories were done before, Secret of Mana's sequel for example) and nothing truly unique. its a generic run at the mill RPG catered to old school fans.

Call of Duty has been heavily criticized, just because it sells well doesn't mean its good. Just because  a game doesn't sell well doesn't mean its bad either....see Okami, a criticial success but commerical failure which kille dtheir studio. And notice how CoD has increasing criticism against it as each game in the series is released....its because they don't innovate, they don't take risks, they just rehash. Contrast this with the Assassin's Creed series that innovates with each new game. That multiplayer for Brotherhood is different and unique. It gets sales by taking risks, and the franchise itself was the ultimate risk.

[BlueMagitek]

Depends on the fandom. Look at the Sonic fandom. They're crazy. Poor Sega can't do a thing without their shattered base reacting loudly. ~_'

[OdanUrr]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Depends on the fandom. Look at the Sonic fandom. They're crazy. Poor Sega can't do a thing without their shattered base reacting loudly. ~_'

"I'm falling free in the wind, in the wind...":whistle:

[txgoldrush]

Morroian wrote...

And here is the actual Bioware tropes chart:

http://img189.images...5/bwcliches.png

bEVEsthda wrote...

Which is a strange comment to make in this context (DA:O vs DA2) since a straight railroad and rags to riches is umpteen times as cliché.

Not if you take it as an examination of how powerless Hawke actually is.

right on.....

Instead of a god like protagonist whose decisions affect everything, DAII, breaking WRPG norm, has a far less powerful and far more human protagonist in which while his or her decisions don't affect the grand scaie of things, affect many outcome son the personal level.

[txgoldrush]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Depends on the fandom. Look at the Sonic fandom. They're crazy. Poor Sega can't do a thing without their shattered base reacting loudly. ~_'

The Final Fantasy fanbase is atrocious, its because of them that we got FFXIII in all its linear and cliched glory. It became a far more extreme version of FFX and undid every step forward FFXII brought to the table.

[bEVEsthda]

Morroian wrote...

And here is the actual Bioware tropes chart:

http://img189.images...5/bwcliches.png

bEVEsthda wrote...

Which is a strange comment to make in this context (DA:O vs DA2) since a straight railroad and rags to riches is umpteen times as cliché.

Not if you take it as an examination of how powerless Hawke actually is.

 Oh, but yes it is, still. Particularly the railroad.

I'd also think that Hawke's powerlessness is maybe more a side effect of the lack of interweave gameplay/story  than intention of how we are supposed to perceive it.
Anyway, it's all irrelevant, because a powerless Hawke is not an element of quality, just as 'saving the world' is not something bad. And if you go on calling everything involving major cataclysmic events and a protagonist caught up in it all, a "save-the-world-cliché" and consider it something bad, well, then goodbye to you.

[txgoldrush]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Morroian wrote...

And here is the actual Bioware tropes chart:

http://img189.images...5/bwcliches.png

bEVEsthda wrote...

Which is a strange comment to make in this context (DA:O vs DA2) since a straight railroad and rags to riches is umpteen times as cliché.

Not if you take it as an examination of how powerless Hawke actually is.

 Oh, but yes it is, still. Particularly the railroad.

I'd also think that Hawke's powerlessness is maybe more a side effect of the lack of interweave gameplay/story  than intention of how we are supposed to perceive it.
Anyway, it's all irrelevant, because a powerless Hawke is not an element of quality, just as 'saving the world' is not something bad. And if you go on calling everything involving major cataclysmic events and a protagonist caught up in it all, a "save-the-world-cliché" and consider it something bad, well, then goodbye to you.

its not "saving the world" that is bad, its not being unique about it.

Look at Majora's Mask..it definitely is a "save the world" story, HOWEVER, its conveyed in a unique manner by a game play element with the three day Groundhog Day style cycle in which the moon will crash. Not only that, it took the Zelda series to more emotional and darker places that it normally couldn't go due to the three day cycle.

DAO doesn't have this, its by the numbers....

[BlueMagitek]

OdanUrr wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

Depends on the fandom. Look at the Sonic fandom. They're crazy. Poor Sega can't do a thing without their shattered base reacting loudly. ~_'

"I'm falling free in the wind, in the wind...":whistle:

I'm not saying anything is good, I'm just saying that anything they do has a large portion of the fanbase up in arms.

txgoldrush wrote...


The Final Fantasy fanbase is atrocious, its because of them that we
got FFXIII in all its linear and cliched glory. It became a far more
extreme version of FFX and undid every step forward FFXII brought to the
table.

Considering I tend to hear the FF fandom calling for a more return to past glory rather than the ridiculous mess we ended up with in XIII, I think it's mostly SE's fault.  Like the mess that was XIV; mostly SE's fault.

[OdanUrr]

BlueMagitek wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

Depends on the fandom. Look at the Sonic fandom. They're crazy. Poor Sega can't do a thing without their shattered base reacting loudly. ~_'

"I'm falling free in the wind, in the wind...":whistle:

I'm not saying anything is good, I'm just saying that anything they do has a large portion of the fanbase up in arms.

It was just an innocent quote.

[BlueMagitek]

Oh yes, you and your "innocent" quotes. >_>

At least you didn't bring up the game that wrote itself out of existence. "

Anyway, to the main topic, I think it'd be best if Bioware found some common ground between what they want to do and what their fanbase wants.

Or just allow a "Dragon Age: Dark Alliance" and make a hack and slash. =D