597 réponses à ce sujet

[Lenimph]

Sylvianus wrote...
They will at least make the difference between the floor and walls. <_<

But to please you, everything is beautiful in DA2. Yeah.

I never said beautiful...  I said "fine" I'm not here to proclaim DA2 has the best graphics of all time but it was certainly an improvement from DA:O (console wise) but it's not as bad as you say it is.  

The Dragon Age series was never a series that you played for the graphics to begin with.   Yes there could be improvement, yes the artistic style is questionable, but is it total horse manure? No

And yes the floor is the same color as the natural materials that the wall was made of in certain places...

[Mr.House]

Ringo12 wrote...

Lenimph wrote...

@those complaing about DA2's console graphics....

Dragon Age 2 looked fine on my grandma's HD television... I don't know what the fuss is all about *sexbox girl* Yeah it doesn't look good on my standard TV but nothing looks great on that thing really.

I'll wait to see how "great" TW2 will perform on console before I would say anything personally...

So far it's looking better and performing just fine.

Demo presentation and finish product are two diffrent things.

[Costin_Razvan]

Lenimph wrote...

@those complaing about DA2's console graphics....

Dragon Age 2 looked fine on my grandma's HD television... I don't know what the fuss is all about *sexbox girl* Yeah it doesn't look good on my standard TV but nothing looks great on that thing really.

I'll wait to see how "great" TW2 will perform on console before I would say anything personally...

Set Witcher 2 to medium settings and play it, and then you will see how it will look on consoles.

I was amazed myself.

 In other news I don't think there might be another Witcher any time soon due to the fact a good chunk of the core team have been laid off and found work in other studios. Even if CDProjeckt recovers from their publisher fiasco in their console port, building a new team from the ground up is going to be painful if the most important people on the original team have left.

DA3 should be its own entity. If anything its game engine needs a serious overhaul.

Could you provide a link. Not saying I don't belive you but I would REALLY want to know more about this ( It's like a punch in the gut for me right now ).

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 03 août 2011 - 09:22 .

[contextual_entity]

RageGT wrote...

If by that you mean, amazing graphics, mechanics, a real dark and mature game for adults, filled with really meaningful choices, clever humor, amazingly intrinsic politics, no hands holding, punitive of stupidity, no button awesome - at least until adrenaline bar is filled =) - a game which treats gamers at least as half intelligent beings who knows how to read...

All that combined with BioWare usual party-based combat and customizable protagonists (with all different races too) is certainly a winner.

I felt this comment bore repeating.

[Sylvianus]

Lenimph wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
They will at least make the difference between the floor and walls. <_<

But to please you, everything is beautiful in DA2. Yeah.

I never said beautiful...  I said "fine" I'm not here to proclaim DA2 has the best graphics of all time but it was certainly an improvement from DA:O (console wise) but it's not as bad as you say it is.  

The Dragon Age series was never a series that you played for the graphics to begin with.   Yes there could be improvement, yes the artistic style is questionable, but is it total horse manure? No

And yes the floor is the same color as the natural materials that the wall was made of in certain places...

that was fine for you but not me, you know. Me =/ you. Not at all.

And for what it's worth, ( dao ) it was reasonable and accurate at the time despite poor graphics ( yeah a game released in 2009 ). Da2 has a better potential, yes.. but it was clearly rushed. It's obvious they have not made any effort in this area. And that's why they released " a little later " a high-quality graphics for PC.
 
Unacceptable for a plateforme that is so powerful. I do not know if you lie yourself, or if you are blind. ( well, I don't really care ) Or if you are talking about a game you do not even have on this platform.

That is is immediately visible when I play the game and I travel to Kirkwall. The beach are also surprising. And caves too. You think it may be fine as they were presented ?, Not me. Not at all for the love of god.
I hope that there will be a real job for the next game on xbox.

And it is time to leave this kind of poor justification. The graphics of a game released some years ago were already mediocre, so you should not worry about that today. We must evolve and improve in sequels, not the contrary. And that thought must be realized in each area. If DA2 would have worked in many areas and with much less defect, it could be less an issue, however.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 03 août 2011 - 10:03 .

[hoorayforicecream]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Just mentions. In my eyes, not different than the immediate reactions that TW2 had. None of them really end up mattering im my eyes. They can enhance the experience sure, but things like that do not make a story for me, unless it's deliberately a romance story, or a personal story, something that I felt DA2 was not good enough at to be considered as such.
The difference between friendship and rivalry is limited in most cases. You can't make a companion hate you for instance, based on your choices.

This is somewhere we'll have to agree to disagree. Choices Hawke makes with the companions have effects that are felt later, and not as immediate responses. But if those don't seem meaningful to you, that's not something I can change. 

Except Geralt can have a relationship. The fact that you do not see it as a good relationship, is completely different and of course valid. I personaly do see a relationship, and am not just told about it. And I find it good enough.

If you choose to call it a relationship, it's as immutable as Geralt is. Once again, I feel like I have no sense of agency in Geralt's choices. For me, it sucks.

Triss does mention the relationship prior to the bath scene, without Geralt prompting her. Going as far as to say she'd drop everything for him.
I do see a couple. They express affection rarely, but they do and I do not mind. I personally do not express my affection often either (in fact, me being expected to do so annoys me).

Considering who and what Geralt is and what he's been through, I find that's part of his charm and appeal.
As in, it's a design choice imo, and not a flaw.

And we're back to the feeling of agency. I can respect that this is what the characters *are*. Maybe they are a couple that just doesn't like to express or show any of the affection that the other characters keep telling me is there that I just don't see. I just don't *like* them, because I don't feel like anything I do can possibly affect these characters' lives. So I don't feel like I should bother, because I'm just an observer looking in. In DA2, I *do* feel like can have an effect on other characters' lives and growth, and that sense of agency provides me the motivation to continue with the game. I was hoping to see something similar in W2 because all of the reviews kept saying how character-driven it was, and was woefully disappointed. It was certainly character-driven, but it wasn't me doing the driving. That left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Hence I said "most". Anders is one of the rare few I thought, though I felt the implemention was flawed. Much of his development was done off screen.

Fenris, Carver, Bethany, and Aveline can also be affected by plot-oriented choices made over the course of the game by changes in the world state, and not simply by being told to do something. Maybe your definition of "most" is different than mine.

[TexasToast712]

The Witcher (1&2) sucked. I honestly dont see what everyone likes about it.

*Activates Barrier*

[KnightofPhoenix]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
And we're back to the feeling of agency. I can respect that this is what the characters *are*. Maybe they are a couple that just doesn't like to express or show any of the affection that the other characters keep telling me is there that I just don't see. I just don't *like* them, because I don't feel like anything I do can possibly affect these characters' lives. So I don't feel like I should bother, because I'm just an observer looking in. In DA2, I *do* feel like can have an effect on other characters' lives and growth, and that sense of agency provides me the motivation to continue with the game. I was hoping to see something similar in W2 because all of the reviews kept saying how character-driven it was, and was woefully disappointed. It was certainly character-driven, but it wasn't me doing the driving. That left a bitter taste in my mouth.

That's perfectly understandable.
I prefer agency in other matters.

TW2 is more plot-driven than character driven, imo.

Fenris, Carver, Bethany, and Aveline can also be affected by plot-oriented choices made over the course of the game by changes in the world state, and not simply by being told to do something. Maybe your definition of "most" is different than mine.

Fenris reacts to the world state? How, he keeps sitting in that god awful mess of a house of his, not doing anything, except at the very end and appparently it's very easy to sway him anyhow. I saw my brother playing, he didn't have him at either rival or friendship, didn't do his Danarius quest, and still managed to convince him to fight with mages. 
Aveline, sure we are told she became a competent captain, but what I see tells a different tale and at the end of the day, Aveline remains Aveline throughout (so does Varric really). I do not feel they act that different after their quests. I do not know about Bethany, but Carver's insistance on reminding me that he is jealous makes me not give a damn about anything he does. 

In what is supposed to be a companion driven story, especially considering the lack of a strong overall plot, what I see is pretty weak. Not that it being stronger would change much considering how I am indifferent to 6 out of 8 companion. 

I feel many companions have little to no role in the story. TW2 characters are imo integrated better, and react to the story better.

And gtg again. Cheers!

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 août 2011 - 09:45 .

[nitefyre410]

TexasToast712 wrote...

The Witcher (1&2) sucked. I honestly dont see what everyone likes about it.

*Activates Barrier*

*grabs tombstone* 

So what  would you like me to engrave on  this for you?

Modifié par nitefyre410, 03 août 2011 - 09:55 .

[Lenimph]

Sylvianus wrote...


And for what it's worth, ( dao ) it was reasonable and accurate at the time despite poor graphics ( yeah a game released in 2007 ).

Wait are you saying you had DA:O in 2007?!

Lucky you!!!

[Leoroc]

It really seems odd that people calling on The Witcher as the game to compare to. To be honest this is the only place I ever hear of the game and it doesn't sound all that good to be honest. People complain about not being able to make Hawke their own here but TW2 you can't even change your appearance?

Why not say DA3 has to become Fable or Elder Scrolls or even Torin's Passage?

[erynnar]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Just mentions. In my eyes, not different than the immediate reactions that TW2 had. None of them really end up mattering im my eyes. They can enhance the experience sure, but things like that do not make a story for me, unless it's deliberately a romance story, or a personal story, something that I felt DA2 was not good enough at to be considered as such.
The difference between friendship and rivalry is limited in most cases. You can't make a companion hate you for instance, based on your choices.

This is somewhere we'll have to agree to disagree. Choices Hawke makes with the companions have effects that are felt later, and not as immediate responses. But if those don't seem meaningful to you, that's not something I can change. 

Except Geralt can have a relationship. The fact that you do not see it as a good relationship, is completely different and of course valid. I personaly do see a relationship, and am not just told about it. And I find it good enough.

If you choose to call it a relationship, it's as immutable as Geralt is. Once again, I feel like I have no sense of agency in Geralt's choices. For me, it sucks.

Triss does mention the relationship prior to the bath scene, without Geralt prompting her. Going as far as to say she'd drop everything for him.
I do see a couple. They express affection rarely, but they do and I do not mind. I personally do not express my affection often either (in fact, me being expected to do so annoys me).

Considering who and what Geralt is and what he's been through, I find that's part of his charm and appeal.
As in, it's a design choice imo, and not a flaw.

And we're back to the feeling of agency. I can respect that this is what the characters *are*. Maybe they are a couple that just doesn't like to express or show any of the affection that the other characters keep telling me is there that I just don't see. I just don't *like* them, because I don't feel like anything I do can possibly affect these characters' lives. So I don't feel like I should bother, because I'm just an observer looking in. In DA2, I *do* feel like can have an effect on other characters' lives and growth, and that sense of agency provides me the motivation to continue with the game. I was hoping to see something similar in W2 because all of the reviews kept saying how character-driven it was, and was woefully disappointed. It was certainly character-driven, but it wasn't me doing the driving. That left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Hence I said "most". Anders is one of the rare few I thought, though I felt the implemention was flawed. Much of his development was done off screen.

Fenris, Carver, Bethany, and Aveline can also be affected by plot-oriented choices made over the course of the game by changes in the world state, and not simply by being told to do something. Maybe your definition of "most" is different than mine.

Can you give me examples of how plot oriented choices make a difference (not being ****y or playing gotcha, I really want to know)? I played two playthroughs and I didn't notice the characters change much. Only Isabela really seemed to change or grow (Varric doesn't have to, he has the chesthair:lol:). And yes, I did like characters mostly, I just fetl they were the same from beginning to end for the most part.

[Sylvianus]

Lenimph wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...


And for what it's worth, ( dao ) it was reasonable and accurate at the time despite poor graphics ( yeah a game released in 2007 ).

Wait are you saying you had DA:O in 2007?!

Lucky you!!!

Well,I am a privileged person, I have access to Bioware, so yeah. Don't be jealous honey.

* fix his post *

[Realmzmaster]

Leoroc wrote...

It really seems odd that people calling on The Witcher as the game to compare to. To be honest this is the only place I ever hear of the game and it doesn't sound all that good to be honest. People complain about not being able to make Hawke their own here but TW2 you can't even change your appearance?

Why not say DA3 has to become Fable or Elder Scrolls or even Torin's Passage?

The Witcher 2 is the game that came out right after DA2. Many people on the forum here have played it and found it to be quite enjoyable.  The OP has played The Witcher 2 and like many elements in it more than DA2.

It has been 5 years since the last ElderScrolls game and Skyrim is not out yet. So DA2 gets compared to the Witcher 2 which is freshest in most forum mates mind's.

I did not like the Witcher 1 & 2. Yes I have played both to completion, but YMMV.

[Wittand25]

erynnar wrote..
Can you give me examples of how plot oriented choices make a difference (not being ****y or playing gotcha, I really want to know)? I played two playthroughs and I didn't notice the characters change much. Only Isabela really seemed to change or grow (Varric doesn't have to, he has the chesthair:lol:). And yes, I did like characters mostly, I just fetl they were the same from beginning to end for the most part.

Since this is the no spoiler section let me just say Fenris *** if you do *** during ***.
Aveline can *** if you do *** resulting in ***.
Carver`s the most obvious at the end of act one
Merril can either go on to do *** or realise *** and do ***

For further discussion I would recommend going to the spoiler section.

[Chromie]

[quote]Mr.House wrote...
So far it's looking better and performing just fine.

[/quote]
Demo presentation and finish product are two diffrent things.

[/quote]

For alpha testing that's pretty damn good. Remember when people though this was ONLY alpha and not how the game would like once it has reached gold status?

[hoorayforicecream]

erynnar wrote...

Can you give me examples of how plot oriented choices make a difference (not being ****y or playing gotcha, I really want to know)? I played two playthroughs and I didn't notice the characters change much. Only Isabela really seemed to change or grow (Varric doesn't have to, he has the chesthair:lol:). And yes, I did like characters mostly, I just fetl they were the same from beginning to end for the most part.

If you take Fenris outside of the city in act 2, the group will be ambushed by Hadriana, one of Danarius' proteges. If you don't chase down the lead within a reasonable amount of time (Fenris will complain), he will permanently leave. Not really sure if this counts a lot as growth or not, but it is a reaction based on choices made in the game.

Aveline can get married based on Hawke's choices in act 2. That colors how she views things somewhat. Unmarried Aveline is less happy, for certain.

Merrill can be convinced to give up blood magic at the end of her quest line in act 3, but this isn't really main plot-based, it's how Hawke treats her and encourages her.

Carver and Bethany can become Wardens, or join the Templars/Circle. Their personalities change significantly, depending on where they end up, and the choices aren't in any way based on Hawke's encouragement or discouragement. Bethany as a Warden is much more fatalistic, while she is more hopeful as a circle mage. Carver is much more mellow as a Warden and less jealous, probably because he feels like he's finally found his purpose in life.

Anders grows based on the story itself, the choices don't really affect him quite as much. It's just not a good growth; he becomes more withdrawn and more revolution-oriented. He can, however, be convinced via rivalry path to side with the Templars, by convincing him that Justice has been corrupted.

Isabela you've already mentioned.

Varric doesn't really change (as he is the only party member who will never leave under any circumstances), but most folks don't seem to mind that.

[axl99]

Why should DA3 aspire to be an aesthetically uninspired game and use overclocked graphics and copious amounts of expensive post processing as a crutch to cover for the unambitious art direction?

I'd much rather it concentrate first on being a better game to play, starting with the level designs. Narrative and art can come later. In DA2 a lot of the level design was top heavy, there wasn't enough assets populating the characters' eye level - which in our case is the default 3/4 top down camera view.

Modifié par axl99, 03 août 2011 - 10:27 .

[nitefyre410]

Sylvianus wrote...

Lenimph wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...


And for what it's worth, ( dao ) it was reasonable and accurate at the time despite poor graphics ( yeah a game released in 2007 ).

Wait are you saying you had DA:O in 2007?!

Lucky you!!!

Well,I am a privileged person, I have access to Bioware, so yeah. Don't be jealous honey.

* fix his post *

*sips a cool refreshing bottle of Haterade* 

I ain't mad but I am hatin' just  a bit... jk

[axl99]

U mad bro? U mad?

And another thing I'd rather not have in DA3?

Quicktime events.

Modifié par axl99, 03 août 2011 - 10:32 .

[DragonRageGT]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

 In other news I don't think there might be another Witcher any time soon due to the fact a good chunk of the core team have been laid off and found work in other studios. Even if CDProjeckt recovers from their publisher fiasco in their console port, building a new team from the ground up is going to be painful if the most important people on the original team have left.

DA3 should be its own entity. If anything its game engine needs a serious overhaul.

Could you provide a link. Not saying I don't belive you but I would REALLY want to know more about this ( It's like a punch in the gut for me right now ).

LOL... that guy is a couple of years late with his news!

April 30th, 2009
Rumors started to hit the web this week claiming that The Witcher developers CD Projekt are having some deep financial problems that caused cancellation of two follow-up projects of the Witcher, as well as the console versions.

Various other reports suggest that the developers were also forced to can one unannounced title and lay off a big portion of their employees

http://www.unigamesi...ncial-problems/

Fact is that companies are disputing to see which will distribute TW2 for the Xbox! And if CDPR delivered this amazing game after facing problems, which I know wasn't that big just by looking who's their parent company, I imagine what they will do now that TW2 is a huge success, commercially as well. (they fired the hired third party that should develop TW1 for consoles when those news appeared, because they failed to deliver - check the credits of TW1 and TW2 and everyone's there! )

[Chromie]

axl99 wrote...

Why should DA3 aspire to be an aesthetically uninspired game and use overclocked graphics and copious amounts of expensive post processing as a crutch to cover for the unambitious art direction?

I'd much rather it concentrate first on being a better game to play, starting with the level designs. Narrative and art can come later. In DA2 a lot of the level design was top heavy, there wasn't enough assets populating the characters' eye level - which in our case is the default 3/4 top down camera view.

I could understand not letting the story suffer for pretty graphics but DA2 doesn't even that. Hell DA2 doesn't have much in level design.

Just have to say I play Witcher 2 with almost everything on except AA, SSAO and Ubersampling at 1920x1200 and I I have been getting such a great framerate since patch 1.3 35-45 fps and when playing on my tv dropping down to 1920x1080 gives me a much bigger boost.
This is all on a SINGLE HD 5770, 4 gigs of ram and a old Q6600. Dragon Age 2 if I happen to turn everything on it doesn't look great and get a terrible framerate worse then in Witcher 2 hell worse then Crysis 2 which I turn on DX11 for.

A game that looks good doesn't have to sarifice story I don't see where this comes form.

[Wynne]

*dreams of a universe where she could play a female human and romance Iorveth/Yaevinn* Yes, PLEASE.

I don't want the DA franchise to copy the Witcher series, but taking a look at what those games did right certainly couldn't hurt. And one of the biggest things they did right was elven rebel leaders. I would love to see the DA team's version of Robin Hood, elf-style. He or she should be bitter/sarcastic/cynical. That would make a great romance.

[axl99]

Graphics does not equal Art Direction.

.

[Krusty84]

@axl99
Ha ha ha

Modifié par Krusty84, 03 août 2011 - 11:11 .