474 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

Ukki wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The reaction to Legacy from a significant number of people who disliked DA2 suggests otherwise.

I disliked DA2 because it is so mediocre game, but I also didn´t like Legacy because it was way too boring and didn´t add anything to the game.

It added to the lore, it added to Hawke's background, the encounter design was better than any fight in DA2.

[Joy Divison]

Morroian wrote...

It added to the lore, it added to Hawke's background, the encounter design was better than any fight in DA2.

Does Bioware pay you to defend DA2?

[Morty Smith]

Joy Divison wrote...

Morroian wrote...

It added to the lore, it added to Hawke's background, the encounter design was better than any fight in DA2.

Does Bioware pay you to defend DA2?

I don´t think they are in the "wasting-money-business".

[Kaizerzero2]

Morroian wrote...

Ukki wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The reaction to Legacy from a significant number of people who disliked DA2 suggests otherwise.

I disliked DA2 because it is so mediocre game, but I also didn´t like Legacy because it was way too boring and didn´t add anything to the game.

It added to the lore, it added to Hawke's background, the encounter design was better than any fight in DA2.

...and the core game still remains of poor quality.

[Nerdage]

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

Don't put words in my mouth, Nerdage. Words like "Good" and "Fun" are subjective. A lot of people LOVE the crap EA puts out, but I don't find it fun at all. Likewise I love spending hours at a time playing Sim City, a game that most madden fans find boring beyond the pale. What I'm saying is that pretty much everyone who enjoys playing RPGs is already playing RPGs. Story has nothing to do with it. Almost everyone likes stories. That's why they're so "ubiquitous" (I hope you don't really talk that way) in video gaming. But a lot of people, I'd even  venture to say most people, who enjoy stories don't neccesarily like RPGs.

What EA has done is taken a product that I think everyone here will agree was "fun" and split us down the middle so that half of us will still buy it, and the other half wouldn't wipe our bottoms with it. Their logic for doing this was that more people would play the game if they dumbed it down for the console tards and threw us RPG snobs overboard.

I may be right or wrong about the "why" of it, but the fact is it didn't work.

Of course everyone who likes RPGs is already playing them, they wouldn't like them otherwise, but more people might like them if given the chance. If everybody likes story, why would they not like a game with a deeper, more interactive story, where they had more control over who their character was? Because the gameplay itself is deliberately exclusive? How is that a good thing?

The idea of bringing the roleplaying element (character, story, the RP in RPG) to more kinds of gameplay is one I support fully, and just because you call yourself an RPG fan doesn't give you the right to chastise Bioware for making an RPG whose gameplay isn't to your specific liking. For the record, I'm talking generally, not about DA2 specifically.

(I hope you don't really talk that way)

Mmmm.. unnecessary internet hostility, it sustains me.

Modifié par nerdage, 30 septembre 2011 - 11:43 .

[Mike_Neel]

I'm kind of tired of people assuming anyone who has anything to say against DA2, be it constructive or not, automatically wants another Origins or was mad it wasn't DA Origins 2.

I try my best to remain non biased towards both games and see things in both games that went well and bad.
I don't want another Origins. I like a lot of the changes DA2 made, but it was by no means the great game Bioware claims it to be. I'm sorry but it's not. I'm not saying I expect them to hang their heads in shame and agree with me. I just wish they didn't herald DA2 as the "messiah" of RPG gaming if you will. Yes the game does some things well. Yes it improved on several things Origins did, but no this is definitely not the best product and I honestly hope this isn't the bar they're setting for themselves.

And while I think it's perfectly fine to want to widen your audience, I really wish they'd stop targeting the shooter audience by taking out RPG elements in favor of a more linear experience and easier accessibility.
I'm not saying the game has to be near impossible for it to be good nor be buried in endless stats and virtual dice rolls. I'm just tired of devs taking stuff out entirely to ship a simpler game instead of working on improving the mechanic and explaining the learning curve better to newer players. Bioware is pretty bad about this across all games though. They see something that doesn't work well or isn't well received and instead of performing some precision surgery on it they just amputate from the core game all together.

I will say I am very optimistic about the future of the franchise both in seeing all the feedback that's going into the DLC as well as all the commentary and talks that have been given about DA in general. It really does sound like they might actually pull of this "best of both worlds" as they're saying.

[Morroian]

Mike_Neel wrote...

I'm kind of tired of people assuming anyone who has anything to say against DA2, be it constructive or not, automatically wants another Origins or was mad it wasn't DA Origins 2.

No-one is saying that apart from trolls not even Zeschuk and Muzyka despite the claims that they are.

Mike_Neel wrote...

I try my best to remain non biased towards both games and see things in both games that went well and bad.
I don't want another Origins. I like a lot of the changes DA2 made, but it was by no means the great game Bioware claims it to be. I'm sorry but it's not. I'm not saying I expect them to hang their heads in shame and agree with me. I just wish they didn't herald DA2 as the "messiah" of RPG gaming if you will. Yes the game does some things well. Yes it improved on several things Origins did, but no this is definitely not the best product and I honestly hope this isn't the bar they're setting for themselves. 

You're not taking into account the feedback from the devs themselves on this forum and the example of the improvements they've made in Legacy in repsonse to the criticism. Based on the feedback DA2 is not the bar.

[Jerrybnsn]

I don't think Bioware is so much concerned about the forum feedbacks such as this site. I think they were stunned that the game reviewers gave it lower scores than Origins (excluding PC Magazine's "RPG of the decade?") AND the lower than expected sales. When a respected reviewer like Game Informer picks apart your game's faults and you end up selling less than 2 million than your first game in a series, then Bioware and EA begin to take notice. Because if Bioware was listening to this site to start with DAII would have never been made the way it was. It's not us that they are talking about, its Joe Juba and his fellow reviewers AND a sales chart held up by EA financial advisors that they are listening to.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 01 octobre 2011 - 12:20 .

[billy the squid]

Morroian wrote...

Great another go round  of lets criticise Bioware for public statements even though there's nothing actually in the interview to get annoyed by. 

Monica83 wrote...

The funny thing is that didin't realize they can't statisfate both community ..

Its just simple there are people the DAO fanbase that loves old School RPG and the new crew that likes more action rpg...

The reaction to Legacy from a significant number of people who disliked DA2 suggests otherwise.

Really? Or is this a purely anecdotal assumption based on a handful of threads with inherent positive bias. Although I don't think it as simple as some claim, regarding old and new adherents to the IP prefering one type to another.

Modifié par billy the squid, 01 octobre 2011 - 12:21 .

[dreadpiratesnugglecakes]

Morroian wrote...

Ukki wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The reaction to Legacy from a significant number of people who disliked DA2 suggests otherwise.

I disliked DA2 because it is so mediocre game, but I also didn´t like Legacy because it was way too boring and didn´t add anything to the game.

It added to the lore, it added to Hawke's background, the encounter design was better than any fight in DA2.

Wow.  Better than any fight in DA2?  That's like being the tallest building in a town of 600.  Not that impressive.  Hawke's background?  I didn't like Hawke; not interested in his beginning; just in his end.  I bought the stupid DLC but your sales technique is making me wish I hadn't.  Please stop.

[MingWolf]

nerdage wrote...

Of course everyone who likes RPGs is already playing them, they wouldn't like them otherwise, but more people might like them if given the chance.  If everybody likes story, why would they not like a game with a deeper, more interactive story, where they had more control over who their character was? Because the gameplay itself is deliberately exclusive? How is that a good thing?

I really think it all depends, and one really has to define what "given the chance" really means.  When I look at DA2 personally, I see a game that tried to be something that it was never meant to be.  You see controls really simplified, you see combat sped up with what I consider to be over-the-top flair, the whole game seemed more action paced.  It was almost as though the game tried to focus too hard on grabbing a different crowd, while probably struggling at both keeping the core fans and making new ones.  Heck, the game seemed so much like a frankensteined ME2xDA:O that scared me to an extent.  So again, how do we give people who couldn't care much about RPGs a chance to enjoy them? 

DA2 seemed to try the hybrid approach, by taking little elements that work in some games and trying to meld them
together through fire and err.. programming language.  If I only cared about first person shooters, I probably wouldn't have been really that much impressed by such a feat.  I think that the developers shouldn't really pay so much attention on technical successes of other games, or the boundries of different genres, and instead try and come up with a game that focuses on good presentation and artform.  They need to know what they are trying to tell their audiences, determine how they will offer their experiences, whether such methods would actually work, and then build the game from there.  Furthermore, they need to be consistent, and I really felt DA2 went offroading on this one.  I don't mind mixing different kinds of gameplay together, so long as it makes sense.  Personally, I don't care whether a game may be classified as some action adventure or an RPG or a mix of both.  What matters to me as a gamer is how the game is presented and whether I am really entertained by the hard earned money I spend. 

I read somewhere once that Bioware/EA, whatever, actually did try to target the CoD crowd with DA2.  I feel that such aims are a bit misguided and foolish.  They should have focused first on their own game and what they've created before focusing their crosshairs on others who perhaps couldn't care more about Dragon Age, fantasy, RPGs and the like.  They don't have to make their games the same way all the time, but when it's finished, it better be worth all the effort with the gamers, hopefully, pleased at the results.

Modifié par MingWolf, 01 octobre 2011 - 04:58 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

nerdage wrote...

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

Don't put words in my mouth, Nerdage. Words like "Good" and "Fun" are subjective. A lot of people LOVE the crap EA puts out, but I don't find it fun at all. Likewise I love spending hours at a time playing Sim City, a game that most madden fans find boring beyond the pale. What I'm saying is that pretty much everyone who enjoys playing RPGs is already playing RPGs. Story has nothing to do with it. Almost everyone likes stories. That's why they're so "ubiquitous" (I hope you don't really talk that way) in video gaming. But a lot of people, I'd even  venture to say most people, who enjoy stories don't neccesarily like RPGs.

What EA has done is taken a product that I think everyone here will agree was "fun" and split us down the middle so that half of us will still buy it, and the other half wouldn't wipe our bottoms with it. Their logic for doing this was that more people would play the game if they dumbed it down for the console tards and threw us RPG snobs overboard.

I may be right or wrong about the "why" of it, but the fact is it didn't work.

If everybody likes story, why would they not like a game with a deeper, more interactive story, where they had more control over who their character was? Because the gameplay itself is deliberately exclusive? How is that a good thing?

Oh I agree. But streamlining those elements from NW ( I never play Baldur Gate. My system can't handle it. ) to DA2 isn't a way for "deeper, more interactive story and more control over their character" things.

DA 2 removed Neverwinter Night's character creation. NW 2 removed Neverwinter Night's origins with selective and limited origins and races. DAO followed that path. Player control is already limited. The reason is to have deeper story. DA 2 further streamlined it with only human races and predefined PC for the same reasoning. Did it accomplish anything?

Nope. Nothing is accomplished. In DA 2, there is no such things as deeper story. It's disjointed 3 mini episodes with no focus and motivation. Interactive story now become interactive movie. And player control? How is it, players gain more control over their character? Players can't even express their dialogue lines in their own way, watching their character do and say things without their input, have to rely on other person to tell their own story and most disturbing of all, players character is "gone" the entire time. What in Maker's Breath an RPG without an actual player character?

All this nonsense things are not how it is supposed to be if you want to bring new players to like an RPG.  

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 01 octobre 2011 - 05:53 .

[xkg]

Morroian wrote...

Mike_Neel wrote...

I'm kind of tired of people assuming anyone who has anything to say against DA2, be it constructive or not, automatically wants another Origins or was mad it wasn't DA Origins 2.

No-one is saying that apart from trolls not even Zeschuk and Muzyka despite the claims that they are.

You love to be wrong don't you ?
How about Lead Designer ?

"Well it's hard to know exactly what's going on with scores that are really, really negative. One possible culprit could just be a change backlash, i.e. this isn't Origins and I wanted Origins 2"

http://www.eurogamer...ge-ii-interview

[xkg]

Filament wrote...

xkg wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Mike_Neel wrote...

I'm kind of tired of people assuming anyone who has anything to say against DA2, be it constructive or not, automatically wants another Origins or was mad it wasn't DA Origins 2.

No-one is saying that apart from trolls not even Zeschuk and Muzyka despite the claims that they are.

You love to be wrong don't you ?
How about Lead Designer ?

"Well it's hard to know exactly what's going on with scores that are really, really negative. One possible culprit could just be a change backlash, i.e. this isn't Origins and I wanted Origins 2"

I've changed the emphasis to show where, in fact, you're wrong.

Nice try and you sounds like "yeah it is not raining it is water falling from the sky" 
ehh i wont even bother ...

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Filament wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

DA 2 removed Neverwinter Night's character creation. NW 2 removed Neverwinter Night's origins with selective and limited origins and races. DAO followed that path. Player control is already limited. The reason is to have deeper story. DA 2 further streamlined it with only human races and predefined PC for the same reasoning. Did it accomplish anything?

What? NWN1 didn't have origins.

Wrong. I create my own Origins. Just because the game doesn't show it, doesn't mean it doesn't have one. Otherwise, it's silly that your character just come out of nowhere at the academy. 

Filament wrote...
NWN2 had a broader race and class selection than NWN1 did.

What you see as "broader race and class selection" is what I see as limited choice to create my own character. I don't define creation as selection of choice like most people do.   

Filament wrote...
DAO was more the anomaly among RPG games for having Origins like it did, though truth be told they're more of a slightly expanded race selection gimmick than anything else, since beyond the origin story the game plays out pretty much exactly the same aside from a few references here or there.

I agree. I thought DA 2 would improve it by branching it out through the use of it's class selection since race selection is gone. But alas, it's easier to cut everything than trying to expand it's concept.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 01 octobre 2011 - 07:17 .

[Monica83]

Versago wrote...

Dragon Age II really is the pinnacle of gaming. Everyone should take note. This is how you make a good video game.

ok that was fun

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Versago wrote...

Dragon Age II really is the pinnacle of gaming. Everyone should take note. This is how you make a good video game.

Oh please. You already made so much jokes in one thread already. Don't make me laugh again here. 

[Ostagar2011]

Filament wrote...
It's a vital distinction. No one said "all people
who disliked DA2 disliked it for this reason." They've only ever
offered it as one possible reason. The latter is absolutely true, seeing
as I could find you a million example posts on this board where that's
the main reason they cite. The former is not.

Strawman alert. Yes no one ever said that all people who disliked DA2 wanted Origins 2. But the Origins 2 reason is given over and over again and this is blinding BioWare from seeing any faults in DA2 itself. Here is one from Fernando Melo:

Fernando Melo wrote...
“For sure there are certain people who probably wanted Origins 2 with Dragon Age 2; we did not go in that direction,” Melo adds.

If it's only "certain people" why does he even bring it up? And wait! What a co-incidence! I've just found this from BioWare's CEO:

Ray Muzyka wrote...
"Maybe some of that [negativity] can be attributed to some of the fans of Dragon Age:
Origins who were maybe expecting a similar experience. But we actually
innovated, we took a lot of risk, we were pushing the envelope on how we
told the story, the gameplay, the action moments, the graphics - a lot
of things were changed. And, actually, I really believe it was the right
direction."

Again only "some of the fans" so you're right, the argument collapses. Damn you Ray! Next time please say "all" so that we can win the strawman argument!!

[Feanor_II]

Trying to fuse the whishes of so diferent audiences, may end in a big failure

Jack of all trades, master of none