157 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

Ariella wrote...

The talent/spell icons aren't that different from the ones in DAO, except in how they're arranged and how the player can access them. The only difference I noticed was the icons were somewhat simplified in their art. Rather than overdetailing on icons most people aren't going to notice anyway, they went to simplier line based shapes. It's a little bit more modern of a look, which may be why you see it clashing. But I wouldn't call it childish.

I agree with that, rather than childish they perhaps simply don't fit the setting. I disliked them at the start but now having played through the game multiple times they don't bother me.

[Morroian]

PinkShoes wrote...

I agree with everything you said. Im not a hardcore gamer myself i just want when im player on a harder mode to feel like i am actually playing on a harder mode. The mages in DAO were a damn nightmare and i was always scared in DA2 well..meh.

I breezed through most of DAO on nightmare and I find DA2 to be more difficult in that respect.

[Sutekh]

PinkShoes wrote...

Graphics dont make a game.

Didn't say they do. *is confused* They're part of the package, though.

DA2 did have a story i wont deny that but it was pretty weak. I just felt like its combat was the main focus of the game.

It was weak at times, strong at others. The underlying themes were pretty solid (albeit slightly clichéed, but cliché <> bad). It's all very much YMMV, anyway, so not much point in discussing that, if you ask me. But combat in DA2, for me, is "just there to pass the time". Meaning that I could almost play the game without it and still enjoy it, with the exception of a few particular fights. Legacy, for that matter, was a bit different because of the slightly more tactical aspect.

I really didnt hate DA2, it was okay it had some really good elements. And the combat was so much better than DAO but i still dont think its perfect. The one thing i loved about DAO was the story and the character interaction but i felt like that was taken down a whole lot. I dont want a combat centered game but i want every part of the DA series to be amazing because i loved DAO so much.

OK. Let me get things straight I prefer DAO by a length roughly equal to the long radius of the Milky Way (give or take a few centimeters, and yes, that's hyperbole). I still think that DA2, despite its flaws, has some very great things going for it, and some aspects of the story are part of it (can't go into details, no spoilers). In short, I enjoyed playing it, and still do. The trick here is to stop comparing it to DAO. Admittedly, it's not that easy.

Now, on a totally unrelated note...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

By presenting the opposite opinion in the same terms as his, I demonstrate that his opinions - indeed, anyone's opinions - on their own, are valueless.

This, right there, is a magnificent paradox.

[R0vena]

PinkShoes wrote...

I dont want the gameplay to be insane. I just want there to be a challenge when i am playing hard. DAO was hard i usually played on Normal/hard. But i just felt DA2 lacked that.

Depends on individual gamer, I guess.
I could breeze through DAO on NM without paying much attention to fights at all. NM in DA 2 actually made me think how and what to do next. I still have some battles I can't win with the first try after playing half of dozen times through the game (although I admit, I generally reload when even one companion falls). DAO stopped to be any challenge after very first playthrough. 

Modifié par R0vena, 04 octobre 2011 - 01:42 .

[elfdwarf]

Ukki wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

Yes thats why i liked Legacy because finally we had an end boss that took a tatical thought.

I didn´t feel that way at all.  I just ran to all of the statues to touch them until I faced the boss after which it was pure hack/hack/hack/hack/hack. Booring as h*ll.

really had to change my tactic so they don't get kill in maze and add early fire runes oh forget the potion

[Firky]

R0vena wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

I dont want the gameplay to be insane. I just want there to be a challenge when i am playing hard. DAO was hard i usually played on Normal/hard. But i just felt DA2 lacked that.

Depends on individual gamer, I guess.
I could breeze through DAO on NM without paying much attention to fights at all. NM in DA 2 actually made me think how and what to do next. I still have some battles I can't win with the first try after playing half of dozen times through the game (although I admit, I generally reload when even one companion falls). DAO stopped to be any challenge after very first playthrough. 

That was exactly my experience. Nightmare in DAII was a rare and refreshing challenge. I have hardly seen anyone disputing that - and only a couple of credible people (one person claimed to have done it on a first try but knew, like, two CCCs. OK.)

But, I do wish they'd put friendly fire on hard. Not everyone wants to learn the ins and outs of the optimising you need for nightmare, and many people still want a challenge that is more realistic, I guess.

[ScotGaymer]

Filament wrote...

Sylvius wasn't saying his opinion had any value either. He was only countering Schnozberry's implication that his opinion about what constitutes entertainment in video games ought to be prescribed onto everyone else. ("You want to feel a sense of accomplishment? Donate to charity.") Because other people have different opinions about what constitutes entertainment in video games that don't match RinpocheSchnozberry's.

I'm amazed at how offended people always get when reminded that, you know, that's just, like, their opinion, man.

I dont agree.

I dont think he said or did that at all.

It looked to me like he was merely expressing his own opinion on the subject; nowhere did I see anything that indicated everyone ought to agree with him.

Just that he thought/felt that games ought to be about the "fun factor" more than anything else and I cant say I entirely disagree with him.

Silvius' response to me (and I dont know the history here) seemed like he has some sort of problem with Rinpoche from past encounters and jumped the gun a little in trying to refute him, or put him down. Because actually what Silvius actually said seemed to be agreeing with Rinpoche's actual point.

Rinpoche said that games' primary motive ought to be to be fun, to be entertaining. Which is exactly what Silvius also said but qualified what he said by stating what he found to be "entertaining" where Rinpoche didnt say what he found entertaining at all.

So it boggles the mind when it seems to me like they were in actuality in agreement about what games are for, why he put it in such a way that it was like he was launching a personal attack on Rinpoche. To me it was completely unwarranted.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 04 octobre 2011 - 11:31 .

[PinkShoes]

Ariella wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Mark of the Dragon wrote...

Your not alone. We all want a more realistic art style then the cartoon that is DA2. I kind of picture a better vamped up version of Dragon Age Origins graphics and a bit more serious content. I'm sorry its hard to take a game serious when it looks like your watching cartoon network.

DAO looks just as much a cartoon as DA2, its more generic but not realistic.

I have to disagree with you. DAO graphics were terrible no one can deny that but i just feel like DA2 style became a little childish. Like for example the talent/spell icons.

I wouldn't call them childish or cartoony, especially next to say the Fable series. There is a realism there, it's just a bit hyper. certain colors (reds for example) are sharpened, for example. There is a little anime influence, but that's not surprising considering. I don't really see childish though. "Human" face and form attempts to be realistic and I'd say is on par with Mass Effect's human character graphics.

The talent/spell icons aren't that different from the ones in DAO, except in how they're arranged and how the player can access them. The only difference I noticed was the icons were somewhat simplified in their art. Rather than overdetailing on icons most people aren't going to notice anyway, they went to simplier line based shapes. It's a little bit more modern of a look, which may be why you see it clashing. But I wouldn't call it childish.

I agree actually. Childish was probably the wrong choice of words but hyper animeish may be lol. I really do feel like the art style has become too simple. I loved the talent/spell icons in DAO because they were artistic in DA2 sorta not. The facial graphics for DA has always been good i think. Im not talking the weird elvis eyebrow lol i think its very easy to make a very pretty character in all the DA games.

I dont want the DA series to become i surpose, commercialised is the word to use. It will never get the numbers COD will get for the simple fact it is a fanstay RPG, i dont want DA to suddenly become insanely difficult either. I felt DA2 was catered a lot more towards the casual gamer. I dont think casual games are bad its just the DA series isnt a casual sort of game

[PinkShoes]

Sutekh wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

Graphics dont make a game.

Didn't say they do. *is confused* They're part of the package, though.

DA2 did have a story i wont deny that but it was pretty weak. I just felt like its combat was the main focus of the game.

It was weak at times, strong at others. The underlying themes were pretty solid (albeit slightly clichéed, but cliché <> bad). It's all very much YMMV, anyway, so not much point in discussing that, if you ask me. But combat in DA2, for me, is "just there to pass the time". Meaning that I could almost play the game without it and still enjoy it, with the exception of a few particular fights. Legacy, for that matter, was a bit different because of the slightly more tactical aspect.

I really didnt hate DA2, it was okay it had some really good elements. And the combat was so much better than DAO but i still dont think its perfect. The one thing i loved about DAO was the story and the character interaction but i felt like that was taken down a whole lot. I dont want a combat centered game but i want every part of the DA series to be amazing because i loved DAO so much.

OK. Let me get things straight I prefer DAO by a length roughly equal to the long radius of the Milky Way (give or take a few centimeters, and yes, that's hyperbole). I still think that DA2, despite its flaws, has some very great things going for it, and some aspects of the story are part of it (can't go into details, no spoilers). In short, I enjoyed playing it, and still do. The trick here is to stop comparing it to DAO. Admittedly, it's not that easy.

Now, on a totally unrelated note...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

By presenting the opposite opinion in the same terms as his, I demonstrate that his opinions - indeed, anyone's opinions - on their own, are valueless.

This, right there, is a magnificent paradox.

Thats the problem yes lol.

On its own yes DA2 is a pretty soild game, in fact if i hadnt played DAO and just DA2 i would of really really enjoyed DA2, but i played DAO first and that was an amazing game, it wasnt perfect but you could so easily look over those imperfections because the good points were that good.

[Sakawatchi]

I think the differences between the different modes are the important thing when it comes to difficulty. I personally prefer to play normal, simply because I'm more interested in the story and interaction with NPCs than the action (which let me down a lot in DA2, I was really looking forward to talking to my companions, but all I got was two conversations an Act, before and after personal quest), but I also enjoy the challenges that comes with upping the difficulty mode or setting personal rules, i.e may only use found equipment/potions, may only use bought equipment/potions (and no looting things for sellin either), do only use these companions during the entire game, come up with a bad lineup and use that one for the entire game etc.

There's a lot of people who think the differences between the different difficulty modes are too small, Nightmare is easy, etcetc. I say: make up your own challenges then. Anyone like Morrowind? A lot of fans of that game have used this system for years (myself included). Todays games are designed to be played a certain way, of course it's easy if you play it that way. My nightmare mode is to get through an the entire game using only basic equipment and leveling in a really weak sort of way.

....
Still dissapointed with the lack of interaction though

[PinkShoes]

Sakawatchi wrote...

I think the differences between the different modes are the important thing when it comes to difficulty. I personally prefer to play normal, simply because I'm more interested in the story and interaction with NPCs than the action (which let me down a lot in DA2, I was really looking forward to talking to my companions, but all I got was two conversations an Act, before and after personal quest), but I also enjoy the challenges that comes with upping the difficulty mode or setting personal rules, i.e may only use found equipment/potions, may only use bought equipment/potions (and no looting things for sellin either), do only use these companions during the entire game, come up with a bad lineup and use that one for the entire game etc.

There's a lot of people who think the differences between the different difficulty modes are too small, Nightmare is easy, etcetc. I say: make up your own challenges then. Anyone like Morrowind? A lot of fans of that game have used this system for years (myself included). Todays games are designed to be played a certain way, of course it's easy if you play it that way. My nightmare mode is to get through an the entire game using only basic equipment and leveling in a really weak sort of way.

....
Still dissapointed with the lack of interaction though

Sakawatchi  that is the big thing taht killed DA2 for me. Seriously the part i loved most about dao was how i could sit and talk to my compaions or NPCS for ages if i felt like it. Sometimes i didnt want to and just wnated to fight. I so badly hope they bring that interaction back. I really really do.

[Ariella]

PinkShoes wrote...

Ariella wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Mark of the Dragon wrote...

Your not alone. We all want a more realistic art style then the cartoon that is DA2. I kind of picture a better vamped up version of Dragon Age Origins graphics and a bit more serious content. I'm sorry its hard to take a game serious when it looks like your watching cartoon network.

DAO looks just as much a cartoon as DA2, its more generic but not realistic.

I have to disagree with you. DAO graphics were terrible no one can deny that but i just feel like DA2 style became a little childish. Like for example the talent/spell icons.

I wouldn't call them childish or cartoony, especially next to say the Fable series. There is a realism there, it's just a bit hyper. certain colors (reds for example) are sharpened, for example. There is a little anime influence, but that's not surprising considering. I don't really see childish though. "Human" face and form attempts to be realistic and I'd say is on par with Mass Effect's human character graphics.

The talent/spell icons aren't that different from the ones in DAO, except in how they're arranged and how the player can access them. The only difference I noticed was the icons were somewhat simplified in their art. Rather than overdetailing on icons most people aren't going to notice anyway, they went to simplier line based shapes. It's a little bit more modern of a look, which may be why you see it clashing. But I wouldn't call it childish.

I agree actually. Childish was probably the wrong choice of words but hyper animeish may be lol. I really do feel like the art style has become too simple. I loved the talent/spell icons in DAO because they were artistic in DA2 sorta not. The facial graphics for DA has always been good i think. Im not talking the weird elvis eyebrow lol i think its very easy to make a very pretty character in all the DA games.

I dont want the DA series to become i surpose, commercialised is the word to use. It will never get the numbers COD will get for the simple fact it is a fanstay RPG, i dont want DA to suddenly become insanely difficult either. I felt DA2 was catered a lot more towards the casual gamer. I dont think casual games are bad its just the DA series isnt a casual sort of game

Fair assement. I think they were going for a cleaner style, and I  don't think they're really interested in being  "commercialized" ala COD, but as was pointed out multiple times when DAO was released, there were a lot of people who found the color palate and graphics generic . So it was something the dev team tried to concentrate on this time around.

As I'm writing this, I'm loading DAO to make a character and set up a new "canon" for MotA  when it comes out. I took a look at the icons again, and while they are artistic, I can also understand why the dev team might want to use a more simplified approach for icon art, since it means that resources that would have been spent designing elaborate icon buttons could be moved to other areas that could use more attention or were more exposed as it were, like the armor redesign which is on an HD TV or screen going to be more eye catching than the small button that might not always even be on screen (since the console hot buttons disappear when not in combat). I think it's going to be a lot of give and take to find the balance that will have broad based fan support. I also believe that the Dev team is up to the challange.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Morroian wrote...

PinkShoes wrote...

I agree with everything you said. Im not a hardcore gamer myself i just want when im player on a harder mode to feel like i am actually playing on a harder mode. The mages in DAO were a damn nightmare and i was always scared in DA2 well..meh.

I breezed through most of DAO on nightmare and I find DA2 to be more difficult in that respect.

I suspect DA2's implementation of friendly fire had a lot to do with that.

I played DAO on Hard, and DA2 was much easier on Hard than DAO was.

Until I enabled friendly fire.  Friendly fire is so badly implemented in DA2 that even Normal with FF active is more difficult than DAO's Hard was (and DAO's Hard had full FF).

Fenris might have to hit a trash mob 6 times to kill it, but Isabela dies when she gets caught by a single auto-attack.  That's idiotic.

[Reno_Tarshil]

It's cause of friendly fire that I only play on Casual.

[Firky]

You know, I've lamented the lack of FF on all but NM as hard as anyone, but Sylvius raises an excellent point. The enemy HP is so vastly inflated it's beyond any sense. Even on NM, you cast and trigger disoriented Walking Bomb and it instantly wipes any of your party close by, whereas it maybe kills 30% of an enemy.

I do like the fact that not casting Walking Bomb is strategic a choice as casting it, for this reason, but I also liked the old BG systems where enemies essentially played by similar/same rules.

There were a few problems with that in BG2, though, from an encounter perspective. Like, you really just gained an advantage by figuring our that vampires couldn't do their thing if you'd cast negative plane protection, etc. Like, you'd just shield their abilities, end of story. Or cast protection from magic and hack Kangaxx til he was dead.

It's a tricky one. Once again, I find myself wondering if there is some middle ground/better way than both old school and DAII.

[Kail Ashton]

PinkShoes wrote...

DA2 was an okay game but sometimes i honestly felt like i wasn't really playing an adult game. I was playing Demon Souls and wishing that Dragon Age 2 was somewhat like this. I liked the new combat and graphics but at the same time it still felt very, i suppose, cartoonish. I don't want DA to be like Demon souls i just wish it had some of the adult feel to it.

I wish DA2 was harder, i wish that every fight made me feel like i was seriously working my butt off but i play on hard/nightmare and i barely ever feel threatened. I also wish the graphics would mature a little. I didn't hate the graphics but at the same time the high fantasy style was completely taken away from this game. I don't want to talk about the sex scenes because they have been talked to death and honestly a sex scene does not make an adult feeling game.

What does everyone else feel?

You're opinion on the "adult" subject is all over the place, either you want a more challenging game or sumth'n that looks like pre-crazy Frank Miller drew it and everything inbetween , not exactly sure what you're geting at as the reader here, work on that before making another thread would be my opinion on this

[PinkShoes]

Firky wrote...

You know, I've lamented the lack of FF on all but NM as hard as anyone, but Sylvius raises an excellent point. The enemy HP is so vastly inflated it's beyond any sense. Even on NM, you cast and trigger disoriented Walking Bomb and it instantly wipes any of your party close by, whereas it maybe kills 30% of an enemy.

I do like the fact that not casting Walking Bomb is strategic a choice as casting it, for this reason, but I also liked the old BG systems where enemies essentially played by similar/same rules.

There were a few problems with that in BG2, though, from an encounter perspective. Like, you really just gained an advantage by figuring our that vampires couldn't do their thing if you'd cast negative plane protection, etc. Like, you'd just shield their abilities, end of story. Or cast protection from magic and hack Kangaxx til he was dead.

It's a tricky one. Once again, I find myself wondering if there is some middle ground/better way than both old school and DAII.

i realy think FF should be a choice. Honnestly for a game where your surposed to have choice i dont think we have enough choice.

Like FF should be an option, more than one voice or you can chose to have a silent character. Things like this to help immerse the individual gamer. At first i like the voice but now all my Hawke's sound the same, its weird, and the only reason i cant finish a male playthough is cause i dont like his voice.  I dont think i woul mind if bioware went back to silent but i so so wish we had more than one voice in DA3 i really do.

[Firky]

Sure. It'd be cool if FF were a toggle.

(But my point, possibly related to Sylvius' was that it is probably fairly incompatible with the system of damage, HP etc.)

[PinkShoes]

Firky wrote...

Sure. It'd be cool if FF were a toggle.

(But my point, possibly related to Sylvius' was that it is probably fairly incompatible with the system of damage, HP etc.)

yeah sorry went off on a bit of a rant there lol

[Kidd]

Marionetten wrote...

I'd also like to see the difficulty improved but with instantly r- egenerating health and mana I feel as if the franchise is kind of doomed as a dungeon crawler. Remove those cheap elements and bring back proper resource management and I think it would provide for a far more intense experience. Also, it'd make health regenerating and the like far more useful statistically speaking. But yeah, I think the automatic replenishment needs to go.

In a game where health does not magically refill itself in between battles, there must never be slow regeneration. One of my biggest gripes going back to ME1 is equipping medical upgrades on my armour and then going afk for some 5 minutes waiting for my health to come back.

UltiPup wrote...

I don't want Dragon Age to suddenly turn grimdark on me. It was never that kind of game. I love the humor mixed with the adult themes. It worked together not to depress me utterly.

Agreed. It feels a lot more real and a lot less pretentious when it's not all darkness around every cobblestone. I'm sure people in Thedas make jokes and laugh as well - that must be shown.

Sutekh wrote...

But shouldn't the graphics reflect the actual game? If you play a gritty, dark, low fantasy story, then gritty, dark, low fantasy graphics are a good thing, yes? It pulls you deeper in the mood (Holy Immersion and all that sort of things). I'm not a complete fan of DA2 graphics, tbh. Some things I like, some I don't, but I don't think they're cartoonish, and they reflect the middle fantasy quite well, personal taste not considered.

While I'm not a fan of the new hurlocks, I think having a distinct look is great. Of course I'm biased since I find DA2 to look absolutely amazing art-wise (no linking of low polygon elves please, people, that's not what I meant =)).

[Gibb_Shepard]

Sutekh wrote...

Mark of the Dragon wrote...
I'm sorry its hard to take a game serious when it looks like your watching cartoon network.

Mythal's left pinky nail! I wonder what kind of cartoon they're airing on Cartoon Network these days 

Yeah, shwoing this picture actually hinders your point rather than strengthening it. Something this ridiculous can only be founf in an Anime series on latenight CN.

[Darkly Tranquil]

There seem to be a number of different definitions of what "mature/adult" is in the context of videogames. The conceptions of  "mature/adult"  I can see are:
1. Complexity and difficulty - how much planning, reasoning, strategising is required.
2. Sophistication - what sort of story concepts are at play - morals, decisions, politics, etc.
3. Sex/Violence -  What the rating officials use to grade games; not necessarily a good indication of actual "maturity/adult" content.

In answer to the OP, I would say that while I am all for maturity in videogames, we need to decide what we mean by "mature/adult". I personally believe there is room for all three types of maturity in videogames, provided that they are handled sensibly. A good example of this style (which I would like to see replicated in the DA franchise) is the style found in The Witcher series; it assumes that its players are mature adults who are able to understand strategy (complexity), politics and ethical decisions (shades of grey), adult (sexual) human relationships, and are able to place all these things and place them in context. Rather than treating these things in a cartoonish way, the designers assume that the players understand these issues and don't feel the need to gloss them over (sexuality), or wallow in them (violence). They understand that these things should be vehicles to make stories and characters more engaging, not simply for the sake of it. The difference is interesting, as The Witcher series comes from Europe, which has a somewhat different (some might say less repressed) approach to some of these issues; sex is less taboo and violence is less approved of.

Its a tricky area because designers have to deal with government officials and ratings systems established by people who (still) have no understanding of who the industry caters to. This means that designers are often limited in what they might otherwise like to do for fear of coming afoul of out-of-touch regulators and political hysteria from uninformed do-gooders (such as Jack Thomson). I am given to understand that the rather absurd underwear sex scenes in DAO (Thank the Maker for modders) were the result of Bioware previously running afoul of "concerned parents" with earlier games, and EAs desire to avoid controversy (someone can correct me if I am wrong).

I believe that if you are going to make a game that is geared to an adult audience, do it properly by treating the audience as adults, not as hormonal teenagers; sex is fine as long as it is in context, and violence need not be over the top to get the point across.

[Sutekh]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Sutekh wrote...

Mark of the Dragon wrote...
I'm sorry its hard to take a game serious when it looks like your watching cartoon network.

<insert gory blood mage picture here>

Mythal's left pinky nail! I wonder what kind of cartoon they're airing on Cartoon Network these days 

Yeah, shwoing this picture actually hinders your point rather than strengthening it. Something this ridiculous can only be founf in an Anime series on latenight CN.

Really? And, pray tell, what is my point that is so forcefully hindered by this picture?

(Hint: It has to do with the topic of the thread, oddly enough, which isn't "DA2 is a profound and sophisticated work of art", and I'm pretty sure the person I replied to didn't have "late night" in mind, because if so, what would be their point?).

Modifié par Sutekh, 06 octobre 2011 - 11:47 .

[Fidget6]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Work is what I do at my job. Fun is what video games are for.

If you want to work, go get another job. If you want to feel a strong sense of accomplishment having over come a great challenge, volunteer for a social cause. Do something real and important.

I want to play games that entertain me. If I have to play any section of a game more than four or five times to beat it, the game is broken.

THIS so much! I wish more people had this mindset so that more games were designed for us "story-driven" players. I don't want to see the same cutscene over and over while trying to defeat a particularly pesky enemy. That was really the worst thing about the Final Fantasy series for me. As much as I loved them, by the time I beat some of the bosses I was so frustrated I didn't even feel like playing anymore.... (Yunalesca in FFX anyone?)