313 réponses à ce sujet

[bEVEsthda]

I like, and sorta need (from time to time) Bioware's storydriven approach. ES cannot yet replace that, as little as Bioware's storydriven can replace Elder Scrolls' sandbox. I hope that one day both genres will converge, from each side, by improving, enhancing, not by 'streamlining' or dumbing down. Now, Bioware dropped the ball with DA2. And as good as FO3 and Skyrim are, Bioware need to step up their game a bit, even from DA:O, to hang in there.

Those who find Skyrim lacking should please note that in Bethesda's games the story is yours own to make. All the way. So, for instance, if you want to be bored in Skyrim, that's perfectly possible. Enjoy your precious boredom.

Me, I'm on the top of the world.


And I got there by the North Face.
The lowest system of icefields, at the start from HIgh Hrothgar, presented a couple of 5.12 cruxes. Pretty sustained 5.10 to 5.11 climbing most of the way after that, except for some easy ice fields under the final rockwall. The final rockwall offered a possible 5.13 crux move, or at least 5.12. which unlocked the climb. Fair 5.9 to the top plataus from there, Easy scrambling to the top spire from there, at most 5.6. Final spire 5.9.
(And yes, I fell to my death a couple of times. As it was a ropeless solo. Bad idea in RL, but no rope craft in Skyrim. Besides, Lydia don't climb)
Now tell me which other game offers me satisfying mountaineering with remarkably realistic route finding? Morrowind, yes. But Skyrim does it better. And it probably never was intentional by the developers. Combination of the games physics and a possible small glitch. But that's what a sandbox does, makes things possible that even the developers didn't think of. (PC version, ofc. Have no idea what is possible on consoles, prob less)

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 11 décembre 2011 - 11:55 .

[Zanallen]

DuskWarden wrote...

Its actually quite simple, a game where the chance of success in undertaking an action, and the degree of success you have when undertaking that action, are soley due to your character's abilities, for example having dodge %'s based on an agility attribute or w/e. A game like DA:2 where you can dodge attacks using player reflexes pushes more towards the action rpg end of the spectrum.

So all of the games in the best rpg category were action rpgs.

[Il Divo]

Yrkoon wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
 Popularity and quality are not synonymous. Sales simply funds resources which allow a developer to continue making a series. It's never been an indicator of quality.   Otherwise any "great game" list is going to inevitably have CoD, Super Mario, or Pokemon games at the top. 

They almost always do.

If that were the case, Greatest Games lists would be decided according to sales number, which (thankfully) they are not. They still fall within the domain of a logical fallacy.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 décembre 2011 - 11:50 .

[Gemini1179]

Pure sales numbers cannot be used to determine quality. HOWEVER, sales trends based on word of mouth usually can indicate a good game or good gaming experience, otherwise why give good word of mouth? Take for example the DAO vs DA2 sales chart. I'd say the chart, not the numbers, tells the story fairly accurately. DAO's sales trend showed that the amount actually went up after initial release while DA2 showed an almost exponential drop in sales after the first week. This is very telling.

I love the Elder Scrolls games. They are a different experience from other RPG's for very specific reasons. I'm not even going to mention the discussions on this site about the validity of a non-speaking protagonist when people start making that comparison between Skyrim and DA2. They are truly apples and oranges and it is all personal opinion on which is 'better'. BUT, sales will demonstrate a trend. So far, DA2's sales trend shows extremely poor word of mouth- would this happen to a great game?

Now, as stated above, Skyrim looks to outsell DAO, DA2 and ME2. This is really inconsequential. It stems from an established fan base and the ability to appeal to new fans. I would say that a sales trend for Skyrim showing the first two or three months showing high sales without dramatic drop offs would indicate good word of mouth and therefore a good game experience.

http://www.escapistm...gon-Age-2-Sales

Oh and to the guy who said Dark Souls killed Skyrim in October? Of course it did, Skyrim was released in November.

And just cause:

From gamefaqs.com (take it as you will)

DA2
Average reader review: 7.5 in 16 reviews
Gamefaqs rating average: 7.7 from 707 users
MetaCritic MetaScore: 79 in 75 reviews

Skyrim
Average reader review: 9.6 in 13 reviews
Gamefaqs rating average: 9.3 from 1373 users
MetaCritic MetaScore: 96 in 84 reviews

These numbers might simply be popularity measurements, but they're still telling.

[LPPrince]

bEVEsthda wrote...

I like, and sorta need (from time to time) Bioware's storydriven approach. ES cannot yet replace that, as little as Bioware's storydriven can replace Elder Scrolls' sandbox. I hope that one day both genres will converge, from each side, by improving, enhancing, not by 'streamlining' or dumbing down. Now, Bioware dropped the ball with DA2. And as good as FO3 and Skyrim are, Bioware need to step up their game a bit, even from DA:O, to hang in there.

Those who find Skyrim lacking should please note that in Bethesda's games the story is yours own to make. All the way. So, for instance, if you want to be bored in Skyrim, that's perfectly possible. Enjoy your precious boredom.

Me, I'm on the top of the world.


And I got there by the North Face.
The lowest system of icefields, at the start from HIgh Hrothgar, presented a couple of 5.12 cruxes. Pretty sustained 5.10 to 5.11 climbing most of the way after that, except for some easy ice fields under the final rockwall. The final rockwall offered a possible 5.13 crux move, or at least 5.12. which unlocked the climb. Fair 5.9 to the top plataus from there, Easy scrambling to the top spire from there, at most 5.6. Final spire 5.9.
(And yes, I fell to my death a couple of times. As it was a ropeless solo. Bad idea in RL, but no rope craft in Skyrim. Besides, Lydia don't climb)
Now tell me which other game offers me satisfying mountaineering with remarkably realistic route finding? Morrowind, yes. But Skyrim does it better. (PC version, ofc. Have no idea what is possible on consoles, prob less)

Dream RPG- Bethesda's Worlds with Bioware's Stories and Characters.

As long as Bioware's contribution is nothing like DA2.

[LPPrince]

Gemini1179 wrote...

Pure sales numbers cannot be used to determine quality. HOWEVER, sales trends based on word of mouth usually can indicate a good game or good gaming experience, otherwise why give good word of mouth? Take for example the DAO vs DA2 sales chart. I'd say the chart, not the numbers, tells the story fairly accurately. DAO's sales trend showed that the amount actually went up after initial release while DA2 showed an almost exponential drop in sales after the first week. This is very telling.

I love the Elder Scrolls games. They are a different experience from other RPG's for very specific reasons. I'm not even going to mention the discussions on this site about the validity of a non-speaking protagonist when people start making that comparison between Skyrim and DA2. They are truly apples and oranges and it is all personal opinion on which is 'better'. BUT, sales will demonstrate a trend. So far, DA2's sales trend shows extremely poor word of mouth- would this happen to a great game?

Now, as stated above, Skyrim looks to outsell DAO, DA2 and ME2. This is really inconsequential. It stems from an established fan base and the ability to appeal to new fans. I would say that a sales trend for Skyrim showing the first two or three months showing high sales without dramatic drop offs would indicate good word of mouth and therefore a good game experience.

http://www.escapistm...gon-Age-2-Sales

Oh and to the guy who said Dark Souls killed Skyrim in October? Of course it did, Skyrim was released in November.

And just cause:

From gamefaqs.com (take it as you will)

DA2
Average reader review: 7.5 in 16 reviews
Gamefaqs rating average: 7.7 from 707 users
MetaCritic MetaScore: 79 in 75 reviews

Skyrim
Average reader review: 9.6 in 13 reviews
Gamefaqs rating average: 9.3 from 1373 users
MetaCritic MetaScore: 96 in 84 reviews

These numbers might simply be popularity measurements, but they're still telling.

Said it better than I could.

[TheBlackBaron]

LPPrince wrote...

Dream RPG- Bethesda's Worlds with Bioware's Stories and Characters.

As long as Bioware's contribution is nothing like DA2.

Obsidian needs to be involved somehow. Maybe let Bethsoft handle the world design while J.E. Sawyer and co. design the actual RPG features.

And for the love of Celestia, get them a QA team. None of the above have been particularly stellar with that lately.

[Il Divo]

Gemini1179 wrote...

Pure sales numbers cannot be used to determine quality. HOWEVER, sales trends based on word of mouth usually can indicate a good game or good gaming experience, otherwise why give good word of mouth? Take for example the DAO vs DA2 sales chart. I'd say the chart, not the numbers, tells the story fairly accurately. DAO's sales trend showed that the amount actually went up after initial release while DA2 showed an almost exponential drop in sales after the first week. This is very telling.

I love the Elder Scrolls games. They are a different experience from other RPG's for very specific reasons. I'm not even going to mention the discussions on this site about the validity of a non-speaking protagonist when people start making that comparison between Skyrim and DA2. They are truly apples and oranges and it is all personal opinion on which is 'better'. BUT, sales will demonstrate a trend. So far, DA2's sales trend shows extremely poor word of mouth- would this happen to a great game?

Ah, but that's the problem. The only trend that sales can demonstrate is a player's enjoyment, which gets back into that "arguing for popularity" fallacy. Someone used the Planescape example earlier, which I think is very applicable here. Would a great game fail so spectacularly in terms of sales number? For anyone who considers Planescape a great game, the answer is inevitably yes. Word of mouth is simply another expression which refers to popularity because it's derived from numbers and any player's individual enjoyment.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:06 .

[Yrkoon]

Il Divo wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
 Popularity and quality are not synonymous. Sales simply funds resources which allow a developer to continue making a series. It's never been an indicator of quality.   Otherwise any "great game" list is going to inevitably have CoD, Super Mario, or Pokemon games at the top. 

They almost always do.

If that were the case, Greatest Games lists would be decided according to sales number, which (thankfully) they are not. 

Again, they almost always are.  At least by  Genre.  You cited Mario.   Super Mario Bros. is generally considered The greatest  game ever made,  whether you like it or not.  And with the exception of Wii Sports (the ultimate game for non-gamers), it also happens to be the biggest selling  game of all time.  This isn't a coincidence.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:13 .

[Gemini1179]

Il Divo wrote...

Ah, but that's the problem. The only trend that sales can demonstrate is a player's enjoyment, which gets back into that "arguing for popularity" fallacy. Someone used the Planescape example earlier, which I think is very applicable here. Would a great game fail so spectacularly in terms of sales number? For anyone who considers Planescape a great game, the answer is inevitably yes. Word of mouth is simply another expression which refers to popularity because it's derived from numbers.

This argument doesn't make any sense. Why would I tell my friends to buy a game because it is popular but not that good? I tell them to buy it because *I* think it is good and know what they like. It is up to them to decide if they like it or not.

I'm also not talking about TOTAL sales here. That is about business. If a game sells 1000 copies a week for 10 straight weeks, it's sales number might be terrible, but the trend suggests that it is a good game. That's what we're talking about here. The trend CURRENTLY says that DA2 is not as good as DAO was. I'm not here to say Skyrim has ALREADY sold more than DA2, etc. What I'll wait for is the first 10 weeks of sales for Skyrim and then you can compare trends.

[LPPrince]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Dream RPG- Bethesda's Worlds with Bioware's Stories and Characters.

As long as Bioware's contribution is nothing like DA2.

Obsidian needs to be involved somehow. Maybe let Bethsoft handle the world design while J.E. Sawyer and co. design the actual RPG features.

And for the love of Celestia, get them a QA team. None of the above have been particularly stellar with that lately.

Go into more detail. Break it down.

[LinksOcarina]

Il Divo wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Pure sales numbers cannot be used to determine quality. HOWEVER, sales trends based on word of mouth usually can indicate a good game or good gaming experience, otherwise why give good word of mouth? Take for example the DAO vs DA2 sales chart. I'd say the chart, not the numbers, tells the story fairly accurately. DAO's sales trend showed that the amount actually went up after initial release while DA2 showed an almost exponential drop in sales after the first week. This is very telling.

I love the Elder Scrolls games. They are a different experience from other RPG's for very specific reasons. I'm not even going to mention the discussions on this site about the validity of a non-speaking protagonist when people start making that comparison between Skyrim and DA2. They are truly apples and oranges and it is all personal opinion on which is 'better'. BUT, sales will demonstrate a trend. So far, DA2's sales trend shows extremely poor word of mouth- would this happen to a great game?

Ah, but that's the problem. The only trend that sales can demonstrate is a player's enjoyment, which gets back into that "arguing for popularity" fallacy. Someone used the Planescape example earlier, which I think is very applicable here. Would a great game fail so spectacularly in terms of sales number? For anyone who considers Planescape a great game, the answer is inevitably yes. Word of mouth is simply another expression which refers to popularity because it's derived from numbers.

Or, take a recent example in something like Phychonauts, which still gets sales every so often because of word of mouth, yet when it was released it was not only a bomb, but it was a factor in forcing Majesco to downsize heavily since then.

But this really is a foolish argument anyway, because sales figures and review scores, trends and things do not equate actual enjoyment of a game, since people have varying degrees of what they actually like. So checking up facts on the internet really means nothing in the end to the whole topic on what was the best RPG in 2011, which is still not Skyrim or Dragon Age II if you ask me.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:15 .

[Il Divo]

Yrkoon wrote...

Again, they almost always are.  At least by  Generation.  You cited Mario.   Super Mario Bros. is generally considered The greatest  game ever made,  whether you like it or not.  And with the exception of Wii Sports, it's the biggest selling  game of all time.

You're missing the point. If sales means quality, all a greatest games list is going to be a  list according to sales numbers. It ignores the role which advertising plays, the role which critics play in building hype, amongst other factors.

Here's what your argument basically means:

"Skyrim is a better game than Dragon Age: Origins".
"Why?"
"It sold better."

"Dragon Age II is a better game than Planescape."
"Why?"
"It sold better".

It will never have any logical validity any more than basing a movie's quality according to ticket sales. You'll inevitably be drowned in Transformers films and Harry Potter flicks.

[Il Divo]

Gemini1179 wrote...

This argument doesn't make any sense. Why would I tell my friends to buy a game because it is popular but not that good? I tell them to buy it because *I* think it is good and know what they like. It is up to them to decide if they like it or not.

No, it means that word of mouth is still an argument to popularity, and is logically useless. Do you think anyone who is interested in Twilight doesn't consider it "good"? I'm sure there is plenty of word of mouth there amongst pre-teens and they all consider Twilight good. Word of Mouth still is based entirely on popularity, that is all, since it claims that "Game X had great word of mouth, ergo it's good".  Your claim was that sales, based on word of mouth, can indicate a good game.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:17 .

[Yrkoon]

Il Divo wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Again, they almost always are.  At least by  Generation.  You cited Mario.   Super Mario Bros. is generally considered The greatest  game ever made,  whether you like it or not.  And with the exception of Wii Sports, it's the biggest selling  game of all time.

You're missing the point. If sales means quality, all a greatest games list is going to be a  list according to sales numbers. It ignores the role which advertising plays, the role which critics play in building hype, amongst other factors.

Here's what your argument basically means:

"Skyrim is a better game than Dragon Age: Origins".
"Why?"
"It sold better."

"Dragon Age II is a better game than Planescape."
"Why?"
"It sold better".

It will never have any logical validity any more than basing a movie's quality according to ticket sales. You'll inevitably be drowned in Transformers films and Harry Potter flicks.

Faulty argument, since Torment was limited  in platform  (PC only).  And Movies are also limited due to  when they're released, how long they remain in theaters,  and their ratings, all of which affect ticket sales.

A better argument would be to compare DA:O and DA2 then  argue that DA:O was better, and the proof of this is that it sold twice as much.   <--- this argument would be accurate, since the playing field   is completely equal (Genre, avaliability etc)

You're trying to completely seperate populatiry (sales) from Quality.  You can't do that.  It goes against every law in capitalism.

[bEVEsthda]

LPPrince wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Dream RPG- Bethesda's Worlds with Bioware's Stories and Characters.

As long as Bioware's contribution is nothing like DA2.

Obsidian needs to be involved somehow. Maybe let Bethsoft handle the world design while J.E. Sawyer and co. design the actual RPG features.

And for the love of Celestia, get them a QA team. None of the above have been particularly stellar with that lately.

Go into more detail. Break it down.

I believe Bethesda actually already have a number of more advanced engines (driving things in the sandbox as well as procedurally created content) than have made it into the latest games, FO3 and Skyrim. The reason is that it has to fit into the current consoles. That is always a compromise. And I'm pretty sure that DA2 (and even DA:O) also suffered from that. It could maybe even be so that some of the DA2 style changes were made to free up more CPU for the faster and more fluid action.

Anyway, about a year and we should have new consoles that would offer more possibilities.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:24 .

[Gemini1179]

Il Divo wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

This argument doesn't make any sense. Why would I tell my friends to buy a game because it is popular but not that good? I tell them to buy it because *I* think it is good and know what they like. It is up to them to decide if they like it or not.

No, it means that word of mouth is still an argument to popularity, and is logically useless. Do you think anyone who is interested in Twilight doesn't consider it "good"? I'm sure there is plenty of word of mouth there amongst pre-teens and they all consider Twilight good. Word of Mouth still is based entirely on popularity, that is all, since it claims that "Game X had great word of mouth, ergo it's good".  

Sure if you want to go using extreme cases of mass insanity as an example

Is "Star Wars" popular? Was it good? Ok, maybe that is an outlier too.

What about "Titanic"? Personally, I didn't like the movie, but I can admit that it was good. THAT's what I'm talking about. I suspect you'll find more people who will say that while they did not particularly like Skyrim, it was a good game as opposed to those who will do the same for DA2.

Besides, since the concept of something being "good" is subjective,
logic really has no bearing. Not ALL popular things are good, but more
often than not, they are. If you're really going to argue that, I'm done
here. I've said my piece.

[Realmzmaster]

Sales figures only show that people bought the game (whether it be word of mouth, because of advertisement or because they always buy a game in the series). It does not indicate satisfaction or enjoyment. As witnessed by some gamers who bought DA2. Also many PS3 owners I talked to are seriously unhappy and not satisfied. So sales do not equate to satisfaction or quality.

Many PS3 owners are in serious doubt about the quality of the game and have expressed deep dissatisfaction on the Elder Scrolls forums. Same as  has happened with DA2 on these forums.

There is also serious doubt that Bethesda will be able to solve the problem ( it has to do with the architecture of the PS3 which Bethesda should have been aware of before the game released).  Two patches have been released with no resolution for the PS3 problem.

Also telling PS3 owners to get the PC  or Xbox version is a non-starter especially if you do not own the other two.

Sales figures also do not matter if the person who bought the game did not like it. I have had gamers buy games based on what their friends said was great only the person finds the game their friends like did not suit them. The sale has been made and recorded in the sales figures.

Sales figures I great for the company, but I also remember an advertising exec who sold pet rocks and made millions. Does that mean that rock was a quality product?

[Sylvianus]

Popularity is certainly one thing to judge the quality, even if it is not the only criterion. to deny, or attempt to erase this part in the minds, is irresponsible for any company.

We would have no standards about quality, on which movies/ games,  are considered among the best, or as cited as an example in one category, if the popularity did not matter. for me this absolutist argument does not work.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:32 .

[LPPrince]

bEVEsthda wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Dream RPG- Bethesda's Worlds with Bioware's Stories and Characters.

As long as Bioware's contribution is nothing like DA2.

Obsidian needs to be involved somehow. Maybe let Bethsoft handle the world design while J.E. Sawyer and co. design the actual RPG features.

And for the love of Celestia, get them a QA team. None of the above have been particularly stellar with that lately.

Go into more detail. Break it down.

I believe Bethesda actually already have a number of more advanced engines (driving things in the sandbox as well as procedurally created content) than have made it into the latest games, FO3 and Skyrim. The reason is that it has to fit into the current consoles. That is always a compromise. And I'm pretty sure that DA2 (and even DA:O) also suffered from that. It could maybe even be so that some of the DA2 style changes were made to free up more CPU for the faster and more fluid action.

Anyway, about a year and we should have new consoles that would offer more possibilities.

I'll wait as long as I have to for a game with the best qualities of Bioware and Bethesda combined into one.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Addai67 wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

PresidentCowboy wrote...

Loved DA2, but Skyrim was better. Deus Ex was good, The Witcher 2 sucked.

Whether or not you liked TW2 doesn't matter, the sheer quality of the game tramples  DA2 and rivals Skyrim, it's a shame the VGA's aren't actually a legitimate award ceremony.

I would have liked to see TW2 get something, but not sure what.  As an RPG it suffers from the fact that you're playing a set character.  To me that makes it- well, not an RPG.  As a PC game...  okay, I'd like to say I'd give it that, but the menus are so horrible and obviously consolized, even worse than Skyrim and DA2 which have the same problem.  So it'd be hard for me to reward a game that made so little effort to optimize for mouse-keyboard as PC game.

You can still mold geralt into MANY different beliefs and ideals. He wil always have the same personality, but so will a DA2 character after you have picked the sarcastic response a little too many times. 

My first playthrough had a Geralt who only cared about being a witcher and the money that comes with it, my second was more political and wished to change the geometry of Temeria. Another could be all about equality and join up with the Scoiateal, while another could see them as terrorists and head out the chop the head off the snake. He can remain neutral and completely flip off the conflicts and only worry about Triss. He can use Triss to his own means through manipulation. 

The list goes on and on about just how you can mold Geralt. You can come up with quite diverse characters on subsequent playthroughs. People look at the Witcher and always hear the drony voice, automatically assuming he is completely set. That is false.

[LPPrince]

Good to keep in mind. I was hoping there was some freedom in TW2, now I want it even more.

[Gemini1179]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So sales do not equate to satisfaction or quality.

INITIAL sales maybe. The numbers don't lie, look at the DAO vs DA2 sales trend over 10 weeks. The fact is, people aren't going to buy a bad game over a period of time if it is a bad game. DA2 sales trend indicates this. But good games, that get good word of mouth that is then repeated by the new customers will show the kind of sales trend that DAO showed.

Besides, statistics can be used to prove anything, 14% of all people know that

In the end, I'll wait for Skyrim's 10 weak sales projections to come out. If they are high for 4 weeks then drop off to nothingness, that would indicate perhaps what is being said about customer disatisfaction with the product, ergo, a bad game. If the numbers indicate a slow decline over time, then either new customers simply aren't getting the message, or the game is good enough to warrant the purchase even after several weeks.

[hoorayforicecream]

Yrkoon wrote...

Faulty argument, since Torment was limited  in platform  (PC only).  And Movies are also limited due to  when they're released, how long they remain in theaters,  and their ratings, all of which affect ticket sales.

This would only be applicable if publishers could not choose what platforms they publish on. Super Mario Bros was constrained by platform, and so is Pokemon, yet I didn't see you arguing against these games as examples of exceedingly high quality translating to super high sales. Adding arbitrary restrictions like "it's platform limited" is the faulty argument, because, as you said, good games will sell well.

There are plenty of PC-exclusive games that sold very well, and saying "It was limited in platform" is a disservice to the actual PC games that sold very well without any qualifiers (like the Sims 2 and World of Warcraft).

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 12 décembre 2011 - 12:38 .

[Lenimph]

Nothing like spam sprinting and glitch exploiting to get up a impossibly steep slope for screenies.

Best game ever