623 réponses à ce sujet

[Pzykozis]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'm semi-opposite myself. I prefer more hit points as well as more lethal enemies. In Origins I found that the battles would end far too quickly, even on Nightmare.

So I'd like the enemies to have more health, but for the party's health and mana/stamina to automatically upgrade upon level up using the FFXII method, but still allow the player to invest points in constitution and willpower if he/she so desires.

Isn't it kinda the same thing just a difference of implementation, an equalising of damage to health ratio's on both sides so that if they bring the warrior aoe thing back, you won't stupidly have isabella or yourself decaptitated by fenris from one attack whilst he's on his crazy vanguard power trip.

could lower hp whilst lowering damage output significantly or raise hp on both sides whilst allowing enemy damage to scale better to that hp since it's partially controlled and not boosting crazy ass vanguards so that they scythe through your party and kill everyone.

Not that this happened becasue you'd never take Fenris on a nightmare run because he would kill everyone if your attention slipped, which really needed fixing.

[philippe willaume]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Hello
I think you had more time to prepare in DA:0 as well there was more choke points (and no paratroopers, save for the shrieks, still remember the ambush on the bridge..).
But if I am honest it is more a result of skills, having two weapons to specialize in, may be bigger map and the abilities to engage at a greater range.
 
Personally I am more in favour of less hit points more lethal enemies.  It would be better if the enemies had more concerted approaches and tried to use cover better.

I'm semi-opposite myself. I prefer more hit points as well as more lethal enemies. In Origins I found that the battles would end far too quickly, even on Nightmare.

So I'd like the enemies to have more health, but for the party's health and mana/stamina to automatically upgrade upon level up using the FFXII method, but still allow the player to invest points in constitution and willpower if he/she so desires.

 
Hello
From what I understand the enemy only have according to the threat level posed by each of the characters and somewhat to the extend of damage received per tick or sec.
 
I would like to see them working more together. It is ok for dark span to use mobbing tactics and brute strength.
But I would expect a mage to have some sort of body guard or through to have archers covering/trying to pin the opposition and may be a crossbowman to snipe at guys in armours.
And may be some group synergy abilities like shield wall or testudo and more intelligent opponent should target unprotected mages/ archer.
 
 
For the hit point thing, I can’t disagree with you on the DA: O from but I am coming from the Rinse and Repeat form DA:2 where hit points increase only make the combat longer.
 Plus I do not have a problem with a two handed weapon fighter in full plates dropping enemies with little or no amour in a single blow (but I teach medieval fencing so I could be called bias)
 
Regardless I think the lethality of the enemies should be based on combos, so that we don’t have slap slap reload to often or may be the companion player should have some form of interrupt talent or talent that give last minute defence for each class.
On the automatic class progression I do agree with you

[LobselVith8]

Addai67 wrote...

And Skyrim isn't, because the Dovahkiin can become head of the college without being able to plink x fireballs per minute?  This discussion is ridiculous.  It's not like Bioware really cares about Skyrim anyway.  People are taking one marketing line and blowing it to extremes, as per usual for the forum.

You're probably right. We've read Mike Laidlaw claim that they would deal with the problem of the "significance of choice," only to have two following story DLCs where story didn't matter because it lead to the exact, same conclusion either way. It's possible that the strengths of Skyrim or Witcher 2 will be seriously addressed by the developers, but I won't hold my breath. I suppose I don't think there will be any real move to learn from the best of Skyrim or Witcher 2 when the DLC suffers from the same narrative problems that the main game had - with its passive protagonist letting bad guys go, and the choices turn out to be meaningless.

Speaking of Witcher 2, KoP has written some great blogs about why he appreciates the solid story-telling and the politics in Witcher 2. As for Skyrim, I enjoyed the opportunity to have natural, logical roleplay in Skyrim by having my amoral Spellsword became a member of the Thieves Guild and the Dark Brotherhood, while my Tribunal mage treked across the snowy tundra to make it to Winterhold to become a member of the College. 

I really enjoyed having a proactive protagonist who could rise to power, stop murders instead of simply still like a piece of furniture, investigate a serial killer instead of ignore the evidence you come across, and who could make a choice between two factions that were filled with actual characters instead of paper-thin caricatures.  I also liked having my protagonists explore the unknown - the Dwemer ruins, the Forsworn areas, the places inhabited by the Falmer, and the places that were inhabited by wildlife or ghosts.

I also liked that the narrative made sense, even if my protagonist wasn't a Nord. I've typically gone through the Elder Scrolls games with a Dunmer, and I liked that the narrative accomodated the idea of my protagonist going through the Nord dominated landscape of Skyrim with a Dunmer protagonist.

[DreamwareStudio]

simfamSP wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Can I ask a question? What are your -- as in the team as a whole -- opinions on how to make combat better in the future?

I would like that answer too. Though I found DA2's combat and DA:O's combat similar at it's core, the situations that we were put into was dealt much better in DA:O. That being said the combat situations in Legacy and MOTA were done superbly, so kudos on that.

But first things first... the tactical camera must be added back I feel. There were many times I could have used that bloody thing xD

'Ceilings' were kind of useless in DA2 don't you think? With the recycled areas and all there wasn't much to look at that we haven't seen. I still think it worked pretty well with DA:O (Sacred Ashes Ruin looks gorgeous.)

Personally I found DAII's combat too one-sided and I never found DAO's combat tactical. Both relied too much on mook enemies that display any semblance of actual combat tactics.

MotA and Legacy are steps towards the right direction, but I still think that Bioware has a long way to go to actually make tactical combat.

Regarding ceilings, couldn't Bioware still put ceilings in the game but have them disappear when you pull the camera back? In fact, isn't that what DAO did?

I mean, as you said ceilings don't mean much when there aren't many details in the area.

I used the word 'tactical' because I forgot the word isometric

Ceilings...something small, seemingly unimportant until you see that they are NOT there.

Sloppy, lazy move, IMO.

Or maybe that's how they explain the ninja drops. LOL

Modifié par google_calasade, 18 janvier 2012 - 06:04 .

[ScotGaymer]

I haven't played TW2 but I have played TW1.

And I have to say going by TW1 there is pretty much NOTHING I would want the Dragon Age team to take from that game; except perhaps the more vibrant (while simultaneously darker and more interesting) art style.
That's it.

The Witcher UI sucks (and it doesn't look like the second iteration is any better). The reason I say that is because DA2s UI gets panned for lacking information needed to play the game competently without metagaming and The Witcher 1 and 2's UI is just as bad.
My example of this is the whole thing where the game gives u the option to do something in a screen but when you try to do it it slaps you on the hand and says "no you can't do that here but we won't tell you where you can do that."

Or to use potions. Nightmarish pain in the ass the whole entire thing from the UI to do it, to the animation of actually doing it. Eugh.

And the fact that you need to use different swords for different enemies just makes NO SENSE.

People talk up the Witcher and the Witcher 2 as if they are the BEST GAMES EVAR!!!11!1! and I hate to disagree but they aren't.
Baldur's Gate 2 holds that honour and what do you know we are on the forums for the company that made that glorious game.

Marketing and Art Direction are the ONLY area's where CD Projekt with The Witcher and The Witcher 2 does a better job than Bioware with Dragon Age. And thats only cos those are the area's where Bioware epically fails consistantly.
And up until Dragon Age 2 came out they usually had modders to correct any art problems.

Granted I am only basing my judgement on TW2 based on my horrifying experience with TW1 and the reviews ive seen of it to realise that while I may like the story (and Geralt's relationship with Triss) - let's take a moment to note that CD Projekt are NOT responsible for the amazing story of TW because TW is a set of novels they turned into games so they can't really claim pride of place for that - the game (and its prequel) seems to be so bloody mindedly arduous that I just know I won't be able to play it.

I would much rather Bioware studiously avoided copying The Witcher franchise for everything except art style.

[Am1vf]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I haven't played TW2 but I have played TW1.

And I have to say going by TW1 there is pretty much NOTHING I would want the Dragon Age team to take from that game; except perhaps the more vibrant (while simultaneously darker and more interesting) art style.
That's it.

The Witcher UI sucks (and it doesn't look like the second iteration is any better). The reason I say that is because DA2s UI gets panned for lacking information needed to play the game competently without metagaming and The Witcher 1 and 2's UI is just as bad.
My example of this is the whole thing where the game gives u the option to do something in a screen but when you try to do it it slaps you on the hand and says "no you can't do that here but we won't tell you where you can do that."

Or to use potions. Nightmarish pain in the ass the whole entire thing from the UI to do it, to the animation of actually doing it. Eugh.

And the fact that you need to use different swords for different enemies just makes NO SENSE.

People talk up the Witcher and the Witcher 2 as if they are the BEST GAMES EVAR!!!11!1! and I hate to disagree but they aren't.
Baldur's Gate 2 holds that honour and what do you know we are on the forums for the company that made that glorious game.

Marketing and Art Direction are the ONLY area's where CD Projekt with The Witcher and The Witcher 2 does a better job than Bioware with Dragon Age. And thats only cos those are the area's where Bioware epically fails consistantly.
And up until Dragon Age 2 came out they usually had modders to correct any art problems.

Granted I am only basing my judgement on TW2 based on my horrifying experience with TW1 and the reviews ive seen of it to realise that while I may like the story (and Geralt's relationship with Triss) - let's take a moment to note that CD Projekt are NOT responsible for the amazing story of TW because TW is a set of novels they turned into games so they can't really claim pride of place for that - the game (and its prequel) seems to be so bloody mindedly arduous that I just know I won't be able to play it.

I would much rather Bioware studiously avoided copying The Witcher franchise for everything except art style.

I recommend that you try TW2 sometime, I didn't like TW1 either despite being a big fan of the books but TW2 is much better done, still not as great as the books but one of the best RPG games you can find.

[DreamwareStudio]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I haven't played TW2 but I have played TW1.

And I have to say going by TW1 there is pretty much NOTHING I would want the Dragon Age team to take from that game; except perhaps the more vibrant (while simultaneously darker and more interesting) art style.
That's it.

The Witcher UI sucks (and it doesn't look like the second iteration is any better). The reason I say that is because DA2s UI gets panned for lacking information needed to play the game competently without metagaming and The Witcher 1 and 2's UI is just as bad.

My example of this is the whole thing where the game gives u the option to do something in a screen but when you try to do it it slaps you on the hand and says "no you can't do that here but we won't tell you where you can do that."

Don't talk about the Witcher 2 without having played it.  You have no basis for your opinion about that game because much has changed between the games.

FitScotGaymer wrote...
Or to use potions. Nightmarish pain in the ass the whole entire thing from the UI to do it, to the animation of actually doing it. Eugh.

And the fact that you need to use different swords for different enemies just makes NO SENSE.

Different swords for different enemies does make sense.  SILVER has long been a part of monster lore, and not just within the Witcher world, but in all types of fiction.  At this point, I'm beginning to wonder about your motives when slamming the Witcher games.

I'm also beginning to wonder whether you like a challenge in your games.  Learning about and finding the ingredients for potions takes some work, but any RPG worth its salt requires learning about and working for things.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

People talk up the Witcher and the Witcher 2 as if they are the BEST GAMES EVAR!!!11!1! and I hate to disagree but they aren't.
Baldur's Gate 2 holds that honour and what do you know we are on the forums for the company that made that glorious game.

All right, I'm thinking better of you now.  I'm currently on another play-through of Baldur's Gate 2.  While BG 2 used to be my clear-cut favorite, the Witcher and the Witcher 2 made serious attempts at replacing BG 2 for my top spot.  If not for the combat of both Witcher games, they might have accomplished it.

FitScotGaymer wrote...
Marketing and Art Direction are the ONLY area's where CD Projekt with The Witcher and The Witcher 2 does a better job than Bioware with Dragon Age. And thats only cos those are the area's where Bioware epically fails consistantly.

And up until Dragon Age 2 came out they usually had modders to correct any art problems.

Granted I am only basing my judgement on TW2 based on my horrifying experience with TW1 and the reviews ive seen of it to realise that while I may like the story (and Geralt's relationship with Triss) - let's take a moment to note that CD Projekt are NOT responsible for the amazing story of TW because TW is a set of novels they turned into games so they can't really claim pride of place for that - the game (and its prequel) seems to be so bloody mindedly arduous that I just know I won't be able to play it.

I would much rather Bioware studiously avoided copying The Witcher franchise for everything except art style.

There is a lot more Bioware/EA can take from CD Projekt, such as how  CD Projekt listened to the complaints about the Witcher and addressed those in the Witcher 2 rather than making changes the majority of their fanbsae did not want, how CD Projekt treats its customers, provides free content, etc.

Bioware/EA (unbelievable to me since Bioware used to be the champion of storytelling) could take some inspiration from the Witcher games for less cliche storylines.

Lastly, please get your facts straight.  The Witcher and the Witcher 2 take inspiration from the books, but are independent stories of the books written by CD Projekt as the storylines for the games take place AFTER the books.

There is nothing worse than a post that has little basis in fact.  For the uninformed reader, it's misleading.  To the knowledgable reader, it makes the poster come off in a very bad light.  To be honest, language such as "horrifying" and how you're basing one game upon another without playing both while also finding fault with some of the very things the games were lauded for makes me believe you're over dramatizing and possess the ulterior motive of what a company loyalist might.

In short, you basing the Witcher 2 on the Witcher would be like someone else basing DA 2 on DA:O without playing DA 2.  Of course, in that case, the opinion would be very misleading as DA 2 is a far inferior game to DA:O.  With the Witcher games, the exact opposite is true.  The sequel improves upon the original, as BG 2 did over BG 1, as Skyrim did over Oblivion, as all sequels SHOULD.

Modifié par google_calasade, 18 janvier 2012 - 09:22 .

[ScotGaymer]

@Am1


I was originally fully intended to because even tho I strongly dislike TW1 for its pain-in-the-ass gameplay I found myself rather fond of Geralt and Triss. And really really hoped TW2 would improve the gameplay to allow me to actually truely enjoy the story; but the relentless fanboyism of TW2 that occurs on this forum is very irritating and its rather put me off playing TW2 at all.


@simfan


Yes funnily enough I did say in my post many times that it was my OPINION, and opinions may well be erroneous. Funny that.
But yes I agree with you Planescape is a fabulous game lol definately up there very very close to BG2 ;-).


@google.



As I said I was only basing my opinion on my experience with TW1 (which was exceedingly bad - It was a royal arduous pain in the ass to play), from trailers, gameplay videos, screenshots, and from reviews. As I said in my post.

I wasn't at any point claiming to know all the facts about TW2. Only that FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN there is little except from how pretty TW2 looks that I would recommend to Bioware to take from that game; and a whole LOT of things ive noticed that TW2 seems to do (from what i can see in the game play videos and by what reviewers note) that i would insist Bioware studiously avoid.

The Witcher is not the best thing since sliced bread and it irritates me beyond belief how some people on these forums every few weeks ask "why isnt Dragon Age more like The Witcher 2 cos its THE BEST GAME EVAR!!!11!1!!!?????"

I don't know it might be a decent game, it might do many things better than Dragon Age 2 does, but at the end of the day it is NOT the perfect best PC RPG ever created (IMO that title belongs to BG2 as I said previously) and at the end of the day the two games arent really the same thing, DA sits closer to the RPG side of things and The Witcher franchise sits more towards the Action Adventure side of things.
It's a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

As I said in my post (and you quoted) - it is all my subjective OPINION that may well be wrong. I am sorry if it seemed like I was outright TW2 bashing. I wasn't really intending to come off so hostile about it; it was more a reaction to the relentless TW2 praising and less-than-flattering comparisons to it that DA2 gets rather unfairly IMO.

Dragon Age is better off doing its own thing, than trying to copy a game that as another company's high point is a B+ at best and Bioware's worst being a B-.

EDIT:
As to your specific criticisms of my criticisms I don't think you quite understand exactly what I meant.

I found the potions menu to be overly and unecessarily complicated (the animations for using a potion too). As indeed did I find much of the TW1 UI. And TW2 from what I could tell viewing gameplay videos, and screenies doesn't seem to improve that if at all.

Also on what planet is being physically incapable of using a weapon against certain types of creature making sense?
Yeh I would get certain metals and whatnot being more effective against certain enemies (Silver against Wolves as an example) but the game actually telling you that your char is physically incapable of swinging the monster sword against people makes no sense.
I am sorry nothing you could say could convince me that makes any sort of sense in any universe.

And thats about it really, the rest of your post is you telling me that I am not entitled to my opinion because I haven't played TW2. Because my opinion is based on (IMO) logical assumptions based on its prequel, and on its gameplay videos, and trailers. And on the reviews. And thats completely wrong according to you.

Okay then.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 18 janvier 2012 - 11:32 .

[DreamwareStudio]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

@google.



As I said I was only basing my opinion on my experience with TW1 (which was exceedingly bad - It was a royal arduous pain in the ass to play), from trailers, gameplay videos, screenshots, and from reviews. As I said in my post.

I wasn't at any point claiming to know all the facts about TW2. Only that FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN there is little except from how pretty TW2 looks that I would recommend to Bioware to take from that game; and a whole LOT of things ive noticed that TW2 seems to do (from what i can see in the game play videos and by what reviewers note) that i would insist Bioware studiously avoid.

You, in fact, cannot recommend what to take from the Witcher 2 without having played it, except the aesthetics which you've seen, so stop it.  You have no basis at all on which to make other opinions.  If you want to make comments about the Witcher 1, you MIGHT be able to argue a bit more, depending on how much of the game you played.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

The Witcher is not the best thing since sliced bread and it irritates me beyond belief how some people on these forums every few weeks ask "why isnt Dragon Age more like The Witcher 2 cos its THE BEST GAME EVAR!!!11!1!!!?????"

I don't know it might be a decent game, it might do many things better than Dragon Age 2 does, but at the end of the day it is NOT the perfect best PC RPG ever created (IMO that title belongs to BG2 as I said previously) and at the end of the day the two games arent really the same thing, DA sits closer to the RPG side of things and The Witcher franchise sits more towards the Action Adventure side of things.
It's a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

No, Dragon Age does not sit closer to the RPG side of things, ESPECIALLY Dragon age 2.  Though there is more action involved with the Witcher 2, there is decidely more role-playing opportunities than what you find in Dragon Age 2.  As someone who has played both games, I can make that comment.

In Dragon Age 2, almost none of the choices you make have any impact on the game whereas with the Witcher 2 the entire game changes based on the decisions you make.  Did I mention there are SIXTEEN total endings to the Witcher 2?

YOU, however, cannot compare.  The Witcher 2 might just be the best thing since sliced bread.  It could be the worst, but you would not know.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

As I said in my post (and you quoted) - it is all my subjective OPINION that may well be wrong. I am sorry if it seemed like I was outright TW2 bashing. I wasn't really intending to come off so hostile about it; it was more a reaction to the relentless TW2 praising and less-than-flattering comparisons to it that DA2 gets rather unfairly IMO.

Dragon Age is better off doing its own thing, than trying to copy a game that as another company's high point is a B+ at best and Bioware's worst being a B-.

You were TW 2 bashing, and in doing so, you stated something as fact, but did so erroneously when you stated CD Projekt did not come up with their storyline.  Your statement as you wrote it was neither opinion nor subjective.

It was, however, very mistaken.

Less than flattering comparisons?  There are reasons DA 2 pales in comparison to the Witcher 2, but you would not know why because you're basing your opinions on nothing.  Opinions are subjective and personal, as you have stated, so why would you use someone else's opinions (reviewers, let us say) to formulate your own.

When there is no basis for opinions, those opinions are worthless.

As for DA 2, it was a rush job of a game.  It featured linear play, a disjointed story, repetitive areas, wave and ninja drop combat, stagnancy, lack of immersion, and more than a handful of other things that has been listed time and again in these forums.  THAT is why it pales in comparison to not only the Witcher 2 but also to Origins, Skyrim, Oblivion and almost every other game that's been attached to RPG.

There are definitely things Bioware/EA could look at from CD Projekt and Bethesda.  No, they should not clone any game but instead, come up with something that is wholly theirs.  I did not say they should copy anything, I said there were valuable things they COULD borrow, if they so chose.

The way you come off about TW 2 which you have not even played is that there is nothing of worth from that game or the developer that made it besides the graphics.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

EDIT:
As to your specific criticisms of my criticisms I don't think you quite understand exactly what I meant.

I found the potions menu to be overly and unecessarily complicated (the animations for using a potion too). As indeed did I find much of the TW1 UI. And TW2 from what I could tell viewing gameplay videos, and screenies doesn't seem to improve that if at all.

It's not unnecssarily complicated, but yes, it takes time to learn.  That's part of the immersion, getting to know the world, the plants, and what you can do with them.  There were some likewise complicated things in BG 2, so I am unsure why you are grousing about the potions.

Hardly anything in TW and TW 2, as in BG 2, is handed to the player, as it should be.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Also on what planet is being physically incapable of using a weapon against certain types of creature making sense?
Yeh I would get certain metals and whatnot being more effective against certain enemies (Silver against Wolves as an example) but the game actually telling you that your char is physically incapable of swinging the monster sword against people makes no sense.
I am sorry nothing you could say could convince me that makes any sort of sense in any universe.

See this is something you're stating as fact rather than opinion, that a player CAN'T use a silver sword on people.  Like with what you said regarding the storyline for TW and TW 2, it is dead wrong.

This tells me you spent almost no time at all on the Witcher 1 and have not the slightest clue about the Witcher 2.  You can use the silver sword on humans, you can use non-silver swords on monsters.  They are not as effective as using the proper sword at the right time, but you CAN use whichever sword you like at any given time.

FitScotGaymer wrote...
And thats about it really, the rest of your post is you telling me that I am not entitled to my opinion because I haven't played TW2. Because my opinion is based on (IMO) logical assumptions based on its prequel, and on its gameplay videos, and trailers. And on the reviews. And thats completely wrong according to you.

Okay then.

They are NOT logical assumptions.  At most, your opinions are hand-me downs and as such, they aren't even wholly yours.  To make matters worse, what you have stated as fact is false.

Modifié par google_calasade, 19 janvier 2012 - 10:57 .

[The Executioner]

JohnEpler wrote...

Gunderic wrote...

But... the Witcher 2 has your PC (a man) sleeping with women... and you can't do the opposite! Wouldn't saying that they're looking at the Witcher 2 aggressively anger the uber-feminists that sometimes lurk and post here?

Those pesky uber feminists and their desire for equal and fair representation in popular media. Where will their madness end?

On a less snarky note - we look to all games for inspiration. However, it's not a matter of saying 'Holy crap, Skyrim sold how many copies? We have to DO WHAT THEY DID.' Our approach and Bethesda's approach certainly overlap in some areas, but our focus and their focus are different. Instead, we'll play a game and look at what it did well, then figure out why that particular feature or aspect of the game was so positively received.

A lot of game design is understanding how people think. And if you can understand why a particular feature is looked at so positively, you can work backwards and apply those lessons to your own games. Not always successfully, of course, but that's the general idea.

 Skyrim's great but so are the original Mass Effect and DAO. Keep this in mind BioWare, your much better at Storytelling and dialogue,at creating compelling Character's and Romance then Bethesda ever dreamed of . Those are your strength's continue to build on those and put back in some of the RPG depth that was lacking in DA2 and you will see great results. Just some friendly advice .

[ScotGaymer]

@google

Fair enough if you dont want to take me at my word that I didnt intend to be so hostile then fine thats your problem. Not mine.

My assumptions based on the game play videos, reviews, and prior experience playing The Witcher 1 (which isnt a good game IMO) may well be wrong as I said twice now. I am happy to admit that I dont know everything about the game.
And what i do know I cant say I particularily like.

If you think DAO isnt an RPG and TW2 is then you have no idea what constitutes an RPG. The Witcher 1 and 2 are Action Adventure games with RPG trappings - you can not call a game an RPG if it has a totally predetermined and predefined player character.
In that sense Dragon Age 2 (which is an Action RPG) is more of an RPG because although Hawke is more predefined than the Warden for example he/she is not as predefined as Geralt.

It seems to me that you are reacting to me apparently bashing TW2 which as I have said I didnt intend to do, like a typical Witcher fanboy.

I have said many times now that what I am saying is WHOLLY MY OPINION and have also said that it may well be wrong. And that I havent properly played TW2 as yet.
I have also said that much of my hostility in my original post comes more from the rampant fanboyism on these forums about TW2 being the perfect RPG (when its not even properly an RPG its more an Action Adventure game with RPG trappings) and the constant "Dragon Age sux it should be more like TEH WITCHERRZZ!!" comments really ****** me off.

Dragon Age is its own game and its own franchise and it does a different thing from The Witcher and SHOULD NOT be copying it. It should do its own thing, and find its own way.

I dont mind that you disagree with me. I do mind that you arent bothering to actually refute what I am saying, you are just dismissing me as "wrong" in a big long rant and implying im stupid or inattentive for disliking the overcomplication of The Witcher 1 and 2's UI (which I CAN comment on because its clearly visible in screenies and gameplay video. And give a very clear idea of its functionality).
To that end I am no longer going to engage with you.

I am probably wrong about much of my opinion on The Witcher 2, I can happily conceed. But I am not wrong at how I arrived at those opinions/conclusions about the game.
And I am not wrong about the inaccurate and unfair comparisons that keep getting drawn between DA2 and TW2; and the hostile fanboyism that a certain section of the "community" keep displaying about TW2.

If you dont want to properly read what I am saying, properly refute it, and properly explain why you are refuting it then theres no point in continuing this conversation because you seem to be simply getting increasingly hostile about it.

[ChickenDownUnder]

No problem with Bioware taking a look at other games to see what did or didn't work, The Witcher 2 included. Failure to pay attention to what players liked and didn't like in games other than their own could potentially doom their company's longevity. Not going overboard and make a frankenstein of everybody else's ideas is a given as well, since that would be bad too.

Like with many things, just need to find that happy medium.

So sure, why not take a look at TW2 and Skyrim.

Modifié par ChickenDownUnder, 19 janvier 2012 - 10:54 .

[robmokron]

5-6 hours later and 23 pages later... woooooowheee!!!

Anyways

I first want to say that This thread is quite agreat one, good arguements on each side. I would like to comment and place my two

cents on all if not most things discussed in this forum

There are however a couple things I would Like to ay before we Begin;
1. Nothing that i say, or suggest will make evryone happy, and i understand that
2. These are merely my opinions, i do understand i can be wrong


To start first

A. Devs learning from Skyrim and Witcher 2, and other franchises

First, Dragon Age will never be another game it will be Dragon age. I find it quite silly that people are using the arguement"IFZ

YAZ WANTS TAH PLAY SKYRIMZ PLATS DA SKYRIMS" its true f Bioware made a copy of skyrim wth the dragon age franchose people would be

upset, however this will not happen so get over it. Skyrim however has a couple things going for it that I beleive Dragon Age can

improve on.

a. Things Bioware will probably take from Skyrim

1. A Living World - This can be interupted in two ways, and i beleive both should be use. One thing about Skyrim is

that its world is in itself a Character. The land, dungeons tell a story , just by looking. Rarely have i seen this Dragon age. I

beleive this wikll be Bioware's focus when it comes to Skyrim. The Lore is there, lets just reflect this on the world


b. Things that Bioware should take from Skyrim


1. Optional Dugeons and Random Dungeon Delving - In Dragon Age almost every place you went to was part of the main

story, and side quests were built around that. There wasnt just a random cave you can go in and explore and loot. Im not saying

that the game should be built on this. But it is rather convinient that evreywhere you were able to go to had 6+ side quests

asscoiated with it as you trekked through to get to the final plot device. Either way i wont be upset either way.

2. Skyrim "Similar" tree - I have a feeling alot of people are going to kirby flip at the thought of this. Im not

saying to copy it, but the idea of your own build is qute appealing. Dragon should always have classes. I dont think that should

change. But maybe Elemental should have a quite diverse tree, or maybe even split it up in the elements, frost, fire, spirit etc.

Hexes can be another, healing, wards so on.

3. Randon quests- this may or may not be hard to implement in a Dragon age type game, but Skyrim had small things

that would adapt to how you were playing.. example; a mag challenging you to a duel at a radom spot. Little bits of random would

make a second playthorugh slightly more exciting.


c.Things Bioware should Take from Witcher 2

1. Heavy-Diversive Paths - Now im only half way through Witcher 1, so i can't say for the much of Witcher and how

it is. However I have heard early choice completely change the direction of the game. Now this could be difficult, how should a

player know what choice he should choose for the right player. Isb't tthat the point atleast? not knowing? Now I can't say its fair

for example, in DRagon Age 3, to simply pick Templars or Mages from the start, A player should not be forced to make an important

choice like such at the beginning. Yet maybe something different, whether it affects the companions they get (not just one) or the

areas they see at which time. I can;t say. Just a thought.

d.Things Bioware should take from other franchises

1. Fable; Choices affect landscape - If DA3 take place over a span of time, a Choice should maybe affect certain

areas. Its hard to explain, but similar to how in Fable 2 if you helped the bad guy at beginning, the part of down would turn

slumy. It doesn't have to be gimmicked and happen everywhere or all the time.

2. Old Republic/ Divinity 2; Treasure in the weirdest places - Old Reoublic has the Holocrons, ad Divinity has

random treasure, but eriously, finding some of this stuff is impressive. Its so off the beaten course that i dont sometimes see hwo

to evn get to these places. Not saying imply a jump mechanic, yet, in divinity especially, after you jump across mountains and what

not, for no reason to find a chest with goodies, its quite fantastic.

3. Fallout:New Vegas; Factions and Opposing Factions - Dragon Age for the most part, you were never specifically

ina faction. Like the Mages guild or fighters'guild of Skyrim. Fall Out had a great system thatcertain factions just hated

eachother, and you could have outfits that say loudly " Im ON THIS TEAM!" I thought it was great. Combine Fallout:NV's fame system.

Where Town A hates you cause of this, and town b loves you cause of this. Thedas could be monstrous. Since your travelling from

place to Place, the PC should not eccesarily be respected in the same way everywhere.

4.Kingdoms of Amular: Open Themepark - I think the areas in Dragon age are TOO pathed. Playing the KoA demo, They

have path areas but they are much larger and wider, and scattered with RANDOM Caves. I think this is fantastic.


B. Roleplaying: World revolving around the player? Or player adapting to the world?

This Arguement seemed to start withe the Skyrim Arch Mage issue. Should a Warrior at level 5 be able to become Arch

Mage. I can't answer that question. But I can ay how I feel. III Divo said something interesting about roleplaying which i 100%

agree with. He said that Roleplaying is how the Player (you) plays the role of the character in the world that is given to them.

Meaning, how the player reacts to the world given to them. I think this is Wi. I will admit, there are time i would like to

roleplay a certain way, yet the game does not allow me to do so. With Skyrim, Bethesda decided to not block any content from

paticular build or roleplay styles, and toet the player make up a reason for "non=-practical" things. Now i do strongly beleive

content should never be blocked, but when it is at the price of the world not making sense, or it just seeming silly. There are

people who seem to think that, if it merely explained how a Warrior for example, could be arch mage, with even one line of

dialogue, it would make all the difference. I agree. I mean, i'm a scrolls fan, so things like this dont truly bother me, but it

would be nice. The truth is that everyone will have what they feel is right. If the world revolves around the player, it may seem

extremely strange and convienient, yet the experience tailored for that character. If the Player roleplay style isn't reflected by

the world, he may feel that rolplaying is useless or not worth it. Im a beleiver that the world shouldnt alwasy be about you, yet,

some minor changes would be nice, for the player respect atleast. I had an example a few paragraphs up, talking about a Mage

challenging my character to a duel because hes is a mage. Thats neat, small stuff you know? The entire shouldnt change cause im a

mage, yet the small things should be reflected in that.


C. Sexuality in Game, and Deep Themes

Considering that alot of forum posters are calling Witcher 2 sexist, i wanted to comment on that. I haven't played TW2, o i

cant say from experience, but what i can say is... so? Sexism is a theme that has a deep meaning and has been in our world for

quite some time. The treatment of women as sex objects is not something that hasn't been around In our world today, it is not

tolerated by most and thats fine and I agree. It does not mean however, in a source of media, it should be banned or discredited. I

have not read the books either, but if thats how the world was writtent, then why fuss? Games that show these kind of things should

be awarded, I am quite tired of ALWAYs having politically correct worlds. Not that its okay everyone once in awhile, games that do

something different should be awarded.

It brings me to LIs in Dragon Age World, The All Bi discussion, or the Hawkesexual. Im on the fence on this one, as i feel

players should not be limited to story options based on sexual roleplay prefrences, i also feel that it should be explained more.

Whether is by developers, or in game. a blatant, "im gay hawke" isnt what i mean however. But from my experience, I imagine there

is extremely little difference in a Femhawke, Merril relationship to a straight one. hould it be? I dont know? Do Bisexual women

treat their men partners different than their women? Probably both dependant on the woman. The all Bi thing works for the players

for choice, it also doesn't cause 15 companions with seperate Sexualities, but watered down dialogue, instead we get 6 companions

full of depth.

D. Dragon Age, a quick reflection on the past games and suggestions for the future

I understand the dissapointment of DA2, but i highly disagree with its constant hate. As i understand it was Dragon Age

Origins 2, it still did what it had to do to make the series move on (whether it was initially intentional or not). I understand

that people wated more choice with the dialogue, and have their choices make a difference in the end, and in the most part didn't.

However, maybe it just setting up the mood for DA3's Mage/templar war? Hawke's story had to be told, and for the mot part it was

generic. One could argue that, in all rpg games, things always happen. In Origins, Ostagar always happens, Duncan always dies,

Maric always die, you alwasy fight the arch demon. Now again, its not a perfect arguement, but you can see where i was going.

a. Things Dragon Age 3 should take from DA3

1. Friendhsip and Rivalry - I think this was key, not only did it allow the player to see two sides of a player,

but also does not punish the player for roleplaying how they wanted. I think they should however make on more bar thats

indenpendant. A Love bar. Id imagine loves goes beyond friendhsip and simple rivalry, and it could be something else, depending on

how you comment,

2.Art Style- Just stick with it, DA2 could get away with a style change cause it early in the series, but stay with

it. Another transition may feel weird to most

b.Things that should be taken from DA:O

1. Arcane Warrior - This may be a personal thing, it was a fna favourite and it was taken away, im not sure why, but i think ti would be a nice edition back =) (my main wasnt AW btw)

2. 4 Areas/ KOTOR Planets - Npt sure how to explain it, but the system where you had a couple places to choose to go, and youd pick one then go to another in any order. Does that make sense? Anyways, it should be back, but back with a venegeance! No, but really. They hould make hitgs slightly more complicated, for example,

Choosing Option B in Area A, and Choosing option B in Area B, Should come out with consenquence F, in Area C.

I found that the Areas were too individual in DA:O, doing something in one area, only really affect one area.. seems hollow but i wouldnt want to make things extremely complicated, but hey. Im not a game designer or programer, im ot sure whats possible.


I could probably ay more, but most wont read this entire thing, and if you do, I thank you.

[Gibb_Shepard]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

@google

Fair enough if you dont want to take me at my word that I didnt intend to be so hostile then fine thats your problem. Not mine.

My assumptions based on the game play videos, reviews, and prior experience playing The Witcher 1 (which isnt a good game IMO) may well be wrong as I said twice now. I am happy to admit that I dont know everything about the game.
And what i do know I cant say I particularily like.

If you think DAO isnt an RPG and TW2 is then you have no idea what constitutes an RPG. The Witcher 1 and 2 are Action Adventure games with RPG trappings - you can not call a game an RPG if it has a totally predetermined and predefined player character.
In that sense Dragon Age 2 (which is an Action RPG) is more of an RPG because although Hawke is more predefined than the Warden for example he/she is not as predefined as Geralt.

It seems to me that you are reacting to me apparently bashing TW2 which as I have said I didnt intend to do, like a typical Witcher fanboy.

I have said many times now that what I am saying is WHOLLY MY OPINION and have also said that it may well be wrong. And that I havent properly played TW2 as yet.
I have also said that much of my hostility in my original post comes more from the rampant fanboyism on these forums about TW2 being the perfect RPG (when its not even properly an RPG its more an Action Adventure game with RPG trappings) and the constant "Dragon Age sux it should be more like TEH WITCHERRZZ!!" comments really ****** me off.

Dragon Age is its own game and its own franchise and it does a different thing from The Witcher and SHOULD NOT be copying it. It should do its own thing, and find its own way.

I dont mind that you disagree with me. I do mind that you arent bothering to actually refute what I am saying, you are just dismissing me as "wrong" in a big long rant and implying im stupid or inattentive for disliking the overcomplication of The Witcher 1 and 2's UI (which I CAN comment on because its clearly visible in screenies and gameplay video. And give a very clear idea of its functionality).
To that end I am no longer going to engage with you.

I am probably wrong about much of my opinion on The Witcher 2, I can happily conceed. But I am not wrong at how I arrived at those opinions/conclusions about the game.
And I am not wrong about the inaccurate and unfair comparisons that keep getting drawn between DA2 and TW2; and the hostile fanboyism that a certain section of the "community" keep displaying about TW2.

If you dont want to properly read what I am saying, properly refute it, and properly explain why you are refuting it then theres no point in continuing this conversation because you seem to be simply getting increasingly hostile about it.

Just play the damn game.

[Ricvenart]

Sort of a reply to Robmo or at least what I did read.

Things Bioware can learn from Bethesda:

1. Releasing more or less the same game year after year with the same bugs, many features removed and replaced with fewer shallow poorly put together ideas that scream they had ADHD when making the game and got distracted by shiny objects when people dissappear and others just lack any sense of personality or depth. (Grats on about 100 marriage partners that are essential the same and make for a stagnant and disconnected experience).

2. Ditching whole ideas because they didn't quite work as intended, I'd put money on Marriage and Radiant story both vanishing in TES VI, they never seem to try improving anything and other area where they accidently make a better experience they soon ditch and make it worse again, as illustrated by glitches they have to fix for every single one of thier games of the same engine and features like companions.

3. Lousy PR that rarely actually does anything, when they do it's frequently demeaning and belittling to thier fans and purchasers of thier games (ie. where thier future pay checks come from).

4. Highly venomous forums that attack people personally over debates or evidence to the contrary and at best will use things like "you make a better game before you have any right to cristise". Or even better those that play games and post on a forum just to repeatedly say "this game is great any flaws you claim to find are lies" claiming anyone to post a negative review or constructive cristism are the ones "wasting thier short life". Sure maybe it is but pot-kettle...you know the saying.

5. Hireing vollenter (mental block on spelling atm) that will see the above and are so bias that they ban the people posting the constructive complaint and not the person slinging round names simply because they blindly love the game (by blindly I mean just say it's great you're lying etc, sure the game can be perfect in your eyes but at least say why or try not to deny simply facts like frequent bugs like Beth has never released a buggy game in it's life.)

6. A highly lifeless world and repetive dungeons that somehow get an exception unlike other games, sure the snake is not an eagle and that stairwell is now broken but it's more or less the same dungeon filled with the same textures inconsistant lighting and "waves" of zombies. Where choices you do make have no effect on the story at all (even the sudden ending and choice of what to do with anders had far more impact/difference then the entiriety of the civil war questline). It's frequently hard to care about any choice you make due to how poorly the characters are done, they are really hard to give a care about, even the people who hated what Anders done and thier lack of ability to stop a major plot point that surely is going to come back, a part of history that needed no less to happen then the fereldan or Ostagar battles and thier effects, mostly still felt some emotion regarding it.

7. How to take a perk system of customization and completely ruining it in so many ways.

I can't say what they could take from the witcher 2 as I haven't played it and even with all the positive feedback round it I simply don't fancy it. Although I wouldn't be surpised if they could learn anything from it they could learn from an earlier or better source.

Just to add seen as I'm dying for someone to strip the game for scraps of what it actually did well without just making it a clone (ie Making DA into a TES sort of RPG). Fable.

1. Customization, seriously from gaining scars on "deaths" to the sheer number of gear to wear which you can change (some items have optional hoods/cloaks/sleeves and can dye them). To buying homes and being able to upgrade them and select furniture styles (maybe not such a good idea for DA but maybe being able to select between a few styles of furniture would make a nice touch/money sink).

2. Relationships, not that I'd want the exact way they done it, ie no major plot characters are romancable, it's still worth commending having them being able to discover your bigamy and leave you for it, giving gifts and minor interactions like being able to hold a hand/kiss/sleep with outside of a few set scenes.

3. Generic Randomized NPCs, maybe it's something that could work in towns, not to the scale it had done it but just a few ones tossed into some parts. Although it can be basic and sometimes leads to conflicting personalities it generally works well in keeping a city alive and not making it feel like a town filled with cardboard cut outs when you interact with them and some vomit while others laugh. Frankly I had more of connection and cared more about them then most of the named NPC's with crafted lines and personalities, especially as they all boo you for making a bad choice at the end of the game and not not even acknowlegde you done something great. Add to that the rumors they say, things others pick up on that you've done elsewhere which is far better then hearing npcs complain about the very thing 5 seconds ago you told them you fixed. In fable they provide so much as they gossip, shop, react to you, go home to bed, skyrim may be similar but it lacks in some way and I don't think it's just down to tiny cities with too few people in them.

4. Changing environments over time, this probally would have improved the Kirkwall experience so much if you could see areas becoming rich or poverty sticken from your actions so much that being in the one town over those years would have seemed like nothing. Seeing bowerstone become more green or a lake being drained and being dusty and mined was amazing touches as was supporting one temple over another, shame about the rest of the game.

5. I'm not really against or for either Silent/Voiced protagonists, the transitions didn't bother me in either fable or DA like in TES (given they bothered to give you options in what to say and not 5x the same thing) didn't bother me either. Although I guess thats where the first line here is sort of wrong, because neither DA/Fable/TES actually has a truly silent protagonist anyway, Link is silent grunts of battle don't count, but what I maybe would like to see is to just being able to smile or shake your head, use some  emotion to what someone has said, even outside of scenes (like fable), you can add what you like in your head then and it doesn't leave your character a stale image on screen. At the very least as you talk your character if it's possible to see them should be showing some signs of life and emotion. On that topic maybe when your write the option of  the wheel don't make the said thing so different, sometimes I was like ok I'll crack a light joke I'll pick that one and then Hawke turns into a bully.

6. Not to learn from the positives of the series but still a lesson worth learning, don't make all you're dlc so seperate and frivalous to the main story, sure one for fun now and then is fine, but Fables is so dissappointing when you don't get to see more of the places you'd love to and just some stupidly themed island. Above all don't charge people to "download" the color black on release day when it's clearly on the disc and that file is nothing but a key. Flip side to this I much rather have the games story end like DA's that at least can be added to though DLC unlike Fables Act II which is so skimmed over and missing in massive chunks while leaving you think what the hell was that about as they ruined the build up and cannot have a dlc broken up and slotted into the bits of the game that exist before the ending, although an all too short development isn't great at least it was a better way to deal with time constraints.

Frankly I don't see DAII as the linear set path others seem to, you still have more choice and effect then most other games allow even with the ending which the choices simply where there or at the very least no less there then choices in the supposed game of the year Skyrim or the other in DE HR's ending.

Frankly though I'd rather it learn from nothing else as I for one am glad it existed last year, had enjoyment out of it no other game really filled that area of and don't care that they tried a slightly different direction. I'd rather it remain it's own game then become a clone of something, especially skyrim, that I may not like, If I wanted to play skyrim I would. Even in areas like from fable which I think would benifit the game I would only want to see it fit into the game they already have and not replace the feature entirely (like making entire cities of randomized npcs vs just a few scattered to give a better impression of life) but if it was a choice between cloning fable or one of it's features entirely or the same for skyrim, or nothing at all I'd rather nothing at all as it remains it's own game which I do want to purchase the next one of unlike either of those games.

Modifié par Ricvenart, 20 janvier 2012 - 06:43 .

[Morroian]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I have said many times now that what I am saying is WHOLLY MY OPINION and have also said that it may well be wrong. And that I havent properly played TW2 as yet.
I have also said that much of my hostility in my original post comes more from the rampant fanboyism on these forums about TW2 being the perfect RPG (when its not even properly an RPG its more an Action Adventure game with RPG trappings) and the constant "Dragon Age sux it should be more like TEH WITCHERRZZ!!" comments really ****** me off.

Yep, my reaction exactly.

[DreamwareStudio]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

@google

Fair enough if you dont want to take me at my word that I didnt intend to be so hostile then fine thats your problem. Not mine.

My assumptions based on the game play videos, reviews, and prior experience playing The Witcher 1 (which isnt a good game IMO) may well be wrong as I said twice now. I am happy to admit that I dont know everything about the game.
And what i do know I cant say I particularily like.

If you think DAO isnt an RPG and TW2 is then you have no idea what constitutes an RPG. The Witcher 1 and 2 are Action Adventure games with RPG trappings - you can not call a game an RPG if it has a totally predetermined and predefined player character.
In that sense Dragon Age 2 (which is an Action RPG) is more of an RPG because although Hawke is more predefined than the Warden for example he/she is not as predefined as Geralt.

It seems to me that you are reacting to me apparently bashing TW2 which as I have said I didnt intend to do, like a typical Witcher fanboy.

I have said many times now that what I am saying is WHOLLY MY OPINION and have also said that it may well be wrong. And that I havent properly played TW2 as yet.
I have also said that much of my hostility in my original post comes more from the rampant fanboyism on these forums about TW2 being the perfect RPG (when its not even properly an RPG its more an Action Adventure game with RPG trappings) and the constant "Dragon Age sux it should be more like TEH WITCHERRZZ!!" comments really ****** me off.

Dragon Age is its own game and its own franchise and it does a different thing from The Witcher and SHOULD NOT be copying it. It should do its own thing, and find its own way.

I dont mind that you disagree with me. I do mind that you arent bothering to actually refute what I am saying, you are just dismissing me as "wrong" in a big long rant and implying im stupid or inattentive for disliking the overcomplication of The Witcher 1 and 2's UI (which I CAN comment on because its clearly visible in screenies and gameplay video. And give a very clear idea of its functionality).
To that end I am no longer going to engage with you.

I am probably wrong about much of my opinion on The Witcher 2, I can happily conceed. But I am not wrong at how I arrived at those opinions/conclusions about the game.
And I am not wrong about the inaccurate and unfair comparisons that keep getting drawn between DA2 and TW2; and the hostile fanboyism that a certain section of the "community" keep displaying about TW2.

If you dont want to properly read what I am saying, properly refute it, and properly explain why you are refuting it then theres no point in continuing this conversation because you seem to be simply getting increasingly hostile about it.

I'm not a Witcher fanboy.  I would have had the same reactions to your post if you had stated them about Dragon Age 2 or any other game, whether I liked the game or not.  That is why I called you out.  I would never formulate and post opinions on anything so flimsy as what you have.  It also doesn't help that your posts reek of  a leniency towards being bullheaded and blind to anyone else's opinions other than your own unless those opinions align with yours.  If you were interested in having an intelligent opinion, you would play the game and stop posting one hypocrtical post after another.

FYI, before I tried DA 2, I spent a great deal of time on these forums.  I also read a fair amount of reviews, but I waited to form my own opinions until I actually played the game.

If anyone's a fanboy here, it isn't me.  As stated, I've played DA 2, so I can intelligently speak about where it is lacking and where it is not.  I will also readily concede that the Witcher 2 is far from perfect.  I never said it was perfect.  I said it was A VERY GOOD GAME.  It takes a lot for me to put a game at that level.  What I did say is there are worthy factors about the Witcher 2.  You can't seem to handle that opinion whether it's mine or someone else's, so you refute with no personal knowledge.

Should you wish to discuss RPGs and what makes an RPG an RPG, I would be more than happy to pit my knowledge against yours.  Any day, just name the time.

Are the Witcher games action?  You bet.  Do they also lean heavily towards roleplaying?  Yeah, way more than you're willing to admit.  That is especially true of the Witcher 2.  Roleplaying does not require having a party of people, you know.  If you honestly think DA 2 is deeper roleplaying, it leaves me sittng her flabbergasted.  There is very little roleplaying to DA 2.  If you want to talk about DA:O, that's a different story.  DA:O is roleplaying.  Neither DA:O or TW 1/2 are at the level of say Baldur's Gate or Baldur's Gate 2, but I still consider them roleplaying games (their DM capabilities notwithstanding).  I would be hard stretched to refer to DA 2 in that capacity.

As far as your diatribe against the Witcher 2, I'm finished talking to you.  It's like trying to dig through a foot-thick concrete with an archaelologist's trowel.

Modifié par google_calasade, 20 janvier 2012 - 11:05 .

[LobselVith8]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I have said many times now that what I am saying is WHOLLY MY OPINION and have also said that it may well be wrong. And that I havent properly played TW2 as yet.
I have also said that much of my hostility in my original post comes more from the rampant fanboyism on these forums about TW2 being the perfect RPG (when its not even properly an RPG its more an Action Adventure game with RPG trappings) and the constant "Dragon Age sux it should be more like TEH WITCHERRZZ!!" comments really ****** me off.

I think it's an issue of fans finding what they were looking for in Dragon Age II in The Witcher II. The story, the politics, the fleshed out characters, the significance of choice over the protagonist's actions. There's a lot of frustration and anger over Dragon Age II not being what it was advertised by the creators and developers to be, and for some of us, it feels like our money and time was wasted.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I think it's an issue of fans finding what they were looking for in Dragon Age II in The Witcher II. The story, the politics, the fleshed out characters, the significance of choice over the protagonist's actions. There's a lot of frustration and anger over Dragon Age II not being what it was advertised by the creators and developers to be, and for some of us, it feels like our money and time was wasted.

Eh, I found in TW2 what I dreamed Bioware would do but never dared to expect it. For me, all Bioware games I played pale in comparison and in that sense it was an eye opener: that Bioware does not hold the monopoly on storytelling games. Not only was it challenged, it was almost completely beaten in my eyes. DA2 just made this realization more abrupt but clear for me.

I don't care whether you want to call TW2 an RPG or not, what matters to me is the story and in that regard, DA2 is not the only Bioware game that leaves much to be desired (though it's by far the worse of the bunch imo). 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 janvier 2012 - 03:40 .

[ScotGaymer]

@Gibb.

When I can afford to I might just. ;-)


@Morroian.

I'm glad someone got what I was tryin to say lol.


@Google

As I said I am no longer going to engage with you because you are being incredibly hostile and not properly reading my posts, you have read bits here and there and drawn your own conclusion about what I was saying which wasn't entirely correct and as a result you haven't properly refuted what i have been saying.

I mean I have said 4 times now that I don't know everything, or even a lot about TW2, and that my opinions were drawn from limited sources. But you seem to have completely ignored me repeatedly saying that my opinion could be totally wrong. My saying that was more or less an invite to be proven wrong, so that I know better.

I am sorry if I offended you for whatever reason but there's no need to have been as hostile and rude as you have been towards me for not liking the Witcher as a game as much as many seem to.


@LobselVith

I would be the last person in the world to talk up Dragon Age 2. I am well aware of its faults - in fact I have had a number of conversations in threads with Mike Laidlaw, and David Gaider about those faults (along with some other people).
And I completely agree with you about Dragon Age 2 not reaching its potential.

But IMO from what I can see The Witcher isn't exactly reaching it's potential either. Having only really seen Gameplay Videos, Screenies, and Reviews of the game I am only getting probably about half the picture of course and from them I can see right away a number of things/issues that warrant some constructive criticism IE the overly long taking a potion animation IMO.

For myself The Witcher franchise does something quite a bit different from what Dragon Age sets out to do, even the second game which is closer to the Action side of things than the first is still closer to constituting an RPG than The Witcher 1 and 2, so that trying to compare them its like comparing apples and oranges.
Yes there are probably elements they could concievably take from The Witcher 2 into Dragon Age 3 but the same could be said for all games, for any games.

The open universe of Skyrim, the fun lightheartedness of Fable, the vibrant yet still dark art style of Dark Souls, the gorgeous environment of The Witcher 2, the funky actiony elements of Mass Effect, make it an MMO like TOR. Etc.

The list could go on and on and on without end with the various things various people would want to see in Dragon Age, but very few people who make these suggestions that Dragon Age should be more like game X or game Y actually stop to think if the elements they are suggesting would actually work for Dragon Age, or if the style of game they are suggesting Dragon Age copy would work for the Dragon Age universe.

Hence why I said I would much rather Dragon Age find its own way, find what works for it, rather than randomly nicking idea A from Game X, and idea B from Game Y here and there.

Hopefully now I am putting my thoughts forwardin a less hostile, and more reasonable and understandable way. :-)

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 20 janvier 2012 - 04:30 .

[robmokron]

Ricvenart wrote...

*snips*

I appreciate the response, I do agree that i dont want to see a copy, or i dont want a feature in dragon age 3 make me feel *hey its kinda like skyrim*, but i understand where you are coming from


@ Gaymer

I may have misread the 23 pages, but i dont think MOST of the gamers her asking for features from other games, are actually wanting to make a dragon age a clone, just small things. Like my desire for DA to have some Random dungeons and a more open themepark feel, like Kingdom of Amular

[BBK4114]

Off Topic-I have to say I am always amazed and appalled when I see people on this forum, specifically (yes I have been on other sites *gasp*), bashing other games so fervently. I always wonder what their motivations are. Are they jealous someone could possibly like another game better or as well as their favorite game? I guess everybody's gotta have somebody to look down on, but I skip their posts from then on. No game is perfect and many have good features that are not currently being used by the DA franchise.

Back to the premise of this discussion: What I would like to see Bioware get from the other franchises.
From Skyrim:
I think the general sense of wonder I got from exploring. There were so many different dungeons to crawl through. I have never seen water done as well in a video game. When I opened the door and entered Blackreach I was blown away - just astounded. I absolutely loved it.
I loved having to save up money to buy a house. I enjoy looting unique and worthwhile items. I like enchanting my own equipment. I like smithing-being able to upgrade my own items. Alchemy was wasted in this game though, you found so many potions it just was unnecessary.
I like puzzles - even simple ones like these.
I liked the leveling system.
I like that the monsters look like monsters!
I discovered I didn't care about a voiced protagonist, but I do like facial animations, hah.

A big ++++ for me: They are releasing a toolkit/creation kit for modders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are happy people want to invest time in playing their game, go figure.

Re-The Witcher: I am a woman and I couldn't have cared less that I had to play Geralt. I absolutely fell in love with him. When people talk about role-playing I think they are talking about wanting to be themselves and do things they can't do irl. Like saving the world from the big bad or being totally evil. But playing as a set protagonist can also be a role, can't it? So to me it still qualifies as an rpg. The series is a touch misogynistic but not any worse than DA2 (FHawke's swaying hips, Izzy's & Bethany's boobies -- 'nuff said.)

What I would like to see from TW1:
It has the BEST alchemy/crafting system in games imo. It requires thought and effort if you want to use it to your best advantage. And you will need to use the heck out of the potions!!
I like that the monsters look like monsters!
The boss fights. They are fun!!! It took me several times to figure out how to beat the golem, the kikimore queen, etc. They were each unique - not just more hp added. I'd like to see some of this implemented.

From TW2:
What can I say. The story is so compelling there are times I have to stop myself from advancing the main quest - the sense of urgency is so convincing.
I love that the choices you make lock you out of whole sections of the game. Incredibly re-playable. I like that the game mechanics make you use all your abilities - even in casual, something the 1st neglected.
The kayran fight requires thought.
The monsters look like monsters! (Starting to see a theme, here...)
It's adult. No compromise. I thought Triss undressing magically was unbelievably sexy. (I wanna do that for my husband, lol!)
Can't think of anything else at this time. Thanks for reading.

Modifié par BBK4114, 20 janvier 2012 - 07:16 .