190 réponses à ce sujet

[Ub3r_]

http://xbox-360.nowg...gon-age-origins



a far better review, still low on graphics but 9.4 overall

[Mental Goat]

Modifié par Mental Goat, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:21 .

[Alienraptor]

I actually really welcome harsh reviews. These reviewers, however we may disagree with their conclusions, are always the most valuable for pointing out the weakest points of a game. Nearly every review (most of which were on the X360) seems to have agreed that while never lacking for design or artistic merit, the graphics are technically not impressive.

The audio has received praise and some criticism, and I think the IGN AU reviewer's assessment is likely quite to the point: some of the voice acting is excellent, while some is rather unremarkable. I would probably not be as harsh as he (7.0? really?) but it is worth taking seriously.

The LotR influence is also interesting and deserves some attention. I would definitely agree that the epic high fantasy setting has suffered from LotRification, and it sounds as though DA:O makes some efforts to move away from that but doesn't quite do it.

And I really agree with the point about well-done 2D art being superior to middling 3D graphics. I will always have a soft spot for the exquisitely drawn isometric settings from the Infinity Engine days.

All in all, a worthwhile review and, despite its unspectacular score, I think it was insightful. I am encouraged by the praise of the gameplay and story, as those are the heart of the experience for me.

Modifié par Alienraptor, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:23 .

[Lacan2]

Deran2 wrote...

Lacan2 wrote...

After reading the review, I was disappointed with a few things:

1) LOTR. I hate LOTR, so damn bland. I really hope this guy saw more LOTR in Dragon Age than there truly is in the game.
2) Enemies blindly charge. Seems there's no enemy AI.

I was glad to hear reinforcement on the storyline, which (aside from characterization) is the most important thing. He said this is the next best thing to BG3, so I'm happy on that count.

LOTR is bland? Ummm...Excuse me? You do realize LOTR is the only reason games like this exist, right? Tolkien's writing can get annoying at times, but bland? Really?

It was good for its day, just like the Canterbury Tales. But they're not good anymore; the genre has evolved. Black and white characters like Frodo and Gandalf just don't cut it anymore; enemies like Sauron need to be more deep like Irenicus to keep us hooked.

Modifié par Lacan2, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:21 .

[Wyndham711]

Umh, he slammed the voice acting quite harshly? I'm extremely surprised about that, especially since Bioware has told and shown us how much care and love went into the VO process. Maybe he felt the characters don't sound natural, since they don't speak contemporary English? Also, he kept repeating the game looks bland, the gameplay is too old-school and, at the same time, somehow he seemed to downplay some of the major strong points of the game (epic scale, replayability, soundtrack, vivid NPCs etc).



Also, what's with everyone constantly saying Dragon Age is just like the Lord Of The Rings? Where did the dark fantasy themes and the G.R.R. Martin influence suddenly disappear? Sure, the cinematography of the cutscenes and large scale events are very likely to be influenced by Jackson's movies, but how can anyone be surprised by that? Those were some of the best and most succesful fantasy movies ever made - you would be foolish not to learn from those.

What an annoying viewpoint the reviewer has... I guess at least he'll get what he's looking for when ME2 comes out.

[Deran2]

Lacan2 wrote...

Deran2 wrote...

Lacan2 wrote...

After reading the review, I was disappointed with a few things:

1) LOTR. I hate LOTR, so damn bland. I really hope this guy saw more LOTR in Dragon Age than there truly is in the game.
2) Enemies blindly charge. Seems there's no enemy AI.

I was glad to hear reinforcement on the storyline, which (aside from characterization) is the most important thing. He said this is the next best thing to BG3, so I'm happy on that count.

LOTR is bland? Ummm...Excuse me? You do realize LOTR is the only reason games like this exist, right? Tolkien's writing can get annoying at times, but bland? Really?

It was good for its day, just like the Canterbury Tales. But they're not good anymore; the genre has evolved. Black and white characters like Frodo and Gandalf just don't cut it anymore; enemies like Sauron need to be more deep like Irenicus to keep us hooked.

A good story is always good, even as a genre advances. A lot of LOTR is simply black and white, but there is depth there to be studied. Unlike a lot of fantasy novels where the author's try to make their character's seem "gray" the characters in LOTR feel real and act like real people. You classify Frodo as a character that simply fits into one definition, but that isn't true. He was a conflicted character throughout the last two novels. He likely would have kept the ring had Gollum not attacked.

[Wissenschaft]

Lacan2 wrote...

It was good for its day, just like the Canterbury Tales. But they're not good anymore; the genre has evolved. Black and white characters like Frodo and Gandalf just don't cut it anymore; enemies like Sauron need to be more deep like Irenicus to keep us hooked.

Last time I checked, DA:O isn't full of black and white characters so I fail to see the probelm. This guys main complaint seems to be that DA:O isn't experimental like his pet favorite, mass effect. Also seems to think that BG2 is still the best at high fantasy and now it is so not, it way to dated now. DA:O seems to have much more open, freeroaming gameplay than BG2 every had and that was BG2's biggest weakness. Not to meantion the characters are going to be a lot more developed.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:33 .

[Foxd1e]

Wyndham711 wrote...

Umh, he slammed the voice acting quite harshly? I'm extremely surprised about that, especially since Bioware has told and shown us how much care and love went into the VO process. Maybe he felt the characters don't sound natural, since they don't speak contemporary English? Also, he kept repeating the game looks bland, the gameplay is too old-school and, at the same time, somehow he seemed to downplay some of the major strong points of the game (epic scale, replayability, soundtrack, vivid NPCs etc).

Also, what's with everyone constantly saying Dragon Age is just like the Lord Of The Rings? Where did the dark fantasy themes and the G.R.R. Martin influence suddenly disappear? Sure, the cinematography of the cutscenes and large scale events are very likely to be influenced by Jackson's movies, but how can anyone be surprised by that? Those were some of the best and most succesful fantasy movies ever made - you would be foolish not to learn from those.
What an annoying viewpoint the reviewer has... I guess at least he'll get what he's looking for when ME2 comes out.

I am with you 100% on those points Wyndham, I welcome a critical reviews myself but this guy was out to give the game a lowscore, 7.0 for the sound is ridiculous I can't think of a game in the last couple years I've played that's been rated that low on sound and I am sure I would of noticed this "dubious" quality myself in all the preview vids on the net and Dragon Age's site.

Also the Graphics, seriously there not bad, one of my friend's was hooked on this game by a screenshot I sent him, It was one of the pics of Sten swinging at Darkspawn and he's like dude what is that game the graphics are phenominal. So I don't know take it as you will I guess. I won't totally rip into the negative reviews till I play the game for myself. But the sound and graphics I can comment on by the screenshots, videos, and character creator.

[OldhamA]

makenzieshepard wrote...

8.4 I guess being upside down has scrambled their brains! *ducks the incoming rotten produce*

Are you trying to say Australians are incapable of cultivating crops correctly?

[Lacan2]

Wissenschaft wrote...

 DA:O seems to have much more open, freeroaming gameplay than BG2 every had and that was BG2's biggest weakness. Not to meantion the characters are going to be a lot more developed.

Most haven't played the game yet, so obviously nobody knows. TBH, it's hard to believe any modern game having the size of BG2 (not to mention BG).

We will be very fortunate indeed if the characters are as well-developed as BG2's. Keldorn, Viconia, Irenicus, etc. Those will be hard to top because they had so much depth.

Honestly, I can't wait. Reviews like this one make me hungry for the game.

Modifié par Lacan2, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:39 .

[OldhamA]

On the original Aus review - what do they mean the Baldur's Gate saga abruptly ended? The PC turned into a god (or y'know took the other path, though why you'd do that....), that's pretty good closure.

[delijoe]

This is one poorly written review riddled with mistakes and insane personal biases that pretty much invalidate this whole review.  Thankfully the AU review usually gets overriden by the US review in the metacritic scores.

I particularly liked this paragraph:

"On that, whereas Baldur's Gate
and Icewind Dale existed in the Forgotten Realms, well before Peter
Jackson could lay influence on how Orcs should look and what
constitutes an epic battle sequence. That's right – We're inferring
that Dragon Age: Origins does come across as a Lord of the Rings-lite
at times. It's frustrating that, in the previous eight years or so, the
creative process has been so heavily stunted by Hollywood that it's
lost the delicate originality of so many 2D Dungeons & Dragons
RPGs. "

Huh?  The entire Fantasy Genre is based on LOTR and Tolkien.  So complaining that there are LOTR influences in DA is like complaining about the Star Trek influences in Mass Effect (of which there were many)....  but it's justified because they defined the genres.  And since when were 2D D&D RPGs original?  It's all the same fantasy based on LOTR. 

[Kortok]

Skeetles wrote...

Reading the review, sounds like he'd rather be reviewing the new Mass Effect instead.

Annnnnnnnd... I was right heheh

xbox360.ign.com/articles/836/836701p1.html

zing!

[Foxd1e]

delijoe wrote...

This is one poorly written review riddled with mistakes and insane personal biases that pretty much invalidate this whole review.  Thankfully the AU review usually gets overriden by the US review in the metacritic scores.

I particularly liked this paragraph:

"On that, whereas Baldur's Gate
and Icewind Dale existed in the Forgotten Realms, well before Peter
Jackson could lay influence on how Orcs should look and what
constitutes an epic battle sequence. That's right – We're inferring
that Dragon Age: Origins does come across as a Lord of the Rings-lite
at times. It's frustrating that, in the previous eight years or so, the
creative process has been so heavily stunted by Hollywood that it's
lost the delicate originality of so many 2D Dungeons & Dragons
RPGs. "

Huh?  The entire Fantasy Genre is based on LOTR and Tolkien.  So complaining that there are LOTR influences in DA is like complaining about the Star Trek influences in Mass Effect (of which there were many)....  but it's justified because they defined the genres.  And since when were 2D D&D RPGs original?  It's all the same fantasy based on LOTR. 

Hahaha yeah he's just sputtering out random garbage. It's also obvious with how much bias this guy has that he can't review games properly, you are supposed to clear the palettte and give the game a fresh look to really incorporate all that it has to offer.

[Maugrim]

OldhamA wrote...

makenzieshepard wrote...

8.4 I guess being upside down has scrambled their brains! *ducks the incoming rotten produce*

Are you trying to say Australians are incapable of cultivating crops correctly?

I was hoping that was gonna be too subtle for you Australian 's.

Better get out of boomerrang range *flees*

[Obidex]

Listen as much as I LOVE me some Tolkien the saying ,"There is nothing new under the sun." is entirely too true..much of the races of his world are borrowed or modeled after mythical creatures of ages past. Now his lore, story, and world are entirely unique but I just have to point that out

[Bacon_00]

I've never cared for IGN AU reviews. They've given quite a few games that I really enjoyed crap scores and complain about minor flaws far too much. I get the distinct impression that the IGN AU reviewers play games to find the flaws, whereas other reviewers play games to find the good.

[SillyJerry]

Well he's australian.. he's probably pissed he isnt old enough to buy the game in his country legally.

If they will sell it in australia at all, which considering the absurd hammer and downright censorship that government is dropping on "violent games", i wouldnt be surprised if im right about that.



That having said an 8.4 out of 10 is still way better then average.

[Sensuki]

Alienraptor wrote...

I actually really welcome harsh reviews. These reviewers, however we may disagree with their conclusions, are always the most valuable for pointing out the weakest points of a game. Nearly every review (most of which were on the X360) seems to have agreed that while never lacking for design or artistic merit, the graphics are technically not impressive.

The audio has received praise and some criticism, and I think the IGN AU reviewer's assessment is likely quite to the point: some of the voice acting is excellent, while some is rather unremarkable. I would probably not be as harsh as he (7.0? really?) but it is worth taking seriously.

The LotR influence is also interesting and deserves some attention. I would definitely agree that the epic high fantasy setting has suffered from LotRification, and it sounds as though DA:O makes some efforts to move away from that but doesn't quite do it.

And I really agree with the point about well-done 2D art being superior to middling 3D graphics. I will always have a soft spot for the exquisitely drawn isometric settings from the Infinity Engine days.

All in all, a worthwhile review and, despite its unspectacular score, I think it was insightful. I am encouraged by the praise of the gameplay and story, as those are the heart of the experience for me.

I agree
No review is perfect, but each reviewer usually makes some good points worth taking note of.

[Augerman]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Deran2 wrote...
Hm. Is it just me or did the reviewer try to claim Black Isle as the developers of Baldur's Gate 2?

Sure sounds like it.

IGN Reviewer wrote...
When publisher Black Isle Studios closed its doors, the Baldur's Gate
saga ended abruptly, leaving fans of the High Fantasy RPG series with
few other options as polished and fully-realised as Shadows of Amn and
its expansion, Throne of Baal. When Bioware took up the crown itself,
eventually wowing a legion of players with Knights of the Old Republic
and Mass Effect, a new RPG heavyweight had assured its place in the tomes of gaming lore.

It's a bit hard to take someone who could make a mistake like that seriously.

Well technically Black Isle was the Publisher of the Baldur gate series.   Black Isle was the RPG division of Interplay who published the games.   If you look at the old game manuals you'll clearly see Black Isle's name on the cover.  Bioware developed the games Black Isle/Interplay published them.

[Foxd1e]

Bacon_00 wrote...

I've never cared for IGN AU reviews. They've given quite a few games that I really enjoyed crap scores and complain about minor flaws far too much. I get the distinct impression that the IGN AU reviewers play games to find the flaws, whereas other reviewers play games to find the good.

Quoted for truth, That's what I gathered as well.

I was looking at the other review linked in this thread (The 9.4, which is much more reasonable) and I browsed the screenshot gallery for 360, it is visibly less spectacular than the PC version but that's not Bioware's fault. They are dealing with severely outdated hardware and I'm sure every developer is running into the same problem. The reviewer also doesn't take that into account. Everyone calls Oblivion to mind when they think of stunning graphics on console but Oblivion came out around the launch of the 360, so of course it's gonna stun you, almost 4 years later Bioware releases Dragon Age on the same hardware.

EDIT: Also take a look at the awards Nowgamer nominated it for

Modifié par Foxd1e, 02 novembre 2009 - 07:58 .

[flem1]

Let's face it:  the only Australian reviewer anyone outside your country cares about (or has ever heard of) is Yahtzee.  

Sadly, he doesn't much like story in games so I doubt he'll enjoy Dragon Age.

[StonerMkII]

Meh i could careless about reviews myself. As long as i enjoy the game, the reviewers and all their biased crap can go straight to hell as far as im concerned. Just because a game gets a "bad" review score doesnt mean its a bad game, people need to learn to play the game and then make a decision based off their own opinions.

[ForsakenProphet]

It's hard to take him and his points seriously when he sets up an initial bias against the game. It's not ME2 and it's not BG3, so he sets up initial disappointment for himself and fuels his disappointment into the review. While this can be good, attaching a number rating to a review like this is foolish at best and meaningless at worst.



It's a good review for overall weak points of the game, but it's all lost in his complete disappointment and perhaps even lack of interest in the high fantasy genre.

[damage1900]

Alienraptor wrote...

I actually really welcome harsh reviews...

...All in all, a worthwhile review and, despite its unspectacular score, I think it was insightful. I am encouraged by the praise of the gameplay and story, as those are the heart of the experience for me.

The first sensible reply in this whole thread.