149 réponses à ce sujet

[ChronosSF]

oganalp wrote...
However, as I stated before, I would really prefer a harder game without that tutorial feeling of constantly pushing you towards the storyline, feeling as if constantly someone is holding my hand, showing me the way to go. As some posts here stated earlier, it was a true appealing part of Baldur's Gate and II, it is also an obstacle of reaching casual players, I accept.

I just wish to feel that feeling of success and achievement when I find a clue that moves me towards a quest's grand finale. I had that feeling with The Witcher, making you feel lost at times, pushing you enough to search for answers but not boring you to death (like searching for a blue or red key madly back in Doom II days).

As you pointed it out before a harder and deeper (such as Baldur's Gate) game would not appeal that much to the masses and will be played (and bought) by fewer people making it commercial disaster. Even with DAO you can see the amount of outcry about the game being too difficult which is hilarious. 

I do hope something will change and there will be more real hardcore RPGs in the future (The Witcher and DAO in some aspects are good examples that there is hope). What I mentioned before about the transition from Baldur's Gate I to Baldur's Gate II is quite possible to happen with DAO as the established setting, rules and engine would allow BioWare to concentrate (for DAO II) on the things that made Baldur's Gate II the masterpiece it is (amazing story, mindboggling variety of locations and quests that feel like mini stories masterfully implemented into the main one, of course with a finale so epic it will be always remembered).  

But as DAO stands now it is more of a spiritual successor to NWN than Baldur's Gate.

Modifié par ChronosSF, 03 décembre 2009 - 04:40 .

[spernus]

ChronosSF wrote...

As you pointed it out before a harder and deeper (such as Baldur's Gate) game would not appeal that much to the masses and will be played (and bought) by fewer people making it commercial disaster. Even with DAO you can see the amount of outcry about the game being too difficult which is hilarious. 

I do hope something will change and there will be more real hardcore RPGs in the future (The Witcher and DAO in some aspects are good examples that there is hope). What I mentioned before about the transition from Baldur's Gate I to Baldur's Gate II is quite possible to happen with DAO as the established setting, rules and engine would allow BioWare to concentrate (for DAO II) on the things that made Baldur's Gate II the masterpiece it is (amazing story, mindboggling variety of locations and quests that feel like mini stories masterfully implemented into the main one, of course with a finale so epic it will be always remembered).  

But as DAO stands now it is more of a spiritual successor to NWN than Baldur's Gate.

Well,there is definitively reasons to be optimist. Mass effect 2 will easily be superior to the original,even if I do not enjoy the storyline as much.As far as being a game goes,it's a 100% improvement over the original since you have a solid shooter+unique classes and more boss battle+better system for exploring planets and collecting ressources,etc.

There's no reason to doubt that a Dragon age sequel would be vastly superior to the original,especially since the designers will take good notice of what we didn't like much(lack of loot,melee classes underwhelming,so-so sidequests,generic world,etc).

[oganalp]

There are things that I loved about Dragon Age as well like the battles being real battles in means of number of attendants (no spoilers but the very first one). Oblivion was a disaster because of that. There were like... ermm... 15 or so soldiers battling against 10 or so Dremora and saving the Cyrodil from the evil conquest... With 10 Dremora, you cannot even conquer my neighbour.



If a game puts a battle into scenery, it SHOULD be a battle. I liked that with DA:O.

[Sylvius the Mad]

spernus wrote...

Well,there is definitively reasons to be optimist. Mass effect 2 will easily be superior to the original,even if I do not enjoy the storyline as much.As far as being a game goes,it's a 100% improvement over the original since you have a solid shooter+unique classes and more boss battle+better system for exploring planets and collecting ressources,etc.

Those features you mention are reasons I think ME2 will not be as good as ME.

They're eliminating RPG aspects (like stat-driven aiming) to focus on the shooter aspects, and they're further hampering roleplaying with the interrupt system.

The only good news is that the dev team realises how badly done the dialogue wheel was in the first game so they're working to write more descriptive paraphrases.

[Lord Mephisto]

marshalleck wrote...

Baldur's Gate: 90% nostalgia

I had to comment this... I just had to.

It is probably true that there is a lot of nostalgia related to most old computer games. But with that said, there are facts to consider instead to easily see the difference between these games.

Compare Dragon Age and Baldur's Gate 2 on the following basis:
(No expansions or player made content, none is available to Dragon Age yet making the comparison unfair)
1. How many areas for exploration and adventure are available?
2. How many conversations, quests, merchants, party members and items are available?
3. How many character options (feats, spells, abilities, classes, etc.) are available?
4. How many different tactical combat options are available?
5. How many different stories based upon character choices are available?
6. What is the percentage of production time and cost spent on graphics?

And of course, the most important question:
7. Who else, than the player, reloads in Baldur's Gate 2?

The one who could answer these questions correctly gets a prepaid Free Willy 2 poster and a translucent purple worm from my personal collection of overrated garbage.

[RedShft]

Wishing it won't make it true. You should research a way to erase peoples memories.

[Sam -stone- serious]

While i have no reservations to say that Baldurs Gate 2 saga is the greatest RPG ever and for good reason my gripes with DAO is not because it does not resemble that. What my gripes are with DAO is how little room it leaves you to play within its sandbox how you truly wish and like. Can you go about slaughtering innocents "just because"? No but in BG you could do so with whole cities. Can you have your own keep, guild, fortress, mage tower AND running it too in DAO? No, but you could in BG2? Does the world and people in the game world change around you according to your actions in DAO? No, but in BG it happened. You could be the judge of so many things in it that its really not even funny when compared to the joke of todays games. Is there a chance that one of your party members has an argument with another party member and resort to deadly violence? No, but in BG there were plenty of such special moments.



There are MANY more things that i cant really list here that BG did and let you -PLAY- exactly how you wished with the proper responses and penalties from the game world.



1 word. INTERACTION.



That is what is missing from DAO and that is what Baldurs Gate had back then in spades and interactivity makes or breaks the atmosphere in a game and the illusion of immersion.



LET ME CLEAR IT OUT FOR ANY IDIOT THAT THINKS I DID NOT LIKE DRAGON AGE THAT I DID LIKE IT. Just that as a game, as a whole and overall quality it could have MUCH better.

[Bagsabbis]

Dark83 wrote...

Bibdy wrote...

Oh god, Deus Ex 2 was awful. A ****ing travesty. Let us never speak of it again.

There is no Deux Ex 2.

Word.

As for Baldur's Gate, there is also a mod that will retexture the entire first game with the BGII engine.  There is also a mod that joins the 2 together in one game, including adding a sequence in Baldur's Gate (the city) to give you the reason to leave.  The only downside though is that you are then normally too high a level for BGII to be a challenge.

At the moment I am still undecided about how DA:O stacks up against BG - I think I need to do around 15 more play through's...

[purplesunset]

LET ME CLEAR IT OUT FOR ANY IDIOT THAT THINKS I DID NOT LIKE DRAGON AGE THAT I DID LIKE IT. Just that as a game, as a whole and overall quality it could have MUCH better.

Yeah, you are pretty much required to make such disclaimers on an online forum.

I'm slowly trying to wean myself off from online discussions, because there's little reward for the effort you put in and it's nigh impossible to get past the boolean nature of thinking:

"0 or 1" 

" Us or  them" 

"With us or against us"

"love it or hate it."

[cl_l]

Elanareon wrote...

fro7k wrote...

14-17 year old white males

Racist.

This

It's ok he is not racist. he has a black president.

[WillyPete2171]

Dam Wookie wrote...

Then I would feel mildly surprised and pleased with this above average game. Hence the 9/10 rating given to all above average games. Instead I'm left disapointed that it is just yet another above average game and not a genuine classic. The Phantom Menace of gaming.

On another note I know this game has an 18 rating but I couldn't help but feel that it has been designed and advertised for a target audience of 14-17 year old white males. The posts on this forum certainly cement that view.

I thought about buying the extra content and replaying. Then I found myself wondering where my Deus Ex, BG, Planescape Torment and Fallout disks are instead.

I dont think that game is designed for a 14-17 yo white target audience.  The game deals with a variety of very adult issues.  Im glad that they put the time and hard work into this game, and thankful that we have a great game tp play

[Tianwyn]

I like DA:O a lot, much better than NWN. However, I personally still consider the Baldur's Gate series as my favorite games. There was something about them that just felt genuinely epic. Playing all the games for the first time without being spoiled was truly an awesome experience. Yes, there were cliches (DA has 'em, too), but I would argue that there was enough of a twist on them that I didn't feel like I was playing a Star Wars or LotR knockoff.



As far as graphics go - I know I'm in the minority, but I like BG2's polished, 2-D graphics more than a lot of 3-D games.



BG did have a lot of dark stuff in it; IMO, it's as dark story-wise as Dragon Age. It was just less . . . in your face, I guess. There was obvious stuff in BG, but there was a lot of subtlety as well. The first BG had a lot of tongue-in-cheek stuff; that was part of its charm. No other game has made me laugh that much at dialogue options.



Quests: BG2 has a lot more quests than DA:O. In this regard, Chapter 2 of Shadows of Amn is less linear than the main quest of Dragon Age.



Characters - I prefer Alistair to Anomen, but I like Viconia more than Morrigan and Imoen more than Leliana. Sarevok and Irenicus (but not Mel; now she was obvious) were better villains than the Archdemon because they evoked a responce from the player/player character. I know this is a non-spoiler forum so I won't get into it too much, but from what I've seen, villains in DA are less three-dimensional than the ones from BG1 and BG2.



I think I'm starting to ramble, but yeah - DA is cool, but BG is still better, based on the criteria that I value most in a game.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Apparently not as great as it could have been. Where is my damn interactivity that is to be expected from such kind of a game and from Bioware herself?

[Sam -stone- serious]

As far as graphics go - I know I'm in the minority, but I like BG2's polished, 2-D graphics more than a lot of 3-D games.


I think I'm starting to ramble, but yeah - DA is cool, but BG is still better, based on the criteria that I value most in a game.

Believe me you are not the only one.

[Dark83]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

What my gripes are with DAO is how little room it leaves you to play within its sandbox how you truly wish and like. 

I have to point out that DAO is not a sandbox.

A sandbox lets you do whatever you like. If you look at Transport Tycoon, sandbox is when you have no money or technology constraints and are just building your choo-choo trains.
DAO is not a sandbox, you're the Warden off to save the world - and (almost) everything you do is directed towards that goal.

[Tomark]

Indeed, people are comparing BG and DA:O as if it was the same kind of Genre. Yes, Bioware didn't do a real spiritual successor to BG, but yes, it's what look the most like it since.

DA:O has your goals firmly stated from the first. It's isn't about the character growing up amidst treacherous grounds, it is about the last of the grey wardens trying to save the world, and so you aren't supposed to wander aimlessly.

Now, i am surprised about people saying the characters in BG/BG2 were better. Are you honest with that opinion? In BG2, you could do a whole game (with a party) without them talking much (excep jan janesen). The characters were all archetypes, simply because we didn't know them. We had hints- but that's all. BG characters, when you came down to it, were just first sketches.

As for 'you can't destroy towns' in DA:O. Are you serious? Without spoiling, you can and do, and it is taken into account into the plot (when in BG, it's not).

DA:O gives *much* more impacts on yoru choice, and gives much more of a possibility to create a real character, compared to BG.

The fights? much, much better done. BG fights were not only easier (yes, as long as you din't use mods to make them harder. And if you do, the same exist in DA:O), but apart from wizards and priests, you didn't have much to do when you controlled the characters.

As for the so-called 'adult-tone' of BG? no, it wasn't. each origins are much more 'adult' than most of the whole of BG, and little things in the games, little choices you can take, makes it so much so.

Sorry, can't spoil.

Modifié par Tomark, 03 décembre 2009 - 09:26 .

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

refering mainly to the first page of posts.

It is easy to explain why people like the old games more than this one, the main reason is there was more lore and wicked ways to them... instead of building on that then the developers go the opposite way of making the games, that is pretty much about it as it is.

As for DA:O I see alot of LOTR references in this game as it is which not exactly make it new thinking or following up on past success.

Yes then all the kotor fanboys... and wow fanboys or whatever else come and say it is good when they got no idea about what they have actually missed in which create an abyss between players, there is alot of people around here as it is.

Anyhow that said does not mean I do not like playing DAO its fun as it is and all even with the DLCs and mods you can make, but the game just lacks spirit and lore alot, this comes from an actually hardcore gamer, over a year I might buy 5 games.. and only play 3 of them... the remaning two still would sit in its original box not opened up.

I did expect much much more out of DA:O due to for a non MMO game that it has been this long on its way that is about it, and that is why I personally think that this game is not the uber sensation of year or years to come unless they decide to do something about what they got already.

Modifié par GHL_Soul_Reaver, 03 décembre 2009 - 09:44 .

[Tomark]

No lore?



If you read your codex a bit, there is quite a bit of lore. I might have played BG too long ago, but to me BG had barely any lore- it touched on things, but never developed. Here there is a *lot* of lore.



So much so that most people that play DA:O do not actually check their Codex and read everything about it.



I mean, all te Details about the first enchanters, and about previous enchanter you get in books, those are not lore? and this is just one example among many.

[montana_boy]

Dam Wookie wrote...

Then I would feel mildly surprised and pleased with this above average game. Hence the 9/10 rating given to all above average games. Instead I'm left disapointed that it is just yet another above average game and not a genuine classic. The Phantom Menace of gaming.

On another note I know this game has an 18 rating but I couldn't help but feel that it has been designed and advertised for a target audience of 14-17 year old white males. The posts on this forum certainly cement that view.

I thought about buying the extra content and replaying. Then I found myself wondering where my Deus Ex, BG, Planescape Torment and Fallout disks are instead.

I played BG2.  Played through more than once and I'll tell you I have not, in playing DAO so far, had any thoughts about Baldurs Gate 2.  Why should I?  They are as different as moon and sun. So the above post only leaves me scratching my head, as well as other parts.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Dark83 wrote...

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

What my gripes are with DAO is how little room it leaves you to play within its sandbox how you truly wish and like. 

I have to point out that DAO is not a sandbox.

A sandbox lets you do whatever you like. If you look at Transport Tycoon, sandbox is when you have no money or technology constraints and are just building your choo-choo trains.
DAO is not a sandbox, you're the Warden off to save the world - and (almost) everything you do is directed towards that goal.

Yes i know, i meant it in the context that it has very "crammed" places despite the epic design and that you happen to move like you are on rails, very much like a japan RPG. Thats not a bad thing but it does detract a bit from the experience and its a little dissapointing that you cant wonder about in those insanely well put places OR the fact that you dont get to do much with what you are given to play with which is something that takes away from the immersion. As i said its not a bad thing but a world such as this should be much more intricately designed around freedom and being less "policed".

I wanted to start a big havoc in Denerim for some reason. I have no means of doing so and deal with the guards and whatever consequences just to see what happens. Its the kind of world that does provoke you to act as such. Maybe its only me that i like my western medieval RPGs not holding my hand and leaving me a LOT of tools to play with at my own leissure.

[oganalp]

Character "interractions" were better in BG 2, not the overall character design. Still, its Minsc and Boo who are remembered, gives a hint eh?



Of course certain aspects ARE better than BG 2, afterall, they have like 9 years in between them eh?



About the graphics though, almost none of the 3d RPG games can beat the 2d painted ones. 3d new games DO BEAT the old FPS or space games or stuff but RPGwise, I don't think they improved. The 3d approach gave the devs a chance to alter the camera angle and viewpoint but then it sacrificed the "beauty" a bit.



Still, its a fun game to play and I am enjoying it. What we are discussing here is merely to point out the best "blend" of things. I don't think devs would read these and get it TOO seriously but even if the overall voicing of things can make a difference for future products, its a step.

[Dark83]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

I wanted to start a big
havoc in Denerim for some reason. I have no means of doing so and deal
with the guards and whatever consequences just to see what happens. Its
the kind of world that does provoke you to act as such. Maybe its only
me that i like my western medieval RPGs not holding my hand and leaving
me a LOT of tools to play with at my own leissure.

Shamus Young once wrote an article regarding this. He referred to it as "experimenting with the gameworld." This happens when players don't play the role they are assigned, and are just poking at the game to see how it responds. The Grey Warden is not a randomly violent psychopath - so the game doesn't allow you to make him act that way. Other games handle it in different ways.

Think of Half-Life 2: You can shoot Alyx right in the face and the
bullets go right through and hit the wall behind her. She won’t even
notice. If you start acting like an idiot, the game world stops paying
attention to you.

That's the "no feedback" approach. There's the "negative feedback" approach - send guards after you, or simply let you break the game and not allow you to progress. (Morrowind, if you kill plot characters. BG gets pretty unplayable when you can't interact with anyone in towns, too.) DA:O goes with the denial approach - you just can't do it. Period.

Those are the three ways games handle it.

Check out the short article here.

Modifié par Dark83, 04 décembre 2009 - 02:12 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Crawling_Chaos wrote...

How is an optional interruption system a hamper to roleplaying?  I would think that to actually increase the roleplay value.

Because it's imprecise.  I can't use the system with any reasonable level of foresight, because I can't tell in advance what Shepard is going to do.  If Shepard does something out of character, my roleplaying experience is badly damaged.

But I can't just ignore it, because I'm confident the writers haven't allowed redundant actions through dialogue options, so those "more dramatic" actions are now denied me.

The interrupt system breaks roleplaying the same way the dialogue wheel does: by removing player agency and turning the game into an interactive movie rather than and RPG.

[Dark83]

If you can't skip dialog in a metagame way, and have to interrupt, that would be... horrible for subsequent playthroughs. "I want to be polite, but I know you have another 30 lines, so..."