942 réponses à ce sujet

[Meris]

Kail Ashton wrote...

Ahh times like these is where i apreciate people like the topic creator rant on their little soap boxes instead of being in a position to make the abysmal choices they cry about

People like that will never be happy til we're back in caves banging roicks together and smearing blood and refuse on walls to illustrate their generic lives, back to "roots" indeed.

No, I won't ever be happy until developers actively try to further player agency on their RPGs instead of limiting themselves with voice over and other secondary concerns. Neither Baldur's Gate or Origins were perfect, but instead of trying increase the player's creative voice in the artistic process of the RPG, they've chosen to greatly limit themselves and us by giving Hawke a voice. 3 Dialogue Choices isn't a evolution.

[Relshar]

Meris wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

Tesclo wrote...

http://www.shacknews...r-opportunities

This is a complete joke. No we obviously do not want a Dragon Age 2 expansion. To be honest, I don't even think many would buy DLC. We do NOT want more of the same. Bioware, we wan't the "spiritual successor" to Baulder's Gate. It's that simple. We want what was promised to us in Dragon Age: Origins. This is so simple to grasp, yet you refuse to give the paying customers what they want. Give us back Origins. You have your FPS in Mass Effect. This series was supposed to be for us. And there IS a market for it. People still play RPGs.

I can't believe I actually have to even write this. Go back to your roots Bioware.

No. You want the spiritual successor to BG. I don't.

Then its a matter of wanting a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins? Because Dragon Age II was, at best, a spiritual successor to DA:O.

It was no where near as good as DA:O though. So how can you say it was a successor to DA:O?

[Realmzmaster]

Go back to their roots? Bioware has not left its roots. Most of the game mechanics you see in DAO are in DA2 and came from BG1 and BG2. Realtime with pause is still in all the games along with AI scripting through Tactics screens and a host of other features.

They cannot go back to the D & D mechanics that license is held by Hasbro (Wizards of the Coast) who has given the computer games rights to Atari. Atari has allowed Overhaul games to enhance BG1 and BG2 using an updated Infinity engine which is all of Bioware's work. The only reason Atari can do it because Bioware made BG1 and BG2 for Interplay which Atari bought the assets.

Bioware has never done tactical stat based turn based third person perspective crpgs. The spiritual successor stuff is just marketing PR, because it means different things to different people.

Bioware is still telling the stories that make its crpgs desirable. As for citing Todd Howard he also mentions that Elder Scroll games have always been action oriented and are never party based. And Morrowind wind fans are pissed off at Bethesda for the below average stories in Oblivion and Skyrim.

Elder Scroll as never been known for great stories except for Morrowind. The stories in Oblivion and Skyrim are average in my opinion . Since there is no party there is no interaction with companions. In fact Skyrim is the first time that you have actual companions and marriage, both are done badly. The fact that is also tied to Steam to me limits my choice.

I am still playing the game (on the eighth playthrough). I am as hard core as you can get when it comes to crpgs. TOEE (Temple of Elemental Evil) and Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Dannor are still some of my favorite tactical third person perspective stat based turned based crpgs. Now that in my opinion is going back to the real roots not just Bioware's roots.

[Meris]

Relshar wrote...

Meris wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...

Tesclo wrote...

http://www.shacknews...r-opportunities

This is a complete joke. No we obviously do not want a Dragon Age 2 expansion. To be honest, I don't even think many would buy DLC. We do NOT want more of the same. Bioware, we wan't the "spiritual successor" to Baulder's Gate. It's that simple. We want what was promised to us in Dragon Age: Origins. This is so simple to grasp, yet you refuse to give the paying customers what they want. Give us back Origins. You have your FPS in Mass Effect. This series was supposed to be for us. And there IS a market for it. People still play RPGs.

I can't believe I actually have to even write this. Go back to your roots Bioware.

No. You want the spiritual successor to BG. I don't.

Then its a matter of wanting a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins? Because Dragon Age II was, at best, a spiritual successor to DA:O.

It was no where near as good as DA:O though. So how can you say it was a successor to DA:O?

Because of similar setting and a remote sense of gameplay familiarity - too remote to be an actual sequel so its more akin to a 'spiritual successor'.

[eyesofastorm]

I do think it's a head scratcher. I mean... the whole reason behind all the changes between DA:O and DA2 was to appeal to a wider audience. If the accepted numbers are to be believed, and I've never seen anyone refute them, then DA:O actually appealed to a wider audience. But early indications seem to be that they will stick with many of changes that made DA2 unpopular with the crowd that hearted DA:O. Why? To appeal to a narrower crowd this time? Does Bioware really just not like a subset of their fans. A head scratcher I tell you.

Modifié par eyesofastorm, 26 mars 2012 - 05:01 .

[Thor Rand Al]

Tesclo wrote...

http://www.shacknews...r-opportunities

This is a complete joke. No we obviously do not want a Dragon Age 2 expansion. To be honest, I don't even think many would buy DLC. We do NOT want more of the same. Bioware, we wan't the "spiritual successor" to Baulder's Gate. It's that simple. We want what was promised to us in Dragon Age: Origins. This is so simple to grasp, yet you refuse to give the paying customers what they want. Give us back Origins. You have your FPS in Mass Effect. This series was supposed to be for us. And there IS a market for it. People still play RPGs.

I can't believe I actually have to even write this. Go back to your roots Bioware.

Speaking as a paying customer who not only bought said game and DLC's for my comp but also bought it for my 360:   IIIIII did want a DA2 expansion, I would of bought any DLC that had to do with DA2 because I, a paying customer LOVED DA2.  This  series is for us and as a paying customer I enjoyed it.  Yes there was plot-hole's, yes there was issues but I still LOVED it.  Because I wasn't looking for another carboncopy DAO game, and I am glad their NOT going back to the old RPG way of gaming.  They are moving forward, broadening their horizens, kudo's Bioware.  There's potential and I'm looking forward to it.

Modifié par Thor Rand Al, 26 mars 2012 - 05:08 .

[Great_Horn]

David Gaider wrote...

[Snip ...]

3) I'm a big fan of Baldur's Gate, as I am of Origins (obviously, having worked on them both). While I can't say what we're specifically doing with the future of Dragon Age, and wouldn't want to until we can actually show it, I think it'll please many fans-- and also ****** off many others. That's inevitable at this point, and no matter what we do there will no doubt be many people clamoring as to how obvious it should be that their direction is the one we should take.

Regardless, we'll move forward... and, once you get a chance to see what we're working on, you can decide for yourself whether the next project sticks close enough to our "roots" to interest you. Hopefully it will... and, if not, thanks for being such a passionate fan.

Now It’s my turn to smile.

I can already see people with Torches and Pitchforks, searching the forums for the lead writer from DA:3. Where is he hiding? More serious, if possible, take your time for the next installment. We will see how it turns out.  

[kinna]

Meris wrote...

Kail Ashton wrote...

Ahh times like these is where i apreciate people like the topic creator rant on their little soap boxes instead of being in a position to make the abysmal choices they cry about

People like that will never be happy til we're back in caves banging roicks together and smearing blood and refuse on walls to illustrate their generic lives, back to "roots" indeed.

No, I won't ever be happy until developers actively try to further player agency on their RPGs instead of limiting themselves with voice over and other secondary concerns. Neither Baldur's Gate or Origins were perfect, but instead of trying increase the player's creative voice in the artistic process of the RPG, they've chosen to greatly limit themselves and us by giving Hawke a voice. 3 Dialogue Choices isn't a evolution.

Actually, there are more dialogue choises in DA2 than just three. There is investigate also. Been replaying DA:O and in that there isn't more options in conversations. Just questions you can ask (investigate in DA2) and it ends up with couple of options to move the conversation onward. Just like in DA2. Just because they are not arranged like they were in DA:O does not mean that the choises are not there.

[Maria Caliban]

Great_Horn wrote...

Well, that’s actually the problem. It seems, that the developing team wants to appeal to the RPG veterans and also to new gamers, who are fond of a cinematic, more actiondriven game, with a voiced PC.

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

[David Gaider]

kinna wrote...
Actually, there are more dialogue choises in DA2 than just three. There is investigate also. Been replaying DA:O and in that there isn't more options in conversations. Just questions you can ask (investigate in DA2) and it ends up with couple of options to move the conversation onward. Just like in DA2. Just because they are not arranged like they were in DA:O does not mean that the choises are not there.

This is very true. It's worth noting, however, that some players feel their choices are more limited-- even if that isn't really so from an interface standpoint. While the source of their frustration may not necessarily be what they've concluded it to be, that doesn't mean the frustration isn't there.

[glitter_guld]

Tesclo wrote...

http://www.shacknews...r-opportunities

This is a complete joke. No we obviously do not want a Dragon Age 2 expansion. To be honest, I don't even think many would buy DLC. We do NOT want more of the same. Bioware, we wan't the "spiritual successor" to Baulder's Gate. It's that simple. We want what was promised to us in Dragon Age: Origins. This is so simple to grasp, yet you refuse to give the paying customers what they want. Give us back Origins. You have your FPS in Mass Effect. This series was supposed to be for us. And there IS a market for it. People still play RPGs.

I can't believe I actually have to even write this. Go back to your roots Bioware.

And, please, OP, do NOT speak for ALL the players. WE all want different things and MANY of US are happy and unhappy with different aspects of the game. Speak for yourself, goddamit.

[Great_Horn]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Great_Horn wrote...

Well, that’s actually the problem. It seems, that the developing team wants to appeal to the RPG veterans and also to new gamers, who are fond of a cinematic, more actiondriven game, with a voiced PC.

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

That’s not what I meant. If Bioware would have limitless resources they could probably make the perfect game. So what’s the trade-off, and what do I get in return.  If the PC has a voice it's fine like the Witcher I, hence if I had to sacrifice the Origins concept for that, I would regret it. Same goes for the ability to influence an ongoing interaction thru skills (persuasion/intimidate) and so on.

Edit: I hope you get the idea.

Modifié par Great_Horn, 26 mars 2012 - 07:18 .

[asindre]

Tesclo wrote...

And while I do understand that the genre at some point does need to evolve past what was done in the past, games such as Skyrim find a way to do this without pissing off a large portion of the player base.

What? Bethesda fans complain just as much as Bioware fans. Where Bioware fans say "We want BG/DAO", Bethesda fans say "We want Morrowind".

[eyesofastorm]

asindre wrote...

Tesclo wrote...

And while I do understand that the genre at some point does need to evolve past what was done in the past, games such as Skyrim find a way to do this without pissing off a large portion of the player base.

What? Bethesda fans complain just as much as Bioware fans. Where Bioware fans say "We want BG/DAO", Bethesda fans say "We want Morrowind".

I LOVED Morrowind.  It's one of my favorites of all time.  Oblivion was definitely a letdown.  Skyrim is another beast.  Something was lost from Morrowing to Oblivion to Skyrim, but then... something was gained as well.  I don't feel that way with the games Bioware has been making lately... I only feel like something is being lost.  

[Lord Gremlin]

What I do not understand... All feedback aside - DA2 sold less than DAO and made less money. Well, by the looks of it Bioware/EA were satisfied by profit, but still...
Have you considered why DA2 game sold less, Bioware devs? I honestly wonder what's your opinion on the matter.

[Maria Caliban]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

What I do not understand... All feedback aside - DA2 sold less than DAO and made less money. Well, by the looks of it Bioware/EA were satisfied by profit, but still...

Dragon Age II sold less, but I suspect it made more money. The biggest cost for a game is manhours and Dragon Age: Origins took anywhere from 7 to 5 years to build.

Have you considered why DA2 game sold less, Bioware devs? I honestly wonder what's your opinion on the matter.

Sequels often sell poorly when the original wasn't well received. Maybe a bunch of people bought Dragon Age: Origins on the strength of games like Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect, but didn't like it and so didn't buy the sequel. :innocent:

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

But they are completely different genres that have nothing at all in common.

That's the problem.  It doesn't matter that many people enjoy both.  The problem is that there's a "both" to be described at all.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 26 mars 2012 - 07:28 .

[eyesofastorm]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

But they are completely different genres that have nothing at all in common.

That's the problem.  It doesn't matter that many people nejoy both.  The problem is that there's a "both" to be described at all.

Word.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

While I can't say what we're specifically doing with the future of Dragon Age, and wouldn't want to until we can actually show it

This is a mistake, I think.

I asked Mike about this in another thread, and he made reassuring noises, but now you're all back on the same "we won't talk about details until we can show them to you" mantra.

We got to discuss specifics in Dragon Age long before you had anything to show us.  That was openness.

[Great_Horn]

Sadly it’s not that easy. As far as I know the development cycle was only 18 months. On the other side there are those two millions in sales.

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

But they are completely different genres that have nothing at all in common.

The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

[Lord Gremlin]

David Gaider wrote...

kinna wrote...
Actually, there are more dialogue choises in DA2 than just three. There is investigate also. Been replaying DA:O and in that there isn't more options in conversations. Just questions you can ask (investigate in DA2) and it ends up with couple of options to move the conversation onward. Just like in DA2. Just because they are not arranged like they were in DA:O does not mean that the choises are not there.

This is very true. It's worth noting, however, that some players feel their choices are more limited-- even if that isn't really so from an interface standpoint. While the source of their frustration may not necessarily be what they've concluded it to be, that doesn't mean the frustration isn't there.

And when you use, say, Dualshock controller it's just more convenient to select a line with the D-pad. Selecting a line from a wheel with analog stick is just less convenient.
And speaking of limited choice, DA2 felt that way mostly because Hawke choice almost never had a distinct effect. I mean, a large-scale one. For example, Rock Wraith episode. You can talk with a demon, but no matter what you say the main story point concludes in exact same way.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

I have to ask, what do you value in an RPG?

From where I'm standing, those features you describe are all extrememly likely to break roleplaying.