124 réponses à ce sujet

[lorderon99999]

Ok, I just finished the game. Before saying anything, I think the game was excellent for are time priod and I had some fun with it. Also, before saying I am nostalgique start thinking there must be a reason why I like the game and why do so many people think like me....are we all nostalgique? Will I be as nostalgique for DA:O? The anwser is NO

So here why, IMO, DA:O is not the Spiritual Successor of the BG saga...

1- Story:
Let look at the story of DA:O: Save the World....Mmmmm where did I see that? You have that typical bad guy in black armor and the good guy with blond hair and shiny armor (the king)...Mmmmmm where did I see that? Do I get personnaly involved in there story? No.... Do I feel like that typical 'Only Hope of humanity guy' once again? Yes...

Even if all does elements were really done well in DA:O...it just too typical...boring and not involing...always IMO

As for the BG Saga....Personnel goal? Yes...and for me that makes it very interesting and involving (Think Planescape Torment)....are you the center of the universe in game (excluding TOB)....No...because absolutely no one knows you and you are just trying to understand who you are and who are you'Re ennemies...no story elements are thrown at you....you ahve to discover evrything...you start as an unknown dude and you are thrown in a big world full of excitement and lore (yah DA:O had that 2 but still...)

2- Sense of progression:
In DA:O you start the game not very strong and at the end you finish up killing archdemons and dragons....What a great sense of progression....

In BG you start not even able to beat up a wolf (at the end of BG1 a pack of dire wolf could still be hard) and only at the end of BGII could you even think of fighting a Dragon and relloading 30x times....What I mean here is that you feel that the progress to power is really really long and that you deserve to be strong...

3- Random stuff:

1- I can't kill anything I want...and for me that is taking the RPG backwards...What if I want to be a psycho with and be wanted in all towns? Nope not in DA:O Npc are protected by a stupide 'I have a quest to give you so i cannot die' or 'plot immunity'...I loved being an inquisitor and doing evil detection on people to know if they were evil and know who i can trust or not and then take them down because they are evil....I miss  that element really bad...

2- Death element: I loved the fact that in BG you'Re caracter could be wiped out by a death spell or a hard melee hit...it added a fear element...always playing with our emotions....in DA:O youR'e dudes can fall as many times as they want and just come back up and you use one of the multiples first aid kit.......super funnnn...

3- Living element: In BG: the cities and the wold felt alive (I don'T know if it the number of NPC walking around...the sounds or the music but the element was there....I was feeling like a nobody in a huge living world)....In DA:O I fell no life...I only feel that the only person living in the owlrd are the people that are in relation with the story, merchants...and that its....

4- Level scalling: Even if it WAY better than Oblivion Fallout 3 and more THEY STILL WANT TO KEEP IT...WHy? why is level scalling to freaking important in games today? Plz someone anwser this....

5- Characters: Jon Irenicus...that it

6- Party of 4: THis buzz me a lot....you are stuck (if playing on harder diff) to use a mage, healer, tank....I hate this whole MMO formula....

7- Factions: Why the hell to the guards don't help me when I am chades by Darkspawn...or why do thief and darkspawn don'T attack each other but only me? Welll I guess only games 10 years old could do that

I have a lot more to say but this are the major points

Don't get me wrong...I still loved DA:O but it not even 50% of what BG was...and it not nostalgie! I pointed out the elements! Also, the fact that there are no other games in this world that seems to do the same effect on people...I think the game DO have something special...(Point out if you wish a game that has so many nostalgique peoples if you want)

My dream was that  they created a new game (not BG) but using all the elements that made the game so good (all what a mentionned up)....but marketing tofday don't allow it...

Anyway this was my opinion and feel free to argue in a polite way with me

P.S: Sorry for my english it my third language I know it not perfect

Modifié par lorderon99999, 01 décembre 2009 - 10:17 .

[SheffSteel]

I think that when they said "spiritual successor" they did not mean "it's a sequel with a different name name" but more "I am the ghost of rolepaying games past... woooooo".

[lorderon99999]

I did not what another BG but I wanted a game based on the same formula of BG...this one wasen't...and that ghost is evil

[MarloMarlo]

lorderon99999 wrote...
4- Level scalling: Even if it WAY better than Oblivion Fallout 3 and more THEY STILL WANT TO KEEP IT...WHy? why is level scalling to freaking important in games today? Plz someone anwser this....

It's because they open up the game world early on and don't want there to just be one path through it. If there was, they wouldn't see any point to letting you decide where to go first.

lorderon99999 wrote...7- Factions: Why the hell to the guards don't help me when I am chades by Darkspawn...or why do thief and darkspawn don'T attack each other but only me? Welll I guess only games 10 years old could do that

There aren't a lot of bandits or guards in the same areas as darkspawn in this game. And at least the spiders in the Deep Roads attack both you and the darkspawn.

[Few87]

SheffSteel wrote...

I think that when they said "spiritual successor" they did not mean "it's a sequel with a different name name" but more "I am the ghost of rolepaying games past... woooooo".

hahahahahah, so true

[Bibdy]

Just because you point out the specific elements that tick you off, doesn't mean the nostalgia factor isn't coming into play here...in fact you're trying to sell it off that it isn't nostalgia so hard that its making it even less believable that it isn't.

And come on, spiritual successor doesn't mean its supposed to be Baldur's Gate 3 with a practically identical storyline being continued. Its a spiritual successor because there's a main plot, it branches at a certain point and kinda lets you do whatever the heck you want, but then funnels together and takes you towards an ultimate goal, there's real-time pause-based party combat and its in your atypical fantasy setting. That's about the extent to which you could say DA:O is a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. Beyond that, its a game of its own.

They were even kind enough to give players the option of playing in a top-down isometric viewpoint, complete with big, shiny circles around characters if you wanted.

Modifié par Bibdy, 01 décembre 2009 - 10:24 .

[radioactivewiz]

SheffSteel wrote...

I think that when they said "spiritual successor" they did not mean "it's a sequel with a different name name" but more "I am the ghost of rolepaying games past... woooooo".

This is something they explained later. Quite simple really. BG simply won't exist ever again because console gamers and other idiots allow for games to be released with not even half the content that BG had. Like how some reviews said COD MW2 had a good single player campaign....

[Darpaek]

SheffSteel wrote...

I think that when they said "spiritual successor" they did not mean "it's a sequel with a different name name" but more "I am the ghost of rolepaying games past... woooooo".

QFT and LOL!

[Volourn]

DA is vastly superior to BG2. It is deeper, more complex, and simply awesome.



All I gots to say is DA Ogre > BG Ogre



'Nough said.

[lorderon99999]

radioactivewiz wrote...

SheffSteel wrote...

I think that when they said "spiritual successor" they did not mean "it's a sequel with a different name name" but more "I am the ghost of rolepaying games past... woooooo".

This is something they explained later. Quite simple really. BG simply won't exist ever again because console gamers and other idiots allow for games to be released with not even half the content that BG had. Like how some reviews said COD MW2 had a good single player campaign....

Well said

I guess that being notstalgique....Lol

[The Angry One]

Just why are RPGs automatically worse because you get strong enough to beat dragons.

Oh no! Dragons! Get off your dragon-worship. You know what dragons are? Big lizards with halitosis. Screw 'em.

[lorderon99999]

The Angry One wrote...

Just why are RPGs automatically worse because you get strong enough to beat dragons.
Oh no! Dragons! Get off your dragon-worship. You know what dragons are? Big lizards with halitosis. Screw 'em.

In the world of RPG....dragons are always pointed out as one of the most powerful thing (like in all Bioware's game and others)....And yes for me it kills the sens of progression...did you even play BGII...you just feel that sense of progression

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

I see no D&D support anywhere for this game, which means they must be out of control, there is to little lore build into DA:O and the lore seem like it is self made.



The game is great and fun to play though, not against that or anything, but a follower to any of there past games it is certainly not... I guess that is the only real point that disappoint me the most.



To less artwork on weapons... and stuff they are glued to the back of one so it seem odd for an instance, we need more spirit added to games.

[lorderon99999]

GHL_Soul_Reaver wrote...

I see no D&D support anywhere for this game, which means they must be out of control, there is to little lore build into DA:O and the lore seem like it is self made.

The game is great and fun to play though, not against that or anything, but a follower to any of there past games it is certainly not... I guess that is the only real point that disappoint me the most.

To less artwork on weapons... and stuff they are glued to the back of one so it seem odd for an instance, we need more spirit added to games.

I can't understand why people keep saying we are nostalgique when the game (In the opinion of most of people who played the bG saga) was just better in almost every aspect than DA:O

[Volourn]

No, BG saga isn't better than saga. How in the heck is Minsc a better character than any of the DA companions? Because, he has a stupid pet? Big deal. he has no depth, no complexity, he's a caricature.



Then again, comapred to DA, BG2 is a joke. It was fun nearly 10 years ago. When I was much younger, and ignorant of real role-playing.

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

lorderon99999 wrote...

GHL_Soul_Reaver wrote...

I see no D&D support anywhere for this game, which means they must be out of control, there is to little lore build into DA:O and the lore seem like it is self made.

The game is great and fun to play though, not against that or anything, but a follower to any of there past games it is certainly not... I guess that is the only real point that disappoint me the most.

To less artwork on weapons... and stuff they are glued to the back of one so it seem odd for an instance, we need more spirit added to games.

I can't understand why people keep saying we are nostalgique when the game (In the opinion of most of people who played the bG saga) was just better in almost every aspect than DA:O

It is because that people really expected something from DA:O it came up, they expected a niche game.. a game that would be like woaw what the *insert a word here* and that people look up to bioware more than what the company with this release actually has thought of.

It is not fun waiting for something and then alot of key aspects is missing and that is what people was waiting for, can you really blame the consumers for not being fully satisfied with what they bought?

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

Volourn wrote...

No, BG saga isn't better than saga. How in the heck is Minsc a better character than any of the DA companions? Because, he has a stupid pet? Big deal. he has no depth, no complexity, he's a caricature.

Then again, comapred to DA, BG2 is a joke. It was fun nearly 10 years ago. When I was much younger, and ignorant of real role-playing.

And DA:O is a real RPG, I think not, to some extent it is but not in anyway.

[Giygas Starman]

Why are you even trying? Successor, spiritual, sequel. Dragon Age: Origins is a classic RPG, not DnD. It has elves, dwarves, orcs (darkspawn, okey, whatever) and dragons. DnD treated those races in a way, as does this world (what is the name of the world of Dragon Age anyhow??).



Why are you comparing it to Baldur's Gate so much? Do you really want this game to be like an old RPG that you clearly have set a much higher standard/value on.



It's like if I played Modern Warfare 2 and then wanted it to be as truly badass as Doom. My opinion; Doom can never be matched. Such comparison is really... well, unnecessary.



I want to know this from you instead. Did you enjoy playing Dragon Age? Did you have fun playing said game for what it is? If so, that's a blast! You got what you paid for I hope. If not, well... too bad, maybe next game! ^^

[Volourn]

"And DA:O is a real RPG, I think not, to some extent it is but not in anyway."



Yes, it is. So, is BG2. But, BG2 is not as good a RPG as DA is.





"orcs (darkspawn, okey, whatever)"



Darkspawn are not orcs. Unless you gonna call shrieks orcs? Are DA ogres the equivelant of BG orcs? Tainted spiders? Tainted wolves? Broodmother? There are ALL darkspawn? So, again, how in the bejeebers do you come to the conclusion that darkspawn = orcs? Oh... you meant hurlocks and genlocks are orcs? You do realzie those are just two types of darkspawn right? that they aren't the only darkspawn? You also do realize that they have very little in common with orcs outside of being mean and ugly, right (which is a basic fitting description for the vast majority of fantasy monsters, btw)? You can communicate with D&D orcs. There are even good orcs en masse in D&D *including* pacifistic ones? You can bargain, intimidate, charm, and mate with orcs. You can't do that with hurlocks/genlocks/other darkspawn.





You gots to know your lore.

[NarcissaArtois]

I agree with Giygas Starman.

[BanditGR]

The real problem is that a comparison of an entire series is attempted versus one game. Wait for the sequel and/or expansions to draw any safe conclusions. As has been pointed out, the world of Dragon Age is different (in certain aspects more than noticeable). It's fine really. No one claimed that this would be Baldur's Gate 3. It was an 'experiment' and despite its flaws, I believe it to be a successful experiment, a step in the right direction. If the developers pick up on the good elements and continue improving the more controversial ones (game balance, better character development, more clever and meaningful itemization, less "forced" consequences, an even better "live" world etc), then things are certainly looking up for the franchise.

Modifié par BanditGR, 01 décembre 2009 - 11:41 .

[Skellimancer]

The ability to slaughter any NPC would result in a broken game when i have finished killing.

Modifié par Skellimancer, 01 décembre 2009 - 11:43 .

[Krigwin]

People are only making the comparison because this game was marketed as a supposed "spiritual successor", which is a phrase that surely could only have been born from an advertiser's wet dream. It's like a sequel, only not really!

I for one was never expecting DA:O to be anything near BG2 so I wasn't as disappointed at some, although it does sadden me to see the degree of consolization in this game. If the advertisers were honest, they should have marketed DA:O as another generic fantasyland adventure based on the infinity engine and not even mentioned BG2.

Then again, if they were honest they wouldn't have gone for the blood and guts, hardcore sex scenes zomg mature game for mature gamers only approach.

[JamesX]

I'll just address the first point.

lorderon99999 wrote...
Let look at the story of DA:O: Save the World....Mmmmm where did I see that?

I assume you didn't finish the game yet?

lorderon99999 wrote...
 You have that typical bad guy in black armor and the good guy with blond hair and shiny armor (the king)...Mmmmmm where did I see that?

BG1 nor BG2 have such a distinction.  Yes the Villain in BG1 is wearing spiky armor, but that is a stylization choice other than  Disney White vs Black choice.

lorderon99999 wrote...
Do I get personnaly involved in there story? No....

I assume you didn't play the game?  Because if you have your character stand there and just do nothing nothing happens.  So you are in fact involved in the story as its driving force.

[mrjazzman]

Brothers and sisters can't we all just get along and hope for DA2 as well as BG3? :innocent: