457 réponses à ce sujet

[Akka le Vil]

Smkswazi wrote...

I just hate that 'the world levels with you' in Oblivion. No feeling of accomplishment. And the world is so small in Oblivion that if they would make leveled areas there would be only a tiny part left to explore at max level.

You realize that DAO has a level scaling nearly as bad as Oblivion ?
And blaming Oblivion for being SMALL is, err...

[Jonfon_ire]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Smkswazi wrote...

I just hate that 'the world levels with you' in Oblivion. No feeling of accomplishment. And the world is so small in Oblivion that if they would make leveled areas there would be only a tiny part left to explore at max level.

You realize that DAO has a level scaling nearly as bad as Oblivion ?
And blaming Oblivion for being SMALL is, err...

Aye. At some points the level scaling of DA:O really breaks the immersion for me (one of the random encounters really jars in terms of the types of enemies which attack you). Pity they didn't do the scaling by having scaling enemy types for some of the later encounters.

[Derengard]

Oblivion isn't so bad as many say. There was a need for a game like Oblivion, a free-roaming fantasy RPG with such a fantastic look, nevermind how "generic" or "vanilla". But it has its weaknesses, mainly the storytelling and characters (and also in gameplay), and this is why DA is ultimately a class above Oblivion. But maybe a successor in the spirit of DA should also try to emulate a free world, by making it not necessarily completely open, but somehow more realistic and dynamic. Or simply more detailed, just look at (the first half of) Planescape Torment.

Modifié par Derengard, 03 décembre 2009 - 12:42 .

[Smkswazi]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Smkswazi wrote...

I just hate that 'the world levels with you' in Oblivion. No feeling of accomplishment. And the world is so small in Oblivion that if they would make leveled areas there would be only a tiny part left to explore at max level.

You realize that DAO has a level scaling nearly as bad as Oblivion ?
And blaming Oblivion for being SMALL is, err...

Sorry but Oblivion was small (map). But i wanted to say that if there would be areas with different levels (no level scaling) those areas would be very small compared to 30ish end level you can achieve.

Yes a know that DA:O has level scaling but there are still some areas that you can be low level and need to level up to win. And there were no such areas in Oblivion (not including one or two quest areas).

i did enjoy Oblivion but didn't enjoy leveling there was no need for leveling. 

[pokemaughan]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Smkswazi wrote...

I just hate that 'the world levels with you' in Oblivion. No feeling of accomplishment. And the world is so small in Oblivion that if they would make leveled areas there would be only a tiny part left to explore at max level.

You realize that DAO has a level scaling nearly as bad as Oblivion ?
And blaming Oblivion for being SMALL is, err...

It just feels small, because it all looks the same. Bright and whimsical, with little variation (other than the Bruma and Kvatch, but in a very small way). Not to mention that damned lazy fast-travel. Try walking around for a change. But I'll be damned if even after playing for God knows how many hours, I still run into a cave or quest I didn't know existed. 

Modifié par pokemaughan, 03 décembre 2009 - 12:57 .

[zosoninja]

well in world of warcraft you have an giant world which you can explore just like oblivion, although in WoW the driving force for playing is not really the storyline (although wow has a main storyline for those willing to follow it), but getting the best gear available so u can look cool and kill everyone.
The problem with oblivion, at least for me, was that there was no driving force to play the game, the story is boring, combat is jerky (it feels like you are wacking a bunch of dolls ) and u find yourself having lost interest in the game after u enter the next oblivion gate and do exactly the same thing as u did in the first , and wandering for hours just to get somewhere. I prefer fast travelling anyday, since each place u go in DA:O is very big on its own, so u cut the boring parts of the game such as traveling and put us right in the action.. which is nice.
By the way, i had an account in WoW for 4 years, and after playing a whole week in DA:O, i find myself suddenly losing interest in WoW, as a result i cancelled the account yesterday .
DA:O gave me a gameplay experience i didn't felt in a game for a long time, the developers managed to assemble all the aspects i like in a game in DA:O, i just hope it won't take to long to release a full expansion, or at least i hope they keep us entertained with DLC until they release it

Modifié par zosoninja, 03 décembre 2009 - 01:09 .

[Alex Savchovsky]

Dragon Age >>> Oblivion.
Really . Oblivion was nice, but lost me somewhere along the path. It let me do whatever I want and did not gave me much of a reason for doing so. I quickly ran out of interest. Dragon Age is keeping me focused even on my second play-through.

[Bonkz]

zosoninja wrote...

The problem with oblivion, at least for me, was that there was no driving force to play the game, the story is boring, combat is jerky (it feels like you are wacking a bunch of dolls ) and u find yourself having lost interest in the game after u enter the next oblivion gate and do exactly the same thing as u did in the first

Those are indeed some of the reasons i had as well with Oblivion.
As i said its not a bad game, but it felt like any place you went it was the same and the story that drove you doing the same thing in every oblivion gate was really boring after a couple of them.
The combat was also the most horrid thing for me. I thought my mouse was going to break under my spam clicking to kill the things that got in my way.
The exploration i really didn't mind. Sometimes it was nice walking to places instead of fast travelling but you soon stop doing that.

Edit: Another thing that bugged me in the free exploration of it was that i accidentaly got a sword just when i first went out of the imperial city (found it in a cave from an orc, dont remember the name) that was actually, as i found out, the best sword in the game when i searched for it on the net. I was so annoyed cause i knew that i wouldn't find an upgrade till the end of the game...

Modifié par Bonkz, 03 décembre 2009 - 01:30 .

[Niten Ryu]

Bethesda couldn't write ther way outta paper bag and while Dragon Age world and story are very generic, they are still way better then Oblivion. Enemy scaling is horrible in Oblivion and Gamebryo engine is about worst engine I've experienced. Dragon Age don't have much to be proud about in that area either. Oblivion also win "wooden animation" price.



Oblivion's best features are sandbox elements and at least it has ability to jump and crouch. And swimming.

[Monkinsane]

I'd have to go with Dragon age. Oblivion get's a bit repetative after a while.

[zosoninja]

Niten Ryu wrote...

Bethesda couldn't write ther way outta paper bag and while Dragon Age world and story are very generic, they are still way better then Oblivion. Enemy scaling is horrible in Oblivion and Gamebryo engine is about worst engine I've experienced. Dragon Age don't have much to be proud about in that area either. Oblivion also win "wooden animation" price.

Oblivion's best features are sandbox elements and at least it has ability to jump and crouch. And swimming.

the story of dragon age is generic? perhaps the "main" storyline as i refered in a previous post.. also u can do your own story in many parts of the game so..
Jump and crouch? strangely enough i didnt miss any of it and it really doesn't serve any purpose in the game. Also i would like to see anybody swimming with steel armour on.. Only if that person wanted to drown.. pretty unrealistic i might add 

[zosoninja]

Oblivion is pretty repetitive, and it doesn't do a good job captivating the player to reach the end of the game, unlike dragon age.

Modifié par zosoninja, 03 décembre 2009 - 02:14 .

[spernus]

Niten Ryu wrote...

Bethesda couldn't write ther way outta paper bag and while Dragon Age world and story are very generic, they are still way better then Oblivion. Enemy scaling is horrible in Oblivion and Gamebryo engine is about worst engine I've experienced. Dragon Age don't have much to be proud about in that area either. Oblivion also win "wooden animation" price.

Oblivion's best features are sandbox elements and at least it has ability to jump and crouch. And swimming.

To be fair,Dragon age isn't as generic as I feared. At least,the art direction is much better than I expected.The world and the story are as generic as it come however.

The problem with Bethesda is a flawed approachg toward game design and quality standards.They have some of the worst animators,game designers or writers among the big names of the industry.Each new Bethesda title is very flawed and feature incredibly generic art and storylines(or mediocre).

They get a free pass because they have carved themselves a unique niche,since virtually nobody else in the console market is willing to risk making a sandbox rpg(we know how two worlds turned out).

Just look at the awful games published by Bethesda and you have a good idea of how much taste or care Bethesda put behind brand recognition or quality game design.

[littlerogue]

I would say it depends on what you like, or what you are in the mood for. It is hard to compare the two. I own Fallout 3 and Oblivion... Bethesda makes a solid sandbox RPG, but no body can craft a solid story like Bioware. Once I finish Dragon Age, I'll probably start a new play through on Fallout, before coming back to Dragon Age again for a second play through.

[Ryukahn]

Oblivion is way too open and lacking of a great story for my tastes. I beat it once and had no desire to go back and play it. I've already beaten DAO and made new characters to play, and have put ~10 hours into several different characters.



That being said, it's easy to see why people would love Oblivion. You are much more free to make your own story on each and every playthrough. If you have the time and desire you can get a lot out of it.

[RetrOldSchool]

I did enjoy Oblivion for a while but the combat and the story really didnt strike me as very good. 2 other things got to me even more than that though:

1. Dungeon respawns.

2. Level scaling (but more importantly equipment scaling).



The example below is a result of those 2:

I could find a dungeon filled with vampires with low grade weapons and armor, kill the lot of them and go about my business. X hours later I could get a quest to that cave and think "Hey Im sure glad I've already killed that vampire family" only to arrive and realize a new family of better equipped vampires had moved in?

I have no idea how vampire real estate agencies work, but it just broke a lot of my immersion:



"Now this is a cozy ten room cave complete with luminous mushrooms and a small underground stream. There's one awkward thing....The last tenants were slain by a lone hero a couple of days ago, so... don't mind the smell"

"what do you say honey?"

"We'll be alright, besides we're better equipped! we'll take it!"



And that was the beginning of the end of another vampire household.



I don't know, it just doesn't feel right..



I think Fallout3 > Oblivion for the reason that there were no dungeon respawns. Also level and eq scaling was not as bovious. If Fallout3 wouldve had the same system with eq scaling then every raider near the end of the game would've had tesla armor and plasma repeaters.



I really like Fallout3, but this far (I havent finished DA:O yet) I have to say DA:O > Fallout3 > Oblivion.

[Akka le Vil]

pokemaughan wrote...

It just feels small, because it all looks the same. Bright and whimsical, with little variation (other than the Bruma and Kvatch, but in a very small way). Not to mention that damned lazy fast-travel. Try walking around for a change.

Well, there is decent variations in the sceneries, and the surface is HUGE. I loved the simple pleasure of traveling in Oblivion, and the sense of scale it gave (not realistic, sure, but pseudo-realistic enough to enjoy ; the only scale seriously lacking was the "cities", that felt like small hamlets). DAO in comparison feels small and cramped, with tiny spaces and whole areas always feeling like "one room".

I never used fast-travel. It gives much more the feeling of immersion ("if I have to go here, I'll have to walk for a time"). That's precisely what I loved in the game.
DAO has the same "fast-travel" problem though (though the game is build around it, and doesn't have actual sceneries you can walk from one place to another).

Bonkz wrote...

Those are indeed some of the reasons i had as well with Oblivion.
As
i said its not a bad game, but it felt like any place you went it was
the same and the story that drove you doing the same thing in every
oblivion gate was really boring after a couple of them.

That's
the basic problem of all Bethesda game : FANTASTIC immersion in the
world, but after a while you realize that there is nothing to actually
DO in the world beside looking at the scenery. Fallout 3 was better, but still very lacking in dialogue and scenario.

As
I said, a game with Oblivion's sense of scale and travel and
possibilities of exploration, combined with NPC and scenario like in
Bioware... Get rid of their idiotic obsession on making everything scale all the time, and OMG that would keep me awake for weeks :x

[Damar Stiehl]

My dead grandmother's fake teeth > Oblivion.

In fact, everything > Oblivion.

Formula for Oblivion? Take a "pretty good" game (Morrowind), slap a pretty, but poorly coded engine on it, take out everything that made it a "pretty good" game, and dumb it way down for good measure. Voila - you can call the result a turd, or you can call it Oblivion, the difference is marginal.

Even Buggerfall with its unending randomized dungeons and a plethora of issues was better. But hey, you know what? Oblivion had horsies. And horsie armor. Whee!



Other than that, I have no strong feelings on the subject. Dragon Age might not be the holy grail of RPGs (indeed, what game is? Maybe olden Fallouts and Planescape... *misty eyes*), but it is a shining paragon in comparison.

[SheffSteel]

They're quite different.

Oblivion is crying out to be made into an MMO.

Dragon Age is crying out to be made into a co-op game.

[Akka le Vil]

SheffSteel wrote...

They're quite different.
Oblivion is crying out to be made into an MMO.
Dragon Age is crying out to be made into a co-op game.

Actually, DAO is much closer to MMO in its fighting mechanisms than Oblivion

[Jolly Teaparty]

Not much of a feat given how dull Oblivion turned out to be after a few hours.

[Dark83]

zeejay21 wrote...

andybuiadh wrote...

Why do people use Oblivion as a benchmark? Oblivion was an average run-of-the-mill RPG in my view. Nothing *special* about it.

Hmm.... perhaps it's the first GTA-like RPG with first-person action?

That's not right, Morrowind is superior to Oblivion, and came out first. I'm guessing you're a console gamer?

Oblivion is "OMG GREAT" for the same reason Halo (1) is "OMG GREAT" - console gamers. It's their first exposure to the genre, and all of a sudden it's OMG TEH AWESOME, even if it's at best a decent game.

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Playing a mage in oblivion sure is
fun. So many spells. Create your own spells, enchant your own gear.
Mages are way powerful in both games. Oblivion has a far more in depth
gameworld to play in. The world building in Oblivion is amazing, cities
feel like cities, wide open spaces to run around in, really fun stealth
and archery mechanics. Dragon Age has a better presented story although
i enjoyed Oblivions story as well. Oblivion has side quests that put
Dragon Age side quests to shame. Thieves Guild and Dark brotherhood
side quests are like fun games in their own right. I love both games
for different reasons and think they both really succeed at what they
try to do.I find they are both extremely replayable for different
reasons.

This highlights the problem. TG/DB had the same
writer. He was the good one - everybody else sucked.

You want to be a mage? Morrowind
was far superior - you could fly, your enchanting system was better,
your spell inferface and selection was superior. Wide open spaces? Oblivion was a series of interconnected mini-maps. Morrowind was one (literally) giant map - no load screens. It's cities were really cities - you could see the giant scale and all the buildings, not the tiny districts in Oblivion. Oh, and it's main quest was actually epic. The game was pretty good out of the box, not crap that needed to be modded to playability. (For once, I'll not gripe about having random bandit gangs in full daedric equipment that feels the need to try to mug me for a fraction of the wealth they're wearing. Oh wait, too late. )

MarloMarlo wrote...

I don't see why one is story based
and the other isn't. That Oblivion's storyline wasn't all that great
doesn't mean that it wasn't there as a driving force. And both
stories involved joining some elite group and trying to put some
bastard son heir of the now-dead ruler on the throne as a necessary
step to fighting the demon behind the latest invasion of guys with
messed up faces wearing pointy armor.

Almost everything you do
in DA:O is related to the story - fight darkspawn. In Oblivion, you
basically have one prod to go along the main quest, and you can
completely ignore it for a hundred hours without ever being nudged back
to it. As a "driving force" it's like a kitten on a bicycle. It's
there, but it's going nowhere.

Also, you can't even fight on the horsies.

Modifié par Dark83, 03 décembre 2009 - 04:02 .

[Damar Stiehl]

*sigh* I remember the first time I crested the hill and saw Balmora below. I remember getting lost in Vivec City. Climbing that gigantic staircase to Vivec's Temple and looking at the cantons and Baar Dan in the sky. Getting horribly lost in an ash storm in some canyons and wishing dearly for a flight spell. Finding a cave, kicking out its inhabitants (some monsters I don't remember anymore) and sleeping through the said ash storm, feeling actually relieved that I found shelter. Now THAT is immersion. Morrowind was good, and I was ready to forgive a lot of its shortcomings, like the NPCs that never slept and couldn't open doors...



Oblivion took all that, crumpled it up into a ball, crapped on it and flushed it down the toilet with the combined might of the National Football League.

[TheLadyJess]

I wholeheartedly agree with this topic title! I have played both and Dragon Age is far more balanced and has a better leveling system. In Oblivion, you could only level up using skills...which is kinda broken. You get stronger by fighting more, not by running more or picking more locks.



In Oblivion, you only get one ending, and after that, when you are able to explore the world, the only boon you get is male-only armor...woofreakinghoo...sucks to be a female character, I guess...



In Dragon Age, every decision you make has a direct correlation on how the rest of the game is played, how you are treated, which allies you have, and the ending...this adds more depth and you get to see just how you are regarded by everyone.

[SheffSteel]

A sandbox is much more suited to being made into an MMO than a linear story based game. Oblivion has much more of a feel of a persistent online world. I'd be a lot less surprised wandering about in Oblivion to see another PC (emerging no doubt from a randomly restocked and appropriately levelled dungeon) than I would if in Dragon Age I saw another party of four adventurers on say the third floor of the Mage Tower, or even in the Deep Roads.

On a slightly related note:
Considering that being a level 15 character in a level 15 dungeon fighting level 15 monsters isn't really all that different to being a level 10 character in a level 10 dungeon fighting level 10 monsters, what is the benefit of going up a level? The player needs to feel progress, sure, and to put some points into improving whatever they want to improve, but if the monsters level up at the same rate as you, all you're effectively doing is choosing which things your character is going to get better at. But in all the areas you don't improve, you're actually getting weaker relative to the monsters, because they're getting stronger.

A game that levels monsters and loot with the character is really not all that far from a game that doesn't level anything.

If the player wants to control their character development, then they should be able to do so, by focussing on certain skills, spells or whatever, as long as they understand that they're going to get worse at the things that they don't practice.
This makes it a lot easier to implement MMO gameplay. If beginning characters are average characters, and experienced characters are characters who've had lots of opportunity, not to develop, but to specialise in spellcasting, toughness, archery, stealth or whatever, there's no reason why characters of radically different levels can't go adventuring together.

Modifié par SheffSteel, 03 décembre 2009 - 04:23 .