192 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Phoenix]

Cryocore wrote...

John Epler wrote...
It had flaws - we're proud of what we accomplished, but that's a far cry from 'IT'S PERFECT AND FLAWLESS AND A MASTERPIECE'.

and what did you accomplish? You made a demonstrably inferior game (Sales, critical receptions, fan reception).
You alienated a vast number of long time fans, and STILL fail to own up to the fact that its a worse game made for non core fans.
I fully expect biowEAr to slip in to the mire of the various formerly brilliant developers that were homogonised and bean counted in to failure and eventual closure.
BioWare was the greatest developer in the RPG space for a long time imo. This new entity is just another develop by numbers studio being run in to the ground by a controlling interest that has no interest in anything more than mass appeal and sale figures.

DAII is a comparitively awful game compared to EVERY RPG previously made by BioWare.

So what exactly did you accomplish with DA2?

imo everybody involved in making DA2 should apologise to the lon time fans as you obviously have no interest in making rich and deep RPGs anymore. Pandering to non RPG gamers and sacrificing core RPG mechanics is no accomplishment. 

Rather than blindly defending it maybe, just maybe somebody should just admit the faults and stop deflecting. If you really are interested in regaining lost trust... try some actual honesty. 

He said it had flaws. What more do you want? No developer will ever bash their game into the ground and if they do then they will lose credibility. Considering many fans are already raging at Bioware having Bioware say "Dragon Age 2 sucked hard! Worst game ever!" couldn't possibly help them. 

Bioware have admitted the faults behind Dragon Age 2. They admitted that the waves, re-used level design and choices not having major impact were flaws and from what has been said from David on Twitter we will be able to give companions armor again. 

Bioware will never say that Dragon Age 2 was terrible because in all honesty it wasn't. I found it average at best but far from terrible and a developer will normally look at their game from a different viewpoint than a fan and the day you find a developer calling their game terrible is a very rare day indeed. The game would have had to either had been a massive flop or a broken bugged mess and Dragon Age 2 wasn't either of those things.

[Dragoonlordz]

Cryocore wrote...

John Epler wrote...
It had flaws - we're proud of what we accomplished, but that's a far cry from 'IT'S PERFECT AND FLAWLESS AND A MASTERPIECE'.

and what did you accomplish? You made a demonstrably inferior game (Sales, critical receptions, fan reception).
You alienated a vast number of long time fans, and STILL fail to own up to the fact that its a worse game made for non core fans.
I fully expect biowEAr to slip in to the mire of the various formerly brilliant developers that were homogonised and bean counted in to failure and eventual closure.
BioWare was the greatest developer in the RPG space for a long time imo. This new entity is just another develop by numbers studio being run in to the ground by a controlling interest that has no interest in anything more than mass appeal and sale figures.

DAII is a comparitively awful game compared to EVERY RPG previously made by BioWare.

So what exactly did you accomplish with DA2?

imo everybody involved in making DA2 should apologise to the lon time fans as you obviously have no interest in making rich and deep RPGs anymore. Pandering to non RPG gamers and sacrificing core RPG mechanics is no accomplishment. 

Rather than blindly defending it maybe, just maybe somebody should just admit the faults and stop deflecting. If you really are interested in regaining lost trust... try some actual honesty. 

What are you like 12? Grow up. I did not like DA2 and I probably am (as long if not longer term fan than yourself). They do not owe us an apology. They can just try to improve it next time around. You did not enjoy what they created fair enough but they do not have to apologise for that.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 13 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[Uccio]

Frankaidenryan wrote...

So, let's imagine, for the sake of argument, we're in DA2 and companion armour was customizable like it was in Origins. So my party exists of, say, Rogue Hawke, Varric, Isabella, and Fenris. Naturally, I look for the best sets of armor. My Rogue Hawke wears the Felon's Coat, Isabella wears Shadow of the Empire, and Varric wears Wade's Superior Drakeskin leather armor. I equip Fenris with Juggernaut plate. Humor me, just...picture it.

Now, is that really what you would have wanted your party to look like?

Yes. I want to choose what they wear.

Modifié par Ukki, 13 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[Pasquale1234]

TommyServo wrote...

For sure.

I still like roleplaying, and I do it in TES games more than anything. But with Bioware games, I just want to be told a great story (albeit one that I can exert some control over), with great characters, in a great setting. That's something that t they've delivered consistently, and I feel that aspect of their games is stronger now than ever.

When I want to be told a great story, I generally look to other forms of media.  I like broad player agency, and at least the illusion that I am involved in co-creating the story via live gameplay choices rather than pre-recorded cinematic sequences.  I didn't feel that way at all with DA2.

[Uccio]

^ exactly. If I want to to be told a great story I will watch a movie or read a book. RPG games I want to play myself.

[CuriousArtemis]

brushyourteeth wrote...

I love being able to adjust armors, but in a real life situation you wouldn't be able to tell your friends how to dress ("Not those pants, THESE pants!)

I hate this argument, because, guess what?  In real life, you wouldn't be able to tell your companion which sword or mage staff to use, either.

Ohhh, wouldn't like THAT option taken away, would we?

<_< At least give people the frigging option.  Why are they SO FRIGGING OBSESSED with taking AWAY choices from their players?  If a player wants to leave a companion in a dang "iconic outfit," then so be it.  But why should those of us who like to change our companions looks be forced to use mods?  

[Maria Caliban]

motomotogirl wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I love being able to adjust armors, but in a real life situation you wouldn't be able to tell your friends how to dress ("Not those pants, THESE pants!)

I hate this argument, because, guess what?  In real life, you wouldn't be able to tell your companion which sword or mage staff to use, either.

Ohhh, wouldn't like THAT option taken away, would we?

That wouldn't bother me at all.

[CuriousArtemis]

Filament wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I love being able to adjust armors, but in a real life situation you wouldn't be able to tell your friends how to dress ("Not those pants, THESE pants!)

I hate this argument, because, guess what?  In real life, you wouldn't be able to tell your companion which sword or mage staff to use, either.

Ohhh, wouldn't like THAT option taken away, would we?

Bianca's contribution to Varric's character was not insignificant, in fact.

Yup, very true, but I imagine, still, people wouldn't be very happy if ALL weapons could only be equipped to the PC from here on out.

This whole over-arching argument is really just the difference between people who are role-players (self-immersion in a pre-set story) and those who enjoy storytelling (both as a reader and a teller/creator).  

[Zanallen]

motomotogirl wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I love being able to adjust armors, but in a real life situation you wouldn't be able to tell your friends how to dress ("Not those pants, THESE pants!)

I hate this argument, because, guess what?  In real life, you wouldn't be able to tell your companion which sword or mage staff to use, either.

Ohhh, wouldn't like THAT option taken away, would we?

I wouldn't mind at all. But then again, I also wouldn't mind if they took away the ability to customize a companion's skills either. For me, the companions aren't my character. I don't feel the need to customize them or even really control them.

[FKA_Servo]

Ukki wrote...

^ exactly. If I want to to be told a great story I will watch a movie or read a book. RPG games I want to play myself.

Pasquale1234 wrote...

When I want to be told a great story, I generally look to other forms of media.  I like broad player agency, and at least the illusion that I am involved in co-creating the story via live gameplay choices rather than pre-recorded cinematic sequences.  I didn't feel that way at all with DA2.

Agree to disagree. I see no reason why they can't be both. Besides, if want that great story to be about Thedas (which I think I've come to like more than any other fantasy setting I've encountered in any medium - ditto for ME setting and science fiction), then there are only so many books to read or movies to watch before I have to come running back to the games.

I think having some constraints on the PC makes for better story telling (and that a voiced PC is a better narrative device). I can see and appreciate your position, even if I don't necessarily share it exactly. Neither of us are wrong.

At the end of the day, we can be sure of one thing: the devs are certainly aware of the opinions on both sides of the issue. They'll do what they will with the feedback they receive. I obviously can't tell the future, but considering the reaction to both DA2 and ME3, I think it's very likely that they will err on the side of more player choice, and more traditional RPG trappings, even if they don't go as far as they used to.

EA permitting, of course. Who knows? Maybe it will be kicked out the door for christmas and we all end up crying in the corner.

Edit to add: One thing that I absolutely WOULD love (and that they haven't really nailed - I like to think for lack of time) is the ability to have the story diverge a lot more based on your choices. They did this the best in DAO, clearly. I think they probably did it the worst in DA2 and ME. The railroading in ME2 is very nearly unforgiveable as far as I'm concerned, and we all know about ME3. DA2 I'm willing to chalk up to time constraints, considering there are only like five main quests in Act 3.

Modifié par TommyServo, 13 avril 2012 - 07:02 .

[LolaLei]

Cryocore wrote...

John Epler wrote...
It had flaws - we're proud of what we accomplished, but that's a far cry from 'IT'S PERFECT AND FLAWLESS AND A MASTERPIECE'.

and what did you accomplish? You made a demonstrably inferior game (Sales, critical receptions, fan reception).
You alienated a vast number of long time fans, and STILL fail to own up to the fact that its a worse game made for non core fans.
I fully expect biowEAr to slip in to the mire of the various formerly brilliant developers that were homogonised and bean counted in to failure and eventual closure.
BioWare was the greatest developer in the RPG space for a long time imo. This new entity is just another develop by numbers studio being run in to the ground by a controlling interest that has no interest in anything more than mass appeal and sale figures.

DAII is a comparitively awful game compared to EVERY RPG previously made by BioWare.

So what exactly did you accomplish with DA2?

imo everybody involved in making DA2 should apologise to the lon time fans as you obviously have no interest in making rich and deep RPGs anymore. Pandering to non RPG gamers and sacrificing core RPG mechanics is no accomplishment. 

Rather than blindly defending it maybe, just maybe somebody should just admit the faults and stop deflecting. If you really are interested in regaining lost trust... try some actual honesty. 

Sheesh, DA2 wasn't that bloody bad!

They attempted something different but it didn't quite work out how they initally imagined, thats all. Whether that was due to time or resources is not our business. Sure it was severely lacking in places but that doesn't mean it's a bad game, it just had a lot to live up to after DA:O. John said himself that DA2 had it's flaws, he openly admits that it's a far cry from a perfect, flawless masterpiece. What more do you want him to do? Lick your boots and beg for bloody forgiveness?

The fact that they've already stated that they wish to avoid the same mistakes made in DA2 goes to show that they are, at least, listening to our feedback and trying to impliment it where applicable.

[Dragoonlordz]

Put it this way, customisation (equipment, skills and stats with visual differences) is one of the main RPG elements I buy RPGs for in the first place. It is a requirement for me in order to pick them up or buy them. I can't make it more simple than that from my view point and stance. The RPG genre is defined by the elements such as those not the ability to play a role. All games you play a role but RPG genre relies on those elements amongst others to be classed as an RPG and of interest to me which is why I buy them.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 13 avril 2012 - 06:54 .

[CuriousArtemis]

Zanallen wrote...

I wouldn't mind at all. But then again, I also wouldn't mind if they took away the ability to customize a companion's skills either. For me, the companions aren't my character. I don't feel the need to customize them or even really control them.

You're a role-player; I like to play a part in the creation of the story to an extent, and that includes having some say in what the companions look like and how skilled they are and in what way.  I don't see myself as the player character; I see him as the main character in a story I'm helping to create.

With luck, both playing styles can be accomodated.

[Pzykozis]

motomotogirl wrote...

This whole over-arching argument is really just the difference between people who are role-players (self-immersion in a pre-set story) and those who enjoy storytelling (both as a reader and a teller/creator).  

I agree to a certain extent since you are describing me but, I think that people who identify solely and roleplay solely the PC are split on this aswell, seems more like a schism between those who enjoyed and want to see more of the Might and Magic stuff wherein you create and are the entire party and those who as I said pretty much identify themselves solely as the PC.

Personally loved what Bianca added to Varric but it wouldn't work or make sense to me that all characters were so attached to their weapon, though Sten really should have kept to his sword once he was given it... that was weird, just that switch up from I woke up couldn't find my sword so I butchered a family to.. oh this sword.. meh who cares about that I have the summer sword or something. Guess it could have either have been greater stats or something to make it the more convincing choice but meh.

[LolaLei]

Filament wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

John Epler wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

The DAO story was just metioned in the backround, and I never quoted anyone

The DAO story progressed the world state (and, really, provided the impetus for Hawke's flight from Lothering). As did the DA2 story.

And when you suggest that we said something that we, in fact, never did - you're setting up a massive strawman. Strawmen don't really do much to help with a constructive and positive discussion environment. It's a disingenuous way of making your point stronger.

I never said Bioware "said" I said Bioware "thinks."  So I didn't suggest anyone said anything.  Please don't suggest I said something I in fact never did

You are not doing yourself any favors with either method as you do also not know what they think, especially if they have not said it.

no I don't know what they think, I'm just taking a guess from what ive heard them say over time.  I'm not trying to put words in anyones mouth

So you're not talking about what they said, just about what they think, which you're guessing based on what they said. lol. OR MAYBE what they said is not actually what they think, but what they think based on what else they said clearly demonstrates how what they said really shows what they think even though they didn't say it.

... Mind blown!

[hussey 92]

Filament wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I love being able to adjust armors, but in a real life situation you wouldn't be able to tell your friends how to dress ("Not those pants, THESE pants!)

I hate this argument, because, guess what?  In real life, you wouldn't be able to tell your companion which sword or mage staff to use, either.

Ohhh, wouldn't like THAT option taken away, would we?

Bianca's contribution to Varric's character was not insignificant, in fact.

Asala was a huge contribution to Sten (it was his soul) but you could still unequip that

[hussey 92]

Filament wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

John Epler wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

The DAO story was just metioned in the backround, and I never quoted anyone

The DAO story progressed the world state (and, really, provided the impetus for Hawke's flight from Lothering). As did the DA2 story.

And when you suggest that we said something that we, in fact, never did - you're setting up a massive strawman. Strawmen don't really do much to help with a constructive and positive discussion environment. It's a disingenuous way of making your point stronger.

I never said Bioware "said" I said Bioware "thinks."  So I didn't suggest anyone said anything.  Please don't suggest I said something I in fact never did

You are not doing yourself any favors with either method as you do also not know what they think, especially if they have not said it.

no I don't know what they think, I'm just taking a guess from what ive heard them say over time.  I'm not trying to put words in anyones mouth

So you're not talking about what they said, just about what they think, which you're guessing based on what they said. lol. OR MAYBE what they said is not actually what they think, but what they think based on what else they said clearly demonstrates how what they said really shows what they think even though they didn't say it.

How do you feel about the armour Filament?

[Maria Caliban]

hussey 92 wrote...

Asala was a huge contribution to Sten (it was his soul) but you could still unequip that

He should have attacked you for trying to take it from him.

Or something like Planescape: Torment where you couldn't unequip it.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 13 avril 2012 - 07:29 .

[Pasquale1234]

motomotogirl wrote...

This whole over-arching argument is really just the difference between people who are role-players (self-immersion in a pre-set story) and those who enjoy storytelling (both as a reader and a teller/creator).  

I gotta disagree with your definitions here, because I know some people (including myself) that don't fit either of them.

Some role-players draw distinct lines between the PC (character) and the player (actor - or at least was until a VA and animated toon took over).  Player/actors can be very involved in helping to create the story, and are not necessarily looking to take a character through a pre-set story.

[Zanallen]

hussey 92 wrote...

Asala was a huge contribution to Sten (it was his soul) but you could still unequip that

And one could argue that switching his weapon breaks his character. What possible reason would Sten have for using a sword other than Asala after you retrieve it? It is his soul. He can't return to Qunari lands without it. Yet he is willing to just use any ol' weapon you give him? Preposterous.

[hussey 92]

Zanallen wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

Asala was a huge contribution to Sten (it was his soul) but you could still unequip that

And one could argue that switching his weapon breaks his character. What possible reason would Sten have for using a sword other than Asala after you retrieve it? It is his soul. He can't return to Qunari lands without it. Yet he is willing to just use any ol' weapon you give him? Preposterous.

Some weapons are better for different fights, thats why its good to have the freedom to use what ever weapon you want.  
And maybe you'll want to give Sten a shield, which requires him to have a one handed weapon

[Pasquale1234]

TommyServo wrote...

Agree to disagree. I see no reason why they can't be both.

It is, I think, an amazing thing when they are - but there are some great stories that would not make very good games and vice-versa.

Edit to add: One thing that I absolutely WOULD love (and that they haven't really nailed - I like to think for lack of time) is the ability to have the story diverge a lot more based on your choices. They did this the best in DAO, clearly. I think they probably did it the worst in DA2 and ME.

That's primarily what I mean when I speak of co-creating the story.  It also adds replayability and invites me to play through multiple times with different character concepts that would make different choices.  Delicious.