55 réponses à ce sujet

[Melca36]

Filament wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Got news for you. I wouldnt expect the rogue to be the same for DA:3 as it was for DA:2

Also they already said they would not being doing the friendship/rivalry  system

I wouldn't expect it to be radically different either. We'll see.

That second point is unfortunate in some ways IMO, but also understandable I guess, given what Gaider has said.

They said combat would still be fast but not be as stylized or over the top.

I actually liked the Friendship/Rivalry and thought it just need tweaking.

[BrookerT]

In reality, it actually brought more new things to the table than Origins did,

Origins innovated next to nothing. in fact almost everything it did is entrenched in classic RPG conventions. Saying it brought something new to table is inaccurate, rather it did things other games had already done, better, or in some cases worse.

Dragon Age 2 brought many new things to table which hadn't been done in many RPGs before, whether it did them well is another matter entirely.

Modifié par BrookerT, 19 mai 2012 - 11:27 .

[FaWa]

BrookerT wrote...

In reality, it actually brought more new things to the table than Origins did,

Origins innovated next to nothing. in fact almost everything it did is entrenched in classic RPG conventions. Saying it brought something new to table is inaccurate, rather it did things other games had already done, better, or in some cases worse.

Dragon Age 2 brought many new things to table which hadn't been done in many RPGs before, whether it did them well is another matter entirely.

Nice facts and examples

[wsandista]

BrookerT wrote...

In reality, it actually brought more new things to the table than Origins did,

Origins innovated next to nothing. in fact almost everything it did is entrenched in classic RPG conventions. Saying it brought something new to table is inaccurate, rather it did things other games had already done, better, or in some cases worse.

Dragon Age 2 brought many new things to table which hadn't been done in many RPGs before, whether it did them well is another matter entirely.

I'd rather have a tired and true convention than a new innovation that isn't really new, but copied from another game by the same company. There is a reason DA2 is called Dragon Effect.

[seraphymon]

BrookerT wrote...

In reality, it actually brought more new things to the table than Origins did,

Origins innovated next to nothing. in fact almost everything it did is entrenched in classic RPG conventions. Saying it brought something new to table is inaccurate, rather it did things other games had already done, better, or in some cases worse.

Dragon Age 2 brought many new things to table which hadn't been done in many RPGs before, whether it did them well is another matter entirely.

That is a total lie. DA2 brought nothing new to RPGs, perhaps not even to bioware games. These co called innovations did not exist. really they can only say so to dragon age, which doesnt say alot since its only had 1 game.

[BrookerT]

seraphymon wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

In reality, it actually brought more new things to the table than Origins did,

Origins innovated next to nothing. in fact almost everything it did is entrenched in classic RPG conventions. Saying it brought something new to table is inaccurate, rather it did things other games had already done, better, or in some cases worse.

Dragon Age 2 brought many new things to table which hadn't been done in many RPGs before, whether it did them well is another matter entirely.

That is a total lie. DA2 brought nothing new to RPGs, perhaps not even to bioware games. These co called innovations did not exist. really they can only say so to dragon age, which doesnt say alot since its only had 1 game.

Asking your companions for advice in a situation. as opposed to them just giving it you - Any of those points
Party Banter adapting to show realtionships and charachter development - Isabella and Aveline
Companions taking an active role in cutscenes - Varric and Gascard
Different dialouge scenarios and completely different character development in regards to whether they see you as a friend or rival - Anders
Giving mages the ability to use a staff to fight back when thery'e being stabbed in gut
The strong prescence of family and how it effects Hawke - Legacy Act 3
The main character showing genuine emotion - Mourning Leandra
Much More dynamic cutscenes - Aveline punching Hawke
Every LI being BI, and them recognising the difference between men and women - Anders final romance speech
Companions talking to each other and having conversations with each other without you directly causing it - any moment where you walk to see a companion, and therye talking to someone else

These things are things that DA2 brought to the table, for Dragon Age, Bioware or RPGsn in general. It also subverts several tropes which have been a part for RPGS for ages

[eroeru]

^^ They are not good in themselves though. And the way they were excecuted was, well, not ideal. And no-where near the level of experience DA:O gave (be it troped or not - that doesn't matter that much, if at all).

Modifié par eroeru, 20 mai 2012 - 08:16 .

[Tirigon]

@ Brooker: Party banter is nothing new, and developing relationships arent either. It is absolute average nowadays, hell, even some shooters and games like Diablo3, which is basically about killing 100000s of foes and collecting loot have it (though, admittedly, not as much as DA2).

Main characters show emotion all the time, and that aside - I would actually consider it a BAD thing for an RPG because the main character shouldnt have emotions on its own but instead have those the player chooses, according to his Roleplay persona.

Asking for companions is nothing new either due to the way it was implemented. It is not a choice always given but never forced, instead it is one you have in a select few situations where you MUST take it. That is to say, it is what all non-RPGs have.

And lastly, bi LIs are indeed the only improvement over DAO, but not really innovative either.

[Jerrybnsn]

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Friendship/rivalry

I can't honestly say that this friendship/rivalry meter can be called inovated because it's based off of Origins' Love/Hate meter.  Both systems act in the same way.  If you say, do, or offer you companinons certain things their approval opens up certain dialogues and rewards.  The only difference I see is that the approval/ disapproval ratings are switched for good now on the left and bad on the right.

Well, in another difference if you had low approval rating with your companions in Origin they were quite rude to you if you asked them a question, or they were really nice to you if you had a high approval.  In DA2, the approval rating didn't make a difference on how they interacted with you.  Probably because you couldn't actually engage them in conversation like you could in Origins so it wouldn't matter.  Which is another thing to add to the list of what DA2 took out: Companion Conversations.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 20 mai 2012 - 11:11 .

[BrookerT]

eroeru wrote...

^^ They are not good in themselves though. And the way they were excecuted was, well, not ideal. And no-where near the level of experience DA:O gave (be it troped or not - that doesn't matter that much, if at all).

I didn't say they were good, just they were different.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Zanallen wrote...

Sejborg wrote...


I think groundbreaking is the wrong word to use. I think the point is, that DAO had so many good things going for it. But instead of keeping the good things, DA2 threw alot of them away, and barely added anything instead. 

I would argue that DAO didn't do any of those things mentioned in the OP particularly well. Sure, they were there. They existed in the game (Minus his assertion that DAO didn't have repeating environments. It did.), but they were handled in various degrees of average to poorly. Granted, DA2 could have improved on these aspects instead of cutting some, but that is a far cry from DA2 taking out a bunch of things that DAO did awesomely and giving us nothing in return.

Well i would argue that they were done quite well. So....there?

[Rxdiaz]

Apathy1989 wrote...

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

I like 90% of that list.

Also I find it laughable that people prefer DAOs graphics. Boy that game looked boring and ugly. DA2 had a much stronger art style.

And I find it laughable that you find it laughable.

Guess you like kiddy cartoon graphics. That doesn't make you a bad person though....

[Issala]

Rxdiaz wrote...

Apathy1989 wrote...

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

I like 90% of that list.

Also I find it laughable that people prefer DAOs graphics. Boy that game looked boring and ugly. DA2 had a much stronger art style.

And I find it laughable that you find it laughable.

Guess you like kiddy cartoon graphics. That doesn't make you a bad person though....

There's a difference between graphics and style. Graphically, Dragon Age 2 was better. Whether or not the change in style was better is a matter of personal preference only.
Your companions' mouths don't bloat and stretch freakishly every time they smile in DA2. I'd say that's an improvement over DA:O. Again, as for the art style, that's opinion.

[Tirigon]

Semhaine wrote...


There's a difference between graphics and style. Graphically, Dragon Age 2 was better. Whether or not the change in style was better is a matter of personal preference only.
Your companions' mouths don't bloat and stretch freakishly every time they smile in DA2. I'd say that's an improvement over DA:O. Again, as for the art style, that's opinion.

Only for me they did, while in DAO they didnt.

Honestly, when I saw DA2 I thought I had jumped back in time. I have games from pre-2000 that had better graphic quality.

[Issala]

Tirigon wrote...

Semhaine wrote...


There's a difference between graphics and style. Graphically, Dragon Age 2 was better. Whether or not the change in style was better is a matter of personal preference only.
Your companions' mouths don't bloat and stretch freakishly every time they smile in DA2. I'd say that's an improvement over DA:O. Again, as for the art style, that's opinion.

Only for me they did, while in DAO they didnt.

Honestly, when I saw DA2 I thought I had jumped back in time. I have games from pre-2000 that had better graphic quality.

I don't know, while Baldur's Gate does have some very pretty environments, I think that's a bit of a stretch, even for hyperbole.
Have you seen Zevran when he smiles? Have you watched the Warden smile in character creation? Maybe in DA2 the characters just didn't grin as broadly.
Then again, I played both games on Xbox 360 on a very large, very high definition screen that allowed me to see every fault in glorious detail.

[Tirigon]

Well if you are on XBox, that explains it.

To a PC gamer, everything on XBox looks like utter crap, even on the best TV screens.

[Issala]

I'm sure it does.

[seraphymon]

BrookerT wrote...
Asking your companions for advice in a situation. as opposed to them just giving it you - Any of those points
Party Banter adapting to show realtionships and charachter development - Isabella and Aveline
Companions taking an active role in cutscenes - Varric and Gascard
Different dialouge scenarios and completely different character development in regards to whether they see you as a friend or rival - Anders
Giving mages the ability to use a staff to fight back when thery'e being stabbed in gut
The strong prescence of family and how it effects Hawke - Legacy Act 3
The main character showing genuine emotion - Mourning Leandra
Much More dynamic cutscenes - Aveline punching Hawke
Every LI being BI, and them recognising the difference between men and women - Anders final romance speech
Companions talking to each other and having conversations with each other without you directly causing it - any moment where you walk to see a companion, and therye talking to someone else

These things are things that DA2 brought to the table, for Dragon Age, Bioware or RPGsn in general. It also subverts several tropes which have been a part for RPGS for ages

Wether you ask or it is forced it is the same thing in the end. All it i is just seperating it to an option.
Party banter in DAo also adapated to show relationships and ahcracter development and the choices you made.
Companions taking active roles in cutscenes was in DAO as well. _ Alistair and his sister
Different dialuge also happens when they lik or dislike you, granted  romances some were different in DA2, but at least in DAO if they didnt like you, realisticly they left.
Mages meleeing combat is not innovative, that is just a flash, regardless of how it is done in both mages can still attack up close.
Main character showing genuine emotion is up for debate, even so  that isnt new to RPGS or bioware.
More dynamic cuscenes is also a matter of opinion, as DAO had them too as well as many other RPGGS and Bioware games.
Everyone being BI is something ill give you that. Despite that fact i do not agree with it since its unrealistic, butwhatever.
Companions will not talk to each other unless you click to talk. So what you just said was wrong. Only banter takes place automatically.

[Zanallen]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I can't honestly say that this friendship/rivalry meter can be called inovated because it's based off of Origins' Love/Hate meter.  Both systems act in the same way.  If you say, do, or offer you companinons certain things their approval opens up certain dialogues and rewards.  The only difference I see is that the approval/ disapproval ratings are switched for good now on the left and bad on the right.

Well, in another difference if you had low approval rating with your companions in Origin they were quite rude to you if you asked them a question, or they were really nice to you if you had a high approval.  In DA2, the approval rating didn't make a difference on how they interacted with you.  Probably because you couldn't actually engage them in conversation like you could in Origins so it wouldn't matter.  Which is another thing to add to the list of what DA2 took out: Companion Conversations.

Er...You don't understand how the friendship/rivalry system works at all.

[HiroVoid]

Zanallen wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I can't honestly say that this friendship/rivalry meter can be called inovated because it's based off of Origins' Love/Hate meter.  Both systems act in the same way.  If you say, do, or offer you companinons certain things their approval opens up certain dialogues and rewards.  The only difference I see is that the approval/ disapproval ratings are switched for good now on the left and bad on the right.

Well, in another difference if you had low approval rating with your companions in Origin they were quite rude to you if you asked them a question, or they were really nice to you if you had a high approval.  In DA2, the approval rating didn't make a difference on how they interacted with you.  Probably because you couldn't actually engage them in conversation like you could in Origins so it wouldn't matter.  Which is another thing to add to the list of what DA2 took out: Companion Conversations.

Er...You don't understand how the friendship/rivalry system works at all.

So it's kind of like Alpha Protocol's hate/friendship points.

[seraphymon]

Zanallen wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I can't honestly say that this friendship/rivalry meter can be called inovated because it's based off of Origins' Love/Hate meter.  Both systems act in the same way.  If you say, do, or offer you companinons certain things their approval opens up certain dialogues and rewards.  The only difference I see is that the approval/ disapproval ratings are switched for good now on the left and bad on the right.

Well, in another difference if you had low approval rating with your companions in Origin they were quite rude to you if you asked them a question, or they were really nice to you if you had a high approval.  In DA2, the approval rating didn't make a difference on how they interacted with you.  Probably because you couldn't actually engage them in conversation like you could in Origins so it wouldn't matter.  Which is another thing to add to the list of what DA2 took out: Companion Conversations.

Er...You don't understand how the friendship/rivalry system works at all.

Nope id say thats pretty accurate, only difference is that rivalry isnt a bad  thing, with a different passive ability  and the companions dont leave you, which i find as unrealistic. and not a good thing.

Modifié par seraphymon, 21 mai 2012 - 07:26 .

[KDD-0063]

Rivalry is just making a companion agree to disagree, which is cool by itself.
It's not the first one though; Kotor 2 uses a similar system.

Plus it takes away the possibility of making a companion genuinely hate you, which might not really be a good thing.

[FKA_Servo]

seraphymon wrote...
Nope id say thats pretty accurate, only difference is that rivalry isnt a bad  thing, with a different passive ability  and the companions dont leave you, which i find as unrealistic. and not a good thing.

Approval/disapproval can lead to missed content. Friendship/Rivalry is more, varied content. Your relationship with your companions are more dynamic and develop along different lines.

You can play a do-gooder circle mage who's BFFs with Morrigan (despite her being highly unlikely to view you with anything other than contempt) because you fed her a few dozen presents, but please don't defend that as "realistic" - it's a whole lot less realistic and more gamey than anything about the friendship/rivalry system.

[LeBurns]

Apathy1989 wrote...

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

I like 90% of that list.

Also I find it laughable that people prefer DAOs graphics. Boy that game looked boring and ugly. DA2 had a much stronger art style.

I loved DAO artstyle.  At least it didn't look like a Saturday morning cartoon.  http://burhenn63.dev...814882#/d4azy42