92 réponses à ce sujet

[boba1974]

ejikvkaske wrote...

I've never played BG only BG2, which for me was a huge disappointment. Back in 2001 before I actually played it, I've heard some great things about the series. BG 2 did not live up to my expectations.

You see, BG 2 felt prehistoric even in 2001. Sure, the storyline was good, the world massive, and the game was overall challenging. However, my BG experience was ruined by terrible graphics and poor combat system. Maybe it's because I picked up BG2 right after Diablo 2.

Frankly I was not surprised that BG 3 never came out. The market was moving away from sprite based RPGs, so BG 3 would have needed a brand new engine. I guess Bioware decided that they might as well come up with a new world. I don't think there was anything that special about the BG universe.

How can anyone complain about BG2 graphics after playing Diablo 2? Seriously? It's laughable that on one hand you would say that BG2 was "ruined by terrible graphics" and then talk about Diablo 2, which was much worse graphically and didn't even allow you to change resolutions.

If any game deserves to be called ancient at the time of it's release it's Diablo 2.

%3D

[hmlee2008]

Fredescu wrote...

hmlee2008 wrote...
What makes you say that?

They're making far too much money. EA CEO John Riccitiello said that Dragon Age "sold really, really well, and actually did a million pieces of downloadable content already, which is an astonishing outcome," but what he doesn't mention is that he hates money. Just like most CEOs.

Hah. Quite right. Those dirty socialist CEOs.... such haters of money.

[R1cardo]

Origin and Westwood to mention just a couple, bought by EA, them gone... I don't think Bioware will go same way of those, because it's big, strong, very lucrative and have passion at their work.



The fact that they now hold a potentially big and long live IP helps for the survivality of the company, but in out great, big and mean capitalist world, who knows?



Sorry for any mistakes in the post, I need to practice English more...

[Fredescu]

R1cardo wrote...

Origin and Westwood to mention just a couple, bought by EA, them gone... I don't think Bioware will go same way of those, because it's big, strong, very lucrative and have passion at their work.

The fact that they now hold a potentially big and long live IP helps for the survivality of the company, but in out great, big and mean capitalist world, who knows?

Sorry for any mistakes in the post, I need to practice English more...

Modern EA are a much different company to the one that killed off those studios. They wouldn't do the same today. Have a read of this: http://www.wired.com...02/riccitiello/

Not that they're perfect. I imagine Pandemic Studios employees would see it differently. Pandemic were never an established brand in the way Bioware are though. EA will never outright kill off Bioware. The name alone is worth money on a financial report, and means a lot to a lot of people.

[DarkSpiral]

Isotemod wrote...

One thing to remember about Bioware having there own IP is that they thoretically could do anything with it.
There isn't a limitation on the IP that says its suitable only for single player RPG's.

*facepalm*
Astonishingly, I literally never thought of this before.  I should have, because it's freaking obvious, but I didn't.  Well said!

We've already been assured of two years worth of DLC, so I;m not worriend about the franchise collecting dust to quickly.  A sequel is practically assured as well, seeing how very well thegame has done, financially.  Plenty of modding projects are well under way, so there are obviously plenty of fans that like the worl well enough to want to put their spin on it (people don't bother modding games they hate, afterall).  After DA2 hits?  That's a bit far off to really make any projections about, imo.  But I'm not really worried.

As far the rise and fall of previous Bioware titles, I would hesitate to say that NWN (or NWN2) were supplanted by KOTOR.  KOTOR was, despite many of the player-made mods for the game, a single player game.  Neither NWN or it's sequel were, really.  Their success came from the toolset that allowed you to make your own adventures without knowing how to code (not that knowing how to code didn't help, mind you).  Frankly, the OC in NWN was boring.  Initially I treated NWN as another single player game, and the disapoinment left a bad tatse in my mouth.  It wasn't until many months later that I discovered the NWVault, and through it the true beauty of the game.

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that the NWN series was a different animal than Baldur's Gate, so comparing the two isn't as straighforward as it might seem.  Sorry, I can be a bit long-winded.  Baldur's Gate itself, honestly, was done.  They could have made a BG3, of course (and the project was breifly in development, as I understand) but it would have had to be a brand new story, rather than an actual sequel.

KOTOR is definetly not dead.  The Star Wars MMO is based off of, and references, both KOTOR and KOTOR 2, so there is no doubt that series is alive and well.  It has...evolved, I suppose.  Into a different form.

[hmlee2008]

DarkSpiral wrote...

Isotemod wrote...

One thing to remember about Bioware having there own IP is that they thoretically could do anything with it.
There isn't a limitation on the IP that says its suitable only for single player RPG's.

*facepalm*
Astonishingly, I literally never thought of this before.  I should have, because it's freaking obvious, but I didn't.  Well said!

We've already been assured of two years worth of DLC, so I;m not worriend about the franchise collecting dust to quickly.  A sequel is practically assured as well, seeing how very well thegame has done, financially.  Plenty of modding projects are well under way, so there are obviously plenty of fans that like the worl well enough to want to put their spin on it (people don't bother modding games they hate, afterall).  After DA2 hits?  That's a bit far off to really make any projections about, imo.  But I'm not really worried.

As far the rise and fall of previous Bioware titles, I would hesitate to say that NWN (or NWN2) were supplanted by KOTOR.  KOTOR was, despite many of the player-made mods for the game, a single player game.  Neither NWN or it's sequel were, really.  Their success came from the toolset that allowed you to make your own adventures without knowing how to code (not that knowing how to code didn't help, mind you).  Frankly, the OC in NWN was boring.  Initially I treated NWN as another single player game, and the disapoinment left a bad tatse in my mouth.  It wasn't until many months later that I discovered the NWVault, and through it the true beauty of the game.

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that the NWN series was a different animal than Baldur's Gate, so comparing the two isn't as straighforward as it might seem.  Sorry, I can be a bit long-winded.  Baldur's Gate itself, honestly, was done.  They could have made a BG3, of course (and the project was breifly in development, as I understand) but it would have had to be a brand new story, rather than an actual sequel.

KOTOR is definetly not dead.  The Star Wars MMO is based off of, and references, both KOTOR and KOTOR 2, so there is no doubt that series is alive and well.  It has...evolved, I suppose.  Into a different form.

When I listed NWN, KOTOR, etc in my original post, it wasn't intended to be a comparison of them, really. I was just listing them in the chronological order that I remember them coming out (I think KOTOR came after NWN, but I might be wrong). Also, the "supplanted" remark wasn't supposed to be about whether the games themselves were better or worse than those they came after... just about the fact that it seemed as though most of Bioware (at the time, I imagine they're a bigger studio now) seemed to shift from working on BG to NWN to KOTOR to DA (with a chunk doing the Mass Effect series somewhere in there as well)...

[Adria Teksuni]

Yes, KoTOR came out after NWN.



I understood what you meant and your concerns. Immediately, they are working on releasing official DLC for DA:O for at least two years, so there's that bit of good news. There are also two novels out with plans for more.



Additionally, I doubt that they're "going anywhere". People foretold their downfall when the D&D licensing went away, they survived. Not making KoTOR II? DOOM! Working on their own IP? That's it, they're dead.



Not with DA:O doing as well as it is (and it is doing well, just because it's not having MASSIVE UBER EXTREME SALES doesn't mean it's doing badly) plus the DLC is doing well. They also have the highly anticipated ME2 and Knights of the Old Republic MMO in the works.



I think Bioware is going to be around for a while, and I think Dragon Age is going to be around for a while.

[MerinTB]

R1cardo wrote...
Origin and Westwood to mention just a couple, bought by EA, them gone... I don't think Bioware will go same way of those, because it's big, strong, very lucrative and have passion at their work.
 

Origin.  Westwood.



Thanks for those memories.

Boba1974 wrote...
How can anyone complain about BG2 graphics after playing Diablo 2?
Seriously? It's laughable that on one hand you would say that BG2 was
"ruined by terrible graphics" and then talk about Diablo 2, which was
much worse graphically and didn't even allow you to change resolutions.

Absolutely this.  I didn't want to respond all alone to that in case there was a general "Diablo 2 is god" feeling amongst those viewing this thread, but -

I had played Diablo (the first one) and enjoyed it enough, though I never really finished it.  Loved Starcraft, though.  Then, of course, played and loved BG2 (not nearly as much as many people on these forums - I have only played through the original campaign twice in all this time, the expansion only once) but I never did get around to Diablo 2.

Then, about 3 years ago, I was visiting a friend who lives half the state away (Wisconsin) and he asked me if I had ever played Diablo 2, and when I said no he showed it to me and went on and on about it.  As he was praising it, all I could do was keep from being slack-jawed as how BAD it looked to me.  It was the first time I had seen gameplay, so had I played it when it was released it would have probably looked great, but man did it look wretchedly bad.  He offered to loan me his copy and I declined - more because I figured it was more of the first game by what he showed me and I had never finished that, but honestly that was probably the first time I had ever been hit so hard by an older game's graphics.

So when I read the person said that Diablo 2 holds up, had I been drinking something I would have done a spit-take.

[Adria Teksuni]

Diablo 2 for me is in an entirely different realm of play than BG. I don't even consider it to be a true CRPG. Way too linear and no actual role playing involved.

[I Valente I]

I've always thought that they wanted to end the series on a high note. Which they did. As much as I would like a sequel, I can't help but feel that after Throne of Bhaal it would only go downhill. Some things are just better left as is.

[druidofwarp]

Diablo 2 is the essence of hack n slash rpgs

[Rutaan]

The way I remember it, NWN is what happened to the BG series. I also seem to recall that Bioware wasn't the creative force behind BG2, it was Black Isle Studios. I'm sure I will be corrected if I'm wrong. Now I don't know who ended up working where after BG2 development was done, but NWN was designed to be what fans of BG2 said they wanted, albeit with a big influence from Diablo type games, which was not asked for. The most vocal BG2 fans wanted multiplayer, 3D graphics, and a way to produce custom content that was not just a modification of the original storyline. A PC based way to produce D&D adventures had been a dream for a while, and NWN promised to deliver. Sure, the devs gave lip service to single player, but if you read the message boards it seemed that everyone would have a grand time with MP, so could anyone blame them if the SP campaign was made on the cheap?



Unfortunately, most vocal is not the same thing as the majority. NWN shipped with a rather feeble SP campaign and the bean counters found much to their chagrin that market studies had proven that the vast majority of NWN purchasers played the SP campaign, then shelved the game. It didn't help that MP was plagued with technical issues in the beginning and far fewer people had high speed internet compared to today. It also turned out that the toolset had a brutally steep learning curve for anyone who was not an experienced programmer.



So...that's why DA:O is SP only and why it can stridently claim the mantle of successor to the BG series. It wouldn't be able to make that bold claim if NWN had been what people really wanted. I think 2D sprite based graphics could have been taken to another level, but the game development world had moved on. So, basically, NWN was BG3. It just wasn't what we hoped it would be.

[Fredescu]

I thought I remembered hearing that Bioware wanted to focus NWN on the toolset and multiplayer, but Atari fell on financial difficulties and made them develop a single player campaign very quickly. I don't know if that's true or not.

[Fluffykeith]

Graphically Diablo 2 has aged a lot, in some ways more than Diablo did, but as a dungeon hack it really works, especially multiplayer. Not an RPG tho..



I just picked up NWN2 to play, as I just finished my first playthrough of DA:O and don't want to spoil it by jumping straight into another playthrough (and I want to run it on my own pc, which has better specs than the one I'm having to use now). Anyway, the introductory stuff in the manual says that NWN was being designed at the same time as BG.

[hmlee2008]

Fluffykeith wrote...

Graphically Diablo 2 has aged a lot, in some ways more than Diablo did, but as a dungeon hack it really works, especially multiplayer. Not an RPG tho..

I just picked up NWN2 to play, as I just finished my first playthrough of DA:O and don't want to spoil it by jumping straight into another playthrough (and I want to run it on my own pc, which has better specs than the one I'm having to use now). Anyway, the introductory stuff in the manual says that NWN was being designed at the same time as BG.

That's interesting... I wonder how many people it takes to develop DA:2 now that they have the basic technology in place... I hope (no matter how many people it requires) they get it done in sooner than 5 years, because by then I'll be out of law school and my life will be beholden to a firm somewhere. Then no DA for me.

[Mich-cz]

as for BG: in ToB original story come to the end and there was no space to going further with same character so Bioware to create all new series with NWN. It is also clear that developers aren't happy if they are creating the same thing again and again - They need some creativity and after all these years I imagine they need to make something new to avoid complete burn-out of ideas which converts into players' boredom (see NHL, FIFA and Sims series).



as for new IPs: it is no secret Mass Effect was intended to be in Star Wars universe but there were some discrepancies between IP owners so they made a new world of its own from it. The same applies to Dragon Age but it is slightly different - they wanted to create other game based on DnD system and setting but for law reasons they decided to create a new world instead, accompanied by its own rules.



To my knowing DA is supposed to be trilogy - with new part every two years (so next one will make its debut in 2011 and the third onein 2013. And every part of this trilogy is designed to have 3 expansions, so expect no less than 12-part game.



as for an acquistion of Bioware by EA - it was different than Westwood and other companies - Bioware wasn't integrated into EA as the others, it has very favourable agreement and its boss became one of EA holder afaik.

[Isanox]

I hope they re-release Baldur's gate and Planetscape Torrment for those who haven't played it.

*crossing finger that Gog.com get its*

[Jayce]

Isotemod wrote...

The Baldurs Gate (Forgotten Realms) IP is still going strong in other ways and we can all be thankfull for the contribution Bioware and its previous incarnations made to it.

What, you mean after Hasbro forced WotC to bugger it up with the spellplague, then limited them to three sourcebooks?

The only FR products still going strong are the novels and they're set a hundred years after the Baldurs Gate timeline. 

Dunno how you feel, but after Rich Baker promised WotC wouldn't do anymore RSEs, the spellplague felt like a kick in the teeth. So I'm glad Bioware developed their own IP. A 1480's set BG or NWN3 would've been a very bitter pill to swallow.

YMMV.

[Fredescu]

Planescape Torment was re-released recently in the UK. http://www.amazon.co...xgy_vg_h__img_a

[chingu75]

Mich-cz wrote...

To my knowing DA is supposed to be trilogy - with new part every two years (so next one will make its debut in 2011 and the third onein 2013. And every part of this trilogy is designed to have 3 expansions, so expect no less than 12-part game.

Have you got a source for that, other than your a $ $?

Modifié par chingu75, 14 décembre 2009 - 12:47 .

[Rolenka]

From a business standpoint I'd say BG died because Interplay wanted to retire the license. Because EA actually owns Bioware, that shouldn't be a problem. If Bio wants to do it, they don't have to count on an outside company (just a parent company) to allow it.

[cmorganbg]

There is a DVD out now that has all the i.e. games (BG, BG2, ToB, etc., etc.) and there is still a strong modding community supporting them; so, in terms of market for that (fictional) historical period, there might have been support. But as a die-hard BG/BG2 fan and modder, I darned well applaud a new setting. The commercial freedom is a good thing, and the storyline freedom is a great thing.

[JO2D4N]

Considering that Bioware provided all of us with the map of "Thedas" which includes all of the storied places we have been reading about in our codices and that, said, map was provided explaining that "Thedas" is simply a continent in the Dragon Age World, I would wager that we may be looking at, the very minumum, 15 games with 2000 hours of DLC.



This, by the way, would be fine with me. I don't need other games with this title around.

[totertot]

I still pull out BG and BG2 to replay them... *hides in her nerd hole*

[tarahawk]

I'd like to see DA2, different settings, but maintaining the current characters as well as new ones