92 réponses à ce sujet

[SinYang]

http://social.biowar...dex/423949&lf=8

This very interesting, perhaps people have missed it?

[Skellimancer]

BG1 to BG2

DEVS:"yeah! erm.. import your character you lose items and party. We decided to use characters from BG1 that were the most popular!"

ME: "OH GOD NO!.. NOT.."

MINSC: "AHHHHHHHHHHH! We are all heroes! You and Boo and i, hamsters and rangers everywhere! rejoice!"

ME: www.youtube.com/watch

[OneBadAssMother]

To be honest sometimes I wonder why they didn't make Sten as stupid as Minsc. He is by far my fav character of all time.

[SinYang]

I doubt it would pay off loosing too many npcs, depends if voice actors/actresses are available cos the model work is done. Certainly understand why BG2 lost some in transition.

Heck my party was Safana/Kagain/Garrick/Viconia/Imoen..

BG2: Coran greetings I traveled here with safana... blah blah....
Player: what? how did this happen.
PARADOX
Irenicus: Now im the all powerful! lord of time.

Modifié par SinYang, 14 décembre 2009 - 02:20 .

[OneBadAssMother]

Well at least they included Saverok in ToB =)

[zorbik]

Some people seem to be forgetting that Bioware doesn't have it's own IP, EA does.

[Neil_McK1701]

Unless they update DOA for multi-player to use the toolset, I don't see it with a long life span. The majority of big games out now have online multi player avail. I've played NWN and NWN2, but 90% of that time has been in online created worlds or with buddies in story. The tool set they gave in both was gr8. I played in worlds that you start with nothing. There are wolds that you make your eqip and everything. The worlds just pull you in. The removal of interaction with other players, not just AI, but humans at another comp just takes away from all they did with this game. I know I would not buy any DLC, or expansions till this was added. I personaly feel that RPGs like this are best with multiplayer. These RPG games are all crafted from table tops. You wouldn't sit at a table and play D&D by yourself. I know you need a DM for the NPCs, but still you wouldn't play with only 2 people. The more you have the better it is. Same goes for RPGs. I would say Bioware dropped the ball on this one. Looks like gr8 graphics, and story line. I can understand the idea of DLC to expand the game and reduce the need for all the expansions. When it comes to the multiplayer, online PVP, and enjoying all the possible worlds the tool set could make, Bioware gets a big BOOOOOOOO.

[Marvin TPA]

If anyone hasn't tried the Easy TuTu mod that lets you play BG on the improved BG2 engine I highly recommend it. Don't have a link or anything, but then that's what google is for. It makes replaying the lot a lot less painful for those who have got used to modern graphics. You can even go into BG2's experimental 1280 *960 resolution"only for those with very powerful machines".

[Palarran1118]

Even better, there is a widescreen mod. I'm playing BG Triliogy right now at 1920x1200--it actually doesn't look that bad.

Modifié par Palarran1118, 14 décembre 2009 - 06:38 .

[Gecon]

BG was a planned Triology, DA is a planned franchise. BG cut short because Bioware cut the original plans to do level 1-7 in BG1, level 8-14 in BG2, and level 15-20+ in BG3. DA1 already allows you to reach "maxlevel" (as feats are already running thin for nonmages level 20+), and so will DA2, DA3 ...

[MerinTB]

Neil_McK1701 wrote...

Unless they update DOA for multi-player to use the toolset, I don't see it with a long life span. The majority of big games out now have online multi player avail. I've played NWN and NWN2, but 90% of that time has been in online created worlds or with buddies in story. The tool set they gave in both was gr8. I played in worlds that you start with nothing. There are wolds that you make your eqip and everything. The worlds just pull you in. The removal of interaction with other players, not just AI, but humans at another comp just takes away from all they did with this game. I know I would not buy any DLC, or expansions till this was added. I personaly feel that RPGs like this are best with multiplayer. These RPG games are all crafted from table tops. You wouldn't sit at a table and play D&D by yourself. I know you need a DM for the NPCs, but still you wouldn't play with only 2 people. The more you have the better it is. Same goes for RPGs. I would say Bioware dropped the ball on this one. Looks like gr8 graphics, and story line. I can understand the idea of DLC to expand the game and reduce the need for all the expansions. When it comes to the multiplayer, online PVP, and enjoying all the possible worlds the tool set could make, Bioware gets a big BOOOOOOOO.

Hard to read, but I will reply to what I think is the gist of your sentiment (multi-player is king) -

NO.

I have far more fun playing single-player, story driven games than I do trying to get along (or find enough people at the right time) to play any kind of multi-player.
I've tried MMOs, and had the most fun SOLOing those.
I tried NWN persistant worlds, and never found anyone on at the same time as I was able to get on to do anything with, so it was back to the (horrible) single-player-afterthought of that multi-player game.
I cried (figuratively) at how short the Halo 3 story was, and accepted the notion many put forth that they focused so much on multi-player to the detriment of the single-player story.
I've had some passing fun getting together with friends (as an adult, finding time for this is exceedingly difficult with everyone's schedules) to play stuff like SFIV and L4D - but the few times that happened really didn't justify rental fees, let alone multiple controllers and buying the games.

I know people like their multi-player, but there are tons of multi-player options out there.

Not every game needs to be all things.  Not every game needs multi-player.

[Mich-cz]

chingu75 wrote...

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

Yes I have, though I'm not completely sure if there would be two or three expansions. View this as offline mmo, it is not bad to have expansion every half year (or once a year) with several smaller DLCs meanwhile to make players happy Of course, I only know that 3 expansions are plans for the first two years, the plans for other 2 parts could change on the way.

tarahawk wrote...

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

The way I see it there would be completely new storyline with new main character in each part (unlike mass effect) and each part would advance the world of Thedas some 20-30 years forward (it can be no more than that because every age has only 100 years). Your actions in previous part could of course affect the next one in some way. Story which began with Origins will be undoubtedly completed in its expansions.

[Adria Teksuni]

Mich-cz wrote...

chingu75 wrote...
Have you got a source for that, other than your a $ $?

Yes I have, though I'm not completely sure if there would be two or three expansions. View this as offline mmo, it is not bad to have expansion every half year (or once a year) with several smaller DLCs meanwhile to make players happy Of course, I only know that 3 expansions are plans for the first two years, the plans for other 2 parts could change on the way.

I think he was asking for links to your source of information.

Da intarwebz:  source or it didn't happen.

[Allen63]

I like DA a lot.



Problem is similar to what some are saying about Diablo 2. Its technology already looks very old -- it has the appearance of a game released 4 years ago. And, as more time passes and DA tech looks older and older, that will impact some peoples' enjoyment.



Problem with EA is that they overpaid for Bioware. Now, Bioware games have to profit hugely. Thus, EA will trade on the Bioware "name" -- they will assume the fans will buy any "old" stuff so long as it has the Bioware name.



Conseqently, DA and other Bioware titles will tend to have minimized content and technology upgrades. This will cause a "drag" on the series for RPG fans who are not "wedded" to Bioware.

[Skellimancer]

Allen63 wrote...

I like DA a lot.

Problem is similar to what some are saying about Diablo 2. Its technology already looks very old -- it has the appearance of a game released 4 years ago. And, as more time passes and DA tech looks older and older, that will impact some peoples' enjoyment.

Problem with EA is that they overpaid for Bioware. Now, Bioware games have to profit hugely. Thus, EA will trade on the Bioware "name" -- they will assume the fans will buy any "old" stuff so long as it has the Bioware name.

Conseqently, DA and other Bioware titles will tend to have minimized content and technology upgrades. This will cause a "drag" on the series for RPG fans who are not "wedded" to Bioware.

If they created DA:O on an optimized high rez infinity engine, i would be very happy.

[Auraad]

Fredescu wrote...

If DA2 is to DA what BG2 was to BG, I will die happy.

Won't happen ...
Well, there will be a DA2, but the milage between DAO and DA2 wont be like BG and BG2.

[SheffSteel]

There are plenty of possibilities for the future. As I've said elsewhere, it's possible that Bioware will release a future Dragon Age game that re-uses ingame assets from DA:O. The most obvious is a co-op multiplayer client allowing for up to four players to take part in a modified version of the singleplayer campaign. However, the writers may wish to carry forward the story in another installation that works similarly to the Origins game but might re-visit some familiar areas (e.g. the town of Denerim with more/different playable areas).
There's also the possibility that they would fence off a different region of the world, possibly adjacent to Ferelden, and set a slightly different game there. This might be a more casual multiplayer game, more similar to Dungeon Siege or Diablo than to more heavyweight RPGs. It might even be an open world or sandbox style of game, though that probably wouldn't suit the design and creative team's talents or experience.
They could even go so far as to implement a persistent world with MMO mechanics, although given the company's upcoming Old Republic title, it wouldn't seem wise to try to run two MMO games at the same time.

Personally I would most like to see the co-op campaign and/or a casual multiplayer game. It seems that both would lend themselves to community-made mods and add-ins, which should extend the appeal of the franchise.

Modifié par SheffSteel, 14 décembre 2009 - 04:40 .

[Sam -stone- serious]

MR-9 wrote...

I can see how this all got started. They all sat down at a table together and said "Look, no more D&D. We're going to make this simple."

If the final product is anything to go by then yes that was the idea they agreed on that table that day.

[Tiniuc]

Pseron Wyrd wrote...
Here's what Greg Zeschuk has to say about it:

http://www.videogame...no_regrets.html

Reading that article has renewed my faith in Bioware.

[Tiniuc]

SheffSteel wrote...

Personally I would most like to see a casual multiplayer game. It seems that would lend itself to community-made mods and add-ins, which should extend the appeal of the franchise.

Oh there's a jolly good way to make a fun and enjoyable online experience in DA. Use the blight. Players start wherever their character origin places them, or alternatively, can pick to play as darkspawn and pilot hordes around the surface and deep roads to seize territory and expand the blight.

The only way for DA not to suffer the same fallacies as the NWN's franchise's online gameplay is to ensure the gameworld can flex and breath with the players.

[LynxAQ]

EA are evil. I have seen NO difference between the filth that is EA of yesterday and the blight that is EA of today. All I see is a publisher jumping from developing studio to developing studio, milking it for all its worth and then jumping to the next conquest. In the process treating the staff like crap, thinking they know whats best for the public, whilst releasing unfinished rubbish with very little support. I HATED buying DA:O because it had that filthy EA logo on it, but I felt like I was betraying my support of Bioware. I was torn.



DA:O was probably the first EA game I have bought in many years and unless its a DA:O sequel / expansion, it will most likely be the last.



The problem is, filth like EA will continue to do what they do, as long as simpletons (which is what you are if this applies to you) continue to buy these EA sports games that never change, and just have a different year slapped on the cover.. etc.



The fact is I also worry that in a year or 2 Bioware will not exist anymore and the only PC RPG available to us will be trash from filth like EA and the RPG will be 3 hours long with about 10 minutes of dialogue. (That is the type of "RPG" a company like EA would release).



We will see, but the future is not pretty when blights like EA are involved.

[Ghandorian]

Loredis wrote...

I wouldn't speculate about the DA series too far ahead. Bioware iteslf is not going to be around much longer sadly, you can thank EA for that.

Mr. Muzyka and Mr. Zeshcuk seem pretty happy about the deal they made. They are still running the Bioware and now so much more. Besides they had to do something for SWTOR. That is a massive project!

Besides BioWare was not BioWare anymore. It was still calling Itself BioWare/Pandemic. But was owned by VG Holding Corp. Who has Bono on its board so you know it is all about saving the planet . . .er I mean making good games. Who knew our gaming habits where helping to fight world hunger. I feel all warm and fuzzy inside now

Thursday afternoon, top publisher Electronic Arts announced that it will acquire VG Holding Corp., owner of BioWare/Pandemic.

Way back in 2007

Aside from all that stuff that is not really any of our business, It seems that Dragon Age Origins will not only have great funding but BioWare's legacy of great  games will continue to grow now that it has become a partner with the biggest publisher around. Maybe this way the CEO's of the old BioWare can get more pull for doing things the way they want.

Oh and why does no one ever say "Good Gaming ended when Black Isle Studios died"? Because It didn't did it.

[Soretooth]

Quick answer to the OP: Yes. What happened to BG will happen to DA:O whenever the storyline and the engine have made it to the end of the line.



However, and this is just my opinion, I think DA:O is an experiment. Yes, Bioware has lots of time and money buried in this project. Did they impress their fans and the established game reviewers? YES, and in a big way. Every fan knows by now that DA:O won Best RPG of the Year, Best PC Game of the Year, Best Original Song - Video Game, and Outstanding Music Supervision.



Bioware tested the waters, and found that the recipe for DA:O resonates with its fans, old and new alike. DA:O tastes great!



I think that Bioware glanced into the crystal ball and knew this before the game was even launched. That's why the company announced early that it has dedicated at least two years of DLC to the continuing enjoyment of the game. I also think they had DA:O 2 planned a long time ago and are feverishly working on it right now. So the DLC will play out, keeping us happy and then DA:O 2 will hit the shelves, while they are working on DA:O 3.



What's in store for us specifically: co-op, expanded realms, multiplayer? I don't know, but I can't imagine Bioware letting this franchise going stale.



I'm in no matter what happens.

[LynxAQ]

"I don't know, but I can't imagine Bioware letting this franchise going stale."



This is where your entire post dies. Its not up to Bioware anymore. Its up to that filth EA. When EA gets their hands into something, it usually turns stale and dies very quickly, hence why terming EA as the gaming industry blight is fitting.

[Hurra_asbest]

PLEASE REMOVE
Double post due to forum time-warp. See next page for a better formulated version.

Modifié par Hurra_asbest, 14 décembre 2009 - 06:11 .