203 réponses à ce sujet

[CuseGirl]

I've only played ME2 and ME3. But since ME2 is better than ME3, than instantly means it's not their best game. Simple as that.

[Darth Garrus]

Baldur's Gate 2, NWN and Kotor are the best (Kotor is the best story and best dialogues ever written for a game, imho). Jade Empire was great. Mass Effect, in the end, changed too much during the series, and had the worst ending of all. Of all games, from all companies. That bad.

[MB957]

no..to me...this is not the best game bioware ever made. of course..Ive only played DAO and all its dlc, ME2 with all dlc, some of ME1 and DA2 and all its dlc. that all I have to compare to.

DAO and ME2 are my favs.

[Vizard355]

Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age: Origins

[saracen16]

ME > ME3 > ME2

[thefallen2far]

Mass Effect 1... Mass effect 2... KOTOR... Jade Empire...Neverwinter Nights... Baldur's Gate.... I think a better question is if it's the Worst game they made?

[chemiclord]

Darth Suetam wrote...

Baldur's Gate 2, NWN and Kotor are the best (Kotor is the best story and best dialogues ever written for a game, imho). Jade Empire was great. Mass Effect, in the end, changed too much during the series, and had the worst ending of all. Of all games, from all companies. That bad.

You never played the Ultima series, I take it.

For every who thinks Mass Effect had the worst ending of all time ever... I invite you to TRY and play Ultima IX.

Believe me.  It can get worse.

It can get a LOT worse.

[o Ventus]

For me it's a tie between DA:O and ME2.

[Nefla]

My ranking of the BioWare games I've played goes:

1)DA:O
2)ME2
3)KOTOR
4)ME1
5)Jade empire
6)SWTOR
7)DA2
8)ME3

[Hackulator]

It is my favorite of the series, I haven't really played many other Bioware games except SW:TOR.

[SNascimento]

I think DA:O is very overrated.
.
The game isn't bad, please. This is not what I'm saying. It's great, but I don't think it comes close to ME2 or KoTOR. Those two are masterpieces, DA:O is only a great game, like ME1. Dragon Age lacks a soul, the lore is there, no doubt, but Bioware couldn't craft the world.

[Galenwolf]

No way in hell.

Baldurs Gate 1 and 2 will be, they changed the RPG genre - and they didn't need some pissant star child - you fought for your victory.

[Nefla]

SNascimento wrote...

I think DA:O is very overrated.
.
The game isn't bad, please. This is not what I'm saying. It's great, but I don't think it comes close to ME2 or KoTOR. Those two are masterpieces, DA:O is only a great game, like ME1. Dragon Age lacks a soul, the lore is there, no doubt, but Bioware couldn't craft the world.

That's a matter of opinion. I love DA:O, it's my favorite game of all time and was the game that pulled me away from JRPGs once and for all. It all depends on what you look for in a game.

[LinksOcarina]

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

[Memnon]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Explain that second part?

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Dragon Age Origins, Mass Effect 1 & 2 are better than Mass Effect 3, but Mass Effect 3 is better than Dragon Age 2, hell ludo is better than Dragon Age 2.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Haha Thats funny.

[LinksOcarina]

Stornskar wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Explain that second part?

Basically, Dragon Age II revamped a lot of things, but three things in particular make it an important game if you ask me.

The first, is the friendship/rivalry system. Basically, the fact that they made the system not based on how characters would like/dislike you as a flat number, but instead how they would act toward you, made the party members more believable as characters. Plus, this would fall into a more apropro version of role-playing: you can play Hawke however you want, and the characters around you react accordingly to Hawke and his/her responses. 

Second, the interaction with the characters in a non-linear storyline. Note I didn't say gameplay, what I say a non-linear storyline, I mean a story that is different from its predecessor. Were not following the Warden anymore, and its likely we won't follow Hawke in game III. This allows the world of Thedas to be the main attraction, not unlike the world building we see in say Elder Scrolls or something like that. We get a new protagonist and their story, as the narrative structure goes on. Now you may be thinking Elder Scrolls does that already, but this here is the difference: there is a long-term investment over our control of the said world. 

Basically, if people enjoy the series enough it will become Final fantasy, but it will be connected to each other in a stronger way; it is a storyline were shaping from choices, so each game is connected through big and small choices in some way. Of course they have a central plot and an outcome to that said plot, but we shape then outcome; does the Warden die or take the dark ritual as a way out, does Hawke side with the mages, or templars? The true test of this will be in Dragon Age III, and how choices from game 1 and 2 can come into play, if they do at all. If they do, and we see choices from game one pop up in game 3, and so on, then BioWare is onto something huge if they can keep the story straight and pull it off as a long narrative. 

And I am hopeful they will. Basically, the way characters were handled through the friendship/rivalry system, and the way the story structure has been set up is damn innovative and unlike anything I have seen in a long time. they basically changed how "light/dark" side work and are taking a gamble on story structure that can pay off in the long run if people stick with it. At least, thats why I think its important. 

[Renmiri1]

Alex Arterius wrote...

I remember a lot of the development team and Bioware employees stating ME3 was the best game they had ever made pre release and that those who didn't buy it would be missing out.

Would you guys agree or disagree with this now that it's been out for 5 months and given you time to replay it etc?

Personaly i'd say ME2, but that's just me...

I'd say it is the worst but I haven't played DA2 yet

[thefallen2far]

chemiclord wrote...

Believe me.  It can get worse.

It can get a LOT worse.[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

Keep in mind, this is essentially the ending of the game:

A game that's thematically about qactively retaking your world from an invading alien robot force, which has no final boss, but ends in a cutscene with autodialogue and then Casper the genocidal ghost shows up and says he created the enemy and that he arbitrarily tells to choose to "destroI" him and take out another species with it, or do what the other previous main villains thematicaly wanted to do. All this and if you choose to defy this nonsense, comes a cut scene that essentially says "eff you".

What ending could possibly be worse? You could say "game x had a worse ending" but unless you can actually say what makes it a bad ending, I really can't imagine an ending being worse than ME3.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Explain that second part?

Basically, Dragon Age II revamped a lot of things, but three things in particular make it an important game if you ask me.

The first, is the friendship/rivalry system. Basically, the fact that they made the system not based on how characters would like/dislike you as a flat number, but instead how they would act toward you, made the party members more believable as characters. Plus, this would fall into a more apropro version of role-playing: you can play Hawke however you want, and the characters around you react accordingly to Hawke and his/her responses. 

Second, the interaction with the characters in a non-linear storyline. Note I didn't say gameplay, what I say a non-linear storyline, I mean a story that is different from its predecessor. Were not following the Warden anymore, and its likely we won't follow Hawke in game III. This allows the world of Thedas to be the main attraction, not unlike the world building we see in say Elder Scrolls or something like that. We get a new protagonist and their story, as the narrative structure goes on. Now you may be thinking Elder Scrolls does that already, but this here is the difference: there is a long-term investment over our control of the said world. 

Basically, if people enjoy the series enough it will become Final fantasy, but it will be connected to each other in a stronger way; it is a storyline were shaping from choices, so each game is connected through big and small choices in some way. Of course they have a central plot and an outcome to that said plot, but we shape then outcome; does the Warden die or take the dark ritual as a way out, does Hawke side with the mages, or templars? The true test of this will be in Dragon Age III, and how choices from game 1 and 2 can come into play, if they do at all. If they do, and we see choices from game one pop up in game 3, and so on, then BioWare is onto something huge if they can keep the story straight and pull it off as a long narrative. 

And I am hopeful they will. Basically, the way characters were handled through the friendship/rivalry system, and the way the story structure has been set up is damn innovative and unlike anything I have seen in a long time. they basically changed how "light/dark" side work and are taking a gamble on story structure that can pay off in the long run if people stick with it. At least, thats why I think its important. 

man! you just described nearly everything that is wrong with that game.

that was one revamp that was never needed.

Modifié par DinoSteve, 16 juillet 2012 - 01:01 .

[LinksOcarina]

DinoSteve wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Explain that second part?

Basically, Dragon Age II revamped a lot of things, but three things in particular make it an important game if you ask me.

The first, is the friendship/rivalry system. Basically, the fact that they made the system not based on how characters would like/dislike you as a flat number, but instead how they would act toward you, made the party members more believable as characters. Plus, this would fall into a more apropro version of role-playing: you can play Hawke however you want, and the characters around you react accordingly to Hawke and his/her responses. 

Second, the interaction with the characters in a non-linear storyline. Note I didn't say gameplay, what I say a non-linear storyline, I mean a story that is different from its predecessor. Were not following the Warden anymore, and its likely we won't follow Hawke in game III. This allows the world of Thedas to be the main attraction, not unlike the world building we see in say Elder Scrolls or something like that. We get a new protagonist and their story, as the narrative structure goes on. Now you may be thinking Elder Scrolls does that already, but this here is the difference: there is a long-term investment over our control of the said world. 

Basically, if people enjoy the series enough it will become Final fantasy, but it will be connected to each other in a stronger way; it is a storyline were shaping from choices, so each game is connected through big and small choices in some way. Of course they have a central plot and an outcome to that said plot, but we shape then outcome; does the Warden die or take the dark ritual as a way out, does Hawke side with the mages, or templars? The true test of this will be in Dragon Age III, and how choices from game 1 and 2 can come into play, if they do at all. If they do, and we see choices from game one pop up in game 3, and so on, then BioWare is onto something huge if they can keep the story straight and pull it off as a long narrative. 

And I am hopeful they will. Basically, the way characters were handled through the friendship/rivalry system, and the way the story structure has been set up is damn innovative and unlike anything I have seen in a long time. they basically changed how "light/dark" side work and are taking a gamble on story structure that can pay off in the long run if people stick with it. At least, thats why I think its important. 

man! you just described nearly everything that is wrong with that game.

that was one revamp that was never needed.

To you, maybe.

You did ask why, well not you, you just decided to make fun of me, but to be honest I can care less if you believe it or not. We shall see in time in the end. 

[WandySilva]

For me, BG2 by a mile.

[IanPolaris]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Hmm

The best game they ever made was probably Baldurs Gate

the most important game they ever made was Dragon Age II, however.

Explain that second part?

Basically, Dragon Age II revamped a lot of things, but three things in particular make it an important game if you ask me.

The first, is the friendship/rivalry system. Basically, the fact that they made the system not based on how characters would like/dislike you as a flat number, but instead how they would act toward you, made the party members more believable as characters. Plus, this would fall into a more apropro version of role-playing: you can play Hawke however you want, and the characters around you react accordingly to Hawke and his/her responses. 

Second, the interaction with the characters in a non-linear storyline. Note I didn't say gameplay, what I say a non-linear storyline, I mean a story that is different from its predecessor. Were not following the Warden anymore, and its likely we won't follow Hawke in game III. This allows the world of Thedas to be the main attraction, not unlike the world building we see in say Elder Scrolls or something like that. We get a new protagonist and their story, as the narrative structure goes on. Now you may be thinking Elder Scrolls does that already, but this here is the difference: there is a long-term investment over our control of the said world. 

Basically, if people enjoy the series enough it will become Final fantasy, but it will be connected to each other in a stronger way; it is a storyline were shaping from choices, so each game is connected through big and small choices in some way. Of course they have a central plot and an outcome to that said plot, but we shape then outcome; does the Warden die or take the dark ritual as a way out, does Hawke side with the mages, or templars? The true test of this will be in Dragon Age III, and how choices from game 1 and 2 can come into play, if they do at all. If they do, and we see choices from game one pop up in game 3, and so on, then BioWare is onto something huge if they can keep the story straight and pull it off as a long narrative. 

And I am hopeful they will. Basically, the way characters were handled through the friendship/rivalry system, and the way the story structure has been set up is damn innovative and unlike anything I have seen in a long time. they basically changed how "light/dark" side work and are taking a gamble on story structure that can pay off in the long run if people stick with it. At least, thats why I think its important. 

Dragon Age 2 was a failure and a failure for good reason.  A lot of the features you like aliened the core audience and not enough new people like it to be successful.  DA2 is exactly the wrong direction for Bioware.

-Polaris

[chemiclord]

thefallen2far wrote...

Keep in mind, this is essentially the ending of the game:

A game that's thematically about qactively retaking your world from an invading alien robot force, which has no final boss, but ends in a cutscene with autodialogue and then Casper the genocidal ghost shows up and says he created the enemy and that he arbitrarily tells to choose to "destroI" him and take out another species with it, or do what the other previous main villains thematicaly wanted to do. All this and if you choose to defy this nonsense, comes a cut scene that essentially says "eff you".

What ending could possibly be worse? You could say "game x had a worse ending" but unless you can actually say what makes it a bad ending, I really can't imagine an ending being worse than ME3.

As I said, try playing Ultima IX.

How they try to explain the origins of The Guardian in that game will make you long for the comforting logic of the Catalyst.

You think Shepard got stupid in ME3?  The Avatar of Ultima IX apparently suffered critical brain trauma, then was lobotmized while comatose.  Go to any Ultima fan and say, "What's a paladin?"  Watch their head explode shortly after they try choking you to death.

Think the Mass Relay explosion was lore-breaking?  Think that bit of space magic was aggravating?  At least THAT has the caveat of only having an extremely limited sample size so that you can say "Well, this might be different."  Ultima IX ends with the Avatar casting a spell that is supposed to destroy the world it's cast within... that is its DESIGNED PURPOSE... it had done so ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS on two other worlds... but, lawl, jk, don't happen here because... magic!

Modifié par chemiclord, 16 juillet 2012 - 01:14 .