329 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

wsandista wrote...

Androme wrote...

I don't care about gameplay mechanics, RPGs are all about the story. And if they succeed in that department, then it's a good game.

I always thought role-playing games were about role-playing. That is why Skyrim, a game with little focus on story, is an rpg, because it allows role-playing.

Except the role-playing in Skyrim is all headcanon because the Dragonborn does not exist as a PERSON or PERSONALITY in Skyrim. They have no name, no past, no family, no roots, no STORY. Skyrim's whole marriage feature shows that at its worst. "Amulet! U single?" "Uh...yeah? U like me?" "Of course! Hey, MARRY ME!" "I just met you and have no clue why you'd...OK!"  That is pathetic roleplaying, pathetic gameplay and pathetic writing. I can use Skyrim-like headcanon in any game. Or I could just read a book.

[addiction21]

You forgot the part about wearing a necklace so the NPCs know your available.

[wsandista]

Persephone wrote...

Except the role-playing in Skyrim is all headcanon because the Dragonborn does not exist as a PERSON or PERSONALITY in Skyrim.

Yes they do. They just aren't defined by the writers and are able to be played in the first person without any railroading.

They have no name, no past, no family, no roots, no STORY.

Neither does the PC in NWN. I don't see how letting the player define the PC is a bad thing.

That is pathetic roleplaying, pathetic gameplay and pathetic writing.

DA2 was the pathetic role-playing and writing. You get three tone options that all lead to the same thing, and as for writing "You hate mages and turn them in to the Templars! Your'e a Horrible person"...*3 minutes later after picking the Heart icon* " Lets have sex!" Don't even get me started on the paraphrases or the resurrections.

I can use Skyrim-like headcanon in any game.

Only games that never contradict your character design.

Or I could just read a book.

Or you could watch a movie if you wanted to witness a tale with a completely defined protagonist.

Modifié par wsandista, 30 juillet 2012 - 02:11 .

[Persephone]

wsandista wrote...

DA2 was the pathetic role-playing and writing. You get three tone options that all lead to the same thing, and as for writing "You hate mages and turn them in to the Templars! Your'e a Horrible person"...*3 minutes later after picking the Heart icon* " Lets have sex!" Don't even get me started on the paraphrases or the resurrections.


Or you could watch a movie if you wanted to witness a tale with a completely defined protagonist.

Except, that is not how it goes at all.

Completely defined? You've never played a game with a completely defined character if you think Hawke is one.

Try playing...I dunno....any adventure game ever made? Or even MOST RPGs ever made.

Personal headcanon is all nice & dandy and I've been a TES fan for years. (Oblivion was a downer though) Games like that SHOULD exist and Bethseda does them well.

To me, the Dragonborn is a non-entity and Hawke is TOO defined. I'd rather have heart icons than stupid "marriage systems" ala Skyrim though.

[deuce985]

Rojahar wrote...

Persephone makes some good points. There seems to be a double standard. People criticize DA2 for things like romance being too rushed... but wearing a necklace and someone randomly marrying you (but never having more than like 1 line of dialog ever) is a system with depth? People insert fanfiction headcanon into Skyrim "Oh, well I IMAGINED there was more dialog and events that happened off-screen." but that can be applied to DA2 as well.

People do this a lot with Witcher 2 on these boards too. They criticize DA2 flaws, compare them to Witcher 2 and W2 suffers similar flaws but they ignore them.

And quite frankly, I don't understand why some people hang around these forums when the only comments that come out of their mouth is how terrible Bioware games are. Why do you stick around on a Bioware forum then? Like bashing their game without any constructive criticism is going to make your voice heard.

Modifié par deuce985, 30 juillet 2012 - 05:02 .

[ItsTheTruth]

deuce985 wrote...
And quite frankly, I don't understand why some people hang around these forums when the only comments that come out of their mouth is how terrible Bioware games are.

Most Bioware games are great;  just less so in recent years.

Only Dragon Age 2 is a true piece of garbage, a quick cash grab disguised as the sequel to a masterpiece.

[Cultist]

deuce985 wrote...
And quite frankly, I don't understand why some people hang around these forums when the only comments that come out of their mouth is how terrible Bioware games are. Why do you stick around on a Bioware forum then? Like bashing their game without any constructive criticism is going to make your voice heard.

Because we do not want to see Dragon Age 3 as terrible as recent BioWare games. This IS forums, they exist so people can express their opinions on various matters. Or maybe you really think that praising a game with miriad flaws will do it any good? We want to see it successful. We want to see BioWare decline reversed. Alas, it can't be done with praises.
And, in case you didn't notice, most of the topics in this forum section are made of constructive criticism. People criticized DA: Origins as well, but DA2 got major bashing for obvious reasons.

[weedyfun]

it's spelled does, not dose. completely different meanings.

[Dwarva]

weedyfun wrote...

it's spelled does, not dose. completely different meanings.

Pretty sure it might have been a typo? <_<

[weedyfun]

Staarbux wrote...

weedyfun wrote...

it's spelled does, not dose. completely different meanings.

Pretty sure it might have been a typo? <_<

don't mind me i'm just trollin'

[Maclimes]

weedyfun wrote...

don't mind me i'm just trollin'

This has been driving me nuts for weeks, too.

[deuce985]

Cultist wrote...

deuce985 wrote...
And quite frankly, I don't understand why some people hang around these forums when the only comments that come out of their mouth is how terrible Bioware games are. Why do you stick around on a Bioware forum then? Like bashing their game without any constructive criticism is going to make your voice heard.

Because we do not want to see Dragon Age 3 as terrible as recent BioWare games. This IS forums, they exist so people can express their opinions on various matters. Or maybe you really think that praising a game with miriad flaws will do it any good? We want to see it successful. We want to see BioWare decline reversed. Alas, it can't be done with praises.
And, in case you didn't notice, most of the topics in this forum section are made of constructive criticism. People criticized DA: Origins as well, but DA2 got major bashing for obvious reasons.

I'm not talking about people who give opinions and actually articulate them.

I'm talking about people who come in a thread and go, "Bioware makes the worst games ever LOLOLOL". What is the point? Do they think anyone at Bioware is going to take a post like that serious? Because I know I wouldn't. Especially when they come off as a borderline troll. Some people don't know how to express their opinions properly on a "forum" to get their point across. They need to keep it civil. The only thing that is going to do is drown the voices out of people with valid concerns because Bioware is going to post less. In case nobody noticed, they rarely post in ME3 forums now because of the cesspool over there. Why read forums where the overwhelming majority do things above like I mentioned? Then whine when a temporary ban happens? And you're right, that's what a forum is for but they have a right way to do it too...

They have a couple really good posters in here, who bring up valid criticisms. But some posters make me facepalm on BSN(not necessarily this board because it's so small).

Modifié par deuce985, 30 juillet 2012 - 06:05 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Skyrim allows you to completely role play without the writers getting in your way. That said, it still doesn't have any characters in the world to bounce off of. It's a little more difficult to define your character in that game.

In DA, the character is more pre-defined. The game doesn't allow you to build your character from scratch like Skyrim does. You HAVE to choose an origin story of some kind. Also, leveling in DA doesn't have the same impact as it does in Skyrim. Leveling is what really defines your character in Skyrim. In DA, it's more about the choices you make on each quest.

I'm glad they're both different. But I would like to have more freedom to choose my own path in DA. It's one of those things I love about Elder Scrolls. I wouldn't mind seeing more of that in DA.

Example:

If I choose to be a vampire in Skyrim, the world reacts to what I am, especially if I don't feed for a few days. It can get violent.

In DA, it would be cool if I decided to become a Templar the mages would be far less trustful of me and maybe wouldn't help on a quest or something. Currently, there is no reaction to being a Templar or a Blood Mage... or any specialization, really. That needs to change.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 30 juillet 2012 - 08:01 .

[wsandista]

Persephone wrote...

Except, that is not how it goes at all.

Well I did exagerrate a bit but you can still have sex with a certain mage if you constantly bash mages and side with Templars.

Completely defined? You've never played a game with a completely defined character if you think Hawke is one.

I think Hawke is a semi-fixed character who shows certain emotions that conflict with my character design, in fact I have a problem with Hawke not being defined enough for the cinematic game DA2 is.

Personal headcanon is all nice & dandy and I've been a TES fan for years. (Oblivion was a downer though) Games like that SHOULD exist and Bethseda does them well.

Bioware can also do them well. Neverwinter Nights(and both expansions) left the PC completely undefined and the player has the ability to create almost any type of PC they can imagine.

To me, the Dragonborn is a non-entity and Hawke is TOO defined. I'd rather have heart icons than stupid "marriage systems" ala Skyrim though.

I thought of the Dragonborn as MY PC, while Hawke was Biowares character that I got to steer a bit.

As for romance/marriage, both of them had pretty ****ty systems tbh. A better system(IMO) would be one where the PC has to spend x amount of time or complete x amount of quests with the LI, who will totally reject the PC for certain actions they would not approve of.

[cheokes]

I think this is my 2nd post after being registered here for a number of years and being a huge bioware fan.

It is alarming to find people defending the debacle and utter piece of crap that was DA2. It is one of the worst ever RPG's, quite possibly the worst i have ever played. It was an insult to fans and the bioware name. This forum must have a legion of extreme, blind 'fanbois' for there to even be a couple of people defending DA2 and asking for more of the same.

After buying the whole BG, NWN, DA and ME series on day one/pre order to support one of the developers i love i will never do so again until Bioware, in my eyes, regains its credibility.

Not only was DA2 an extremely poor RPG it was an insult as it was rushed to milk fans who rightfully expected at least a decent game. Straw that broke the camels back for me were the copy/pasted dungeons, no effort even went into hiding it. So many great systems were oversimplified and the game just felt wrong on most, if not all accounts, it hurts my head to think back to this game and what it offered...

People will prefer some games over others, i for example prefered the heavier emphasis on rpg elemennts of the first ME game to the streamlined route taken for 2 & 3. I like others did not really like the ME3 ending but it was what Bioware wanted to go with. However, DA2 is where i draw the line and where in my eyes one of the greats lost its way, based on their feedback i just can't see them recovering.

I fear DA3 will simply add a bit of polish to what was DA2, but regardless how many times you polish a turd it doesn't change the fact that its still a turd.

[Xilizhra]

It is alarming to find people defending the debacle and utter piece of crap that was DA2. It is one of the worst ever RPG's, quite possibly the worst i have ever played. It was an insult to fans and the bioware name. This forum must have a legion of extreme, blind 'fanbois' for there to even be a couple of people defending DA2 and asking for more of the same.

I would apologize for having opinions, but I'd be lying. And that would be wrong.

Personally, I consider DA2 to be more fun than Origins, and if it had gotten the proper development time, it would have been better in all regards; as it stands now, Origins is better in some spots and the objective quality may be higher, but I still enjoy DA2 more.

[CelestJP]

this topic reminds me of Kotor 1 vs Kotor 2 the last being unfinished but still a decent but it could have been a great game as you can see when you use the restoration project mod sometimes companies will compromise creative integrity for the sake of their stock holder's quick buck but after the total garbage writing that was ME 3 and the false claims that our choices would matter I have little faith in Bioware delivering a great game it seems the company went down the drain after they was bought by EA Swtor was changed to suit the bad writing of drew say what you will but his novels make me face palm

there most be a cloning center for story writers and creative presidents where they all turn into clones of Chris Metzen with their own Green Jesus and lol lore teams

it's easy to dismiss criticism of a game series you love but being in denial won't do anyone any favours there is a cliff between the costumer is always right and ..... those people are clueless I'll write how i feel ..... ill start by murdering the main character in a 3 bad endings .... cough fail effect 3 cough it's true that majority does not always know what they want but totally blind to what people desire is a recipe for disaster Obsidian Entertainment seems to be what Bioware was before they got corrupted by EA's horrible decision making process say what you will about Neverwinter Nights 2 but once they worked out the chinks the game was Awesome

[Realmzmaster]

cheokes wrote...

I think this is my 2nd post after being registered here for a number of years and being a huge bioware fan.

It is alarming to find people defending the debacle and utter piece of crap that was DA2. It is one of the worst ever RPG's, quite possibly the worst i have ever played. It was an insult to fans and the bioware name. This forum must have a legion of extreme, blind 'fanbois' for there to even be a couple of people defending DA2 and asking for more of the same.

After buying the whole BG, NWN, DA and ME series on day one/pre order to support one of the developers i love i will never do so again until Bioware, in my eyes, regains its credibility.

Not only was DA2 an extremely poor RPG it was an insult as it was rushed to milk fans who rightfully expected at least a decent game. Straw that broke the camels back for me were the copy/pasted dungeons, no effort even went into hiding it. So many great systems were oversimplified and the game just felt wrong on most, if not all accounts, it hurts my head to think back to this game and what it offered...

People will prefer some games over others, i for example prefered the heavier emphasis on rpg elemennts of the first ME game to the streamlined route taken for 2 & 3. I like others did not really like the ME3 ending but it was what Bioware wanted to go with. However, DA2 is where i draw the line and where in my eyes one of the greats lost its way, based on their feedback i just can't see them recovering.

I fear DA3 will simply add a bit of polish to what was DA2, but regardless how many times you polish a turd it doesn't change the fact that its still a turd.

You have a right to your opinion as does everyone on this forum does. I like DA2. I have fun playing it. I apologize to no one for that stance. If that makes me a fanboy so be it. I must also be a fanboy of the numerous crpgs and p n p rpgs I have played over the past three decades.

[Morty Smith]

Bioware has a great knack when it comes to interesting concepts and writing, but I think in the game-developer department they were never top of the class. Not combat, not gameplay or even cinematics. In my eyes one of the top-selling points of their games was the involvement of the player´s character, especially through npc encounters and dialogue.

But it get´s to be less and less about the player´s character. Now it´s your shepard or your hawk. Gone is the option to imagine your characters backstory, given was the joy or ordeal of unpuzzeling the background of bioware´s protagonist.

In my eyes, bioware does "get it", the question remains "do they care?"

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Kroitz wrote...

Bioware has a great knack when it comes to interesting concepts and writing, but I think in the game-developer department they were never top of the class. Not combat, not gameplay or even cinematics. In my eyes one of the top-selling points of their games was the involvement of the player´s character, especially through npc encounters and dialogue.

But it get´s to be less and less about the player´s character. Now it´s your shepard or your hawk. Gone is the option to imagine your characters backstory, given was the joy or ordeal of unpuzzeling the background of bioware´s protagonist.

In my eyes, bioware does "get it", the question remains "do they care?"

Well, clearly their priorities have changed. But that's with almost every dev studio. It happens eventually. The thing that has to remain the same is the quality bar. That has definately been taken down a few notches, and that's what we notice the most.

But as far as BioWare wanting to experiment with new ideas, I don't see the problem. As long as the quality bar is very high, I think the changes that we may or may not like will sort themselves out in time. As gamers, we have to adapt to change. Too many people want the same thing over and over again. Just look at Call of Duty. It sells because the quality bar is high, yes, but more importantly, it sells because it's familiar. People know they will love it because it's the same game as last year.

But with devs who actually take a risk and want to be creative, I think that's something we should embrace. DA2's quality bar was very low compared to Origins. But it was different than the usual BioWare formula. They wanted to try something different. They failed for the most part, but it doesn't mean the shouldn't try again.

[wsandista]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

But as far as BioWare wanting to experiment with new ideas, I don't see the problem. As long as the quality bar is very high, I think the changes that we may or may not like will sort themselves out in time. As gamers, we have to adapt to change. Too many people want the same thing over and over again. Just look at Call of Duty. It sells because the quality bar is high, yes, but more importantly, it sells because it's familiar. People know they will love it because it's the same game as last year.

But with devs who actually take a risk and want to be creative, I think that's something we should embrace. DA2's quality bar was very low compared to Origins. But it was different than the usual BioWare formula. They wanted to try something different. They failed for the most part, but it doesn't mean the shouldn't try again.

While trying new things is great(DAO wouldn't have been made if Bioware hgadn't tried something new), but sticking to a new thing that many find to be inferior to the old is not great at all. Especially if the quality is clearly not up to the same level as before the new things were tried.

Take DA2 for instance, while many find the changes made in DA2 to be bad, it seems like Bioware is going to stick with the majority of those changes. In fact, it seems to me that Bioware is doing the opposite of "trying something new" lately, because every game they have made since DAO has been a cinematic game featuring a semi-fixed PC and the dialogue wheel.

[Morty Smith]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Well, clearly their priorities have changed. But that's with almost every dev studio. It happens eventually. The thing that has to remain the same is the quality bar. That has definately been taken down a few notches, and that's what we notice the most.

But as far as BioWare wanting to experiment with new ideas, I don't see the problem. As long as the quality bar is very high, I think the changes that we may or may not like will sort themselves out in time. As gamers, we have to adapt to change. Too many people want the same thing over and over again. Just look at Call of Duty. It sells because the quality bar is high, yes, but more importantly, it sells because it's familiar. People know they will love it because it's the same game as last year.

But with devs who actually take a risk and want to be creative, I think that's something we should embrace. DA2's quality bar was very low compared to Origins. But it was different than the usual BioWare formula. They wanted to try something different. They failed for the most part, but it doesn't mean the shouldn't try again.

"trying new things", that is one of the arguments that bugs me the most. Many say that the storytelling was something new in RPGs, but that is not true. The dialoge wheel was nothing new, combateffects based on enemy status was nothing new. It were mostly just concepts that alread existed in other Bioware franchises or were borrowed from other games. The only thing I personally found to be "new" was the changed art-style. If they really did something different I for one wouldn´t be so confused by this argument, but saying people can´t handle change when the product is sup-par and patched together from old concepts, that feels like a punch to smart-center. People are not dumb, even if they try hard at representing themself as such.

[Shevy]

I hope they "get it". Their last games lowered the quality level BioWare is (hopefully not was) known for.
F2p model now on TOR, ME 3 ending rant and the rushed, low quality product DA II is. They have to recover because their reputation got damaged by their last games.

That said I'm glad they take their time to work on DA III and only provide information when its good enough to show and to discuss what is shown.

If another DA II is going to happen, I don't know If I'll stick with BioWare.

Modifié par Shevy_001, 01 août 2012 - 01:10 .

[LobselVith8]

Rojahar wrote...

Persephone makes some good points. There seems to be a double standard. People criticize DA2 for things like romance being too rushed... but wearing a necklace and someone randomly marrying you (but never having more than like 1 line of dialog ever) is a system with depth? People insert fanfiction headcanon into Skyrim "Oh, well I IMAGINED there was more dialog and events that happened off-screen." but that can be applied to DA2 as well.

People criticize the marriage system in Skyrim, and some feel it will improve because BSG has listened to fans and improved issues and gameplay with past games. Some people don't feel the same is true about Bioware. The romance in Dragon Age II is criticized for jumping from kissing to sex to moving in in a matter of minuets - it seems rushed; the poorly implemented marriage system in Skyrim doesn't change that.

I don't like the direction Dragon Age is heading towards, since Dragon Age III seems to be another Dragon Age II with the same graphics, the Mass Effect wheel, the paraphrasing, the auto-lines, the mandatory armor, the fixed protagonist, ect. Will we even have any genuine choices in Dragon Age III, or will we be railroaded again because the developers can't accommodate many choices into a sequel?

As for the protagonist in Skyrim, he isn't partly predefined, there isn't auto-dialogue, he can actually stop a murder attempt instead of standing idly by, and he doesn't start off as a default white protagonist like Hawke (which means Varric is telling stories about a white Hawke, even if he is black). The 'head canon' comes from coming up with a backstory to explain who the character is, which is the same thing the developers of New Vegas expected for the Courier. With Hawke, I get a defined protagonist who comes across as inept, stupid, and passive.