103 réponses à ce sujet

[rubels1986]

Altharas wrote...

kingthrall wrote...

wow is a piece of **** any anyone who says otherwise should be flogged and buried with rocks

I really don't get the WoW hate. The aim of games is to be fun, WoW has (Lost track of how many since i haven't played for sometime so i'm going to make a guess here) 8+ million subscribers.

So not only were people willing to spend upto £60 (20 per game/expansion) but they're also willing to pay an additional £9 every month. I'm sure people do that because the game is garbage and in no way shape or form fun.

WoW was a very good MMORPG before the expansions.
Blizzard got extremly greedy, sacrificing the little skill it takes to play WoW
so that the majority of players ( those that have no clue )
could get the same gear and so forth.
You can now change race, name  making it a no skill game.
They severly increased the grinding but removing all
skill requirments to "make it a game for everyone".
It´s the game that i ever played that´s the mot addictive one
and i can imagine a lot of people feel guilt for quitting / leaving guild etc.
It just becomes more of a job than a game that´s doing everything
to prevent people from leaving because of greed.

Modifié par rubels1986, 20 décembre 2009 - 04:07 .

[DragonRageGT]

Yet another thread of game comparison and endless expression of universal truths... only they are not absolute... they are relative to who owns that opinion.

DA is just a very fine and excellent, has some minor bugs like empty shimmering corpses with no lot, sometimes, for instance. Char development is great and I like a lot of different styles too. Oblivion is ok, I like the game, with over 1000 hours in it with 2 chars only, both level 54... never even started main quest with one, stopped playing the other after closing the 60 Oblivion Gates... that was a test of patience... and with a combat system that is awful in these days... specially if you have a well built melee/ranged char, gorgeous Nord Black Knight as I named it, thanks to mods but with her amazing and legit speed... the char is actually incontrolable... but she runs faster than the black horse and than that NPC at least...

Being able to join and reach the top in all factions of the game is a major flaw in the game, one that the Gothics and now Risen do not have.

The only real thing wrong with Dragon Age is the lack of a DEMO, like NWN had and got me to buy the retail version. It would at least prevent trolls from bashing the game because is not wow, not oblivion, not gothic, not bg, not anything really, other than Dragon Age and to say rubbish about it as if it were made without an enormous ammount of dedication, concern for delivering a great game and actually delivered it is just that, trolling... IMHO.

Am I wrong? Perhaps, that is just my opinion but the day any of these games some praise so much, delivers something like that which I have tubed and gives people some hard time to stop laughing... that alone is worthy the whole game and it has so much more... want to have a good time and see DA with different eyes? Watch the Epilogue and the Prison Break (which starts in the Epilogue) episodes in my banter series... you can downrate them and post rubbish there at will too... if you don't like them.

Other than that, the game still need more trolls... the forums don't!

Troll Killer!

Modifié par RageGT, 20 décembre 2009 - 04:11 .

[whtnyte-raernst]

I agree with arntson. I have never played an archer/ranged missile character in an RPG. I just don't think they are that much fun. That doesn't mean all bowmen/women skills are worthless, they just don't fit the way I like to play.



I was surprised today by Torchlight though! They have PISTOLS...hmmmm. Before I knew it I was running around firing dual pistols and having a blast. It wasn't ranged combat that I didn't like, it was the choice of weapons!

[rubels1986]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

rubels1986 wrote...

I don´t understand what you mean and i don´t play wow but the combat
system in DA is very, very similiar to that WoW uses.
I agree that WoW is garbage.
Replay value almost excusively has to do with the combat
oriantated part of the game after a certain point in my experience.
To me the story isn´t really that good either but DA gets away with most of its
flaws because even though there´s very little innovative thinking it still works out.

So, watched videos of people playing wow or seen a friend/relative playing it?

Otherwise, how could you say it is similar a system to what WoW uses?

Firstly, considering you have stated you've played BG and not WoW makes me wonder how you can state such a thing?  From anyone one of the standard "There was no RPGs before WoW" type attitudes of people, I could understand it, but not someone whom has played other RPGs before it.

By WoW I also take it you mean the standard 'holy trinity' of tank, dps and healer. Sorry but again this is another false nod to WoW, that system was in place well before WoW.

You can easily play DAO without using the trinity system. This is proven by the fact some people have stated how they have soloed the game.

If you are referring to the use of talents and spells, erm, most RPGs before WoW had them as you would know if you have played BG and previous RPGs.

So it isn't just similar to a system WoW uses but countless other games including to some extent BG.

DAO has a lot of replay value if you want to fully try the different variables you can try and different possible endings.

Did you read what i wrote?
"I don´t play wow" is not the same as "never played wow"
Yes i have played WoW and in my experience DA system is very much alike.
I think almost all the best games where made way before WoW.
I never wrote that no game before WoW had talents or whatnot.
In my opinion DA has taken and missplaced some of ( pretty much copied or almost
identical wow talents) into their system that doesn´t really fit in because it plays differently.
Yes i think as a very long time BG2 player that DA is very similar to BG2 in
story/romance/characters/ general theme but i was referring to the combat system and
how it´s built up and this is my opinion.

Modifié par rubels1986, 20 décembre 2009 - 04:32 .

[rubels1986]

whtnyte-raernst wrote...

I agree with arntson. I have never played an archer/ranged missile character in an RPG. I just don't think they are that much fun. That doesn't mean all bowmen/women skills are worthless, they just don't fit the way I like to play.

I was surprised today by Torchlight though! They have PISTOLS...hmmmm. Before I knew it I was running around firing dual pistols and having a blast. It wasn't ranged combat that I didn't like, it was the choice of weapons!

Archery isn´t useless just far from optimal.
If you want to have the most effective group
thoughout the game assuming a 4 party an archer wont be in there.
It has nothing to do with playstyle it just isn´t as effective.
You could roleplay having every single member putting all points
in magic combined with only using archery.
You´re free to play how you want and it wont be useless just far from optimal.

Modifié par rubels1986, 20 décembre 2009 - 04:33 .

[DragonRageGT]

is this a new style of formatting?

Archers are great for those who like them... wish there was Arcane Archer again!!!

[Age86]

For the amount of hype this game and along with the amazing reviews its recieved i'm a little dissapointed so far. Feels a lot like 'the Watcher' but.. with something missing...



Now I'm only a short way through the game but so far there are a couple of things that sh*t me.



1. Player character doesnt talk! - WTF? for a cinematic epic such as this it makes the coversations bland as bread. Completely removes the player from the experience I do not agree with this and just seems lazy not to record dialouge for the main character. Possibly what could have made the game an absolute classic.



2. Blood splatter on Characters - Kinda amusing but silly use of a texture(?). Whenever you start kicking some butt, stylistic blood is automatically stained onto your characters... but only them... not the walls or floor etc. And to make it even more silly, it stays on after the battle so when you ask the nearest person which way Redcliffe is, you do it with blood dripping from your face....

[arntson]

rubels1986 wrote...

whtnyte-raernst wrote...

I agree with arntson. I have never played an archer/ranged missile character in an RPG. I just don't think they are that much fun. That doesn't mean all bowmen/women skills are worthless, they just don't fit the way I like to play.

I was surprised today by Torchlight though! They have PISTOLS...hmmmm. Before I knew it I was running around firing dual pistols and having a blast. It wasn't ranged combat that I didn't like, it was the choice of weapons!

Archery isn´t useless just far from optimal.
If you want to have the most effective group
thoughout the game assuming a 4 party an archer wont be in there.
It has nothing to do with playstyle it just isn´t as effective.
You could roleplay having every single member putting all points
in magic combined with only using archery.
You´re free to play how you want but and it wont be useless just far from optimal.

what is it with you people and optimal? if your going for optimal all you need three mages with cone of cold flame blast and shock wave but if you want fun than mesh whoever or whatever you like together and archers are still good because unlike mages when something gets close they can fight toe to toe

[whtnyte-raernst]

See, here we go. I was very careful to NOT say that the archery skills are useless. I simply stated that I've never cared for them because it doesn't fit my "Smash your way through" style of play. That's why there is a variety of skills to choose from. Any game that takes a "one size fits all" mentality with their end user is doomed to fail. If I want to take L's bows away from her and give her a dagger, I'm free to do that!



Oh, and I got on the Blizzard beta server, my D:II is now patched with the newest v1.13 content. We had over 25 inches of snow yesterday...what will I do with myself now that all the cars are plowed in???

[rubels1986]

arntson wrote...

rubels1986 wrote...

whtnyte-raernst wrote...

I agree with arntson. I have never played an archer/ranged missile character in an RPG. I just don't think they are that much fun. That doesn't mean all bowmen/women skills are worthless, they just don't fit the way I like to play.

I was surprised today by Torchlight though! They have PISTOLS...hmmmm. Before I knew it I was running around firing dual pistols and having a blast. It wasn't ranged combat that I didn't like, it was the choice of weapons!

Archery isn´t useless just far from optimal.
If you want to have the most effective group
thoughout the game assuming a 4 party an archer wont be in there.
It has nothing to do with playstyle it just isn´t as effective.
You could roleplay having every single member putting all points
in magic combined with only using archery.
You´re free to play how you want but and it wont be useless just far from optimal.

what is it with you people and optimal? if your going for optimal all you need three mages with cone of cold flame blast and shock wave but if you want fun than mesh whoever or whatever you like together and archers are still good because unlike mages when something gets close they can fight toe to toe

To me replayability has to do with the combat part of the game after a certain point.
That´s why  action rpgs / mmorpg like Diablo 2 / WoW were / are so popular.
While a game like Planescape did not sell very well.
Character creation, combat system, skill and talents are very important to a big
portion of the people DA is aiming for with advertising etc.
I always enjoyed the archer character but in this game it just was not
fun because of their very lacking talents.
To say that archers is good because they can fight in melee is more of a joke to me than an real argument.

[rubels1986]

whtnyte-raernst wrote...

See, here we go. I was very careful to NOT say that the archery skills are useless. I simply stated that I've never cared for them because it doesn't fit my "Smash your way through" style of play. That's why there is a variety of skills to choose from. Any game that takes a "one size fits all" mentality with their end user is doomed to fail. If I want to take L's bows away from her and give her a dagger, I'm free to do that!

Oh, and I got on the Blizzard beta server, my D:II is now patched with the newest v1.13 content. We had over 25 inches of snow yesterday...what will I do with myself now that all the cars are plowed in???

I know you did not say they were useless but usefull.
People play games differently, still the fact is a lot of people want to play on the
hardest level, creating a party that can run through things on nightmare.
Almost the whole talent/skill system is very poorly made in my opinion.
You don´t really have that many talents to choose from in the first place either.
Why do you think the paladin is the most popular class in D2?

Modifié par rubels1986, 20 décembre 2009 - 05:09 .

[arntson]

you know what i just realised whats very wrong with this game.......................................................NOT enough hot elf and dwarf women to romance also i wont deny that archers need a bit more power (mainly cause i havent played them much)and how is it a joke its a very good advantage to be able to defend yourself with melee

[rubels1986]

arntson wrote...

you know what i just realised whats very wrong with this game.......................................................NOT enough hot elf and dwarf women to romance also i wont deny that archers need a bit more power (mainly cause i havent played them much)and how is it a joke its a very good advantage to be able to defend yourself with melee

An archer is built as a loose cannon and should not be in melee.
If an archer is getting attacked you´re playing suboptimal except in
the very beginning when he most likely will be attacked.
The thing is there is nothing to discuss really, archery talent tree is very, very
weak and ranged combat except for mages aren´t  doing it.
For people playing on Normal or lower i don´t know if it does matter but there´s
a _huge_ difference what tree you choose.
If you´re playing optimal you shoulnd´t worry about getting hit in melee as an archer,
the goal is not to engage in melee.
If you really want to be a "full archer" there´s almost no room for melee skills
and you will die quickly anyway assuming nightmare mode.

[SleeplessInSigil]

Dragon Age is ground-breaking.

but maybe you know some other recent Western medieval-fantasy CRPGs with the same level of production quality gone into to them.

Yeah, unless you can present some comparable alternatives that are actually better, all this DA hate is just thinly-veiled trolling by now. <_<

[rubels1986]

SleeplessInSigil wrote...

Dragon Age is ground-breaking.

but maybe you know some other recent Western medieval-fantasy CRPGs with the same level of production quality gone into to them.

Yeah, unless you can present some comparable alternatives that are actually better, all this DA hate is just thinly-veiled trolling by now. <_<

What about dragon Age is groundbreaking?
I don´t have to give any alternatives by giving critisism.

[SleeplessInSigil]

rubels1986 wrote...

What about dragon Age is groundbreaking?

The mere fact that it exists. <3

[Age86]

rubels1986 wrote...

Dragon Age is ground-breaking.

but maybe you know some other recent Western medieval-fantasy CRPGs with the same level of production quality gone into to them.

Try "the Witcher" Amazing game.

[SleeplessInSigil]

Age86 wrote...

rubels1986 wrote...

Dragon Age is ground-breaking.

but maybe you know some other recent Western medieval-fantasy CRPGs with the same level of production quality gone into to them.

Try "the Witcher" Amazing game.

I've been meaning to get around to playing that, heard and read a lot of good recommendations for it, but for the issue at hand, it's 2 years old though, so you can't really consider it "recent" (in gaming industry terms) for comparison with Dragon Age, because then you'd have Elder Scrolls: Oblivion too.

[whtnyte-raernst]

I don't recall any hating until Sleepless came in.

I thought we were having a very reasonable discussion on various skill aspects of Dragon Age as compared to other general RPG type games.



There are not many TACTICAL RPG's to compare to, so the discussion wound around to a few ACTION RPGs. There's no hate.

I enjoy Dragon Age, and I've played through it several times.

[Pocketgb]

The systems aren't too well polished and are a bit questionable, this is true, but a few things:
-It's another completely different ruleset
-Most people are oblivious to these "problems" anyways (as with all games)
-Game is still great regardless

And it's awesome someone mentioned Soulblighter. That game is the shiznet!

Modifié par Pocketgb, 20 décembre 2009 - 05:46 .

[yitsak]

Dragon age isn't Obliivon and it isn't Baldur's Gate, it's Dragon Age. I think what you guys want is for someone to come up with a game that combines all of the best features of these games into one game?? Am I right? Frankly, who wouldn't want that? In the meantime, I'll enjoy the phenomenal combat system and animations/critical hits of Dragon Age when I want that; and I'll enjoy the wide open world and superior graphics of Oblivion when I want that. Unfortunately, as much as I loved Baldur's Gate (only Diablo II LOD I enjoyed more, and that only for the awesome loot system/economy of Diablo), I can't play it because the graphics are so antiquated. NWN, on the other hand has lots of great user-created mods for nearly endless enjoyment, but the graphics are, in a way, worse than those of Baldur's Gate.

[yitsak]

SleeplessInSigil wrote...

Age86 wrote...

rubels1986 wrote...

Dragon Age is ground-breaking.

but maybe you know some other recent Western medieval-fantasy CRPGs with the same level of production quality gone into to them.

Try "the Witcher" Amazing game.

I've been meaning to get around to playing that, heard and read a lot of good recommendations for it, but for the issue at hand, it's 2 years old though, so you can't really consider it "recent" (in gaming industry terms) for comparison with Dragon Age, because then you'd have Elder Scrolls: Oblivion too.

Witcher is comparable storywise and graphicswise to DAO, but I felt the combat in Witcher was so repetitive and mechanical that it detracted from the good points of the game.  To the point where I stopped playing it.

[0mrn]

Simply Like the Dragon Age , Have Fun , So this Enough for me , )

[Nokturnal Lex]

SphereofSilence wrote...

Even the options provided to you for warrior and rogue class development felt limited.

Take this case as an example. If you want to play as a dual-wielding fighter, you basically go for all the dual wield talents and fighter talents. You might add a few skills here and there on archery to supplement your melee capabilities. It doesn't make sense to go for sword and shield or two-handed talents in this case so the options in store there might as well be non-existent. Then you go for specializations - single line of four talents that encourages you to take of which if you decide to go for it. Sure you can have different combinations of specializations, but ultimately for the most part customization choices felt like they were already decided for you.

Same goes for the rogue class. Mage was the only class with more options and combinations, but even then they can hardly hold a candle to the BG2 spells/mage class system. You can quickly and easily access many really powerful spells and spell combinations in DAO. With elementary level of spell use, you can already dominate the battlefield easily (this is on nightmare mode, mind you). And not just easily, but again and again, thanks to the quick mana regeneration and lyrium potions. Where is the depth? Where is the challenge? Where is the feeling of being rewarded when you pull off an amazing feat due to smart and deep planning, strategy and tactical usage of spells?

Totally agree there. Although traps were available I never had to use em. I would've liked having to defend a location from a horde of enemies (that were actually hard enemies, not like how boring the ending is or how ez the only defense part in the game was on nightmare mind you) and had time to prepare traps at choke points.

Hell I can think up off the top of my head tons of ways to make this game better, but it seems Bioware definitely hasn't evolved since BG2. BG2 was an awesome game and it seems that even though the graphics have gotten better the gameplay hasn't. The story was decent I'll give them that, but judging it on combat alone it was horrible.

In BG2 you had to slowly build your character up to access the really cool spells (like summoning demons etc) but in DA:O by lvl 3 you can have any max lvl spell you want, it felt so unrewarding. Magic got dumbed down to a point where any moron could kill anything and everything as a mage and at verrrry early levels.

Modifié par Nokturnal Lex, 20 décembre 2009 - 06:02 .

[Balek-Vriege]

Things like character development, class variation etc. are all secondary and were never the main focus of RPGs until games like Oblivion and MMORPGs. I find the criticism of character developments and "useless" skills to be incorrect. If anything, DAs skills/talents work much like and are most similar to Guildwars skills.



Are there some talent lines which are better based on what character you wish to build? Of course. Are a lot of lines useless? No, they just have different fuctions some more situational than others. Do some builds become much less optimal than others on harder difficulties? Of course, but Dragon Age like many others were designed to be played on normal mode and hard or higher is meant to give challenge. If you could go through nightmare mode easily with any build it wouldn't be a nightmare mode would it?



It's the same thing as someone saying the game is way too easy, characters are overpowered and no tactics are needed, but then we find out the person was playing on the easiest mode. Duh. Also as long as a type of play is playable and functions well it's fine. This isn't a multiplayer game where balance is actually needed between classes and sometimes I think there shouldn't be for singleplayer games. Lets face it if magic were a reality, a guy with a gun would be much less powerful than a guy who could use magical shields and fling fireballs at will.



What I think a lot of the complaints about DA seem to miss is the quality of the storyline, dialogue options and the writing which to me makes a true RPG and was a big focus for this game. It's definately been a while since I have seen dialogue options and story arcs in a game that plan for just about every eventuality, origin, class and train of thought.



How many times did people play a class (Druids ) in the NWN series or try to be evil but then found out there was no course of action to express your character? Or worse yet the RPG's writing would force you to play counter to your class/playstyle and totally break immersion? Well not only does DA give great options, but the varying choices actually change the circumstances of the storyline and NPC reaction in fairly substantial ways.



What would have made this all better was voice acting for the PC, but I think we would have a third of the dialogue options and the game would most likely not be out right now. So I personally can give up voice acting and leave it to that other awsome Bioware RPG Mass Effect where two voice actors are needed for Male/Female Shepard and only three or so "scripts" to voice.