300 réponses à ce sujet

[Immer Rastrelly]

BioWare started moving downhill since Mass Effect 2. That was the first game to show signs of general lazyness. Whatever you say, ME2 was much more primitive then ME1 and/or DA:O. Basically, it was an attempt to sell bad storytelling and fanservice as "character-oriented@ story. Problem is not about plotholes - BW writers are experienced enough to avoid them - it's general lack of attention to details. It was forgivable for the first attempt in ME - but... Just start asking questions about this game, questions beginning from "why", and you'll see. DA2 was made on a knee, rushed out but presented as AAA class game. It was extraordinarily empty. I liked it at first, but this game is one epic fail on leveldesign part. It was one of the cheapest games I've ever seen. And, finally, ME3. Well, I didn't even finish it, so angry I was. Unexcusable face import issue (unresolved), dumbest plot (no, seriously, it's literally consists of stupidity - even WITHIN ITS OWN SETTING!!!), and ending... Oh that ending. After this funny little slope ride, and after seeing same design issues on DA:I trailers, I am just sure that this game will be worse then ME3. I still have some hopes, but there are enough of inconsistencies to show me that:
a) There will be new retcons to visual style and setting
There will be new retcons to character appearance
c) There will be no save import, which means you'll be unable to continue your story without serious damage to suspension of disbelief
These three marks show me cheapness and lazyness behind this project. These things show that developers have no pride with their legacy, they just make whatever they please to try and sell the product. I can be wrong, the time will sow, but for now I'm almost sure - this game will crash as a burning WWII bomber.

[Shark17676]

All the mudslinging and garbage in this thread and I'm the one who gets yelled at by David for something that was actually on-topic.  <_<

[spirosz]

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

BioWare started moving downhill since Mass Effect 2. That was the first game to show signs of general lazyness. Whatever you say, ME2 was much more primitive then ME1 and/or DA:O. Basically, it was an attempt to sell bad storytelling and fanservice as "character-oriented@ story. Problem is not about plotholes - BW writers are experienced enough to avoid them - it's general lack of attention to details. It was forgivable for the first attempt in ME - but... Just start asking questions about this game, questions beginning from "why", and you'll see. DA2 was made on a knee, rushed out but presented as AAA class game. It was extraordinarily empty. I liked it at first, but this game is one epic fail on leveldesign part. It was one of the cheapest games I've ever seen. And, finally, ME3. Well, I didn't even finish it, so angry I was. Unexcusable face import issue (unresolved), dumbest plot (no, seriously, it's literally consists of stupidity - even WITHIN ITS OWN SETTING!!!), and ending... Oh that ending. After this funny little slope ride, and after seeing same design issues on DA:I trailers, I am just sure that this game will be worse then ME3. I still have some hopes, but there are enough of inconsistencies to show me that:
a) There will be new retcons to visual style and setting
There will be new retcons to character appearance
c) There will be no save import, which means you'll be unable to continue your story without serious damage to suspension of disbelief
These three marks show me cheapness and lazyness behind this project. These things show that developers have no pride with their legacy, they just make whatever they please to try and sell the product. I can be wrong, the time will sow, but for now I'm almost sure - this game will crash as a burning WWII bomber.

They've been going downhill since they're first ever title.  

[dreamgazer]

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

[Immer Rastrelly]

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

BG2 was obviously better then BG1. KOTOR was pretty much the same as BG2 gameplay-wise (same roleplaying system, same combat mechanics). JE was a nice little experiment. ME1 was a game in another genre, not RPG but third person shooter with RPG elements and nonlinear scenario. DA:O was a rather fine return to BG roots. And then - a slope. If you do not agree, just do not agree. I'm here not to argue someones fanatism or blindness.

Modifié par Immer Rastrelly, 17 décembre 2013 - 06:15 .

[AresKeith]

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

BG2 was obviously better then BG1. KOTOR was pretty much the same as BG2 gameplay-wise (same roleplaying system, same combat mechanics). JE was a nice little experiment. ME1 was a game in another genre, not RPG but third person shooter with RPG elements and nonlinear scenario. DA:O was a rather fine return to BG roots. And then - a slope. If you do not agree, just do not agree. I'm here not to argue someones fanatism or blindness.

What?

[Fast Jimmy]

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

Well... in ME3, there was this...




It's all in how you look at things. If you determine complexity by player agency and character control, one could make the argument that ME1, with only one race and less dialogue options, is primitive. But if you look at graphics, obviously BG2 is more primitve. 

[dreamgazer]

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

BG2 was obviously better then BG1. KOTOR was pretty much the same as BG2 gameplay-wise (same roleplaying system, same combat mechanics). JE was a nice little experiment. ME1 was a game in another genre, not RPG but third person shooter with RPG elements and nonlinear scenario. DA:O was a rather fine return to BG roots. And then - a slope. If you do not agree, just do not agree. I'm here not to argue someones fanatism or blindness.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess?

[spirosz]

dreamgazer wrote...

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

BG2 was obviously better then BG1. KOTOR was pretty much the same as BG2 gameplay-wise (same roleplaying system, same combat mechanics). JE was a nice little experiment. ME1 was a game in another genre, not RPG but third person shooter with RPG elements and nonlinear scenario. DA:O was a rather fine return to BG roots. And then - a slope. If you do not agree, just do not agree. I'm here not to argue someones fanatism or blindness.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess?

[Immer Rastrelly]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

Well... in ME3, there was this...




It's all in how you look at things. If you determine complexity by player agency and character control, one could make the argument that ME1, with only one race and less dialogue options, is primitive. But if you look at graphics, obviously BG2 is more primitve. 

I prefer to measure games not by their primitivity at all. Pacman is primitive, but it's one of the most genius games ever made, right? RPG is a very special genre. It is the genre, most based on players suspension of disbelief. The setting, the universe, characters, they all must fit perfect to both previous iterations of the series, and to the whole setting in order to achieve player's belief. Let's see what cpmponents IMO form this belief:
- Setting continuity, logical flawlessness, consistency
- Character beliewability both in human terms and in terms of the setting
- Story coherency, adequateness to the setting
- Gameplay coherency to the setting, story and characters
- Atmosphere
What games manage to win or fail for me on this subject? Say, Morrowind wins, Oblivion fails. ME1 wins, ME3 fails (with ME2 closer to ME1 on the gradient), M&M6-7 win, M&M8-9 fail, Gothic 1-2 win, Gothic 3-4 fail. I think pattern is pretty much the same in each case. here is no problem with simple RPG, main things are roleplaying system, story, setting and characters. Should anything of this fail - it's boom!- headshot for me. But what I see within BW community is inability of some people to actually see the real big flaws both on storytelling, mechanical and setting dept. It pretty much kills me. I think sometimes, that people intentionally don't want to think and analyze stories and events presented to them from common sence point of view.

[Senya]

I do not think that Bioware is going to fail with Dragon Age Inquisition. As has been pointed out, Dragon Age II was rushed and Mass Effect 3 was epic in my opinion... until the last ten minutes of course.

I feel that Bioware has learned from their mistakes.

[Argentoid]

spirosz wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

And Mass Effect 1 was more "primitive" than BG2 and KOTOR.

Jesus.

BG2 was obviously better then BG1. KOTOR was pretty much the same as BG2 gameplay-wise (same roleplaying system, same combat mechanics). JE was a nice little experiment. ME1 was a game in another genre, not RPG but third person shooter with RPG elements and nonlinear scenario. DA:O was a rather fine return to BG roots. And then - a slope. If you do not agree, just do not agree. I'm here not to argue someones fanatism or blindness.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess?

[GreyLycanTrope]

It's not a really as steady line graph of decline, they try different things in different games while usually attempting to maintain their root niche appeal. Sometimes it just doesn't work well for all interested parties. That said I do feel they've been in a bit of slump with Swtor, DA2 and ME3 being met as either lackluster or with outright disdain more so than what could be explained with the usual naysayers.

[The Baconer]

Skorm777 wrote...
If you compare what they created in 1.5 years to Skyrim,
which had a team of 100 working on it for 3 years, DA2 is a commendation to
Biowares potential.

It's really not.

Thankfully, DA:I is looking fantastic so far.

[ghost_ronin]

Things were better two months ago? This place has been a cesspool for years. You could cut through the miasma of resentment and bitterness with a knife. Hopefully, DA:I will heal some of the wounds festering here.
Thank the gods i don't come here often.

Modifié par ghost_ronin, 17 décembre 2013 - 07:07 .

[Dominus]

I was pretty impressed with the quality of posts and
maturity level on this forum when I began visiting frequently only a month ago.
Lately however it seems this forum is drowned in anxiety and negativity ranging
from questions concerning Biowares capabilities and intentions, to bashing
early release DLC.

As it has been, is, and likely always will be with the internet, you have to take the good with the bad. The best we can do as individuals is to lead by example to make the place a less hazardous and negative environment. Let your presence become a positive influence to those around you.

Personally I think this anti-gamer corporate attitude that
everyone believes Bioware has adopted, is nothing more than misunderstanding.

I neglect which of the two doctors mentioned it, but it was said that EA essentially gave them enough room to either succeed or tie their own noose. I generally stray away from the topics of corporate policies and all that. I go where the good games are, and BioWare hasn't entered "terribad" status yet.

However nobody seems to realise that they spent 1.5 years on the title, half of the time spent on the average AAA RPG; and they didn't have a full development team. If you compare what they created in 1.5 years to Skyrim, which had a team of 100 working on it for 3 years, DA2 is a commendation to Biowares potential.

While I don't think the final product was worth $60, I will agree that they did an exorbitant amount in a short development cycle.

Therefore we should reserve judgement for after playing the game, or at
least refrain from making connections to their last title given the difference
in effort this time.

Well, I'd still prefer to give feedback/impressions on whatever gameplay videos/previews they release, but I know what you mean.

Modifié par DominusVita, 17 décembre 2013 - 07:24 .

[Sanunes]

ghost_ronin wrote...

Things were better two months ago? This place has been a cesspool for years. You could cut through the miasma of resentment and bitterness with a knife. Hopefully, DA:I will heal some of the wounds festering here.
Thank the gods i don't come here often.

Knife? I use a spork

[LinksOcarina]

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

I prefer to measure games not by their primitivity at all. Pacman is primitive, but it's one of the most genius games ever made, right? RPG is a very special genre. It is the genre, most based on players suspension of disbelief. The setting, the universe, characters, they all must fit perfect to both previous iterations of the series, and to the whole setting in order to achieve player's belief. Let's see what cpmponents IMO form this belief:
- Setting continuity, logical flawlessness, consistency
- Character beliewability both in human terms and in terms of the setting
- Story coherency, adequateness to the setting
- Gameplay coherency to the setting, story and characters
- Atmosphere
What games manage to win or fail for me on this subject? Say, Morrowind wins, Oblivion fails. ME1 wins, ME3 fails (with ME2 closer to ME1 on the gradient), M&M6-7 win, M&M8-9 fail, Gothic 1-2 win, Gothic 3-4 fail. I think pattern is pretty much the same in each case. here is no problem with simple RPG, main things are roleplaying system, story, setting and characters. Should anything of this fail - it's boom!- headshot for me. But what I see within BW community is inability of some people to actually see the real big flaws both on storytelling, mechanical and setting dept. It pretty much kills me. I think sometimes, that people intentionally don't want to think and analyze stories and events presented to them from common sence point of view.

Or perhaps your own interpretation of events is merely the subjectivity of your own personal bias. It frankly doesn't matter how you analyze a story, the question of analysis gives the story merit.

Your laundry list for example, does not adequately mesh with games like Mass Effect 1 fully. Shepard for one, is a hybrid blank character, one with a clean slate but has a background persona you control. This makes it impossible to define shepards character until the end of the trilogy.  

Another example, setting continuity. How does a setting show continutity within its own world exactly? What sets Mass Effect apart from Mass Effect 2 or 3 in this regard, you don't really explain that. Also, how is it logically flawless? Is it due to codexes? Narrative structure on what were told, vs what we can infer from the world itself? That needs to be defined.

As for the rest, subjective to a persons tastes. That we can't take away from you, but you can't presume anything either to be objectively correct or incorrect. And if these aspects do you fail you...well, I am surprised you enjoyed Mass Effect to begin with from the start. Dragon Age as well, for that matter, since it follows the quintessential blueprint that BioWare has always employed since the get go. 

[LinksOcarina]

The Baconer wrote...

Skorm777 wrote...
If you compare what they created in 1.5 years to Skyrim,
which had a team of 100 working on it for 3 years, DA2 is a commendation to
Biowares potential.

It's really not.

Thankfully, DA:I is looking fantastic so far.

Really? Considering it has perhaps the best story they ever told in the history of the company, I say that the potential is there.

As a game it doesn't slouch, although it suffers from design mostly, which is the achilles heel in the end. 

[dreamgazer]

I mean, I think Dragon Age 2 gets plenty of unjust hate in the writing department, but the "best story they ever told"?

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Are you talking about Skyrim?

[CronoDragoon]

Immer Rastrelly wrote...

BioWare started moving downhill since ________. That was the first game to show signs of general lazyness. Whatever you say, _______ was much more primitive then ______ and/or _______. Basically, it was an attempt to sell bad storytelling and fanservice as "character-oriented@ story.

It's time for another edition of generic Biofan bellyaching! Who else wants to play?