209 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

vania z wrote...
Thanks. It seems ME3 indeed outsold da:o by a slight margin:) Both games are quite popular though. I wonder, if DA:O was one of the most popular bioware games, why don't they make something similiar to it? I have not seen da:i yet, but it already seems pretty distand from dao. Floating spellbooks is just... well, i don't know the world, but they are definetely out of place. 

Because only a very small percentage of players actually even completed the game, showing that the game sales might be more a result of a succesful marketing campaign, than the delivery of a game most people wanted. There are many possible reasons as to why the more slow-paced gamestyle of DA:O and BG aren't being made by the truckload like some of the more fast-paced gamestyles.

[Star fury]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Because only a very small percentage of players actually even completed the game, showing that the game sales might be more a result of a succesful marketing campaign, than the delivery of a game most people wanted. There are many possible reasons as to why the more slow-paced gamestyle of DA:O and BG aren't being made by the truckload like some of the more fast-paced gamestyles.

Yeah, sure. "A very small percentage of players actually even completed the game" like 50% of players who completed ME. A very small percentage indeed.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Star fury wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Because only a very small percentage of players actually even completed the game, showing that the game sales might be more a result of a succesful marketing campaign, than the delivery of a game most people wanted. There are many possible reasons as to why the more slow-paced gamestyle of DA:O and BG aren't being made by the truckload like some of the more fast-paced gamestyles.

Yeah, sure. "A very small percentage of players actually even completed the game" like 50% of players who completed ME. A very small percentage indeed.

Compared to the amount of people who doesn't see the ending of a movie they've bought, another piece of media entertainment, 50% not completing the game is staggering. You can also compare it to games like CoD or BF with an extremely high amount of people who pour hundreds of hours into the game, and haven't even touched the campaign, but that would be a dishonest comparrison, since I doubt a lot of people bought either game for the singleplayer aspects.
If a game who prizes itself on its deep story, only has 50% actually appreciating it enough to compelte it, then they should start consdiering what they can do to improve it.
If 50% of all CoD players didn't play the multiplayer of the next CoD game, do you honestly think they wouldn't try to change some aspects in the next game again, to make that part more appealing again?

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 31 janvier 2014 - 05:15 .

[KristofCoulson]

Sadly I was never able to complete ME2 or 3. I got bored.
I keep meaning to go back and finish them. I do intend to!

[Rawgrim]

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
 Unlimited ammo for ranged combat is god-moding.

I disagree with regards to regular ammunition. For special/enchanted ammo, then yes. But the DA:O system IMO is superior. There's nothing more annoying to me than running out of regular mundane ammo and having to break off the exploration to run back to town so my ranged specialist has something to fight with. Having unlimited regular ranged ammo is no more 'godmoding' than a warrior being able to endlessly swing his sword.

Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

[EmperorSahlertz]

KristofCoulson wrote...

Sadly I was never able to complete ME2 or 3. I got bored.
I keep meaning to go back and finish them. I do intend to!

Exactly.
If the game bored you, then obviously it isn't best suited to your liking. You might ahve thought it looked interesting, which would be the result of good marketing. Now if they wanted to tailor the game to your specifications they woudl need to change a few things, correct?

[Eurypterid]

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

[Wulfram]

Limited arrows would make more sense if it didn't practically take a full quiver to just kill one guy.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

It is called resource management. Most rpgs have it in one aspect or another. Regarding arrows, they usually overcome it, by either saying that you got unlimited normal arrows, or they make arrows readily available in loot and/or treasure.
I would say though, that some of the most intense moments in my Fallout experiences has been when I unexpectedly ran out of ammo.

[Rawgrim]

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

The warriors stamina goes down. Unlimited ammo is overpowered, and makes zero sense.

Actually having to shop ammo and whatever else adds alot of planning and whatsnot. That is fun. The awsomme button isn`t. 99 percent of all rpgs out there have ammo for ranged combat.

[Rawgrim]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

It is called resource management. Most rpgs have it in one aspect or another. Regarding arrows, they usually overcome it, by either saying that you got unlimited normal arrows, or they make arrows readily available in loot and/or treasure.
I would say though, that some of the most intense moments in my Fallout experiences has been when I unexpectedly ran out of ammo.

Exactly. Happened to me as well. Had to think on my feet and use a weapon I had no skill in. Added excitement, and a sense of accomplishment when I managed to win the fight anyway.

[Wulfram]

Most games make basic ammo too common/cheap for it to be meaningful resource management. Buying them is just a chore, like sharpening your sword or eating and drinking.

And, like I said, arrow consumption is too high for a realistic approach to make sense. And if we're in charge of a paramilitary organisation, we really shouldn't be lacking for an arrow or two - if we were looking at a more survival themed game, then making even mundane arrows difficult to acquire might make sense.

Special arrows are different, of course.

[jncicesp]

Wulfram wrote...

Most games make basic ammo too common/cheap for it to be meaningful resource management. Buying them is just a chore, like sharpening your sword or eating and drinking.

And, like I said, arrow consumption is too high for a realistic approach to make sense. And if we're in charge of a paramilitary organisation, we really shouldn't be lacking for an arrow or two - if we were looking at a more survival themed game, then making even mundane arrows difficult to acquire might make sense.

Special arrows are different, of course.

Yeah and you can carry a ton of armors and weapons with you in some kind of invisible infinite storage cube type thing... It would be more confusing to figure out how you ran out of arrows then where you put them or how you found them.

[CybAnt1]

See, Dungeon Siege solved that problem.

Many games feature people making a character as the "mule" or schlepper of all the excess equipment.

DS basically gave you an actual mule, that followed your party, and carried all your excess gear.

Elegant solution.

P.S. it would kick anything that came up from behind and do a bit of damage, but was otherwise useless in combat. Not that you would expect pack mules to DO anything. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 01 février 2014 - 03:25 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Rawgrim wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

The warriors stamina goes down. Unlimited ammo is overpowered, and makes zero sense.

Actually having to shop ammo and whatever else adds alot of planning and whatsnot. That is fun. The awsomme button isn`t. 99 percent of all rpgs out there have ammo for ranged combat.

99 percent? Really? That's quite a hyperbole for a not-so-common feature.

[Fortlowe]

Find the word that doesn't belong:

Magic. Dragons. Elves. Fantasy. Realism. Game. Nugs.

[Black-Xero]

Fortlowe wrote...

Find the word that doesn't belong:

Magic. Dragons. Elves. Fantasy. Realism. Game. Nugs.

Nugs. It's not even a real word.

[Realmzmaster]

What you have is a difference in the definition of fun. I like resource management planning. Unlimited arrows and the ability to carry enormous loads takes some of the fun out of the game for me.

I had many a tense moment in the Fallout series where the character could run out of ammo or a weapon break and have to fall back on either unarmed combat or a melee weapon.

The ability to repair a weapon in the field from other weapons of the same type was fun.Fallout also allowed for crafting of unique weapons.

None of which was required to finish the game, but added that additional touch.

[KaiserShep]

Wulfram wrote...

Limited arrows would make more sense if it didn't practically take a full quiver to just kill one guy.

It's not really worth putting a whole lot of thought into, especially when we're talking about the same games that allow you to swap up equipment and other gear on the fly. Characters magically switch from bows to melee weapons in DA:O, so unlimited arrows doesn't serve to break the illusion any more than that. In A Trial of Crows, the Warden can somehow haul a bodybag around but you never see it, but it sure makes a splash at the drop point. Those templars in front of the chantry are too hopped up on lyrium to notice.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 01 février 2014 - 06:20 .

[Rawgrim]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

The warriors stamina goes down. Unlimited ammo is overpowered, and makes zero sense.

Actually having to shop ammo and whatever else adds alot of planning and whatsnot. That is fun. The awsomme button isn`t. 99 percent of all rpgs out there have ammo for ranged combat.

99 percent? Really? That's quite a hyperbole for a not-so-common feature.

Maybe 95 percent then But yes. I have played way more rpgs that has this feature, than not.

[CybAnt1]

The ability to repair a weapon in the field from other weapons of the same type was fun.Fallout also allowed for crafting of unique weapons.

Dragon Age also doesn't feature any weapon or armor damage, or breaking, either. You never have to repair any of your gear. (Unlike WoW, where even ordinary combat slowly reduces the durability of gear, and death does extreme damage to it, requiring repair at a blacksmith. You have to start getting concerned when it reaches a level of severe damage, as if you still keep waiting to repair, it could be destroyed and rendered useless. However, unlike other systems, there is no reduced effectiveness, until the point of breakage - but breaking is point of no return.) 

Some people like it. I'm "meh". Maybe I shouldn't have brought it up, people who want it will start asking for it. :innocent:

It could give something for a tinkerer class to do. 

Resource management -- well, if you're asking MHO, I don't really think it's all that interesting as to mundane items, there it's just tedious. Rather, I prefer where you have to think about what kinds of things based on the vulnerabilities and capabilities of what you're facing. Fire breathing Dragon? Bring fire resistance items/gear. Troll? Bring acid/fire arrows, bombs, and items to stop regeneration. Ice Yeti? Bring fire items, it's vulnerable to fire, don't bring your ice arrows, it will resist them.

But then some call that "golf bag gaming". Who knows. I think DA could use a bit more of it. Like I keep saying, what's the point of putting all the ice/fire/spirit/lightning etc. warding runes in the game, if nothing ever uses those kinds of attacks against you? I wish they were given more of a POINT. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 01 février 2014 - 01:12 .

[Black-Xero]

Rawgrim wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


Yes it is. Same as if a warrior just got given a new weapon all the time if his weapon broke. It is the player`s own fault if he runs out of ammo. Same goes for healing potions and whatever else too.

Not the same at all. Does the archer's bow break? How is it any different thana  warrior that can swing his sword infinitely without ever suffering fatigue? Having to keep restocking on mundane ammo is not fun gameplay. There comes a point where 'realism' turns to tedium, and IMO, this is it.

The warriors stamina goes down. Unlimited ammo is overpowered, and makes zero sense.

Actually having to shop ammo and whatever else adds alot of planning and whatsnot. That is fun. The awsomme button isn`t. 99 percent of all rpgs out there have ammo for ranged combat.

99 percent? Really? That's quite a hyperbole for a not-so-common feature.

Maybe 95 percent then But yes. I have played way more rpgs that has this feature, than not.

Using an anecdote to support your hyperbole doesn't help the point you were trying to make.

[Sidney]

jncicesp wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Most games make basic ammo too common/cheap for it to be meaningful resource management. Buying them is just a chore, like sharpening your sword or eating and drinking.

And, like I said, arrow consumption is too high for a realistic approach to make sense. And if we're in charge of a paramilitary organisation, we really shouldn't be lacking for an arrow or two - if we were looking at a more survival themed game, then making even mundane arrows difficult to acquire might make sense.

Special arrows are different, of course.

Yeah and you can carry a ton of armors and weapons with you in some kind of invisible infinite storage cube type thing... It would be more confusing to figure out how you ran out of arrows then where you put them or how you found them.

Ahhh reminds me of the vast fun of arrow management in BG2 when my archers would have a ton of arrows in their pack.....but run out in the quiver and the game wouldn't move them into the "ready" slots. Anyone who played BG should be able to recall what a joke managing arrows was. They were dirt cheap, you could buy tons and tons of ammo so it wasn't about managing resources. The only thing vaguely "management" was running out of slots to carry stuff but even that never happened. DA* doesn't even bother with limited inventory slots so arrow management is even less valuable.

[Star fury]

Fortlowe wrote...

Find the word that doesn't belong:

Magic. Dragons. Elves. Fantasy. Realism. Game. Nugs.

You're welcome. Even in fantasy/sci-fi there should be realism within established in-unverse laws.