312 réponses à ce sujet

[Almostfaceman]

"And for those that linked Entropy more than dps mage?"

We're essentially being flipped off by the developers.

 

That's enough. It's childish to say devs are flipping you off. They don't know you, they're making a game. If you don't like the game, fine. It doesn't mean they've got something against you, or anyone. There are hundreds of games made that i don't buy. That doesn't mean I'm flipping off all those designers, or that they hate my guts. Look at this board. Opinions vary, widely. All designers make a game they hope appeals to enough people to make money. They know they can't make a game that appeals to everyone. Perspective, please keep some. 

[Paul E Dangerously]

That's enough. It's childish to say devs are flipping you off. They don't know you, they're making a game. If you don't like the game, fine. It doesn't mean they've got something against you, or anyone. There are hundreds of games made that i don't buy. That doesn't mean I'm flipping off all those designers, or that they hate my guts. Look at this board. Opinions vary, widely. All designers make a game they hope appeals to enough people to make money. They know they can't make a game that appeals to everyone. Perspective, please keep some. 

 

This is exactly what they're trying to do, though. The focus on romance? LGBT content? Multiplayer? Fast combat? Attempting to up the difficulty?

 

It just happens that fans of about three-quarters of the character builds in Origins are last on the totem pole, and got told to take a hike.

[Super Drone]

This is exactly what they're trying to do, though. The focus on romance? LGBT content? Multiplayer? Fast combat? Attempting to up the difficulty?

 

It just happens that fans of about three-quarters of the character builds in Origins are last on the totem pole, and got told to take a hike.

 

3/4s of the character builds in Origins were Entropy Mages?

[Meltemph]

This is exactly what they're trying to do, though. The focus on romance? LGBT content? Multiplayer? Fast combat? Attempting to up the difficulty?

 

It just happens that fans of about three-quarters of the character builds in Origins are last on the totem pole, and got told to take a hike.

Yup, they made design decisions with...Oh jeez. Saying you dont like a game design decision is one thing, acting like a decision being made was all about you or your likes(or how ever many people you can find to think like you) is by no means a rational way to look at things. They made a design decision you dont like, they didnt make a design decision specifically because they didnt care about you or your particular tastes. I mean, really?

[Paul E Dangerously]

3/4s of the character builds in Origins were Entropy Mages?

 

Warrior Archers, Dagger Warriors, Sword, Axe, Mace Rogues, Heavy Armor Rogues, Mages that could hit things with staves, Creation Mages, Entropy Mages, Spirit Healers, Blood Mages, Shapeshifters, Rangers..

[Paul E Dangerously]

Yup, they made design decisions with...Oh jeez. Saying you dont like a game design decision is one thing, acting like a decision being made was all about you or your likes(or how ever many people you can find to think like you) is by no means a rational way to look at things. They made a design decision you dont like, they didnt make a design decision specifically because they didnt care about you or your particular tastes. I mean, really?

 

Can you seriously look at DAI and tell me they were aiming for the hardcore RPG fan? With a straight face?

 

The restrictive character builds? Armor and weapon restrictions? Abilities gone? Tactics gutted? Eight ability handcuff?

[Meltemph]

Warrior Archers, Dagger Warriors, Sword, Axe, Mace Rogues, Heavy Armor Rogues, Mages that could hit things with staves, Creation Mages, Entropy Mages..

And 3/4ths of people used these builds? I dont understand what you are trying to say here. Warrior's using bows doesnt exist anymore, but in DA2, even with them calling everything daggers I still used axes and what looked to be at least short swords. Then there was quite a bit of DA2 armor that looked heavy or at least not leathers or light. Again though, are you saying 3/4ths of game customization was cut or are you saying 3/4ths of the people who played DA used these builds?

[Meltemph]

Can you seriously look at DAI and tell me they were aiming for the hardcore RPG fan? With a straight face?

 

The restrictive character builds? Armor and weapon restrictions? Abilities gone? Tactics gutted? Eight ability handcuff?

"hardcore RPG fan", means a lot of things to a lot of people. Do I think it is aimed at the BG/IWD fans(combat mechanic wise?)? hell no.  But neither was DAO, none of DAO felt like Forgotten realms D&D games, to me. I dont know exactly who their targeted audience ever was with these games, nor do I care. I play games I think I'll enjoy, regardless of genre. You clearly have very specific things you want and more specifically you want things to be as much like DAO as possible, mechanics wise, I get that.

 

Here is the thing, not everyone agree's with you, so I dont see how you can claim to have the market cornered on what constitutes a "hardcore RPG" for those not you or people who think like you. I dont even see the benefit of you trying to do such a thing, other then to claim your opinion as some sort of auithority on the subject of game design, which I find laughable.

[Aurok]

Would love a scene with Mage Hawke LOLing his ass off at Mage Inquisitor because he only knows like 4 spells.

[Almostfaceman]

This is exactly what they're trying to do, though. The focus on romance? LGBT content? Multiplayer? Fast combat? Attempting to up the difficulty?

 

It just happens that fans of about three-quarters of the character builds in Origins are last on the totem pole, and got told to take a hike.

 

No, man. They're trying to make a fun game. That's it. They may fail, in your opinion, but they're not trying to build some nebulous image you of have of the perfect game. 

 

Seriously, you're not some cop who's job it is to assign motive to someone. An "I don't know what they were thinking" is much more appropriate a response than a "I'm being flipped off."

 

Ego-centric is the condition I'm looking for here, some of you folks act like the world revolves around you. That's the only way you could personalize this into "I'm being flipped off."

[Almostfaceman]

The restrictive character builds? Armor and weapon restrictions? Abilities gone? Tactics gutted? Eight ability handcuff?

 

All character builds are restrictive, that's what makes them character builds. Armor and weapon restrictions also have existed in all the games. Tactics gutted? That hasn't been proven yet and even if it has, neither of us has had a game to play to measure what kind of impact that has on our fun, if any. Eight ability handcuff? Don't care. If you don't like it, fine. Whatever. All video games have limitations and restrictions, they can't be all things to all people, this is not pen and paper role playing where the rule set and our imaginations are our only limitations. 

[Tevinter Soldier]

Would love a scene with Mage Hawke LOLing his ass off at Mage Inquisitor because he only knows like 4 spells.

 

followed by hawke receiving a letter that their last remaining sibling is dead...... also the cat died...... and kirkwall has been struck by a plague and his best mate just murder someone. also the courier that presented the letter get's killed seconds after delivering it.

[Paul E Dangerously]

No, man. They're trying to make a fun game. That's it. They may fail, in your opinion, but they're not trying to build some nebulous image you of have of the perfect game. 

 

Seriously, you're not some cop who's job it is to assign motive to someone. An "I don't know what they were thinking" is much more appropriate a response than a "I'm being flipped off."

 

Ego-centric is the condition I'm looking for here, some of you folks act like the world revolves around you. That's the only way you could personalize this into "I'm being flipped off."

 

That's fine if you think that. I'm just standing up for people, who like myself, want to do more than the blindingly obvious stereotypes Bioware is increasingly pushing us into. "Lightning/Ice/Fire Mage" or "Dagger Rogue" or "Warrior who can't engage anything at range".

 

You know, like Origins let you do. The only successful game in the series. The one Bioware seems like they're trying to ignore.

[Meltemph]

That's fine if you think that. I'm just standing up for people, who like myself, want to do more than the blindingly obvious stereotypes Bioware is increasingly pushing us into. "Lightning/Ice/Fire Mage" or "Dagger Rogue" or "Warrior who can't engage anything at range".

 

You know, like Origins let you do. The only successful game in the series. The one Bioware seems like they're trying to ignore.

DAO sold something like 3 million copies(a game that took about half a decade to create), DA2 somewhere in the 2.5 million(18 month dev cycle)... Success is very relative. Also, I'm not sure how you think DAO's combat was the reason it hit 3 million. I think if 99% of the people on these forums were in charge of game design nobody would buy the game. I think you fill in the blanks of what made DAO mildly popular and enjoyed by critics because you want your tastes to represent what made DAO popular and I see no real evidence that shows that DAO sold what it did because of the combat. Quality combat mechanics in this market anymore dont sit at 3 million. 

[Almostfaceman]

That's fine if you think that. I'm just standing up for people, who like myself, want to do more than the blindingly obvious stereotypes Bioware is increasingly pushing us into. "Lightning/Ice/Fire Mage" or "Dagger Rogue" or "Warrior who can't engage anything at range".

 

You know, like Origins let you do. The only successful game in the series. The one Bioware seems like they're trying to ignore.

 

It's a dangerous business, speaking for anyone other than yourself. 

 

As far as "successful" goes, that's also a nebulous term. Success to you may mean something else to them. Perhaps success, in Bioware's eyes, is building a game that's better than Origins and will sell more copies. Perhaps according to their telementy, they see something different than you do in what made or did not make Origins a "success". I hardly think they're looking to shoot themselves in the foot. You may want to consider other folks perspective before picking a crowd to defend, just a thought. 

 

I didn't, really didn't, like the ending to ME3. When I posted about it on their forums, I told them why. I didn't tell them they hated me or that they were picking on me. I proposed a solution, I even offered to pay them for their time. Because that's how you talk to people when you have a disagreement. You try to find common ground. You don't start out with insults and finger-pointing. 

 

The anonymity of the internet is great, but it's also terrible. Manners go right out the window. 

[Paul E Dangerously]

DAO sold something like 3 million copies(a game that took about half a decade to create), DA2 somewhere in the 2.5 million(18 month dev cycle)... Success is very relative. Also, I'm not sure how you think DAO's combat was the reason it hit 3 million. I think if 99% of the people on these forums were in charge of game design nobody would buy the game. I think you fill in the blanks of what made DAO mildly popular and enjoyed by critics because you want your tastes to represent what made DAO popular and I see no real evidence that shows that DAO sold what it did because of the combat. Quality combat mechanics in this market anymore dont sit at 3 million. 

 

DAO sold 3.5 million copies within the first year. Not in the lifecycle. I wish you'd stop saying that.

 

All you have to do is look at the numbers.

 

DAO was successful enough that it had multiple DLC and an expansion, even seeing a re-release on multiple platforms with everything bundled.. DA2's expansion was not only cancelled because of low sales, but retailers weren't interested in an ultimate edition collecting the base game and the DLC.

[Lucidbo]

"hardcore RPG fan", means a lot of things to a lot of people. Do I think it is aimed at the BG/IWD fans(combat mechanic wise?)? hell no.  But neither was DAO, none of DAO felt like Forgotten realms D&D games, to me. I dont know exactly who their targeted audience ever was with these games, nor do I care. I play games I think I'll enjoy, regardless of genre. You clearly have very specific things you want and more specifically you want things to be as much like DAO as possible, mechanics wise, I get that.

 

Here is the thing, not everyone agree's with you, so I dont see how you can claim to have the market cornered on what constitutes a "hardcore RPG" for those not you or people who think like you. I dont even see the benefit of you trying to do such a thing, other then to claim your opinion as some sort of auithority on the subject of game design, which I find laughable.

 

You do realize DA:O was marketed as "the spiritual successor to BG"? And that Bioware specifically stated that DA:O was to carter to traditional RPG fans whereas Mass Effect was to be more action focused. These are all fairly easy to look up if you so wished.

 

Then you wonder why the original fans are whining when they feel they're being tossed aside and forgotten? You could almost compare this to the Europeans colonizing America really, would you say the Native americans are selfish and egocentric in voicing their displeasure of being eradicated and dislocated to make space for the Europeans? 

[Meltemph]

DAO sold 3.5 million copies within the first year. Not in the lifecycle. I wish you'd stop saying that.

So then you know the numbers of DAO and DA2 then? Where is your source for this, at best I can find triple plat as of 2010 which is 3.2 million copies. It doesn't change what I said though, so it just highlights your irrationality in regards to your mechanic preferences. Numbers of the 1st year is normally what is used, so you're just reaching at this point.

[Paul E Dangerously]

So then you know the numbers of DAO and DA2 then? Where is your source for this, at best I can find triple plat as of 2010 which is 3.2 million copies. It doesn't change what I said though, so it just highlights your irrationality in regards to your mechanic preferences. Numbers of the 1st year is normally what is used, so you're just reaching at this point.

 

Sorry, 3.2 million. And that's not within a year, that's within four months. (Nov '09, Feb '10)

[Meltemph]

Sorry, 3.2 million. And that's not within a year, that's within four months. (Nov '09, Feb '10)

Again, unless you have other numbers we can only use what we have. Hell even 4 million in this market isnt much for a game with solid combat mechanics, so regardless I dont get your point. DAO wasn't some out of the ballpark success. It did relatively good, but to assume DA2 did bad because of the gamepaly mechanic changes is... grasping. The story, while enjoyable was a mess, and also if I remember only a very small % of people ever finished DAO, so there is probably a lot of factors rolled into the Dragon Age series. Your over simplification of what caused DAO's success is...telling.

[CrazyMooNew]

Oh great...its Paul Heyman again...

 

Bioware has always...been progressive when it comes to same-sex romances, and that kind of thing has been in nearly all of their games...including your beloved DA:O, and along with that they've pretty much always had romance options...

 

And since DA:O they've been aiming for most fast paced combat...that keeps the player engaged..instead of keeping the player waiting for cooldowns to finish while watching the PC auto-attack...

 

The multiplayer looks fantastic as well...and we've heard nothing but good things in regards to it from the people who have played it...its a fully fleshed out experience compared to a tacked on addition that appeals to the masses.

 

Lets also talk about the lack of entropy, blood magic and bow wielding warriors. There will always be changes between games...some things don't make it, and the decision to to it is never as easy as "To spite a certain group of players", and don't for a single second try to say that 3/4 of the player created characters were in this group of left behind classes...because you have nothing to back that up, and I don't think anyone is buying it.

 

Personally....I loved the entropy tree, but I'm excited for the Necromancer...I enjoyed being a Spirit Healer, but a Knight Enchanter has me rather giddy...there is give and take, to expect them to take nothing out of the game is silly...childish...and to completely ignore what is being added is...quite frankly.. rather dumb.

 

DA:I is not DA:O, and it was never going to be...Bioware has evolved and in my opinion they've been constantly trying to do new things...to advance the core of their games...if you want to play as a mage that is capable of beating stuff to death with sticks, or a rouge who for some weird reason wants to wear plate armor...then sadly you're out of luck, but...perhaps I just don't see what the problem is...DA:O was a great game, but to me it sounds like you're wearing nostalgia tinted glasses while refusing to adapt along with the game.

 

[xkg]

So then you know the numbers of DAO and DA2 then? Where is your source for this, at best I can find triple plat as of 2010 which is 3.2 million copies. It doesn't change what I said though, so it just highlights your irrationality in regards to your mechanic preferences. Numbers of the 1st year is normally what is used, so you're just reaching at this point.

 

Retail 

DAO 4.54 http://www.vgchartz....on-age-origins/

DA2 2.36 http://www.vgchartz..../dragon-age-ii/

[Paul E Dangerously]

Again, unless you have other numbers we can only use what we have. Hell even 4 million in this market isnt much for a game with solid combat mechanics, so regardless I dont get your point. DAO wasn't some out of the ballpark success. It did relatively good, but to assume DA2 did bad because of the gamepaly mechanic changes is... grasping. The story, while enjoyable was a mess, and also if I remember only a very small % of people ever finished DAO, so there is probably a lot of factors rolled into the Dragon Age series. Your over simplification of what caused DAO's success is...telling.

 

Not really. Good word of mouth. It hit a lot of the things RPG fans wanted, and it sold better as time went on. DA2 fell off a cliff because the story was a mess and the oversimplification and focus on AWESOME BUTTON didn't draw in nearly as many new fans as it drove off older ones.

 

 

Oh great...its Paul Heyman again...

 

Bioware has always...been progressive when it comes to same-sex romances, and that kind of thing has been in nearly all of their games...including your beloved DA:O, and along with that they've pretty much always had romance options...

 

And since DA:O they've been aiming for most fast paced combat...that keeps the player engaged..instead of keeping the player waiting for cooldowns to finish while watching the PC auto-attack...

 

The multiplayer looks fantastic as well...and we've heard nothing but good things in regards to it from the people who have played it...its a fully fleshed out experience compared to a tacked on addition that appeals to the masses.

 

Lets also talk about the lack of entropy, blood magic and bow wielding warriors. There will always be changes between games...some things don't make it, and the decision to to it is never as easy as "To spite a certain group of players", and don't for a single second try to say that 3/4 of the player created characters were in this group of left behind classes...because you have nothing to back that up, and I don't think anyone is buying it.

 

Personally....I loved the entropy tree, but I'm excited for the Necromancer...I enjoyed being a Spirit Healer, but a Knight Enchanter has me rather giddy...there is give and take, to expect them to take nothing out of the game is silly...childish...and to completely ignore what is being added is...quite frankly.. rather dumb.

 

DA:I is not DA:O, and it was never going to be...Bioware has evolved and in my opinion they've been constantly trying to do new things...to advance the core of their games...if you want to play as a mage that is capable of beating stuff to death with sticks, or a rouge who for some weird reason wants to wear plate armor...then sadly you're out of luck, but...perhaps I just don't see what the problem is...DA:O was a great game, but to me it sounds like you're wearing nostalgia tinted glasses while refusing to adapt along with the game.

 

If something is less capable than it's predecessor, that is no way in any form evolution.

 

Bioware's already been through this once. ME2, despite being a success, dumbed down - sorry, "simplified" the game too much for a lot of people. Unsurprisingly, ME3 brought back the RPG elements from ME1 people missed, combined it with ME2's positives, and made ME3 better than either as a result. Writing nonwithstanding.

 

Why is it so ungodly unreasonable to expect the same for Dragon Age, again?

[Paul E Dangerously]

Retail 

DAO 4.54 http://www.vgchartz....on-age-origins/

DA2 2.36 http://www.vgchartz..../dragon-age-ii/

 

That's a bit off since IIRC they don't have numbers for PC, but it's an indication.

[xkg]

That's a bit off since IIRC they don't have numbers for PC, but it's an indication.

 

They do. Just click : "Also On "

to change the platform