I received this text from my daughter, who loved the games (DAO mostly). I thought it said pretty much everything that needed to be said in a sad yet humorous way. Hopefully it will give some of you a laugh like it did for me. A sad laugh maybe, but a laugh nonetheless:
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Well said.
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Changing something doesn't necessarily make it better.
Guest_Hander Wayne_*
If science and art was lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone.
How about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? That's the case.
Changing something doesn't necessarily make it better.
It's called a stepping stone. If you change something, and it doesn't work, you have room to improve on it again.
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Yes, because science is all about randomly changing things up without checking whether the changes actually improve anything.
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Hi!
Science has the purpose of bettering our lives and mankind in the process.
A games only function is to entertain.
If the first installment entertained, all you need to do is hone in on what made it entertaining and improve upon that.
You don't overhaul it wholesale in the hopes of getting "more fun" when you already had a certainty of fun in the orignal design.
If you gamble on such a change and lose, then you cannot complain when many people call you on it.
Primarchone
It's called a stepping stone. If you change something, and it doesn't work, you have room to improve on it again.
Certainly depends on what was changed.
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
I see a few people defending some of the design decisions here, yet they never go into detail as to how exactly this iteration is superior.
It's easy to call the OP a Neaderthal and then just walk away, while making no real argument as to how "progress" was made here.
Change is NOT always for the better, thats a major problem in the software industry in general, not just gaming. Companies feel they have to change things, just to sell a new product. Often the result is a new product which is worse. The clearest example currently would be Windows 7 to Windows 8. Microsoft had is absolutely nailed with Windows 7. It's an operating system which usually does what you want it to do in a reasonably clear and easy to understand way. Windows 8 is a nasty mess where they tried to cram two completely different ways of operating a computer into one experience, and people hated it. (Does it sound anything like the current DAI situation?). Versions of Mac OS after Snow Leopard also suffer from this same issue, but to a lesser degree. Instead of building on what they had and making it better - making it what people want - they went for "look how new it is!" and produced products which reduced usability in key areas that the actual USERS find most important.
For me, it's really the obvious lack of any concern for the PC player that annoyed me enough to get my refund. Will I buy it again? Sure, if they fix some of these fundamental issues.
But no, I fundamentally don't think Bioware moved in the proper direction with either DA2 or DAI, neither of which built on the best aspects of DAO that made it such a beloved game. Instead the concentrated on exactly the wrong things and demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of what made DAO great. I'm certainly willing to play it anyway, for the story and the characters, but not until they fix the broken control structure and camera.
Take just one aspect: DAO had fantastic aesthetics. Aesthetically it looked different than anything else, and had a look which complemented the subject of the game well. DA2 moved away from this and looked somewhat more like "any other game". DAI takes this a step further and now doesn't have anything aesthetically special or unique. Sure, both DA2 and DAI have better graphics than DAO, but not better aesthetics (DAI isn't even close). Take a look at this excellent (and short) explanation of the difference between the two: Aesthetics vs. Graphics.
After trying DAI I now firmly believe that Bioware would have been far better off using the DAO engine, with minor but important updates (like the ability to access reasonable amounts of RAM) and then giving us a series of great, emotionally engaging, memorable, epic, story-and-character-rich RPGs. They would have save countless millions on development and they would have built upon the core strengths of DAO and built it into a strong franchise. Their core user base would have grown and grown based on those strengths. We could have probably had a new great RPG every year or two, because nearly all the technical work would have already been done. Instead, they ended up with a game that just might have a good story in there somewhere, but with mechanics and aesthetics problems (along with other issues) which are so disastrous that they've ended up with this forum being full of disappointment, anger, and fury. Take a look at the user Metacritic reviews of DAO, DA2, and DAI, and you'll clearly see what people think of these "great changes" Bioware has made. It's a clear example of change being for the worse, although at least DAI is currently slightly ahead of the disaster that was DA2...
That I received a text that so perfectly expressed what I was thinking at the time made me smile!
Change is NOT always for the better, thats a major problem in the software industry in general, not just gaming. Companies feel they have to change things, just to sell a new product. Often the ...
Change is good, otherwise you end up with the exact same product every year; like Call of Duty, or the iPhone. Both are incredibly s***.
Change is good, otherwise you end up with the exact same product every year; like Call of Duty, or the iPhone. Both are incredibly s***.
OK, so here is what I want you to do. I want you to go and change your car so that instead of having round wheels, it has one round wheel, one square wheel, one triangular wheel, and one wheel which changes shape based on the mood of your passenger. That's change! Was it good? Please stop back and let us know...
OK, so here is what I want you to do. I want you to go and change your car so that instead of having round wheels, it has one round wheel, one square wheel, one triangular wheel, and one wheel which changes shape based on the mood of your passenger. That's change! Was it good? Please stop back and let us know...
I don't drive...
Yes, sure. Let's turn every next title of a franchise in an exact copy of the previous one with just some little enhancements. This is all we need for progress.
If science and art were to be lead by people like you (and 80% of those on this forum) we would still be cavemen engraving graffiti on stone while looking at the sun thinking it is a god.
Uh, the point of a sequal/franchise is you enhance and build on the base people like.
If you want to go crazy and do something totally different, you MAKE A DIFFERENT GAME in a new IP.
Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't that much a revolution from Baldur's Gate 1. It did fairly well as I recall.
Most of the biggest franchises around evolve in small steps, and they churn out plenty sales year in year out.
I received this text from my daughter, who loved the games (DAO mostly). I thought it said pretty much everything that needed to be said in a sad yet humorous way. Hopefully it will give some of you a laugh like it did for me. A sad laugh maybe, but a laugh nonetheless:
I personally disagree. I didn't like DAO. It was old school. I liked DA2, but my favorite fantasy RPG right now is Dragon's Dogma. I can't make a conclusion on DAI since I haven't finished it.
Uh, the point of a sequal/franchise is you enhance and build on the base people like.
If you want to go crazy and do something totally different, you MAKE A DIFFERENT GAME in a new IP.
Fair point. But, Mass Effect and Bioshock succeeded in making significant changes while maintaining and growing a base of fans.
Japanese development is gotten stale because they keep making the same games with new numbers for decades.
I disagree DAI is the best in the series. Origins design was so clunky, DAI has its issues but combat is loads more fun. The only issue I have is how companion is stupid. Especially for ranged characters and I would prefer we had tactic lists as in the previous titles. Other then that I'm having a blast.
Yes we need customizable tactics back from Origins and DA2, 'cause at the moment the AI companions in combat are 
Guest_Hander Wayne_*
Yes we need customizable tactics back from Origins and DA2, 'cause the AI companions in combat are
I always played with AI switched off. Much more fun.
Retour en haut