241 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Yes, I said, it.

 

Why?

 

Because many reasons.

 

1) All three games are very flawed. DAO was far too dated, had poor gameplay balance, had a very cliched plot and characters and followed Bioware formula too closely. DA2 had a much better plot and characters, but the game was rushed out the door and it shows with its wildy uninspired level and world design and moments where the story simply seemed unfinished. DAI on the other hand, lacks a lot of focus, goes against the strengths of Bioware by filling the game with fetch quests and busy work, goes back to a cliched, formulaic plot, and has an overall weak and rushed plot. DAO and DAI also follow Bioware's bad habits of telling about things and not showing them.

 

2) The series has an identity crisis. First game wants to be Baldur's Gate in a KOTOR shell, but the success of Mass Effect comes along and now it wants to be Mass Effect, hence DA2, Now it wants to be Skyrim, hence DAI. Instead of establishing its own identity, like the Mass Effect series did, which in turn influenced the entire industry, the Dragon Age series mooches off others for its identity (hell, FFXII is another influence), and then changes the identity of the next game to respond to "fans". Its a mess. All three games are wildly different in a bad way. Hell, i would compare it to whats going on with the Final Fantasy franchise right now.

 

3) Its not innovative. There is no influence, no new things that seperate this franchise from other fantasy franchises. All it does is combine a bunch of influences from other games, but those other games do what DA does, but better. FF12 has a much better comabt system than DAO does, with more enemy variety and better boss battles. As for DAI, Bethesda and Obsidian's Fallout New vegas does exploration and quests better, Dragon's Dogma does combat better, especially against large foes and dragons, Suikoden does the "Keep" and recruiting agents and characters much better, and Mass Effect does the protagonist better (however DAI's wheel is a step in the right direction, too bad the inquisior is not as memorable as Shepard). And this lack of innovation makes all the flaws less forgivable because they are not flaws from doing something new or creative (This is why ME1's flaws were not criticized harshly).

 

Dragon Age is easily Bioware's lesser franchise against Mass Effect. It will really show once everybody starts talking about the next Mass Effect once its revealed for real and DAI's honeymoon period is over. Why? Because Mass Effect has an identity, it has innovated and influenced the industry (look at the games that use dialogue wheels or similiar paraphrasing systems), it has taken more risks, and the games are straight up, better than the DA games. Then the new IP will further overshadow DA.

 

While DAI is a good overall game, its simply not the series definer Bioware needed.

[Ozzy]

Oh, trying to give this another go?

 

Before many others bite and this inevitably blows up into a multi-paged affair, I'd like to bite!

 

I completely disagree and that's the thing about opinions. Dragon Age, with its cast of memorable characters, engaging setting and vast array of possibility make it probably my favourite of Bioware's worlds.

 

Sure, it combines a vast array of things covered in other games but it does so in a way that excites me. Innovation for the sake of innovation can quickly lead a company into a brick wall. Dragon Age may rely on tropes but it does so well. Dragon Age is familiar. It's, I dunno, comfortable? Comforting? I can't think of the world exactly but it's inviting. It's marries the familiarity of a well loved genre and style of game with all the newer bells and whistles. 

 

Plus, the lore behind it is so ******* interesting. 

[Fardreamer]

You are simply wrong. You have an opinion, but like all opinions, we are free to think you're an idiot for having it. Dragon Age is my single most favorite gaming franchise.

[txgoldrush]

You are simply wrong. You have an opinion but like all opinions we are free to think you're an idiot for having it. Dragon Age is my single most favorite gaming franchise.

So Mass Effect being more innovative and influential in the gaming industry is an opinion?

 

Its more than just my opinion.

 

And to add, DA games have scored lower critically than most other Bioware games. Even DAI scored below ME3.

[TheJediSaint]

So Mass Effect being more innovative and influential in the gaming industry is an opinion?

Using an opinion to back up another opinion does not make it a fact.

[CredulousAlloy]

It's a great franchise to me. Sure, it has its problems, but its strengths far outweigh the negatives for me. I have almost no interest in Mass Effect, either.

[Cid Revolution]

Why does FFXII always crop up in these kinds of threads...? DAI and FFXII are nowhere near the same type of game to merit comparison.

[Jaron Oberyn]

How is DAI trying to be skyrim again? Bethesda has a patent on open world games now? Or are you going to ignorantly suggest dragons like some other misinformed ranter the other day? The DA franchise has always exceeded the ME franchise. 

 

1. Fetch quests are in almost every RPG. Get over it. 

 

2. The series does not have an identity crisis, again please explain how this game is in any way similar to Skyrim. The combat is completely different, its multi region open world which by the way exceeds the overall size of Skyrim. This game actually has a story, Skyrim does not. The games being different from each other is due to the fact that the DA games aren't meant to be one and the same. This isn't the mass effect franchise where you have a singular protagonist or goal. It is a franchise about the world, not a specific character and thus takes different approaches to story telling. The Final Fantasy franchise is the exact same way, that you made the mistake of thinking otherwise with both of them suggests you don't really know what these franchises are all about. 

 

3. The combat in FF games (aside from the 13 series) is a joke compared to the DA franchise. Furthermore, this isn't a JRPG. Bethesda games may be open world, but there isn't incentive to explore. The quests in those games are bare bones, you have no reason to do it other than for the sake of doing it. The quests in this game all tie back to the main plot in one way or another. It gives you motive to actually complete them. The dragon fights in this game are the best that's been in any RPG to date. 

 

In Mass Effect, shepard was linear no matter what you did. You got dialogue options every 30 minutes and got to choose whether you were going to give a happy or angry response. It wasn't a role playing game. DAI on the other hand is. You have to select everything that comes out of your inquisitors mouth. You have on average a maxed dialogue wheel, with investigations that sometimes contain further investigation dialogue options. You choose how your relationships develop with your characters in DAI, whether its rivalry, friendly, or romantic. Mass Effect, your relationships with companions is forced on you. Don't like Garrus? Too bad you're in a forced bromance with him. That's poor writing and limiting RPG elements. 

 

The franchise as a whole, Mass Effect dumbed down each subsequent iteration to appeal to newcomers. We had to reintroduce and reestablish relationships with players in each game because they had to satisfy the potential new guy. Dragon Age does not suffer from this, they won't water down their story just because someone didn't play the first or second game, thus ruining the experience for fans who stuck with them from the beginning. The DA franchise is, and always will be the strongest out of the two for that very reason, among many others. Mass Effect 1 may have invented the dialogue wheel, but Mass Effect 3 made it pretty clear that they weren't fond of that invention. You can't argue that fact as it was one of the many reasons people criticized that game for, the lack of dialogue choice and control over what your character says. 

 

 

 

Why does FFXII always crop up in these kinds of threads...? DAI and FFXII are nowhere near the same type of game.

 

This guy wasn't even making sense to begin with. He makes broad statements without even getting into specific detail. If anything this is just another random hater looking to incite a reaction. Too bad I realized that halfway into my wall of text. 

[txgoldrush]

Using an opinion to back up another opinion does not make it a fact.

Nope, its a fact to back up my opinion.

 

You just don't like that fact.

[txgoldrush]

Why does FFXII always crop up in these kinds of threads...? DAI and FFXII are nowhere near the same type of game.

Because DAO uses FFXII's Gambit system, its a near carbon copy.

 

Something DAI got rid of......to a fault.

[taranoire]

ugh. 

[Jaron Oberyn]

Because DAO uses FFXII's Gambit system, its a near carbon copy.

Oh, so FF has a patent of that common sense feature as well? What was the first game that included the pause feature? Every subsequent game is clearly a carbon copy. 

[Ozzy]

fact

 

[TheJediSaint]

Nope, its a fact to back up my opinion.

 

You just don't like that fact.

You don't know what I like.  Just like how you don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

 

Seeing you're clearly trying to start a Mass Effect vs Dragon Age fight, I think I'll just add you to my ignore list and call it a morning.

[wolfhowwl]

Mass Effect is Twilight for the space marine crowd.

[Heimdall]

Nope, its a fact to back up my opinion.
 
You just don't like that fact.

Prove it's a fact.

It's your opinion that Mass Effect is more innovative and its your opinion that it's more influential. I've never seen much evidence that Mass Effect is very influential. It might have a bigger mainstream awareness, but that's not the same thing. I might be tempted to agree that it's more innovative, in that it tried meshing RPG storytelling and action in fairly new ways, that doesn't really put it ahead.

[Jaron Oberyn]

I like Mass Effect as much as the next guy, but it just doesn't stack to the DA franchise. 

 

 

 

Prove it's a fact.

It's your opinion that Mass Effect is more innovative and its your opinion that it's more influential. I've never seen much evidence that Mass Effect is very influential. It might have a bigger mainstream awareness, but that's not the same thing. I might be tempted to agree that it's more innovative, in that it tried meshing RPG storytelling and action in fairly new ways, that doesn't really put it ahead.

Tried and failed. Ever since Arrival DLC and ME3 the series has been shying away from the RPG, particularly when it comes to character control. 

 

[Cid Revolution]

Because DAO uses FFXII's Gambit system, its a near carbon copy.
 
Something DAI got rid of......to a fault.

Wow. Just wow. You take two very different, epic games and reduce them to what combat system they're using? That's your argument's whole foundation? That's not a very good foothold for you.

[taranoire]

Mass Effect is Twilight for the space marine crowd.

I was going to respond angrily to this, but--

 

Yeah. 

 

Yeah, you have a point. 

[Toasted Llama]

ugh. 

No no no, you're doing it all wrong! It should've been:

(Disgusted noise.)

[txgoldrush]

 

How is DAI trying to be skyrim again? Bethesda has a patent on open world games now? Or are you going to ignorantly suggest dragons like some other misinformed ranter the other day? The DA franchise has always exceeded the ME franchise. 

 

1. Fetch quests are in almost every RPG. Get over it. 

 

2. The series does not have an identity crisis, again please explain how this game is in any way similar to Skyrim. The combat is completely different, its multi region open world which by the way exceeds the overall size of Skyrim. This game actually has a story, Skyrim does not. The games being different from each other is due to the fact that the DA games aren't meant to be one and the same. This isn't the mass effect franchise where you have a singular protagonist or goal. It is a franchise about the world, not a specific character and thus takes different approaches to story telling. The Final Fantasy franchise is the exact same way, that you made the mistake of thinking otherwise with both of them suggests you don't really know what these franchises are all about. 

 

3. The combat in FF games (aside from the 13 series) is a joke compared to the DA franchise. Furthermore, this isn't a JRPG. Bethesda games may be open world, but there isn't incentive to explore. The quests in those games are bare bones, you have no reason to do it other than for the sake of doing it. The quests in this game all tie back to the main plot in one way or another. It gives you motive to actually complete them. The dragon fights in this game are the best that's been in any RPG to date. 

 

In Mass Effect, shepard was linear no matter what you did. You got dialogue options every 30 minutes and got to choose whether you were going to give a happy or angry response. It wasn't a role playing game. DAI on the other hand is. You have to select everything that comes out of your inquisitors mouth. You have on average a maxed dialogue wheel, with investigations that sometimes contain further investigation dialogue options. You choose how your relationships develop with your characters in DAI, whether its rivalry, friendly, or romantic. Mass Effect, your relationships with companions is forced on you. Don't like Garrus? Too bad you're in a forced bromance with him. That's poor writing and limiting RPG elements. 

 

The franchise as a whole, Mass Effect dumbed down each subsequent iteration to appeal to newcomers. We had to reintroduce and reestablish relationships with players in each game because they had to satisfy the potential new guy. Dragon Age does not suffer from this, they won't water down their story just because someone didn't play the first or second game, thus ruining the experience for fans who stuck with them from the beginning. The DA franchise is, and always will be the strongest out of the two for that very reason, among many others. Mass Effect 1 may have invented the dialogue wheel, but Mass Effect 3 made it pretty clear that they weren't fond of that invention. You can't argue that fact as it was one of the many reasons people criticized that game for, the lack of dialogue choice and control over what your character says. 

 

 

 

 

This guy wasn't even making sense to begin with. He makes broad statements without even getting into specific detail. If anything this is just another random hater looking to incite a reaction. Too bad I realized that halfway into my wall of text. 

 

1. Doesn;t make it good.

 

2. Bioware mentioned Skyrim as an influence for DAI.

 

3. Fallout New Vegas disagrees, and Dragon's Dogma had far better dragon fights.

 

Once again, you simply ignored what I said about flaws of innovation, which the Mass Effect series has. The later games brought a more consistant PC at the cost of dialogue options. And it also had to handle new players in a way because of the save import feature, which got more prominent. It wasn;t the first franchise to use it, but it was the one that made it popular.

[Jaron Oberyn]

No no no, you're doing it all wrong! It should've been:

(Disgusted noise.)

You're both wrong, it should have been the pic:

 

[txgoldrush]

Prove it's a fact.

It's your opinion that Mass Effect is more innovative and its your opinion that it's more influential. I've never seen much evidence that Mass Effect is very influential. It might have a bigger mainstream awareness, but that's not the same thing. I might be tempted to agree that it's more innovative, in that it tried meshing RPG storytelling and action in fairly new ways, that doesn't really put it ahead.

 

Proof. look at The Bureau: XCOM Declassified...its a straight clone of Mass Effect.

[Todd23]

Oh, trying to give this another go?

Before people bite and this inevitably blows up into a multi-paged affair, I'd like to say that I completely disagree. Dragon Age, with its cast of memorable characters, engaging setting and vast array of possibility make it probably my favourite of Bioware's worlds.

Cast of memorable characters, that they like to almost entirely forget about, and when they don't, they retcon the character or change them to the point that they only have the same name and similar physical features (Anders). Engaging setting, that is not nearly as original as a brand new world and lore should be, and gos through too many changes from the inconsistency in its writing. Vast array of possibilities, that are either gone through great lengths to not have a real effect, or are blatantly retconned.

[Enesia]

Actually, to be honest DAOs dated feel is what was the appeal to me. Those are the type of games I like, and the thing is that at the time DAO came out it felt like the type of games that I like were dying or going through their own identity crisis. It was that homage to old school Roleplaying games that to me gave it the feel and made it still to this day one of my favorite games.

 

The course of action I have for DAO is to look at another great game, that sadly is extremely under appreciate is Kingdoms of Amular. Open world, with unique side quest along the way, interesting, lore, interesting world, interesting side quest and the NPC that come along with it.  Kingdoms of Amular is another one of my top rated RPGs. If DAO wanted to update than Kingdoms and Two Worlds were perfect ways of updating, making it modern, without losing its core.

 

What I don't understand is this.

 

A movie, and I know the difference between movies and video games hear me out though, a movie like Django Unchained can be praised and glorified as being a good homage and a good tip to the hat to old Spaghetti Western movies.

 

But a video game cannot?

 

A video game must always update and not be "out of date" to survive. I don't think so. With as much DAO support there still is, I don't actually think the industry or the people who follow it understand that a video game doesn't simply die because its "outdated"