Cutscenes aren't a priority but it seems they're always rougher around the edges when it comes to just about everything - animations, graphical fidelity, glitches etc. this would be a good query for a dev.
Bioware does a good job with facial animations, it's their body animations that have always needed work. Particularly the female ones. That'd be a place to start improving.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Define "most".
Please tell me you're not about to start impersonating Leo...my sanity couldn't stand that.
Look at everything on my list. None of that is particularly popular.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
What you call "the best portrayal of force power," I call the rape of the
natural worldlore.
Luke Skywalker, one of the most powerful Jedi in the Star Wars lore, who reached the level of being a Master by the third movie, does not force lightning the Rancor at Jabba's fortress to death. He does not use force push to rip apart his body. He does not employ Force ninja acrobatics to assassinate it with kill moves.
He loses his light saber, almost gets crushed and then uses the Force to throw a switch and smash the Rancor with a gate. That's what the Force is - not a Diablo mage, but the power of a spiritual monk.
It is NOT pulling spaceships out from the sky. That is NOT POSSIBLE with the Force. It's just not.
You call the Force the "power of a spirit monk."
From Wikipedia: "In the original Star Wars film, the Force is first described by Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi as an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds and penetrates living beings and binds the galaxy together."
Is this definition correct? I wouldn't know, I've never watched the movies.
If it is, then Starkiller's actions are a mere drop in the bucket of the Force's power. The idea that "an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds and penetrates living beings and binds the galaxy together" is only as powerful as pushing a person's throat closed or flipping a switch, is one I cannot comprehend.
Now, there's a different idea--that it is only proper to use the Force when absolutely necessary, and not for stylish moves. That one has merit. But again, I don't understand how the life force of literally the entire galaxy is confined to clumsy movements.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Bioware does a good job with facial animations, it's their body animations that have always needed work. Particularly the female ones. That'd be a place to start improving.
The second is better than the first, the third is the best game in the history of mankind (to hear CDPR fanboys talk - despite the game not being out yet).
So, what... like Pokemon?
You call the Force the "power of a spirit monk."
From Wikipedia: "In the original Star Wars film, the Force is first described by Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi as an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds and penetrates living beings and binds the galaxy together."
Is this definition correct? I wouldn't know, I've never watched the movies.
If it is, then Starkiller's actions are a mere drop in the bucket of the Force's power. The idea that "an energy field created by all living things, that surrounds and penetrates living beings and binds the galaxy together" is only as powerful as pushing a person's throat closed or flipping a switch, is one I cannot comprehend.
Now, there's a different idea--that it is only proper to use the Force when absolutely necessary, and not for stylish moves. That one has merit. But again, I don't understand how the life force of literally the entire galaxy is confined to clumsy movements.
I don't see how the power of a tree would allow me to rip a spaceship out of the sky.
The movies (as of the most recent move by LucasArts, are considered the ONLY canon of the universe now) depict it as low-level magic. It is considered a huge feat to be able to communicate with others through telepathy or use telekinesis to move objects, yourself or other beings. The use of force lightning is the very epitome of malevolence and the pinnacle of the Dark Side's power. The Emperor, pretty much a god-tier Sith, never killed a single human with the Force Lightning in the movies (just tortured and greatly damaged), much less a beast as large as a rancor.
The Force is just that - a force that binds and connects all living things. Those who are able to tap into that power are able to use the cohesiveness of the universe to see the future, move objects and enhance their reflexes and senses... not become gods. Also...
Is this definition correct? I wouldn't know, I've never watched the movies.
For shame! FOR SHAME, GOOD SIR!
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
I have no interest in movies.I don't see how the power of a tree would allow me to rip a spaceship out of the sky.
The movies (as of the most recent move by LucasArts, are considered the ONLY canon of the universe now) depict it as low-level magic. It is considered a huge feat to be able to communicate with others through telepathy or use telekinesis to move objects, yourself or other beings. The use of force lightning is the very epitome of malevolence and the pinnacle of the Dark Side's power. The Emperor, pretty much a god-tier Sith, never killed a single human with the Force Lightning in the movies (just tortured and greatly damaged), much less a beast as large as a rancor.
The Force is just that - a force that binds and connects all living things. Those who are able to tap into that power are able to use the cohesiveness of the universe to see the future, move objects and enhance their reflexes and senses... not become gods. Also...
For shame! FOR SHAME, GOOD SIR!
Guest_Lathrim_*
I have no interest in movies.
I think part of the problem is that "binds and connects" sounds a whole lot more vague and wimpy than "evergy field created by all living beings." The first I can understand being low-level. The second sounds to me like a character could destroy the galaxy.
Until Lucas Arts made it non-canon, KotOR 2 exemplified that quite well.
Whether it's a valid interpretation of the Force is an entirely different discussion, though.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Until Lucas Arts made it non-canon, KotOR 2 exemplified that quite well.
Whether it's a valid interpretation of the Force is an entirely different discussion, though.
This thread title needs to be: "the Derailed thread thread"
I was thinking actually why not have a thread be the "Attention seeking thread of de-railment and flaming, where off topic is on topic." Then when people start talking about whatever and getting really angry over small comments it would actually fit the topic.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
The lack of a customizable player character is odd for a western rpg, and the focus on action based combat is odd for a eastern rpg.
Nah.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Which goes back to my original point in this thread - Bioware can't compete with other studios who do one set of things much better than them by simply doing a wide variety of things below par.
Open world? Bethesda does it better. Cinematic story-telling? TellTale or NaughtyDog do it better. Choice and Consequence? CDPR does it better. Action RPG? Capcom does it better. Interaction with NPCs/companions? Atlus/Squaresoft does it better.
The only thing that Bioware has consistently done better than any other AAA studio is party based RTwP gameplay. This is really more due to a lack of competition from other AAA studios in the past decade, but that doesn't really negate the point - Bioware has one of the few AAA IPs that let's the player directly control each member of a party equally and in a strategic manner.
And so, of course... they focus on other areas and make this part of their game WORSE.
Persona 5, 2015 Game of the Year. Just saying. Probably.
Bioware does a good job with facial animations, it's their body animations that have always needed work. Particularly the female ones. That'd be a place to start improving.
I don't know. DA:I actually seems like a step backwards when it comes to facial animations. Everyone has dead eyes just staring straight ahead, while in DAO and DA2 the eyes made subtle movements to the side. Foreheads and eyebrows move rarely and very little anymore. When talking they awkwardly open and close their mouth by lowering their jaw.
When you talk to someone you don't usually get to stare into the other's mouth like this, especially not regularly. Reminds me of one of those dolls:
It's weird to consider DA2 superior in anything, but faces actually were more expressive there. Subtle movements could convey emotion pretty convincingly.
So? They could be the worst or the best, doesn't affect the game. No one buys a game for the cutscenes. In before MGS.
I have no interest in movies.
I think part of the problem is that "binds and connects" sounds a whole lot more vague and wimpy than "evergy field created by all living beings." The first I can understand being low-level. The second sounds to me like a character could destroy the galaxy.
You people don't get the point of the thread. It's about Biowares refusal to improve their wares which they ask 60$ .
Since 2009 they haven't improved anything worth mentioning, the only big changes to their games have been for the worse.
A good developer's mindset on their product is to take what was good, what the fans liked what worked perfectly, and improve
it while adding new features and ideas.
bioware's current standpoint seems to be to NOT improve anything, remove what the fans liked, and add stuff no one really asked for.
How many players wanted healing removed from their new rpg?.
How many wanted the tactical options removed for the partymembers?,
How many many wanted more shooter and less rpg in mass effect?.
How many players wanted a red/blue/green ending to the epic trilogy saga ?.
bioware's current standpoint seems to be to NOT improve anything...
How so? They've improved graphics 
How many players wanted healing removed from their new rpg?.
It's not removed, just substituted by absorbtion mechanics
How so? They've improved graphics
It's not removed, just substituted by absorbtion mechanics
They have also improved the nudity.
In other words, the latest game might not have been improved in shape, but it has been certainly improved in terms of size 
They have also improved the nudity.
And the swearing. Plenty of f*** bombs suddenly!
And the swearing. Plenty of f*** bombs suddenly!
Guest_TrillClinton_*
And the swearing. Plenty of f*** bombs suddenly!
****** hell man.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
"Low level" is the perfect way to define it. The original trilogy makes The Force about on par with magic in LOTR. Which is to say, nebulous and lacking very few destructive or huge demonstrations, but meant more as a to overcome mundane obstacles. Frodo is given a nightlight to ward off a giant spider, Gandalf uses a magic whistle to summon a horse, some of the most powerful magical artifacts allow spying that Google Earth puts to shame, etc.
Then why is it described as "the energy of all living beings?" because the "energy of all living beings" is flat out not low-level, full stop.
You people don't get the point of the thread. It's about Biowares refusal to improve their wares which they ask 60$ .
Since 2009 they haven't improved anything worth mentioning, the only big changes to their games have been for the worse.
A good developer's mindset on their product is to take what was good, what the fans liked what worked perfectly, and improve
it while adding new features and ideas.
bioware's current standpoint seems to be to NOT improve anything, remove what the fans liked, and add stuff no one really asked for.
How many players wanted healing removed from their new rpg?.
How many wanted the tactical options removed for the partymembers?,
How many many wanted more shooter and less rpg in mass effect?.
How many players wanted a red/blue/green ending to the epic trilogy saga ?.
They made stupid choices. But by and large they are listening. Did you actually play DA I? it's an excellent game (crippled by sh*tty, sh*tty combat).
Then why is it described as "the energy of all living beings?" because the "energy of all living beings" is flat out not low-level, full stop.
They made stupid choices. But by and large they are listening. Did you actually play DA I? it's an excellent game (crippled by sh*tty, sh*tty combat).
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Gravity is the energy of all mass in the universe. It doesn't mean you can grab and harness the entire gravity of a planet just by being on it.
It's the same with the Force - you can't suck up the ambient energy of the entire cosmos in one person, location and instance. It's a generalized energy, that flows through living and inanimate things alike. A Jedi is in balance with the Force and is able to partner with it to have its energy flow in ways the Jedi desires... he is not able to fuse the energy of every living thing in a forest (let alone the Galaxy) to do his bidding.
Trust me on this. TFU is not at all an accurate representation of the Force. A fun one, sure. But not accurate.
I'm of the mind that a game can't be excellent with sh*tty gameplay, but I've also not played DA:I due to me seeing in videos exactly what I suspected it would be a long time ago.
You want me to provide an analysis on Star Wars fictional physics to prove how the Force works in the movies?Gravity is defined by the mass of two objects combined over distance. It is fundamentally based on physics, in the real world. The Force is not, unless this was mentioned somewhere? Is the Force some actual formulaic property of the universe? if so, I can accept your point. If not, however, I can't. And that's what the next paragraph is predicated upon: I see no evidence that the Force is like Gravity, thus we have no evidence that you cannot manipulate the Force and draw its energy.
Retour en haut
