270 réponses à ce sujet

[PSRdirector]

I didn't find ME 2 far superior, I didn't really notice the graphic being bad like people complain. And DA:O doesn't have any features I absolutely hate and think was the stupidest change to a game I have ever seen.



BTW thats thermal clips, that alone makes Dragon age a better game, it doesn't have stupid things that are designed to just add an artificial ammo limit.

[Raphael diSanto]

Stronghold II wrote...

 So Bioware, I love you guys, always have, but let's be honest here.

 Mass Effect 2 is superior to Dragon Age in every possible way. IN MY OPINION

There. Fixed it for you.

Modifié par Raphael diSanto, 01 février 2010 - 04:54 .

[Sliveris]

Apples to oranges. Dragon age is epic awesome, mass effect is epic awesome.  Comparing the two is like comparing halo to diablo. The differences are so vast to make such a comparison would warrant much inner fail.

Modifié par Sliveris, 01 février 2010 - 04:59 .

[_Aine_]

Actually some of the models in DA:O are really fabulous. i got a weird view inside a Drake's mouth and was impressed by the detail. I think that what skews the perception is that many of the *humanoid* character models, the ones you stare at the most and the closest are of a lesser quality ( at time anyway) than the creature models. That and there is some inconsistency with the resolutions of model parts throughout the game ( some alpha issues, skin seams, lower rez cutscenes, teeth at certain points etc.) but some of it I think comes down to *style* -- i always recreate Sten for one example because I prefer and view sten differently in my own mind, so I recreate the characters as I want to see them. *shrugs* this doesnt mean the original sten was bad, just stylistically different than my preference.

I currently am playing DA:O and mass Effect. They are different games. i don't expect them to offer me the same experience or environment, or I would have no need to play one of them. An ambitious company will always try to surpass its quality in future releases, the art and science of it changes everything and you have to keep up. Still, I think its important to remember there is more at work in creating a game than what you see when its done. And art *is* open to interpretation -- what one considers cutting edge another could find too mainstream realism.

I find the graphics suit the time period pretty well actually. The world ends up dirty, old, dark and slightly depressing. If i found all glistening steel and sterile modern touches, i would find that completely out of place.

My work/graphics/gaming computer died, so i am playing on a laptop with only a moderate graphics card *sobs* but if you look at some of the screenshots even i can get, some of the graphics are great, i have seen cutting edge cards and it looks even better, i guess it all depends on how much you expect from your game, and how much you are willing to spend to only slightly increase your normal play-experience. That said, I still want a new comp.

Modifié par shantisands, 01 février 2010 - 05:03 .

[johook213]

Dragon Age: Origins is one of the best fantasy RPGs i've ever played.... and i'm going back even past Baldur's Gate, all the way to classics like Final Fantasy 4 and 6, and Ultima 7: The Black Gate. 

[Survalli]

people blaming the Dragon Age engine for the game not looking as great as ME2...well, i wouldnt hold your breath on a new DA engine for DA2...hands down ME2 is perhaps the greatest game of the past couple of generations.

[Abriael_CG]

Survalli wrote...

people blaming the Dragon Age engine for the game not looking as great as ME2...well, i wouldnt hold your breath on a new DA engine for DA2...hands down ME2 is perhaps the greatest game of the past couple of generations.

Aaaand donkeys can fly.  

[Survalli]

TheLion36 wrote...

I found FallOut 3 rather boring and repetitive, but to all its own I would say

as repetitive as killing the same mobs over and over again...yes i know there were 3 whole mobs.

[Survalli]

one other thing related to what the OP was saying and should consider...the majority of these posters that are flaming you do not seem to own both games, likewise most are probably on Xbox...so the ME2 graphics and shine will be dumbed down.

[Abriael_CG]

Survalli wrote...

one other thing related to what the OP was saying and should consider...the majority of these posters that are flaming you do not seem to own both games, likewise most are probably on Xbox...so the ME2 graphics and shine will be dumbed down.

Actually there isn't much of a difference between ME2 on 360 and on PC.

[Andat]

Valmy wrote...Yeah being able to control my party members directly and control the battle field is one of the main reasons I find the DA combat alot more compelling.  In ME and ME2 I pretty much just let my companions do their own thing because trying to really get them to go where I want is simply too big of a hassle and doesn't really seem to work well.  Of course I just may not be doing it right.  I tend to just find some good cover and blow the heck out of everybody, which is sorta fun but not really the same.

It doesn't even need to be direct control - neither BIA nor SW:RC had that, and that's 2 out of 3 of the games I mentioned. What they had was a system that was useful and, importantly made sense.  As I say, none of these systems were perfect, all of them had issues (whether it's the intrusiveness of SW:RC's icons to BIA's occasional brain-dead AI), but they made the attempt.

Of course, leaving aside the fact that ME and DA are so different, and attempt two entirely different things, it's entirely possible that I was just looking for a different experience from Mass Effect.

[Valmy]

If you want to get on the graphics I will say that Dragon Age's character models were not that great. The clipping problems alone were a big issue. Everything else looked great but you are looking at your characters most of the time. Hopefully they will do it better in the expansion and sequel.

[booke63]

Stronghold II wrote...

 So Bioware, I love you guys, always have, but let's be honest here.

 Mass Effect 2 is superior to Dragon Age in every possible way. The graphics are tons better, the action and combat is much more smooth,  the story seems more detailed and fleshed out, the characters are more developed, I could go on and on. 

You've offered several assertions here which you do not support.  I see no proof offered that the graphics are indeed better.  You've not shown any coding, pics, video links.  You simply assert that they are.  You also offer no arguments to those who simply don't agree that superior graphics make a superior game.  Maybe they sell better, but that means they sell better not that they are in fact superior and that they MUST matter to our evaluation of the game--as it does for you or for buyers in general.  Similarly, you offer no arguments that that action and combat is more smooth; you offer no examples or comparisons regarding the story's "flesh" or details or character development.  You can and do, howver, "go on and on."

 

My question is why?

 Dragon Age was in development for what.......3 times as long as ME 2? Wasn't the dev time about 10 years? If not it was VERY close to it. Why is DA so far below the level that ME 2 is?

 Did you guys just get sick of working on it? Were you just ready to get the thing released after all this time? Is ME 2 the goldmine that EA was looking for, therefor more money was pumped into the project?

 I just don't get it.

 I didn't realize just how far behind DA was until I experienced the gloriousness of Mass Effect 2.

Resons why DAO MIGHT be inferior (yet to be established in fact and not even well in opinion) have been offered by the community and by the developers.  They sound like good reasons, but you've not acknowledged them and not refuted them.  (Please correct me if that last statement is incorrect.  I've not read the entire thread.)  I think your wondering if Bioware got "sick " of DOA is disingenuous, no?  Maybe you're on to something with EA money, but who would know that here?  Hard to see that as a serious question as if you would get a true answer.

Instead of actually defending your position, you're merely mired in the fanboi/non-fanboi BS that goes on and on and on and on around here.  Why?  What value does that have for you?  Us?  The tone of the forums in general?

Modifié par booke63, 01 février 2010 - 06:56 .

[Aathis]

Stronghold II wrote...

Dragon Age was a good game indeed......then Mass Effect 2 comes along.

I am just confused as to how a game that had a third of the dev time ended up so much better.

Dont be confused. Be gratefull that Bioware make such great games. You might not believe it but there are people who prefer DAO to ME2...I know...are you serious?

[dualmind]

Well, considering DA was in developtment much longer, its right to assume it was built on different engines than ME2, So its only to assume its not the same as Mass Effect. Besides, they had to build up a complete new setting with DA, with background and world altogether. ME2 is a continuation of a series, and dont require so much work.( I dont doubt it took a lot of work though)

[IceTitan]

 To be honest their both different genres, one was built from bottom up, and more than likely scrapped on some occasions as do all originals tend to go through.

While one was more of an upgrade from an already existing and established game.

Played both and you can't compare one to the other. As they are both different genres as far as gameplay goes, one is more of an ARPG while the other is traditional. Graphics, their both well done, just one had already established model's and textures that simply needed touch ups and improvements. While the other needed model's and textures to be made from scratch.

One has an established story that it expands upon, while the other is attempting to establish itself. To say one suck while the other doesn't is a biased view, nothing more. Everyone has their favorites and their dislikes no one likes the same things completely.

I will admit I was disapointed with ME 2, though the story was great and the gameplay good, felt like alot was stripped from it, and left with nothing but the core. Made no sense landing in a hot zone in a shuttle and no one shooting at it.specially considering they always made you land right into it.

But anyways I liked both games, they have both strength's and weakness's no game is 100%. It's all a matter of preferences. traditional RPG's are harder to produce than ARPG's, specially when they are from the ground up. You can expect DoA 2 to be superior, like ME 2 has been superior to ME 1. 

All that matters to me is the story and game play eye candy is more a bonus to me and I'm satisfied in both cases.

[JLFL]

EJ42 wrote...

Birdieboink wrote...

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Dragon Age = more immersive, better character development, better plot

Mass Effect 2 = Better visuals

Half of the time developing DA was making the engine, actually. I think if DA had better animation and graphics it would be as good, as well as giving the PC more personality (no, NOT VOICE OVER) with more facial animations or focus on them in conversations.

I really felt that if the Warden had had their own voice, the game could have been immersive. As it was, with an archaic combat system and a Warden who never spoke (Shepard at least speaks during ME and ME2) during dialog scenes, Dragon Age felt like an older game that someone had decided "hey, let's go release this!" With a top-down combat perspective in addition, I really don't see how anyone could view Dragon Age as immersive. Maybe that's just me. Also, considering that some of the places you traveled to actually took more time to load than to explore, it really felt like there was a lot of wasted potential; I wish they'd just used Unreal 3 as an engine.

Mass Effect had a far superior plot (full of twists and turns, where most of the sidequests actually worked towards fleshing out the universe) than Dragon Age, but maybe that's just me. There was never anything unexpected going on in Dragon Age, and the world itself hardly felt original or inspired. Also, Mass Effect's combat and art design are far, far greater than Dragon Age, though this might have something to do with DA utilizing what seemed to me to be a rather poor graphics engine.

People who complain about the PC not having a voice fall into the same category as ones who whine about graphics.  You have NO imagination!

The PC is YOU, not some other "person" you interact with.  When you click on the various conversation options, then you can feel free to speak the lines yourself.  That is the PC's voice.  If that doesn't do it for you, then imagine what the voice should sound like as if you are reading a book.

You do read, don't you?

No?

(Comic books/graphic novels do not count)

I think this is a very lame argument against the protaginist having voice acting. While were at it lets get rid of music from the game so we can imagine our own, or get rid of all npc's voices so we can imagine how they sound. My protaginist in DAO felt personality less and a void of life because he lacked a voice, All the characters and companions in DAO felt like they had tons of personality except my main character who is the most important character of the game. A voice adds so many emotions to my protaginist like fear, anger, sadness, joy, sarcasm, etc.. Without a voice it felt like he didn't even have a reaction to anything that happened in the game, he just stood there with a blank reaction. When I started playing I was dissapointed by the lack of VA for the protaginist. The only reason why I could imagine Bioware didn't add voice acting to the main character is because of the variety of races and genders the player can choose from. Right now if they added voice acting to DAO protaginist and an option to disable it, I bet you a very small minority would disable it.

[Andat]

Well the argument against voice acting is just the cost given the number of permutations the character can have - not just male female, but male / female across 3 races. So that's already (potentially) 3 times as many different voices (which means more actors and more wages to pay) required as for ME.

I wouldn't have minded voice acting for the PC, but I can understand why it wasn't there and I don't terribly miss it.

Modifié par Andat, 01 février 2010 - 09:42 .

[Stronghold II]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Stronghold II wrote...

 So Bioware, I love you guys, always have, but let's be honest here.

 Mass Effect 2 is superior to Dragon Age in every possible way. IN MY OPINION

There. Fixed it for you.

 Okay seriously....

 Of course it is my opinion, I NEVER stated that it was fact. Only a complete idiot would think otherwise. I made a post about what I thought about a video game, the ones hanging on to this "opinion" thing are only doing so because they have NO argument to come back with. 

 I'm not going to throw a bunch of "in my opinions" around to suit the needs of the anal. 

 So in conclusion:

 Bioware is > all

 Dragon Age is a great game.

 Mass Effect 2 is a spectacular game. (better)

 and the Baldur's Gate series are the GREATEST games of all time, nothing will EVER compare. 

 OH NOES!!!! There I go throwing facts around again. But for real, good conversation people.

 Gold Star for each of you.

 

[Ylvena]

Hey everyone



I love both ME and Dragon Age. But imo DA is still nowhere near as good as the BG series.

One of my issues is that the conversations between party members seem forced rather then surprising, and even though i love the characters in DA it still feels like something is missing. I have to force conversations with my companions through gifts, and after playing long enough i know places in areas that trigger conversation, and that is a let down for me. And dont get me started on the side quests...( if you can even call them that) after a few playthroughs nothing new really happens. I can play BG today and may still get surprised with something new in the story. DA seems a little unfinished sometimes imo.

But playing through Fallout3 and Oblivion makes me appreciate having party members at least, so i will not complain to much

But that said i love DA and it is one of the best rpg`s i have played in a long time. Thank you Bioware.



PS:ME is an rpg just as much as DA, its just a different setting.



Have a nice day all

[Feraele]

Personally I play Dragon Age for the story..not the graphics. That story pulls me in and gets me involved, no matter how many times I've played through. At this point and time I am not even considering ME2, I tried ME1..didn't like it. So if I didn't like the first one (due to playstyle nothing else) then more than likely I "may" feel the same way about the sequel. We'll see. Might wait til after Awakening to try ME1 again, and see if it "works for me".

[spernus]

Andat wrote...

Well the argument against voice acting is just the cost given the number of permutations the character can have - not just male female, but male / female across 3 races. So that's already (potentially) 3 times as many different voices (which means more actors and more wages to pay) required as for ME.

I wouldn't have minded voice acting for the PC, but I can understand why it wasn't there and I don't terribly miss it.

True,but I'm starting to doubt if Bioware can't afford that cost.

If Mass effect 2 sell as well as I think it will (and Dragon age is no flop either),they have no excuse to cut corner's in making sure their product are top notch.Once you become really popular,it's easier to sell anything you release (at first).I am sure Dragon age 2 could easily outsell the first,especially if the graphics are better and the game end up with superior production values and polish. 

[Mlai00]

ME2 is not the Holy Bible:



"A new predictable plot, removal of most of the RPG elements from the last game, rather than fix the things people complained about in the last game they simply removed those elements entirely (I think someone over at Bioware completely missed the boat on that one) or in some cases replaced them with something even more tedious and unimaginative.



Scanning planets is a bore, at least with the Mako you felt like you were doing something more productive than just swiping the cursor back and forth. People complained about how bland it was exploring barren worlds and infitrating the same three structures over and over again. The solution to that problem shouldn't be to remove planet exploration and replace it with something even more tedious and 100x simpler to program. Pure laziness. What makes it worse is now you have to do it with EVERY planet, not just the one in the system you can land on and it's a requirement if you want to upgrade anything in the game.



The only real improvement was with the hacking system. It's nice that you don't need to level up electronics and hacking to get into stuff and the hacking minigame is better, but some more variety would have been nice.



For whatever reason, they completely changed the control scheme on the PC version. I kind of miss being able to take cover simply by walking up to a wall and not having to hit a button for it. The menus are just awful and unintuitive. The way they look is obviously intended for the 360, but they don't work the way you'd expect on the PC. The arrows mean nothing and you end up going through more menus to complete simple tasks than you really need to. Plus you have pointless menu options like the "close file" option on the mission cleared screen.



There are a few other annoyances, as well. I've noticed new weapons when picked up automatically replace your equipped gun in that slot. You can't change your loadout mid battle, though, so you're stuck with it until you find a gun rack or go back to your ship. The menus for changing your equipment aren't the easiest to navigate on the PC. You need to click on the weapon class, and then click on the accept button at the bottom of the screen. The arrow keys do nothing, even though each button has an arrow up and down to indicate that you can moved between the choices. Sometimes a screen provides a back arrow, sometimes you just have to know to hit escape. There are no longer any hot keys for bringing up the upgrade screen or journal, you have to hit escape and then select them from the menu. Your ship doesn't stay docked anymore. If you leave an area and go back to your ship, you have to go back to the galaxy map and redock and watch the docking animation again every time you want to get on the ship and then off again. Since there are times I'd like to research upgrades while still going through an area, this is extremely annoying.



Bioware has also shown their typical half-assed programming here when it comes to errors and glitches. For whatever reason, it's really easy to get trapped in the game. You walk up to a cabinet, for instance, and Shepherd will pop up on top of the cabinet and your party will block you so you can't get back off. This happened to me five times in the first couple of hours. Text doesn't display properly and can show black bars behind it, which is a bit distracting. The installation required a reboot just to get the install to work. I've also seen people's heads disappear and other graphical errors in the game. Loading times are longer than the previous game. I also don't like that taking a hit removes you from cover. Importing your save file isn't as easy as it should be. The first game creates a standard directory for save files under your documents. The second one shouldn't need you to move those files to another directory. And if it does, Bioware should have made the config utility actualy work and not crash every time you tried to move it. I had to move the files manually and look up online where I could find the old saves and where they needed to go.



There is practically no inventory system. You can get new weapons and change your loadout on the ship, but you won't be picking up new weapons, armor, and upgrades as drops from enemies and you can't reequip when in the field. Also, when you pick your loadout on the ship, there are no stats for the guns, just vague text descriptions. Enemies only drop ammo, now, and all guns use ammo. This wouldn't be so bad if every area didn't boil down to "walk to next intersection, defeat swarm or enemies, rinse, repeat" or if there was a way to restock on ammo other than picking up the canisters dropped by enemies. The heat system from the previous game is completely gone, once you run out of ammo, you automatically switch to another gun. The game is essentially just a shooter, now, with some minor RPG elements.



You can get some armor pieces to upgrade your personal armor, which you can only equip in your cabin, but your squad never gets new armor. There really isn't much in the way of managing your squad mates. They each have a handful of skills, each with four ranks, and you can change their weapon loadout. They added some customization options for the look of your armor, but kind of ruin it by making the different armor pieces offer minor stat boosts. You never have to level up your skill with a gun. It is just assumed that everyone is a master with their assigned gun types and you cannot equip anything that isn't within those assigned types (unlike the last game where everyone could equip any type of gun, but might not be as skilled at using the guns they couldn't level up in).



It was hard to tell on the 360 version where they masked the loading times with elevator rides, but going from place to place was a lot quicker on the PC version. They put in these fancy loading screens, but still have no progress bar. In addition to not having the hotkeys for the journal and squad menus anymore, they've also made it so that most areas no longer have a map. You just get a radar and if you hit the map button, it pops up an arrow of where you are supposed to go. How did sensor technology downgrade over the past two years? They also removed the ability to quickly swap out your guns with the function keys. It's kind of sad that a third party was able to make a better port of a Bioware game than Bioware could.



I also have to wonder why with Dragon Age: Origins you could get your DLC and install it through the program menu and with Mass Effect 2, you have to go to the EA web site, log in, find the page that lists the DLC, make sure you pick the right one, then download it and install it outside of the program? If they could do it in the program with Dragon Age, what makes Mass Effect 2 so different?



I also have to wonder why Bioware suddenly decided that they couldn't coast on their own success with this game and needed to "borrow" characters and ideas from Star Trek every step of the way."



===========================================



"My roommate has the 360 version. Apparently scannig planets is even worse on the 360. On the PC, the cursor at least adheres to the speed at which you move the mouse, making thigs a little faster than on the 360 where it just moves at an unbearably slow pace, even with the upgrade. I can scan planets in easily half the time he can and I still find it really tedious. Too bad it's kind of required in this game and not just a side mission like in the original.



I'm also seeing some really nonsensical handling of character abilities and weapons. At one point in the game I can research a Krogan shotgun for Grunt. Apparently only he can use it, but later on I can pick up the exact same type of shotgun at a particular point in the game and suddenly I can use it too. If I have the gun in my armory already, why can't I use it until I pick it up off the ground? Also, why can't I use it if I don't pick it up off the ground? What is significant about the gun lying in the dirt? Also you get a choice of three guns to pick up, an assault rifle, a shotgun, and a sniper rifle. If they're all just laying in a pile on the floor and they are all different weapon classes, why can't I just pick up all of them? Also, why is it that the class that is supposed to be the master of weapons is the only class that can't equip SMGs? How does it make any sense that I can use handguns and assault rifles, but not a class of gun that is somewhere in-between the two, especially when all of the other classes which aren't weapons experts can use it?



Another thing bugs me about the ammo, too. Most guns use the same ammo pickups. If they were just heat sinks as many people were saying, it doesn't make much sense to record them as how many shots you have left. It also doesn't make any sense to get a certain number of shots and then throw the unit away or that you can redistribute unused shots to your overall shot pool, heat sinks really don't work that way. They are treated like clips of ammo.



Plus, with most guns (apart from heavy weapons) using the same type of ammo, why can it not be redistributed between your weapons of different classes? If they all use the same type of heat sink, wouldn't it make sense that they should all take from the same ammo pool or record them as heat sinks and each one offers a different number of shots to each gun type in your inventory? Why shoudl I have to switch to an assault rifle if I run out of shots with my sniper rifle rather than just use my assault rifle ammo and keep using the sniper rifle?"



The above was written by someone whose opinion I value much more highly than yours, my dear OP.

[Mistersunshine]

Yeah, but...



Dragon Age is the best game evar. The bestest, even.



So, what now?

[gjmh]

Dragon Age environment graphics are sub par compared to most recent games. Character NPC models and animation are good however. Just my opinion.