270 réponses à ce sujet

[Rendar666]

They were developed by different teams and the Dev time was about 5 years I believe. They are radically different games. Some people prefer Dragon Age or Mass Effect, some don't. I prefer Mass Effect 2, but my friend doesn't. One's Sci Fi and once Fantasy.

[EJ42]

I think Super Smash Bros. Brawl was better than ME2. Also, Tiger Woods PGA Tour 10 was so much better than DA:O that there is almost no comparison.

[QuentaSilmarillion]

Both are awesome games. I applaud Bioware for their story telling and game play. I love their games, just no one like them out there.

[LolaRuns]

It's a game......and I enjoy seeing how worked up people get. It's great entertainment.

And here I thought that that was the textbook definition of trolling.



IMO while it's a valid strategy to pursue graphical excellence it's not the only road to achieve success. Otherwise The Sims or the Wii or WOW would never sell one item. There is more than one way to get your niche. IMO having the best graphics is mainly about having having the best bragging rights. Kinda like a dingdong measuring contest. And there's nothing wrong with that. Trying to appeal to the young male audience is a valid marketing strategy since those typically buy the most games. Just like appealing to console gamers is a valid marketing strategy particularly since so far they are more secure from piracy at this point [at least so far, I think by the time PC gaming dies out piracy will just shift towards consoles and you already have the problem of rental vs. buying with console games].



But it's not the only strategy. The Sims found its audience by trying to appeal more to female buyers too. The Wii did it by trying to appeal to both much younger and much older potential buyers. So there's not just one way to go about a thing.



I don't know whether the "niche" of DAO has a future. All I know is that I'm damn happy it exists. Does it have the appeal/emotional attachement to be an everburner like Diabolo or Baldur's Gate? I have no idea.



IMO shooters and shooterlike things have it easier when it comes to graphics. That said, this has been a good year for shooter/action-y type games (Uncharted, ME2, AC2, Batman AA), so if this is the direction shooters are developing into I say good for them. And if ME2 introduces more outsider people to RPG-like elements and storytelling I say good too.



But as somebody who already liked RPGs I found DAO incredibly more satisfying. On my personal scale ME as a franchise gets points for trying something new. Well technically something used a bit less frequently than the dwarves+elves formula. But hey, as long as dwarves plus elves are done well and in an engaging way who am I to complain?



I do caution against blindly pursing better graphics. It seems to me that they key point of RPG is feeling immersed in the character. It's the difference between "that Shep guy is awesome" and "I feel like I'm that hero". To me ME still feels like you are still sitting kinda backseat to the hero and giving him pointers. But that might just be how it comes across to me.



Again, I'm knocking Bioware or anybody for pursuing the young male console market. It is a fairly tried and true strategy, the most dominant one in the market. And yes I agree that by those standards ME is the more successfull/sale-able game. But is that really the same as better? Once more, not knocking on ME, both truly original and outstanding games to me and I'm glad for the sake of the market that they exist.



Point and Click-ish strategy games have it hard at this point in the console market. At this point in time and techonology you won't be able to pursue this market without sacrifcing something. And I argue that if you just blindly pursue slickness it might even hurt rather than help the immersiveness (that again to me is the point of RPGs in addition to good story). Not saying that graphics shouldn't be better, but I think it should be understood that the graphic goals of an RPG should be different than the graphic goals of a shooter (let's not forget that the easiest way to do perfect graphics is to make a railshooter, because that way you have complete control over everything that happens).



I don't know whether ME2 is the better (or merely the more polished) game. I only know that I like DAO better. However me/people liking DAO better isn't going to pay Bioware's bills. Sometimes being emotionally appealing pays off (look at Mario vs. Sonic), a lot of the time it doesn't (Psychonauts... and too many to count other underground beloved games that weren't financially viable).



That said, even though that is naturally my preference talking, to me DAO seems more extendable with DLC and the like. DAO makes me hunger for every little new bit. With ME2 I would wait for a new full third title, but not bother with just minor updates. The world there just works better for me as part of a whole story rather than just an episde. And the game mechanic itself isn't that good that I wouldn't get the same amusement even better with a variety of shooters (especially coop-etc).

[ile_1979]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

... am I the only one that thinks ME2 is more of an RPG than ME1?

gameplay wise, ME2 cuts on lot of the RP elements. skill trees are shortened and less divesified. weapon proficiency is no longer determined by skill or character level, but by your own refelx and hand-eye coordination. these are all marks of action/shooter games and not RPGs. 

the only aspect where ME2 beats ME1 in RPG-ness is in the details, like customising you armour or quarters. you have more NPCs and they are more interesting then in ME1, but they all have just 1 relatively short quest each and far to few lines of dialogue. i feel like there is just so much more about them, that i will never know. it was way more easy to stick with Garrus and Tali, as i already had some attachment to them. Miranda just starts to get interesting when the game ends. Legion is maybe the best new NPC and you only have IT in your team for 1/2 hour before the game ends. Jacob and Samara also tickled my interest but there was just so little of them shown. maybe if you romance them the y will tell you more. overall i am really impressed with the ME2 NPCs. i haven't seen so large a concentration od NPCs i love sinse Jade Empire. and there are 10 in ME2!!! but there is just no time to really develop a realationships with them.

compare this to DAO where you have tons and tons of stuff to chat with your NPC companions. and they open up as you gain their trust gradually. not even BG2 had so much dialogue unless you take the romances into account. romances....well this is where ME2 really surprised me. 7?! this is a record and just for this i could rate ME2 better then ME1. true they are short like anyting in ME2 but all are very interesting (the 4 for  male and 1 for female that i have played) and left me wanting for more.... 

[WilliamShatner]

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

[EJ42]

WilliamShatner wrote...

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

Turn out a better game in less time, then come back to tell us how much better you are than Bioware.

(Requirements include creating your own game engine from scratch, fully voice-acted game utilizing major Hollywood talent, and a very detailed storyline, which could fill several novels of backstory alone)

Modifié par EJ42, 01 février 2010 - 12:44 .

[WilliamShatner]

EJ42 wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

Turn out a better game in less time, then come back to tell us how much better you are than Bioware.

Give me a studio the size of BioWare and their resources and I'll try or better yet come up with a more valid arguement.

BioWare themselves have done better games in a lot less time.

[Morroian]

WilliamShatner wrote...

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

The graphics are only sub par in comparison to cutting edge games. On high res I think the game looks good. As for the rest I think you're underrating the time it would take to write it. 800,000 lines of dialogue and an immense amount of backstory had to be written.

[David Gaider]

WilliamShatner wrote...
New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

The five year figure gets bandied around a lot.

We did not have a full team working on the game for five years. What we had was a significant amount of pre-production with a small team followed by a great deal of time preparing the engine and figuring out exactly what kind of game we wanted to make and how. There is a lot of fluidity in terms of the team sizes between Bioware projects, and projects that have "priority zero" will take up more resources than other projects which are due further down the line. That's just the way it is.

Even so, if someone really wants to imagine that we should be able to whip off a game like Dragon Age lickety split or that the game in its current format didn't take a herculean amount of effort to produce -- and turned out quite well for all that -- then go right ahead. We're not going to lose any sleep over it.

[JLFL]

Dragon Age was a great game and I will definitely get it the sequel day one but I personally perfer Mass Effect 2. Like previous people have stated its all a matter of personal taste. I still can see why the OP is wondering why DAO isn't as polished as ME2. In DAO the silent protaginist was real turn off, it felt like my character was doing nothing and was missing a personality, The graphics also weren't as beautiful and detailed as ME2 which gave more immersion. The Devs above already explained why DAO was a lot of work though. Both games are amazing and should be bought by anybody that likes rpgs.

[BeautyoftheBeast]

Snaps.

I understand having a preference for a game, but is it really necessary to rip into a game on the forum its fans post on? Maybe its just me but I think it gets a little redundant.

I love DA. I think it's one of my all-time favorite games, if not my favorite. I'm one of those people who will lose interest in a game and not waste my time on it, but with DA I was fully engaged in every way possible (albeit I hated certain parts of the game, but that was mostly due to getting lost on the first playthrough then realizing what I was doing wrong on the second.) I think the devs did a fantastic job with creating a world that I can immerse myself in for several hours and creating characters that I gained an emotional connection with. That to me is more important than graphics or bugs that can inevitably happen when working on something like a VIDEO GAME. I could never do something like that, so you'll never hear a negative word from my mouth.

However, I have no interest in playing ME or ME2. I don't like sci-fi games or shooter games. But I respect the developers for coming up with a game for people who enjoy them. My friends all swear up and down about ME, but surprisingly they find the storyline of DA much more fulfilling that they would spend money on DLC, the books, and other various items. It all depends on how you connect with a game. Saying you think a game is subpar or crappy or whatever is disrespecting the people who actually love the game. I know if I went onto the ME forums and trolled about how much I hate ME, I would be knocked down in a second by the people who genuinely enjoy the game.

Modifié par BeautyoftheBeast, 01 février 2010 - 01:56 .

[Wissenschaft]

Mass effect 1's worlds felt very empty. Mass Effect 2 is a 3rd person shooter with a very well made story. But mostly a shooter. Dragon Age on the other hand is the type of RPG world I've waited for since BG2. I wanted a greatly detailed world that for once wasn't D&D based. Its taken about a decade to get my dream game which is sad but its finally happened.



Dragon Age's world seems much more developed than Mass Effect 1 which had so many areas that just felt empty. I enjoy learning about the elves, drawves, and circle mages as I explored their homes in DA. That level of detail is just missing in Mass Effect. Then again, I feel mass effect was going more for a cinematic (heavy focus on story) 3rd person shooter. And lol and behold in mass effect 2 they slim even more on the RPG elments and focused more on presenting a cinematic story for their primairly shoot game. Theres nothing wrong with that but it not the type of game I want.

[Wissenschaft]

I would add that I compare DA to Baldurs Gate 1. BG1 was a great game but there were plenty of flaws as well. Baldurs Gate 2 was a vast improvement over BG1 and I suspect that if and when we get a squeal to Dragon Age it will similarly be a vast improvement over the original.

[Ellestor]

David Gaider wrote...
lickety split

I just want to say that I haven't seen or heard this in at least 15 years. Thanks.

[Bryy_Miller]

Morroian wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

The graphics are only sub par in comparison to cutting edge games. 

This.
Whenever I read someone complain about how DA does not have the graphics of ME2, I roll my eyes for multiple reasons.

[EJ42]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Morroian wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

New engine or not the five year development of DA does have to be questioned. If BioWare turned this game out in 2-3 years I'd say fine, but FIVE YEARS? If this game had state of the art graphics and was a big divergence from BioWare's previous game in terms of gameplay and design I'd understand but it's not. For 2009 the graphics were subpar and the gameplay and game design was KOTOR Redux. It seems like a game BioWare could turn out in their sleep. The only new element is the origin stories (wait for someone to point out a game that has done that already).

The graphics are only sub par in comparison to cutting edge games. 

This.
Whenever I read someone complain about how DA does not have the graphics of ME2, I roll my eyes for multiple reasons.

Whenever I hear people complain about graphics, I just cannot bring myself to have any measurable amount of respect for their opinion at all.

What we have, today, is a bunch of spoiled children who have no clue what it is that truly makes a game great.

Kids should be forced to play nothing but Atari 2600, Colecovision, and then C64 until they're at least 12 so they can figure out what really matters.

Modifié par EJ42, 01 février 2010 - 04:33 .

[Abriael_CG]

LolaRuns wrote...

And here I thought that that was the textbook definition of trolling.
 

Bingo. It indeed is. :innocent:

[Spitz6860]

i think DO:A looks significantly better than mass effect 2, except the character models maybe, and ME2 has almost no vegetation

[Mordaedil]

Wishpig wrote...

Lol... you are so unbealibly wrong.

Look at the Witcher. GOD what a pretty game... made with the NwN engine which is older then the Dragon Age engine.

Look at the Witcher 2. Up to par with modern games graphically no doubt, made with Witcher's engine.

Check mate.

I'm sorry, I was using actual factual statements rather than insulting drivel. What exactly is your points connection to my own?

I was stating that Bioware had to build on their own engine and couldn't be using someone elses work, such as CD Projekt or Obsidian's.

Then you state, what, that CD Projekt made better with the engine than Obsidian and Bioware both? I suppose that is true, their engine did turn out really well.

Though they still had a base to go on and spent several years just improving these things. I recall early shots of the Witcher didn't look even half as good as NWN2, before they had a major last year update in art department.

Next time, check all your pieces before declaring "check mate" and be sure you're playing the same game.

[Pinkleaf]

There must be a gazillion and one games out there with great (ground breaking) graphics but rubbish game play, needless to say such games are a waste of time.
I see nothing wrong with the graphics of Dragon age, I find them to be very nice and do the job they were intended to do.
Game play comes first in my book, there are so few games that posses any.

If  we had better graphics in Dragon age, no doubt a lot of people would be complaining about their fps and such rubbish.

Modifié par Pinkleaf, 01 février 2010 - 06:09 .

[Mordaedil]

Pinkleaf wrote...

There must be a gazillion and one games out there with great (ground breaking) graphics but rubbish game play, needless to say such games are a waste of time.
I see nothing wrong with the graphics of Dragon age, I find them to be very nice and do the job they were intended to do.
Game play comes first in my book, there are so few games that posses any.

If  we had better graphics in Dragon age, no doubt a lot of people would be complaining about their fps and such rubbish.

We get that now too, and then they go on to say that the graphics aren't good enough to make their PC's lag like they are.

We live in an age of ignorance, really.

[thegoldfinch]

ME is to Hollywood movies as DA is to classic literature. Some people prefer to watch epic stuff blow up and some people prefer to explore character journeys.



Both are nice, but different people prefer different things.



On a personal level, I felt that ME - as pretty as it was - had a flat world and flat characters. The planet exploration/mining/surveying/what-have-you felt too much like grinding on WoW, albeit without the boars -- which is my primary problem with open world games. I didn't think Saren was all that intimidating of a bad guy. A huge turd, yeah, but not a force to be reckoned with and not unlike any other Hollywood bad guy. The Citadel was lovely, but stagnant. Kaiden and Ashley, while nice people, were simple with not a whole lot to say.



At the end of the day, I did not feel bonded with my crew like I did with DA and Knights. I did not feel like we all grew up in some way. So because the personal connections which are so vital to a good story (for me) were absent, I did not feel like I did a whole lot worthwhile and was left feeling blah.



Like I said: pretty, but not especially deep.



That's why I prefer DA. I have a game which presents me with fascinating characters who each have meaningful flaws and have personal secrets and memories you could not guess right off the bat. I also have a primary goal from start to finish and that wraps up the package of the story quite nicely. I don't care if the graphics aren't up to Edward Cullen's standard of sparkliness if it can deliver a story that is so intriguing, it makes me create fan art, fan fiction, and post on forums.

[Lucy Glitter]

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.

[Zugin]

Dragon Age is plane AWESOME



I cant wait for them to play with this engine and make DAO 2.. if they do it right it will be the best rpg ever made.