Aller au contenu

Photo

Comparison Between Dragon Age and Baldurs Gate


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
206 réponses à ce sujet

#26
Haexpane

Haexpane
  • Members
  • 2 711 messages

CybAnt1 wrote...
  And frankly, I'm still waiting for the 3D single player RPG that gives me a team of six, like BG2 did, rather than three or four. With six, I could afford to have one sit back and do nothing but support & healing. It's a harder choice with only four.
 


Not only is a harder choice, it "violates" (and I use this term in a nerdy loose way) the core 6 player party dynamic that I learned to love in Everquest 1.

Fighter/healer/mage/rogue/bard/ranger or some such.  It's simply more fun.

However if you have a PS2, try Summoner 1.  It is very much like BG2 mixed with Vagrant STory, only 4 players but still has that same type of vibe.  And you can get a summon who acts as a BG2 style full party member, so its almost like having 5 party members.

#27
devSin

devSin
  • Members
  • 8 929 messages

attackfighter wrote...
As you can see, Baldurs Gate 2 has very beautifully made, hand-drawn maps. There are plenty of them and they are all filled with adventure!

Those aren't hand-drawn. Pre-rendered, sure (I mean, you can even seen the texture patterning at that scale), but they're still just 3D models and whatever post-processing the artists could cheat with at the time (if anybody remembers the wyvern cave in Cloak Wood; total Photoshop from Hell work over the area art).

Now, you can fill out an area with more and unique doodads and objects if you're just going to push it as a 2D image instead of rendering all your junk in real-time, but don't make it out to be more than it actually is.

#28
Haexpane

Haexpane
  • Members
  • 2 711 messages

devSin wrote...
 , but don't make it out to be more than it actually is.


however the map was made, it wont change the fact that the BG2 maps look nice and the DAO maps do not.

#29
Vuokseniska

Vuokseniska
  • Members
  • 498 messages

Haexpane wrote...

Macadami wrote...

 

We are comparing a 2d game, where you had 1 top down view, limited graphical effects, limited cutscene cgi, and an antiquated ruleset to a 3d, multi million dollar budget game made and designed for present technology and the 11 year old one wins...

Are there improvements in DA:O over BG2? Sure. The tactics are great, easier to use than BG2 and they actually work. The 3D view is obviously very much an improvement, except there's only a handful of enemies and peasant skins, spell effects are kinda bland, and weapon and armor skins are very dull. The move from memorization to mana, in my opinion could've been very good, except they made everything very spammable. Cooldowns could've easily balanced it all out and kept the 'powerful' feel of magic, instead you can just chain freeze everything you see. Where are the melee combos and specials? Even Age of Conan had melee combos....

Eh I could continue, but in summary this engine has so much potential they just didn't bother with using. So many things learned 11 years ago were put to the side for easy casual gamers and to milk their followers with DLC.


I hate reading this type of thing because I agree so strongly and other people simply ignore it and call you a "BG2 whiner".   Why is recognzing the fact that BG2 was AWESOME  and DAO is not quite as awesome such a bad thing to do?

I find it healthy.  BG2 was 2.5 d and now we have a 3D  AD&D style RPG only with less gameplay, less features, less skins, less variety , less of everything.  It's still good.  but why are we considerd sinners for comparing the past w/ the present?  


Well you forget that this is a new engine(gamerules and such) and they made DA:O out of scratch so just like spore or sims. skins, features and other stuff will be less but can only be approved on. So i don't think DA:O made a bad start because they can only add more features, skins etc etc

#30
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 618 messages

Haexpane wrote...

This isn't a "which is the more realistic dragon slaying game" it's simply "which was better"

The BG2 maps were better, rationalizations won't change that.  The DAO maps are almost worthless and ugly.


How are the DA:O maps worthless?  As maps they do the job just fine; in fact, they're more functional than the IE maps. So I like them better.

They're not pretty, but pretty isn't something I want out of a map. Apparently you do. Sucks to be you, I guess.

#31
GithCheater

GithCheater
  • Members
  • 808 messages
Butt kicking for goodness ...

BG's NPC's had great one-liners, but the NPC's were very one dimensional ... just like the graphics.

Modifié par GithCheater, 17 février 2010 - 11:16 .


#32
exorzist

exorzist
  • Members
  • 411 messages

Stippling wrote...

attackfighter wrote...

Stippling wrote...

I said it before and I'll say it again. I'm just not sure what you hope to accomplish by doing this. Is your goal to improve Dragon Age? Or just to show which is superior? If it's the latter, I don't really care and you're definitely wasting your time. If it's the former, carry on but be a little more objective. Don't just pick categories you can slant to BG. You have to do Graphics, voice overs, Origins and other details, etc.


You don't seem to understand the point of a forum. This isn't here so we can pitch ideas to Bioware (no company randomly implements things suggested by its fans), this forum is here so we can discuss stuff. If you're here for the sole purpose of improving Dragon Age: Origins then you're doing it wrong:blush:.

Ugh, I feel like I'm a preschool teacher when I have to explain this stuff haha.


My argument isn't that a forum is a medium to improve games, my argument is I don't see your end game in all of this. I'm just trying to figure out if there's a reason behind your antics or if you're throwing out comparisons just for casual conversation. But I suppose my curiousity is irrelevant, and you'll continue to post on a forum of a game that is inferior in your eyes and subpar, yet you can't stop talking about it.

So I will feed this fire and continue the debate:

Round Four: Graphics

Baldur's Gate:

Image IPB

Dragon Age:
Image IPB

Ahmawgawed, graphix r 4 newb gamerz. Not really. Graphics are an
important element in a games story telling. It is a game after all, not
a Goosebumps "Choose Your Own Ending" book. The crafting of an
interesting and appealing graphics engine takes a vast amount of a
developers resources and time.

The time and care taken to craft the artistic and stylistic world of Dragon Age is at a modern an up-to-date level that aids in the delivery of a cinematic experience. Comparing Baldur's Gate to other games of the time period (a time period which began the immergence of 3d gaming), Baldur's gate cut a lot of corners to deliver a drawn out story without presenting it in a visually appealing form for the era.


i looked at both pictures for several minutes ... but if i had to choose, i'd pick bg ...

#33
Sarevok Anchev

Sarevok Anchev
  • Members
  • 1 404 messages
Nice Thread!

I at first also thought about Quests and their correlating Maps (ie Firkraag) when comparing BG-Series with DA:O.



What also was a loss, is the Lack of Interaction with Objects on the Map.

#34
devSin

devSin
  • Members
  • 8 929 messages

AlanC9 wrote...
How are the DA:O maps worthless?  As maps they do the job just fine; in fact, they're more functional than the IE maps. So I like them better.

I think some of the people are discussing minimaps, and the rest are discussing the actual area "maps"... I know I was.

I think the OP clarified that he wasn't commenting on the minimaps (even though the only DA picture was of a minimap, but just used to represent the area)?

#35
Realmzmaster

Realmzmaster
  • Members
  • 5 510 messages
Ah! Another BG2 is better than DA:O thread.

BG2 was a great game for its time. DA:O is a great game for its time. Is BG2 better than DA:O in some ways yes in other ways no. I have played them all from Ultima I to Da:O all had their strengths and weaknesses.

Everyone here has an opinion. It is just that an opinion. But it all comes down to the market. What does the market expect in the age of WOW, EverQuest and others. How does BioWare attract newcomers?

Does a game like BG2 appeal to the new breed of gamers and potential gamers or does DA:O. Because in the end it comes down to the bottomline. Do you want CRPGs to just remain a niche market or expand?

When it comes to maps I want a functional map. The maps in BG2 are pretty not that functional. The maps in DA:O are functional not pretty. I simply need to know where to go. I do not need eyecandy on a map. But that is my opinion. But remember I aslo played Wizardry 1 (which was awesome for its time) in black and white, so I am not that big on eyecandy. But YMMV.

#36
Destrier77

Destrier77
  • Members
  • 117 messages
I loved baldurs gate but there really is no comparison. Though dragon age is more arcady with the healing after fights (which i thought i would hate but dont) It has far more wow moments which thinking back baldurs gate didnt really have a lot of. It was great but what were the real OMG WOW moments in bg?



I just had 2 in the space of 10 minutes!!! Real wow wow moments.



Im a fan of both i just love DA though.

#37
attackfighter

attackfighter
  • Members
  • 90 messages

devSin wrote...
I think the OP clarified that he wasn't commenting on the minimaps (even though the only DA picture was of a minimap, but just used to represent the area)?


Yes, that's correct. By map I meant the actual layout of a location - not a minimap (although yes, BG does have prettier minimaps;)). I couldn't find a screenshot encompassing an entire location in DA:O (as none exist), so I just used a minimap to try and illustrate the market district in Denerim as an example. I had thought that my wording would make my intentions clear, but alas, I have been gravely miniterpreted:(.

#38
attackfighter

attackfighter
  • Members
  • 90 messages

Realmzmaster wrote...
Do you want CRPGs to just remain a niche market or expand?


CRPG's today are completely different from CRPG's of the past. Also they've already become mainstream.

When it comes to maps I want a functional map. The maps in BG2 are pretty not that functional. The maps in DA:O are functional not pretty. I simply need to know where to go. I do not need eyecandy on a map. But that is my opinion. But remember I aslo played Wizardry 1 (which was awesome for its time) in black and white, so I am not that big on eyecandy. But YMMV.


Actually I think Baldur's Gate's minimaps did a better job of showing you where to go. They allow you to actually see what the building you're looking for looks like, where as DA:O's minimaps only tell you the direction it's in.

#39
Haexpane

Haexpane
  • Members
  • 2 711 messages
and in BG you can click on the map and your party will sometimes auto path there. Prettier, more functional, and flat out cooler.



I also get a kick out of people calling DAO a "CRPG" when it's on consoles and PC

#40
Murphys_Law

Murphys_Law
  • Members
  • 113 messages

attackfighter wrote...

I started another thread here about some of the major problems I had with Dragon Age: Origins. Despite clarifications that I wasn't simply "whining that DA:O isn't as good as Baldurs Gate" the thread still turned into a fight between the two series. Due to the popularity of the subject and the numerous points presented, I think that this "fight" warrants it's own thread.


You quite literally made comparsions with BG and frankly those comparsions were the central part of your argument.  I fail to see how the thread wasn't anything but DA:O isnt as good as BG, as that is apparently the ruler you use to measure a great game.  I really wish people would just ignore/put it out of their minds/not write about any comparsions with BG because of the massive amount of rtheroic and nostroglia that normally goes into those comparsions.  Talk about Dragon Age: Origins and what it can do to improve (and please clearly show what you loved/liked too so I know you are not a whiny baby) and let that be your major point and stop looking to the past for ideas.

Modifié par Murphys_Law, 18 février 2010 - 02:03 .


#41
GithCheater

GithCheater
  • Members
  • 808 messages
A statistically insignificant poll seems to indicate that DAO is slightly preferred over BG.

http://social.biowar...577/polls/1720/

Modifié par GithCheater, 18 février 2010 - 02:35 .


#42
Nogaurd

Nogaurd
  • Members
  • 46 messages
I love BG2. Why?

Well it was the first RPG I had played on a computer since the old SSI Gold Box games. Remember those?



I loved my Sorcerer. Stop time, spam magic missiles, summon etc. Loved it. The Xpac was great and I also enjoyed IWD1 (and xpacs) and 2.



DAO for me is a different type of game. I enjoy it a hell of a lot. More than BG2? No. But I enjoy it just as much. I just wish you could have a few more people in your party. I really miss my......



Fighter

Rogue

Paladin

Sorcerer

Ranger

Cleric



Well, my 2c worth.

#43
Nogaurd

Nogaurd
  • Members
  • 46 messages
Edit: Double post. Sorry about that.

Modifié par Nogaurd, 19 février 2010 - 12:49 .


#44
attackfighter

attackfighter
  • Members
  • 90 messages

GithCheater wrote...

A statistically insignificant poll seems to indicate that DAO is slightly preferred over BG.

http://social.biowar...577/polls/1720/


Considering that these forums are solely about DA:O and Mass Effect 2, that's not very surprising.

From what I've observed on neutral forums, the majority of people were very dissapointed in DA:O and many flat out hated it, so I wouldn't exactly trust the fanboys around here:P

#45
Red Frostraven

Red Frostraven
  • Members
  • 237 messages
... I think you're a tad hard on the companions in Dragon Age.
The problem beeing, your characters talked to YOU in baldur's gate, when THEY felt like it (after X hours of gameplay after quest Y). The average run-through was about 100 hours, so the dialogue was spread out pretty heavily. But it was spread out.

In dragon age, I quest for three hours, then pick the new dialogue options in the camp before I go to bed.
The game is kind of forced to do this, because the story is just too short to have companions fetch your attention every fifteen minutes to build up your relationship with them -- like they talked to your charcter every hour like in BG2 -- so the developers chose to let you talk to them instead, when you feel like it.
Problem is, when everything happens when YOU tell things to happen, characters become less interesting.
...
I expect dialogue when I enter the camp.
Not when traveling.
The fact that your companions TOOK your attention in BG2 caused them to seem more alive.
There were five companions with you at all times in BG2, and many of them interacted with eachother and forced you to listen by normal dialogues.

I love that characters interact with eachother in Dragon Age, but I wish they interacted with ME half as much as with eachother. Or one quarter. I'd settle for one tenth!
But at the very least talk to me, or I will feel alone. Talking to, and talking with are two entirely different breeds of conversation.
When characters "talk TO you", they start the conversation. That is a forceful action which bonds the player with that character.
When you talk with them you start the conversation every single time, which makes them just another NPC with dialogues which may lead to loot.

The same is true ingame: I skip a lot of dialogues I initiate because I know there will be a quest added to my list.
I listen to the NPCs that come and talk TO me.

maxernst wrote...

Minsc was the mindless barbarian with the hamster. A completely 1-dimensional character.


Very funny, considering that the development of minsc progressed YEARS ahead of the making of the game:
He was originally a pen and paper character some of the developers used in a Dark Sun campaign.

His Giant Space Hamster isn't necessarily just a hamster: If Minsc is truthful, the hamster IS actually an intelligent alien hamster-like lifeform bred to minatyre size for the purpose of light travels on the ground, beeing wiser and more intelligent than most ranger animal companions.
It also would explain why Minsc appears to be mad. He has actually listened to and followed an alien lifeform's advice and may have started to see the world differently through the advice of his companion.
This is not something I make up, minatyre giant space hamsters ARE D&D source material, albeit probably just random material provided for fun by Wizards of the Coast -- it is officially D&D source material, used by Black Isle.

Note that the Black Isle developers have never said Minsc is insane, nor have they said that Boo is a regular hamster.
Other than that, if anything made minsc insane rather just unsane and unsanitarty, it was the death of Dynaheir: He wasn't too bad in BG1, but in BG2 he's pretty messed up.
... and I actually felt for him and HOPED there was a quest to restore (a part) of his sanity.

...
You may think he's one-dimensional, but I beg to differ. His dialogue is ment to be witty and lighthearted, but he is also disturbingly accurate in his assumptions provided by boo.

Finally.
Most people in the Dungeons and Dragons setting have never seen nor heard about most types of dragons, and don't know that gods exist in the D&D world. Raise Dead and Ressurection are spells that not even kings can afford when they fall in battle... and how many people in the game world EXACTLY, do you think have actually interacted with extraterrestial mindflayers and aquired the knowledge of there actually BEEING giant space hamsters in the D&D world considering people don't know about dragons despite there beeing thousands of them?

...
THAT is a quite disturbing and game altering observation right there.
Boo is in fact a giant space hamster: The only way Minsc, a simple barbarian, could have known about the existence of such creatures is if someone told him. He has an effing hamster. What if that hamster told him about giant space hamsters?
The plot thickens.

Don't take me too serious on this matter, because I'm certainly not taking this discussion very seriously myself, but all I've stated is the truth.
Source material for giant space hamsters: 
The Spacejammer campaign setting for Advanced Dungeons and Dragons.

If you bother to read the source material, why of ALL THINGS would Minsc know about giant space hamsters (which is too fantastical to be thought up by D&D characters randomly) and not EVER mention Thri-Kreen or other D&D space creatures -- creatures that are both more dangerous and more fantastical than magical hamsters?

Remember that next time you play: Chances are -- Minsc is sane or at least not as insane as the developers want us to believe, and Boo is actually a giant space hamster bred to minatyre size by extraterrestials like mindflayers, and Boo itself told Minsc about their existence... and listen to Minsc whenever he tells you what boo has told him... just try. And see if he's ever mistaken. EVER.

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 18 février 2010 - 03:35 .


#46
Murphys_Law

Murphys_Law
  • Members
  • 113 messages

Haexpane wrote...

BanditGR wrote...

Your comparison serves very little point I'm afraid. Most people nowadays are probably...too young to realize that Baldur's Gate was released under a different gaming philosophy, favoring content and an amazing storyline over stunning graphics and Hollywood actor voice overs. By focusing on a rather limited amount of characters, spanning over 1-2 games (and expansions) allowed players to form bonds with the characters, understand their personalities and ultimately appreciate them more for what they were. You are correct that most featured RPG characters nowadays are largely forgettable, with a few exceptions that simply verify the rule.

The truth of the matter is, Baldur's Gate took no real risks, as a CRPG, considering that it "borrowed" the Forgotten Realms world and the AD&D ruleset.  al and steps are taken in the right direction. Personally, I'm trying to stay positive and optimistic.


Well you make a great case for why BG2 was a better game (which is unarguable, BG2 is considered one of the best games of all time, probably the best party based RPG)

But BG2 didnt borrow AD&D it licensed it.    


You heard it here folks, it is "unarguable".  You are not even allowed to have an opinion because it is a fact of the universe.  How can Dragon Age stand against this ultimate truth, who cares if the "truth" is blinded by nostaglia and rhetoric?

#47
Murphys_Law

Murphys_Law
  • Members
  • 113 messages

attackfighter wrote...

GithCheater wrote...

A statistically insignificant poll seems to indicate that DAO is slightly preferred over BG.

http://social.biowar...577/polls/1720/


Considering that these forums are solely about DA:O and Mass Effect 2, that's not very surprising.

From what I've observed on neutral forums, the majority of people were very dissapointed in DA:O and many flat out hated it, so I wouldn't exactly trust the fanboys around here:P


From what I've observed on neutral forums, the majority of people were very pleased with DA:O and many flat out loved it, so I wouldn't exactly trust the BG nostalogic, DA:O haters around here.  See I can make bull**** ancedoctal ecidence too, me r good at making arguments!  Yeah I am sure EA/Bioware is really upset that the "majority" of people in "neutral" forums "flat out hated" DA:O.    In fact, I think I can hear them now crying all the way to the bank.  I noticed you forgot to even compare the sales numbers of the two games...funny how the thing that actually means anything gets neglated in both of your forum rant threads and the majority of "DA:O is ****" threads.

#48
Red Frostraven

Red Frostraven
  • Members
  • 237 messages

GithCheater wrote...

A statistically insignificant poll seems to indicate that DAO is slightly preferred over BG.

http://social.biowar...577/polls/1720/


A poll. On the official Dragon Age forums... saying that Dragon Age is just barely prefered over Baldur's Gate.

Make one on the Baldur's Gate forums, too, and splice the results to one...

#49
GeorgeZip

GeorgeZip
  • Members
  • 150 messages
While this game is awesome and imrproves the gameplay by leaps and bounds from BG, with a few exceptions it is missing some of the flavor. The npc approval system works well, better than the alignments, but it would be nice if they initiated more conversations with you. Lots of little short talks versus long player initiated interrogations.



BG2 was better with all the unexpected stuff that happens. Like:

- walking into a tavern, opening a secret door and facing a demi-lich.

- walking past a door in the docks and being transported into the Twisted Rune.

- being captured by fish people from your ship just when you think you've escaped a prison

- a spaceship that crash landed in the slums

- entering a fireplace portal and going to a planer prison



Alot of that wouldn't fit this game, but there's not too much that makes you go wow, didn't expect that. The ice cathedral was about the only thing that seemed an amazing unexpected setting.

#50
Guiomar

Guiomar
  • Members
  • 92 messages
What i miss from Bg 2 on DA are sidequests like the murder investigation on Athkatla, Assaulting a troll infested castle, getting your own planar globe etc. I also miss the Riddles hehehe :P They are both great games though