281 réponses à ce sujet

[artmonster1967]

Xalm Grey wrote...

 Yet they market it as an apple and its really an orange.

wasn't that yesterday's argument?

kinda running out of justifications arent we?

.

[Shplane]

aliandracy wrote...

My favorite part of the post was when you mentioned "fanboi mode" then talked about how Hideo Kojima makes such brilliant cinematics. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find someone that is much of a fanboy as yourself.

While the OP IS a blithering idiot, one cannot deny that Kojima is awesome.

[JEBesh]

Xalm Grey wrote...

Sorry man but i couldn't take your post too serious when you couldn't even give me a good source of info that didn't have me diving through threads while this game was in development just to find out they are using 10 year old mechanics. Sorry man i'm like most other people out there that bought this, bought it by name ( Bioware ) and after reading misleading reviews ( Gamespot ) and seeing the trailers showcasing this game to be something it isn't. It stops being my fault after i did a reasonable amount of research that just ended up in this fiasco. Marketing is how ALOT of companies make their money. The companies that advertise one thing and hand out another like they've done here only stand to lose people in the future. I'm hardly a long sole voice here. There are many many people that share my complaints. Some don't granted. To those that are having fun thats great. But they could still make this game fun for the people that expected what was advertised in a patch. Better AI. That doesn't affect any of you BG players. You still can turn tactics off and have your micro management. Why anyone is fighting this idea is beyond me. All they are doing is losing money.

Diving through threads? I must have been following a different game, because every other preview I read mentioned Baldur's Gate. In fact, I believe the very review you're complaining about mentioned micromanaging spells in Baldur's Gate tradition. Your disdain for "10 year old mechanics" should have set off an alarm right there. Hell, even the damn Wikipedia article tells you immediately that it was described as the spiritual successor to BG. Once again, it's ridiculous to expect every game to cater to everyone's taste. It would be absolutely stupid of me to ask for tactical cRPG gameplay in Mass Effect, and I don't consider the fact that it doesn't offer that a flaw. I'll tell you once more: Dragon Age is not an action RPG. The fact that it is not an action RPG is not an objective flaw. The only error on BioWare's part was the ridiculous marketing campaign which obviously mislead people who make impulse purchases.

[Wardawg1001]

Xalm Grey wrote...

JEBesh wrote...

Xalm Grey wrote...

10 minutes of research on what site? Gamespot? Have you read their review? I missed the part where they mentioned the micro-management and tedium. And the part where its nothing like KOTOR or anything bioware has released in the last 10 years.

10 minutes of research on.. I don't know.. the games website? Maybe even a quick Youtube video of the gameplay? I'm sure one could conjure up some fantastical method of getting information through the internet. It's a stretch, I know.

Is it REALLY that hard a stretch for you people to see how their last few games could lead to this kind of accidental frustration?

Sure. Some people who are used to ME, KotOR and JE could certainly be put off by DA:O. What's the point here? Do you think it somehow justifies any of your reasoning? What of the transition from BG gameplay to the games you mentioned? Is the transition that moves away from the gameplay you prefer the only relevant one? You think there weren't long time BioWare fans who were put off by ME? Gee, that must be one of ME's flaws, since it didn't cater to everyone's taste. BioWare should have made it a tactical/action RPG/FPS/dance sim to truly warrant a perfect score. This was again the point of the "shooter comparison." If it's a style of gameplay you don't enjoy, then it simply isn't for you.

Everyone here is so hard on trying to defend an obvious flaw in their
marketing campaign and obvious oversight of the players they have
gained over the 10 years since BG. They could have made this easily
accessable to both parties. Yet they market it as an apple and its
really an orange.

I understand you're new to the forums, but it's a pretty universally shared opinion that the marketing campaign was botched. You should have been around back when the "Violence" trailer was released. Once again, when spending your money, you should be making an informed purchase. I would never recommend anyone to take marketing as anything more than hot air.

Sorry man but i couldn't take your post too serious when you couldn't even give me a good source of info that didn't have me diving through threads while this game was in development just to find out they are using 10 year old mechanics. Sorry man i'm like most other people out there that bought this, bought it by name ( Bioware ) and after reading misleading reviews ( Gamespot ) and seeing the trailers showcasing this game to be something it isn't. It stops being my fault after i did a reasonable amount of research that just ended up in this fiasco. Marketing is how ALOT of companies make their money. The companies that advertise one thing and hand out another like they've done here only stand to lose people in the future. I'm hardly a lone sole voice here. There are many many people that share my complaints. Some don't granted. To those that are having fun thats great. But they could still make this game fun for the people that expected what was advertised in a patch. Better AI. That doesn't affect any of you BG players. You still can turn tactics off and have your micro management. Why anyone is fighting this idea is beyond me. All they are doing is losing money.

If you disagree about that money loss comment, just look at WoW. While some of you vilify it and the people that play it, it has made more money in a year than Bioware stands to ever see from this game. Because Blizzard had the common sense to market to MAINSTREAM people. Not a niche.

You must be trying really hard to not find this information. Heres a quote for you right from the official FAQ:

Dragon Age: Origins is a dark heroic fantasy set in a unique world. As
the spiritual successor of BioWare's popular Baldur's Gate series of
games, it uses a pause-and-play tactical combat system. Play in
over-the-shoulder mode, or the more tactical top-down view. Dragon Age:
Origins features a stunning amount of cinematic dialog. Players will be
able to acquire unique party members. These party members will have
their own motivations for accompanying the player.

If you know anything about Baldurs Gate (please note that it mentioned NOTHING of its other games as inspiration for DAO, while clearly mentioning BG), then you should know what you are getting into from this information. If not, go do a little research, watch a gameplay video or two. Or you could have watched some of the gameplay videos that were available pre-release which clearly show how the combat system works (pausing and everything!). Or you could haev waited a week and watched a plethora of gameplay videos before purchasing. The fact that you based your purchase decided for a game based on CINEMATIC advertisements which NEVER EVER EVER portray a game the way you actually play it is your fault alone. And how is it Biowares fault if GameSpot or other reviewers portray the game as something its not (and I haven't read the reviews, but I'm guessing they arent as misleading as you state)?

[Xalm Grey]

Diving through threads? I must have been following a different game, because every other preview I read mentioned Baldur's Gate. In fact, I believe the very review you're complaining about mentioned micromanaging spells in Baldur's Gate tradition. Your disdain for "10 year old mechanics" should have set off an alarm right there. Hell, even the damn Wikipedia article tells you immediately that it was described as the spiritual successor to BG. Once again, it's ridiculous to expect every game to cater to everyone's taste. It would be absolutely stupid of me to ask for tactical cRPG gameplay in Mass Effect, and I don't consider the fact that it doesn't offer that a flaw. I'll tell you once more: Dragon Age is not an action RPG. The fact that it is not an action RPG is not an objective flaw. The only error on BioWare's part was the ridiculous marketing campaign which obviously mislead people who make impulse purchases.

You are implying they they screwed up their own marketing campaign and i'm somehow supposed to know better? Do you even read what you write before you write it? Thats asinine. And saying something is the spiritual successor to something else doesn't mean its an exact copy of it. The double cheeseburger is the spiritual successor to the cheeseburger but its added a patty to it. Something new with something old. It can mean alot of things. I find people clinging to these two mentionings of BG's successor to be running low on a valid arguement honestly.

[Xalm Grey]

If you disagree about that money loss comment, just look at WoW. While some of you vilify it and the people that play it, it has made more money in a year than Bioware stands to ever see from this game. Because Blizzard had the common sense to market to MAINSTREAM people. Not a niche.

You must be trying really hard to not find this information. Heres a quote for you right from the official FAQ:

Dragon Age: Origins is a dark heroic fantasy set in a unique world. As
the spiritual successor of BioWare's popular Baldur's Gate series of
games, it uses a pause-and-play tactical combat system. Play in
over-the-shoulder mode, or the more tactical top-down view. Dragon Age:
Origins features a stunning amount of cinematic dialog. Players will be
able to acquire unique party members. These party members will have
their own motivations for accompanying the player.

If you know anything about Baldurs Gate (please note that it mentioned NOTHING of its other games as inspiration for DAO, while clearly mentioning BG), then you should know what you are getting into from this information. If not, go do a little research, watch a gameplay video or two. Or you could have watched some of the gameplay videos that were available pre-release which clearly show how the combat system works (pausing and everything!). Or you could haev waited a week and watched a plethora of gameplay videos before purchasing. The fact that you based your purchase decided for a game based on CINEMATIC advertisements which NEVER EVER EVER portray a game the way you actually play it is your fault alone. And how is it Biowares fault if GameSpot or other reviewers portray the game as something its not (and I haven't read the reviews, but I'm guessing they arent as misleading as you state)?

I remember the pause and play tactics being a highlight of ME too. Whats your point? I'm still waiting for one that doesn't rely on everyone having this huge BG knowledge. I admit i never played it. I started with NWN 1 and even there you didn't need to abuse pause. That was back in 01. Why in 09 would i think they would suddenly throw a roadblock to most mainstream people with that one line "dark heroic fantasy set in a unique world. As
the spiritual successor of BioWare's popular Baldur's Gate series". Thats a bloody crutch for your arguement. Thats all.

Modifié par Xalm Grey, 09 novembre 2009 - 01:53 .

[Wardawg1001]

They changed a lot. Like the entire rule system. And how spells are learned and cast. And they castrated the race/class combination's down to about 1/10 of what was available in BG2. The tactics system is a more powerful version of the very weak AI from BG2. They allowed for a first person (and other variations of non-isometric views) camera. Items and equipment have been changed greatly, scrolls and wands removed, the magic effects available to items are entirely different. And this is just the start.



Your ignorance is digging you a very deep hole. Just climb out now.

[JEBesh]

Xalm Grey wrote...

You are implying they they screwed up their own marketing campaign and i'm somehow supposed to know better? Do you even read what you write before you write it? Thats asinine. And saying something is the spiritual successor to something else doesn't mean its an exact copy of it. The double cheeseburger is the spiritual successor to the cheeseburger but its added a patty to it. Something new with something old. It can mean alot of things. I find people clinging to these two mentionings of BG's successor to be running low on a valid arguement honestly.

Yes, you are supposed to know better. As I said before, you should never take marketing as anything more than hot air. I can only imagine your dissapointment if you applied your same impulsive standards to the Fable series. And no, "spiritual successor" does not mean "BG3," and DA:O is certainly neither BG3 nor an exact copy. The point is that it was made for people who enjoy BG style gameplay. This does not mean that it appeals exclusively to that group, though. It would be ridiculous to assume that everyone who didn't play BG didn't enjoy DA:O's combat, but if you have a particular dislike for these mechanics, it should have been made clear that it wasn't for you.

[fairandbalancedfan]

JEBesh wrote...
snip

sorry to butt in, But JEebesh, long time, no see.

[artmonster1967]

hehe....



this is getting good now.



*crunch crunch.

[KingSarevok]

JEBesh wrote...

Yes, you are supposed to know better. As I said before, you should never take marketing as anything more than hot air. I can only imagine your dissapointment if you applied your same impulsive standards to the Fable series. And no, "spiritual successor" does not mean "BG3," and DA:O is certainly neither BG3 nor an exact copy. The point is that it was made for people who enjoy BG style gameplay. This does not mean that it appeals exclusively to that group, though. It would be ridiculous to assume that everyone who didn't play BG didn't enjoy DA:O's combat, but if you have a particular dislike for these mechanics, it should have been made clear that it wasn't for you.

Discussion over.

[JEBesh]

fairandbalancedfan wrote...

sorry to butt in, But JEebesh, long time, no see.

Indeed. I was busy playing the game.

[Wardawg1001]

You dont need any knowledge of BG whatsoever to play this game. Hell it would probably only hinder you. My point is that when the game is advertised as a spiritual successor to another game, you can't possibly sit here and say you had no warning about what this game was going to be like while admitting you dont **** sh*t about BG. There are no roadblocks thrown here either. You act like this game is going to be a massive failure because of the pause-and-play system, while so far its gotten amazing reviews, and most people are still expecting a huge success out of it.



It sounds like your real gripe is with the difficulty and/or the micro-managing involved, which is not a fault of the game, but a fault in your skill. Take a look at the forums, there are people who have already beat the game on nightmare. Either learn the game, or turn down the difficulty, and if you still cant beat it on easy, you just cant play well, thats ALL THERE IS TO IT. I've been playing the entire game on normal mode, and beyond tactics the ONLY times I've switched to a character other than my main were healing potions and a couple battles where I had to take extra care to take out a mage quickly.

[Xalm Grey]

JEBesh wrote...

Xalm Grey wrote...

You are implying they they screwed up their own marketing campaign and i'm somehow supposed to know better? Do you even read what you write before you write it? Thats asinine. And saying something is the spiritual successor to something else doesn't mean its an exact copy of it. The double cheeseburger is the spiritual successor to the cheeseburger but its added a patty to it. Something new with something old. It can mean alot of things. I find people clinging to these two mentionings of BG's successor to be running low on a valid arguement honestly.

Yes, you are supposed to know better. As I said before, you should never take marketing as anything more than hot air. I can only imagine your dissapointment if you applied your same impulsive standards to the Fable series. And no, "spiritual successor" does not mean "BG3," and DA:O is certainly neither BG3 nor an exact copy. The point is that it was made for people who enjoy BG style gameplay. This does not mean that it appeals exclusively to that group, though. It would be ridiculous to assume that everyone who didn't play BG didn't enjoy DA:O's combat, but if you have a particular dislike for these mechanics, it should have been made clear that it wasn't for you.

No. Just no. You admitted they screwed their marketing campaign up. Yes i got caught in it. But its ludicrous to blame it on me when you even admitted they screwed the pooch. The rest of your arguement falls on deaf ears for me after you admitted that and then blindly follow through. And you totally didn't get what i meant with the very easy to follow cheeseburger line. They could have had your ever so loved BG combat easily optional by turning off the AI which you can do in game without alienating the rest of us dopes that spent money on their title. I won't be buying anymore Bioware games after this fiasco though i don't think.

If i was the lone voice on these forums saying the same thing i might tend to agree with you, but i'm not. There's a vast majority of us that don't like what they've fed to us for our hard earned money. Doubt that? Just look at the mess of new threads hourly about this. Hard to deny that.

[JEBesh]

KingSarevok wrote...

JEBesh wrote...

Yes, you are supposed to know better. As I said before, you should never take marketing as anything more than hot air. I can only imagine your dissapointment if you applied your same impulsive standards to the Fable series. And no, "spiritual successor" does not mean "BG3," and DA:O is certainly neither BG3 nor an exact copy. The point is that it was made for people who enjoy BG style gameplay. This does not mean that it appeals exclusively to that group, though. It would be ridiculous to assume that everyone who didn't play BG didn't enjoy DA:O's combat, but if you have a particular dislike for these mechanics, it should have been made clear that it wasn't for you.

Discussion over.

If only that was so.

Modifié par JEBesh, 09 novembre 2009 - 02:00 .

[Xalm Grey]

Wardawg1001 wrote...

You dont need any knowledge of BG whatsoever to play this game. Hell it would probably only hinder you. My point is that when the game is advertised as a spiritual successor to another game, you can't possibly sit here and say you had no warning about what this game was going to be like while admitting you dont **** sh*t about BG. There are no roadblocks thrown here either. You act like this game is going to be a massive failure because of the pause-and-play system, while so far its gotten amazing reviews, and most people are still expecting a huge success out of it.

It sounds like your real gripe is with the difficulty and/or the micro-managing involved, which is not a fault of the game, but a fault in your skill. Take a look at the forums, there are people who have already beat the game on nightmare. Either learn the game, or turn down the difficulty, and if you still cant beat it on easy, you just cant play well, thats ALL THERE IS TO IT. I've been playing the entire game on normal mode, and beyond tactics the ONLY times I've switched to a character other than my main were healing potions and a couple battles where I had to take extra care to take out a mage quickly.

"I" don't act like anything. "I" wanted this game to be something i could enjoy. Instead of letting me constructively get any points out though to the developers i'm having to deal with trolls and people that have nothing better to do than clutter up the forums. If you are enjoying your game so much go play it and **** off already. Pretty simple aint it?

[Wardawg1001]

Xalm Grey wrote...

JEBesh wrote...

Xalm Grey wrote...

You are implying they they screwed up their own marketing campaign and i'm somehow supposed to know better? Do you even read what you write before you write it? Thats asinine. And saying something is the spiritual successor to something else doesn't mean its an exact copy of it. The double cheeseburger is the spiritual successor to the cheeseburger but its added a patty to it. Something new with something old. It can mean alot of things. I find people clinging to these two mentionings of BG's successor to be running low on a valid arguement honestly.

Yes, you are supposed to know better. As I said before, you should never take marketing as anything more than hot air. I can only imagine your dissapointment if you applied your same impulsive standards to the Fable series. And no, "spiritual successor" does not mean "BG3," and DA:O is certainly neither BG3 nor an exact copy. The point is that it was made for people who enjoy BG style gameplay. This does not mean that it appeals exclusively to that group, though. It would be ridiculous to assume that everyone who didn't play BG didn't enjoy DA:O's combat, but if you have a particular dislike for these mechanics, it should have been made clear that it wasn't for you.

No. Just no. You admitted they screwed their marketing campaign up. Yes i got caught in it. But its ludicrous to blame it on me when you even admitted they screwed the pooch. The rest of your arguement falls on deaf ears for me after you admitted that and then blindly follow through. And you totally didn't get what i meant with the very easy to follow cheeseburger line. They could have had your ever so loved BG combat easily optional by turning off the AI which you can do in game without alienating the rest of us dopes that spent money on their title. I won't be buying anymore Bioware games after this fiasco though i don't think.

If i was the lone voice on these forums saying the same thing i might tend to agree with you, but i'm not. There's a vast majority of us that don't like what they've fed to us for our hard earned money. Doubt that? Just look at the mess of new threads hourly about this. Hard to deny that.

LOL. The mess of threads that are just like this one, where a single idiot who doesnt know how to play the game gets ridiculed by most of the community for not knowing what the hell he is talking about. Every game in the world is going to have people who dont like it, this is not a secret. You however, are claiming its not your fault that you didnt realize that you couldnt run through a party based RPG without clicking over to another character or spending 30 minutes learning the tactics system. Just settle with the fact that you stupidly bought a game based on cinematic trailers without reading the FAQ, researching the games its based off of, or watching a single in-game video of either the games it was based off or the game itself.

[JEBesh]

Xalm Grey wrote...

No. Just no. You admitted they screwed their marketing campaign up. Yes i got caught in it. But its ludicrous to blame it on me when you even admitted they screwed the pooch. The rest of your arguement falls on deaf ears for me after you admitted that and then blindly follow through. And you totally didn't get what i meant with the very easy to follow cheeseburger line. They could have had your ever so loved BG combat easily optional by turning off the AI which you can do in game without alienating the rest of us dopes that spent money on their title. I won't be buying anymore Bioware games after this fiasco though i don't think.

If i was the lone voice on these forums saying the same thing i might tend to agree with you, but i'm not. There's a vast majority of us that don't like what they've fed to us for our hard earned money. Doubt that? Just look at the mess of new threads hourly about this. Hard to deny that.

I haven't "admitted" anything new. I was on board with the people who were upset with the ridiculous trailers months ago. I knew it would mislead people. I anticipated hundreds of posters just like you come release day. I know it would be a stretch to expect the majority of people to make informed decisions with their money, but I can only hope to point out the error in that so this you don't end up in this horrible predicament again. Do research. I'm not making any point in defense of the marketing per se. The problem is judging the game's merits based on the marketing campaign.

Modifié par JEBesh, 09 novembre 2009 - 02:09 .

[Xalm Grey]

LOL. The mess of threads that are just like this one, where a single idiot who doesnt know how to play the game gets ridiculed by most of the community for not knowing what the hell he is talking about. Every game in the world is going to have people who dont like it, this is not a secret. You however, are claiming its not your fault that you didnt realize that you couldnt run through a party based RPG without clicking over to another character or spending 30 minutes learning the tactics system. Just settle with the fact that you stupidly bought a game based on cinematic trailers without reading the FAQ, researching the games its based off of, or watching a single in-game video of either the games it was based off or the game itself.

A single idiot? Perhaps you should go back to school and learn how to count. There's alot of threads just like this one. And being ridiculed by this "community", well first off calling it a community is comical. Very. Prisoners treat eachother better than these people do here on these forums. Community is a stretch. Secondly i'm hardly alone in my complaints. But if mouthing off to me on these forums is better than playing the game that you so love than to each their own. But to claim i'm of a minority of complaints is ignorant at best. |

[Xalm Grey]

I haven't "admitted" anything new. I was on board with the people who were upset with the ridiculous trailers months ago. I knew it would mislead people. I anticipated hundreds of posters just like you come release day. I know it would be a stretch to expect the majority of people to make informed decisions with their money, but I can only hope to point out the error in that so that you don't end up in this horrible predicament again. Do research. I'm not making any point in defense of the marketing per se. The problem is judging the game's merits based on the marketing campaign.

Wow and i'm in the wrong here huh?

 I anticipated hundreds of posters just like you come release day. I know it would be a stretch to expect the majority of people

Are you trying to make my arguement for me? If it was "minority" of people i could see it but even you have to admit its the majority. Your arguement is sinking, i hope you can swim.

[andysdead]

i cheated.



in all honesty, though, i think the OP is nitpicking, i just completed this game and it is beautiful, with an amazing story line, excellent facial expressions and voice acting, and a familiar combat system (i played NWN 1 and 2, and KOTOR 1 and 2).



i feel very strongly that this is the best RPG i have ever played, even going as far back as the original Baldur's Gate. i am an old-school RPG'er, i've played pen-and-paper D&D ffs, before Wizards of the Coast bought TSR out. Never before have I felt so exalted after completing a game, or so attached to the characters within said game. Dragon Age is BioWare's masterwork, I really don't think it gets better than this.

[Diteron]

I agree with the OP except for the difficulty. This game has been far too easy on "hard" so far for me.

[JEBesh]

Xalm Grey wrote...

Are you trying to make my arguement for me? If it was "minority" of people i could see it but even you have to admit its the majority. Your arguement is sinking, i hope you can swim.

Good grief, you are dense. Yes, I expected the majority of people to be mislead by the marketing campaign. I know that the majority of people (i.e. "the mainstream") are going to be mislead by a simple trailer. I know that this was BioWare's error in believing that people would actually research the game before they spend their money, as opposed to seeing a trailer and thinking "Ooh, shiny graphics. Anime backflips. Do want." In a really simple to understand summary, the marketing was botched. It is unfortunate for you that you are in the large group of people who don't know better than that to take it seriously; without disregarding marketing to make an informed decision after said marketing has brought the game to your attention.

The problem, once again, is judging the game based on the marketing. I don't know how I can make that more clear.

Modifié par JEBesh, 09 novembre 2009 - 02:23 .

[Xalm Grey]

JEBesh wrote...

Xalm Grey wrote...

Are you trying to make my arguement for me? If it was "minority" of people i could see it but even you have to admit its the majority. Your arguement is sinking, i hope you can swim.

Good grief, you are dense. Yes, I expected the majority of people to be mislead by the marketing campaign. I know that the majority of people (i.e. "the mainstream") are going to be mislead by a simple trailer. I know that this was BioWare's error in believing that people would actually research the game before they spend their money, as opposed to seeing a trailer and thinking "Ooh, shiny graphics. Anime backflips. Do want." In a really simple to understand summary, the marketing was botched. It is unfortunate for you that you are in the large group of people who don't know better than to disregard marketing and make an informed decision after said marketing has brought the game to your attention.

The problem, once again, is judging the game based on the marketing. I don't know how I can make that more clear.

You are calling me dense and yet you are conceeding points to me in arguements. You sir are the thick one. They screwed the pooch and you are defending them even after admitting they screwed up. How cute. Do they pay you to be their patsy? I'd love to have someone take lashings for me when i screw up. Whats your price?

[JEBesh]

Xalm Grey wrote...

You are calling me dense and yet you are conceeding points to me in arguements. You sir are the thick one. They screwed the pooch and you are defending them even after admitting they screwed up. How cute. Do they pay you to be their patsy? I'd love to have someone take lashings for me when i screw up. Whats your price?

What am I conceding to you? That they botched the marketing? I "conceded" that long before you were ever aware of this game. I wasn't aware I was ever saying anything contrary to that. Yes, I told you it was your error in not making an informed purchase. No, I don't believe I should expect anything more out of the majority. Predictable or not, it is an error.