97 réponses à ce sujet

[CybAnt1]

Why would you suddenly need more books to play earlier editions?

If you're the kind of DM that insists on writing your own modules for your players from scratch (I used to write some of my own, but I also used the premade ones) and wants to do this and only this, I suppose you'll never need anything. 

If you want new (premade) dungeon modules for your players, well, they're only going to be made for the current ruleset. 

[E-Nigma_1972]

[quote]Drake Sigar wrote...

Never got through a single one without cheating though.[quote]

lol, they were really cool though

[Bryy_Miller]

fsfsfsfsfsfsf wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

fsfsfsfsfsfsf wrote...

Bryy_Miller
wrote...

You should remember, that we
don't really have anywhere else to go.

Outside. You can go
outside. Video games are a luxury, not a need.

Did you really
think that is what I meant? 

Yes, I did.

Then I pity you.

Why? For suggesting that you not waste your time waiting for video games to launch?

[Mintyone]

I m a dinosaur. Started playing computer games back in the 80s. I played through the old gold-series (curse of the azure bonds, secret of the silver blades, etc etc). I played bg-series, nwn (mostly on private servers). Did pen and paper in a variety of systems.



As far as I m concerned the single-player fantasy rpg peaked with planescape:torment. The story and companions were truly unique and had a genuine epic feel. Systemwise I was more happy with nwn (I really liked 3rd edition in many respects).



The way things are these days, I doubt we ll see anything like that in the immediate future. Its all consoles or console-ports from now on, with all that that entails. The plot in DA (even the original game) is shallow in comparison and the balance / stats system is ludicrously bad.



The only reason I, and probably many others bought the original DA:O was because of desperation. Bioware really doesnt have any competitors. They are in a defacto monopoly situation. As consumers we dont have alternatives if we want a fantasy single player rpg for the pc.



its really despressing, and reading the fanboys praise recent games makes me feel really old. They just dont know what quality used to be, and thats the truth. Standards have fallen. Maybe its intentional; lower peoples expectations, bribe the review sites, get good sales for low investment and you have happy shareholders....

[Mintyone]

come to think of it, the bad plot in the dragon age setting is unsurprising. Bioware used to be able to draw on the work of TSR and later wizards of the coast. These are companies who, in a gross simplification do nothing but create settings and stat-systems.



Sure they dont have their hands tied any longer by the wizards, but they also cant draw on that immense resource either, and it really shows. I think it was a huge mistake to move away from D&D. I hope I m right and they realize it. I would love to see a game like planescape torment in modern graphics. Its my holy grail of gaming.

[dbkkk]

Mintyone wrote...

As far as I m concerned the single-player fantasy rpg peaked with planescape:torment. The story and companions were truly unique and had a genuine epic feel. Systemwise I was more happy with nwn (I really liked 3rd edition in many respects).

True this ... but then I am a dinosaur also.

P.S. Aren't we supposed to be extinct by now?

[Rendar666]

Are you serious? I'm am so annoyed by this insulting of "common", "Average Joe cheeto munching couch sitting gamers". It's ******* insulting and you need to stop. You literally called gamers who don't play RPGs dumb:

you have to dumb down the game for the *dumb mass* market gamer.

I'm getting sick of this ****. You are insulting an entire group of people because they don't play something you like. Your just a Gamer **** and as such I cannot, and will not, ever respect someone like you. Throw you MASSIVE ego out the window and ******* grow up.

[Murphys_Law]

SuperBaggles1 wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

SuperBaggles1 wrote...

Maybe the OP could also explain to me how marketing to a smaller crowd would ever benefit anybody who's in business in the long run. Because of your passion you'll have for the game? Are you serious? Last time I checked game developers get paid in money...not passion, enthusiasm, and compliments.

"Well, Greg, we made a game that 300 people out of the whole millions and millions of gamers in the world liked. Now let's go file for bankruptcy since we just lost all the money we had cause we invested it in the smaller crowd."

"That's right, Ray, we may be going out of business and we need to find new jobs but at least we have those 300 people's compassion, enthusiasm, and compliments for this game!"

Many companies make a lot of effort to appeal to a small group of loyal/repeat customers.  This can be seen in a wide variety of methods from rewarding repeat customers to giving loyal customers (as in they pay more ) with special products/services.  Do not try to simplify markets by making it seem like the "LOL LETS MARKET THE GAME TO EVERYONE" strategy is the only one in their playbook.  In addition, loyal customers are the best form of marketing one could ask for and these are the customers that will continue to drive the product/service forward in the future even when you slip up.  The "majority" is a lot less forgiving and is exremely fickle, so relaying them for a long period of time isn't very wise.  I haven't even touched the problem of "selling your artistic soul" and trying to make a mass marketed game.  There are a lot of terrible trash games that have tried to appeal to the masses, but guess what you need to have some artistic integrity if it is going to succeed at all.  So the OP has a point, although mixed in with too much elitism and nostalgia for my taste, Bioware should always be wary of balancing the "hardcores" and the "casual" influences.

And yet it seems that it is all the so called "loyal BioWare fans" who seem to be doing the most whining about how Dragon Age isn't BG or NWN 3 but actually has the audacity to be it's own game and universe. How dare BioWare want to make a completely new fantasy IP when all these hardcore RPGers want is to relive the past! Personally I didn't think NWN was all that great of a game. To be fair it's been awhile since I've played it and I may like it more now than I did a few years ago.

Once again, you can make a mass marketed game without selling your artistic soul. Like someone said earlier, video games are a business. These people may love making games but at the end of the day they still have to make a profit. Clearly, though, BioWare is not marketing this game to everyone. Dragon Age is
strictly a fantasy RPG in the spirit of BG (that doesn't mean it is BG
for those of you who can't seem to grasp this simple fact) and not some
sport/racing/shooter/adventure/RPG/flight simulator ultimate super
hybrid game.

You made my point for me.  Loyal fans care enough to make a post on an internet forum "whining" about the game.  The last thing a developer should want is to have nobody "whine", as that is a good sign the game is dead.  I am not interested in what they are whining about because that is all relative on whether you disagree or not, the point is they care enough to "whine".  The masses simply stop playing and care little about improving the game.  I never said you couldn't make a mass marketed game without "selling your artistic soul", I made it quite clear balance is ideal (and stock DA:O has that balance imo).  The OP has a point and recent DLC/expansion talk has me concerned the scale has shifted to the suits.

[Macadami]

Here's the deal....Bioware could've released Dragon Age: Origins with tons of more character builds, much harder combat, complex attack/defense/armor setup(that made an actual difference in game) and basically just retain all of the things us 'hardcore' RPG fans love.......AND ALL OF YOU PEOPLE WOULD"VE STILL LOVED IT.



You bought this game because it's made by Bioware who is synonymous for creating good entertainment. A lot of you would've probably had a very difficult time on hard/nightmare but eventually when you learned the ins and outs(learning is fun kids) you'd completely agree with the OP.

[Onyx Jaguar]

DJ0000 wrote...

I agree with the OP other than comment about us console players being bone heads. Awakening was way too easy and had too much of a hack and slash feel.

Thats not our fault, we use to have the most annoying games on the console platform.  People seem to forget this.

[AlanC9]

Nukenin wrote...

Oh, Bioware started down this treacherous path of deviltry back when they made the boneheaded decision to implement a real-time* combat system in Baldur's Gate.  They haven't turned back yet.



*gods bless the plethora of autopause options they gave us turn-based Luddites, especially in further installments of the Infinity Engine

Whenever I read a post like this I wonder if the poster actually ever played D&D, or if he just started with the Gold Box games. The IE games got D&D pre-3.0 D&D combat pretty much right - you had to call your actions before the initiative roll, rather than waiting for your action the way you do in a true turn-based system like D&D 3.0/3.5. Technically, I suppose you should play the IE without doing anything at all between end-of-round autopauses, but in practice DMs used to rule all over the place as to what a character would do if his called move was impossible or nonsensical before his action came. (The AD&D DMG was no help at all with this.)

[AlanC9]

Mintyone wrote...

come to think of it, the bad plot in the dragon age setting is unsurprising. Bioware used to be able to draw on the work of TSR and later wizards of the coast. These are companies who, in a gross simplification do nothing but create settings and stat-systems.

You're really sticking up for the FR setting? Seriously?

[AlanC9]

fsfsfsfsfsfsf wrote...
The problem with "growing with the new market" though is that at the moment they seem to be trying to satisfy both, and I'm not sure that's possible. I think they need to go one way or the other. 

Get rid of the friendly fire, get rid of the full party and just have one "hero", get rid of the toolset, and go for a pure action RPG like all the other action RPG's out there and it might stand a better chance. Or go the other way and satisfy the likes of me and the legion of old Baldur's Gate fans.

I don't know if they are managing to satisfy both types of gamer at the moment, or are they trying to satisfy both but in fact disappointing both types. I'm sure they will do the right thing, whatever is best for them and EA. At least I had my say.

I'm still looking for some evidence of an actual problem. Dragon Age and Mass Effect are both successful games. You're saying that they somehow won't be in the future, but what's this based on?

[TJSolo]

AlanC9 wrote...

fsfsfsfsfsfsf wrote...
The problem with "growing with the new market" though is that at the moment they seem to be trying to satisfy both, and I'm not sure that's possible. I think they need to go one way or the other. 

Get rid of the friendly fire, get rid of the full party and just have one "hero", get rid of the toolset, and go for a pure action RPG like all the other action RPG's out there and it might stand a better chance. Or go the other way and satisfy the likes of me and the legion of old Baldur's Gate fans.

I don't know if they are managing to satisfy both types of gamer at the moment, or are they trying to satisfy both but in fact disappointing both types. I'm sure they will do the right thing, whatever is best for them and EA. At least I had my say.

I'm still looking for some evidence of an actual problem. Dragon Age and Mass Effect are both successful games. You're saying that they somehow won't be in the future, but what's this based on?

Maybe assumptions of how people view DAO/ ME1, as pre-EA and DAO:A / ME2 as post-EA.
People are looking at the different scope, intended audience, bugs, characters...meh possibly.
It is just a guess. I do not know.

[Realmzmaster]

Mintyone wrote...

come to think of it, the bad plot in the dragon age setting is unsurprising. Bioware used to be able to draw on the work of TSR and later wizards of the coast. These are companies who, in a gross simplification do nothing but create settings and stat-systems.

Sure they dont have their hands tied any longer by the wizards, but they also cant draw on that immense resource either, and it really shows. I think it was a huge mistake to move away from D&D. I hope I m right and they realize it. I would love to see a game like planescape torment in modern graphics. Its my holy grail of gaming.

BioWare did not move away from D & D. Atari owns the license to make games using the D & D ruleset. Until that contract runs out Atari decides who will make the D & D games in conjunction with WOTC which is a division of Hasbro. Atari has Obsidian Entertainment to make their CRPGs. BioWare cannot use the D & D settings because they cannot get a licenseor would have to pay through the nose to Atari and WOTC or give up portion of the royalities. Bioware/EA already has to pay Microsoft and Sony just think how much more DA:O and DA:A would cost if you have to pay Atari and WOTC.

[Andari_Surana]

Poll:  I like to play at what difficulty:
Poll 1
Poll 2

BG2 is my favorite game of all time, however I was actually happy when i heard that DAO was going to have its own ruleset, not D&D.  I thought it was good that developers not feel limited by pen and paper mechanics.  One thing i hated in D&D was the need to rebuff before every battle.   Very time consuming at high levels. 

But DAO did not really replace D&D with a ruleset, they repalced it with spells and tactics that are in no way balanced.  A lot of things are just outright i win buttons, of these mana clash is probably the worst offender. 

I won't regurgitate all the reasons the mechanics are awful, i'll just say that OP is right when you dumb down this game, it brings it in the realm of competing with the Diablo clone games.  RPGs have always been a strategy stronghold for gaming, and i feel let down by DAO.  The fact that bioware made BG and this was the first RPG of that style to be released by them since made this an automatic buy for me, but next time i'll be looking to see if they addressed the concerns of gamers like myself.

Modifié par Andari_Surana, 25 mars 2010 - 06:26 .

[AlanC9]

I don't know if that poll is producing any useful data. I've never felt enough interest to answer it. It's not like Bio needs to find out from polls anyway.

[Massadonious1]

You have the patience to pause and manually execute your combat moves.

You are so more incredibly L337 than the rest of us.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 25 mars 2010 - 06:49 .

[AlanC9]

As for the rest of that post, D&D isn't really any more difficult than the DA system. It's just that mastering D&D doesn't get you as far as mastering DA does. You're at the mercy of blown saves and whatnot in D&D but not DA -- though to some extent that's because the AI doesn't understand spell combinations and has poor spell loadouts -- and you can direct builds in DA in a way you just can't in D&D.



DA may be easier to master, though. Having mastered both, more or less, I can't say which was harder to pick up.

[Grimx0r]

I think this debate is a really important one. As gamers it is impossible to turn back the tide of the conglomo-developers who appeal to the mass market for big bucks. In fact, the hardcore that keeps debating for an increased challenge quite simply doesn't have to be listened to at all. The games will sell without us. So perhaps our energy is better spent in the independant games industry. More small development teams making the old Black Isle/Bioware style of game, I say!

Modifié par Grimx0r, 25 mars 2010 - 07:09 .

[AlanC9]

Clarify, GrimxOr. The difference between old-style Bioware and new is only difficulty? If not, what do you mean?

[TheMadCat]

I'm more curious as to why you think the old Bioware games were a challenge, I'd say DA:O was one of the more difficult games I've played in their lineup (Though still far to easy even on nightmare) and I've played pretty much everything from BG1 and on. They've never been seeking the mind numbing challenge, as they've always been of the "sell to as wide an audience as possible" mind set. I don't think Bioware has changed much since the old days, other then getting stuff our more frequent I suppose but I'm sure that's mostly due to Ricitello cracking the whip.

Off topic here but Alan, are you the same AlanC9 over at the Paradox forums?

Modifié par TheMadCat, 25 mars 2010 - 07:25 .

[MelodicCure]

Never Winter Nights actually sucked. Both of them. One and two. Worst pile of doodoo to come out of Bioware. I rather play Baldur's Gate over again. However I agree with the primary idea behind the post. Lots of devs are starting to jump the band wagon and cator to the crappy console. What next? Star Craft 2 and Diablo 3 for the xbox 360? That would be worthy of a hard laugh that may cause stomach pains for days.

[MelodicCure]

Massadonious1 wrote...

You have the patience to pause and manually execute your combat moves.

You are so more incredibly L337 than the rest of us.

Yea,  some of us actually bought a game to PLAY it and not watch it play for us. 

[Onyx Jaguar]

The Diablo games would work fine on a console



???



Oh I'm sacrificed a few hotkeys, shame I have to dial them up SUCH A PAIN



Hell the first diablo was on console, don't know how it played though... but alas both of those games have nothing preventing them from being on a console.