http://gamingtrend.com
October 02, 2014, 01:18:07 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 30   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Hawke's Adventure (formerly know as Dragon Age II) - Impressions! Mods!  (Read 42342 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #80 on: August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 08, 2010, 08:45:38 PM

There will never be anything like BG2 from them again.

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink
Logged
KePoW
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1877


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: August 08, 2010, 09:09:46 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM

Quote from: cheeba on August 08, 2010, 08:45:38 PM

There will never be anything like BG2 from them again.

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink

Was just about to say the same thing.  DA1 is very close to Baldurs Gate, and I really loved it.

DA2 is starting to sound a little iffy... hopefully it's much ado about nothing.  But if they end up making things a lot different than DA1, it will be a huge disappointment.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #82 on: August 08, 2010, 09:25:56 PM »

Quote from: KePoW on August 08, 2010, 09:09:46 PM

Quote from: TiLT on August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM

Quote from: cheeba on August 08, 2010, 08:45:38 PM

There will never be anything like BG2 from them again.

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink

Was just about to say the same thing.  DA1 is very close to Baldurs Gate, and I really loved it.

DA2 is starting to sound a little iffy... hopefully it's much ado about nothing.  But if they end up making things a lot different than DA1, it will be a huge disappointment.

Yeah, I love fresh ideas and all, but Dragon Age doesn't really need them. If new stuff is going to be tried out, at least do it with something that could do with changing. The overhead view is the one thing that made Dragon Age really stand out for me. Letting me move the camera freely around in 3rd person view isn't the same.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: August 08, 2010, 10:07:58 PM »

Quote from: CeeKay on August 08, 2010, 07:50:08 AM

faith failing, it feels like they are setting things up to be stripped.

dang, that thread sure did fall apart.  I'd bet jersoc could use it for Bioware bashing porn  Tongue
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: August 08, 2010, 10:20:21 PM »

Before it was closed they came to basically the same conclusion I did, Mass Effect 2 was a huge hit due to streamlining so there are really
no reasons to stop doing it with Dragon Age 2. Apparently the toolkit is close enough to the old one that it doesn't make sense releasing a new one.
Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
ScubaV
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 941



View Profile
« Reply #85 on: August 08, 2010, 10:31:09 PM »

I made a post on Qt3 about this as just being one of many examples of a push for homogenization.  DA should have its own style, not be the medieval version of ME.  Sadly the developers/publishers are blinded by $$$ and will do whatever it takes to appeal to the lowest common denominator for sales.  This kind of crap is killing game diversity.
Logged

I have absolute faith in the power of people to be stupid.

My vision is augmented.
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #86 on: August 08, 2010, 10:41:16 PM »

Quote from: Sarkus on August 08, 2010, 07:20:56 PM

Quote from: morlac on August 08, 2010, 03:22:16 PM

"Now, the game mainly sold on console, so we're going the way of the audience"

Hmm.  I thought it sold quite well on the PC?  Anyone have any sales figures?

As always hard numbers are difficult to find.  VGChartz claims the 360 version sold about 1.5m worldwide and the PS3 version about 900,000 worldwide.  If those numbers are correct, that would mean the PC version sold about 800,000 copies, based on the official EA announcement of 3.2m copies "shipped."   

Those figures don't look so terrible and Dante says it beat their expectations.  Looks to me that the PC version was about 1/3rd of their sales.  Can't say for certain but I bet it had a better % of core games vs DLC sales as well.  Seems odd they would just chunk out the PC version if those figures are true.  I realize they are not abandoning it but it seems they will not being doing anything to make it a better experience on the PC by taking advantage of what it offers over the consoles.  If they follow this path it will not sell as well as the first.  Of course they will just point to this as justification for their actions.  Viscous cycle and all that.  Sigh.
Logged

morlac00 on PSN
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: August 08, 2010, 10:58:39 PM »

Using what works doesn't kill diversity. If something helps gameplay then by all means they should use it.
I don't see that many similarities in the story between DA and Mass Effect 1/2. Actually now when I think of it, maybe they should
use some copy writers from ME2 because that story is far stronger than DAs.
Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: August 08, 2010, 11:48:00 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink

Dragon Age was like the margarine of BG2. Group size reduced. Combat was simplified. The number of classes were simplified. Character stats? Removed. Hours of gameplay? Reduced.

Dragon Age was a good game, but it was no Baldur's Gate 2.
Logged
ScubaV
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 941



View Profile
« Reply #89 on: August 09, 2010, 01:33:17 AM »

Except they're not using what works or what is better, they're using what they think is more popular.  I don't think a reduced tactical view is better or a phrase-based wheel dialog system, but the console crowd likes them so Bioware goes with what will get them sales.  They're homogenizing their games.  Ideally, they'd stick to their guns and keep distinct gameplay styles adjusting their budget as necessary to stay profitable.  Sadly, these days it's all AAA or indie and not much in between.  Hence the loss of diversity.
Logged

I have absolute faith in the power of people to be stupid.

My vision is augmented.
KePoW
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1877


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: August 09, 2010, 01:48:14 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 08, 2010, 11:48:00 PM

Quote from: TiLT on August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink

Dragon Age was like the margarine of BG2. Group size reduced. Combat was simplified. The number of classes were simplified. Character stats? Removed. Hours of gameplay? Reduced.

Dragon Age was a good game, but it was no Baldur's Gate 2.

All of those things are technically true, but it still felt like BG to me.  As Bioware said, it was the spiritual successor and it captured that feel to me perfectly.

What did you expect, a total clone of BG down to the exact mechanics?  That's not gonna happen in this day and age.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: August 09, 2010, 03:19:24 AM »

Quote from: KePoW on August 09, 2010, 01:48:14 AM

What did you expect, a total clone of BG down to the exact mechanics?  That's not gonna happen in this day and age.

I didn't really expect much of anything going into the game. I didn't want a clone of BG, but it would have been nice if the game had BG's depth. Really my biggest gripe was with the reduction of the group from 6 to 4. That really sucked the strategy out of the game, IMO. Your party had to pretty much be a rogue, a warrior, and 2 mages. I suppose you could swap out the rogue for another dps mage, but that's not what I'd call variety.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #92 on: August 09, 2010, 04:39:44 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 09, 2010, 03:19:24 AM

Your party had to pretty much be a rogue, a warrior, and 2 mages. I suppose you could swap out the rogue for another dps mage, but that's not what I'd call variety.

Wow, I never knew. I must have run across a glitch, because I made it through with a rogue, a wizard, and two warriors.

Baldur's Gate's "complexity" came from using the AD&D rules which were and continue to be clunky and unwieldy and filled with weird license restrictions. This is why Bioware created their own rules and their own setting in the first place. AD&Ds design is very front-loaded in character advancement, so I feel that Dragon Age has a much more satisfying approach to stats and how my characters develop over time. Don't get fooled by numbers. More numbers doesn't necessarily mean more strategy.
Logged
KePoW
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1877


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: August 09, 2010, 05:47:17 AM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 09, 2010, 04:39:44 AM

Quote from: cheeba on August 09, 2010, 03:19:24 AM

Your party had to pretty much be a rogue, a warrior, and 2 mages. I suppose you could swap out the rogue for another dps mage, but that's not what I'd call variety.

Wow, I never knew. I must have run across a glitch, because I made it through with a rogue, a wizard, and two warriors.

Baldur's Gate's "complexity" came from using the AD&D rules which were and continue to be clunky and unwieldy and filled with weird license restrictions. This is why Bioware created their own rules and their own setting in the first place. AD&Ds design is very front-loaded in character advancement, so I feel that Dragon Age has a much more satisfying approach to stats and how my characters develop over time. Don't get fooled by numbers. More numbers doesn't necessarily mean more strategy.

Exactly, I totally agree.  I wouldn't want to play any video games anymore that strictly adhere to AD&D rules.  It's too rigid for a video game.
Logged
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: August 09, 2010, 07:51:54 AM »

Quote from: ScubaV on August 09, 2010, 01:33:17 AM

Except they're not using what works or what is better, they're using what they think is more popular.  I don't think a reduced tactical view is better or a phrase-based wheel dialog system, but the console crowd likes them so Bioware goes with what will get them sales.  They're homogenizing their games.  Ideally, they'd stick to their guns and keep distinct gameplay styles adjusting their budget as necessary to stay profitable.  Sadly, these days it's all AAA or indie and not much in between.  Hence the loss of diversity.

It would be hard to justify doing DA2 as a AAA title for the PC based on the sales they apparently got.  The PC market is pretty weak if the numbers I mentioned in the other thread are close to accurate.  A AAA RPG from a major developer that was the #9 PC selling game of the year (NPD says) and they only sold 800,000 or so copies?  Even if you grant them some significant digital bump to that, it's still hard to justify focusing the sequel on the PC version when the rushed console version managed 2.5m copies.   

That said, I bet an independent Bioware would approach things differently.  But one of the costs of becoming a dev studio for EA is that you can't have a "well it's ok as long as the PC version breaks even" approach to things.
Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #95 on: August 09, 2010, 11:16:05 AM »

Do not forget that BOTH the market and reviewers agreed that ME2 worked better in most departments.
And what about Fallout3 in that case? It was always more streamlined and simplified compared to games like BG/Fallout1, most here seem to like it.

Let's face it, times move on and so does game technology. What worked before doesn't necessarily work today.

Personally I found Dragon Age on console great except the graphics were quite awful but gameplay is king so it won me over.
Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: August 09, 2010, 11:27:56 AM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 09, 2010, 04:39:44 AM

Wow, I never knew. I must have run across a glitch, because I made it through with a rogue, a wizard, and two warriors.

Wow. Switching out 1 dps for another is a totally radical strategic change! That's some variation right there. I mean you're totally right, it's just like BG2 where you could have 3+ mages, you could have actual wizards which were different from mages, you could have clerics which were different from mages, you could have 4 warriors, 2 rogues, 3 clerics and 2 mages, you could have mage/clerics, rogue/warriors, rogue/mages, druids, paladins, monks, sorcerers, wild mage, or any of several variations.

It would take a moron of epic proportions to argue that the class system in Dragon Age comes close to the complexity and depth of Baldur's Gate 2.

Quote
Baldur's Gate's "complexity" came from using the AD&D rules which were and continue to be clunky and unwieldy and filled with weird license restrictions. This is why Bioware created their own rules and their own setting in the first place.

The licensing is exactly why Bioware created their own rules - they didn't want to pay someone else the money. It had nothing to do with some odd idea of what is clunky or unwieldy.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #97 on: August 09, 2010, 11:50:25 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 09, 2010, 11:27:56 AM

It would take a moron of epic proportions to argue that the class system in Dragon Age comes close to the complexity and depth of Baldur's Gate 2.

I'm glad to see you're as open to fair discussion as always.
Logged
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: August 09, 2010, 11:54:01 AM »

Yet again people think that tons of stats and shit makes for a good roleplaying game. The term moron seem to fit the Dungeon Masters some
of you guys played with. Dungeon & Dragons was never really complex, it wasn't the point with that RPG (Gary Gygax himself told me in person so I know this for a fact).

The best RPGs like Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, D&D and Runequest were all quite simple to understand. Anything that detracts from telling and playing through a great story, is per defintion a crap system.
Only accountants and similar boring people like such game systems.

AD&D tried to make it more complex than was intended.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2010, 12:00:36 PM by marcusjm » Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
Razgon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8298


The Truth is out there


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: August 09, 2010, 12:36:48 PM »

Quote from: marcusjm on August 09, 2010, 11:54:01 AM

Yet again people think that tons of stats and shit makes for a good roleplaying game. The term moron seem to fit the Dungeon Masters some
of you guys played with. Dungeon & Dragons was never really complex, it wasn't the point with that RPG (Gary Gygax himself told me in person so I know this for a fact).

The best RPGs like Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, D&D and Runequest were all quite simple to understand. Anything that detracts from telling and playing through a great story, is per defintion a crap system.
Only accountants and similar boring people like such game systems.

AD&D tried to make it more complex than was intended.

Is that just the way it is, or do you think there is room in there for some personal preferences as well?
Logged

A new one
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #100 on: August 09, 2010, 12:45:27 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 08, 2010, 11:48:00 PM

Quote from: TiLT on August 08, 2010, 08:58:56 PM

If you don't count the first Dragon Age, of course. slywink

Dragon Age was like the margarine of BG2. Group size reduced. Combat was simplified. The number of classes were simplified. Character stats? Removed. Hours of gameplay? Reduced.

Dragon Age was a good game, but it was no Baldur's Gate 2.

Hmmm...agreed on some points.  Classes were greatly reduced, no real character stats and the flexibility within any given class was much less.  But combat options in the game worked together to provide a pretty deep tactical experience.  By making any given character less complex, they were able to increase the tactical options as a group

Still, I prefer BG2 simply because I think it had a better story.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #101 on: August 09, 2010, 01:03:26 PM »

Quote from: Razgon on August 09, 2010, 12:36:48 PM

Quote from: marcusjm on August 09, 2010, 11:54:01 AM

Yet again people think that tons of stats and shit makes for a good roleplaying game. The term moron seem to fit the Dungeon Masters some
of you guys played with. Dungeon & Dragons was never really complex, it wasn't the point with that RPG (Gary Gygax himself told me in person so I know this for a fact).

The best RPGs like Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, D&D and Runequest were all quite simple to understand. Anything that detracts from telling and playing through a great story, is per defintion a crap system.
Only accountants and similar boring people like such game systems.

AD&D tried to make it more complex than was intended.

Is that just the way it is, or do you think there is room in there for some personal preferences as well?

Yes, this is why there are hundreds of PnP systems to choose from, some (accountants maybe?) want thousands of stats, they can find such systems or even make their own. With computer games you get indie RPGs that cater for the obscure demands. Bioware has to think of millions of sales so they have to use what works for the majority.

Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
Razgon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8298


The Truth is out there


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: August 09, 2010, 01:07:30 PM »

Thank you, I can now sleep easily knowing that you've explained how the world works perfectly.
Logged

A new one
Morgul
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1075


View Profile
« Reply #103 on: August 09, 2010, 01:27:09 PM »

tank, healer, and fill the rest of the party with crowd control/Damage...

Dragon age did not have a cleric/priest, it was combined into the mage class.  (A specialization is you will)

Just pointing out one reason dragon age required being "mage heavy"..   

They could have just broke mage class into 3 classes (Priest, enchanter, mage) and then we would have what looks to be more variety on paper I guess.

I still prefer BG2 to dragon age and 6 party members however... slywink   

IMO, bioware can make any change they want, I will just judge the game on its own merits when it comes out.   
If it sucks, I will not play it..

I wouldn't be betting against them when it comes to making awesome roleplaying games.  I think it may be a fool's bet, their track record is pretty damn solid.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: August 09, 2010, 02:11:13 PM »

I think the only thing Fallout 3 was missing from the original was the turn based combat; other than that you still had the same special system, VATS and a much bigger world.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #105 on: August 09, 2010, 02:50:03 PM »

Quote from: CeeKay on August 09, 2010, 02:11:13 PM

I think the only thing Fallout 3 was missing from the original was the turn based combat; other than that you still had the same special system, VATS and a much bigger world.

Note: I'm a big Fallout fan, including the third game. I've completed it three times.

The SPECIAL system used in Fallout 3 is only superficially similar to the one used in the two other games. The stats have the same names but work in dramatically different ways. I could write a large article about the differences, but it can be summarized like this: The system used in the first two games was designed so that two different characters would be truly different. The system in Fallout 3 balances things so that even if you have a large difference in stats between two characters, they'll still behave similarly (to a certain degree). Toss a large amount of levels at a Fallout 2 character and you'll end up with someone who's incredibly good at a small handful of things, and dreadful in others (unless you deliberately choose to be a jack-of-all-trades). Do the same with a Fallout 3 character and you end up having to toss skill points at skills you wouldn't even dream of using, simply because the ones you use are maxed out. The result is cookie-cutter characters towards the end-game.

Edit: Damn! I've actually written a fairly lengthy article about this already that I never posted since I never really finished it. It's several pages of introduction, describing some of the changes between Fallout 2 and 3 (going into a lot of numerical detail), but I stopped writing just as I was getting to the interesting part (the "where did Fallout 3's design philosophy break apart" section) and now I can't really remember what I was supposed to write. I'll have to think about this a little more and see if I can't remember what bothered me about the system.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2010, 03:13:17 PM by TiLT » Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: August 09, 2010, 04:30:25 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 09, 2010, 11:50:25 AM

I'm glad to see you're as open to fair discussion as always.

You'd probably have found me much more open to fair discussion if you hadn't immediately turned to sarcasm. Don't whine when others treat you as you treat them.

Quote from: marcusjm on August 09, 2010, 11:54:01 AM

Yet again people think that tons of stats and shit makes for a good roleplaying game.

If you get that from reading my post then you're reading something terribly wrong. It's not about the numbers, it's about the variety. More choice = better. Dragon Age was like a hybrid between Mass Effect and Baldur's Gate. As is usual with hybrids, I felt it didn't live up to either system.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #107 on: August 09, 2010, 04:36:30 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 09, 2010, 04:30:25 PM

If you get that from reading my post then you're reading something terribly wrong. It's not about the numbers, it's about the variety. More choice = better. Dragon Age was like a hybrid between Mass Effect and Baldur's Gate. As is usual with hybrids, I felt it didn't live up to either system.

As I said, AD&D is front-loaded. You have plenty of class choices at the beginning, but after that your choices in how your character develops are very restricted. This is part of the 80s and 90s RPG design philosophy of limiting player choice. The modern way to do things is to encourage player freedom. One way to do that is to reduce the number of classes and instead allow for greater freedom within each class. D&D 4th Edition did this, for example (though there's now a rather large amount of customizable classes there as well). Dragon Age did this as well. Two mages can be incredibly different, but the same can't be said about two mages in Baldur's Gate (unless one is gimped and the other isn't, I guess).

Many people fall into the trap of assuming that the old-school RPG design philosophy encouraged choice, when in fact it did the exact opposite (instead creating an illusion of choice).
Logged
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21061



View Profile WWW
« Reply #108 on: August 09, 2010, 04:46:34 PM »

Realize there was a great deal of similar nerd rage when it was announced that Mass Effect 2 would be removing the inventory and ammunition system.  I think that turned out alright.  I have faith in Bioware.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #109 on: August 09, 2010, 05:27:55 PM »

Variety is nice if it means something. Not sure if it was TiLT but we all know that BG2 contained alot of spells that were totally useless, even Oblivion contains alot of crappy spells.

Dragon Age got it fairly right with it's useful spell mix(not all but most).

Because of this I have felt the need to start the PC version of DA just to see what's so much better compared to the 360 version. Rogue/Assassin/Elf maybe?

Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7921



View Profile
« Reply #110 on: August 09, 2010, 05:29:08 PM »

Quote from: jersoc on August 08, 2010, 08:16:56 AM

witcher 2>shit>cananda>bioware

what a pathetic company they have become.

Wow, just amazing that you use the possible changing of a camera view in a game as an excuse to insult me and the rest of my country and one of it's leading development studios.  Oh, and before you decide to equate us Canadian's as lesser than feces, please learn to spell the name of our country correctly - not that I really believe you have the intellect to spell anything correctly. IMO stating that Bioware creates products that are lesser than turds in quality, you've forfitted your right to being taken seriously in any gaming site forum.
Logged
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: August 09, 2010, 05:37:15 PM »

Why can't we get a CRPG based on Paranoia btw? Of all the PnP systems I think this would have worked best on a PC/Console. Much better than D&D for instance.
Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21061



View Profile WWW
« Reply #112 on: August 09, 2010, 05:39:56 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on August 09, 2010, 05:29:08 PM

Quote from: jersoc on August 08, 2010, 08:16:56 AM

witcher 2>shit>cananda>bioware

what a pathetic company they have become.

Wow, just amazing that you use the possible changing of a camera view in a game as an excuse to insult me and the rest of my country and one of it's leading development studios.  Oh, and before you decide to equate us Canadian's as lesser than feces, please learn to spell the name of our country correctly - not that I really believe you have the intellect to spell anything correctly. IMO stating that Bioware creates products that are lesser than turds in quality, you've forfitted your right to being taken seriously in any gaming site forum.

You have a point - this was a bit over the line.  Ease up guys. 
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
Autistic Angel
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3626


View Profile
« Reply #113 on: August 09, 2010, 06:30:23 PM »

Speaking as someone who played Dragon Age on the PC and used the overhead view *constantly* thanks of the tactical precision it offered, I'd be pretty bummed if the rumors of its removal turn out to be true.  I'm sure there are many ways the sequel could be adjusted to make that wider perspective less important, but its hard for me to imagine those changes making the game more enjoyable for me.


Quote from: Knightshade Dragon on August 09, 2010, 04:46:34 PM

Realize there was a great deal of similar nerd rage when it was announced that Mass Effect 2 would be removing the inventory and ammunition system.  I think that turned out alright.


I think just about everyone agreed that the inventory management in the first Mass Effect was clumsy and tedious, so doing anything else represented an improvement.  Bioware had a few options, including streamlining their interface and filling the game with loads of distinctive gear a la Borderlands, or eliminating the system altogether and reducing the equipment options to two or three possibilities each.  Either option was better than what they had, but I think the direction they chose ultimately resulted in a game with fewer player choices and less experimentation or customization.

By comparison, I wonder if there's *anyone* who thinks Dragon Age would be a better game by removing the top-down camera.  Better AI options?  Sure.  Adding the ability to queue commands on the console version?  Absolutely!  But stripping out the camera angle that lets you take in the entire tactical situation and issue commands to each party member, all from a single intuitive perspective?  That's a design decision that takes choice away from the players while forcing the designers to restrict themselves to creating environments, encounters, and combat abilities that function well from a more narrow and restrictive viewpoint.  They already tried that in the console version of Dragon Age, and the only way they could make it work was to reduce the number of enemies, eliminate friendly fire, and a number of other things to make the game less challenging or sophisticated.  

Those were the definable, tangible reasons why I and many other people chose the PC version.  I think the outcry comes from the feeling that we're going to be getting a diminished experience this time around, and although I expect that I'll play Dragon Age II either way, I'd sure prefer it to follow in the footsteps of its predecessor.

-Autistic Angel
Logged
marcusjm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 787


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: August 09, 2010, 06:41:17 PM »

Well since I mostly played the 360 version I do (just starting out on PC just to compare). What you lose with the overhead view, is the closeness to your characters. Remember that the most sought after hak for NWN was the first person view. So some clearly prefer that way of playing (Oblivion/Fallout3 anyone?).

With PnP it was clearly nice to have figurines and tactical paper but not in any way necessary. We rarely used any figures with Call of Cthulhu for instance. Mapping yes but nothing else. These things usually detracts from the story which is bad in my book.

I think the console version of DA mainly sufferd from being thought out after the PC version. This time it is integral in the development process and I expect a much better console version.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2010, 06:42:56 PM by marcusjm » Logged

Dedicated Gamer - XBL Profile DreamsurferSWE
XFire tag - dreamsurfer
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: August 09, 2010, 06:51:19 PM »

Huh, I've played Fallout 3 and gotten 3 characters to or prett close to the original level cap and never felt they were the same. Maybe it was because I decided to try something different each time and purposely spent points on the skills that fit within what I wanted the character to be, like gunslinger, low tech weapons guy or babe with the BFG's.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Farscry
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4004



View Profile
« Reply #116 on: August 09, 2010, 07:09:15 PM »

I also played Dragon Age almost exclusively as a tactical crpg with the fully zoomed out camera view, so I hope that they retain something very similar as well as that tactical gameplay as well. I really loved it.
Logged

Purge - You have unlocked an Achievement!
You are now of the rank reprobate
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #117 on: August 09, 2010, 07:22:48 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on August 09, 2010, 04:36:30 PM

As I said, AD&D is front-loaded. You have plenty of class choices at the beginning, but after that your choices in how your character develops are very restricted.

Except that's not true. My character started as a rogue. From there I could have made him into several different types of rogue or I could do what I did and dual into warrior. That gave me a rogue when I needed rogue skills but an extremely competent fighter in battle. I could have dualed into mage and my character would have developed in an altogether different way. There were lots of ways to develop the character.

Quote
The modern way to do things is to encourage player freedom. One way to do that is to reduce the number of classes and instead allow for greater freedom within each class.

The modern way is to drop complex, deep systems for simple alternatives because consoles require simplicity and dumbing down.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6551


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #118 on: August 09, 2010, 07:32:03 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on August 09, 2010, 07:22:48 PM

Except that's not true. My character started as a rogue. From there I could have made him into several different types of rogue or I could do what I did and dual into warrior. That gave me a rogue when I needed rogue skills but an extremely competent fighter in battle. I could have dualed into mage and my character would have developed in an altogether different way. There were lots of ways to develop the character.

You aren't helping your case here. Making choice of class the only way to develop a character is front-loaded. Just so you understand what I mean, I'm not necessarily saying that you make all the choices at the beginning of the game, but when you choose a class, there are few if any significant choices left to make unless you choose another class. That's not good game design in my eyes, and it leaves you having to make all the important decisions before you even begin playing the game.

Quote
The modern way is to drop complex, deep systems for simple alternatives because consoles require simplicity and dumbing down.

On the other hand, it seems I'm doing myself a disservice by arguing with you. You're doing a fine job in losing the argument all on your own, no other participants needed.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #119 on: August 09, 2010, 07:48:49 PM »

found another Comic Con hands on.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 30   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.157 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.036s, 2q)