Nightshape

With the greatest respect Nightshape, you're missing the point. I probably am...

Narrative and story are merely parts of the machine. In a game you have much more than the story narrative, the interactive experience itself should be fun, and rewarding. Core gameplay is king, else we're just talking interactive movies. As much as I enjoy story mechanics in games like DA 2, and NV... It's not the only thing I'm focused upon. NWN2 may not have the best story, but I do believe it is the best package.

It's one of the games epic flaw's mind... The asset reuse. It sucks... And makes me sad...

I like Sandel, he's awesome, I want to see more of him... "ENCHANTMENT!" *Drools*

That type of sign is actually really common in many art and design companies. I have it too but I've used strikethrough on every fast. Deadlines can go to hell EA and Bioware really took costcutting measures seriously with Dragon Age 2. They cut so many corners that they managed to carve sphere out of cube. Beancounters must be happy. I think Bioware did a good job, but the timeframe was evil... You have to recycle assets, or you're going to lower the quality bar so much it'll suck.

While NWN2 was... Unstable on release (so was NWN... Deal with it Volo). NWN2 was the better product, and I think with the exception of the camera, a far better game. NWN2 is the best game Obsidian has released to date in my opinion, while everything else hasn't been bad, its not been all that great either... New Vegas, AP, so on... Nothing worth spaztarding out about.

Lots and lots of crap FPS's in the world.

This. If you are interested in CRPGs then you have to be interested in what Bioware is up to. I don't like Apple products much, but I read the reviews of the iphone 4 and ipad because I'm interested in tech. I shouldn't have to explain this. Do Bio-friendly or neutral folks here think that the fact that other developers generally eschew romance options is because: (a) they realise that they suck or (b) there's no point competing with Bio? Is it like taking on WoW as a MMORPG developer? © Budget, development timeframe, and experience. Nobody really makes games like Bioware, atleast not the same level of quality, they've always been formulaic... More and more so since KOTOR, Obsidian is the only other company that's making anything remotely like what Bioware is doing. I suppose we had "rise of the argonauts", but that's a one off opposed to the norm. When I was out in Canada at EA, I noticed this little A4 sheet of paper which one of the rendering guys had pinned up. I liked it, because it made things very clear. Here it is: This is games development.

I thought it was pretty awful, and the art quality was like a hookers draws... That said, it was fun, some of the time.

<faceplam> Idiots </facepalm>

Here here! Sir!

BAH! I want authenticity.

The comments about "graphics" are unfounded. Saying morrowind looked better, I mean its just stupid. People will be negative about any game.

Do you realise that those quotes are absolutely stupid?

You're a funny man.

Hey if Ron's in it, it'll be quality. I actually went through a phase of watching anything with Ron in it, I wasn't disappointed.

Consoles seemed to be the focus for the release, I intend to pick it up on 360 at some point, but the PC version has this bug, and my g/f has witnessed a nasty bug where she got caught in the collision mesh, thankfully she is an obsessive when its comes to saving. DA:O must have done really well on console, I know this much though... I'm prefering DA 2 to DA:O.

There is a lovely bug where the game gives up letting you access the menu's. The GUI becomes unresponsive, and even the keystrokes won't help you. Thankfully you can still quick save and restart the program. *grumbles*

My actual argument is more to do with the fact that the gameplay has been rethunk. In terms of the gameplay, I would say they've pretty much decided to abandon the DA:O style of play, in favour of a new style. Its as much of a progression of thought as comparing versions of dungeon's and dragons, say 3rd edition and 4th edition, or even 2nd and 3rd editions, they're still called dungeons and dragons in terms of rule sets, but there are definite diversions in mechanical thought. I would say that the way most games improve upon gameplay elements is more akin to 3ed to 3.5ed changes, they're not as dramatic as what we have witnessed with DA 2, it's quite a drastic rethink of how the fundemental game plays. Everything seems to have been rethought, the inventory, the way the player interacts in combat, skill tree, and so on. For example they've kept the same spell/skill names, but altered the progression mechanics, you could say refined as its deeper than DA:O. This is a fairly minor progression, opposed to how scenarios actually play out when using the spells, using cone of cold for example in DA : O, is different than in DA 2, spread and depth have changed. Both the progression, and effect have been altered to fit a new style of play. This doesn't mean that the game isn't set in the same world, it most definately is a Dragon Age game world, the mythology, locations etc... That stuff is all solid, and coherent. I think I would be correct in saying that DA 2 bares less of a resemblance to Baldur's Gate than DA:O did. Another example of this kind of difference would be the dramatic difference between Fallout 2 and Fallout 3. Lots of people called the game many things, Oblivion with guns, it's not a true fallout sequel(in many respects it isn't). Now we can debate to the hells freeze over about this, or simply except the fact that Fallout 2 and Fallout 3 play like very different games. Its a sequel in terms of brand, and not a gameplay sequal. My argument is that DA 2, is a brand sequel, and not a gameplay sequel. This isn't a good or bad thing, but it does mean the people who enjoied DA:O because of the gameplay are going to be potentially very upset. They wanted a gameplay sequel, but they were delivered is a brand sequel. Now people have mentioned that ME 2 and ME had some pretty drastic changes, it somewhat did and didn't. The fundemental core, combat mechanic changes were very basic, they added ammo, they added cover attachment as a button press, yes they changed lots of other things. It's still very much a 3rd person cover based shooter. This cannot be said for DA:O and DA 2, they didn't just tweak some mechanics, they fundementally rethought how the player interacts with the game to the point that console gamers are mashing A, or X. This whole discussion begs the question of what makes a game sequel? This is just how I feel about it, later I'll address your points in a more direct fashion, but right now... I actually want to go and play a game I am enjoying very much. Dragon Age 2.

In response to your comments from the previous DA2 thread. Seriously mind Volo, saying the DA2 has anything past an IP relationship with DA:O is retarded. I actually like DA 2 mind... I just think it should be called JE2. *GRUMBLE*

Mike Laidlaw was the lead designer on Bioware's only canned project JE2... You heard it here first. The man is a tool.

No Volo... No. I will not frustrate myself by eating the troll bait. I will not frustrate myself by eating the troll bait. I will not frustrate myself by eating the troll bait. I will not frustrate myself by eating the troll bait.

Dragon Age 2 is what happends when you have to cut all the corners to make sure you ship. It shouldn't really be called Dragon Age 2, it's not even cut from the same cloth, its merely cut from a cloth that looks a bit like it. From what I've played so far I wouldn't say its a bad game, I would say that Mike Laidlaw and co. Should get a win/fail stamp, they win because they shipped a product in a crazy short timeframe, but they fail because they agree'd to it in some manner... It's really sad. Well the new age of console lead Action/RPG has truly dawned, its been coming for a while, but DA:O was without a doubt, an end of a bioware era. I don't think we'll see such a game from bioware again, as they move along a more... Interactive, opposed to, strategic future.

Compressed data actually just makes sense, it means the file you reading is smaller, you unzip it in memory so to speak... Basically Compression is good for games with lots of streaming, not bad.