RPGmasterBoo

What about the experienced game designers that embraced the change? Jokes aside, designers don't decide what's popular or what can make money, which is the one and only point of this change - someone thought this way DA would be a better cash cow. Nothing to do with creativity. Also this way its more easily adaptable to consoles, which is again the same thing - more moneyz. am suggesting an alternative reason for the consolized changes we sees in da2: time. da2 development is relative short, and many o' the streamlining efforts is intended more to save resources than they is motivated by creativity or a genuine belief that such changes will create more revenue. bio is trying to cut fat from da so they can get the game released Q1 2011, and if some stuff many o' us view as pc staples can be cut, then so be it. HA! Good Fun! Quite possible, I didn't think of that. (that former designer did mention recent "cutbacks" as well)

I was going to say that but I guess there's no need to now.

My good and wonderful friend Volo, these are the Bioware games that I own: BG BGII ToB NWN SOU HOTU The latter bunch is in my collection because they came in a compilationthat included Icewind Dale. They don't even work because something is screwed up with their copy protection Jade Empire - Because it came in a nice metal box and cost 5$ Everything else I played by the mercy of my other good and wonderful friends, since I wouldn't spend a dime of my own on those games.

What about the experienced game designers that embraced the change? They need the money. Jokes aside, designers don't decide what's popular or what can make money, which is the one and only point of this change - someone thought this way DA would be a better cash cow. Nothing to do with creativity. Also this way its more easily adaptable to consoles, which is again the same thing - more moneyz. You're talking about it as though it was a creative issue. You're talking as though we should only listen to the designer that didn't want to do this game, and ignoring the other ones. You're selectively picking what you want because you feel as though BioWare not making games specifically for you is somehow a sleight against yourself. Face it bub, you don't have a clue what went on behind closed doors. Grow a pair and stop being such a baby. Clearly the ones that stayed with the project did it purely because "they need the money." I was criticising Bioware for what I percieve their faults are. I also noticed their own designer felt the same way. I voiced the opinion that this change in DA2 is nothing but sucking up to console kids and trying to make more money. I dont give a rats ass about DA2, for me Bioware ended with ToB. All I was doing was expressing delight at a former Bioware employee feeling the same way as I do, because for me that confirms my thoughts on the matter. The only issue I have with them is the degeneracy of the genre they, as a big, influential company are creating, and that's beyond fixing at this point. If you actually bothered to read my previous posts you would know all this, and wouldn't need to post such garbage.

Oh I agree. Every experienced gamer can immidiately tell apart a game that was a labor of love, but thats the sort of thing I don't actively expect, just hope for. IMO DA, ME, NWN and KOTOR all played safe, thus to me they're all more or less cash cows. DA2 doubly so. @Volourn: much anger in you.

What about the experienced game designers that embraced the change? They need the money. Jokes aside, designers don't decide what's popular or what can make money, which is the one and only point of this change - someone thought this way DA would be a better cash cow. Nothing to do with creativity. Also this way its more easily adaptable to consoles, which is again the same thing - more moneyz. You're talking about it as though it was a creative issue.

I agree that its likely to be a success. That of course, doesn't make the game good. I believe they're on a downward spiral. They can strip and recycle the former BG formula for a while more, although without party based gameplay its so down to its bare bones that they have to go cross genre to make the meat - combat, playable. ME went shoota, DA2 is going hacknslash. That sort of stuff gets real old, real fast as they're likely to find out by the time ME3 is out.

Fact: he quit his job. Fact: he voiced his opinion that Mass Effect was not the way DA2 should develop. The two are only partially related. Many other things probably factored into his decision. It wasn't made as a moral stance against Bioware stupidifying their games - he just didn't see himself working on such a project. But that's all unimportant. What is important: he's an experienced game designer, thus his opinion should carry some weight. I personally agree with him. If I was a boss in Bioware I'd value an experienced employees opinion. More importantly: all that crap about "streamlining gameplay", "innovation" and a thousand other excuses for Bioware's failure to truly innovate on their original formula gains weight when its subtly pointed out by the very people working on their project - or refusing to do so.

I love the game myself but I think Outcast may be one of those "had to have played it at release" to fully appreciate it games. It hasn't aged wonderfully. Still, I may be wrong. And for a cheap price I think it'd be a good buy. I see. Its 4$

That was never disputed. We were just discussing some of its faults

makes you wonder, where is all the money going? Origins cost how much? I refuse to believe it all went in voiceovers and marketing. As far as DA is concerned I have no idea. It was too long in the making and the technology was too outdated upon release for me to believe they worked on it in a dedicated fashion. I think a lot of cash went down the drain with the protracted development period. But frankly it all pales in comparison to the laziness of the writing team who took 5 years to create DnD without the license. I've seen a single person cook up a better setting (eg Talislanta) in a lot less time. And don't get me started on the storyline. They must have paid them in peanuts.

Why should they ditch a good concept - just because it was badly implemented? Remove level scaling and speed up the action and it would be fine. Of course they would have to expand the besitary and cut down on the combat...

I want to buy Outcast at GoG. Can someone tell me if the game is as good as its cultists claim

I hear you brother. So I was wrong about all of them suffering from extreme hubris. Its what I've been saying all along and I can't say I'm sorry to see them losing talented people over it. No ambition makes Jack a dull boy.

Pulling CoD out is a bad example. I finished CoD5 on the hardest difficulty, and I died a million times - but that has nothing to do with health mechanics and everything to do with a) AI picking me all the time and b) AI throwing 17 grenades at my feet. CoD games are an arcade shooting gallery that's all about twitch reflexes and enemy spawn memorization - nothing to do with tactics. The combat areas are too confined and linear to offer real tactical depth. Games are about overcoming obstacles. Every single one I played that had health regen was a pushover and gave me no satisfaction in the long run. Gunning down enemy after enemy while below 10 hp is what gets my adrenaline rushing. Not sitting in a corner and waiting for the irritating blood thumpin' animation to stop or bar to fill up.

You probably shouldn't have done that. The word on GoG is that its one of the few broken releases (bug overload) they put out.

Who's plot was blatantly stolen from The Black Company. So? Whats your point? At least its a good pick. Its the only fantasy strategy game that I've played in the last decade whose plot was worth following. Well, when you use "creative" make sure you qualify that Stealing the entire story from another media isn't generally considered creative. I will give you the fact that they implemented a pretty good physics and formation engine, but not the story. Well it was well told and charged with an atmosphere the actual gameplay supported, with the edgy battles and all. It takes talent to weave aspects of game design like that - i don't think its just a matter of ripping off someone else...

I know right? Great news. NEXT UP: BG2! That or NWN + exp if the Atari Forgotten Realms collection is anything to go by (I have it).

What took you so long? I realized I hated it by Act II. I never did complete the thing until after Hordes came out. I still don't even know why I gave Hordes a chance, but am glad I did. I was young and green and loved watching my monks combat animations and (at level 20) glowing eyes. Even after the initial disappointment I played again as a wizard to see the spells in action and to make sure I didn't actually miss anything. I didn't. At that time I could play anything. Later I came to hate the game for its half-arsed approach to absolutely every aspect of game design - from graphics, to story and gameplay. Funny as it sounds I liked the esotericism of ADnD in BG and Torment. The third edition killed the enjoyment for me somewhat, because it was too easy to grasp and abuse the system.

Does it? You have to run to get a health pickup, while with rechargable stuff all you need is a dark corner to hide in.

Actually NWN is far worse than KOTOR. I guess that's the sort of thing that happens when you're successful - you make one good thing and everything else gets praised by default. Like with Steven Spielberg. Except that in the movie industry there are higher standards than in game journalism, or at least more reputable critics. You didn't realize that Sorophx's comment is in response to Volo stating how those that talk up KOTOR make Volo hate KOTOR more, while Volo's commentary regarding NWN does the same for others? I'm just in it for the ride But I must admit, I've never felt so ripped of as when I finished NWN OC. I'm not really trying to bait him, I firmly hold the opinion that the vanilla game is garbage.

Who's plot was blatantly stolen from The Black Company. So? Whats your point? At least its a good pick. Its the only fantasy strategy game that I've played in the last decade whose plot was worth following. Homeworld's plot was partly taken from the Bible and Battlestar Galactica. Most of Starcraft was ripped off from Warhammer 40k. Doesn't make them any less landmark titles, does it? Its a mystery to me as well. When I played the PC port a bit later I thought it was a pretty average shooter. Certainly its not half as good as Half Life 1 or which ever top PC FPS you choose. I think it was just strong XBox propaganda making the game to something it was not.

Because they were being raped by Microsoft to make Halo games for too long. It got so bad that their discontent was known amongst the general gaming public. Bungie was one of the most creative developers... ever. All hail Myth II.

Actually NWN is far worse than KOTOR. I guess that's the sort of thing that happens when you're successful - you make one good thing and everything else gets praised by default. Like with Steven Spielberg. Except that in the movie industry there are higher standards than in game journalism, or at least more reputable critics.

Yeah, that. While everything was taken from BG they forgot the part where the combat was supposed to be fun. Not click > wait to die. Same applies to every Bioware game post ToB minus Dragon Age. Mass Effect rectified that by running away and becoming a shooter. A mediocre shooter but at least a functional within such a limited genre.