Niten_Ryu

I think there might be mixup where models were used. It might be possible that real life models were used as inspiration for in-game models but Blur used nearly 1-on-1 copy for Dragon Age trailer. Photo is by Christine Kessler.

It's good that Bioware used great looking models as inspiration but they totally failed to take right features out of 'em. In game models barely look anything like their real life counterparts. Maybe released character creator have problems creating certain type of face, but that shouldn't be a problem with full developer tools. I also know that Bioware has talented artists so it's odd that character models look so bad.

I think game industry have to accept low difficulty curve at least for the moment. World of Warcraft was great game to see what average players can an cannot do. I wasn't in the most hardcore of the guild, but still in 5% of all raiding guilds. Difficulty of many of the raid encounters was really high, not because of individual tasks were very complex, but for the fact that 40-25 players all had to be successful on some mindnumbingly simple task. Guess what, people still falied on 'em, time after time. I'd say to the point where pushing red or blue button (or different symbols) on correct time becomes a risky manouver. This means that players can't be bothered to learn even the most simple of the tasks, unless by heavy repeatation. And in singleplayer games that's not an option because there's no peer pressure from other players to keep that player going, he'll just quit the game. Player might quit MMOG too but often social connections (and other easier content) keep players interested. Dragon Age example is badly build mage, with sub optimal party just running around like chicken without the head. Old school game design would say that person have to fail horribly and maybe he'll learn from his mistakes. Nowadays we have to reward that same player, no matter how stupidly he plays. Because he's "valuable" customer. This can only be done by very easy difficulty curves, to the point of triviality. I'd say maybe it might be ok option to allow players to skip all combat if they so choose (or autowin). At least then developers could design difficult encounter without watering 'em down.

This is because turn based tactical games stopped progressing 10 years ago. I remember heated arguments what should be improved in JA2 and Xcom but none of us expected that genre would just die. Turn based AI with modern computers could do some really advanced moves (as well as removing ultra stupid hex movements with better systems).

Old fans would explode but Jagged Alliance could be done in "next generation" style. Let's take 2 of the most successful games of this generation and rip 'em off. Modern Warfare and Left for Dead. Singleplayer campaign and 2-6 person co-op multiplayer campaign. Tons of weapons and vehicles. Players control characters from old Jagged Alliance games and each have their own speciality. You'd still get "expo", much in the same way as you do in modern multiplayer shooters. Game could use new Cryengine 3 and main location similar to old Jagged Alliance game and Crysis games (jungle, with small towns and villages). For better or worse, such game would probably sell better then turn based sequel.

Well, original IP do give certain freedoms and if developers want to justify unibody desins with that, more power to 'em Because of unibody, I'm going to play beautiful elven mage. Let's see.. few sliders to that direction and maybe bit of that... Lovely. Bit orcish but who cares, they are same lineage anyway

Common problem in games that use unibody type of solution. In MMOGs even the most casual players seem to notice the difference, even when they can't explain why models look "wrong" somehow. Blizzard don't use unibody type of system and has to custom make animations for models that have different proportions. In Dragon Age dwarf is really good example when unibody goes wrong. For example take default human female model, face it towards the camera and take screenshot. Then do the same with default dwarf female. Open up two different screenshots in your photoshop (or similar program that allow easy image manipulation). Then resize different parts of the one model to match the other. Hands are identical (nimble hands ms. dwarf), arms are same lenght, only thicker. Neck shorter and face is wider. Torso and legs about 1/3 shorter. Human female model is actually very close to a ideal 8 head size like it should be. But dwarf model proportions are complitely messed up. It's too roughly 8 head sizes but not for arms. And it shouldn't be 8 head sizes as it makes models look very awkward, if they are wider (or more like flatten in case of dwarf female).

Fallout 3 managed to mix up muddy water real good. It showed that IP can move to new platforms, new engine, new view point, new development team and be nearly complitely different game from game mechanics point of view and still be a huge commercial hit. World is still Fallout world. You could take all the mobs, all the quests and move 'em to Fallout 2 (the writing or the quailty of the quests is of course debatable). I'm not sure if target is specifically to burn old fanbase but developers have to deal with economic realities. To build heavy text AAA quality turnbased game nowadays is the risk that nobody want to take. And probably for a good reason. It don't mean 100% certainty that the game would be absolute commercial bomb, but none has tested that type of game in modern console/computer era. Truth is that mass market and majority of the gamers want easy games. Light on text, relatively short and not to have complex game mechanics (or at least have 'em hidden like in Blizzard games). Some suggest that in next generation (probably start 2012-2014), AAA game budgets could be around 60 million. That kind of situation can't work, as only 1/3 of the games break even now. Personally I have hard time to imagine what kind of solutions games require in order to reach profitable in next generation. Gimmicky games with plastic crap on the box like Guitar Hero or Wii Fit? Semi interactive movies with massive amounts of quicktime events? Or will the gaming industry finally implode and budgets come back to where niche games might be possible.

Kind of pointless character creation utility. I was expecting WoW type of character builder, where you can plan your character past level 1. Ok, we can rotate and play with ugly character models but customization is very low so there ain't much fun in that. I like that portait icon system. In that characters are tiny enough to cut the rough edges away and low camera angle gives dramatic douchebag look for my human noble.

They did outsource the trailer. It's made be famous california based Blur studios. I have strong feeling of deja-vu, didn't we already discuss about this trailer and in this same board ? have to go check.... edit - found it http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?s=&am...st&p=979343

Maybe we see the story different way. IMO stories in MMOGs and in most CRPG are same caliber as your average jr high PnP session. Sure there are stories but are the stories so amazing that it was worth to sacrifice certain game mechanics in order to tell that story. Is the story really impossible or too expensive to tell with that certain game mechanic in the game? Blizzard will even retcon their own lore to fit it to game mechanics. Ken Levine had basic idea for Bioshock years but still build the game mechanics and the world before it (and made sure that majority of players like 'em). I only care about the story if it's extremely good, like in Torment or extremely bad, like in Dead Space. Most of time stories are just filler, like in comics, tv series or movies. I'm not going to blame bad story of Dead Space or NWN on engine or game mechanics. Nor give credit to Infinity engine or (rather bad) D&D rules if someone manages to build good story within those limits.

In light of Bioshock, I'm not sure if that statement makes sense or not. It actually makes perfect sense. System Shock 2 was hard lesson for Ken Levine. So much details went into it but majority of players wanted something complitely different. He and his crew did very detailed study what majority of players did want and then build Bioshock around that. Another quote from Ken Levine "We did some focus testing on BioShock -- and their answer as a focus group of 40 people was... 'Uh... Madden? Halo 3?'. The truth is that people have no idea of franchises. It's so hard to understand the experience of actual guys. You have to make the game for people who don't care." Bioware do - Story first, world second and game mechancis last. 2k games and Blizzard do - Game mechanics first, world second and story last.

I think this is really important to understand about current Bioware. I'd say in there writers have power to override just about every other design choice. No matter if it's game mechanics like allowing jumping (might lead players to skip certain encounters, event or NPCs) or reducing death to minor inconviniance. I see all NPCs who can't be killed the same way as I see unskippable cutscenes. Sure most of players will not kill NPCs or skip the cutscene but IMO it's important to have that option. Player should be allowed to choose if they want to ignore something that developer spend months to create it. "Yes, you wrote moderately interesting character / cutscene but I don't really care about it - Skip please". I'll quote Ken Levine from 2008 GDC "I'm not really a fan of game story." But he thinks that's normal. "The first big secret is, the bad news is for storytellers is that nobody cares about your stupid story... no matter how detailed or lovingly you craft it." Ok, saying nobody is bit harsh as Bioware's boards are full of players who care just about everything Bioware do or say but for majority of players statement is probably true. At this point I don't care about any Dragon Age characters, the world, the plot, the events or the monsters. I care about game mechanics like combat system, spells, how movement is handled, camera, difficulty, x:y:z axis, NPC AI, party AI, graphics ect ect. Bioware might win me over with story if they allow me to experience it from my perspective, rather then just following what writers want you to do (unless of course you happen to choose the same things as writers did).

It was excruciating to watch 'em play game so badly. No strategy, no crowd control, bad positioning, incorrect use of abilities, drinking health potions like they're going out of style and still getting killed... No wonder game industry is moving towards semi interactive quicktime event games because EVERYTHING is too hard for the majority.

There's no reason to believe that Shale is underdeveloped. I'm very suprised if Shale reacts same way as rest of the party members to various events in main quest as well as in side quests. Shale will have his own little quest, but for me most important part of character development is how they react on different events or actions. It's possible that Bioware did put tons of new dialogue from other party members towards Shale but I doubt that.

Wardens Keep cost money, no matter if you DL more pricey digital collectors edition (as you don't get any physical crap) or buy it for $15. Shale, extra character (and probably under developed) is free for all Dragon Age retail games. 2nd hand market it cost $15.

Ol' blue eyes Frank Sinatra is 50's Las Vegas. Of course it's another matter if it's possible to licence songs from him (US copyrights laws being what they are currently, not even songs made from 50's and by now dead artist seem to be enough). Maybe boozehound Dean Martin will do

Great. Now Alpha Protocol have to fight new Splinter Cell again. In the past I've been too kind for Troika but the truth is that from technical point of view all their games have been horrible. I'm currently playing Arcanum again and it's hard to belive that I'm playing it on modern computer. it seem like not even brute force can make that game run smooth. Bloodlines was huge lost opportunity. Think about how popular different emo vampire stories are now in mainstream. Twilight, True Blood ect ect. Sequel to Bloodlines would have had massive potential for really big sales. I really hope that Obsidian can avoid Troika's fate.

I really hate the whole idea of DLC and 0-day DLC is something that makes me want to throw my monitor outta window. It don't really matter for what reason Bioware did this, but now there's a chance that this will become industry standard. Cut portions of the game (if not the main storyline, side quests at least) and then sell 'em separately.

I think Blur studio managed to capture all essential elements of Dragon Age. Snowy mountain trek and archers movements are strong nod toward Lord of the Rings movie and that suits Dragon Age just fine. Orc hordes fall in front of Gimli... I mean that big guy with 2h sword. Finally we have a dragon, who can take few arrows, huge hit to the side (like dragon skin is made out of paper) and lighting blot to the face befoe getting beheaded. Difficulty level just perfect for the majority of players. Generic fantasy world (in positive way for the majority) and lowish difficulty curve. I'd say trailer was very accurate with all the other available info.

We have to remember that Disney has a lot of history and those early years are just about opposite what Disney is today. Oswald the Lucky Rabbit seem to be a very "unlucky" character. From Wikipedia: "Mintz instead demanded that Walt take a 20 percent budget cut, and as leverage, he reminded Disney that Mintz owned the character, and revealed that he had already signed most of Disney

I don't understand why this bothers you so much, not like nude patch is going to invade your PC Character creator utility is always fun to have before the game.

Archivements are one of the most inexpensive ways to increase the lifespan of the game. Best example is from World of Warcraft where old dungeon instances and quests were rarely done but when archivements were patched in the game, there was huge demand for old content again.

Why do you disagree with that ? Ultima was on it's way down the tubes, SSI's Gold Box era was gone, FPS and RTS games dominated the scene, MMOGs were just around the corner and many bad AD&D games almost ruined the brand. Fallout was nothing but unoffical sequel for Wasteland at the time and Jagged Alliance was more of tactical combat sim. I'd say Bioware did save the western type of CRPGs.

Graphics is the worst con in that list as it's definately gonna cost Bioware some sales. In Bioware boards there's tons of people who scream how graphics don't matter but for the majority they do matter. I probably should say that graphics don't matter to me either as I started to play CRPGs when ASCII or few blobs in the screen were "the thing" but I'd lie in that case. I enjoy good gtaphics and even more good art design. Dragon Age don't have either of 'em. Then again, graphics are not that bad that I'd skip the game entirely for that reason.