Dragon Age Discussion

[Tigranes]

Warning: Spoiler!

 

 

Advanced players will appreciate DA's customizable party tactics system - an integrated way of scripting combat behavior for your allies. Have your rogue auto-heal you if your health drops to a certain percentage; have your mage boost your party

[Niten_Ryu]

Sounds good. I don't mind the spoilers but dont read the article if ya don't wanna know the details of one origin story.

[Monte Carlo]

That was a good review, even if it did confirm some of my worst fears about deus ex machina gameplay via origin stories (i.e. the arc is fixed, you only make tweak-decisions, we are all goldfish in Dave Gaider's aquarium).

 

However, and this cannot be forgiven, the author used the word 'impactful', which isn't a word and annoys me greatly.

 

On the other hand, I simply cannot wait to see what the community does with the cutscene dialogue tools. It's gonna be a riot.

 

Cheers

MC

[Moatilliatta]

However, and this cannot be forgiven, the author used the word 'impactful', which isn't a word and annoys me greatly.

It exists now because of the good people who make advertising.

[Volourn]

"However, and this cannot be forgiven, the author used the word 'impactful', which isn't a word and annoys me greatly."

 

Meh. Words are created all the time. How else do you think language has been created, and advanced? By people sticking with words that were created ebfore they were born? No. By constantly adding new ones.

[Pidesco]

The Volourn is correct on the language thing.

[Monte Carlo]

Or Wrongtastic. Wrongifullnae. Wrongtabulous.

 

Those aren't new words, they're existing words with an annoying suffix. I'm completely aware of the evolution of language. That doesn't mean that the future of English being determined by Micro$oft spell-checker is necessarily a good thing.

 

Cheers

MC

 

Edit: I can't be bothered to argue with Vol.

Edited February 25, 2009 by Monte Carlo

[alanschu]

You're being redonkulous!

[Pop]

Not using real words is what we in the business of using words like to call "being unprofessional". If you're writing in any official capacity you ought to be professional. Unless you trust the incisive critics over at hipster runoff.

 

On the whole that article is really horribly overwritten.

 

Compare this flowery turd:

"Role-players relish character creation. It’s that beautiful blank slate - that special time when the imagination can forge an entire history with a few clicks, where your mental image of a daring rogue hits the page in the form of high dexterity, archery training, and dropping a dozen points into his lockpicking skill."

 

with this:

"Character creation is a useful and exciting means of conceptualizing your character, turning statistics into recognizable traits and skills."

 

They convey the same idea, except the second one does not suck.

Edited February 26, 2009 by Pop

[alanschu]

It depends on who you're writing to.

[Pop]

I would rather that the gaming press not treat its audience as though they they were stupid, even if gaming boards across the internet tend to support the notion that they are, in fact, stupid.

 

Besides which, I'm not sure the writer really grasps the notion of player choice.

 

Oh hello pagebreak, old friend.

Edited February 26, 2009 by Pop

[Tigranes]

To be fair, if you graduate high school English, they *tell* you to write like that.

[alanschu]

Meh, to me it just seemed like he was writing a bit more stylized with a bit of enthusiasm.

 

Your example may be more to the point, but it is less entertaining to read.

[Amentep]

Meh, to me it just seemed like he was writing a bit more stylized with a bit of enthusiasm.

 

Your example may be more to the point, but it is less entertaining to read.

 

Are reviews entertainment or sources of reasoned, expert opinion?

 

I'd imagine the answer to that question would lead us to find a divide between those who expect casual vs formal in the writing style.

[alanschu]

Since it seems any schlub can write a review, I don't expect it to be expert opinion.

[Amentep]

Then what purpose does the review actually have? If a review is just a schlub writing or entertainment, then is it terribly useful to the reader as anything other than entertainment in and of itself?

[Volourn]

To me a review should let me know what the writer thinks of the game (or movie, or whatever) in as entertaining a way as possible. Also, throwing in some 'facts' about how gameplay works, characetrs, story, whatever is cool too. The best way to tell if a review is poorely done is if I end up skipping multiple paragraphs of it.

[Slowtrain]

Then what purpose does the review actually have? If a review is just a schlub writing or entertainment, then is it terribly useful to the reader as anything other than entertainment in and of itself?

 

 

To me, the most important aspect of a review is that the writer have a sense of the history of the topic he/she is writing about. WIthout a sense of what has been done before, it is impossible to place current reviews in context.

 

 

If you've only seen 10 movies in your life and they are all in the last year, you're reviews aren't going to be very informative. Same with games. Or music or anything else.

 

I expect someone whose reviews I am reading to have seen more or played more or listened to more (depending on what is being reviewed) than me. That way the can provide with information and context I simply don't have.

 

Beyond that, I don't have much preference other than they be able to express their thoughts reasonably clearly. Stylistically, I don't care at all.

[Morgoth]

I don't need reviewers to decide what game I should buy or not. Bioware, Obsidian, Valve and Blizzard games are always blind purchases, no reviewers needed there.

[Slowtrain]

I don't need reviewers to decide what game I should buy or not. Bioware, Obsidian, Valve and Blizzard games are always blind purchases, no reviewers needed there.

 

 

Reviews are not just for purchase. A good reviewer is educational. My favorite reviewers I read regardless of whether I am actually interested in paying for something or not. They usually just have interesting things to say.

[alanschu]

Then what purpose does the review actually have? If a review is just a schlub writing or entertainment, then is it terribly useful to the reader as anything other than entertainment in and of itself?

 

 

When a reviewer writes with a style such as that exhibited by Pop's example, it sends a strong signal that he really enjoyed that part of the game.

[Volourn]

"A good reviewer is educational"

 

FUNNI!

[Junai]

Reviewers?

 

A good reviewer has the nuts to tell the truth, namely that NWN2 was an uninspired slam-dunk high-school project, and that Dragon Age's story about heroic elflings who save the world from evil monsters isn't original, dark or mature at all, just pure.. shizzle.

 

Oh, and IWD1 is the best game ever.

 

Anything else?

 

J.

[Morgoth]

I don't need reviewers to decide what game I should buy or not. Bioware, Obsidian, Valve and Blizzard games are always blind purchases, no reviewers needed there.

 

 

Reviews are not just for purchase. A good reviewer is educational. My favorite reviewers I read regardless of whether I am actually interested in paying for something or not. They usually just have interesting things to say.

No, a reviewers job is just hyping a game, usually the hyping-level is proportional with the bribery sum.

 

Educational.... *facepalm*

[Volourn]

A reviewer's 'job' is to describe mhis epxereince with the game. Period.

 

 

"who save the world from evil monsters isn't original,"

 

Originality is oevrrated

 

 

" dark or mature at all,"

 

Actually, from what we've seen it is dark, and mature. The origins see to that.

 

 

" just pure.. shizzle."

 

That would be a lie, and we wouldn't want a reviewer to lie, right?