Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

Also, marketing is bad if it tarnishes the name of your brand

Bioware's marketing did not tarnish the Dragon Age name. Dragon Age 2 did that all by itself.

 

 

^ Pretty much. Theres a reason Bioware managed to come from being one of the most loved companies after Mass Effect 1 and 2, which was done because of the success of these 2 games but add to that Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights 1 and KOTOR, which are all epic games, to being one of the most joked about companies recently.

 

Bottom line is, make bad games, you'll have a bad name. 

 

Bioware has it now because of the greatest joke of the century: Mass Effect 3, but add to that DA2, SW TOR (cant believe they wasted 200 million on that ****) and DA:I (which is the embodiement of mediocre)

 

 

haha oh look it's another one of those guys who think ME3 was "the greatest joke of the century".

 

No-one would give a toss about ME3 if it wasn't for the stellar quality of the series up to THE VERY LAST 5 minutes of the game. Conveniently enough everyone brushes that aside. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DA2 and tactics in the same sentence?  :blink:

 

Yep. Between the cross-class combos, heaps of ways for the enemies to reach your back line(reinforcments popping out everywhere which was a plus to me) and lack of constant healing, DA2 was a blast to play through on nightmare and I actually had more of an inclination to do that again than play through DAO again with its usual "mages own everything" gameplay.

 

 

Yep.  DA2 on Nightmare is the game I go to if I want some fun, reasonably challenging combat.

 

People incredulous about this - the difficulty setting makes a large difference.  For one, Nightmare turns friendly fire on.

Edited by sparklecat
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

SW TOR (cant believe they wasted 200 million on that ****)

 

 

It actually looked really promising in the beta. A few months before release however they did a massive dumbing down of the game, and then it shipped. The rest is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No-one would give a toss about ME3 if it wasn't for the stellar quality of the series up to THE VERY LAST 5 minutes of the game. Conveniently enough everyone brushes that aside.

No, Mass Effect 3 itself had its... Well, it had its problems. Kai Leng seems fairly emblematic: he makes the player hate him, it's true, but it's because he feels like a middle finger from Bioware to the player.

 

It would have been forgivable had they not blatantly lied about the ending, however, this is true.

Curious about the subraces in Pillars of Eternity? Check out 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

 

 

 

Also, marketing is bad if it tarnishes the name of your brand

Bioware's marketing did not tarnish the Dragon Age name. Dragon Age 2 did that all by itself.

 

 

^ Pretty much. Theres a reason Bioware managed to come from being one of the most loved companies after Mass Effect 1 and 2, which was done because of the success of these 2 games but add to that Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights 1 and KOTOR, which are all epic games, to being one of the most joked about companies recently.

 

Bottom line is, make bad games, you'll have a bad name. 

 

Bioware has it now because of the greatest joke of the century: Mass Effect 3, but add to that DA2, SW TOR (cant believe they wasted 200 million on that ****) and DA:I (which is the embodiement of mediocre)

 

 

haha oh look it's another one of those guys who think ME3 was "the greatest joke of the century".

 

No-one would give a toss about ME3 if it wasn't for the stellar quality of the series up to THE VERY LAST 5 minutes of the game. Conveniently enough everyone brushes that aside. 

 

ME 3 is a narrative monstruosity from the very begginning. I really don't get all this "great until the ending" thing. The prologue on earth was cheap but tolerable, but Mars? Absolutely unforgivable from a narrative standpoint. Using a Deus Ex Machina out of the blue as the engine to fuel the plot when you had 2 previous games to set things up, I'm sorry, but I can't be on board with this, specially when that Deus Ex Machina is the ridiculous concept of a "superweapon" (I thought that Bioware couldn't go cheapper than that, but actually they could, as the ending demostrates)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

ME3 is a great game.

 

Go nuts about that for a moment.

 

I laugh at people like you. If you honestly think that anything else than a super weapon was gonna defeat the Reapers, you have not been paying attention the first 2 games.

 

And ME2... now that was a joke. Doesn't move the story forward one bit, Dr. Phil simulator in space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

DA2 and tactics in the same sentence?  :blink:

 

Yep. Between the cross-class combos, heaps of ways for the enemies to reach your back line(reinforcments popping out everywhere which was a plus to me) and lack of constant healing, DA2 was a blast to play through on nightmare and I actually had more of an inclination to do that again than play through DAO again with its usual "mages own everything" gameplay.

 

 

Yep.  DA2 on Nightmare is the game I go to if I want some fun, reasonably challenging combat.

 

People incredulous about this - the difficulty setting makes a large difference.  For one, Nightmare turns friendly fire on.

 

mäh , DA2 bad

lame story, empty (to the vomit ) recycled areas.the story have so many countless  logic errors and  even the characters were not deep and dull.

 

difficulty don't save a game wenn the rest of the game is ****...

 

DA2 is bad.in many levels

Edited by Macro
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must have missed the new guideline in which the definition of the CRPG genre was downgraded to combat and combat systems alone...

 

I guess it's the same guideline according to which every other genre is now solely defined by the quality of the graphics... tongue.png

People are ridiculous.

 

I've actually seen people argue that a game is only an RPG if there's a 'to hit' mechanice.

 

Yes. DA2 was so awful I only played it for a few hours. Anyone with half a brain would do the same and uninstall that **** before it gave you cancer. There's zero defense for this stuff other than; I'm a special snowflake who should STFU. The game was bad and should be avoided by everyone. Even butthurt gamers who bought it and are desperately trying to justify doing so. 

 

Now, DA:I. I only played that for a few hours as well and never went back(thank god for piracy) and I have similar low opinions of anyone who were in any way entertained by that travesty. Of the entire "Dragon Age Series", only Origins was worth anything at all.

Oh look, it's another one of those 'I'm a better human being for liking certain games'

 

Seriously, get over yourself.

Edited by Psychevore
Link to post
Share on other sites

I laugh at people like you. If you honestly think that anything else than a super weapon was gonna defeat the Reapers, you have not been paying attention the first 2 games.

 

Well, I actually thought you would need to know the origins of the reapers and go to really ancient and bizarre places to find information on how to defeat them, or something like that (I'm not a very imaginative person). But I really didn't expect a superweapon to pop up out of the blue, from the Mars archives nonetheless.

 

But if you think that is good storytelling, well, good for you, I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An action game is a completely different beast from an RPG.  Full stop.  I think that we need to turn down the flamethrowers here, frankly.

 

I have a ton of choices when it comes to action games - especially on consoles.  RPGs are rare.  DA2 got a lot of *deserved* scorn for two sets of reasons: first, it replaced an RPG with an action game; and second, it was objectively (I'll get there in a minute) shoddy in construction.  By the latter, I mean that they recycled assets to an astonishing degree.  They parachuted enemies in instead of trying to make them remotely believable.  These are not subjective things: they are explicit mistakes, and Bioware admitted that they were.  I can't believe that we can be arguing these points.

 

On the rest, if you prefer action games to RPGs you'd prefer DA2 to DA:O.  It really annoys me when people make sweeping claims - for example, that a reflex action game is "more tactical" than an action RPG.  Is Call of Duty really "more tactical" than chess, for example?  Apples and oranges.

 

But the thing fort the action fans to realize is twofold: this game represented a real breach of faith between audience and producer.  They marketed a game as a successor to another when they switched genres.  They'd have been a ton better off calling it something completely different, and they wouldn't have gotten the reaction that they did.  I no longer am *interested* in Bioware games.  They're entitled to chase a younger audience and I'm not obligated to support them.

 

Second - as you get older your reflexes slow down.  I'm no longer particularly good at twitch gaming, and I don't enjoy it.  There is a space for games that aren't frantic and games that aren't flashy, and they've been rare. If Bioware wants to make fantasy Call of Duty, bully for them.  But call it that - don't pretend that a console action game is a RPG, and don't claim (as in DA:I) that you're making a game for PCs first with console controls.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don´t be so narrow with definitions. There is no divide between RPG and action. Both can exist within the same framework. Something like Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines is most definitely both RPG and action game and extremely good RPG at that (action part is only serviceable).

Edited by Zorfab
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I've actually seen people argue that a game is only an RPG if there's a 'to hit' mechanice.

 

 

 

That's preposterous..its such a silly thing to say that a game is only a RPG unless it contains a "to hit " mechanic

 

A game is only a RPG if it contains deep and engaging Romance arcs...at least this is something we can all agree on 

 

:yes:

  • Like 4

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ME3 is a great game.

 

Go nuts about that for a moment.

 

I laugh at people like you. If you honestly think that anything else than a super weapon was gonna defeat the Reapers, you have not been paying attention the first 2 games.

 

And ME2... now that was a joke. Doesn't move the story forward one bit, Dr. Phil simulator in space.

 

and a giant T-800 as the last boss.  REALLY??

 

as for ME3.. i enjoyed all but the ending.. and it was mostly because of the following.. which i believe can be objectively shown...

 

our decisions from the first two games meant NOTHING..  it came down to a red/green/blue choice given by an AI in the form of a human child.  if you think i am wrong, please cite TWO separate examples where our previous choices mattered AT ALL to the ending.. you cant.

 

otherwise, the ending isnt THAT bad.. but it still ended up being underwhelming because in the end the previous 2 games mind as well not have existed. 

Edited by kalel78
Link to post
Share on other sites

A game is only a RPG if it contains deep and engaging Romance arcs Titties

Fixed.

 

Sorry, Just trying to get my self psyched for Witcher 3. (which, btw, you should be *really* interested in Bruce. The Main plot is about Geralt finding a lost love. Isn't that, like, what you live for?)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I must have missed the new guideline in which the definition of the CRPG genre was downgraded to combat and combat systems alone...

 

I guess it's the same guideline according to which every other genre is now solely defined by the quality of the graphics... tongue.png

People are ridiculous.

 

I've actually seen people argue that a game is only an RPG if there's a 'to hit' mechanice.

 

Yes. DA2 was so awful I only played it for a few hours. Anyone with half a brain would do the same and uninstall that **** before it gave you cancer. There's zero defense for this stuff other than; I'm a special snowflake who should STFU. The game was bad and should be avoided by everyone. Even butthurt gamers who bought it and are desperately trying to justify doing so. 

 

Now, DA:I. I only played that for a few hours as well and never went back(thank god for piracy) and I have similar low opinions of anyone who were in any way entertained by that travesty. Of the entire "Dragon Age Series", only Origins was worth anything at all.

Oh look, it's another one of those 'I'm a better human being for liking certain games'

 

Seriously, get over yourself.

 

 

The point wasn't that I'm a better human being at all, that's the furthest from the truth. The point was that only retards would play those games and like it. 

  • Like 1

- How can I live my life if I can't even tell good from evil?

- Eh, they're both fine choices. Whatever floats your boat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A game is only a RPG if it contains deep and engaging Romance arcs Titties

Fixed.

 

Sorry, Just trying to get my self psyched for Witcher 3. (which, btw, you should be *really* interested in Bruce. The Main plot is about Geralt finding a lost love. Isn't that, like, what you live for?)

 

 

You right, I'm super excited about W3...but more because of the size of the game world and the overall quality of the narrative. And of course all the other endearing qualities that come with a Witcher game like monster hunting, the mature themes and the real choices you need to make that seem to really matter and make you think (I let Letho live after hearing why he did what he did )

 

So yeah you right Stun..bring on W3  :dancing:  :dancing:

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, ME3 is superlame.

Deus Ex Machina weapon that should do "no one knows what, but the last cycle was building it, so we might just as well finish it" and then what? It just triggers the AI governing the Reapers to make us decide if we want to commit tech-genocide, enslave an entire species or just tamper with what every being in the galaxy is and merge it with something else.

 

No great battle, no nothing. All that was done in the previous games was reduced to numbers, and if you had enough numbers you could choose between all of the previous options, otherwise you'd have a more limited choice.

 

Yes it has its moments, like when (if you played your cards well in the previous games) you can broker peace with Geths and Quarians. Or the Mordin part (if he's still alive in ME3).

 

But the rest is just meh.

 

Oh, and forcing you to play multiplayer to increase the amount of resources is even worse than the cluster**** ending.

 

 

Edit.

Oh I forgot the lamest of them all. Javik. Day one DLC with 0 use in the game, other than be another companion. Nothing major plotwise, nothing significant on the gameplay side.

I bet if it had been in the game from the start, MAYBE, they could have done something serious with him.

But hey. Day one DLC.

Go team!

Edited by DocDoomII
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, marketing is bad if it tarnishes the name of your brand

Bioware's marketing did not tarnish the Dragon Age name. Dragon Age 2 did that all by itself.

 

 

^ Pretty much. Theres a reason Bioware managed to come from being one of the most loved companies after Mass Effect 1 and 2, which was done because of the success of these 2 games but add to that Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights 1 and KOTOR, which are all epic games, to being one of the most joked about companies recently.

 

Bottom line is, make bad games, you'll have a bad name. 

 

Bioware has it now because of the greatest joke of the century: Mass Effect 3, but add to that DA2, SW TOR (cant believe they wasted 200 million on that ****) and DA:I (which is the embodiement of mediocre)

 

 

haha oh look it's another one of those guys who think ME3 was "the greatest joke of the century".

 

No-one would give a toss about ME3 if it wasn't for the stellar quality of the series up to THE VERY LAST 5 minutes of the game. Conveniently enough everyone brushes that aside. 

 

ME 3 is a narrative monstruosity from the very begginning. I really don't get all this "great until the ending" thing. The prologue on earth was cheap but tolerable, but Mars? Absolutely unforgivable from a narrative standpoint. Using a Deus Ex Machina out of the blue as the engine to fuel the plot when you had 2 previous games to set things up, I'm sorry, but I can't be on board with this, specially when that Deus Ex Machina is the ridiculous concept of a "superweapon" (I thought that Bioware couldn't go cheapper than that, but actually they could, as the ending demostrates)

 

In a way, I'm happy ME3 had such a bad ending. It was so legendarily bad, that one can almost have a sense of pride for having been there. We can trade our war stories of staring at the credits screen stunned and uncomprehending, and heading onto the forums to make sure our game wasn't screwed up or something. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Effect (the first) was a good game with room for improvement.

Sadly, they didn't improve where it was needed and just dumbed down everything on sequels. me2 and me 3 are crap and a scourge on good RPGs.

 

 

The wheel of dialogue especially is an abomination.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of his opinions. 

 

Very great game, but the lack of AI/Scripts and pathing issues stopped it from being as amazing as the IE classics.

The pathing issues made it fit right in with the IE classics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...