malek Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 More I heard, less I like it.Seems to me they are trying to take the game away from RPG fans, and make it "likable"to broader audience.They are making it too easy, and are significantly simplifying things from what I heard.And downsizing from 6 to 4 party members is a step in wrong direction in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 As for sex, no way this can be done without becoming hilarious. Until graphics overcome uncanny valley, sex/intimate contact (including kissing) should be proscribed from video games. It just doesn't work.I thought it worked well enough in Mass Effect, but Dragon Age uses a different engine in which characters don't look anywhere near as good. Plus they apparently keep their silly looking underwear on during sex, so yeah, that aspect of the game is probably going to be hilarious.Seems to me they are trying to take the game away from RPG fans, and make it "likable"to broader audience.They are making it too easy, and are significantly simplifying things from what I heard.And downsizing from 6 to 4 party members is a step in wrong direction in my opinion.Oh please. I've seen no indication that they are "simplifying" things. How could they, as they created the ruleset themselves? Or do you mean it will be less complicated than the oldschool AD&D rules used in the BG games, with its confusing, arcane conventions? Surely that is bound to be a good thing?And the number of party members is probably mostly due to balance issues I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 The only reviews of the game so far have marked it down for being too hard even at easy difficulty and too old school in design. Also 6 party members hasn;t been the norm for a while now.I'm still looking forward to it despite the fact that as someone from the UK I'm being abused by the releases in that every Uk release gets less stuff than anyone else and costs more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yagathai Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Or do you mean it will be less complicated than the oldschool AD&D rules used in the BG games, with its confusing, arcane conventions? Surely that is bound to be a good thing?You take that back, you son of a bitch. :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 The only reviews of the game so far have marked it down for being too hard even at easy difficulty and too old school in design.Why have they marked it down for that? This is good news. A game you can't blitz through in just a week is a rarity these days. It also sounds like a proper PC game with some console ports rather than vice versa. I'm tired of the PC getting shafted by shitty ports (hello GTA4!) these days, so seeing something more balanced is refreshing.Also 6 party members hasn't been the norm for a while now.Mainly thanks to BioWare themselves, who downgraded the 'standard' party size to 3 for KotOR and a paltry 2 for Jade Empire. If they wanted to put it up to 6 again, that's up to them, and it's a shame they haven't done that. At least 4 is going in the right direction.EDIT: Reviews here and here. The interesting bit is that the game's main quest only accounts for about 30% of the game, even though it took the devs about 26 hours to complete it. The rest is sidequests and other things your character can do, which apparently adds up to a lot.Also, apparently only the PC version has the Baldur's Gate-style overhead camera view. The 360 and PS3 versions had to drop it due to memory limitations (WTF?) and will only have a Mass Effec/KotOR-style over the shoulder view. Interesting. I hadn't heard that before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emberling Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I think it's pretty silly to view this as a dumbing down of Baldur's Gate type games. The games we've gotten in that vein in the past ten years or so - as far as I know, this means NWN2 and Drakensang - have been fine on the mechanics but lacking on the writing, the interaction, the qualities that really made so many people (note: not including myself) love BG so much.While they're far from perfect, the closest thing to consistently good writing, characterization, and world development from a still extant company in the WRPG genre is still BioWare, and they're finally turning their attention (back) to this style of game. What does it matter if there are only three character classes*, or four party members, or no polearms if the writing and characterization are good and the world is sufficiently explorable? There are only so many points of complexity available in good design, and the market has changed from one that probably already knew what THAC0 was into one that expects their games to be accessible and grokkable. Expanding from the me-plus-AI dynamics of recent popular RPGs into full party control is going to take up some of that mindspace.*with a seemingly sufficient number of customization options to not make that patently ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durckad Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 You take that back, you son of a bitch. :angry:You can't take back the truth. :)Also, apparently only the PC version has the Baldur's Gate-style overhead camera view. The 360 and PS3 versions had to drop it due to memory limitations (WTF?) and will only have a Mass Effec/KotOR-style over the shoulder view. Interesting. I hadn't heard that before.That seals it.PC version ftw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Why have they marked it down for that?It was some Polish site that published the very first review. They tried to rush through the game without doing anything other than what is strictly necessary (presumably to get the review out as soon as possible) and apparently ran into an enemy they could not defeat even on the easiest difficulty. I believe the reason for this is that Bioware has made the enemy scaling Baldur's Gate style -- the power of the enemy will fluctuate with your level, but there is a floor and a ceiling for each enemy. Keep in mind that this reviewer also listed being "old school" (compared to, say, Mass Effect) as a negative so it probably wasn't somebody who is good at playing RPGs and without the XP and items from side quests, the game became too hard for him. Basically, everything he listed as a negative I consider a positive.Also, apparently only the PC version has the Baldur's Gate-style overhead camera view. The 360 and PS3 versions had to drop it due to memory limitations (WTF?) and will only have a Mass Effec/KotOR-style over the shoulder view. Interesting. I hadn't heard that before.The differences between the PC and console versions are not trivial. I've compiled a list of them based on what I've seen on Bioware's forum:1) The PC version will have a toolset and be capable of downloading user-made content (either mods to the original game a-la the Baldur's Gate series or standalone adventures a-la Neverwinter Nights). The console versions will not have either of these, although there is some possibility of the better player made mods being packaged as DLC at a later date (you'll probably have to pay for them though).2a) On the PC version, the interface is some combination of Baldur's Gate, Knights of the Old Republic (KotOR) and Neverwinter Nights with the player choosing which one is dominant. That is, you can control movement via either point-and-click or WASD and you can use as many quick slots as can fit on your screen (the bar is extendable). On the consoles, movement is KotOR-style only which means that while you can issue ability usage and attack commands to multiple characters at once, you can only control the movement of one character at a time. This makes using positioning in battle a royal pain in the neck -- it wasn't necessary in KotOR, but I have a feeling that won't be the case here...2b) On the PC, you have the choice of a Baldur's Gate style overhead view (what Bioware calls "tactical zoom") or a KotOR-style third person view and can switch between them at any time. On the consoles, you only get the KotOR-style view (though you can still move the camera a bit). The reason is that unlike practically all games made today, Dragon Age was made for the PC first and only ported to the consoles later (the PC version was delayed for months to assure a simultaneous release, though they claim to have polished it in the meantime). The XBox 360 and the PS3 each only have a total of 512MB of memory -- this means for the CPU and GPU put together. Since the game was made for the PC and every PC that can play the game is required to have roughly twice as much (once you combine the RAM and video RAM and subtract the memory used by the OS), something had to give and this was one of those things.3) Because of the same memory constraints, the console versions cannot have as many creatures on the screen at once. They said that they are working around this by sometimes making what is one large battle on the PC happen in waves on the consoles and sometimes substituting a smaller number of slightly tougher enemies for large hordes.4) The PC version is cheaper.I suspect there are reasons to buy the console versions (some people just don't like PC gaming or their PC is not capable of playing it or they have a truly awesome entertainment center setup around their consoles), but for most people, the PC version is without a doubt the one to get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanrn Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Oh please. I've seen no indication that they are "simplifying" things. How could they, as they created the ruleset themselves? Or do you mean it will be less complicated than the oldschool AD&D rules used in the BG games, with its confusing, arcane conventions?What in the name of hell was even remotely confusing about the BG ruleset... Seriously, a chimp wouldn't find it confusing."Marked down as being too hard", yeah thats better than being too goddam easy.Mind you these are the people who call Fallout 3 an excellent game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 What in the name of hell was even remotely confusing about the BG ruleset... Seriously, a chimp wouldn't find it confusing.I understood it without problems, but anyone who's never played AD&D before is bound to get confused, as a lot of it is not exactly intuitive (so I've equipped a longsword +1, why does my THAC0 decrease because of this?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 "Too hard", "Old School"?I think I'm in love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kungtotte Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 What I like about it is that Dragon Age was developed for the PC and then ported to the 360, instead of the other way around. I love Bioware for getting their priorities straight.People's panties are also getting real bunched up over this launch-day DLC thing, because none of them understand how game developers work. The PC version has been "done" for some time, barring last-minute polish and bug-hunting of course, so the content-creators found themselves more or less with nothing to do so they kept making content for the game, on the side so to speak. And this content will be released as a DLC on the day of the launch (presumably free for PC users as I've not seen anything to the contrary, but 360 users will have to pay Microsoft's DLC-toll of about $7 USD, as per usual). There really isn't anything gamers won't cry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverstar Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I wish they hadn't dropped the multiplayer option for the game, because their original premise with that sounded awesome (iirc, there was to be a completely different storyline for the game if you played it multiplayer as opposed to playing it singleplayer). However, really looking forward to playing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneeye Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 26 more days ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yagathai Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I understood it without problems, but anyone who's never played AD&D before is bound to get confused, as a lot of it is not exactly intuitive (so I've equipped a longsword +1, why does my THAC0 decrease because of this?).To Hit Armor Class 0. What part of that is tough to understand? The lower the number, the lower you have to roll, the better it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 To Hit Armor Class 0. What part of that is tough to understand? The lower the number, the lower you have to roll, the better it is!Well, duh. The thing is that saying that a +1 bonus lowers THACO is a little bit unintuitive. As are a lot of AD&D rules. They are they aren't terribly difficult and all their arbitrary restrictions have a certain weird charm, but nostalgia aside I don't think it so terrible to admit that it's possible to improve on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yagathai Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 HERESY! TREASON!SHUN THE NONBELIEVER! SHHHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emberling Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 To Hit Armor Class 0. What part of that is tough to understand? The lower the number, the lower you have to roll, the better it is!And why would Joe Gamer know that a roll of a virtual twenty-sided die is involved, or what Armor Class 0 represents (which is not, as one might assume, 'no armor')? That stuff is ridiculously opaque to anyone who didn't study it, either via AD&D 2E elsewhere or in the game's own documentation.What I'm trying to say here is, back in the Baldur's Gate days, the arcane AD&D 2E mechanics were in no small part due to the fact that using them was the best way for Bioware to make their game accessible and well-liked by the gaming public. The D&D name sold their game, and a huge portion of their userbase was already familiar with the terms and concepts.Now, Bioware is doing exactly the same thing - building their game mechanics in a way that makes it accessible to the gaming public. The current gaming community lends more weight to the BioWare name than it does to WotC or D&D, so borrowing doesn't help. Great value is now placed on the development of game mechanics that seem easy to comprehend and gradually become deeper and add more complexity; the concept of the skill tree as innovated in Diablo II has become entrenched for good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yagathai Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 And why would Joe Gamer know that a roll of a virtual twenty-sided die is involved, or what Armor Class 0 represents (which is not, as one might assume, 'no armor')? That stuff is ridiculously opaque to anyone who didn't study it, either via AD&D 2E elsewhere or in the game's own documentation.RTFM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogbebaba Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 RTFM.I have never played D&D in my life and I have never had any trouble understanding the mechanics of Bioware RPG gamesIT'S BUT PLUG SIMPLE to understand the basics but add all the facets of combat together and its is an enjoyably complex puzzle to figure out how to defeat hard opponents or bad odds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.