Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Am I the only one who HATES dragon age?

13468913

Comments

  • LorkLork Member Posts: 338
    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    I can assume pretty much the obvious.  It's life, get over it.
    Why do we keep saying it's life, get over it?  Right afterward we complain about something else.

     

    And that's why people get shot. I bitched about him bitching about a game he didn't enjoy.

  • TryggviTryggvi Member Posts: 83

    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

  • LorkLork Member Posts: 338
    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

     

    What? That metaphor has nothing to do about what was posted in this thread.

  • TryggviTryggvi Member Posts: 83
    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

     

    What? That metaphor has nothing to do about what was posted in this thread.

     

    May I refer you back to your statement I originally quoted as to add on to something else that was posted that has nothing to do with this thread?

  • LorkLork Member Posts: 338
    Originally posted by Tryggvi

    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

     

    What? That metaphor has nothing to do about what was posted in this thread.

     

    May I refer you back to your statement I originally quoted as to add on to something else that was posted that has nothing to do with this thread?

     

    TWO DUNCES in one night, JEEBUS SAVE ME!

  • gothagotha Member UncommonPosts: 1,074

    I am actually enjoying dragon age more then mass effect.  Been a long time since i played so Kotor so hard to judge.  Dragon age is more of a setting I like though then sci fi.  Low fantasy FTW.



    As for a lot of the complaints for the opening post.  I can only say you seriously misjudged this game and what it was suppose to be.  Its kind of like complaining about GTA because there are not enough dragons and you like fantasy.

     

     

  • TryggviTryggvi Member Posts: 83
    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi

    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

     

    What? That metaphor has nothing to do about what was posted in this thread.

     

    May I refer you back to your statement I originally quoted as to add on to something else that was posted that has nothing to do with this thread?

     

    TWO DUNCES in one night, JEEBUS SAVE ME!

    You must make the third.  Such hypocrisy from someone with a quote from Plato astounds me.

  • LorkLork Member Posts: 338
    Originally posted by Tryggvi

    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi

    Originally posted by Lork

    Originally posted by Tryggvi


    Just like people who complain about being broke but if you give them some non-namebrand shit they get all pissy.

     

    What? That metaphor has nothing to do about what was posted in this thread.

     

    May I refer you back to your statement I originally quoted as to add on to something else that was posted that has nothing to do with this thread?

     

    TWO DUNCES in one night, JEEBUS SAVE ME!

    You must make the third.  Such hypocrisy from someone with a quote from Plato astounds me.

     

    Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have. Hypocrisy is thus a kind of lie. Hypocrisy may come from a desire to hide from others actual motives or feelings.

    Please, do the world a favor, think before you post.

     

  • ZhqrxtZhqrxt Member Posts: 152

    Thats the thing about hype and product placements. RPG players hate it.They instantly turn around and start looking for flaws -which every games have. Becomming FoTM is a dangerous thing in the RPG community. Two other games which have recieved high scores and positives review atm is Borderlands and Arkham. Both of those have their downsides as well - if i entered those game with high expactations i might end up asking; no more talents?(Borderlands) Linear gameplay?( Arkham)questionable graphics? ( Borderlands) etc etc.

    However i have to agree with some of op`s points. Cutscenes and forced storyline is a thing of the past. Today players want to create their own story. Why beeing forced to watch a second grade movie which isnt better then Dungeon and Dragons ( the horrible Jeremy Irons movie). If the developers want to make movies and show us how good they are at telling adventures, they need to come up with something extra ordinary - like Planescape Torment. The game is allso way to instanced imo. Entering a 10x10 square foot house promps a loading screen. Wtf?

    Bioware prolly need to find out what leg to stand on. Rpg or Adventure games. A mix is a bad idea today, where Sandbox games and games with high freedom becomes more and more the norm. If you enter a game to play RPG, it is the character development which should be in focus - cutscenes just interrupts the flow and is anoying. Bioware should ask themself, if the market really is open for story driven, adventure games today - and if they even would sell, if it wasnt because they where bundled with tons of RPG.

  • sidfusidfu Member Posts: 170
    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter

    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter


    I agree somehow agree with the OP.
    I was hoping for something a lot better than that... I mean c'mon... They made Mass Effect and it rocked. Graphics were good, the story was good, the world was huge, etc. What have they done with DAO?
    The graphics were also... terribad. And the game had EA sign on the box.
     
    ^ PS3 version
     

     

    ahhh   ps3 version

     

    you know what? get a xbox 360 or the pc version and throw that garbage away =P

     

    I had a 360 and with the experience I got with it, nahhhh.

    I rarely mind graphic, but from Bioware... what the hell.

     

    Believe me, ive played both versions side by side, 360 and ps3, and the ps3 version is way worse.

    May be because the ps3 hardware is crap, dont know (they cant even put gran turismo 5 out in that thing).

    Either way is easy, go to a store and ask to make the side by side comparison.

     

    The PC version, the one i play, has excellent graphics, and doesnt demand a top computer. So, i really cant see how graphics in this game can be criticized. Dont blame Bioware for a consoles limitations

     

    guess u dont know to much. pc,360 and the ps3 all 3  are not even close to each other when it comes to hardware. but by your comment u dont even have a guess at it.  to port the game to 3 diffent types of systems u gonna have some lose going over. from my understanding  makeing the games for them are  in this order of difficulty   pc( its the easiest since its been around a while) 360 been out a while and has already hit is max hardware ablity  and ps3 is the hardest for them to make games for right now due to it using alot of newer tech

  • Lord_IxiganLord_Ixigan Member Posts: 548
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    Originally posted by lawnmowerman


       I , for one, am perplexed by the hype/reviews of this game. I mean, I get why it's so hyped on this site as mmorpg.com has increasingly lost credence in the journalistic department and seem to be more shills for the highest advertiser than anything at this point...but In my own opinion this game is just...well, not good. Far be it from me to just post nonsense like that without giving you my reasons though:
     
    1) Load screens.Lots of them.
    I dont' like the load screens either but it is what it is.
    2) Ok, the story is KIND OF interesting. Doesn't mean I wanna take 3 steps watch a 5 minute cut scene, fight one mob, watch a 5 minute cut scene...etc
    I very much like the cut scenes as it makes the game more cinematic and frames the players in a way that to me is far more intresting then just stayiing in 3rd person view and clicking on dialogue screens.
    3) very , very , very linear. There is no "world". There is a series of linear, very restricted zones. You port from one to the next. "Exploring" consist of bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball between walls, both invisible and not down the corridor that is the "story"
    All of bioware's games are like this. Their games are more about the story going on and the player's choices within that story than exploring a world. It's not oblivion or morrowind.
    4) combat. Sigh. Revolutionary? Breathtaking? My god. Swing my sword, hit pause, cue attacks, unpause, watch action for 3 seconds, pause again. yeah...takes my breath right away. Guys..."exhilarating combat" generally doesn't involve the pause button.
    I dont' understand why people aren't getting this. I suspect they didn't read the manual. Put it on easy and don't pause. Problem solved. Easy is also there for players who want more real time combat experience.
    5)DLC ON LAUNCH DAY!!!!!!! LOLOLOL
    meh, I don't mind this. Why do they have to stand on ceremony with this service. That is how they are going to be pushing the game for the next 2 years. There is going to be content that is purchased. You don't need it to play the game.
    6) partyy system. Meh, this one is personal preference, but I dont want to have to control a party. Game would have been better , imo if it was just me and my hound. When I think of a classic rpg, i think of me. My chararacter.Singular.Micromanaging sucks.
    I'm very much with you here. This is why I've been using the tactics slots more as I hate micromanaging the party.
     
    Iv'e got more, but will stop there. Not really designed to be a bash of boware or their game, I just don't like it. Obviously a ton of people do. It just surprises me  is all. I am an older guy so perhaps what i think of as a "good game" is just different from the current generations. Seems "playable movies" are the new thing :(
      



     

    that probably is it. I enjoy playable movies as I'm a huge movie buff. I like things being theatrical and cinematic. I'm sure you aren't alone in your feelings.

     

    I don't usually like quoting walls like this, but meh...it sums things up nicely.

    Your last point there about the tactics though is basically an argument ender though. I REPEATEDLY have to explain to people that using the tactics makes the game DRASTICALLY different. They aren't there are some crutch or something. The tactics are there SPECIFICALLY SO YOU DONT HAVE TO PAUSE TO CONSTANTLY QUEUE ATTACKS. I have recently started a hard campaign as a Mage and I've done this to fully explore the tactics.

    As I have further explored and exploited all the ways in which the tactics work together I find myself having to pause less and less. I have Wynne do ONLY HEALING and cast rejuv on me at certain %'s and mass rejuv's at other %'s. I haven't even bothered to pick up Shale (the best tank character in the game). Instead I've just been using Alistair in knight-commander armor. I have his tactics set up perfectly to tank. As support and more ranged I use Leliana with lots and lots of cunning, song of valor and lots of scatter shots.

    For my character I have a lot of cc's, sleep, waking nightmare, paralyze, etc and a few aoe damage spells - mostly just use fireball, coc, blizzard/inferno combo. Having taken all this time to properly set up my party and really use my brain about tactics means I RARELY have to pause. People who complain about having to pause a lot are complaining about their own laziness, period.

  • Lord_IxiganLord_Ixigan Member Posts: 548
    Originally posted by sidfu

    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter

    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter


    I agree somehow agree with the OP.
    I was hoping for something a lot better than that... I mean c'mon... They made Mass Effect and it rocked. Graphics were good, the story was good, the world was huge, etc. What have they done with DAO?
    The graphics were also... terribad. And the game had EA sign on the box.
     
    ^ PS3 version
     

     

    ahhh   ps3 version

     

    you know what? get a xbox 360 or the pc version and throw that garbage away =P

     

    I had a 360 and with the experience I got with it, nahhhh.

    I rarely mind graphic, but from Bioware... what the hell.

     

    Believe me, ive played both versions side by side, 360 and ps3, and the ps3 version is way worse.

    May be because the ps3 hardware is crap, dont know (they cant even put gran turismo 5 out in that thing).

    Either way is easy, go to a store and ask to make the side by side comparison.

     

    The PC version, the one i play, has excellent graphics, and doesnt demand a top computer. So, i really cant see how graphics in this game can be criticized. Dont blame Bioware for a consoles limitations

     

    guess u dont know to much. pc,360 and the ps3 all 3  are not even close to each other when it comes to hardware. but by your comment u dont even have a guess at it.  to port the game to 3 diffent types of systems u gonna have some lose going over. from my understanding  makeing the games for them are  in this order of difficulty   pc( its the easiest since its been around a while) 360 been out a while and has already hit is max hardware ablity  and ps3 is the hardest for them to make games for right now due to it using alot of newer tech

     

    You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Take a ~700 dollar computer and you will have hardware way beyond what is shoved into a ps3.

    Neither the ps3 nor the 360 have more than 512kb of ram. Both of them are using equivulents to an nvidia 8600 or 8700. In the case of 360, it is actually an nvidia 8600 upgraded for 2x anti-aliasing support. The ps3 is using an ATI card. The PS3 has a more powerful processor, but the 360 has a slightly better graphics card.

    PC's are the hardest platform for gaming to code for. You have to code for multiple chipsets, multiple processors (most companies cannot code to properly utilize multi-core systems), MANY gpu's and multiple OS's. Compare that to a console - All ps3's use the exact same hardware and software. All 360's use the exact same hardware and software. If you code a game for ps3 you know EXACTLY what it is you're coding for, there's absolutely no additional bases to cover.

  • MentatMentat Member UncommonPosts: 516
    Originally posted by Thillian


    I don't like it either. I didn't like Mass Effect nor Knights of Old Republic. I do not like Bioware RPG's at all, in my opinion they should be rather called interactive movies with lots of facial expressions and cut-scenes, but with no real interaction apart from the tactical fights.
    On the other hand, I did like Baldur's Gate 1 and Planescape Torment, altho I'm not sure now whether these weren't made by Black Isle instead.



     

    as far as kotor - turn off the pauses - get passed the first planet and the game is gold...

    Is there a turn off for the pause system in dragon age?

  • The thing I don't like about BioWare games in general are the loading screens and the breaking up of the gameworld. This was true for Baldur's Gate and the same is true with DA: O. In DA: O specifically the camera can be annoying at times when you're trying to target far-off enemies, enemies around corners or on ridges.

    On the other hand I think the game does other things so well that I love it regardless.

    My favourite RPG of all time is easily Ultima 7. It's from 1992 (with a part 2 released in 1993, also a great game). It did some really great things that I really miss in modern RPGs, such as

    - Completely seamless world. You can walk from one end to the other without a single loading screen. You can enter buildings and dungeons and there's no loading screen. There's only a loading screen when you start the game, or if you use a teleport device.

    - NPCs live their own day-to-day routines. Eg. a farmer eats breakfast in the morning, is out in the field, comes home for supper, sleeps in the bed etc. This adds an amazing amount of immersion and atmosphere to the game.

    - Highly interactive gameworld. You could pick up practically anything and move it around. As a more extreme example, you could bake bread by getting lowering a bucket into a well to get water, put some flour on a table, use the water with the flower, put the dough into an oven, wait a bit and then retrieve the finished bread.

    It had an excellent main plot that you could pursue at your own leisure. You could at any point break off it and go explore the rich world, although following the main plot would eventually lead you around everywhere. I'd love to see BioWare do a game that offers these features in addition to what they already offer in their games (great interactive story-telling).

  • TalinTalin Member UncommonPosts: 918

    To me, Dragon Age is everything right about a story-driven RPG. It is NOT an Action RPG (ARPG) along the lines of Diablo, not was NWN/Baldur's Gate/etc. People call the story linear, and on many levels it is - there are only so many different areas to go to and relatively fixed paths in most - but what is NOT linear is the perception of and interaction with the characters in the world.

    You can single-handedly cause almost your entire party to leave you just by a few actions and dialogue choices. Dragon Age shows a dark world where you will be a hero - although whether you are a shining example of honor or a bloodthirsty knave is up to you to decide through the choices you make.

    After reading half of the bashing posts, it makes me realize there is too much of the MMORPG/WoW crowd out there now. You don't want a story unfolding through a game (yes, making it almost to the point of an interactive movie at times), you want to go kill 10 murlocs and bring some generic NPC back their eyes; rinse and repeat as desired. 

    Have you ever read a book for pleasure in the last decade? Dragon Age has all the high points of a fantasy novel - backstory,, character development, an engrossing plot - except you get to control the action. Make the decisions. Determine the ending (and yes, there are multiple endings). I can see how some people might not like certain features, but to HATE Dragon Age? You might as well admit you HATE true RPGs then.

  • Zorvan01Zorvan01 Member CommonPosts: 390
    Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

    Originally posted by sidfu

    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter

    Originally posted by tryklon

    Originally posted by Legsbiter


    I agree somehow agree with the OP.
    I was hoping for something a lot better than that... I mean c'mon... They made Mass Effect and it rocked. Graphics were good, the story was good, the world was huge, etc. What have they done with DAO?
    The graphics were also... terribad. And the game had EA sign on the box.
     
    ^ PS3 version
     

     

    ahhh   ps3 version

     

    you know what? get a xbox 360 or the pc version and throw that garbage away =P

     

    I had a 360 and with the experience I got with it, nahhhh.

    I rarely mind graphic, but from Bioware... what the hell.

     

    Believe me, ive played both versions side by side, 360 and ps3, and the ps3 version is way worse.

    May be because the ps3 hardware is crap, dont know (they cant even put gran turismo 5 out in that thing).

    Either way is easy, go to a store and ask to make the side by side comparison.

     

    The PC version, the one i play, has excellent graphics, and doesnt demand a top computer. So, i really cant see how graphics in this game can be criticized. Dont blame Bioware for a consoles limitations

     

    guess u dont know to much. pc,360 and the ps3 all 3  are not even close to each other when it comes to hardware. but by your comment u dont even have a guess at it.  to port the game to 3 diffent types of systems u gonna have some lose going over. from my understanding  makeing the games for them are  in this order of difficulty   pc( its the easiest since its been around a while) 360 been out a while and has already hit is max hardware ablity  and ps3 is the hardest for them to make games for right now due to it using alot of newer tech

     

    You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Take a ~700 dollar computer and you will have hardware way beyond what is shoved into a ps3.

    Neither the ps3 nor the 360 have more than 512kb of ram. Both of them are using equivulents to an nvidia 8600 or 8700. In the case of 360, it is actually an nvidia 8600 upgraded for 2x anti-aliasing support. The ps3 is using an ATI card. The PS3 has a more powerful processor, but the 360 has a slightly better graphics card.

    PC's are the hardest platform for gaming to code for. You have to code for multiple chipsets, multiple processors (most companies cannot code to properly utilize multi-core systems), MANY gpu's and multiple OS's. Compare that to a console - All ps3's use the exact same hardware and software. All 360's use the exact same hardware and software. If you code a game for ps3 you know EXACTLY what it is you're coding for, there's absolutely no additional bases to cover.



     

    You don't have it all straight, either.

    The PS3 graphics card:

    The RSX 'Reality Synthesizer' is a graphics processing unit (GPU) co-developed by NVIDIA and Sony for the PlayStation 3 game console. Sony staff were quoted in PlayStation Magazine saying that the "RSX shares a lot of inner workings with NVIDIA 7800 which is based on G70 architecture. Since the G70 is capable of carrying out 136 shader operations per clock cycle, the RSX was expected to feature the same number of parallel pixel and vertex shader pipelines as the G70, which contains 24 pixel and 8 vertex pipelines.

    So the PS3 uses an Nvidia GPU comparable to a 7800.

    The 360 graphics card:

    Graphics processing is handled by the ATI Xenos, which has 10 MB of eDRAM. Its main memory pool is 512 MB in size. The Xenos is a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) designed by ATI, used in the Xbox 360 video game console. Developed under the codename "C1," it is in many ways the precursor to the R600 desktop PC graphics card series. The package contains two separate silicon dies: the GPU and an eDRAM. The Radeon R600 is the foundation of the Radeon HD 2000/3000 series and the FireGL 2007 series video cards developed by ATI Technologies. The R600 family is called the Radeon HD 2000 series, with the enthusiast segment being the "Radeon HD 2900 series" which originally comprise the Radeon HD 2900 XT with GDDR3 memory released on May 14, and the higher clocked GDDR4 version in early July, 2007.

    So the 360's card is ATI and comparable to an Nvidia 8800.

    The 360 has the better card. However...

    As far as RAM:

    The 360 has:

    The console features 512 MB of GDDR3 RAM clocked at 700MHz with an effective transmission rate of 1.4 GHz on a 128-bit bus. The memory is shared by the CPU and the GPU via the unified memory architecture. This memory is produced by either Samsung or Qimonda. 

    The PS3 has:

    The PlayStation 3 has 256 MB of XDR main memory and 256 MB of GDDR3 video memory for the RSX.

    So because the ram is shared unlike the PS3 seperate dedicated ram, the 360's superior card cannot run as efficiently as the PS3's inferior one. Therefore the PS3 wins on graphics.

    CPU's:

    The PS3:

    The PlayStation 3 uses the Sony, Toshiba, IBM-designed Cell microprocessor as its CPU, which is made up of one 3.2 GHz PowerPC-based "Power Processing Element" (PPE) and eight Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs). The eighth SPE is disabled to improve chip yields. Only six of the seven SPEs are accessible to developers as the seventh SPE is reserved by the console's operating system.

    The 360:

    The XCPU, named Xenon at Microsoft and "Waternoose" at IBM, is a custom triple-core PowerPC-based design by IBM. The CPU emphasizes high floating point performance through multiple FPU and SIMD vector processing units in each core. It has a theoretical peak performance of 115.2 gigaflops and is capable of 9.6 billion dot products per second. Each core of the CPU is simultaneous multithreading capable and clocked at 3.2GHz.

    So, the PS3 is more powerful for handling background/analytical tasks ( such as lighting, ambience, particle effects/physics )while the main CPU runs the main game programming.. But the CPU is throttled 1 "core" by the factory and further gimped in how much the developer's can use of it by another "core". This is why you'll get more "choppiness" in certain PS3 games while the 360 versions run smoothly (Dragon Age: Origins being a recent example ). The 360's CPU runs the main program better but can't handle alot of background tasks.

    Any way, order of difficulty to develop for from hardest to easiest would be PS3 because of it's different CPU design ( ask any developer, they'll tell you. In fact, Id software and Bethesda have both stated they hated doing the PS3 versions of their games because of the complicated routes needed to program for it), PC because of the many different builds out there, then 360.

     

    image
    image]image

  • ShazzelShazzel Member Posts: 472

    Dragon Age best RPG ever? no but neither is it a complete product at this point. Still the best RPG in the last few years. Maybe im biased though, sandbox games like oblivion just annoying me with their "lack of a point" and easy non story driven gameplay.



    In fact unless you heavily mod oblivion (or fallout3) their both pretty terrible.

     

    I'd rate DA:O about a 8.8 out of 10 at this point with the potential to improve given proper DLC,mods and expansions.

  • ElikalElikal Member UncommonPosts: 7,912

    Quote from Interview with Ray Muzyka

    http://www.videogamer.com/news/dragon_age_origins_a_retrospective_with_ray_muzyka.html?page=2

     

    "I felt pleasing my party members almost more important than the overarching goal of saving the world. I was more bothered about pleasing Morrigan with my choices than getting on with the main quest. "

     

    THAT is what I HATE about the game. The party members are way to independent, like a walking critic holding scores over every goddamn decision of mine. I don't carry around people to score my every step and end up pleasing them! I am to save the world, dammit not please some touchy egos. Bioware went WAY overhead with this. Companions are free to have opinions, but when I have my own private jury following me, it gets annoying. I ended up hating all, outside of Zevran, who ended up the most loyal, since he usually had no judgement on my decisions.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • starstar Member Posts: 1,101
    Originally posted by Elikal


    THAT is what I HATE about the game. The party members are way to independent, like a walking critic holding scores over every goddamn decision of mine. I don't carry around people to score my every step and end up pleasing them! I am to save the world, dammit not please some touchy egos. Bioware went WAY overhead with this. Companions are free to have opinions, but when I have my own private jury following me, it gets annoying. I ended up hating all, outside of Zevran, who ended up the most loyal, since he usually had no judgement on my decisions.

    Cause he's the only one who'd bone you up the butt? :P

    I soooooooooooo wholeheartedly disagree with you. They might've been independent, but even if they didn't like you, they were still enjoyable characters who realized what they had been recruited/tasked to do trumped their personal feelings. They might've disliked you, but it added, imo, a great deal of depth to them.

    image

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 31,892
    Originally posted by Elikal


    Quote from Interview with Ray Muzyka
    http://www.videogamer.com/news/dragon_age_origins_a_retrospective_with_ray_muzyka.html?page=2
     
    "I felt pleasing my party members almost more important than the overarching goal of saving the world. I was more bothered about pleasing Morrigan with my choices than getting on with the main quest. "
     
    THAT is what I HATE about the game. The party members are way to independent, like a walking critic holding scores over every goddamn decision of mine. I don't carry around people to score my every step and end up pleasing them! I am to save the world, dammit not please some touchy egos. Bioware went WAY overhead with this. Companions are free to have opinions, but when I have my own private jury following me, it gets annoying. I ended up hating all, outside of Zevran, who ended up the most loyal, since he usually had no judgement on my decisions.



     

    Ok, so then DON'T please them.

    This is what I actually like about the game. That I am in a party of (quasi) independantly minded companions. If I make a decision that they don't like then that is what it is. If they really don't like my decisions they leave. Fine by me.

    I see this as a stepping stone to future rp games where your decisions might even make your companions betray you. Heck, in Dragon Age, if you make certain decisions your party might attack you. This is a good thing in my opinion. People keep saying they want to play in a world. Well, "worlds" are filled with people of different opinions and agendas. Part of what makes my decisions matter in a game is that not only can it change circumstances but it can alter the npc's perceptions.

    Take Oblivion. Or heck, Morrowind. I can play an evil character in those games but in the end it really doesn't matter. The main characters will still see me as their friend and ally and it forces me to have a role playing reason for them to ignore that I go around defying guards' commands and laying waste to cities.

    If I do something in the game (any game for that matter) and it goes against an npc's moral compass then I want to see that npc do something about it. Depending on the npc they can either run, tell me off, attack me or perhaps some day they will betray me. That is what makes a story.

    Otherwise the story is "my great and awesome character is loved by everybody no matter what I do and I save or destroy the world based on my whim of the day. And still i'm loved by all. The End".

    That's of no interest to me.

    So instead of feeling guilty for your companions' reactions to you, just realize that you are "leader". It's your game plan. If they don't like it they can go fly a kite. Or attack you. Or hit on you. etc.

    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 31,892
    Originally posted by Shazzel


    Dragon Age best RPG ever? no but neither is it a complete product at this point. Still the best RPG in the last few years. Maybe im biased though, sandbox games like oblivion just annoying me with their "lack of a point" and easy non story driven gameplay.



    In fact unless you heavily mod oblivion (or fallout3) their both pretty terrible.
     
    I'd rate DA:O about a 8.8 out of 10 at this point with the potential to improve given proper DLC,mods and expansions.



     

    It is true that there are issues with games like morrowind and oblivion. I don't agree with you about the "unless you heavily mod oblivion it is terrible"  In any case, though I love them to death, part of their great flaw is that nothign really matters.

    For instance, (and I don't think this is a spoiler at this point and if it is I'm sorry) in oblivion the emperor is assassinated and you are tasked with taking an amulet to the leader of a military order that is responsible for the well being of the royal line. So you leave your prison area and you can "immediatly find this leader because this is heavy stuff and something needs to be done" or you can "go shopping at the nearest market, perhaps solve a problemor two that the local vendors are having with one of the sellers in the market area" or "go exploring for a while, maybe even months, until you realize that you have this amulet and perhaps you should do somethign about it".

    Because if this was a real story, while you were shopping or doing other things, the enemy would be moving in and the next time you left your inn after a good night's sleep you might find yourself walking out into a lake of fire because the enemy didn't wait for you to move your butt or realize this was serious business.

    Another example (oblivion) is that you close down a gate and then the head of the guard for Kvatch (a recently invaded city) asks for your help to drive back the invaders inside. But he asks, "do you need time or can we go because they aren't going to be held back for much longer". You can then leave and go shopping or explore caves or go back to the imperial city market district and really look into that vendor who was causing problems and come back in half a year's time and then say "hmmm ok I'm ready... is the city still saveable"?

    So both styles of games, whether it's dragon age/Baldur's gate or Morrowind/Oblivion have their issues. In one you get more freedom but there is less of a sense of things hitting the fan if you don't "act now". In the other it's about a moving story and your choices inside it but you have very little time to hang around in caves or collect moss.

     

    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • ElikalElikal Member UncommonPosts: 7,912
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    Originally posted by Elikal


    Quote from Interview with Ray Muzyka
    http://www.videogamer.com/news/dragon_age_origins_a_retrospective_with_ray_muzyka.html?page=2
     
    "I felt pleasing my party members almost more important than the overarching goal of saving the world. I was more bothered about pleasing Morrigan with my choices than getting on with the main quest. "
     
    THAT is what I HATE about the game. The party members are way to independent, like a walking critic holding scores over every goddamn decision of mine. I don't carry around people to score my every step and end up pleasing them! I am to save the world, dammit not please some touchy egos. Bioware went WAY overhead with this. Companions are free to have opinions, but when I have my own private jury following me, it gets annoying. I ended up hating all, outside of Zevran, who ended up the most loyal, since he usually had no judgement on my decisions.



     

    Ok, so then DON'T please them.

    This is what I actually like about the game. That I am in a party of (quasi) independantly minded companions. If I make a decision that they don't like then that is what it is. If they really don't like my decisions they leave. Fine by me.

    I see this as a stepping stone to future rp games where your decisions might even make your companions betray you. Heck, in Dragon Age, if you make certain decisions your party might attack you. This is a good thing in my opinion. People keep saying they want to play in a world. Well, "worlds" are filled with people of different opinions and agendas. Part of what makes my decisions matter in a game is that not only can it change circumstances but it can alter the npc's perceptions.

    Take Oblivion. Or heck, Morrowind. I can play an evil character in those games but in the end it really doesn't matter. The main characters will still see me as their friend and ally and it forces me to have a role playing reason for them to ignore that I go around defying guards' commands and laying waste to cities.

    If I do something in the game (any game for that matter) and it goes against an npc's moral compass then I want to see that npc do something about it. Depending on the npc they can either run, tell me off, attack me or perhaps some day they will betray me. That is what makes a story.

    Otherwise the story is "my great and awesome character is loved by everybody no matter what I do and I save or destroy the world based on my whim of the day. And still i'm loved by all. The End".

    That's of no interest to me.

    So instead of feeling guilty for your companions' reactions to you, just realize that you are "leader". It's your game plan. If they don't like it they can go fly a kite. Or attack you. Or hit on you. etc.

     

    Thats the typical way to dicuss these days: take the point to the extreme and make it ridiculous then. You make it look like I said I want mindless robots, which I did NOT. I know this method is a very good way to win a debate, taking things of the opponent to the extreme, but it is false nontheless. I never ever said I wanted a mobile cheerleader group instead.

    I said, I don't want companions who critizise my every move on a whim. Especially as in DA when I am forced into the lead. I NEVER wanted to be Grey Warden, I NEVER wanted to lead them! Why does not Alistair? He is the senior, and yet he prefers to follow orders, and isn't that comfortable? You don't have to make ANY decision, but when the leader (me!) makes a tiny step I don't like I can yell at him. How comfortable. Though I am not surprised people of our days find that normal because essentially thats what everyone does these days in our so called Democracy. You never take responsibility but bitch about everything "those above" do. How nice.

    Alistar is an ass. Reasons see above. Or Morrigan. EVERY SINGLE DAMN TIME I am trying the help someone, I get negative ratings from her. Why? When I want to help, it's not her matter. She wanted to travel with me, not I asked her. Or Wynne. I played as Dalish, so my char is not a follower of the Maker Church, and I decided against the Church. In the end, Wynne left the party, yelling at me, because I had decided against her religion. Not that I did evil, I just supported other cults as the Maker cult in that Dragon Cultist place. Where they evil? No. They had another belief, and you may find it ridiculous what they belief, but I saw no reason to slay them just because they had another belief and I did hate the Church. So Wynne left. For matters of faith, and I thought WTF?

    And so with everyone. I find it interesting that the party members have opinions, but I dont want them to judge me on every single whim. Like I let some Blood Mage go, because there was no evidence he actually commited a crime. Result: Alister - 10. Why? This Blood Mage had done nothing. Am I supposed to kill people, just because they might do something someday? We are on the very brink of doom, and those jerks have nothing better to do that bicker over trivial decsions of mine! Well, then THEY can go and safe the world! Sorry, but I do want my crew a BIT more faithful in my decisions. Like in KOTOR or ME. The KOTOR and ME companions had their opinion too, and sometimes they didn't like what I did, but overall they were WAY more supportive, as I expect of MY HENCMEN. They are my goddamn party, my followers, not some accidentally in the same place equals. They are NPCs, god if I wanted a walking jury I can have that in RL for free, thank you very much.

     

    Again, I dont want blind yay sayers, but they are my crew, I am the captain and like with Picard, everyone can suggest something, but when the Captain (me!) makes the decision, what I say goes. Period.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • ThrakkThrakk Member Posts: 1,226

    Maker's breath

    A chanter says what?

  • KenaoshiKenaoshi Member UncommonPosts: 1,022
    Originally posted by Elikal


    Thats the typical way to dicuss these days: take the point to the extreme and make it ridiculous then. You make it look like I said I want mindless robots, which I did NOT. I know this method is a very good way to win a debate, taking things of the opponent to the extreme, but it is false nontheless. I never ever said I wanted a mobile cheerleader group instead.
    I said, I don't want companions who critizise my every move on a whim. Especially as in DA when I am forced into the lead. I NEVER wanted to be Grey Warden, I NEVER wanted to lead them! Why does not Alistair? He is the senior, and yet he prefers to follow orders, and isn't that comfortable? You don't have to make ANY decision, but when the leader (me!) makes a tiny step I don't like I can yell at him. How comfortable. Though I am not surprised people of our days find that normal because essentially thats what everyone does these days in our so called Democracy. You never take responsibility but bitch about everything "those above" do. How nice.
    Alistar is an ass. Reasons see above. Or Morrigan. EVERY SINGLE DAMN TIME I am trying the help someone, I get negative ratings from her. Why? When I want to help, it's not her matter. She wanted to travel with me, not I asked her. Or Wynne. I played as Dalish, so my char is not a follower of the Maker Church, and I decided against the Church. In the end, Wynne left the party, yelling at me, because I had decided against her religion. Not that I did evil, I just supported other cults as the Maker cult in that Dragon Cultist place. Where they evil? No. They had another belief, and you may find it ridiculous what they belief, but I saw no reason to slay them just because they had another belief and I did hate the Church. So Wynne left. For matters of faith, and I thought WTF?
    And so with everyone. I find it interesting that the party members have opinions, but I dont want them to judge me on every single whim. Like I let some Blood Mage go, because there was no evidence he actually commited a crime. Result: Alister - 10. Why? This Blood Mage had done nothing. Am I supposed to kill people, just because they might do something someday? We are on the very brink of doom, and those jerks have nothing better to do that bicker over trivial decsions of mine! Well, then THEY can go and safe the world! Sorry, but I do want my crew a BIT more faithful in my decisions. Like in KOTOR or ME. The KOTOR and ME companions had their opinion too, and sometimes they didn't like what I did, but overall they were WAY more supportive, as I expect of MY HENCMEN. They are my goddamn party, my followers, not some accidentally in the same place equals. They are NPCs, god if I wanted a walking jury I can have that in RL for free, thank you very much.
     
    Again, I dont want blind yay sayers, but they are my crew, I am the captain and like with Picard, everyone can suggest something, but when the Captain (me!) makes the decision, what I say goes. Period.

     

    THAT`S what most annoyed me, i play lawfull good AND the lawfull EVIl on rpgs, did on nwn and got no problem, but here i just CANT play the way i like.

    First i played, made a human warrior berserker(very boring poor skils and miss alot) got everybody but dint go war cause got bored. then made a mage but then AGAIN i am everydody´s bitch, the grey warden´s bitch, cricle of magi bitch, templar´s bitch...

    [SPOIL ALERT]

    i helped the blood mage on the begining. so i already rebeled against the "order" so why in the hell i just bow down and go with the greywardens? why i must be a asshole that kill innocent ppl to save the world?

    now: GW2 (11 80s).
    Dark Souls 2.
    future: Mount&Blade 2 BannerLord.
    "Bro, do your even fractal?"
    Recommends: Guild Wars 2, Dark Souls, Mount&Blade: Warband, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.

  • DeViLzzz2007DeViLzzz2007 Member Posts: 107

    controlling a whole party has always been fail unless it is a turn based game like the Final Fantasy series ..... 

    Money is the root of all evil.

Sign In or Register to comment.