Again, I think the sales and public reaction to DA2 speaks for itself. You also have a lot of flaws you can directly point to (flaws I see you have no interest in disputing). Just because you have non-randomly met 40 people (though I find that precise number a bit suspicious), doesn't mean that's a remotely represenative sample of the overall population. Fact is sales fell rapidly after release, forums are filled with complaints about it (a big sign with any bad game), and anyone people can vote or comment on games in significant numbers has posts full of detailed negatives about the game. But if you want to ignore all that and say it is a good game...that's certainly your choice.
Originally posted by Drachasor Again, I think the sales and public reaction to DA2 speaks for itself. You also have a lot of flaws you can directly point to (flaws I see you have no interest in disputing). Just because you have non-randomly met 40 people (though I find that precise number a bit suspicious), doesn't mean that's a remotely represenative sample of the overall population. Fact is sales fell rapidly after release, forums are filled with complaints about it (a big sign with any bad game), and anyone people can vote or comment on games in significant numbers has posts full of detailed negatives about the game. But if you want to ignore all that and say it is a good game...that's certainly your choice.
But if you look at all the negative posts about DA2, the only things anybody ever complains about are the non-heroic plot (which I found refreshing), the reusing of levels (which I agree was bad), and the lack of player races (which I am indifferent to). Nit-picking about perfectly good gameplay or art style is to be expected with any game.
It's an effect very similar to seeing a speck of dust on a mirror. The entire surface is expected to be flawless but that means the one little tiny flaw is noticed and pointed out by everyone. Many who expected nothing less than perfection were outraged enough to curse the game and badmouth it.
Since we expect nothing less than perfection from SW:TOR, you have better expect people to be raging about details they did not like. This is inevitable.
Again, I think the sales and public reaction to DA2 speaks for itself. You also have a lot of flaws you can directly point to (flaws I see you have no interest in disputing). Just because you have non-randomly met 40 people (though I find that precise number a bit suspicious), doesn't mean that's a remotely represenative sample of the overall population. Fact is sales fell rapidly after release, forums are filled with complaints about it (a big sign with any bad game), and anyone people can vote or comment on games in significant numbers has posts full of detailed negatives about the game. But if you want to ignore all that and say it is a good game...that's certainly your choice.
But if you look at all the negative posts about DA2, the only things anybody ever complains about are the non-heroic plot (which I found refreshing), the reusing of levels (which I agree was bad), and the lack of player races (which I am indifferent to). Nit-picking about perfectly good gameplay or art style is to be expected with any game.
It's an effect very similar to seeing a speck of dust on a mirror. The entire surface is expected to be flawless but that means the one little tiny flaw is noticed and pointed out by everyone. Many who expected nothing less than perfection were outraged enough to curse the game and badmouth it.
Since we expect nothing less than perfection from SW:TOR, you have better expect people to be raging about details they did not like. This is inevitable.
That's not true at all. They also complain about a story that isn't very good (one act has little to do with another, no proper build up and development of villians or other significant plot elements, etc, etc), a poorly balanced skill system, the combat waves ruining the tactical element that would otherwise be there, etc. There are lots of things to legitimately complain about.
Originally posted by Drachasor Originally posted by Xero_Chance
Originally posted by Drachasor Again, I think the sales and public reaction to DA2 speaks for itself. You also have a lot of flaws you can directly point to (flaws I see you have no interest in disputing). Just because you have non-randomly met 40 people (though I find that precise number a bit suspicious), doesn't mean that's a remotely represenative sample of the overall population. Fact is sales fell rapidly after release, forums are filled with complaints about it (a big sign with any bad game), and anyone people can vote or comment on games in significant numbers has posts full of detailed negatives about the game. But if you want to ignore all that and say it is a good game...that's certainly your choice.
But if you look at all the negative posts about DA2, the only things anybody ever complains about are the non-heroic plot (which I found refreshing), the reusing of levels (which I agree was bad), and the lack of player races (which I am indifferent to). Nit-picking about perfectly good gameplay or art style is to be expected with any game.
It's an effect very similar to seeing a speck of dust on a mirror. The entire surface is expected to be flawless but that means the one little tiny flaw is noticed and pointed out by everyone. Many who expected nothing less than perfection were outraged enough to curse the game and badmouth it. Since we expect nothing less than perfection from SW:TOR, you have better expect people to be raging about details they did not like. This is inevitable. That's not true at all. They also complain about a story that isn't very good (one act has little to do with another, no proper build up and development of villians or other significant plot elements, etc, etc), a poorly balanced skill system, the combat waves ruining the tactical element that would otherwise be there, etc. There are lots of things to legitimately complain about. I agree the plot jumped around a bit and was a little hard to follow by those of us with inferior intellects (foreshadowing everywhere, also it was non-traditional), I did not notice any balance issues at all, and combat waves just introduced new tactics that some DA1 players did not have the patience and ability to adapt to. I don't really see any of these as being legitimate concerns. They seem more like whining based on different tastes and unfulfilled personal expectations stemming from the inability and unwillingness to adapt to new things.
You're just forming second-hand opinions from other people's opinions and not from first-hand experience. If you have a grudge against Bioware and/or don't want to pay for the game before you try it, there are other methods of obtaining it that I will not mention here. Try it, see for yourself before opening your mouth (moving your fingers?).
Even if...assuming if seeing as i've not yet played the game myself but assuming if the worst case scenario that it wasn't a great game (aka up to bioware standards) one "bad game" does not suddenly make the It's a bioware game suddenly mean nothing.
Sure the general populace is fickle and looks at the most recent addition, but this isn't the first time they've made less then perfect games, and yet they continue to bounce back. I guess i'm just more loyal then some people in this regard. In case you were corious this is a list of Bioware's game
Looking back they always managed to bounce back from a less then great game to make a great game. So i'll be sticking around a bit longer and not just assume DA2 suddenly breaks the idea of it's a Bioware game. As i stated before it means to me that they make great games. Which they do. That doesn't mean they always do. But on the whole they make better games then most companies ever do.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
I agree the plot jumped around a bit and was a little hard to follow by those of us with inferior intellects (foreshadowing everywhere, also it was non-traditional), I did not notice any balance issues at all, and combat waves just introduced new tactics that some DA1 players did not have the patience and ability to adapt to. I don't really see any of these as being legitimate concerns. They seem more like whining based on different tastes and unfulfilled personal expectations stemming from the inability and unwillingness to adapt to new things.
You're just forming second-hand opinions from other people's opinions and not from first-hand experience. If you have a grudge against Bioware and/or don't want to pay for the game before you try it, there are other methods of obtaining it that I will not mention here. Try it, see for yourself before opening your mouth (moving your fingers?).
Ahh, I see, there are no bad plots, just idiots, is that it? Nice to know we aren't being insulting here. All other concerns aren't legitimate because they are form idiots, in your opinion, I take it?
Oh, and now you've decided I haven't played the game? I guess I didn't buy it for 40 bucks (with a free ME2 bundled with it), right? I must be delusional to see its icon on my computer. Those many hours I spent doing a complete playthrough must be some sort of odd mental disorder. I guess I need to check myself into a hospital since you seem to know me so well.
The plot IS bad. Meredith is initially rumored to being really authoritarian. You don't see her until the end of act 2 however, and by the end of act 3 rather than build up on her authoritarianism, they instead use a magic device to just make her crazy. Yeah, that's horrible character development when you use something to transform someone into something they would be anyway. The fact she doesn't play a significant role in act 1 or 2 IS a problem with the plotting as well (same with the First Enchanter Orsino who might also be considered a main "villian" of the game even though he inexplicably goes insane at the end...they didn't bother with a magical device for him). These people lack proper character development and are barely in the majority of the story. Nor is their direct influence felt in most of the story. Mages running have nothing to do with Orsino, and the Templars are just doing their jobs as cops and if they are corrupt it has nothing to do with Meredith. The foreshadowing isn't "non-traditional" it is crap. No surprise when the lead writer complained about being rushed on the job (as did many others).
The far most developed enemy in the game is the Arishok, who is removed at the end of act 2. He has probably twice as much development and a personality that actually makes sense (unlike the act 3 villains). Still, he's development could be a lot better and again he is removed by the end of act 2. That's part of the problem of course with DA2, each act has little to do with the next act. It isn't so much one cohesive story as 3 little stories with some of the same characters and the game suffers for it.
I don't care if the story isn't some epic "save the world" plot. I do care that it is poorly put together. If your main counterargument is that I must be an idiot and haven't played the game, then I humbly suggest that you completely reconsider your position, for it is quite lacking.
Even if...assuming if seeing as i've not yet played the game myself but assuming if the worst case scenario that it wasn't a great game (aka up to bioware standards) one "bad game" does not suddenly make the It's a bioware game suddenly mean nothing.
I agree DA2 being bad doesn't have much to do, necessarily, with TOR. I'm just stubborn and feel the rushed design of DA2 should be pointed out as a matter of truth (you get lots of complaints from the people involved in making it about how they were rushed and didn't have enough time). TOR doesn't seem to be rushed, but there have been some reports that it has had some problems during development. Whether those problems will persist or not is hard to say. I've read some that the story elements don't take up much of the time in the game and that largely you are doing "kill 10 of X" quests and the like. That's of a bit more concern.
Anyhow, DA2 doesn't have much to do with TOR. TOR is also largely being made by people who haven't had much to do with Bioware before. I'll see how TOR is at release, but I am not expecting the majority of the play experience to be markedly different than WoW -- not that housing and story don't matter, but rather the core combat mechanics and so forth doesn't seem that different from the WoW formula and that's no surprise given how the TOR designers talk about WoW.
I expect that one will probably like TOR if they like WoW, though I suppose there's a possibility that TOR won't be that challenging (which I hear is a problem with Rift). Still, I suppose you could always up the challenge by doing 4-man dungeons with 2 people and 2 companions.
Even if...assuming if seeing as i've not yet played the game myself but assuming if the worst case scenario that it wasn't a great game (aka up to bioware standards) one "bad game" does not suddenly make the It's a bioware game suddenly mean nothing.
Ye at least one thing is almost sure with Bioware, it is that their mmo will certainly have high quality. And this is not to underestimate in the mmo world, when most of the released game look more as alpha/beta stage games than any thing else. And i'm pretty confident the quantity of content will also be quiet good.
Comments
Again, I think the sales and public reaction to DA2 speaks for itself. You also have a lot of flaws you can directly point to (flaws I see you have no interest in disputing). Just because you have non-randomly met 40 people (though I find that precise number a bit suspicious), doesn't mean that's a remotely represenative sample of the overall population. Fact is sales fell rapidly after release, forums are filled with complaints about it (a big sign with any bad game), and anyone people can vote or comment on games in significant numbers has posts full of detailed negatives about the game. But if you want to ignore all that and say it is a good game...that's certainly your choice.
It's an effect very similar to seeing a speck of dust on a mirror. The entire surface is expected to be flawless but that means the one little tiny flaw is noticed and pointed out by everyone. Many who expected nothing less than perfection were outraged enough to curse the game and badmouth it.
Since we expect nothing less than perfection from SW:TOR, you have better expect people to be raging about details they did not like. This is inevitable.
That's not true at all. They also complain about a story that isn't very good (one act has little to do with another, no proper build up and development of villians or other significant plot elements, etc, etc), a poorly balanced skill system, the combat waves ruining the tactical element that would otherwise be there, etc. There are lots of things to legitimately complain about.
But if you look at all the negative posts about DA2, the only things anybody ever complains about are the non-heroic plot (which I found refreshing), the reusing of levels (which I agree was bad), and the lack of player races (which I am indifferent to). Nit-picking about perfectly good gameplay or art style is to be expected with any game.
It's an effect very similar to seeing a speck of dust on a mirror. The entire surface is expected to be flawless but that means the one little tiny flaw is noticed and pointed out by everyone. Many who expected nothing less than perfection were outraged enough to curse the game and badmouth it.
Since we expect nothing less than perfection from SW:TOR, you have better expect people to be raging about details they did not like. This is inevitable.
That's not true at all. They also complain about a story that isn't very good (one act has little to do with another, no proper build up and development of villians or other significant plot elements, etc, etc), a poorly balanced skill system, the combat waves ruining the tactical element that would otherwise be there, etc. There are lots of things to legitimately complain about.
I agree the plot jumped around a bit and was a little hard to follow by those of us with inferior intellects (foreshadowing everywhere, also it was non-traditional), I did not notice any balance issues at all, and combat waves just introduced new tactics that some DA1 players did not have the patience and ability to adapt to. I don't really see any of these as being legitimate concerns. They seem more like whining based on different tastes and unfulfilled personal expectations stemming from the inability and unwillingness to adapt to new things.
You're just forming second-hand opinions from other people's opinions and not from first-hand experience. If you have a grudge against Bioware and/or don't want to pay for the game before you try it, there are other methods of obtaining it that I will not mention here. Try it, see for yourself before opening your mouth (moving your fingers?).
Even if...assuming if seeing as i've not yet played the game myself but assuming if the worst case scenario that it wasn't a great game (aka up to bioware standards) one "bad game" does not suddenly make the It's a bioware game suddenly mean nothing.
Sure the general populace is fickle and looks at the most recent addition, but this isn't the first time they've made less then perfect games, and yet they continue to bounce back. I guess i'm just more loyal then some people in this regard. In case you were corious this is a list of Bioware's game
I grabbed this form here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Shattered Steel 1996
Baldur's Gate 1998
Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast 1999
MDK2 2000
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn 2000
Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal 2001
Neverwinter Nights 2002
Neverwinter Nights: Shadows of Undrentide 2003
Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Underdark 2003
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2003
Jade Empire 2005
Mass Effect 2007
Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood 2008
Mass Effect Galaxy 2009
Dragon Age: Origins 2009
Mass Effect 2 2010
Dragon Age: Origins – Awakening 2010
Dragon Age II 2011
Looking back they always managed to bounce back from a less then great game to make a great game. So i'll be sticking around a bit longer and not just assume DA2 suddenly breaks the idea of it's a Bioware game. As i stated before it means to me that they make great games. Which they do. That doesn't mean they always do. But on the whole they make better games then most companies ever do.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
Ahh, I see, there are no bad plots, just idiots, is that it? Nice to know we aren't being insulting here. All other concerns aren't legitimate because they are form idiots, in your opinion, I take it?
Oh, and now you've decided I haven't played the game? I guess I didn't buy it for 40 bucks (with a free ME2 bundled with it), right? I must be delusional to see its icon on my computer. Those many hours I spent doing a complete playthrough must be some sort of odd mental disorder. I guess I need to check myself into a hospital since you seem to know me so well.
The plot IS bad. Meredith is initially rumored to being really authoritarian. You don't see her until the end of act 2 however, and by the end of act 3 rather than build up on her authoritarianism, they instead use a magic device to just make her crazy. Yeah, that's horrible character development when you use something to transform someone into something they would be anyway. The fact she doesn't play a significant role in act 1 or 2 IS a problem with the plotting as well (same with the First Enchanter Orsino who might also be considered a main "villian" of the game even though he inexplicably goes insane at the end...they didn't bother with a magical device for him). These people lack proper character development and are barely in the majority of the story. Nor is their direct influence felt in most of the story. Mages running have nothing to do with Orsino, and the Templars are just doing their jobs as cops and if they are corrupt it has nothing to do with Meredith. The foreshadowing isn't "non-traditional" it is crap. No surprise when the lead writer complained about being rushed on the job (as did many others).
The far most developed enemy in the game is the Arishok, who is removed at the end of act 2. He has probably twice as much development and a personality that actually makes sense (unlike the act 3 villains). Still, he's development could be a lot better and again he is removed by the end of act 2. That's part of the problem of course with DA2, each act has little to do with the next act. It isn't so much one cohesive story as 3 little stories with some of the same characters and the game suffers for it.
I don't care if the story isn't some epic "save the world" plot. I do care that it is poorly put together. If your main counterargument is that I must be an idiot and haven't played the game, then I humbly suggest that you completely reconsider your position, for it is quite lacking.
I agree DA2 being bad doesn't have much to do, necessarily, with TOR. I'm just stubborn and feel the rushed design of DA2 should be pointed out as a matter of truth (you get lots of complaints from the people involved in making it about how they were rushed and didn't have enough time). TOR doesn't seem to be rushed, but there have been some reports that it has had some problems during development. Whether those problems will persist or not is hard to say. I've read some that the story elements don't take up much of the time in the game and that largely you are doing "kill 10 of X" quests and the like. That's of a bit more concern.
Anyhow, DA2 doesn't have much to do with TOR. TOR is also largely being made by people who haven't had much to do with Bioware before. I'll see how TOR is at release, but I am not expecting the majority of the play experience to be markedly different than WoW -- not that housing and story don't matter, but rather the core combat mechanics and so forth doesn't seem that different from the WoW formula and that's no surprise given how the TOR designers talk about WoW.
I expect that one will probably like TOR if they like WoW, though I suppose there's a possibility that TOR won't be that challenging (which I hear is a problem with Rift). Still, I suppose you could always up the challenge by doing 4-man dungeons with 2 people and 2 companions.
Ye at least one thing is almost sure with Bioware, it is that their mmo will certainly have high quality. And this is not to underestimate in the mmo world, when most of the released game look more as alpha/beta stage games than any thing else. And i'm pretty confident the quantity of content will also be quiet good.