See, the reason I was still on back then was because despite the new shit, DAO was specifically going back to their old shit, so when they throw out that for some new action shit...well, I'm one of the people who did in fact thing that there were things that stunk with the changes they made in ME2.
And also, how baffling it is that they made something on the same engine which looks so much worse.
It doesn't look any worse technically, but artistically I think you're right, some models like the Darkspawn, could use a major overhaul. Their faces just look plain bad.
That said, the only reason any of us wouldn't buy this game is if it turned into a shooter or if the story was on a level paralleling Jersey Shore.
See, the reason I was still on back then was because despite the new shit, DAO was specifically going back to their old shit, so when they throw out that for some new action shit...well, I'm one of the people who did in fact thing that there were things that stunk with the changes they made in ME2.
And also, how baffling it is that they made something on the same engine which looks so much worse.
It doesn't look any worse technically, but artistically I think you're right, some models like the Darkspawn, could use a major overhaul. Their faces just look plain bad.
That said, the only reason any of us wouldn't buy this game is if it turned into a shooter or if the story was on a level paralleling Jersey Shore.
Well, if it worked for ME2...
I think ME2 was a step in the right direction, though it had many flaws. The variation between the weapons for example, was a very good idea. Weapons that were as varied as they are in MW2 or BC2 is a great idea, which is something that ME1 did not do well at all. Still, they need more variation I think.
Dragon Age is a completely different game, though. It has magic as a crutch to create variation between its weapons. Mass Effect, being a shooter, has to differentiate their weapons through rate of fire, capability vs. barriers/armor/shields, clip/ammunition capacity and damage of course. Ammunition powers and mods add more variety to ME's weapons.
Bioware will hopefully get the RPG-Shooter hybrid right by ME3.
I'm gonna be so torn between the PC version and the 360 version of DA2.
360: Large HD TV + Sofa + DA story + Potentially more satisfying combat system = Awesome
PC: Original DA Combat + DA story + Potential mods = Awesome
Don't make me choose.
I think people are overly concerned by those screenshots. With DAO, if you were take the characters in a party, put them ontop of a mountain with a white, empty sky and make them fight Darkspawn, it would look just as underwhelming. The graphics themselves look a little better, it's just these parts that we have been shown which seem to have quite poor art direction - Which is a justified concern, but bare in mind how bad the fade looked, whilst the rest of the game looked great.
Except even ignoring the new, shit artstyle, the generic darkspawn still look way worse. The Mage companion looks ok, but that's cause that looks like reused assets
Man, way to rub the salt in the wound of Trokia being closed while doing Arcanum 2 in source
I never finished Arcanum. The furthest I got was to get shipwrecked on some prison island (supposed to paralel Australia) and I couldn't figure out what to do next.
Smrtnik on
0
jefe414"My Other Drill Hole is a Teleporter"Mechagodzilla is Best GodzillaRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
I said it before and I'll say it again, the ogre looks SO SAD that his buddy is dead on the ground.
I always find it funny when people actively want something to fail or dislike it simply because it is becoming more mainstream. Especially with graphics. Complaining about graphics has always been the most shallow complaining there is as far as I'm concerned. Graphics haven't mattered to me since the ps2 was released, they only matter if they hinder the gameplay or story telling. I like to equate it to George Lucas-ism where we can throw out all reasonable sense of plot or pacing, but it's cool because my colors are better than your colors.
As long as the story is competent and the gameplay is solid graphics shouldn't matter.
Mild Confusion on
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I'm gonna be so torn between the PC version and the 360 version of DA2.
360: Large HD TV + Sofa + DA story + Potentially more satisfying combat system = Awesome
PC: Original DA Combat + DA story + Potential mods = Awesome
Don't make me choose.
I think people are overly concerned by those screenshots. With DAO, if you were take the characters in a party, put them ontop of a mountain with a white, empty sky and make them fight Darkspawn, it would look just as underwhelming. The graphics themselves look a little better, it's just these parts that we have been shown which seem to have quite poor art direction - Which is a justified concern, but bare in mind how bad the fade looked, whilst the rest of the game looked great.
Take it from somebody who spent money on both. The PC version of DA:O was far better than the 360. And I didn't even mind the controls of the 360.
I always find it funny when people actively want something to fail or dislike it simply because it is becoming more mainstream. Especially with graphics. Complaining about graphics has always been the most shallow complaining there is as far as I'm concerned. Graphics haven't mattered to me since the ps2 was released, they only matter if they hinder the gameplay or story telling. I like to equate it to George Lucas-ism where we can throw out all reasonable sense of plot or pacing, but it's cool because my colors are better than your colors.
As long as the story is competent and the gameplay is solid graphics shouldn't matter.
I'm not so sure. For example, I find that the much improved graphics in HL2 relative to HL1 really draw me into the game world and make it much more immersive and enjoyable.
HL2's graphics don't really impact upon the gameplay or story, but they have an important contribution to how good the game is overall. Even with the right art style I don't think i'd want to have simpler/lower
fidelity graphics.
Then again, I have just paid £400 for a new graphics card...
I always find it funny when people actively want something to fail or dislike it simply because it is becoming more mainstream. Especially with graphics. Complaining about graphics has always been the most shallow complaining there is as far as I'm concerned. Graphics haven't mattered to me since the ps2 was released, they only matter if they hinder the gameplay or story telling. I like to equate it to George Lucas-ism where we can throw out all reasonable sense of plot or pacing, but it's cool because my colors are better than your colors.
As long as the story is competent and the gameplay is solid graphics shouldn't matter.
I'm not so sure. For example, I find that the much improved graphics in HL2 relative to HL1 really draw me into the game world and make it much more immersive and enjoyable.
HL2's graphics don't really impact upon the gameplay or story, but they have an important contribution to how good the game is overall. Even with the right art style I don't think i'd want to have simpler/lower
fidelity graphics.
Then again, I have just paid £400 for a new graphics card...
I'll concede that graphics do matter when compared to generation jumps, but when people start saying that Crysis is better than Half-life because of the graphics are shinnier, it's silly.
One addendum to my previous statement is that graphics are a good thing, especially when they contribute to gaming innovation. Examples such as motion blur, depth of view, real time shadows, ect. I just don't care to hear developers saying stuff like, "We have 10000 pixels in the left breast alone compared to last generations 2000 pixels. That's 5 times more boobage!" and the fans rejoice.
Mild Confusion on
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I'll concede that graphics do matter when compared to generation jumps, but when people start saying that Crysis is better than Half-life because of the graphics are shinnier, it's silly.
One addendum to my previous statement is that graphics are a good thing, especially when they contribute to gaming innovation. Examples such as motion blur, depth of view, real time shadows, ect. I just don't care to hear developers saying stuff like, "We have 10000 pixels in the left breast alone compared to last generations 2000 pixels. That's 5 times more boobage!" and the fans rejoice.
The people you're referring to are idiots.
So their opinions don't matter.
Also, there are definitely more shins in Crysis than HL. This can only be a good thing.
That picture is the same as the one in Game Informer and on GI's website, isn't it?
Couscous on
0
kaliyamaLeft to find less-moderated foraRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
It's really clear that the beta leaked screenshot is not going to be representative of the game. I don't know if graphics will get better, but there's no way the finalized art assets are going to look worse. The worst possible outcome would be that they recycle a bunch of stuff, in which case it looks the same - this tells me that these are placeholder assets or unoptimized.
I'm gonna be so torn between the PC version and the 360 version of DA2.
360: Large HD TV + Sofa + DA story + Potentially more satisfying combat system = Awesome
PC: Original DA Combat + DA story + Potential mods = Awesome
Don't make me choose.
I think people are overly concerned by those screenshots. With DAO, if you were take the characters in a party, put them ontop of a mountain with a white, empty sky and make them fight Darkspawn, it would look just as underwhelming. The graphics themselves look a little better, it's just these parts that we have been shown which seem to have quite poor art direction - Which is a justified concern, but bare in mind how bad the fade looked, whilst the rest of the game looked great.
Take it from somebody who spent money on both. The PC version of DA:O was far better than the 360. And I didn't even mind the controls of the 360.
Plus you can always run your video/audio output to your TV and with wireless controllers, play on your couch
See, the reason I was still on back then was because despite the new shit, DAO was specifically going back to their old shit, so when they throw out that for some new action shit...well, I'm one of the people who did in fact thing that there were things that stunk with the changes they made in ME2.
And also, how baffling it is that they made something on the same engine which looks so much worse.
I just hope that they remember that choice, complexity and strategy are all GOOD things. Fundamentally I want to pause the game and issue a queue of orders to fight. No up down left right square shit.
"Warrior, mage, and rogue are archetypes for a reason, but I don't know that Origins delineated them enough. It didn't create enough space between them. A rogue dual-wielding was just a warrior with less armor in some cases."
"What I want to do is make sure that you feel like this unstoppable juggernaut, a lithe super-ninja, or field artillery." - Laidlaw
I'll concede that graphics do matter when compared to generation jumps, but when people start saying that Crysis is better than Half-life because of the graphics are shinnier, it's silly.
One addendum to my previous statement is that graphics are a good thing, especially when they contribute to gaming innovation. Examples such as motion blur, depth of view, real time shadows, ect. I just don't care to hear developers saying stuff like, "We have 10000 pixels in the left breast alone compared to last generations 2000 pixels. That's 5 times more boobage!" and the fans rejoice.
The people you're referring to are idiots.
So their opinions don't matter.
Also, there are definitely more shins in Crysis than HL. This can only be a good thing.
Shins lol, I just caught that
Mild Confusion on
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
My problem, however is that my first play through was as a mage, and it was very fun and rewarding.
I'm trying with a rogue, and I'm just not feeling it. Sure, she does nice damage but it's really just autoattack city in backstab range.
It's hard to go from being the deciding factor in almost every encounter to ... a kind of damage accessory. I'm thinking a warrior playthrough would be more of the same. 2handers are super slow, dual-wield is kinda the same as a rogue, I would think. Too many points to really pump will to actually do moves during combat. (and does it really matter?).
I like the Origins part of the game. I play through the beginning sections and like it. Then I get to the meat of the game and it just kind of loses me.
Derrick on
Steam and CFN: Enexemander
0
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
edited July 2010
That's why I didn't play a mage first. First I played a warrior, and got through it having fun with the combat. my second, slow burn playthrough is a mage which just blows everything up. If I had done it the other way around, I'd probably be bored shitless with my warrior.
-Loki- on
0
HalfmexI mock your value systemYou also appear foolish in the eyes of othersRegistered Userregular
And like in real life, the artillery will be the god of the battlefield.
One can only hope.
God I hope not. Enemy mages on higher difficulties were enough of a pain in the ass in Origins without making them even more powerful.
o.0 You must not have taken Mana Clash or the Glyph of Negation. 2 ways to totally negate mages (and there are others.)
I never really had the chance to retaliate against them; I'd often round a corner and eat an AoE-knockdown fireball to the face before I could cover the length of the room to get to them with my warrior. Shit sucked. Game was a blast otherwise, but fuck enemy mages.
I don't like rping as a mage, but it didn't stop me from using the enchanted warrior mod. It pretty much gives a warrior/rogue 4 spells. Stonefist, fireball, cone of cold, and crushing prison. It's a bit OP, but fun as hell.
Mild Confusion on
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Posts
Well, if it worked for ME2...
I think ME2 was a step in the right direction, though it had many flaws. The variation between the weapons for example, was a very good idea. Weapons that were as varied as they are in MW2 or BC2 is a great idea, which is something that ME1 did not do well at all. Still, they need more variation I think.
Dragon Age is a completely different game, though. It has magic as a crutch to create variation between its weapons. Mass Effect, being a shooter, has to differentiate their weapons through rate of fire, capability vs. barriers/armor/shields, clip/ammunition capacity and damage of course. Ammunition powers and mods add more variety to ME's weapons.
Bioware will hopefully get the RPG-Shooter hybrid right by ME3.
Steam: CavilatRest
darkspawn won't be so tough with a magic-propelled bullet through the eyes
Ferelden all in it's "Victorian" style age, with steam and coal and shit powering everything and flintlock weapons becoming the norm
It would be like Fable II, except good!
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
I don't get to play games like these enough.
Steam: CavilatRest
360: Large HD TV + Sofa + DA story + Potentially more satisfying combat system = Awesome
PC: Original DA Combat + DA story + Potential mods = Awesome
Don't make me choose.
I think people are overly concerned by those screenshots. With DAO, if you were take the characters in a party, put them ontop of a mountain with a white, empty sky and make them fight Darkspawn, it would look just as underwhelming. The graphics themselves look a little better, it's just these parts that we have been shown which seem to have quite poor art direction - Which is a justified concern, but bare in mind how bad the fade looked, whilst the rest of the game looked great.
I never finished Arcanum. The furthest I got was to get shipwrecked on some prison island (supposed to paralel Australia) and I couldn't figure out what to do next.
As long as the story is competent and the gameplay is solid graphics shouldn't matter.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Take it from somebody who spent money on both. The PC version of DA:O was far better than the 360. And I didn't even mind the controls of the 360.
3DS FC: 5086-1134-6451
Shiny Code: 3837
I'm not so sure. For example, I find that the much improved graphics in HL2 relative to HL1 really draw me into the game world and make it much more immersive and enjoyable.
HL2's graphics don't really impact upon the gameplay or story, but they have an important contribution to how good the game is overall. Even with the right art style I don't think i'd want to have simpler/lower
fidelity graphics.
Then again, I have just paid £400 for a new graphics card...
supposed to be an improvement over this:
?
Likewise for the common DS.
Sentinel Armor + Landsmeet Shield = I solo'd a fucking dragon
I'll concede that graphics do matter when compared to generation jumps, but when people start saying that Crysis is better than Half-life because of the graphics are shinnier, it's silly.
One addendum to my previous statement is that graphics are a good thing, especially when they contribute to gaming innovation. Examples such as motion blur, depth of view, real time shadows, ect. I just don't care to hear developers saying stuff like, "We have 10000 pixels in the left breast alone compared to last generations 2000 pixels. That's 5 times more boobage!" and the fans rejoice.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Are you really comparing beta leaked pictures to a doctored screenshot they use in their promotional material?
3DS FC: 5086-1134-6451
Shiny Code: 3837
The people you're referring to are idiots.
So their opinions don't matter.
Also, there are definitely more shins in Crysis than HL. This can only be a good thing.
That's pretty much how my copy of DA:O looked:
Plus you can always run your video/audio output to your TV and with wireless controllers, play on your couch
I just hope that they remember that choice, complexity and strategy are all GOOD things. Fundamentally I want to pause the game and issue a queue of orders to fight. No up down left right square shit.
"What I want to do is make sure that you feel like this unstoppable juggernaut, a lithe super-ninja, or field artillery." - Laidlaw
Man I hope he can actually deliver on that.
One can only hope.
Shins lol, I just caught that
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Someone else mentioned it before me.
God I hope not. Enemy mages on higher difficulties were enough of a pain in the ass in Origins without making them even more powerful.
o.0 You must not have taken Mana Clash or the Glyph of Negation. 2 ways to totally negate mages (and there are others.)
Shield Bash to the face.
Force Field or Crushing Poison works just as well.
Steam: CavilatRest
My problem, however is that my first play through was as a mage, and it was very fun and rewarding.
I'm trying with a rogue, and I'm just not feeling it. Sure, she does nice damage but it's really just autoattack city in backstab range.
It's hard to go from being the deciding factor in almost every encounter to ... a kind of damage accessory. I'm thinking a warrior playthrough would be more of the same. 2handers are super slow, dual-wield is kinda the same as a rogue, I would think. Too many points to really pump will to actually do moves during combat. (and does it really matter?).
I like the Origins part of the game. I play through the beginning sections and like it. Then I get to the meat of the game and it just kind of loses me.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
IGN's Comic-Con preview of the new Dragon Age.