Originally posted by Drakkhen

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 Little kid? lol. Your going to start with personal attacks because I proved you wrong. Your real mature for your age old man.

 

Sorry you took that so personally, but your old man compliment is welcome! I am Old, and I am a Man .... with much more life experience, game experience, and I'm going to assume much more experience with the opposite sex XD.

Lol again with the personal attack....Anyway you said you've been gaming for 25 years well have you ever thought you've been doing it wrong all this time?  Also lol at the women comment while I'm getting the younger hot ladies you have fun at bingo night with the old wrinkled ladies (sorry I couldn't resist)

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Incorrect. Gamers like yourself need to be held by the hand and shown what to do and where to go while gamers like myself flourish in sandbox like games. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are my top games because of the lack of direction and freedom of choice.

Oblivion and Fallout 3???

Are you serious?

Oblivion is the pure example of a "hand helding" game, not only that, but the whole leveling system is the most casual you can get. When the whole world level with you exploration has no meaning.

Fallout3 is NOT  a sandbox, it is a huge map with little to no content where only the main storyline is polished, in the end Fallout 3 is a linear and "small" game with the illusion of openess caused by its map. Fallout 3 is a shallow action RPG that was made with the intention to seduce COD gamers and unfortunately killed what Fallout originaly was. Not a bad game, but not a true fallout, not a true sandbox, and trust me you are not "special" because you like it.

Morrowind would be a better example , even GTA, Saints Row and Infamous would be a better sandbox example.

Sacred (one and two) and Gothic series are better examples than Oblivion and Fallout 3. To tell the truth Sacred 2 is much more "open" and less "hand helding" than Oblivion even with its issues.

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Incorrect. Gamers like yourself need to be held by the hand and shown what to do and where to go while gamers like myself flourish in sandbox like games. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are my top games because of the lack of direction and freedom of choice.

 

Oblivion and Fallout 3???

Are you serious?

Oblivion is the pure example of a "hand helding" game, not only that, but the whole leveling system is the most casual you can get. When the whole world level with you exploration has no meaning.

Fallout3 is NOT  a sandbox, it is a huge map with little to no content where only the main storyline is polished, in the end Fallout 3 is a linear and "small" game with the illusion of openess caused by its map. Fallout 3 is a shallow action RPG that was made with the intention to seduce COD gamers and unfortunately killed what Fallout originaly was. Not a bad game, but not a true fallout, not a true sandbox, and trust me you are not "special" because you like it.

Morrowind would be a better example , even GTA, Saints Row and Infamous would be a better sandbox example.

Sacred (one and two) and Gothic series are better examples than Oblivion and Fallout 3. To tell the truth Sacred 2 is much more "open" and less "hand helding" than Oblivion even with its issues.

 

 

 

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

Fallout 3 and Oblivion are in there. Where's your link?

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Anubisan

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Frostbite05

Originally posted by Cyborg99

I've seen movies that were less linear then dragonage.  BW needs to take lessons from Bethesda(Oblivion).

 

Man i really hope your joking because if not you might be legally $#$#$#$#$e

What was incorrect about my statement? Even a blind fanboi can see that the game is linear and is not an open world. Maybe you like being guided through a game but games like Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls Series will always be better then linear games (like DA). If I wanted to watch cinematics every 5 min I would just watch a movie.

I'll answer that for you. Oblivion may have been less linear in that you could pick a direction and wander through the wilderness, but the storyline was anything but open-ended. There were lots of quests here and there, but the main storyline was the same no matter how you went through it.

Dragon Age has choices that actually do affect the outcome of the story... some of them significantly. In every way that matters in terms of an RPG, Dragon Age is less linear than your example. And you can choose in what order you visit each area in the game... which really isn't much different from deciding to go east first, instead of west.

I do agree with you though that Oblivion's open-map approach is a bit more immersive and preferable in my opinion... but I still enjoyed the story and overall game experience in Dragon Age more than I did in Oblivion.

 

 

Calling Oblivion a more linear game then DA is just blind fanboism and just makes you look like a fool. If you don't have an open map/world then the game is linear.

A little help (for those that trust wiki) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

I am actually a big fan of both games, so I don't think 'blind fanboism' as you say has anything to do with it. I only called Oblivion more linear in terms of the storyline, which I think many people would agree with me on. I don't remember there being any big choices to make regarding the main storyline that would change the outcome in any way whatsoever.

I also mentioned that I agreed with you in terms of the open-map being less linear in terms of exploration and also said that I in fact preferred it. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the posts on this site...

Your defensive responses look much more like 'blind fanboism' than anything I have done thus far...

Originally posted by Anubisan

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Anubisan

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Frostbite05

Originally posted by Cyborg99

I've seen movies that were less linear then dragonage.  BW needs to take lessons from Bethesda(Oblivion).

 

Man i really hope your joking because if not you might be legally $#$#$#$#$e

What was incorrect about my statement? Even a blind fanboi can see that the game is linear and is not an open world. Maybe you like being guided through a game but games like Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls Series will always be better then linear games (like DA). If I wanted to watch cinematics every 5 min I would just watch a movie.

I'll answer that for you. Oblivion may have been less linear in that you could pick a direction and wander through the wilderness, but the storyline was anything but open-ended. There were lots of quests here and there, but the main storyline was the same no matter how you went through it.

Dragon Age has choices that actually do affect the outcome of the story... some of them significantly. In every way that matters in terms of an RPG, Dragon Age is less linear than your example. And you can choose in what order you visit each area in the game... which really isn't much different from deciding to go east first, instead of west.

I do agree with you though that Oblivion's open-map approach is a bit more immersive and preferable in my opinion... but I still enjoyed the story and overall game experience in Dragon Age more than I did in Oblivion.

 

 

Calling Oblivion a more linear game then DA is just blind fanboism and just makes you look like a fool. If you don't have an open map/world then the game is linear.

A little help (for those that trust wiki) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

 

I am actually a big fan of both games, so I don't think 'blind fanboism' as you say has anything to do with it. I only called Oblivion more linear in terms of the storyline, which I think many people would agree with me on. I don't remember there being any big choices to make regarding the main storyline that would change the outcome in any way whatsoever.

I also mentioned that I agreed with you in terms of the open-map being less linear in terms of exploration and also said that I in fact preferred it. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the posts on this site...

Your defensive responses look much more like 'blind fanboism' than anything I have done thus far...

So correcting your ignorant statement = blind fanboism.......you might want to think about that.

Thread derail:

DA has been released for what, 3 weeks? And you guys have finished it? That translates into an average of what, 6-8 hours per day? 

Dang. Back in the day, I could do that. Ah well. Glad someone is getting to enjoy this game. (Yep, I'm jealous.)

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Incorrect. Gamers like yourself need to be held by the hand and shown what to do and where to go while gamers like myself flourish in sandbox like games. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are my top games because of the lack of direction and freedom of choice.

 

Oblivion and Fallout 3???

Are you serious?

Oblivion is the pure example of a "hand helding" game, not only that, but the whole leveling system is the most casual you can get. When the whole world level with you exploration has no meaning.

Fallout3 is NOT  a sandbox, it is a huge map with little to no content where only the main storyline is polished, in the end Fallout 3 is a linear and "small" game with the illusion of openess caused by its map. Fallout 3 is a shallow action RPG that was made with the intention to seduce COD gamers and unfortunately killed what Fallout originaly was. Not a bad game, but not a true fallout, not a true sandbox, and trust me you are not "special" because you like it.

Morrowind would be a better example , even GTA, Saints Row and Infamous would be a better sandbox example.

Sacred (one and two) and Gothic series are better examples than Oblivion and Fallout 3. To tell the truth Sacred 2 is much more "open" and less "hand helding" than Oblivion even with its issues.

 

 

 

 

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

Fallout 3 and Oblivion are in there. Where's your link?

Read again what I said.

Oblivion with its hand helding system, leveling system and casual approach destroy all the meaning behind exploration. Compare it even to its predecessor Morrowind.

Fallout 3 with its linear main story and lack of polish, progression and side quest content make the sandbox aspect much more of an illusion and a real feature.

What I said will not be in the wikipedia, it is based on player experience.

If you are basing your opinion and game experience into "links", it would be pointless, right?

So you need a link hand helding you even for you to develop an opinion? I see...

Anyway, about your "sandbox" and "hand helding" argument... trust-me you need to play more games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 are the supra example of casual modern RPG, you and every randon today´s Shooter player has them as favorite "RPGS", "Sandbox" ;)

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Anubisan

 

I am actually a big fan of both games, so I don't think 'blind fanboism' as you say has anything to do with it. I only called Oblivion more linear in terms of the storyline, which I think many people would agree with me on. I don't remember there being any big choices to make regarding the main storyline that would change the outcome in any way whatsoever.

I also mentioned that I agreed with you in terms of the open-map being less linear in terms of exploration and also said that I in fact preferred it. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the posts on this site...

Your defensive responses look much more like 'blind fanboism' than anything I have done thus far...

 

So correcting your ignorant statement = blind fanboism.......you might want to think about that.

what?

"I'll answer that for you. Oblivion may have been less linear in that you could pick a direction and wander through the wilderness, but the storyline was anything but open-ended. There were lots of quests here and there, but the main storyline was the same no matter how you went through it.

Dragon Age has choices that actually do affect the outcome of the story... some of them significantly. In every way that matters in terms of an RPG, Dragon Age is less linear than your example. And you can choose in what order you visit each area in the game... which really isn't much different from deciding to go east first, instead of west.

I do agree with you though that Oblivion's open-map approach is a bit more immersive and preferable in my opinion... but I still enjoyed the story and overall game experience in Dragon Age more than I did in Oblivion. "

I don't see him correcting anything, I think you just failed to read, which is pretty common on this site.

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Incorrect. Gamers like yourself need to be held by the hand and shown what to do and where to go while gamers like myself flourish in sandbox like games. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are my top games because of the lack of direction and freedom of choice.

 

Oblivion and Fallout 3???

Are you serious?

Oblivion is the pure example of a "hand helding" game, not only that, but the whole leveling system is the most casual you can get. When the whole world level with you exploration has no meaning.

Fallout3 is NOT  a sandbox, it is a huge map with little to no content where only the main storyline is polished, in the end Fallout 3 is a linear and "small" game with the illusion of openess caused by its map. Fallout 3 is a shallow action RPG that was made with the intention to seduce COD gamers and unfortunately killed what Fallout originaly was. Not a bad game, but not a true fallout, not a true sandbox, and trust me you are not "special" because you like it.

Morrowind would be a better example , even GTA, Saints Row and Infamous would be a better sandbox example.

Sacred (one and two) and Gothic series are better examples than Oblivion and Fallout 3. To tell the truth Sacred 2 is much more "open" and less "hand helding" than Oblivion even with its issues.

 

 

 

 

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

Fallout 3 and Oblivion are in there. Where's your link?

 

Read again what I said.

Oblivion with its hand helding system, leveling system and casual approach destroy all the meaning behind exploration. Compare it even to its predecessor Morrowind.

Fallout 3 with its linear main story and lack of polish, progression and side quest content make the sandbox aspect much more of an illusion and a real feature.

What I said will not be in the wikipedia, it is based on player experience.

If you are basing your opinion and game experience into "links", it would be pointless, right?

So you need a link hand helding you even for you to develop an opinion? I see...

Anyway, about your "sandbox" and "hand helding" argument... trust-me you need to play more games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 are the supra example of casual modern RPG, you and every randon today´s Shooter player has them as favorite "RPGS", "Sandbox" ;)

Umbral says, "Fallout3 is NOT a sandbox"

Wikipedia (many gamers) say: Fallout 3 is a sandbox

You decide who's right......

say what you want cyborg. dragon age is great game, miles ahead of oblivion in terms of everything. im looking forward to play dlc and some good usermade stories. havent enjoyed rpg since baldurs gate. im scared to start ego draconis cause im DAO spoiled :) and whatever you say about linearity in this game. i like it, and ALOT of people will think the same. im glad i bought this game and ill probably play it at least 3-4 times, like i did with bg2. DAO linearity > oblivion sandbox.

liana > morrigan :D

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Anubisan

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Anubisan

I'll answer that for you. Oblivion may have been less linear in that you could pick a direction and wander through the wilderness, but the storyline was anything but open-ended. There were lots of quests here and there, but the main storyline was the same no matter how you went through it.

Dragon Age has choices that actually do affect the outcome of the story... some of them significantly. In every way that matters in terms of an RPG, Dragon Age is less linear than your example. And you can choose in what order you visit each area in the game... which really isn't much different from deciding to go east first, instead of west.

I do agree with you though that Oblivion's open-map approach is a bit more immersive and preferable in my opinion... but I still enjoyed the story and overall game experience in Dragon Age more than I did in Oblivion.

 

Calling Oblivion a more linear game then DA is just blind fanboism and just makes you look like a fool. If you don't have an open map/world then the game is linear.

A little help (for those that trust wiki) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

 

I am actually a big fan of both games, so I don't think 'blind fanboism' as you say has anything to do with it. I only called Oblivion more linear in terms of the storyline, which I think many people would agree with me on. I don't remember there being any big choices to make regarding the main storyline that would change the outcome in any way whatsoever.

I also mentioned that I agreed with you in terms of the open-map being less linear in terms of exploration and also said that I in fact preferred it. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the posts on this site...

Your defensive responses look much more like 'blind fanboism' than anything I have done thus far...

So correcting your ignorant statement = blind fanboism.......you might want to think about that.

Except that you didn't correct any statement at all. You completely misinterpreted what I said and spat out a garbage response intended to fuel a flame war.

You were the one who used the words 'blind fanboism' first I will remind you. It did not fit my remarks, but now that we're debating... it does fit yours. You liked Oblivion more than DA, we get that. Your defensiveness is ample evidence of that fact. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and I'm not going to argue that your opinion is wrong. I was only commenting on the linear aspect of Oblivion's storyline...  to which you have not had any meaningful rebuttal. I will concede that the exploration in Dragon Age is far more linear than it is in Oblivion... but if you'll read my original post, you'll see that I never claimed otherwise.

You wrote earlier that you are "shooting us down like flies". I'm sorry bud, but responding every 5 seconds does not equal winning an argument.

I have a hard time giving any developer shit that created the cinematic masterpiece Mass Effect.

Bioware is fucking awesome.

You may enjoy Bethesda's Rpgs more (as do I) But you can't deny how freaking awesome some of the Bioware games are.

How many home runs can Bioware hit?

BG1&2, NWN, Kotor, JE, ME and DA its crazy. Can these fucking guys make a bad game? even that sonic rpg was good lol.

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Incorrect. Gamers like yourself need to be held by the hand and shown what to do and where to go while gamers like myself flourish in sandbox like games. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are my top games because of the lack of direction and freedom of choice.

 

Oblivion and Fallout 3???

Are you serious?

Oblivion is the pure example of a "hand helding" game, not only that, but the whole leveling system is the most casual you can get. When the whole world level with you exploration has no meaning.

Fallout3 is NOT  a sandbox, it is a huge map with little to no content where only the main storyline is polished, in the end Fallout 3 is a linear and "small" game with the illusion of openess caused by its map. Fallout 3 is a shallow action RPG that was made with the intention to seduce COD gamers and unfortunately killed what Fallout originaly was. Not a bad game, but not a true fallout, not a true sandbox, and trust me you are not "special" because you like it.

Morrowind would be a better example , even GTA, Saints Row and Infamous would be a better sandbox example.

Sacred (one and two) and Gothic series are better examples than Oblivion and Fallout 3. To tell the truth Sacred 2 is much more "open" and less "hand helding" than Oblivion even with its issues.

 

 

 

 

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay

Fallout 3 and Oblivion are in there. Where's your link?

 

Read again what I said.

Oblivion with its hand helding system, leveling system and casual approach destroy all the meaning behind exploration. Compare it even to its predecessor Morrowind.

Fallout 3 with its linear main story and lack of polish, progression and side quest content make the sandbox aspect much more of an illusion and a real feature.

What I said will not be in the wikipedia, it is based on player experience.

If you are basing your opinion and game experience into "links", it would be pointless, right?

So you need a link hand helding you even for you to develop an opinion? I see...

Anyway, about your "sandbox" and "hand helding" argument... trust-me you need to play more games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 are the supra example of casual modern RPG, you and every randon today´s Shooter player has them as favorite "RPGS", "Sandbox" ;)

 

Umbral says, "Fallout3 is NOT a sandbox"

Wikipedia (many gamers) say: Fallout 3 is a sandbox

You decide who right......

Cyborg don't be such a kid, if you like sandboxes you would probably even enjoy all the games I mentioned;).

And I will say it again, I didn't have a real "Sandbox" experience with Fallout 3 because its linear main storyline and unpolished and limited side content and lack of progression killed it to me... while other games that are less casuals have a much more open ended experience.

But as you need someone to hold your hand even to formulate an opinion, I am ok with it...

I will give you an example.

Resident Evil 5 is considered a Survival Horror... go play Silent Hill 1-2-3 and Siren and try to see RE5 as a Survival Horror;).

EDIT- and by the way, there is a non official version of Morrowind using Oblivion's graphics in progress...without the annoying Oblivion's hand helding...

...

Originally posted by RadioMaryja

say what you want cyborg. dragon age is great game, miles ahead of oblivion in terms of everything. im looking forward to play dlc and some good usermade stories. havent enjoyed rpg since baldurs gate. im scared to start ego draconis cause im DAO spoiled :) and whatever you say about linearity in this game. i like it, and ALOT of people will think the same. im glad i bought this game and ill probably play it at least 3-4 times, like i did with bg2. DAO linearity > oblivion sandbox.

 

liana > morrigan :D

I'll say it again, I enjoy some linear games and they dominate the market. I'm just correcting the comment that Oblivion is more linear the DA when it clearly isn't. You can have fun playing DA and thats great, just don't get the illusion that DA is a sandbox game.

Originally posted by Umbral

 

Cyborg don't be such a kid, if you like sandboxes you would probably even enjoy all the games I mentioned;).

And I will say it again, I didn't have a real "Sandbox" experience with Fallout 3 because its linear main storyline and unpolished and limited side content and lack of progression killed it to me... while other games that are less casuals have a much more open ended experience.

But as you need someone to hold your hand even to formulate an opinion, I am ok with it...

I will give you an example.

Resident Evil 5 is considered a Survival Horror... go play Silent Hill 1-2-3 and Siren and try to see RE5 as a Survival Horror;).

 

...

Need someone to formulate an opinion, wtf? Get enough people together and that opinion turns into a fact. (most info on wiki is factual)

So your saying that the majority of people are wrong and you are right or are you just ignoring facts?

So I can just say Eve online is a fantasy single player game. Then you say um no it's not heres a link. Then I can just say, Oh your not an expirienced gamer so you don't know. See how silly that makes you look?

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by Drakkhen

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 Little kid? lol. Your going to start with personal attacks because I proved you wrong. Your real mature for your age old man.

 

Sorry you took that so personally, but your old man compliment is welcome! I am Old, and I am a Man .... with much more life experience, game experience, and I'm going to assume much more experience with the opposite sex XD.

 

Lol again with the personal attack....Anyway you said you've been gaming for 25 years well have you ever thought you've been doing it wrong all this time?  Also lol at the women comment while I'm getting the younger hot ladies you have fun at bingo night with the old wrinkled ladies (sorry I couldn't resist)

No, I've been doing it just right.

And don't knock those wrinkled ol' ladies ... they know how to eat a ... uhm ... sandwhich, yeah thats the ticket ... lol.

*Edit*

Dude, you are the biggest Wiki shill ever! Just admit Wiki is paying you to send people to their site!

Originally posted by Drakkhen

 

No, I've been doing it just right.

And don't knock those wrinkled ol' ladies ... they know how to eat a ... uhm ... sandwhich, yeah thats the ticket ... lol.

*Edit*

Dude, you are the biggest Wiki shill ever! Just admit Wiki is paying you to send people to their site!

Hey wiki has progressed and made leaps and bounds over the years
 

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Need someone to formulate an opinion, wtf? Get enough people together and that opinion turns into a fact.

So your saying that the majority of people are wrong and you are right or are you just ignoring facts?

You do have some real  issue to understand what is a player and personal experience, right?

Ok, lets try to forget all your flaming and arrogance ...when you can go check the non official Morrowind into Oblivion version, no hand helding.

Just a side note,  you said "Get enough people together and that opinion turns into a fact." ... I see...this is funny, all I can think about when I read this is ... well, nevermind.

Just a tip go get Gothic series, Morrowind, Fallout 1-2, Sacred you may like it and understand what I said. Maybe a player like you that doen't like linearity and hand helding ( and all the irony on it) may have some good time with these games.

Originally posted by Umbral

Originally posted by Cyborg99

 

Need someone to formulate an opinion, wtf? Get enough people together and that opinion turns into a fact.

So your saying that the majority of people are wrong and you are right or are you just ignoring facts?

 

You do have some real  issue to understand what is a player and personal experience, right?

Ok, lets try to forget all your flaming and arrogance ...when you can go check the non official Morrowind into Oblivion version, no hand helding.

Just a side note,  you said "Get enough people together and that opinion turns into a fact." ... I see...this is funny, all I can think about when I read this is ... well, nevermind.

Just a tip go get Gothic series, Morrowind, Fallout 1-2, Sacred you may like it and understand what I said. Maybe a player like you that doen't like linearity and hand helding ( and all the irony on it) may have some good time with these games.

 

Didn't understand most of your statement, something about you reading something then I would enjoy those game you mentioned (which I own most of those games and still enjoy them today). Not trying to be mean, I just really get what you were trying to say. Please Explain?

Originally posted by Cyborg99

Originally posted by RadioMaryja

say what you want cyborg. dragon age is great game, miles ahead of oblivion in terms of everything. im looking forward to play dlc and some good usermade stories. havent enjoyed rpg since baldurs gate. im scared to start ego draconis cause im DAO spoiled :) and whatever you say about linearity in this game. i like it, and ALOT of people will think the same. im glad i bought this game and ill probably play it at least 3-4 times, like i did with bg2. DAO linearity > oblivion sandbox.

 

liana > morrigan :D

 

I'll say it again, I enjoy some linear games and they dominate the market. I'm just correcting the comment that Oblivion is more linear the DA when it clearly isn't. You can have fun playing DA and thats great, just don't get the illusion that DA is a sandbox game.

Dudes, Cyborg is right. You're just messing around with the definition of 'linear' to suit your arguments in a pretty fallacious way. Whatever decisions Dragon Age enforces on the player aren't comparable to the ones Oblivion can give you; I mean, what if I don't wanna do ANY of the options given to me by the game? Oblivion does give you the option to ignore the main story altogether, Dragon Age does not. Games like Oblivion are linear only when it comes to the main story, but has a world that is bigger than the story and includes it, while others like DA have nothing (the content doesn't exist) outside the main story and related little side quests. 

It seems like the Old Republic MMO from Bioware seeks to combine both aspects, though, so we'll see how that goes.