Apparently you've never played neocron.

the game mechanics worked quite well

even if it wasn't popular.

its a decent game

the only problem I have with it thus far is the fact that they used the baldur's gate name to sell copies of a dumbed down rpg that is so far removed from what baldur's gate was it sickens me

 party members can't die?  pfft

lets hope they make a game with DnD rulesets and mechanics, cause sticking their mechanics just didn't work for me

I wanted to like dragon age

but they put in mana regen, health regen, and party members can't die.

if I wanted to play a d dumbed down "rpg" I'd install wow.

I was hoping for some real old school baldur's gate type gameplay where if you screwed up you had to reload

Not your party members never die and your at full health 10 seconds after every fight.

Originally posted by BloodDuality

So I am just going to add my 2 cents as far as hardware failures. I have an alienware laptop I use for gaming and an xbox 360. So in my years of owning an alienware laptop I had to send the computer in for repars probably 10 times, this is counting the life pan of 3 different computers over 6 years. Seems that the video cards fail a lot, and they cannot seem to repair them without a video car failing again a few weeks later. Ultimately I eventually get the to send me an all new computer since they are too inept to fix them and the BBB really helps with complaints. On avarage those repairis take anywhere from 2 weeks to up to 5 weeks for the company to get parts.

No on to the xbox 360, yes I have had the red ring of death, not once, not twice, but three times. After calling them and getting the shiping lable I sent it out and got a new 360 within a week. I'll let others do the math on this, and of course they will say that I suck and have horrible luck, which might be true. But I would say my down time with PCs is far greater than it is with consoles, and I am a pretty heavy gamer.

Also, in closing Alienware sucks, don't buy anything from them...

just to clarify, the 360 they sent you back wasn't new

it was a refurb that someone else sent back and got fixed.

congrats, you now own a used piece of hardware that broke under someone elses watch.

Originally posted by Forumfall

Originally posted by ishist

How many of those parts required you to pack up your PC in a box and ship it back to the company to fix?

 

Nice argument but do you even have a clue what for a pathetic support/warranty service most hardware companies have? So IMHO the 'hassle' thing is still worse on the pc side...

IF you fall within the warranty time frame you get a brand new product should one of them fail over time in your computer.

and it doesn't take 4-6 weeks like the crapbox360.  a lot of them will send you the new one and have you send the old one back.

Originally posted by ishist

Originally posted by Forumfall

Originally posted by PoopyStuff

Originally posted by Forumfall

Originally posted by reimaru

ya consoles are like pcs, but sad part in consoles is that you can't upgrade them

then in the old days consoles were much prefered because there are some games that pcs don't have

 

Console give you a hasslefree experience. For the most part. Not evrybody wants to upgrade hardware/windows/antivirus/firewall/antispyware/drivers just for 5% better graphics. That and sitting on a couch with a big lcd and perhaps 5.1 beats the shit out of sitting at a desk.

 

Consoles have alot of exclusives. Of course you don't hear about them if your a pure pc gamer.

 

hassle free?

I almost busted out laughing when I read that

 

what planet are you on pal?

red ring of death?  disc read errors?     At least when my computer is having trouble I can replace a part and get the thing up and running in a day...    

there's no argument to be had between consoles and pc.   consoles are for people on a lower income scale and\or don't wanna spend the money for the best game experience money can buy...  

 

You are the one living in a little odd world were everyone gives a shit about pc tech and the like. Newsflash, most people just want to play games. That dosn't make them stupid or low income, it makes them people that have better things to do with their time.

In the past 6 years I had 4 (award winning) pc powersupplies (from the better brands), one HIS Radeon 9800 pro, two (again awardwinning) HDD's, one asus and one msi mainboards crap out on me to. That beeing said I have always monitored my temps so don't bother bringing that argument.

 

I am still a pc gamer but imho saying that one is better than the other is stupidity and shows that you haven't experienced the other side with some proper equipment.

How many of those parts required you to pack up your PC in a box and ship it back to the company to fix?

None.

I've yet to pack up my PC.

next argument?

There's no point in debating the obvious

PC is superior, in almost every way.

And this is coming from a 29 year old guy who has been playing games before many of you were born, I've had just about all manner of consoles ever created.  I got into PC's when I was 15, and have never looked back.   If you have any brains PC's are the top of the food chain in terms of entertaining yourself with games.   The factors which stop people from reaching this high up are a few.

Cost

Time

Brains

Eventually console only people graduate to PC's, some don't, and those are the people who are intimidated by price (cost), don't have time to build or learn something more complex than a console (Time) and\or can't operate a keyboard and mouse cause there are too many buttons (brains)  

Originally posted by Forumfall

Originally posted by reimaru

ya consoles are like pcs, but sad part in consoles is that you can't upgrade them

then in the old days consoles were much prefered because there are some games that pcs don't have

 

Console give you a hasslefree experience. For the most part. Not evrybody wants to upgrade hardware/windows/antivirus/firewall/antispyware/drivers just for 5% better graphics. That and sitting on a couch with a big lcd and perhaps 5.1 beats the shit out of sitting at a desk.

 

Consoles have alot of exclusives. Of course you don't hear about them if your a pure pc gamer.

hassle free?

I almost busted out laughing when I read that

what planet are you on pal?

red ring of death?  disc read errors?     At least when my computer is having trouble I can replace a part and get the thing up and running in a day...     

5% better grahpics?   again..   what planet?   2560x1600 here pal with 16xAF, 8xAA with as far as the eye can see view distances, 12 gigs of ram to load everything in a second...        the technology after I type this has already moved past where it was.     your average 360 when not breaking and in a shipping box headed back to microsoft for repair, can't even come close to what PC's can do.

video games is like an evolutionary process.

you go from little tyke toys, to tiger electric games, to a gameboy, to your average console, and at the end with the guy standing upright is the PC and everything it can do.   

there's no argument to be had between consoles and pc.   consoles are for people on a lower income scale and\or don't wanna spend the money for the best game experience money can buy...  

Originally posted by Suraknar

Originally posted by Hathi

 Remember this is a single rpg game. There is little incentive to keep players on for months on end.  Death penalty of time is the now normal. Fallen toons also suffer debuffs (injuries) until you use a kit on them.

The other thing you have to consider : the Pause button. Can't do that in MMOs either. It is enjoyable, but can't go overboard comparing it to MMOs.

Overall the basic storyline is good.  However, like I suspected, you can't account for the freedom many players enjoy. The game may let you vary paths a little, but it is eventually going to nudge or deny you actions if you don't move the story foward. 

SW:TOR - will we expect the same?

I agree as well, I am a bit surpised that we are even discussing this game in MMORPG.com, I guess whatever is a Hype is good now days even if technically it does not belong here.

On the other hand, DAO made me think about MMORPG's as well, and helped me define what it is I really dislike in a Modern MMORPG.

And In my opinion, it is strongly related to the fact that modern MMORPGs are designed from a single player perspective...not unlike a solo RPG game but Massive....and that is why they fail in my opinion.

When I play a Solo RPG game I am transported in to the fantasy Setting where I play the role of the Stories "Hero", it is like being given the leading role in a movie, and I try my best to carry him or her to the end of the story.

Within an MMORPG setting however, the dynamic simply Cannot be the same. We cannot all be given the leading role, yet we all have to have one nevertheless.

I feel like many modern MMORPGs, specially the Themepark ones, try to do just that, handing our the leading role to everyone, and that makes them non imersive because they present to all the players a Utopian Existence.

An MMORPG is first and foremost a world in which many people exist in and interact with one another, the game has to provide the tools for these people and within the desired setting so people can choose the role they want to occupy, but the game should not hand the role to the player in my opinion. The dynamics of interaction should be what determines which players get to be heroes or not, based on their own initiative actions and undertaking during shared adventures and situations within the virtual world that they share with their peers.

Of course, not everyone, like in RL becomes a hero, but everyone unlike RL has the opportunity to, and most importantly everyone does get to occupy a given role of their liking. Some people simply do like to be heroes and prefer to be the sidekicks or play a supportive role to the heroes, and thus, how is an MMO satisfying to these players when it makes everyone a Hero?

That is I beleive what made a most lasting impact to me in Ultima Online, that MMORPG was designed in such a way as to leave Heroship up to natural dynamics of the in game community of players. In every new adventure that impacted the players there were always heroes that stood out, and it was not always the same people either, but all of them were (within the cotext of the game) true heroes...and it is what I also beleive has been lost from the design of MMORPG's...as these got boxed in to pre-canned design, where heroship is just handed to everyone pending them completing a series of mondane actions such as a quest, leveling, killing an NPC boss etc...all things kin to a Solo RPG game...that should have no place in an MMORPG.

 

 

Very well said.

My beef with RPG's that are not mmo's is that there is a dumbing down, playing to the instant gratification crowd.  I'm old school, you work hard you get somewhere, you screw up, you get punished.

Originally posted by Daedalus732

Originally posted by Scot

How long before we get this in MMO's?

“Party wiped? Fear not, with DA (tm) rezzing technology our new MMO brings you all back if one survives.”

So casual you can play it in a coma.

 

It works well in a single player RPG. I wonder how many of you have actually played the game before coming in here and ranting about something you haven't experienced for yourself?

It really has nothing to do with the game being "casual" or "hardcore".

You could definitely levy a number of criticisms against this game, but this is not one of them.

I have played the game, enjoyed it quite much till I realized death meant nothing.

immersion counts for something to some gamers...

I like to be able to relate to my games with something that would happen in real life.

and getting up and being fine after being so close to death is about as far away from immersion as one can get.

Originally posted by LethalBurst

Originally posted by PoopyStuff

In BG you paid for your mistakes and you learned from them

In DA who cares if your party dies, no emotional investment at all.

 

 

Nah, in BG, you saved the game, and just reloaded if too many party members died. DA does away with this unnecessary downtime. And in DA, when party members "awake" after falling in combat, they have permanent, stackable injuries that lower stats, and must be removed.

The "legendary" RPGs stopped being made by around 1990. The Wizardry series, Ultima series, those are truly legendary games.

 

So instead of being forced to come up with different ways to beat a certain battle, your whole party gets up and regens in 10 seconds?
 

"unnecessary" my ass.   It's called "consequences"     I fucked up, I have to start over....

Not..  I ran in there barely survived and now everyone has healing factors like wolverine.

It makes no fucking sense

Originally posted by Scot

The casual gamer rule set by the sound of it.

Any solo RPG should be better than a MMO at drawing the player in and telling a story. MMO’s are made for many players; they cannot come to a conclusion. Solo rpg’s are made for you as the main protagonist and can end till the next game is released. So any solo rpg that does not do a better job than a MMO in terms of making you feel part of the story and telling a great story has really missed the boat.

Exactly.

you summed up my thoughts on this to the letter.

Originally posted by skeaser

Originally posted by PoopyStuff

Originally posted by Silverthorn8

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by PoopyStuff

Originally posted by arenasb

Originally posted by Gel214th

 I find the article amusing.

Dragon Age copied from World of Warcraft everything but the User friendliness of its interface.

 

LOL

Really?

LOL

There is nothing that they copied from wow. It is much more similar to their earlier games of Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate 1 and 2.

 

Are you joking?

It's an average RPG. and highly average.

Party members don't die and you regen all your health and mana after a battle.

That alone puts the game in the average catagory.

and to put the legend "baldur's gate" in the same breath as this dumbed down RPG offends me.

 

 

 

Well, I played Baldur's Gate and I dont' see it as being a better game. The story is a little less boiler plate but not much. I do see it as being in the Baldur's gate family. It plays in a similar fashion.

I can't see why players not dying makes it average? What is the basis for this statement? Also, you will have to remind me, did players actually permanently die in Baldur's gate? I don't recall this.

 

Agree with this.

Baldurs Gate had some fucking awful pathing, firewine bridge still gives me nightmares *shudder*, BG2 wasnt much better! Legend these games may be, however maybe it is time to put the rose tinted specs back in the case.

 

path finding?

lol

that's your beef?

Yes.  BG is legends

DA is not.    When you reach 0 health, you die.  Why is that so hard to get for game devs?  You don't magically get up after a battle where you were cut down thru the neck with a sword to the throat.   And you don't don the wolverine healing factor after you get up and are able to fight at full strength 10 seconds later.

It's a dumbed down RPG to the max.   In BG you paid for your mistakes and you learned from them

In DA who cares if your party dies, no emotional investment at all.

 

 

Pretty sure that's because BG/IWD/NWN etc. were fairly strict DnD rules, DA:O seems to just follow a different ruleset.

Hey I got no problem with them going a different route for a different game.

But attaching the name "baldur's gate" to this game as being anything in the same league as it, is just wrong.

If your a huge fan of DnD, and think baldur's gate is perhaps one of the best games of all time, to stray from what made it great and have something so obviously make no sense like having party members never die, in what is supposed to be an RPG... 

It's so offensive to me to put the Baldur's Gate name out there, in an OBVIOUS attempt to bring in sales from old school gamers, then you don't even live up to the old school name by having game mechanics that make no fukking sense and are NOT old school.

shame on bioware for this abomination, it could have been a worthy successor to Baldur's Gate, but its clearly not.

boring

move the carrot and people follow

lemmings

Originally posted by Silverthorn8

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by PoopyStuff

Originally posted by arenasb

Originally posted by Gel214th

 I find the article amusing.

Dragon Age copied from World of Warcraft everything but the User friendliness of its interface.

 

LOL

Really?

LOL

There is nothing that they copied from wow. It is much more similar to their earlier games of Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate 1 and 2.

 

Are you joking?

It's an average RPG. and highly average.

Party members don't die and you regen all your health and mana after a battle.

That alone puts the game in the average catagory.

and to put the legend "baldur's gate" in the same breath as this dumbed down RPG offends me.

 

 

 

Well, I played Baldur's Gate and I dont' see it as being a better game. The story is a little less boiler plate but not much. I do see it as being in the Baldur's gate family. It plays in a similar fashion.

I can't see why players not dying makes it average? What is the basis for this statement? Also, you will have to remind me, did players actually permanently die in Baldur's gate? I don't recall this.

 

Agree with this.

Baldurs Gate had some fucking awful pathing, firewine bridge still gives me nightmares *shudder*, BG2 wasnt much better! Legend these games may be, however maybe it is time to put the rose tinted specs back in the case.

path finding?

lol

that's your beef?

Yes.  BG is legends

DA is not.    When you reach 0 health, you die.  Why is that so hard to get for game devs?  You don't magically get up after a battle where you were cut down thru the neck with a sword to the throat.   And you don't don the wolverine healing factor after you get up and are able to fight at full strength 10 seconds later.

It's a dumbed down RPG to the max.   In BG you paid for your mistakes and you learned from them

In DA who cares if your party dies, no emotional investment at all.

Originally posted by arenasb

Originally posted by Gel214th

 I find the article amusing.

Dragon Age copied from World of Warcraft everything but the User friendliness of its interface.

 

LOL

Really?

LOL

There is nothing that they copied from wow. It is much more similar to their earlier games of Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate 1 and 2.

Are you joking?

It's an average RPG. and highly average.

Party members don't die and you regen all your health and mana after a battle.

That alone puts the game in the average catagory.

and to put the legend "baldur's gate" in the same breath as this dumbed down RPG offends me.

Lol

you can't loot an axe because your salvage skill isn't high enough?

that's just horrible.

The combat looks really messed up.     Everything moves as quick as you do, so getting range on someone is pointless.

I think the review had a lot of valid points.

thanks for posting that review, I've been debating on trying this game

I just left after a short stint

The game is good but doesn't have much replay value

not a long term game

IF they end up leaving sov to console players

it will EPIC FAIL

dude, they ran out of money

what company do you know of does ANYTHING when they don't have money?

I'm gonna root for the underdog on this one. I like market competition.. 

if there's even a slim hope that interplay can come back and be a major player I'm for it

Dude

Bethesda isn't a great company.

Interplay on the other hand kicked some major ass back in the day

if they got their shit together I'd love to see them come back

We need more developers in the market not less.