Whocares65 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I don't think we'll see the level of care and detail exhibited in DA:O in any future title. DA:O is the product of an earlier era and a long development cycle. Its goals were fundamentally different from DA:II's. Look at the concept art for DA:O. It aspired to be a fantasy novel in the form of a game, and I'd say it succeeded beyond measure. Alas, I have no such hopes for DA:III. [[User:Whocares65|Whocares65]] ([[User talk:Whocares65|talk]]) 05:32, December 3, 2011 (UTC) |
I don't think we'll see the level of care and detail exhibited in DA:O in any future title. DA:O is the product of an earlier era and a long development cycle. Its goals were fundamentally different from DA:II's. Look at the concept art for DA:O. It aspired to be a fantasy novel in the form of a game, and I'd say it succeeded beyond measure. Alas, I have no such hopes for DA:III. [[User:Whocares65|Whocares65]] ([[User talk:Whocares65|talk]]) 05:32, December 3, 2011 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | I had no idea Dragon Age had to redeem itself of anything, not meeting your expectations or my own is not a grievous sin. Having played DA:O many times through, I think it was a great game but DA:O is DA:O and DA2 is DA2, and this has nothing to do with it not being DA:O2, but just because something is a sequel (not even a direct sequel a la Mass Effect -> 2 -> 3) does not mean it should be compared or held to the same kinds of criteria where those may no longer apply. |
||
| + | |||
| + | They are very different games set in the same universe. It's like critiquing your new sporty boyfriend for not being as good at maths as your ex-mathematician boyfriend was. You dated them both (played the game), you fell in love with the first (DA:O/Mathematician) but when you keep asking why the sporty one isn't the mathematician then what hope do you have of falling in love with the things that make the sporty one who he is. |
||
| + | |||
| + | I'm rambling here but what I'm getting at is play the games for what they are, not in light of each other. It's possible and very rewarding. [[User:YGuy|YGuy]] ([[User talk:YGuy|talk]]) 06:02, December 3, 2011 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 06:02, 3 December 2011
Can Dragon Age redeem itself? Dragon age has changed their core stuff in dragon age 2, to become more Mass Effect. In addition, it seems in the news that it is moving towards Mass effect and frostbite. When Mass Effect introduced multiplayer in to their new game Mass Effect, a rumour spread around that the new Dragon Age will have a multiplayer plate form, and the game engine shall resemble frostbite (I’m not sure about the last). Dragon Age is not even trying to be its own independent game anymore. I’m not sure that is the game I felt in love with in the first place. If you do agree to some extended would you give your suggestion on how Bioware can make Dragon Age the game we loved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maslove23 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't think we'll see the level of care and detail exhibited in DA:O in any future title. DA:O is the product of an earlier era and a long development cycle. Its goals were fundamentally different from DA:II's. Look at the concept art for DA:O. It aspired to be a fantasy novel in the form of a game, and I'd say it succeeded beyond measure. Alas, I have no such hopes for DA:III. Whocares65 (talk) 05:32, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
I had no idea Dragon Age had to redeem itself of anything, not meeting your expectations or my own is not a grievous sin. Having played DA:O many times through, I think it was a great game but DA:O is DA:O and DA2 is DA2, and this has nothing to do with it not being DA:O2, but just because something is a sequel (not even a direct sequel a la Mass Effect -> 2 -> 3) does not mean it should be compared or held to the same kinds of criteria where those may no longer apply.
They are very different games set in the same universe. It's like critiquing your new sporty boyfriend for not being as good at maths as your ex-mathematician boyfriend was. You dated them both (played the game), you fell in love with the first (DA:O/Mathematician) but when you keep asking why the sporty one isn't the mathematician then what hope do you have of falling in love with the things that make the sporty one who he is.
I'm rambling here but what I'm getting at is play the games for what they are, not in light of each other. It's possible and very rewarding. YGuy (talk) 06:02, December 3, 2011 (UTC)