r505Matt said:
From what I've been told, the PC version takes a more strategy-RPG perspective versus the action-RPG perspective of the console versions. A change in perspective is not the same as just polish. But what does that have to do with DA:O? DA:O is a new franchise, it's not like I expect anything "drastic" from it; it doesn't have a foundation to work off of and subsequently improve/change. So I'm not sure what you're really trying to say. Something about me somehow being hypocritical (though in a nice way, thank you for that, politeness is a rare virtue these days, especially online) but I don't think it applies. If DA:O were the 4th or 5th installment in the franchise and it was all essentially the same game, or at least with a similar feeling/atmosphere throughout, things would be different. I guess, in a sense I expect less from new franchises since I just want to see how it starts out. Polish/good execution is NOT the most important part of a game; fun-factor/entertainment is. Polish means nothing if it's boring, and if many of these reviews are claiming the first 10-15-20 hours of a game are tedious and slow, I think that's a serious issue that shouldn't be ignored. I'm not saying it means the game is awful, but it is awful design, and surely detracts from the overall experience. |
It would be silly for me to argue with your personal definition of polish (or execution as I keep calling it, which has broader connotations) in game making, so I won't. I don't think that switching your controller from gamepad to mouse/keyboard represents a drastic rethinking of the game design, though. And having the ability to zoom out further. And a better framerate. They do make the game a lot more fun, though, I'll bet (and a lot more nostalgic, since Dragon Age is basically Baldur's Gate 3 in terms of game design, a game over a decade old).
Ok, one more point. Thanks for being nice by the way, it's definitely not the standard internet experience. Anyway, I'm not really arguing with you, since all we really disagree about is how trustworthy a review sounds to a game neither of us have played yet. So I feel kind of silly I've kept it going this long. In my head I'm more arguing with a large subset of reviewers who seem these days to be really misunderstanding what makes JRPGs fun, reviewers who have a tendency to say JRPGs haven't changed in two or more decades and why can't they have more immersive "roleplaying" like a good Western RPG. For some reason, it seems like these reviewers are mostly from the UK or Europe -- maybe not as many JRPGs made it over there in past years, and being late to the party they don't really get why people enjoy JRPGs. (I'll admit, it's hard to explain.)
My last point is just that pretty much every Final Fantasy game ever made has changed more significantly in terms of core elements of the game design, whether it be the combat system, the way you explore, or the way the story is told, than Bioware changed their winning formula between Baldur's Gate 2 and Dragon Age -- two games separated by a ten year gap. In fact, there was Neverwinter Nights in between, so even the jump from 2D to 3D and user-created mods had already been done in a game almost ten years before. The Final Fantasies have changed (their combat systems in particular) more significantly than the Elder Scrolls series has changed in its entire existence.
So the accusation that Final Fantasy games aren't changing enough is hard to respond to... it just seems obvious that it's wrong. In fact, one of the things most commonly said about the series is how drastically each game differs from the previous one. I know you are specifically talking about the atmosphere, which definitely is one consistent thing that people often talk about. Some ineffable quality that makes each game "feel like a Final Fantasy." I wonder, do you think people would be more happy if it was announced by the first reviewers, "the game doesn't feel like a Final Fantasy!" How would the internet treat this news, I wonder?
That feeling, the type of fantasy/sci fi worlds they create which you explore completely and come to eventually understand throughout the game, is the real reason most people who love the entire series play the games.
Obviously if the game is no fun for me I'll have to examine why. Not having side quests while I'm hopefully playing through a twisting, fast paced story in a fantasy world unlike anything ever made in games or movies, will not be one of my complaints.
tl;dr
Baldur's Gate 2 = Dragon Age
Final Fantasy IX ≠ Final Fantasy X ≠ XI ≠ XII ≠ XIII?
Side quests ≠ fun
