Justin Kemppainen, Minnesota Games Examiner, writes:
Dilemma, of course, being not necessarily the case, perhaps it was more of an issue of simple choice. In any case, the beans were recently spilled about Bioware's upcoming sequel to the very popular (and excellent) Dragon Age: Origins, specifically how the characters would be structured.
Instead of the "Origins" type of storytelling (multiple different beginning scenarios based upon race, class, and societal standings), there will be one, and only one, situation. Boiled down to its essence, Hawke will likely take the route of Commander Shepard in Mass Effect: customized to a certain point: most likely choose male/female and class.
With this decision, there's a virtual certainty that the amount of choice in the character built for the DA: II will be much more limited, as there will be full facial expressions and voice acting.
Dragon Age 2 set the precedent that the series would always carry our choices over, but was it worth it?
If the choices won't matter, why bother? Bioware works so hard at giving meaningful choices but rarely if ever carrying out the impact of such choices to the end.
Immersed Gamer writes: "In order to replace the oppressive BioWare Points system, EA is making a large portion of the Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC catalogs free for PC users.
For those of you blissfully unaware, EA and BioWare employed a payment system called BioWare Points on PC to pay for DLCs for titles like Mass Effect and Dragon Age. While PC gamers have been struggling with BioWare point’s unfair conversion rates and extremely scarce and cost-detrimental sales.
Console players have been allowed to purchase content in pieces through the appropriate Sony and Microsoft shops. For real money, and not BioWare monopoly bucks. In turn, console players missed out on some DLC content, such as Mass Effect 2 pre-order bonuses that have been repackaged into a DLC pack."
Great response to Ubisoft and their disgusting behavior. Ubisoft decide to take away DLC from people who paid for it, while EA give it for free to everyone when they realize their system sucks. Who would have thought that EA of all companies would be showing Ubisoft how it should be done (even if this is EA fixing their own mistakes as well).
What goes around comes around and I promise you, Ubisoft will see their actions blow back on them when their diminishing sales numbers and stock taking a hit downward. That's the only way a company learns when they decide to be reactive instead of proactive.
BLG writes: "There was a time that BioWare games were the biggest deal in gaming. The Canadian developer’s legacy of all-time classics is well known. Mass Effect, Knights of the Old Republic, and Baldur’s Gate are some of the biggest names in gaming.
While BioWare’s quality has fallen off lately, there’s no denying the quality of titles in their portfolio. That’s why we’re going to dive in and rank every BioWare game from worst to best. By every, I do mean every BioWare game, even the ones you completely forgot about!"
Ranked from worse to even more worse more like, they been on free fall for a fair few years now and I personally don't think any of there earlier games have aged well
Wow to think at one point in their history they made a Sonic the Hedgehog game..crazy
Anthem is crazy underrated. I really enjoyed it. ME1 is Bioware's best imo
Replies(1)
I actually put quite a bit of hours into Anthem but i dont think its underrated. It was a huge mess, server issues, gameplay issues, crashes, no endgame loop, too few different enemies, uninteresting gear. too few dungeons.
It for sure had potential and if they could have managed to keep the same gameplay of the classes but without the rest of the issues, this game could have been huge, but in the state in which it launched it was such a letdown. They partly fixed some of the issues, but it took too long. A grinding game like this needs to hook players from day 1.
Fascinating question - do you make characters CUSTOMIZABLE, creating a bond between the character and the player that is mostly physical, or do you effectively 'CHARACTERIZE' the entities in the game and give them realistic feelings, thoughts, and mannerisms?
My opinion is this: in terms of immersion, customization is the way to go. It gives the player a sense of ownership over their character and a greater connection to NPCs and those around them.
However, from the perspective of relating the experience that the game offers to the outside world, then characterization is the way to go. Take Metal Gear Solid 4 or Uncharted 2 as examples. I don't think either game would have benefited from being able to create your own character or 'customize' your persona. The powerful aspects of each game stemmed from the characters themselves making choices that the player couldn't control.
Bioware is well-known for offering a great amount of customization options, but nonetheless it will be fascinating to find out how Dragon Age II turns out if it indeed does go the way of Mass Effect instead of the more open-ended Dragon Age/KOTOR route. Will players feel more connected to their characters, or will we respond differently to existing stereotypes and well-known idiosyncrasies?
That depends on what kind of story you are trying to tell. If it is very personal based on the character you are playing, I feel that customization can take a lot away from that. You cannot create an iconic character, such as say Cloud or Solid Snake, if you have character customization.
However, if the story is based more on the world around you rather than you yourself, then I am all for character customization.
Either way the player is going to feel a strong connection with the character they are playing, just in different ways.
Characterization all the way.
It's hard to give a character CHARACTER if you get to customize him/her. Most obvious example is dragon age origin where your hero feels like an empty shell.