View Single Post

Default 

October 11th, 2011, 00:11
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
My comment on the similarities is that they are almost identical running engines, meaning controls are almost exactly the same, 3d angles and layout are the same. If you can't see the engines look almost identical I'm not sure what to tell you.
To me those seem like basic, slightly superficial similarities on the surface, and there are significant things about each game that set them apart from each other, similar to how I wouldn't say Mass Effect is a Gears of War clone just because they each have 3rd person shooting and cover systems.

Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
The problem Drakensang really had was the it was cold. No life, felt sterile. The characters came across wooden. No one can deny Bioware kicks ass when it comes to emotion display on its characters, for instance….just compare two worlds 2(fun game, horrible character interaction/writing) with say dragon age or any other bioware game for that matter.
That's been a major focus for Bioware since the beginning, and they have done a good job with bringing characters to life until recently (but the "until recently" part is just a personal opinion). I'd say that over the years, they have implemented party-member depth and interactions better than a lot of developers out there, but sadly, there aren't many party-based games to compete with. As far as pure NPC depth/writing goes, there have only been a few games in the last decade that are on a similar level. A series like Drakensang didn't have the budget to compete in that area, but they did a good job with the writing of River of Time and a great job with the overall atmosphere. So long as one is able to use a bit of imagination to fill in the blanks, they added enough personality to the world to make it feel much more alive than Drakensang 1 felt.
Nerevarine is offline

Nerevarine

Nerevarine's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#37

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 834