Cretaceous_Bob's forum posts

#1 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -
@extomar said:

I don't know about that. Each of the "origins" had something happen immediately before you got the "main story/problem". To say that it is the same seems kind of odd.

I believe the issue is that DAO was geared as the first and introduction to the world while this game is not. You can't have the first "quest" in the first game have some crazy detailed thing where the player needs to start making "big choices" immediately. My memory of all of the "origins" where straight forward "something bad has happened, fix this now" with a later of "oh crap! dark spawns!!" while DAI throw the player into a situation that involves psuedo-politics and psuedo-religion tensions where the player may not know which way is what.

After my first 8 hours of DAO I thought it was pretty generic, had a lot of MMO stuff, and the characters weren't very interesting. The first 8 hours of DAO are not significantly better than those of DAI. I don't think any specific 8 hours of any RPG ever actually give you a good picture of the quality of the overall game. The end of DAO where you're saying goodbye to everybody would have been total crap without having spent the last 50 hours with them. RPGs are cumulative.

#2 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

Most of the things the OP said are things that very much could have been applied to Dragon Age: Origins in its first 8 hours. If they truly did make another great game like Origins, you literally wouldn't be able to tell, because 8 hours wouldn't be a large portion of the game.

What's more, DA2 was so god awful across the board in art, design, and writing, that I cannot imagine how anything could be disappointing compared to it. In fact, my biggest complaint about DAI so far is that it is a sequel to DA2. Everything DA2 did was stupid, so having them continue from all the stupid places that DA2 took us is the worst part of this new game.

#3 Edited by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

At this point I think they just should have made a ship game instead of an AC game. The ship part of ACIV ran great and looked great, whereas the towns looked and ran like ass. Maybe in some weird way the PC version of Rogue will be a decent new AC.

#4 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

@tru3_blu3 said:

I'm going to run it on Medium or Low, then. Problem solved.

This shows an unfamiliarity with Ubisoft games. AC IV for me, and I read about a lot of other people experiencing the same thing, had about the same framerate whether it was on super high or super low. Every AC game has been like that for me, and their other games have had different ways of being total shitshows. AC: Revelations had a really weird microstuttery sort of thing that was really jarring, and then it just stopped halfway through the game. Far Cry 3 had microstutter like a bastard and I had to run it windowed and install a frame limiter to get it to stop.

I like Ubisoft's games, but they have so many problems and run so bad that it's easier just to give up on them. I want to play a game, not spend hours troubleshooting their shitty engine so that it'll even work, and by "work" I mean look bad and run like crap anyway.

#5 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

#6 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

There are more people in the US who've died this year so far from being intentionally poisoned than from Ebola, so my plan is to catch Ebola to kill the inevitable assassins that are coming for me.

#7 Edited by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

Considering there have been sales where you can get the whole Origins package -- DLC and all -- for $10-$20, I can't imagine who wouldn't have this already who would want to play a 40 hour RPG.

#8 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

When you take out your bow it slows down time; you can easily dodge a little way out of combat and headshot any archers that are annoying you and keep your combo going.

#9 Edited by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

Playing it on a PC with an i5-3570k and a R9 290, looks real nice and runs real smooth at 1080p. Everything's on the highest setting. Haven't had a problem with it in 10 hours. There was some grousing on the internet about the PC port of this game, and certainly PC ports of console games tend to have problems, but I can't really see how they could have done any better.

#10 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (527 posts) -

@ravelle said:

Destructoid 6.

Destructoid 2nd opinion:

Fuck. I may actually pay $50 for this game now. I can't tell you when the last time I paid full price for a game was.