Saw the preview. Now that's strange. How come this Games for Windows magazine have recent details for Dragon Age while other gaming sites seem to be stuck with an article dated back to 2004? About the tactical aspect of the game, notably the action queue, it sounds very similar to the system used in KOTOR.
And about the screenshot, my impression is that the graphics are good, even though it doesn't look like next-gen quality. As for the camera angle, it kind of reminds me of Fable's camera angle. Is this game supposed to be a 3rd person game or top-down one?
''They say truth is the first casualty of war. But who defines what's true? Truth is just a matter of perspective. The duty of every soldier is to protect the innocent, and sometimes that means preserving the lie of good and evil, that war isn't just natural selection played out on a grand scale. The only truth I found is that the world we live in is a giant tinderbox. All it takes...is someone to light the match" - Captain Price
DesR85 wrote: How come this Games for Windows magazine have recent details for Dragon Age while other gaming sites seem to be stuck with an article dated back to 2004?
Probably because PR decided to go with the biggest print source (GFW is/was Computer Gaming World before Microsoft bought them). A second possibility is that a decision has been made on a publisher, which just happens to be the same as the publisher of the magazine.
DesR85 wrote:
And about the screenshot, my impression is that the graphics are good, even though it doesn't look like next-gen quality. As for the camera angle, it kind of reminds me of Fable's camera angle. Is this game supposed to be a 3rd person game or top-down one?
paraphrasing some of the things that David Gaider has said on the Bioboards that answer those questions. It's still an early build of the engine, though it IS the actual DA engine. The shots from E3 2004 were a revamped version of the NWN1 engine that they used because it was at hand. (It was also used to 'storyboard' the entire Story for DA since you don't need the pretties for dialogue.) I'm still amazed at the people who can look at one shot of an early engine and decide things about it's technical or art direction prowess. Pretty sure early shots like this are chosen because they're the hardest to screw up. On the camera angle, DG confirms that this is in 'exploration mode' and that we'll have the more BG-traditional isometric-style view for combat. He's alos fairly sure that there will be a variety of camera locations available; something I don't doubt given how far they came in NWN1 and that started with three views itself.
Catcher9 wrote:I'm still amazed at the people who can look at one shot of an early engine and decide things about it's technical or art direction prowess. Pretty sure early shots like this are chosen because they're the hardest to screw up. On the camera angle, DG confirms that this is in 'exploration mode' and that we'll have the more BG-traditional isometric-style view for combat. He's alos fairly sure that there will be a variety of camera locations available; something I don't doubt given how far they came in NWN1 and that started with three views itself.
Well, I was just commenting on the graphics and the camera angle. I did not say that the game will play like that or even have that kind of camera angle at all. I've seen quite a lot of next-gen game graphics and believe me, they look a lot more lighting heavy than what I've seen so far in that screenshot.
But then again, it is best to wait for more screenshots as it's hard to tell whether the game will remain like what you see in that lone screenshot. It's still too early to judge at the moment as there will be changes overtime.
''They say truth is the first casualty of war. But who defines what's true? Truth is just a matter of perspective. The duty of every soldier is to protect the innocent, and sometimes that means preserving the lie of good and evil, that war isn't just natural selection played out on a grand scale. The only truth I found is that the world we live in is a giant tinderbox. All it takes...is someone to light the match" - Captain Price
DesR85 wrote:Well, I was just commenting on the graphics and the camera angle. I did not say that the game will play like that or even have that kind of camera angle at all. I've seen quite a lot of next-gen game graphics and believe me, they look a lot more lighting heavy than what I've seen so far in that screenshot.
But then again, it is best to wait for more screenshots as it's hard to tell whether the game will remain like what you see in that lone screenshot. It's still too early to judge at the moment as there will be changes overtime.
On no, I was just clarifying some of the facts about the screenshot that have come out for information, not repudiation. Some folks on the Bioboards are getting really deep into some things that are really crazy to try and get from an early screenshot. DG also stated that the lighting model hadn't been incorporated into the engine at the time of that screenshot, which leads to the wonky lighting. There's still a far piece to go on this one.
Catcher9 wrote:On no, I was just clarifying some of the facts about the screenshot that have come out for information, not repudiation. Some folks on the Bioboards are getting really deep into some things that are really crazy to try and get from an early screenshot. DG also stated that the lighting model hadn't been incorporated into the engine at the time of that screenshot, which leads to the wonky lighting. There's still a far piece to go on this one.
Interesting. And yeah, this game is far from completion so, it's still too early to judge what Dragon Age looks like and how it plays. Considering that Bioware is currently focused on Mass Effect, it may take a while before the development of this game picks up. Just a hunch, though, but I think that is the closest reason why there has been no new information about this game as of late.
''They say truth is the first casualty of war. But who defines what's true? Truth is just a matter of perspective. The duty of every soldier is to protect the innocent, and sometimes that means preserving the lie of good and evil, that war isn't just natural selection played out on a grand scale. The only truth I found is that the world we live in is a giant tinderbox. All it takes...is someone to light the match" - Captain Price
No they didn't want to have to ask permission from Wizard of the Coast for everything they do in the game. So they made their own IP. Now they say they have made a darker game than any DnD Crpg ever.
Right Speech has four aspects: 1. Not lying, but speaking the truth, 2. Avoiding rude and coarse words, but using gentle speech beneficial to the listener, 3. Not slandering, but promoting friendliness and unity, 4. Avoiding frivolous speech, but saying only what is appropriate and beneficial.
Im not a fan of D&D ruleset... that thing is just to overwhelming for me and it is one of the reasons i uninstalled NWN2 and its expansion after an hour of play
Hope that the same thing wont happen with Bioware's custom made ruleset
There is an article from PC Games Hardware mentioning that [url="http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,693394/Dragon-Age-Origins-Optimum-performance-with-middleclass-hardware-possible/Practice/"]middle-class hardware can run this game smoothly[/url]. Excerpt below:
At the Gamescom in Cologne the men behind genre hits like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights presented their new title Dragon Age: Origins on a PC with Core 2 Duo E6750 (2.66 GHz), Geforce 8800 GTS/512 MiByte and 3 GiByte RAM.
On this middleclass system the RPG run absolutely smoothly and without any performance problems with a resolution of 1,680 x 1,050 (no FSAA/AF). The graphics is up to date and does not need to hide behind other competitors. The character details are very high. Especially the facial animation is very impressive. Combat animation is worth seeing, too, and metal parts of armors look very realistic due to the brightness effects rendered with Specular Maps. Also fire looks impressive as well as the detailed and soft shadows of protagonists and opponents.
Well, it's good to know that you don't really need a Quad Core PC to run it at maximum details. I assume that it is running in everything maxed out (except AA and AF), though I'm not too sure as it isn't mentioned in the article.
''They say truth is the first casualty of war. But who defines what's true? Truth is just a matter of perspective. The duty of every soldier is to protect the innocent, and sometimes that means preserving the lie of good and evil, that war isn't just natural selection played out on a grand scale. The only truth I found is that the world we live in is a giant tinderbox. All it takes...is someone to light the match" - Captain Price
DesR85 wrote:Well, it's good to know that you don't really need a Quad Core PC to run it at maximum details. I assume that it is running in everything maxed out (except AA and AF), though I'm not too sure as it isn't mentioned in the article.
I'd be slightly more interested to know what the absolute, bare minimum requirements for this game is. Though I still think I'd probably need a system upgrade, or overhaul before I can even contemplate running DA:O.
Love is just a chemical. We give it meaning by choice ~ Eleanor Lamb, Bioshock 2: Sea of Dreams
* OS: Windows XP with SP3
* CPU: Intel Core 2 (or equivalent) running at 1.4Ghz or greater
* AMD X2 (or equivalent) running at 1.8Ghz or greater
* RAM: 1GB or more
* Video: ATI Radeon X850 128MB or greater
* NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT 128MB or greater
* DVD ROM (Physical copy)
* 20 GB HD space
These minimum requirements for Dragon Age seem pretty reasonable to me, although I don't know how much "extra features" you need to strip off the game to get to this level.
Recommended Specifications
* CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
* RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP)
* Video: ATI 3850 512 MB or greater
* NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater
* DVD ROM (Physical copy)
* 20 GB HD space
The recommended specifications don't really look like they require a high end computer either.
“The world breaks every one and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially.”
The system requirements don't look to be a problem, but I'm leery of what it will take to actually run the game.
I've avoided EA games ever since I made the mistake of shelling out money for one of their LOTR games.
Since it's Bioware, I'm assuming that it won't require disabling all software protections (anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewalls, etc.), shutting down all TSRs and systematically turning off Windows operating files just to get the game to load?
Vygg wrote:The system requirements don't look to be a problem, but I'm leery of what it will take to actually run the game.
I've avoided EA games ever since I made the mistake of shelling out money for one of their LOTR games.
Since it's Bioware, I'm assuming that it won't require disabling all software protections (anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewalls, etc.), shutting down all TSRs and systematically turning off Windows operating files just to get the game to load?
Cheers.
It's Bioware, Part of EA. You might want to wait for reviews.
I should be able to tell you something myself at least a few days after release.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Nonsensical video card choices in the requirements
Anyone with a slight knowledge about PC video cards can see a variety of ignorant inclusions in the proposed System Requirements. For instance, a Geforce 7600 GT is named as minimum for a PC running Vista. The equivalent Radeon for performance is either the X1650 Pro, or the X1650 XT, and which it is will depend on how heavily the game uses shaders, because the Geforce 6000s and 7000s were weak when the shader instructions became profusive.
But no amount of shaders would ever make an X1550 equivalent to any Geforce more powerful than a 7300 GS!
(Remember, it's just a detuned X1300 Pro with another name.)
{Edited here: Instead of an X1650 Pro as the match to a 7600 GT, it's the X1650 XT that is equivalent. Also of note is that even though the video card entries remain screwed up, an amended official requirements list is out that affects the minimum and recommended CPUs.}
Supposedly, a PC running XP will need an X850 minimum? Really? That one blows a 7600 GT into the weeds, but it's the equivalent, they think, to a 6600 GT? Not only ignorant, that's just plain stupid! I can imagine the 7600 GT as the XP minimum, matched to a Radeon X800 GTO, perhaps.
