AGS Steam Games

Forums → Games → Bioware or Blizzard?

41 6283
cobrakarate
offline
cobrakarate
104 posts
Nomad

When you finally get some time to sit down play some quality games on your console or PC do you prefer to play something from Bioware or Blizzard?

In all honesty I'm a total Bioware fanboy but I also enjoy playing WoW or Warcraft (never played anything else by Blizzard :/ ). Also what is your favourite game made by them?

My fave by Bioware is Dragon Age but Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic will always have a place in my heart as it was one of the first proper games I had. Enough from me, what's your opinion?

  • 41 Replies
iMogwai
offline
iMogwai
2,027 posts
Peasant

They're both great, but at different types of games. That is, until BioWare launches their MMORPG The Old Republic.

Blizzard has great RTS games (Warcraft 1-3 and Starcraft 1 & 2), they've got the Diablo series which is some sort of action RPG thingie, and they have their MMORPG, WoW.

BioWare, however, are one of, if not THE best when it comes to single player RPGs. Knights of the Old Republic, Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect and Dragon Age, all epic RPG games.

So basically, which company you prefer depends on the kind of games you like. Personally, I prefer BioWare.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

I play both. There is no doubt in my mind with iMogwai's statement "BioWare, however, are one of, if not THE best when it comes to single player RPGs." being true.

Mass Effect II. Enough said in my opinion lol. It is amazing. I never played 1 (well, before I played 2 anyway) and hell it was so easy to get into, use and play. The immersion was outstanding, the graphics were great and the cinematic twitch on everything for presentation was incredible.

I'm not in preference for either - I don't see any need to be. Blizzard has made incredible lore for both WoW and Starcraft (and if you have seen me post recently, almost certainly I've mentioned Starcraft II), but Bioware is so great in having it in the game - ESPECIALLY if you decide to read it as well. Learning about the situation in Mass Effect II is so easy and passively done but taking it a step further makes it oh so much better and immersive.

Sorry for wall of text. :<

- H

samblue234
offline
samblue234
136 posts
Peasant

what r these?

muffinman08
offline
muffinman08
524 posts
Nomad

i prefer blizzard, why?
because im a huge diablo fan
never really cared for warcraft the staegy or wow for that matter, but iv never been much of a bioware fan anyway

cobrakarate
offline
cobrakarate
104 posts
Nomad

@ Highfire I've played Mass Effect 1 for a while and my only pet peeve with it was not having very customisable armor, between different armors the only difference is sort of just being different colors but I've seen reviews for Mass effect 2 and how you can customise armor a lot more which will be beautiful. And also how Paragon and Renegade affects your looks, like Knights of the Old Republic- Jedi or Sith.

@ Samblue234 Bioware and Blizzard make games. Freaking. Epic. Games.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Bioware and Blizzard make games. Freaking. Epic. Games.

This is basically the bottomline of the entire thread

- H
SazerX
offline
SazerX
38 posts
Nomad

Blizzard is better because it made Diablo, Wow, and Defense of the Ancients

iMogwai
offline
iMogwai
2,027 posts
Peasant

Defense of the Ancients


I'm pretty sure this was a custom WC3 map made by a third party, and not Blizzard.
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Blizzard is better because it made Diablo, Wow, and Defense of the Ancients

Defense of the Ancients, nope

I'm pretty sure this was a custom WC3 map made by a third party, and not Blizzard.

Defense of the Ancients was a Warcraft III mod based on Aion of Strife - a map on the original Starcraft. In a way, Blizzard is indirectly at fault for this being made, having made the two games it developed from.

From there games like League of Legends, Heroes of Neworth and soon to come DotA2 have sprung. It is in a way, an entirely new genre - and has been used in high-end competitions. It's possibly the most renowned mod ever.

Blizzards games are (and my opinion on them):
World of Warcraft - Top leading MMO game, not incredibly innovative as it takes ideas from every other game and refines them (which is, nowadays, the business, and I like it), making everything you want in a single package.
RIFT has taken notice of the lack of any "worldly atmosphere" in the game and has made much more activity through it using a RIFT mechanic.

Starcraft - High competitive eSports game with incredibly fluent editor (I've played a DotA remake on it), balanced for 1v1 and holds 3 races in an incredible storyline.

Warcraft - The prelude to the MMO World of Warcraft (but probably wasn't treated as such before the idea of WoW came up). Incredible lore, but I am unsure of how competitive it was (although I've heard much about W3 players playing SC2 and so on).

Diablo - A dungeon third-person slash-em-up game with a small amount of abilities, a varied class system and different play styles against different enemies - basically, you haven't got tonnes of one thing, a little of another, to vary the gameplay. You've got plenty of different situations, combos and etc to define how you may want to act.

That's it, as far as I know.
Oh, and Mass Effect II is second-best RPG I've played. Fable I takes the lead because I learnt quite a lot from it (I can elaborate on your profile if you ask )

- H
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,503 posts
Jester

Bioware makes Pen-and-Paper RPGs which, in my opinion, make terrible adventure games. If you look closely at Dragonage and Neverwinter Nights (a game which a good chunk of you probably don't recognize), the combat system is timed. You have to wait for your turn to come up, even though it's perceived as a real-time action RPG. The computer in the game, therefore, is making the "rolls" and "checks" to make sure the game is flowing as it should. Developers, leave this game to board games and Dungeons and Dragons, because this does not make an immersing combat system.

The fact that Bioware was in cahoots with Lucas Arts to create Knights of the Old Republic churns my stomach to make the pH more acidic. I never thought they would have gone down the dark side.

Objectively, however, Bioware breaks away from this Pen-and-Paper RPG feel by developing Mass Effect and DragonageII, both action-oriented. Only slightly though. You see those effects that characters use from techniques? The other party has to make checks. Bad Bioware! Bad!

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Objectively, however, Bioware breaks away from this Pen-and-Paper RPG feel by developing Mass Effect and DragonageII, both action-oriented. Only slightly though. You see those effects that characters use from techniques? The other party has to make checks. Bad Bioware! Bad!

Er.. You are aware that it's good?

It lets you time things to go your way, it helps combo abilities and it is required in harder modes of Mass Effect, sometimes.

If you want a more freestyle RPG then I suggest Fable, No.1 was outstanding

- H
dionkar336
offline
dionkar336
9 posts
Nomad

I prefer Bioware for some unfathomable reason.... Great games, interesting stories, But don't know exactly why I prefer Bioware to Blizzard. Maybe Blizzard is too mainstream? IDK

Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,503 posts
Jester

Er.. You are aware that it's good?


I don't think I even have the energy to review the story elements of Mass Effect, which sorely needs work. But I will admit that the series is better than Bioware's earlier works.

If you want a more freestyle RPG then I suggest Fable, No.1 was outstanding


Nothing can get more freestyle than The Elder Scrolls series. And Fable is a sim-city society RPG.
iMogwai
offline
iMogwai
2,027 posts
Peasant

@Freakenstein.

I though the semi-turn based style of BioWares earlier games was interesting, and I actually loved Knights of the Old Republic. I think it's just a matter of taste, and seeing as how BioWare is quite successful, I think there are a lot of people out there who'd agree with me.

You see those effects that characters use from techniques? The other party has to make checks. Bad Bioware! Bad!


I think it makes a lot of sense that, for example, a strong character such as a warrior has a higher chance to resist getting knocked back in combat.

I guess I sort of have one complaint about Dragon Age II, though, and that would be that in the first one, combat looked a lot more realistic. For example, when the mages shoot with their staves in DA2, they keep swinging them around like crazy, making all kinds of fancy moves, when in a real life situation it would have been a lot more practical to actually keep your eyes on your target and fire like they did in the first one. Aside from that, I'd pretty much say that DA2 is perfect in every way.
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,503 posts
Jester

and I actually loved Knights of the Old Republic. I think it's just a matter of taste


It's not a matter of taste so much as Knights of the Old Republic is part of a collection of games Lucas Arts has created (100%) that is the center of utter plagiarism.

seeing as how BioWare is quite successful, I think there are a lot of people out there who'd agree with me.


Oh yes, Bioware is a very successful software developing company, I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that games like Dragonage and Neverwinter Nights aren't meant to be turn-based, or Pen-and-Paper RPGs. They are meant to be action-oriented.

I think it makes a lot of sense that, for example, a strong character such as a warrior has a higher chance to resist getting knocked back in combat.


A game that is meant to be action-oriented isn't supposed to be relying on chance, however. Either the character is resistant to attacks or isn't.

I guess I sort of have one complaint about Dragon Age II, though, and that would be that in the first one, combat looked a lot more realistic.


I believe what you're saying is the opposite of what you meant. DragonageII contains real-time combat elements, while Origins was turn-based. That's not realistic at all.

For example, when the mages shoot with their staves in DA2, they keep swinging them around like crazy, making all kinds of fancy moves, when in a real life situation it would have been a lot more practical to actually keep your eyes on your target and fire like they did in the first one.


Are you talking about spells or their combat? Because the mage's swinging his staff, creating sparks when hitting the opponent makes sense. Origins had the staff create a small spark fluttering towards the opponent, which was unfortunately turn-based. The spells in DragonageII were pulled off very well, because the spells actually were executed like spells.
Showing 1-15 of 41