614 réponses à ce sujet

[Frogman1975]

http://twitter.com/dragonage

Hmmmmmm...

*crosses fingers*

Modifié par Frogman1975, 07 juillet 2010 - 09:13 .

[Zy-El]

MaxQuartiroli wrote...

Zy-El wrote...
On my PC, each character I create takes up about 1GB disk space. I can see why there'd have to be a limit on the number of characters on the console versions.

lol.. How many saves did you do?
My first character ended with more or less 100 saved games and take about 700 mb
But with the others I didn't pass 50-60 saves and they are about 400 mb
Not that 400 mb is small.. especially if you consider that ME saves take only a few mb...

Truth be known, I guess we only really need the last save.  So, I could probably recover a few GB's by deleting old save files, keeping maybe just the last 2 or 3. 

[Lord Gremlin]

Frogman1975 wrote...

http://twitter.com/dragonage

Hmmmmmm...

*crosses fingers*

???
Well, I will be re-playing Leliana's Song tomorrow, but I'm so upset with character limit that... I hope they remove character limit or  savegame copy protection for PS3.

[The Masked Rog]

Frogman1975 wrote...

http://twitter.com/dragonage

Hmmmmmm...

*crosses fingers*

I wouldn't really bet on it, since Victor said there would be more info updates before the patch, possibly with the full patch notes. I'm more leaning towards a BioWare Bazzaar-style crappy promotion.

[Lyora]

Frogman1975 wrote...

http://twitter.com/dragonage

Hmmmmmm...

*crosses fingers*

Oh, it would be fantastic... If only.  I'm nearly through having faith though.  I'm waiting on the patch before getting the new DLC.  I hope you're right.

[night0205]

I have a feeling that tomorrow won't be a great day because of the patch, but because of the announcement of either Dragon Age 2 or another DLC. But it could be the patch... But sometimes I don't see the patch as that big of deal to Bioware themselves, because they have already released two before it... But maybe.

[MaxQuartiroli]

Zy-El wrote...

MaxQuartiroli wrote...

Zy-El wrote...
On my PC, each character I create takes up about 1GB disk space. I can see why there'd have to be a limit on the number of characters on the console versions.

lol.. How many saves did you do?
My first character ended with more or less 100 saved games and take about 700 mb
But with the others I didn't pass 50-60 saves and they are about 400 mb
Not that 400 mb is small.. especially if you consider that ME saves take only a few mb...

Truth be known, I guess we only really need the last save.  So, I could probably recover a few GB's by deleting old save files, keeping maybe just the last 2 or 3. 

I like to keep them because it's like to keep a "photo album" of the story of your character... 
But after every playtrough I usually move them on an external disk and on the PC disk I keep only the final saves

[mildmort]

I think we don't need to worry about saves....

After beat the game, we still can post forums as usual or maybe more easily.

[xxSylphxx]

I wonder if the forum were polled how many would rate the patch being released as the the number one "great day" option.

It would certianly get my vote over any other option.

Modifié par xxSylphxx, 07 juillet 2010 - 09:39 .

[Lord Gremlin]

MaxQuartiroli, I'd love to do the same on PS3 but Bioware doesn't allow it, horrible...

[night0205]

As you can see DLC takes a priorities over Patches. That's just the way it is. Mainly because of money. Also, to tell you the truth, I do not believe Bioware believes the game is broken, like some of you do. Of course, I don't think the game is broken either...

[ladydesire]

night0205 wrote...

As you can see DLC takes a priorities over Patches. That's just the way it is. Mainly because of money. Also, to tell you the truth, I do not believe Bioware believes the game is broken, like some of you do. Of course, I don't think the game is broken either...

If Bioware doesn't think the game is broken, why are they patching it?

[Lord Gremlin]

Come to think of it, I actually paid for DLC today, but I got the patch yesterday for free, so... But it's a very narrow-minded suggestion, night0205. Once you really ****** people off they stop buying your products at all. Right now Bioware promised a bunch of fixes and people counting on it.

[xxSylphxx]

night0205 wrote...

As you can see DLC takes a priorities over Patches. That's just the way it is. Mainly because of money. Also, to tell you the truth, I do not believe Bioware believes the game is broken, like some of you do. Of course, I don't think the game is broken either...

I am guessing you were responding to the post I started and then decided to trash.

Yes, based upon both quantity and frequency I would have to agree that DLC is of greater priority to BioWare than patches. People pay for DLC while patches are given free of charge. From that vantage point patches have less earning potential than DLC. However, they'd get more sales from me with more patches as I would end up buying more DLC (and titles) due to the greater confidence I would have in BioWare's commitment to it's products after the point of sale. To would be flamers: This not being true for you doesn't make it less true for me.

Perhaps I am part of the minority in this as it seems to worsen from year to year, the number of post 'gold' patches games require. It also seems that gamers as a group have grown more complacent and accepting of this as a reasonable expectation (games being rushed to meet release dates). I had hoped that the recent trending down in number of titles per year that companies would be producing would result in those fewer titles being of a higher quality (including from a QA standpoint). Perhaps it's just that DLC is the new business model. Less titles, more DLC, same number of patches required (who is to say the number implemented).

\\\\musing

Edit: PS. The word broken seems to cause conflict. What if we refered to the problems in this game as unintended game features requiring further modification to be implemented as intended? Too long? 

Modifié par xxSylphxx, 07 juillet 2010 - 11:28 .

[Wicked 702]

xxSylphxx wrote...

Perhaps I am part of the minority in this as it seems to worsen from year to year, the number of post 'gold' patches games require. It also seems that gamers as a group have grown more complacent and accepting of this as a reasonable expectation (games being rushed to meet release dates). I had hoped that the recent trending down in number of titles per year that companies would be producing would result in those fewer titles being of a higher quality (including from a QA standpoint). Perhaps it's just that DLC is the new business model. Less titles, more DLC, same number of patches required (who is to say the number implemented).

\\\\musing

Agree 100%. The apparent decline in quality (or at least the appearance of such) coupled with the increasing complacency of the gaming community is really starting to show itself more prevalently. I wonder if it's just that I'm getting older, and therefore less patient, or if I'm really seeing what I think I'm seeing.

Of course 15 minutes in threads like these remind me that it's probably the latter...

[MaxQuartiroli]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

MaxQuartiroli, I'd love to do the same on PS3 but Bioware doesn't allow it, horrible...

Really horrible.. I probably would go crazy..
Being a PC user from years I am used to have back up of allmost anything...especially of saved games
If I should ever lose hundreds of hours of gameplay for a technical problem I would cry for days...

Modifié par MaxQuartiroli, 07 juillet 2010 - 10:23 .

[The Masked Rog]

Or maybe perhaps other people aren't seeing the decline in quality you speak off? Is that possible?

[Wicked 702]

No, because I have 1000's of posts in technical support forums and a massive compiled bug list I can produce to back up my claims.



You have only conjecture.

[The Masked Rog]

I have 4 highly enjoyable playthroughs behind me. Is that conjucture? Don't think so.

[Wicked 702]

To some an over-salted steak should be sent back because it was not prepared properly. Others simply eat the steak anyway. Eating the steak anyway does not mean it wasn't excessively salty.

The flaws exist whether you choose to focus on them or not.

Edit: Yes, I'm aware I used a double negative...

Modifié par Wicked 702, 07 juillet 2010 - 10:33 .

[The Masked Rog]

But can't a game which has bugs still be high quality? Can't an excellent narrative, variety of choices and enjoyable gameplay offset the damage caused by the bugs? CAn't Dragon Age be an excellently prepared steak which just happened to be a bit over-salted?

[Tezzajh]

for everyone who says about the character limit, cant you simply save to usb? you can on xbox so i dont see why this is such a big deal?

[ladydesire]

Tezzajh wrote...

for everyone who says about the character limit, cant you simply save to usb? you can on xbox so i dont see why this is such a big deal?

I don't think that is possible for PS3 users, so it is a big deal for them.

@others fanning the flames: Guys, lets give it a rest, shall we? I don't think either side is going to convice the other that they are wrong, and it's ultimately disrespectful to the new players to see us (yes, I'm including myself in this) sniping at each other for disagreeing about things.

[13Dannyboy13]

Wicked 702 wrote...

xxSylphxx wrote...

Perhaps I am part of the minority in this as it seems to worsen from year to year, the number of post 'gold' patches games require. It also seems that gamers as a group have grown more complacent and accepting of this as a reasonable expectation (games being rushed to meet release dates). I had hoped that the recent trending down in number of titles per year that companies would be producing would result in those fewer titles being of a higher quality (including from a QA standpoint). Perhaps it's just that DLC is the new business model. Less titles, more DLC, same number of patches required (who is to say the number implemented).

\\\\\\\\musing

Agree 100%. The apparent decline in quality (or at least the appearance of such) coupled with the increasing complacency of the gaming community is really starting to show itself more prevalently. I wonder if it's just that I'm getting older, and therefore less patient, or if I'm really seeing what I think I'm seeing.

Of course 15 minutes in threads like these remind me that it's probably the latter...

I agree as well quality seems to be slipping for a few extra dollars. Games are rushed to meet deadlines and extra content that should've been in the game in the first place is then sold as dlc. A lot of dlc being put out is overpriced as well, companies can nickle and dime us to death with dlc instead of actually putting up the money for a new game. Maybe it's just me, but it seems that it's purely about business now and not about the games at all.

[13Dannyboy13]

The Masked Rog wrote...

But can't a game which has bugs still be high quality? Can't an excellent narrative, variety of choices and enjoyable gameplay offset the damage caused by the bugs? CAn't Dragon Age be an excellently prepared steak which just happened to be a bit over-salted?

If they were minor bugs then it might be ok, but there are bugs that can ruin hundreds of hours of gameplay, and others that can stop your current playthrough dead and make the character useless. I agree that it is a great game when it works as it should, and maybe with this patch most of the major issues can be fixed, but right now, for me at least the bugs easily outweigh the enjoyment.