654 réponses à ce sujet

[Hathur]

Yrkoon wrote...

 Its official name is the Tsood engine, and You're right.  it isn't designed for party based RPGs,  but  who knows if it can be modified/tweaked.     But it does have some serious, SERIOUS   advantages over the current DA engine though, as well as some glaring disadvantages.


Advantages:

1) It's utterly and completely console ready - and easily supports Xbox game pads, from what I've heard
2) The Graphics capabilities are stunning.
3) It supports some of the  better physics  and environment interaction I've  seen in a video game.

Disadvantages:
1) it's intellectual property that belongs to someone else, which means Bioware would have to pay for its use.  
2) It doesn't support pause and play gaming - which would probably  make it a no go from Bioware's point of view.

Actually, Witcher 2 does sorta have pause and play... press and hold the CTRL key... this puts you into super slow-motion (like 98% slow motion.. stuff is just barely moving but at insanely slow speed)... this allows the player to select signs, throw alchemical bombs, etc... no reason they couldn't implement this to 100% slow mo (aka pause) for a different game.

[Ariella]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

Ariella wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

Great hopefully this game actually has an ending...

DAII has an ending. A cliffhanger ending. :happy:

I should've edited and said anything but another cliffhanger ending.....

I said it before and I'll say it again, at least this cliffhanger isn't as annoying as the s3 ends of Fringe or Castle or the s1 ending of West Wing for that matter.

Of course, I expect something the quality of Shadow of Two Gunmen for DA3, but that shouldn't be so hard for the DA dev team.

Never heard of it. Is it good?

Both Fringe (on FOX) and Castle (ABC) are wonderful shows (Castle stars Nathan Fillion as the title character if that does anything for you), however they both ended on MAJOR cliffhangers.

And West Wing, which aired on NBC from 1999 to 2006 IIRC, aired it's first season finale "What Kind of Day it Has Been" and at the end shot one of the principles, but camera work was done so the audience didn't know who.

Season 2 opened up with a 2 hour ep dealing with the shooting from literally seconds after, and also manange to tell  in flashbacks how all these people ended up serving in the White House. It was some of the most brilliant storytelling I've ever seen.

My husband has been quoted as saying "to be continued" are the three worst words in any language, especially when appended to the end of a TV show or movie or in this case computer game. I only pointed out those three TV episodes specifically because they end on some very world changing moments, just like DA2 does.

And when I say I expect Shadow of Two Gunmen from the DA team, I mean quality, guys, not literally. I know you're up for it.

I wonder if walk anbd talks could be implemented in a game... John, you're in the cinemagraphic part, what do you think?

[PlumPaul93]

Ooh I thought they were games . I think I remember west wing, wasn't that the one which had the women who played the mom in stuart little as president?

[Drachasor]

Persephone wrote...
Coercion exists in DAII.

Trap making was meh in DAO. If it's like in TW2, GIMME:

No thanks, don't want interrogation hour coming back. I want more interaction too. But not Origins style. I want more interaction DAII/TW2 style.

There were more Fetch quests in DAO. Besides, they were optional. Far as I am concerned, get rid of them entirely (Both the DAO "Get 10 toxins for X" nonsense and the "This yours? Yay!" DAII inaneness are awful IMHO)

NO NO NO! Please NO! No more dungeon grinding. Look at the TW2 dungeons for inspiration re: dungeon length, not DAO level grinding!!!

Coercion doesn't exisit very well in DA2, as most dialogue options the choices often just aren't there.  There is ALSO the problem of the wheel not providing a sufficient number of choices, imho.  And they never even approach the idea of offering multiple coercion options.

Ironically, trap-making would be a lot easier with DA2 crafting system (I like how it handles resources, but I don't care for it removing the thematic element of your character(s) knowing how to craft), especially with the riduculous wave system.

I want to be able to interact with my companions when I want to.  It's annoying when it only happens rarely and then you basically don't have any options to talk to them about anything ever beyond that.  DA2 interaction with companions is pretty awful.  Heck, companions interact more meaningfully and often with each other and your dog.  That's pathetic.

More fetch quests in DA:O?  I don't see how you can possibly say that.  Unless you are counting such things as "find and get Branka" or The Urn of Sacred Ashes as a "fetch" quest.  The vast, vast majority of the DA:O "fetching" was highly connected to the plot and made sense.  There were maybe a half dozen that were not, such as the crafting ones, but those were easy and made sense.  DA2 has tons of fetch quests every act where you just find an item and magically know who owns it, so you have to deliver it to them.  That's just horrible design on so many levels.  Further, side quests in DA2 are grossly inferior to DA:O.  The latter had them seemlessly integrated into the major campaign arcs (save for a small number), whereas DA2 have the major campaign completely unrelated to side quests.  What a mess!  One keeps you attention and keeps you involved, the other one distracts you and weakens the plot.

DA:O didn't have level grinding.  I don't know what you are talking about.  Did you not play the game?  It did have non-linear dungeons though, which is pretty realistic.  The only bad elements was that the Deep Roads revealed some problems with the fast travel system (it would be nice to fast travel to the middle of a cleared map now and then), but beyond that the dungeons were great.

[Feogrisha]

Dear Bioware. If you didn't listen to the community and DA3 is going to feature even less decisions and more AWAZOMNEZ tnen, please, don't even bother.

[PlumPaul93]

Feogrisha wrote...

Dear Bioware. If you didn't listen to the community and DA3 is going to feature even less decisions and more AWAZOMNEZ tnen, please, don't even bother.

this

[PlumPaul93]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

Ooh I thought they were games . I think I remember west wing, wasn't that the one which had the women who played the mom in stuart little as president?

Yes. And The Illusive Man is the President of America o_o

 that made me laugh.

[Keladis]

I wasnt surprised by the news, cause if I remember right I read and artical in which EA announced that Dragon Age was going to be one of its yearly titles

[Jamie9]

I'll say it, after DA2 I am not looking forward to DA3. I won't even check out trailers or anything of the sort for DA3. If and when it comes out, I'll see if it's DA2 standard, or Origins standard and that will be my decision.

[CitizenThom]

The only problem with the Castle cliffhanger... was that it had about thirty seconds committed to it. Nothing wrong with cliffhangers in general, but the previous two season ending cliffhangers had a little more than thirty seconds of the episode committed to them. Heck, there was already a cliffhanger in place in the episode's events without adding another cliffhanger.

What, on topic? I didn't think DA2 was all that terrible. With only a few of improvements, DA3 would be something that I'd pre-order:

(1) The re-use of maps is tolerable, but a little more work should be done with the re-used maps... if some part of the re-used map isn't accessible, something better than a filled opening needs to be done. And the parts that can't be accessed should not show up on the mini-map, period. If it's easier just to create multiple maps, then just create multiple maps.

(2) More armor sets for the main character and more sets for the party members. The possibility of at least three armor sets favoring different 'builds' for the NPC's would be a big help on replayability.

(3) For climactic main story events, on any given playthrough, the player should have the ability to at least trade one event for another. Yes, a story has to proceed from point A to point B, but replayability is greatly improved if there are multiple roads from point A to point B. The opening events, and the closing cinematic could have had a larger variety of events that took place in between.

[Drachasor]

CitizenThom wrote...

The only problem with the Castle cliffhanger... was that it had about thirty seconds committed to it. Nothing wrong with cliffhangers in general, but the previous two season ending cliffhangers had a little more than thirty seconds of the episode committed to them. Heck, there was already a cliffhanger in place in the episode's events without adding another cliffhanger.

What, on topic? I didn't think DA2 was all that terrible. With only a few of improvements, DA3 would be something that I'd pre-order:

(1) The re-use of maps is tolerable, but a little more work should be done with the re-used maps... if some part of the re-used map isn't accessible, something better than a filled opening needs to be done. And the parts that can't be accessed should not show up on the mini-map, period. If it's easier just to create multiple maps, then just create multiple maps.

(2) More armor sets for the main character and more sets for the party members. The possibility of at least three armor sets favoring different 'builds' for the NPC's would be a big help on replayability.

(3) For climactic main story events, on any given playthrough, the player should have the ability to at least trade one event for another. Yes, a story has to proceed from point A to point B, but replayability is greatly improved if there are multiple roads from point A to point B. The opening events, and the closing cinematic could have had a larger variety of events that took place in between.

(1) I totally disgaree.  Re-using maps is totally unacceptable in this day and age.  Worst case make halls, forks, etc that are set pieces that can be combined together into a map, but even that should be avoidable in modern games -- it certainly was 10 years ago and with pretty much any modern game today.

(2)  Having companios that can actually fight in more than one way would be nice.  You could make Alistair use two weapons or anything else if you really wanted (Got him early enough), same with Leiliana, but in ME2 you are stuck with companions that can only ever know one way to fight.  That's lame.

(3)  The game needs big and significant decisions.  It really had none.  An overarching plot would have been nice too.

[Cathey]

I fangirl squee'd when I read about DA3. I mean, BW aren't sadistic enough to not make a 3rd game after the way DA2 ended, right? :x


However, please BW no multiplayer. Keep Dragon Age SP - if you want to dabble with MP make a new game for it

Modifié par Cathey, 20 mai 2011 - 06:46 .

[TEWR]

More fetch quests in DA:O? I don't see how you can possibly say that. Unless you are counting such things as "find and get Branka" or The Urn of Sacred Ashes as a "fetch" quest. The vast, vast majority of the DA:O "fetching" was highly connected to the plot and made sense. There were maybe a half dozen that were not, such as the crafting ones, but those were easy and made sense. DA2 has tons of fetch quests every act where you just find an item and magically know who owns it, so you have to deliver it to them. That's just horrible design on so many levels. Further, side quests in DA2 are grossly inferior to DA:O. The latter had them seemlessly integrated into the major campaign arcs (save for a small number), whereas DA2 have the major campaign completely unrelated to side quests. What a mess! One keeps you attention and keeps you involved, the other one distracts you and weakens the plot.

No what Persephone means is that you had the "Find me 10 deep mushrooms" quest, the Scrolls of Banastor, the Corpse Galls, the Sylvanwood, Poison, etc. there were fetch quests in DA:O.

they were however done very well, as the Scrolls of Banastor was lore related.

[Drachasor]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

More fetch quests in DA:O? I don't see how you can possibly say that. Unless you are counting such things as "find and get Branka" or The Urn of Sacred Ashes as a "fetch" quest. The vast, vast majority of the DA:O "fetching" was highly connected to the plot and made sense. There were maybe a half dozen that were not, such as the crafting ones, but those were easy and made sense. DA2 has tons of fetch quests every act where you just find an item and magically know who owns it, so you have to deliver it to them. That's just horrible design on so many levels. Further, side quests in DA2 are grossly inferior to DA:O. The latter had them seemlessly integrated into the major campaign arcs (save for a small number), whereas DA2 have the major campaign completely unrelated to side quests. What a mess! One keeps you attention and keeps you involved, the other one distracts you and weakens the plot.

No what Persephone means is that you had the "Find me 10 deep mushrooms" quest, the Scrolls of Banastor, the Corpse Galls, the Sylvanwood, Poison, etc. there were fetch quests in DA:O.

they were however done very well, as the Scrolls of Banastor was lore related.

And all those together are probably about the same number as the Fetch Quests in Act 1 of DA2, which were NOT done well.

[Mr.House]

What's funny about DA2 issues is they where also in DAO but they where better handled(fetch quest), disguised well(wave combat) choices all leading to the same outcome, Archdemon dies(alot of choices and the epilogue)

Again, short dev time=HOLY CRAP WE HAVE TO DO THIS ASAP

[Persephone]

Drachasor wrote...

Persephone wrote...
Coercion exists in DAII.

Trap making was meh in DAO. If it's like in TW2, GIMME:

No thanks, don't want interrogation hour coming back. I want more interaction too. But not Origins style. I want more interaction DAII/TW2 style.

There were more Fetch quests in DAO. Besides, they were optional. Far as I am concerned, get rid of them entirely (Both the DAO "Get 10 toxins for X" nonsense and the "This yours? Yay!" DAII inaneness are awful IMHO)

NO NO NO! Please NO! No more dungeon grinding. Look at the TW2 dungeons for inspiration re: dungeon length, not DAO level grinding!!!

I want to be able to interact with my companions when I want to.  It's annoying when it only happens rarely and then you basically don't have any options to talk to them about anything ever beyond that.  DA2 interaction with companions is pretty awful.  Heck, companions interact more meaningfully and often with each other and your dog.  That's pathetic.

More fetch quests in DA:O?  I don't see how you can possibly say that.  Unless you are counting such things as "find and get Branka" or The Urn of Sacred Ashes as a "fetch" quest.  The vast, vast majority of the DA:O "fetching" was highly connected to the plot and made sense.  There were maybe a half dozen that were not, such as the crafting ones, but those were easy and made sense.  DA2 has tons of fetch quests every act where you just find an item and magically know who owns it, so you have to deliver it to them.  That's just horrible design on so many levels.  Further, side quests in DA2 are grossly inferior to DA:O.  The latter had them seemlessly integrated into the major campaign arcs (save for a small number), whereas DA2 have the major campaign completely unrelated to side quests.  What a mess!  One keeps you attention and keeps you involved, the other one distracts you and weakens the plot.

DA:O didn't have level grinding.  I don't know what you are talking about.  Did you not play the game?  It did have non-linear dungeons though, which is pretty realistic.  The only bad elements was that the Deep Roads revealed some problems with the fast travel system (it would be nice to fast travel to the middle of a cleared map now and then), but beyond that the dungeons were great.

1) I too want to be able to talk to them more often but I also don't want the "Ran out of dialogue -> Bye!" scenario we get if you talk to them often in DAO.

2) There were many Fetch Quests unrelated to anything in DAO. (Mages' Collective etc.) Boring. And DAII doesn't have tons of them in every act, maybe 5-6 per act which you can easily avoid if you don't like them. IMO Side quests were superior in DAII for the same reason you cite they were superior in DAO. Ah, opinions. Lovely, aren't they? Neither distracted me nor marred my enjoyment in any way. I esp. liked the Companion Quests in DAII. Definite step up.

3) DAO had MAJOR level grinding. (Why do you think the "Skip the Fade" Mod is so popular?) I despise the DR for the same reason as many do the Fade. And yes, I played the game, finished it around 20 times too. So what? 

[TEWR]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

More fetch quests in DA:O? I don't see how you can possibly say that. Unless you are counting such things as "find and get Branka" or The Urn of Sacred Ashes as a "fetch" quest. The vast, vast majority of the DA:O "fetching" was highly connected to the plot and made sense. There were maybe a half dozen that were not, such as the crafting ones, but those were easy and made sense. DA2 has tons of fetch quests every act where you just find an item and magically know who owns it, so you have to deliver it to them. That's just horrible design on so many levels. Further, side quests in DA2 are grossly inferior to DA:O. The latter had them seemlessly integrated into the major campaign arcs (save for a small number), whereas DA2 have the major campaign completely unrelated to side quests. What a mess! One keeps you attention and keeps you involved, the other one distracts you and weakens the plot.

No what Persephone means is that you had the "Find me 10 deep mushrooms" quest, the Scrolls of Banastor, the Corpse Galls, the Sylvanwood, Poison, etc. there were fetch quests in DA:O.

they were however done very well, as the Scrolls of Banastor was lore related.

Yep. DA2''s: *Hawke gives Sister Plinth's remains to some guy*  Here's your garbage, serah!

Me:

the funny thing is that an aggressive Hawke does say something along those lines. "Your lost garbage, serah."

At least we know that Hawke hates those quests too, no doubt due to the short dev cycle. Hell he probably hates how he's so "full of teh AEWSUMZZZ" and is so damn reactive.

[RVNX]

I'm going back to playing Origins.........and I kind of missed my Warden and the multiple Origins.

In a way, I want DA3 to focus back on the Warden.

Or, focus on a brand new character/origins.

[Ariella]

CitizenThom wrote...

The only problem with the Castle cliffhanger... was that it had about thirty seconds committed to it. Nothing wrong with cliffhangers in general, but the previous two season ending cliffhangers had a little more than thirty seconds of the episode committed to them. Heck, there was already a cliffhanger in place in the episode's events without adding another cliffhanger.

I actually wasn't talking about the thrity seconds at the end but the who HE issue, and I don't want to say more that that so I don't spoil anybody for the episode. That's going to drive me crazy this entire summer.

What, on topic? I didn't think DA2 was all that terrible. With only a few of improvements, DA3 would be something that I'd pre-order:

(1) The re-use of maps is tolerable, but a little more work should be done with the re-used maps... if some part of the re-used map isn't accessible, something better than a filled opening needs to be done. And the parts that can't be accessed should not show up on the mini-map, period. If it's easier just to create multiple maps, then just create multiple maps.

Agreed

(2) More armor sets for the main character and more sets for the party members. The possibility of at least three armor sets favoring different 'builds' for the NPC's would be a big help on replayability.

Maybe NPC sets being rewards for finishing NPC quests.

(3) For climactic main story events, on any given playthrough, the player should have the ability to at least trade one event for another. Yes, a story has to proceed from point A to point B, but replayability is greatly improved if there are multiple roads from point A to point B. The opening events, and the closing cinematic could have had a larger variety of events that took place in between.

This I don't know. Varric's closing does change of course based on choices made, but the opening I can't see where the changes are.

And we don't know if they're going to use framed narritive this time around.

[Sidney]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Trap making was only useful if you used the Lothering Trap Girl exploit to get a lot of money. If you tried to set up traps for the corpes in Redcliffe, they disappeared when nightfall came around. That shouldn't have happened. There wasn't a single time when traps could be used because you go to all the enemies, not the other way around. I think that should be rectified or like DA2 did, removed entirely. Either one is good enough imo.

Well and overlook as well that disarming traps and actually making them were two distinct skills. You'd think they might be linked.

Traps were useless and really short of cheap tactics (pulling) they're never going to be all that useful since you usually go to them.