79 réponses à ce sujet

[Kalfear]

LOL, his whole post is a load of Cah cah!



I have the 360 game and finished every quest fiorst time through, no problem.



Not having the ability to think and reason out what to do (IE: Problem solve) is not a BUG as the OP suggests. Thats all on him!



But ahhh well, he probably played through game and then returned for credit so it costed him nothing.



I hate people like that.

[DariusKalera]

The one thing that bugs me about the game are the specializations. Yes, they cover most of the generic rpg classes, but when you take a spec that some one in your party would normally react to, say blood mage, there is no reaction to you doing so. It would ahve been nice if the specs that you chose actually had an influence on the game instead of just boosting your stats.

BTW, I also think the ranger spec was horribly done.

Modifié par DariusKalera, 21 décembre 2009 - 02:08 .

[RockGnasher]

complaining about the game is a way to improve it by allowing game designers to see what people are saying about the game.



I for one am sick of these big save the world plots. I'd be more about weird little side quests. Without some big 'save the world' theme players would have more options to tweak their characters and more options with where to take their game... who wants to be involved in some big contrived mess anyways. Alright lets kill 4000 darkspawn (boring). I want to be forced to do all kinds of different strategies with a huge variety of stuff to defeat...and I think the most fun part of RPG is developing the classes and skills... I couldnt care less about saving the world from darkspawn...

[Sylixe]

They actually let you return the game opened?

[Thiefy]

the only thing i can really agree with is the fade. HATED that area. I usually love puzzles but that was just too drawn out, and for all that running around and slaying I had to do, I had to do it alone, with no companions, AND I had ran out of poultices. For some reason, I could never use the lyrium veins in battle either so going through the rooms was particularly slow and grueling. Shifting between different forms was a hassle too, at least on the Console version.



That and the enviroment was just kind of ugly.

[Realmzmaster]

Providing feedback for the developers is always good. I give Bioware credit for moving away from an alignment system. You decide how to play your character. You can pick the absolute good response, the absolute evil response or like most of us that grey area response that may blur the line between good and evil. For example if you are a rogue, you can take Slim's quests.

Now if you play the absolute good response you will turn him down, because stealing is evil. If you do the absolute evil response you do not care. If it furthers your cause and puts money in your pocket that good.

But in the grey area your character will not steal from just any one. But since the quests that Slim send you on is against people associated with Howe or against Howe my character (human noble) saw it as a way to strike at Howe. My character saw that as a greater good.

If I was hamstrung by the D & D alignment system, I would be playing against my character's alignment if I was lawful goodor lawful evil, unless I said no to Slim. Thereby missing on a great opportunity to strike at Howe.

The approval system works because if you have a high enough approval with your companions you get a chance to persuade them that your response is correct. You can reduce their negative approval reaction.

DA is not perfect, but it is a great game. Constructive criticism should be welcomed. Using another game to compare is one measuring stick, but each game must be evaluated on its own merits. Just like D &D, GURPS, RuneQuest, T & T. Amber etc are different. They have their weaknesses and strengths.

No computer game is going to meet everyone's ideal. The developers can only hope to please a majority of their audience. A game that tries to please everyone is doomed to failure, because it will please no one.

We all have different likes and dislikes. I remember one developer stating I create games I like and hope a majority of the audience agree with me.

[keesio74]

Poyzinblud wrote...

1. Your Alignment - Minor Spoilers
Unlike Star Wars, or Mass Effect, Dragon Age has no alignment; it only has the rating of how much your characters LIKE you. While there's the distinct advantage of not actually having to classify your character as 'good' or 'evil', it occasionally blurs the line between what good and evil actually IS. Why should I NOT pour Dragon's Blood into the Urn of Sacred Ash? Why shouldn't I kill a bandit instead of letting them run free? 
This also means that there's no specialities for being good/evil. In Knights of the Old Republic, your alignment pitted you with the class advancement you would choose; Jedi class or Sith class, and it made a really big (and awesome) difference. I see no reason why alignment shouldn't be put in and given some bearing.

Well I liked that there was no alignment. Because in the real world, people don't go around with "alignments". They are what they are. And yes it blurs the line. Just like real life.

[Atreiden]

1. Your Alignment - Minor Spoilers

Unlike Star Wars, or Mass Effect, Dragon Age has no alignment; it only has the rating of how much your characters LIKE you. While there's the distinct advantage of not actually having to classify your character as 'good' or 'evil', it occasionally blurs the line between what good and evil actually IS. Why should I NOT pour Dragon's Blood into the Urn of Sacred Ash? Why shouldn't I kill a bandit instead of letting them run free?

This also means that there's no specialities for being good/evil. In Knights of the Old Republic, your alignment pitted you with the class advancement you would choose; Jedi class or Sith class, and it made a really big (and awesome) difference. I see no reason why alignment shouldn't be put in and given some bearing.

HAHA after reading this, I must admit I concluded the OP was a fool to say it atleast. Basically you are telling us you are unable to see the difference between a good and an evil action without an alignment measuring device? how the hell do you function in real life?

[kesayo2]

Wow, do you think this hard every time you spend 50 bucks?

[John of Gaunt]

Why exactly would being good or evil give you a bonus? I mean, Kotor is Star Wars - jedi obviously have light side/dark side to play with. Gray Wardens (as the name suggests) are just meant to be neutral. What possible device could you use to differentiate between light/dark? Maybe reputation could be used though. So if you do good deeds, your reputation increases and you get a bonus to your persuade (everyone wants to help the hero) and if you do evil deeds your reputation decreases and you get penalty to persuade (no one likes you) but a bonus to intimidate (everyone is afraid of you). Of course for that to work, you'd need to have more intimidate options, because they aren't too common throughout the game. And then everyone would complain 'oh, reputation only changes persuasion? How lame is that, man it should like give you extra abilities or something'.

[Realmzmaster]

Even if you use a reputation system it would still depend on the person viewing you. If you have a "good" reputation among neutral to good people that is great, but among bad people that would not be great. If you have an evil rep among good folks that is bad, but among evil folks that is good?

[Sabriana]

The good/evil alignment feature always annoyed me. Especially taking hits for alignment shifts that I found downright stupid. I like it that way, it gives me more freedom to make my own choices.



As for glitches, I was pleasantly surprised. My computer is on the low end of the specs,and a laptop to boot, but I've been able to play without problems. Sure, I have the usual ones that I've been reading about, such as the stuck quest-markers over things and people, long, long loading times, and a few other minor hiccups, but I can live with that. Those aren't game-breakers.



Actually, the only one that is truly annoying is that I can't complete Sten's quest. It never updates after I talk to Faryn at Orzammar. Too bad, really, but still not a major game-breaker.

[Original182]

I can understand where the OP is coming from, eventhough I disagree that those things made the game bad. Yes there are room for improvements, but they aren't so bad that made the game something that you want to return.

[Original182]

I have to disagree with the good/evil alignment. I think something like that should be in the game.

I'm not sure if the OP is suggesting this, but when I read his post, I think he's implying that there are NO CONSEQUENCES in the game.
You don't suffer consequences for destroying Andraste's Ashes. No Chantry or Templars chasing you around.
If you free Sten, who murdered an innocent family who took care of him, nothing happens. I deliberately left him in the first game because I thought I would have an invisible -2 reputation if I had him in my party, much like how you had it if you recruited Viconea in BG2.

At least with a good/evil alignment, you can see that your actions have consequences. It's a cheap way to show consequences, but it is still better than NO CONSEQUENCES.

[Sabriana]

Destroying the ashes has no consequences? Lelianna hates your PC's guts for it, and I think Wynne tries to attack your PC.



Sten was freed to atone, even the revered mother agreed. With a blight coming, the PC needs all the help she/he can get, and what are the odds of survival for the Qunari.



So yes, there are consequences, they are just not always plainly obvious. But to each her/his own. If we all liked the same things, these boards would be as boring as all get out

[aznsoisauce]

Poyzinblud wrote...
7. Storyline - SPOILERS
The storyline was riveting-- to a point. You want to fight Loghain, you want to fight the Darkspawn Blight! Sensational! If you're Human, you want to kill Arl Howe, too! Yay for having enemies; I'm sold!
But then, I find that I'm sent on SIDEQUEST after SIDEQUEST that each turned into their own mega-chain of quests that became intolerable.
"We need you to revive Arl Eamon!" I was sold. Find the Urn of Sacred Ash, and maybe the Supermage to save the Arl's wife from needing to be sacrificed. This was fine! I was on it like white on rice! It was number 1 & 2 on my to-do list, and I was ready to haul butt.
I arrive to the Mage's Tower and find myself put into a complete and utter daze. I have about 6-7 quests needed to find this damn Mage, and the FADE?! Oh dear, I wish I had the option to just give up and succumb to the mediocrity of forced puzzles and sidestepping puzzles.
But I continued and made it to... The forest. What's this? I can't pass? The ELVES need help now?! I don't care about the Elves, I don't care about Werewolves! Let me get to this damn Urn and leave me be! But unfortunately for me, I'm required to help the pointy-eared bastards out and pretend like I don't want their people slaughtered so I can loot their valuables.
SO, I get THAT done, and I make my way to the next town, where I can uncover a conspiracy and go to the REAL village where the MOUNTAIN is where I can get the urn to revive the Arl that I wouldn't mind seeing fall into a coffin by now. What do I end up seeing? ANOTHER SIDEQUEST! Cultists looking for my help! Isn't there a scenic route in this game where I can bypass the sidequests in favor of getting the king better? 
Long story short: I loved the idea of amassing an army to help you in your main quest, but if you make that part of the main quest, it gets infuriating. This wasn't the killing blow of my tiring with the game, but this was what made me really wonder if it was worth playing on.

I recall something from my first play through after recruiting my first ally with the treaties (or...maybe it was after a few) and moving on to the next area to recruit the next group. Of course, it starts with a scene that basically says "Oh yes, your Blight problem is important and all but we have some problems here to settle here first. Scratch our back, we'll scratch yours?"

And then one of the party members proceeds to make a sarcastic comment about how every where we go, our help is needed before they can even think of aiding our cause.

I lol'd.

[Squiggles1334]

Sometimes in life, I need a little numerical scale to pat me on the back and let me know that what I just did was the Right Thing To Do. Otherwise how can anyone tell?

[Original182]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Sometimes in life, I need a little numerical scale to pat me on the back and let me know that what I just did was the Right Thing To Do. Otherwise how can anyone tell?

Ah yes, a classic example of someone who can't tell the difference between real life and a video game.

[Rainen89]

Your actions DO have consequences, you can ****** your party members off to the point that they'll try to kill you or just leave outright. You can slaughter an entire settlement of Dalish by aligning with the werewolves, or you can slaughter innocents who are being persecuted for a crime they directily had no relation to. You cannot label people as good/evil/lawful/chaotic and do so accurately, you just can't. That's why people don't like the system. How do you even define something as good or evil? It's all subjective, and a lot of how you view depends on your perspective.

I didn't think Sten killing was an evil thing to do, if anything he was following his way of thinking to afault, from his perspective he failed. He accepted his crime, accepted whatever punishment did not resist even though he would have easily been capable of resisting. That is easily one of the most lawful things a person can do. To willingly allow themselves to be tried and punished accordingly.



It's not as simple as saying that guy is evil or that guy is good, how many people disagree on Morrigan's alignment? On Zevrans? Seriously it's not simple.

[phordicus]

how much did you get for it? my patience for mods has worn thin.

[bodoron]

What made me return the game was that after installing it, it said my DVD wasn't genuine and that I needed a proper one. I returned the game promptly.

I'm pretty sure this is an issue with EA and not Bioware (I'm sorry to say, I really hate EA. They have no idea what the word "customer care" means!). I could go on and on about this.

Lucky for me, EA was offering DA for less than 50% on the 11th of December so I bought it online and I haven't regretted it one bit.

Modifié par bodoron, 22 décembre 2009 - 08:50 .

[Rainen89]

Indeed, Direct2Drive is the greatest thing since sliced and buttered bread.

[Original182]

Rainen89 wrote...

Your actions DO have consequences, you can ****** your party members off to the point that they'll try to kill you or just leave outright.

That's a consequence that is only limited to your party members, and has no effect on the world. I was talking about consequences of a worldwide scale. A good/evil alignment at least would make it easier to show worldwide consequences.

You can slaughter an entire settlement of Dalish by aligning with the werewolves, or you can slaughter innocents who are being persecuted for a crime they directily had no relation to.

Basically you're talking about the consequence where if you kill a darkspawn, that darkspawn dies.

No I want a consequence that is far reaching. At least with BG2's alignment, if you help people near the beginning, it will reflect near the end of the game when you buy stuff from the shopkeeper. It is not that accurate, but it's better than nothing.

Tell you what, I only want a good/evil alignment for far-reaching consequences. If Bioware can design a more wide-scale consequence of your actions without a good/evil alignment, I'll take it. Like if you spec blood mage, templars will hunt you down on the spot.

You cannot label people as good/evil/lawful/chaotic and do so accurately, you just can't. That's why people don't like the system. How do you even define something as good or evil? It's all subjective, and a lot of how you view depends on your perspective.

The karma system seems to work nicely for Fallout 3. There are some universal rights or wrongs in the world no matter how many shades of grey there are. You can always base it on Ferelden law. It is the unbiased measuring stick of what is right and wrong. So even if it's ok for Sten to kill people because of losing his sword, it's not ok in Ferelden. Therefore, Sten's evil alignment increased to 20 points.

I didn't think Sten killing was an evil thing to do

, if anything he was following his way of thinking to afault, from his perspective he failed. He accepted his crime, accepted whatever punishment did not resist even though he would have easily been capable of resisting. That is easily one of the most lawful things a person can do. To willingly allow themselves to be tried and punished accordingly.

And all the friends and relatives of the family he murdered are supposed to just accept your words and let him go? Sten's killing of innocent people is brutally wrong, and now you're trying to justify murder.

It's not as simple as saying that guy is evil or that guy is good, how many people disagree on Morrigan's alignment? On Zevrans? Seriously it's not simple.

The problem here is not that it's hard to tell who is evil or not, it's that you don't even know what evil is. I'll put you to the test, give me one example of something in Ferelden that is evil.

If you cannot give me one example, then how can you tell whether something is evil or not, if you don't even know what evil is?

Conclusion: I prefer a good/evil alignment for the purpose of far reaching consequence, as it is perferable to no real consequence. But if there is a better way to implement consequences without it, I'm game as well.

Modifié par Original182, 22 décembre 2009 - 09:21 .

[ckriley]

[quote]Poyzinblud wrote...


2. classes
Three classes simply aren't enough for me. YES, I know that there's technically a total of 12 classes when you include the sub-classes, but here's the thing; Sub-classes are rubbish. I'm sorry to say, but I hated them all.
What a 'sub-class' was was 4 semi-distinct powers that could or could not be chosen that would distinguish you. Four powers? The moment I chose the Reaver class, my immediate thoughts became 'I destroyed a relic for THIS?' I felt jipped! 
Please; give sub-classes their own bearing with more abilities, and BETTER abilities; they're supposed to be a sort of advancement from the base classes.
As for classes themselves; more abilities! As a Warrior, there are 3 sections; Dual Swords, Sword and Shield, and Two-Handed Sword. No matter what of those you use, those other two sections are USELESS to you! I finished off Dual Swords at a relatively low level and just began wondering what to do next; work on my Templar class?[/quote]

I actually agree with you here.  Once you unlock a specialization it should be more...special for lack of a better word.  Basically all that happens when you unlock a specialization is you get four more new talents.  It's not really a big deal.  I felt like after I unlocked Templar, then Alistair and the other templars themselves would treat me differently.  Nope.  So, not only was there no real RP in unlocking templar, there wasn't much going on game-mechanics wise either.


[quote]7. Storyline - SPOILERS
The storyline was riveting-- to a point. You want to fight Loghain, you want to fight the Darkspawn Blight! Sensational! If you're Human, you want to kill Arl Howe, too! Yay for having enemies; I'm sold!
But then, I find that I'm sent on SIDEQUEST after SIDEQUEST that each turned into their own mega-chain of quests that became intolerable.
"We need you to revive Arl Eamon!" I was sold. Find the Urn of Sacred Ash, and maybe the Supermage to save the Arl's wife from needing to be sacrificed. This was fine! I was on it like white on rice! It was number 1 & 2 on my to-do list, and I was ready to haul butt.
I arrive to the Mage's Tower and find myself put into a complete and utter daze. I have about 6-7 quests needed to find this damn Mage, and the FADE?! Oh dear, I wish I had the option to just give up and succumb to the mediocrity of forced puzzles and sidestepping puzzles.
But I continued and made it to... The forest. What's this? I can't pass? The ELVES need help now?! I don't care about the Elves, I don't care about Werewolves! Let me get to this damn Urn and leave me be! But unfortunately for me, I'm required to help the pointy-eared bastards out and pretend like I don't want their people slaughtered so I can loot their valuables.
SO, I get THAT done, and I make my way to the next town, where I can uncover a conspiracy and go to the REAL village where the MOUNTAIN is where I can get the urn to revive the Arl that I wouldn't mind seeing fall into a coffin by now. What do I end up seeing? ANOTHER SIDEQUEST! Cultists looking for my help! Isn't there a scenic route in this game where I can bypass the sidequests in favor of getting the king better? 
Long story short: I loved the idea of amassing an army to help you in your main quest, but if you make that part of the main quest, it gets infuriating. This wasn't the killing blow of my tiring with the game, but this was what made me really wonder if it was worth playing on. [/quote]

While I agree with most of this, it honestly sounds like you did the Urn quest chain wrong.  This may have already been addressed in this thread, so if it has, disregard this post.  But there was no reason to go to the Brecilian Forest for the Urn quest.  And the reason you were sent to the docks by the mages tower was because you didn't have a high enough coercion to discover that the NPC you talked to in Brother Genitivi's house in Denerim was an imposter.

Basically, after you save Arl Eamon's son, Connor, from the demon, Bann Teagan tells you that only the Urn can save Eamon, and that to find it, you have to talk to Brother Genitivi in Denerim.  Once there, you discover an NPC in the house who tells you that Genitivi went off to the docks by the mage tower and you can find him there.  When you get to the docks, don't try to go to the mage tower, just go into the tavern.  Question the barkeep about Genitivi and he'll tell you he doesn't know where he is.  Go back outside and discover that you've been set up, and there's an ambush waiting for you.  Once you kill all these guys, your quest log will update, revealing that you were lied to.

However, again, all this can be avoided if you have a high enough coercion, because then you catch the imposter in a lie and don't have to go to the docks.  You just confront the imposter right there, kill him and then investigate the house.  You'll discover in a back room a chest with Genitivi's research revealing that he went off to a village called Haven far to the west.  You'll also discover the body of the real Weylon (sp) who is the guy that the imposter was impersonating.

So, if you did the elf quests and all that first, I'm not sure what you were doing exactly, unless I misread your post.[/quote]

[Squiggles1334]

Original182 wrote...

Rainen89 wrote...

Your actions DO have consequences, you can ****** your party members off to the point that they'll try to kill you or just leave outright.

That's a consequence that is only limited to your party members, and has no effect on the world. I was talking about consequences of a worldwide scale. A good/evil alignment at least would make it easier to show worldwide consequences.

You can slaughter an entire settlement of Dalish by aligning with the werewolves, or you can slaughter innocents who are being persecuted for a crime they directily had no relation to.

Basically you're talking about the consequence where if you kill a darkspawn, that darkspawn dies.

No I want a consequence that is far reaching. At least with BG2's alignment, if you help people near the beginning, it will reflect near the end of the game when you buy stuff from the shopkeeper. It is not that accurate, but it's better than nothing.

Tell you what, I only want a good/evil alignment for far-reaching consequences. If Bioware can design a more wide-scale consequence of your actions without a good/evil alignment, I'll take it. Like if you spec blood mage, templars will hunt you down on the spot.

You cannot label people as good/evil/lawful/chaotic and do so accurately, you just can't. That's why people don't like the system. How do you even define something as good or evil? It's all subjective, and a lot of how you view depends on your perspective.

The karma system seems to work nicely for Fallout 3. There are some universal rights or wrongs in the world no matter how many shades of grey there are. You can always base it on Ferelden law. It is the unbiased measuring stick of what is right and wrong. So even if it's ok for Sten to kill people because of losing his sword, it's not ok in Ferelden. Therefore, Sten's evil alignment increased to 20 points.

I didn't think Sten killing was an evil thing to do

, if anything he was following his way of thinking to afault, from his perspective he failed. He accepted his crime, accepted whatever punishment did not resist even though he would have easily been capable of resisting. That is easily one of the most lawful things a person can do. To willingly allow themselves to be tried and punished accordingly.

And all the friends and relatives of the family he murdered are supposed to just accept your words and let him go? Sten's killing of innocent people is brutally wrong, and now you're trying to justify murder.

It's not as simple as saying that guy is evil or that guy is good, how many people disagree on Morrigan's alignment? On Zevrans? Seriously it's not simple.

The problem here is not that it's hard to tell who is evil or not, it's that you don't even know what evil is. I'll put you to the test, give me one example of something in Ferelden that is evil.

If you cannot give me one example, then how can you tell whether something is evil or not, if you don't even know what evil is?

Conclusion: I prefer a good/evil alignment for the purpose of far reaching consequence, as it is perferable to no real consequence. But if there is a better way to implement consequences without it, I'm game as well.

There ARE consequences in the game for your choices, VERY long-term and far-reaching consequences aplenty. Granted, most of them play out in the epilogue so that you don't actually directly interact with some of those consequences in-game, but they are there. I know you're really really hung up on not being chased by templars for specializing as a blood mage, and truth be told, I'm rather surprised myself that there aren't more consequences for choosing a specialization that's held in such contempt and fear from the rest of the known populace. I think a lot of people have taken issue with that very thing.

Citing Baldur's Gate 2 is not really helping your case though, considering the fact that its alignment system was for the most part static, e.g. I could take the ransom for the noblewoman, mouth off to Nalia's aunt, shank Embarl for his dagger, side with Bodhi over the Shadow Thieves, and kill Drizzt and still walk away with a character sheet that says "Lawful Good." Your Reputation score can be affected by your choices and can affect how much shops charge, which companions stick around, and if it's low enough, I think it can even affect how well you get along with the cops, but even then, it's a score that's more reflective of how people perceive you, not necessarily a "Good vs. Evil" deal. In this, it is more akin to your approval score with individual companions than some objective Good/Evil numerical scale.

Original182 wrote...

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Sometimes
in life, I need a little numerical scale to pat me on the back and let
me know that what I just did was the Right Thing To Do. Otherwise how
can anyone tell?

Ah yes, a classic example of someone who can't tell the difference between real life and a video game.

Modifié par Squiggles1334, 22 décembre 2009 - 10:26 .