43 réponses à ce sujet

[Soulfire72]

There are a few things that have bugged me since Dragon Age 2, in terms of general writing from the team. Since DAII, I've been sceptical about DA3 and have regretted buying the things I did for DAII, especially if my suspicions about DAII's plot come true, aka dragons becoming evil, one-dimensional enemies. Anyway, the writing problems in DAII include - resolution of companion plots, sudden sexuality basically everywhere, and plot holes.
So, for DA3 is kinda painful for me. On one hand, I want to know what happens, IF it is a good story. But if it unfolds like I suspect, I don't want anything to do with the series anymore.

[Sasie]

Despite how much complaint Dragon Age 2 and desite me sharing pretty much all those complaints I still in the end find it easier to play and more enjoyable then Dragon Age Origins now. I hate the combat system in DA2 but then I found the combat to be weak in DA1 as well, it certainly wasn't BG2 even with the title of Spiritual successor.

Honestly though the reason I enjoy DA2 more I think is because it's one story focused on one area and with the DLC the family shows up enough to know they are always just around the corner. When I try to replay Origins now I pick the Origin I want, play through it and have a blast, do Ostagar and then when I reach Lothering all my motivation to continue dies simply because for the most of my characters I will spend the majority of the game seperated from their roots and what drew me into the game.

I don't see why a dwarf or dalish elf would care so much about Fereldan. On my dwarven characters I can't help but feel that their place is with the Legion, fighting to protect their people underground instead of running around topside. On a dalish elf there isn't much at all as far as personal motivation goes to look forward to. Considering I also hold no real love for Duncan or the Grey wardens it's hard to hate Loghain.

In DA2 you have your family around you in the city from day one and there is a real personal goal to strive for that I feel DA:O lack. The Origin that comes closest to this is probably the human noble but I don't much care to play it.

Many Origin stories was a nice touch but I just think it created a huge disconnection between the end of the origin story and the rest of the game.

My point in this? Well I actually hope DA3 is more like 2 in terms of story then the first game. 

Modifié par Sasie, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:24 .

[Dhiro]

I consider every peice of information Bioware has given us about DA3 good news.

[Maria Caliban]

We don't have to go to the message board of a game we're not interested in and start a thread about how we're not interested in it, but some of us still do so.

Faerunner wrote...

I notice you don't deny DA2 is basically a CoD/ME clone.

I find myself doubting that anyone could play Call of Duty and consider Dragon Age II a clone of it. That's like suggesting that Skyrim is a clone of Hello Kitty Online.

[Lenimph]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Skyrim is a clone of Hello Kitty Online.

There's Hello Kitty Online? Wtf have I been doing wasting my time playing Skyrim 

Modifié par Lenimph, 12 janvier 2013 - 09:07 .

[Master Shiori]

Dhiro wrote...

I consider every peice of information Bioware has given us about DA3 good news.

Ditto.

Then again I loved the dialogue wheel, voiced protagonist, paraphrases and iconic character looks in DA2.

[Vincent Laww]

I'm going to buy Dragon Age Inquisition because its set in Orlais. I'm very interested in the Orlesian Culture. and will it be intriguing to see how Val Royeaux looks. Hopefully the npcs don't have terrible French accents .

[Whitering]

Unless they give us a toolset there is no chance in hell I will buy it. Even then, I won't pre-order it. EA and Bioware are confusing me. Even on Origin you cannot get DA2 with all the DLC in one pack. I know retailers had no appetite for a complete edition, but Origin is their own platform lol.

I have see DA2 for $2.99 but then it's like $70 to get all the DLC; it's crazy. I had thought about buying it despite being one of the game's harshest critics because even without a toolset, the nexus guys have made the game a lot prettier.

I think you are best just watching DA 3 on youtube.

[Krukk]

I'll buy it just ofr Morrigan and Flemeth.

[themikefest]

Dhiro wrote...

I consider every peice of information Bioware has given us about DA3 good news.

agreed

[Renmiri1]

 I'm very excited about DA3 and have already preordered the Thedas book  

[Dot.Shadow]

So far what I've read about Dragon Age 3 seems brilliant. I'm one of the people who thought DA2 was really cool though.

[karushna5]

I like games that have a social element, the reason I don't like Skyrim is there is little plot and no characterization that is great for a great deal many players, but not me. Also I don't like Zombies or horror games or I might look into i walking dead.
DA 2 disappointed me, but honestly it was better than every game I tried to replace it with. Witcher 2 had a preset personality I found distasteful, and less option for customization than Bioware.
Skyrim has no plot and just fighting and leveling, which bores me in hours.
Fallout while has choices never has a personality to the character, you make choices in a void.
I have tried to get into games other than bioware... I can't. In fact I think ever since I found Bioware I can't even enjoy other games I liked before.

If bioware goes out of business I think I will quit being a gamer, really that bad. DA 2 may have felt more like a segue than a game, but I think DA 3 will knock my socks off. So much excitement from the Devs, and some features that make me happy, like specializations being important, and being able to express your emotions.

I think this story will resolve something, and have companions who are less fanatical. I think the problem was rushing, but honestly... I love the games and how they are done. I don't have to buy DA3, but I want to, so very very much.

[LobselVith8]

karushna5 wrote...

I like games that have a social element, the reason I don't like Skyrim is there is little plot and no characterization that is great for a great deal many players, but not me. Also I don't like Zombies or horror games or I might look into i walking dead.

It's an open-world sandbox type of game, with plotlines for the Guild Factions, the Main Questline (facing Alduin), and the civil war. I particularly liked how the civil war didn't try to vilify either side; the Legion and the Stormcloaks both believed in what they were trying to do, and even if the Dragonborn becomes an opponent to General Tullius or Jarl Ulfric, they don't become mindless monsters or villains simply for being your antagonist.

karushna5 wrote...

DA 2 disappointed me, but honestly it was better than every game I tried to replace it with. Witcher 2 had a preset personality I found distasteful, and less option for customization than Bioware.

Hawke is partly preset as well, especially with the auto-lines and the Plot Railroading that left decisions and personality traits out of my control.

karushna5 wrote...

Skyrim has no plot and just fighting and leveling, which bores me in hours.

While Dragon Age II was about Hawke basically punching his way to being Champion, against one-dimensional villains.

karushna5 wrote...

Fallout while has choices never has a personality to the character, you make choices in a void.

This doesn't even make any sense. Your choices matter in Fallout. Have you even played Fallout 1 or 2? What about New Vegas, where the Courier can make decisions that impact the entire Mojave? And even the storyline DLCs allowed the Courier to make decisions that mattered and caused changes - unlike both story DLCs for Dragon Age II where Hawke was railroaded into virtually the same outcome, no matter what.

As for the protagonist, you get to determine who the protagonist, not the developers. You determine who the Courier is: what places he visited, his sexual orientation, how he views certain groups, his morality. That's the appeal of the Fallout and Elder Scroll games, and even Origins.

In the first Dragon Age game, I got to decide where my Surana protagonist came from, what Fraternity he thought made the most sense, his view on blood magic, whether he believed in the Maker or not, whether he thought Andraste was a good person or simply used the elves, whether Andraste was divine or an ordinary woman, and much more. I prefer that to having Bioware determine who Hawke is with bad paraphrasing and auto-lines that leave me disconnected from the character who is supposed to be my character.

karushna5 wrote...

I have tried to get into games other than bioware... I can't. In fact I think ever since I found Bioware I can't even enjoy other games I liked before.

If bioware goes out of business I think I will quit being a gamer, really that bad. DA 2 may have felt more like a segue than a game, but I think DA 3 will knock my socks off. So much excitement from the Devs, and some features that make me happy, like specializations being important, and being able to express your emotions. 

I think this story will resolve something, and have companions who are less fanatical. I think the problem was rushing, but honestly... I love the games and how they are done. I don't have to buy DA3, but I want to, so very very much.

Given the information released by the developers, if you liked Dragon Age II, you'll probably like Inquisition.

[karushna5]

I don't think quote wars are good for the community.

I played only a little of Skyrim, and while the background information was certainly in depth, the plot was not. They were backgrounds to have a reason to kill lots of stuff, and I feel open sandboxes actually have no plot. I loved the world and the facts behind it, and it sounded great until I started playing, and found all that really makes no difference. Knowing the background doesn't change the game hardly at all, and I understand others enjoy it not me.

As far as Hawke being preset, the fact you can have different personalities, and that the auto dialogue reflects your choices on that was amazing. There is no more Plot railroading than DA:O, You have to deal with 4 plots and only make 1 decision after each. DA2 had so much optional content, and you get to decide to either skip huge portions and what to do about it. I think the main difference is you get an epilogue actually.

Even the end gives you an option on what side, unlike DA:O which obviously had 1 dimensional evil people to fight, the darkspawn are as 1 dimensional as it gets compared to the Arishok who explains how non dimensional it actually is. Additionally the fact neither the mages nor Templars are downright good proves once again that they are not 1 dimensional. I think people are actually muppets they aren't more so, because they want Templars to be pure evil and mages perfect. Not quite so clear cut...

And yes your choices do matter in Fallout but there is no human element. You make choices and you change minor plots but there is no real reaction from the PC and so you have giant decisions, but nothing else. I find Fallout amazing for the amount of choices you can make and get excited about that...but nothing really humanizes the PC and it is so amazingly buggy to boot.

I felt that you got many of those choices, not fraternity or your origins, but all the other choices were optional. Not only that you had views on a major debate, but also on a number of issues like, slavery, possession, qunari, and even the basics of whether you were homesick or settled. It was far from perfect but in my opinion very much a humanizes RPG.

DA II was not my favorite game, not by a long shot, that would definitely be DA:O and the only things similar would being a human with a voiced protagonist, that tells us nothing about the plot or characters or combat. Witcher2 had that, 90% of all video games do. I hardly think a feature that is ordinary is saying it is like that game. In that case, Skyrim is just like WoW since you can play multiple races with no VoiceOver. A few things similar does not make it the same game.

[Crowlover]

I loved DA2 and ultimately enjoyed it a lot more than DA:O (Not to say DA:O was bad, I just found DA2 more entertaining) so I'm definitely planning on per-ordering until new unfortunate information tells me otherwise.

[Gotholhorakh]

Soulfire72 wrote...
resolution of companion plots, sudden sexuality basically everywhere, and plot holes.

Yeah, these things plus the shabby content and the limited fun factor (which really helped you to notice the sudden mind-boggling 540 degree change in gameplay mechanics) have led me to make my peace with the idea that there is very little chance of DA3 being or containing anything that would appeal to people who loved Origins.

These issues span the whole current stable of BioWare products and this I think hammers home the transition (for those of us who were in denial) between old BioWare who made that stuff, and new BioWare, who make OTS action adventures with way too little emphasis on fun tactical party-based RPG gameplay and thrilling stories and way too much emphasis on oversimplification and totally inappropriate sexuality simulation.

For me, anyway... and I guess that's the point. I am not expecting anything of it or them - if DA3 is good after what has been said, it will probably be a fluke. Might buy it if it's good. *might*.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 03 février 2013 - 10:45 .

[Jack Pipsam]

 Suit yourself.

I would rather DA3.

[LobselVith8]

karushna5 wrote...

I don't think quote wars are good for the community.

I played only a little of Skyrim, and while the background information was certainly in depth, the plot was not. They were backgrounds to have a reason to kill lots of stuff, and I feel open sandboxes actually have no plot. I loved the world and the facts behind it, and it sounded great until I started playing, and found all that really makes no difference. Knowing the background doesn't change the game hardly at all, and I understand others enjoy it not me.

As far as Hawke being preset, the fact you can have different personalities, and that the auto dialogue reflects your choices on that was amazing. There is no more Plot railroading than DA:O, You have to deal with 4 plots and only make 1 decision after each. DA2 had so much optional content, and you get to decide to either skip huge portions and what to do about it. I think the main difference is you get an epilogue actually.

Even the end gives you an option on what side, unlike DA:O which obviously had 1 dimensional evil people to fight, the darkspawn are as 1 dimensional as it gets compared to the Arishok who explains how non dimensional it actually is. Additionally the fact neither the mages nor Templars are downright good proves once again that they are not 1 dimensional. I think people are actually muppets they aren't more so, because they want Templars to be pure evil and mages perfect. Not quite so clear cut...

And yes your choices do matter in Fallout but there is no human element. You make choices and you change minor plots but there is no real reaction from the PC and so you have giant decisions, but nothing else. I find Fallout amazing for the amount of choices you can make and get excited about that...but nothing really humanizes the PC and it is so amazingly buggy to boot.

I felt that you got many of those choices, not fraternity or your origins, but all the other choices were optional. Not only that you had views on a major debate, but also on a number of issues like, slavery, possession, qunari, and even the basics of whether you were homesick or settled. It was far from perfect but in my opinion very much a humanizes RPG.

DA II was not my favorite game, not by a long shot, that would definitely be DA:O and the only things similar would being a human with a voiced protagonist, that tells us nothing about the plot or characters or combat. Witcher2 had that, 90% of all video games do. I hardly think a feature that is ordinary is saying it is like that game. In that case, Skyrim is just like WoW since you can play multiple races with no VoiceOver. A few things similar does not make it the same game.

Quote wars? Is that supposed to mean something? I simply addressed the comments you made.

You admit you only played a little bit of Skyrim, but you're dismissing the plot? That might explain why you missed out on the different storylines. There's the plot of Alduin defecting from his role as the World-Eater (as we know from Paarthurnax), the story of the shift between this World and the next World through the destruction of the current age, Talos playing a role in the stagnation of the current world not moving onto the next, and the philosophy espoused by Paarhurnax. Not to mention the dichtotomy about the civil war, where Tullius and Ulfric have conflicting views on what is best for Skyrim, while neither leader is a villain - even if the protagonist becomes an enemy to them and their respective faction.

Skyrim isn't mindless hack and slash like Dragon Age II is - where you have to fight people for reasons that make absolutely no sense, like the confrontation with Decimus, who thinks that apostate Hawke and his companions are templars - even when Hawke is accompanied by Dalish elf Merrill.

Furthermore, claiming that there's the same amount of Plot Railroading as Origins is disingenious on your part. There are different courses of action to pursue in the Circle of Ferelden, in the village of Redcliffe, in the Brecillian Forest, within the Great Thaig of Orzammar, and in the city of Denerim. There are different outcomes that transpire as a result of your decisions - who rules Orzammar, whether the people of Redcliffe survive or not, what happens to the Dalish and the cursed werewolves, who rules Ferelden, ect.

In contrast, Hawke is unable to make certain decisions because of the Plot Railroading - like doing nothing about Petrice, the possessed Warden, Tallis, ect. There's also the problem where Hawke's decisions lead to the same outcome - like Grace seeking revenge, even if Hawke helped her escape. This makes absolutely no sense at all! Considering these facts, it's obvious that Hawke doesn't have the same range of choices that are provided to The Warden in Origins.

Also, I don't get to skip content - I have to do certain things, even if makes no sense for them to be mandatory. Hawke has to go to Sundermount, even though no one is asking him to go; Hawke has to aid Sister Petrice, even if he says no; pro-mage Hawke has to work for Meredith during Act III, even if he adamantly refuses to work for her in spite of her threat.

Not to mention how strongly I disagree with your claim that all the antagonists in Origins were simply evil, since you seem to have forgotten about Loghain and his reasons for being wary of the imperialistic Orlesian Empire that enslaved Ferelden for over a century, or the dichotomy between Branka and Caridin, or even the schism between Zathrian and the Lady of the Forest.

Compare the three-dimensional antagonists in Origins to one-dimensional villains like Decimus, Tahrone, Grace, Quentin, and Huon. Insane and stupid mage antagonists made Dragon Age II into a mindless hack and slash game. There was no complexity in giving us flat, cartoonish buffoons as villains.

As for your comments on Fallout, your decisions as the protagonist humanize you. In New Vegas: defeating the Fiends improves the Mojave, getting rid of the Powder Gangers makes it safer for caravans and travellers, helping the Great Khans realize that they can carve out their own empire and place in history gives them a real future, and that's simply the tip of the iceberg.

Regarding Hawke, if I can't even tell what the protagonist is going to say because of the terrible paraphrasing or the auto-dialogue, he doesn't feel like my character. When he says entire lines outside my control, he really isn't my character at all. With The Warden, I had control over who he was, to the point where he could express that he didn't believe in the Maker; with Hawke, I had little control, don't know what he's going to say most of the time, and I can only express one point of view: that he believes in the Maker.

That said, I can see why some people would be wary of purchasing Inquisition, especially when it seems like it's going to be more of the same.