491 réponses à ce sujet

[Talonfire]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Talonfire wrote...

Crimson Sound wrote...

Skyrim did exploration undeniably well.

In the sense that you could go almost anywhere at anytime sure, but that's it as far as I'm concerned.

That's the most important part. An open world game that doesn't let you explore defeats itself.

I'd argue that the actual world and the content within it is more important, otherwise being able to explore for exploration's sake is pointless. I never really had the desire to explore Skyrim's world, so do you think it really mattered to me that I could?

If BioWare wants to opt for a more open world with Dragon Age III that's great, but I'd rather they take after Baldur's Gate, Arcanum or Fallout and Fallout 2 than Skyrim. I don't mind optional areas that the player can freely explore if there's actually something worthwhile to find in them, but I don't want to be forced to waste twenty minutes of my life trekking across a landscape littered with the same bland art assets that I have already seen more than enough of just to reach the next quest location.

Modifié par Talonfire, 29 décembre 2012 - 10:28 .

[InfinitePaths]

I hate the story in skyrim,and to tell you the truth Dragon age doesn't have a story that leads you in one path,it has many more options than Skyrim(in terms of story).Skyrim has no sense story wise,the story is boring,stupid and lame(IMO).And I don't see what is so special about open world games,It's ok to have adventure and exploration,that doesn't mean opet world.

Modifié par HeriocGreyWarden, 29 décembre 2012 - 11:00 .

[DragonAgeTemplar]

Bioware doesnt only take a look from Skyrim they take a look from other games like: Dark Souls etc. too

Modifié par DragonAgeTemplar, 29 décembre 2012 - 10:59 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Talonfire wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Talonfire wrote...

Crimson Sound wrote...

Skyrim did exploration undeniably well.

In the sense that you could go almost anywhere at anytime sure, but that's it as far as I'm concerned.

That's the most important part. An open world game that doesn't let you explore defeats itself.

I'd argue that the actual world and the content within it is more important, otherwise being able to explore for exploration's sake is pointless. I never really had the desire to explore Skyrim's world, so do you think it really mattered to me that I could?

If BioWare wants to opt for a more open world with Dragon Age III that's great, but I'd rather they take after Baldur's Gate, Arcanum or Fallout and Fallout 2 than Skyrim. I don't mind optional areas that the player can freely explore if there's actually something worthwhile to find in them, but I don't want to be forced to waste twenty minutes of my life trekking across a landscape littered with the same bland art assets that I have already seen more than enough of just to reach the next quest location.

Not to you, perhaps. But not everyone feels the same about it as you do. I would say that you need both great content and the means to find it. So, we're basically both correct on this.

Cheers.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 29 décembre 2012 - 11:32 .

[Talonfire]

scyphozoa wrote...

Talonfire wrote...
I'd argue that the actual world and the content within it is more important, otherwise being able to explore for exploration's sake is pointless. I never really had the desire to explore Skyrim's world, so do you think it really mattered to me that I could?

If BioWare wants to opt for a more open world with Dragon Age III that's great, but I'd rather they take after Baldur's Gate, Arcanum or Fallout and Fallout 2 than Skyrim. I don't mind optional areas that the player can freely explore if there's actually something worthwhile to find in them, but I don't want to be forced to waste twenty minutes of my life trekking across a landscape littered with the same bland art assets that I have already seen more than enough of just to reach the next quest location.

Absolutely, the content that you can find in the vast openess of a game world is very important. That is why I find this statement odd in reference to Skyrim, as Skyrim is absolutely filled to the brim with all sorts of unmarked locations, NPCs, sidequests, treasures, fights and all sorts of other lore and narrative bits to incentivize exploring the game world in every direction. 

You literally can't walk in any direction for more than 1-2 minutes in Skyrim without encountering a new location, NPCs or something else to investigate. 

My issue with Skyrim's exploration isn't a lack of content and I wasn't trying to imply that it was, my problem is the quality of the content. Now this is obviously subjective, but I didn't find the content I stumbled across substantial, and it quickly became repetitive because there's little in the way of diversity in the game. Finding a new dwemer ruin was hardly something to look forward to once I'd already been through two of them, all of the dwemer ruins looked and felt exactly the same.

[tomorrowstation]

As someone who has been playing Skyrim every single day for the last year, I want DA3 to be its own thing and not take too heavily from Elder Scrolls' look and feel.

[lorecast]

Some of us enjoy jumping off of High Hrothgar.
(<---I do!!)

[LPPrince]

lorecast wrote...

Some of us enjoy jumping off of High Hrothgar.
(<---I do!!)

[ezangrando]

i hope so, DA2 it's the worst Bioware game ever for me! a merge between DAO and skyrim it's the best thing they can do! and i hope there will be a toolset for modders, DAO and old bioware games had it, and Skyrim too. It's the feature i'm looking the most for DA3

[Bfler]

HeriocGreyWarden wrote...
Skyrim has no sense story wise,the story is boring,stupid and lame(IMO).

Hm, when I look at the purpose of the main story I see this:

Dragon Age Origins -> defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(darkspawn)
Skyrim ->  defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(other (awakened) dragons, some mummies) 

And the second important conflict: 

Dragon Age 2,3(?) -> civil war between mages and templars
Skyrim              -> civil war between Imperials and Nords


So, where is the difference, besides of the presentation?

Modifié par Bfler, 30 décembre 2012 - 08:41 .

[Hi my name is Ryan]

Bfler wrote...

HeriocGreyWarden wrote...
Skyrim has no sense story wise,the story is boring,stupid and lame(IMO).

Hm, when I look at the purpose of the main story I see this:

Dragon Age Origins -> defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(darkspawn)
Skyrim ->  defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(other (awakened) dragons, some mummies) 

And the second important conflict: 

Dragon Age 2,3(?) -> civil war between mages and templars
Skyrim              -> civil war between Imperials and Nords


So, where is the difference, besides of the presentation?

There isn't any. The writing in Bioware games is no better than average (with a few exceptions).

[Danny Boy 7]

deuce985 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Watch. When Dragon Age 3 comes out, it'll have a few things in it that were inspired by Skyrim, but a load of people are gonna say, "Why isn't the game like Skyrim? Thats what they said."

Personally, I'd like for them to be inspired a bit by Skyrim(playing it right now).

I just hope people don't get the wrong idea and then blast the game for it if by some twist of fate it actually turns out to be good.

Yea, the marketing on this game needs to caution itself. Anyone who is expecting Skyrim exploration is going to be disappointed...

But what I DO expect from DA3 is to modernize their level design/exploration. Those have always been the weakest aspects of Bioware games to me. You have a world so rich and full of life through the lore but you can't see it. They have sandbox games that have good storytelling. They're not common but they do exist. You don't have to be Skyrim in size to be considered "sandbox".

I don't want to be confined by artifical barriers when I'm running down a road in DA3. I hate that "funnel down a tunnel" level design Bioware uses. Can't even walk off the road to explore a tent...

I'm not expecting to run 30 minutes off the road, I just want to see some curious landmarks darn it.

I agree with you. I don't want to be confined by artificial barriers however I think Skyrim's pure open world...atmosphere for lack of a better word is going to far when it comes to Bioware's storytelling methods which build up the plot by hitting you with these amazing sections of game which build up anticipation and when you finally get to the game's end you can feel a great sense of accomplishement.

Now I think that what Bioware is going to do with DA3 is return to the large world map of the original but to make those individual maps larger, likely with less transitions and more scenery shots that artificially make the game look larger so where Origins might have had 60% playable area and 40% background then I imagine DA3 will have 70-80% playable area.

[CuriousArtemis]

The one negative thing I will say about Skyrim is that it feels very cold and heartless to me. I have no attachment to my character I created, who has no voice, looks like an alien, and has absolutely no background. I can't even keep track of which factions hate each other, let alone bring myself to care about them, let ALONE pick a side! My companion so far, Lydia, is a zombie in a woman's body. She has no personality or even life or her own. Hell, half the time she gets stuck on a mountain and I have to go and retrieve her ass somehow lol

One thing BW never has to worry about is making sure their story has a heart. So if it's as beautiful as Skyrim, and still has that old BW storytelling, I think it will be a truly amazing game.

[Savber100]

Hi my name is Ryan wrote...

Bfler wrote...

HeriocGreyWarden wrote...
Skyrim has no sense story wise,the story is boring,stupid and lame(IMO).

Hm, when I look at the purpose of the main story I see this:

Dragon Age Origins -> defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(darkspawn)
Skyrim ->  defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(other (awakened) dragons, some mummies) 

And the second important conflict: 

Dragon Age 2,3(?) -> civil war between mages and templars
Skyrim              -> civil war between Imperials and Nords


So, where is the difference, besides of the presentation?

There isn't any. The writing in Bioware games is no better than average (with a few exceptions).

When compared to all other mainstream games, it nears near-gold standards. 

Shows you the state of writing in video games nowadays... 

But they are improving though while Bioware has been declining. 

[shirespartan]

Skyrim story and characters are awful in comparison to DA, its basically just one huge beautiful empty shell.

[PaulSX]

Bfler wrote...

HeriocGreyWarden wrote...
Skyrim has no sense story wise,the story is boring,stupid and lame(IMO).

Hm, when I look at the purpose of the main story I see this:

Dragon Age Origins -> defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(darkspawn)
Skyrim ->  defeat the big bad dragon, who wants to destroy,rule the world with his minions(other (awakened) dragons, some mummies) 

And the second important conflict: 

Dragon Age 2,3(?) -> civil war between mages and templars
Skyrim              -> civil war between Imperials and Nords


So, where is the difference, besides of the presentation?

imo Story and Plot are different. Story ofren means there are emotional components or kind of magical alchemy involved. Clearly Skyrim does not have any sense of Story. It's just a plot.

[Stripes the Zebra]

Bioware's writing is awesome, I don't see why anyone would contest that. Skyrim doesn't have Bioware-level writing, but it's still a great game as well.

I don't see why everyone is acting as if it's going to be some Skyrim clone. I highly doubt that's even possible given EA's infamous time constraints. At best, Dragon Age 3 will have a structure similar to Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls, as some have suggested, and even that's probably WAY more open than what Bioware is planning. As for the story, it's perfectly possible to have a good story in an open world game, as Red Dead Redemption and plenty of other Rockstar games show.

[dduane o]

it wouldn't be that bad if it's similar to Skyrim but DA3 should still have its own identity mark.  The open world and level up mechanics would be nice to adapt but the world should have DA universe art in it compare to skyrim. the engine for skyrim's day/night sequence was cool but DA's story, characters and fighting mechanics are amazing.

There are other games that DA could look upon on:
-Dragon's Dogma "grab" mechanics
-Mass Effect environment use of cover
-The Witcher 2's texture and environment art
-guild war's 2
-XCOM's ability to go to different altitude (using environment to climb, shoot from) during fights
-every other rpg: jumping, climbing.  (additional world immersion)

DA should still keep some of its key elements:
-DA 1's companion banter
-DA 1's ability to talk to companions outside their campsites/head quarters (talking to leliana about the current location and seeking stuff for Dog was neat)
-DA 1's story
-DA 2's fast pace fighting
-DA 1's texture
-DA 1's companion armor customization
-DA 2's PC's voice
-DA 1's origin
-DA series's tactical battle, switching characters during battle, ordering them was unique to this series.
-carrying choices from previous games.
-character cameos
-DA 1's classes unique finishing moves

DA should also have
-previous character's choices from previous games since DA is making a whole world from the gamer's choices not just the PC's story line.
-additional PC character background choices from previous games. (Morrigan's baby, leliana's baby (if romanced), possibly alistair's heir as PC.  in origins, the unchosen origin background from other races or classes would just be dead seen in codex, it is possible for BioWare to have similar fate for the next game)
-more romance choices
-more companion choices
-cohesive eniding.
-previous characters hint for closure and somewhat.

Since BioWare is good at giving DLCs and knowing that there is alot of content, it would be possible to have more than 1 game disc when playing. It would be nice to see 1 installment disc, glitch free, just for the locations/world and possibly mechanics for roaming and fighting. so that they can take their time on making it beautiful, realisitc, open world, and amazing. The second disc would contain the story, the customization mechanics, player choices and all those good stuff that makes 1 choice unque from the other choices.  having two discs also would mean, the installer/locations disc can be carried to future games and multiplayer rpg.

More importantly, please take the time in developing this game to be beautiful, it's such a nice way to change the gaming world basing storytelling on the player's choices.  Don't rush it, 12/21/2012 is over. make it beautiful please, should be atleast better than skyrim

[dduane o]

they should also look at Assassin's Creed 3's fighting mechanics, no health bars. fluid.

[The Hierophant]

dduane o wrote...

they should also look at Assassin's Creed 3's fighting mechanics, no health bars. fluid.

Tbh i think Dragon's Dogma's would be a better fit (minus the climbing mechanic) as they're both squad based, use similar skill layouts on consoles, and class archetypes. Toss in DA's tactics chart in place of the pawn's inclinations and you'd an all around sexier combat sytem than DA2's.

[In Exile]

scyphozoa wrote...
Absolutely, the content that you can find in the vast openess of a game world is very important. That is why I find this statement odd in reference to Skyrim, as Skyrim is absolutely filled to the brim with all sorts of unmarked locations, NPCs, sidequests, treasures, fights and all sorts of other lore and narrative bits to incentivize exploring the game world in every direction. 

You literally can't walk in any direction for more than 1-2 minutes in Skyrim without encountering a new location, NPCs or something else to investigate. 

I disagree completely - or rather, I agree that there's a lot of crap around if you just wander, but the operative element here is "crap". Most of the dungeons aren't particularly interesting - they're not particularly unique (with some exceptions, like one barrow where you run into two NPCs and explore with them) with similar puzzles (those stupid statues you flip around or reskinned dragon claws). And all of the lore is the same thing: books. 

The NPCs are, again,mostly not particularly interesting (though there are memorable encounters, like the jester with the cart, a really funny meeting before you start the brotherhood quests). 

[H. Birdman]

Glad to hear from the mods that Skyrim's approach to story isn't on the table.

Because Skyrim had one of the weakest main storylines in a AAA title I've seen. Main antagonist is a world-eating dragon? Let's water that down by having the player fight hundreds of dragons as random encounters, most of which aren't terribly challenging. Dragon represents the pending apocalypse? Let's have the townsfolk be more interested in their lost locket, and the nobles more interested in some half-assed civil war. Nothing says, "We're on the verge of doomsday," like eight guys in red and eight guys in blue fighting over some random abandoned fort with no obvious strategic value. Oh, and be sure there's not one single character that you have any reason to care about.

You'd really have to try hard to make a less compelling story about dragons than Skyrim.

[LobselVith8]

H. Birdman wrote...

Glad to hear from the mods that Skyrim's approach to story isn't on the table.

Because Skyrim had one of the weakest main storylines in a AAA title I've seen. Main antagonist is a world-eating dragon? Let's water that down by having the player fight hundreds of dragons as random encounters, most of which aren't terribly challenging. Dragon represents the pending apocalypse? Let's have the townsfolk be more interested in their lost locket, and the nobles more interested in some half-assed civil war. Nothing says, "We're on the verge of doomsday," like eight guys in red and eight guys in blue fighting over some random abandoned fort with no obvious strategic value. Oh, and be sure there's not one single character that you have any reason to care about.

You'd really have to try hard to make a less compelling story about dragons than Skyrim.

As opposed to all mage antagonists being insane and stupid, and templar antagonists being sadists? With Orsino and Metedith losing their marbles for asinine reasons that defy logic and common sense? I don't see any reason to vilify Skyrim's story when Dragon Age II's story is atrocious and ridiculous.

[artemis73]

If there is one thing I can say Dragon Age 2 did better than Skyrim was the voice acting. My God the voice acting in Skyrim was just horrible with the exception of Ulfric Stormcloak who had a great voice actor which is a shame because he was a wonderfully written character among really mediocre/awful ones. I was surprised to encounter such a great character in Skyrim after I met really boring ones with just bad voice acting. But then again I don't play Skyrim for its story and characters but for the combat and open world so I like the game anyway.