310 réponses à ce sujet

[Jerrybnsn]

Filament wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Funnily enough, while I do use DA3, I just as often use DAI or DA:I for Inquisition.  Or I just write Inquisition, since it does not actually take long to type....assuming you actually DO know how to type, of course.

............ What was annoying was that he specifically acknowledged the proper name of the game, DAI, and then basically said, "I don't want to call it that." That's ****ing stupid.

I'm not the one who has specifically said that DA3 would not be used.  That's what the article I linked is about.  What concerned me was WHY BIOWARE DOESN'T WANT TO USE THE "3".   Because they want to distance this third game from the second and the first, which is exactly what the fans don't want.  They want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it.  Bioware is fooling themselves if they think that's what their fans want.  They want it to be like a DA Origins experience as much as possible with as much of the original characters as possible and to be able to tie up their dangling threads left over from the first game.  If they don't do that the game will not do well.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 21 juin 2013 - 11:50 .

[addiction21]

Jerrybnsn wrote...


I'm not the one who has specifically said that DA3 would not be used.  That's what the article I linked is about.  What concerned me was WHY BIOWARE DOESN'T WANT TO USE THE "3".   Because they want to distance this third game from the second and the first, which is exactly what the fans don't want.  They want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it. 

As a fan I will disagree and ask you to stop trying to talk for anyone other then yourself.

[MisanthropePrime]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Filament wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Funnily enough, while I do use DA3, I just as often use DAI or DA:I for Inquisition.  Or I just write Inquisition, since it does not actually take long to type....assuming you actually DO know how to type, of course.

............ What was annoying was that he specifically acknowledged the proper name of the game, DAI, and then basically said, "I don't want to call it that." That's ****ing stupid.

I'm not the one who has specifically said that DA3 would not be used.  That's what the article I linked is about.  What concerned me was WHY BIOWARE DOESN'T WANT TO USE THE "3".   Because they want to distance this third game from the second and the first, which is exactly what the fans don't want.  They want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it.  Bioware is fooling themselves if they think that's what their fans want.  They want it to be like a DA Origins experience as much as possible with as much of the original characters as possible and to be able to tie up their dangling threads left over from the first game.  If they don't do that they game will not do well.

I think s lotta fans will wanna see DA:I distanced from DA2.

[Korusus]

MisanthropePrime wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Filament wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Funnily enough, while I do use DA3, I just as often use DAI or DA:I for Inquisition.  Or I just write Inquisition, since it does not actually take long to type....assuming you actually DO know how to type, of course.

............ What was annoying was that he specifically acknowledged the proper name of the game, DAI, and then basically said, "I don't want to call it that." That's ****ing stupid.

I'm not the one who has specifically said that DA3 would not be used.  That's what the article I linked is about.  What concerned me was WHY BIOWARE DOESN'T WANT TO USE THE "3".   Because they want to distance this third game from the second and the first, which is exactly what the fans don't want.  They want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it.  Bioware is fooling themselves if they think that's what their fans want.  They want it to be like a DA Origins experience as much as possible with as much of the original characters as possible and to be able to tie up their dangling threads left over from the first game.  If they don't do that they game will not do well.

I think s lotta fans will wanna see DA:I distanced from DA2.

That's pretty much a baseline assumption/requirement for me.  The more DA2 vibes I get the less likely I am to care.  Varric is about as much DA2 as I can tolerate.

[Jerrybnsn]

addiction21 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...


They (the fans) want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it. 

As a fan I will disagree and ask you to stop trying to talk for anyone other then yourself.

Two years ago, on this site, the forum overwhelmingly cried over DA2's mere existence.  They made polls on this site that overwhelmingly said they wished DA2 was more like the first game.  They may have left this forum and hence not the vocal majority anymore (this is the first time I've been on this site in over seven months), but they still exist.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 22 juin 2013 - 12:03 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Filament wrote...

For your concern outside of the naming, ie your desire to see the Warden return, I have no sympathy, as others have already explained how that expectation is entirely your own making...

my original post said nothing about having the Warden return, but about my concern that it was not going to be a linear storyline from the first game.  I admit, I did take the bait in later responses that I did want to play as my Warden again, but I've already stated that was not in my original post.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 22 juin 2013 - 12:02 .

[addiction21]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...


They (the fans) want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it. 

As a fan I will disagree and ask you to stop trying to talk for anyone other then yourself.

Two years ago, on this site, the forum overwhelmingly cried over DA2 mere existence.  They made polls on this site that overwhelmingly said they wished DA2 was more like the first game.  They may have left this forum and hence not the vocal majority anymore (this is the first time I've been on this site in over seven months), but they still exist.

And I was here. The same people making the same threads crying about the same things on a internet forum in no way makes "the majority"

Not to mention merely even mentioning you liked anything about DA2 at that time resulted in a **** avalanche of vitriol towards any poster made many walk away from these boards. What happened afterwards was when many could discuss what they liked and did not like in a better fashion.

Bottom line. YOU AND THOSE LIKE YOU ARE NOT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.

Its not as nearly as black and white as you want to make it out but then that is the effect confirmation bias has.

P.S.
Stop invoking "the majority" to lend weight to your arguments. Speak for yourself.

Modifié par addiction21, 22 juin 2013 - 12:13 .

[Boycott Bioware]

Well, those are wildly specific mysteries

At any rate, I may be in the minority, but I don't find those particularly driving questions that NEED to be answered. If they figure into the end game of Inquisition then I am sure we'll get some answers; otherwise these interesting items for idle pondering are not necessary for future narrative, imo.

It need to be concluded if Bioware really want each series have stand alone story.

If DA:O is done, why keep resurrect DA:O characters and sub plots?

It is just marketing...will DA:O/DA:A fans will buy DA2 if there is no Merill, Anders, Isabella and all the cameos are not in DA2? All these characters and cameos are related with The Warden, fans buy DA2 because want to see the continuity through them. It turn out to be DA2 is nothing about continuity of DA:O. That is deceiving

The scene of King Alistair, Alistair the drunkard and Alistair the traveling Warden is NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL with DA2 story. Why need to show all these in DA2 if DA:O is done?

Will DA:O fans will buy DA:I if there is no Morrigan in the trailer? Will DA2 fans will buy DA:I if there is no Varric and Cassandra in the trailer?

Why need to show Cassandra attacking Grey Wardens if Grey Warden story is done in DA:O?

I remember David Gaider said that DA is not about Grey Warden but yet DA2 is about a Grey Warden Mage blow up the Chantry, and DA:I trailer showing Cassandra attacking Grey Warden castle, what the hell?

Why not just conclude everything about Darkspawn, Grey Warden, Archdemon, Tevinter Mage who get tainted in the Black City and everything else in DA:O, then making new game that have no relation at all with everything if each series are intentionally not related to each other and have stand alone story?

[Jerrybnsn]

addiction21 wrote...

And I was here. The same people making the same threads crying about the same things on a internet forum in no way makes "the majority"

When DA2 was just released,  that's when all the fans came to this forum and expressed their feelings.  And there was a lot of ill feelings during that first two months after DA2's debut.  By the sheer definition of more numbers, that was the majority speaking.  Look at the metacritic that gave DA2 an average of a 3 or 4.  The sales numbers alone tell a sad story of the misdirection of DA2.

[slimgrin]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/why-dragon-age-inquisition-isnt-called-dragon-age-3

For simplicity, I just call it DA3.  "Inquisition" is just too long to type.  However, one part of the article that I read gave me doubts about the upcoming game.

"Inquisition is an all-new chapter inside of the Dragon Age universe, as opposed to people expecting a follow-on to Dragon Age 1 and 2 in a literal, linear sense.”

But I want it to follow a "literal, linear sense" and get back on track of the Grey Warden story from Origins.

They have to reinvent the franchise after the DA2 trainwreck.

[Cigne]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

But Dragon Age is NOT about the Grey Wardens.  It's about the entire world.  

I never said the series should be about the Grey Wardens, but now that you mention it, the Grey Wardens are the perfect vehicle to experience the Dragon Age.  The are morality neutral and keep foremost that mission comes first.  They take the good, they take the bad, they take them both and there you have...Grey Wardens.  They are station in every parts of the known Thedas and even go to the mysterious Dwarven cities and Deep Roads.  They accept all races as equals and all classes have a purpose with them.  I liked being in the Grey Wardens and want to be in that company of adventures again when I play Dragon Age.  Heck, until my Warden's time is done, I want to keep playing myself.

They are supposed to by neutral, yes, but instead they have involved themselves in localized politics (and so getting themselves kicked out of at least one country). They are capable of placing their own self interests above the mission, same as those members of the Templar Order and the Chantry.

And it's not an issue of continuing the story of just one Warden. Taking the six different Origins, male and female, gives twelve protagonists whose nature would need to be aknowledged. Since a mage can be human or elf, make that fourteen.

The multiple Origins was something Bioware wanted to do to introduce the world of Thedas, from different perspectives. But they made it clear (imo, at least) that it was costly, in terms of zots, and that we shouldn't expect it again, anytime soon (though I don't recall it being ruled out completely). And this was on the old forums, before DAO was released, before the BSN.

Before Mass Effect's "importing world states" became a Bioware thing, an expectation with all their titles. Considering the difficulties the ME team had with imports, when the trilogy was designed with them in mind from the beginning, I'd bet the DA team wishes they'd never began implementing them in DA.

Myself, as much as I enjoyed my Warden's, I like the idea of seeing Thedas from a new perspective in each new game, and the possibility of seeing how those Warden's (and Hawke's) left their mark on Thedas, in turn.

[addiction21]

Qistina wrote...
snip

Were you not leaving?

http://social.biowar.../index/16856495

Jerrybnsn wrote...


When DA2 was just released,  that's when all the fans came to this forum and expressed their feelings.  And there was a lot of ill feelings during that first two months after DA2's debut.  By the sheer definition of more numbers, that was the majority speaking.  Look at the metacritic that gave DA2 an average of a 3 or 4.  The sales numbers alone tell a sad story of the misdirection of DA2.

The same people posting in every thread over and over again does not make them a majority of anything. It just makes them loud nothing more.

Sales numbers... Oh well then McDonalds makes the best hamburgers and Beiber makes the best music. The CoD series must be the BEST games ever right? That is your logic. Sales equals quality. Tell me why so many hold Planescape as one of the greatest RPGs but its sales don't even match that.

Lol at metacritic.

[Jerrybnsn]

addiction21 wrote...

The same people posting in every thread over and over again does not make them a majority of anything. It just makes them loud nothing more.

Sales numbers... Oh well then McDonalds makes the best hamburgers and Beiber makes the best music. The CoD series must be the BEST games ever right? That is your logic. Sales equals quality. Tell me why so many hold Planescape as one of the greatest RPGs but its sales don't even match that.

Lol at metacritic.

I have to completely disagree with you about DA2 being a well received game.  Polls, critic reviews, and sales numbers all together agree that DA2 was a misguided adventure in Bioware's history.  Their first mistep if you will, but shockingly, not their last.  DA3 needs to become more into context of Origins again or it'll be another, and maybe the last, mistep for the Bioware group.

[Jerrybnsn]

Let's put it this way. Origins is the game that put the roots down for the Dragon Age series....er, a little help here. I'm terrible at analogies.

[Meatbaggins]

Qistina wrote...
Why not just conclude everything about Darkspawn, Grey Warden, Archdemon, Tevinter Mage who get tainted in the Black City and everything else in DA:O, then making new game that have no relation at all with everything if each series are intentionally not related to each other and have stand alone story?

They're separate stories, but that doesn't mean they're unrelated. Think of it like going from The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings. You'll have recurring characters and plot elements, but with a new protagonist and different central conflict.

Modifié par Meatbaggins, 22 juin 2013 - 01:48 .

[LPPrince]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Let's put it this way. Origins is the game that put the roots down for the Dragon Age series....er, a little help here. I'm terrible at analogies.

Origins is the roots of the tree as well as the trunk, DA2 is the dying branch that needs to be cut off(lololol just messin), and DA3 is the part that has yet to grow in.

We'll see how it turns out.

[addiction21]

Jerrybnsn wrote...


I have to completely disagree with you about DA2 being a well received game. 

I never said such a thing. I only (not really) implied it was not as horribly received as you want to make out. Since all you can see are those that agree with you.

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Polls, critic reviews, and sales numbers all together agree that DA2 was a misguided adventure in Bioware's history.  Their first mistep if you will, but shockingly, not their last.  DA3 needs to become more into context of Origins again or it'll be another, and maybe the last, mistep for the Bioware group.

*yawn*

Do you have anything new? I have been having to read this tripe since Baldrs Gate.

BG wasn't like the previous games, BG2 wasn't not exactly like the first game, HOLY **** look at Never Winter Nights going full 3d and doing away with the party system, KoToR, Jade Empire ME1 and ya.

Same **** just a new day and new shovel.

P.S.
And yes anyone with two brain cells are aware the only polls and critics that count are those that you agree with. Not to mention sales have never determined "quality"

P.P.S.
What you want and you proclaim so many others want is not happening. Now deal with it instead of finding some reason to moan and whine about Dragon Age 2. There is a whole other forum for that.

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Filament wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Funnily enough, while I do use DA3, I just as often use DAI or DA:I for Inquisition.  Or I just write Inquisition, since it does not actually take long to type....assuming you actually DO know how to type, of course.

............ What was annoying was that he specifically acknowledged the proper name of the game, DAI, and then basically said, "I don't want to call it that." That's ****ing stupid.

I'm not the one who has specifically said that DA3 would not be used.  That's what the article I linked is about.  What concerned me was WHY BIOWARE DOESN'T WANT TO USE THE "3".   Because they want to distance this third game from the second and the first, which is exactly what the fans don't want.  They want the DA series to get back to the first not away from it.  Bioware is fooling themselves if they think that's what their fans want.  They want it to be like a DA Origins experience as much as possible with as much of the original characters as possible and to be able to tie up their dangling threads left over from the first game.  If they don't do that the game will not do well.

Praytell, who exactly appointed you as the Voice of all the fans?

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

And I was here. The same people making the same threads crying about the same things on a internet forum in no way makes "the majority"

When DA2 was just released,  that's when all the fans came to this forum and expressed their feelings.  And there was a lot of ill feelings during that first two months after DA2's debut.  By the sheer definition of more numbers, that was the majority speaking.  Look at the metacritic that gave DA2 an average of a 3 or 4.  The sales numbers alone tell a sad story of the misdirection of DA2.

You are fooling yourself if you think that the BSN represents all or even the majority of people who ever played DA2.  In other words: it doesn't.

[Silfren]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

The same people posting in every thread over and over again does not make them a majority of anything. It just makes them loud nothing more.

Sales numbers... Oh well then McDonalds makes the best hamburgers and Beiber makes the best music. The CoD series must be the BEST games ever right? That is your logic. Sales equals quality. Tell me why so many hold Planescape as one of the greatest RPGs but its sales don't even match that.

Lol at metacritic.

I have to completely disagree with you about DA2 being a well received game.  Polls, critic reviews, and sales numbers all together agree that DA2 was a misguided adventure in Bioware's history.  Their first mistep if you will, but shockingly, not their last.  DA3 needs to become more into context of Origins again or it'll be another, and maybe the last, mistep for the Bioware group.

You cannot conclusively say that DA2 bombed the way it did because it was not Origins 2.0.  It failed primarily due to being rushed.  There is no reason whatsoever to think that, had it been given proper development time, it would not have been a far better received chapter in Dragon Age...even though it still would NOT have been Origins 2.0.

DA:I does not need to be more like Origins.  It needs simply to be well-developed.

[In Exile]

Jerrybnsn wrote...
When DA2 was just released,  that's when all the fans came to this forum and expressed their feelings.  And there was a lot of ill feelings during that first two months after DA2's debut.  By the sheer definition of more numbers, that was the majority speaking.  Look at the metacritic that gave DA2 an average of a 3 or 4.  The sales numbers alone tell a sad story of the misdirection of DA2.

Metacritic gives Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4 an 8.5 in user reviews and sold 16 million copies.  The majority has spoken: RPGs are worthless compared to multiplayer FPS shooters. 

Except that argument is garbage. 

Or how about this one: Skyrim is the best selling RPG of all time. Fans have spoken: (i) story; (ii) rich NPCs; (iii) meaningful romances; (iv) and plot choices are all irrelevant to an RPG. Tactical combat? No one wants that. Party based combat? Irrelevant. 

It's all about open-world exploration and a flimsly plot slapped on. The fans have spoken: Bioware shouldn't waste their time with DA:O2 but give the fans what they really want: Skyrim Age. 

[Bullets McDeath]

I really think that the suits (and possibly the creative) over think issues like this. Final Fantasy 57 will sell just fine, tons of people played Mass Effect 3 (and talk about a franchise you want to be in on from the start) without playing 1 & 2, or at least 1... I actually find these lines of thought to be just a teensy bit insulting. Most people are not so simple minded as to be unwilling to try a videogame because there's a number after the title. I mean, that's 99% of games.

[Brockololly]

I just find this part funny:

“There wasn’t anything that strategic about it, to be blunt. We just wanted to draw more attention to the fact that Inquisition is an all-new chapter inside of the Dragon Age universe, as opposed to people expecting a follow-on to Dragon Age 1 and 2 in a literal, linear sense.”

Followed by:

“We’re going to have PS3 and Xbox 360 and PC versions of Dragon Age III, so there will be a very broad-based experience there, but the new platforms are giving us the opportunity to tell stories in much larger worlds with more features and more things.

Even just within the confines of this interview/article the guy speaking about how dropping the "3" from the game title ends up calling the game by the number. So is it Dragon Age 3 or not?

The bigger annoyance is that I just wish they'd make up their mind and stick to it. The non numbered naming convention Origins started was fine. I don't know why they didn't add a number and subtitle and go from there.

Modifié par Brockololly, 22 juin 2013 - 03:49 .

[Silfren]

Brockololly wrote...

I just find this part funny:

“There wasn’t anything that strategic about it, to be blunt. We just wanted to draw more attention to the fact that Inquisition is an all-new chapter inside of the Dragon Age universe, as opposed to people expecting a follow-on to Dragon Age 1 and 2 in a literal, linear sense.”

Followed by:

“We’re going to have PS3 and Xbox 360 and PC versions of Dragon Age III, so there will be a very broad-based experience there, but the new platforms are giving us the opportunity to tell stories in much larger worlds with more features and more things.

Even just within the confines of this interview/article the guy speaking about how dropping the "3" from the game title ends up calling the game by the number. So is it Dragon Age 3 or not?

The bigger annoyance is that I just wish they'd make up their mind and stick to it. The non numbered naming convention Origins started was fine. I don't know why they didn't add a number and subtitle and go from there.

It's Dragon Age: Inquisition.  No need to latch on to what is clearly nothing more than a slip of the tongue.