7827 réponses à ce sujet

[Thandal N'Lyman]

question for the beta testers. are the "completed quests" sections in DAO and DA2 sufficient for filling in the information the Keep asks for?

They can't respond without breaking the NDA, even if they know. (And you shouldn't have even asked them.)

[dutch_gamer]

A tiny bit of news about the Keep:

http://www.wired.co....ion-interview-2

 

"..So we built something called the Dragon Age Keep, which is currently in beta. It allows you build up three-to-five world-states. You craft them to say "this is a world where Alexander is King and the Warden was a Daelish elf, etc," covering the events of Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2. You can build it up either through an interactive story, a bit like Pottermore.

Alternatively, you can go straight into what we call The Tapestry, which is where we show you all the things that we're tracking and you make the choices you want. If your choices invalidate things -- for example, Alistair can't be both King AND dead -- it'll tell you and you have to resolve it. Then in Inquisition you log in with your Origin account and it grabs that for free, instantly. That's the world that Inquisition inherits and you play in. If you start a new game you pick a new world-state for it to grab, as you see fit."

So there is two ways to fill in the story, the Tapestry and the interactive story. This may have been known but I believe this is the first time we are told about this in an official manner. Maybe today we will hear more about the Keep at PAX Prime because of a scheduled Keep demo.

Edit: Just as I posted the Dragon Age Keep team tweeted we won't be able to watch a stream of the demo but hopefully some of the visitors will write about it.

[aaarcher86]

You really do not have to defend the developers of DA:I since they have access to the "source code" and know how to do their job, do not idiot-declare them please! But to answer your first statement: It's quite simple to have questions with corresponding flags, so you don't have to worry the least about errors and things like that on a simple thing like a "questionnaire" that I can promise you! I stand my ground on: Not including "the keep's" questionnaire in DA:I from the start go/or as DLC (as a option to click in for users that so desire) is part of a bigger play that has NOTHING whatsoever to do with "complications" in developing the feature in the first place, no no, I bet it's some part in a (for the moment) hidden EA strategy (more on that when it fully unfolds).

 

 

What?  Seriously... what huge scheme could EA be plotting that involves having a save game generator outside of the game?  I'd love to hear the conspiracy theory.  How about it's just flat out easier for the Devs to use the Keep in it's present form... to patch it... to update it... and it won't take up space on the disk this way.  There.  It doesn't have to be a reason you find acceptable to be the reason. 

 

Co-op multiplay:

Regarding your words-play, yes, very funny, but if you read my posts in-detail you'll see I represent the users that WANT a feature to play co-op multiplayer ALONE in offline mode. Technically its the same as gamers that run server emulators for the biggest mmorpgs out there, you set it up and then play alone in the world (cant elaborate too much given the nature of this forum)

 

All boils down to how far you are willing to go to make something "complicated" easy or the other way around. Offline co-op multiplay is a good thing, so why not have in in the game? LAN and Direct Connect (see on most other games with multiplayer support in them) is also a good thing. To *ONLY* have EA server dependent multiplayer is really really REALLY bad (in the long run).

 

Sounds like you're the one requesting something more complicated.  By asking the Devs to do more work to create a secondary type of MP for the few people that might use it, you're requesting more time/work/money go into it.  By all means, if you're willing to fund it.  People with high paranoia of being online are in the minority and it's not cost effective to cater to them. 

 

Regarding the maps:

From what I heard when demos was playing out and all that the "entire game was more or less finished", and next thing we hear is that the release date been changed, see where I am going? There is a REASON why the game got it's release date changed. Please understand we have the "KOTOR" effect here (Knights of the Old republic) where both games (especially the last one) where thrown out on the market BEFORE it was finished. I don't want to put EA in a bad light here, but most of the EA games are rushed out the door and developers have to make huge compromises else they literally get fired (its a damn cruel world thats for sure). I dont have the name in my head now as I don't play sports game, but there was one EA game (think it was football) where they put out an EXACT copy of the game sold a earlier year with a minor text and graphic change.

 

The devs have flat out said that the delay was for more time to polish and perfect the EXISITING features in the game.  If you don't believe them, nothing anyone says is going to convince you other wise.  The game was already delayed a year and in that time they added features, they didn't take them away... ADDED content. 

 

Sim City 2013 is a perfect leading example on when the "greed" is over-reaching and there IS serious consequences (feel free to look up EA stock listings and the time of gaming incidents). Sadly most EA games have had to suffer on way or another on the greed-need, and regarding Bioware, just take a look on all titles they have made under the EA brand... If you *LIKE* cut content released as DLC, forced online access (when it's been proved it's not even needed), micro transactions, rushed game endings, worthless quest system/journal (Mass Effect 3) poorly executed decision to make a expansion pack INTO a full fledged lackluster standalone game with recycled content (Dragon Age 2) and things "in that spirit" you are in damn good luck, because as mentioned earlier: there is lots of more (as I would say) "bad things" in store for us.

 

 

Maybe this just isn't the game for you?  Sounds like you're pretty upset with all the games that are under EAs umbrella.  If you really can't see the care and effort put forth by what Bioware has SHOWN you of DAI, okay.  Again, they've delayed this game twice to make it the best it can be, and everything they've shown should give no indication of it going back to what happened with DA2.  Can't really say anything about the rest of it since we haven't played.  As far as them choosing to add things that 'aren't even needed' - that argument can be applied to anything.  In fact, it seems that they didn't put forth a save game generator on the disk because it's 'not even needed.'  We've got the Keep and I'd assume 90% of users have the ability to access the internet. 
 

 

But people do vote with their wallets, and it's a very well known fact that big companies (no name mentioned lol) is forcing/paying review sites to POST faked reviews of game, for fun look on "metacritic" and the game "Total War: Rome II" then continue with Dragon Age, Mass Effect... see how the scores DIFFER hugely in many cases with the "official review sites consensus" - indeed, they are "bought" and gladly like with the case of Total War: Rome II promote a TERRIBLE product.

 

My answer to why all "bad changes" can enter into the games is because review-sites post fake reviews, and that the official game forums delete all treads that stand out (still amazed why my account is not deleted over here... well, truth been known I have actually gotten a "multiple posts removed" and a "verbal warning" but I guess that's well deserved since I am quite open minded in pointing out lies and scams when I see them).

 

So don't read the reviews?  Game reviews don't get me to a buy a game.  Bioware doing exactly what they've done gets me to buy a game.  SHOWING me the game, just like they've done, is what gets me interested.  I'm an adult - nobody convinces me to do anything I don't choose to do.  No one is forcing you to buy the game if you think the reviews are inflated.  And honestly, you being open minded has nothing to do with your warnings - you're giving yourself too much credit.  Frankly, I'm not positive you aren't a teenager.

 

 

Regarding the Mass Effect 3 ending (as a good example) the situation totally went out of control, and you can only close so many treads before "independent" reviewers (feel free to goggle up Angry Joe) and digital newspapers see a "story" in the brewing. I fully understand that it's great to go in defense of very anticipated game like Dragon Age: Inquisition, and rightfully so, many users have very solid arguments against what I bring to the table, but...

 

Any serious gamer can't go in defense of a company that systematically is known to "rush out" unfinished games onto the market, or implementing "micro transactions" (god how I hate that silly word) to pay-to-play content you already paid for, cutting content from the games later released as dlc's and closing down all online solutions (LAN/Direct Connect) in favor of their own server dependent (often not working) solution, and most importantly "lock out" players that do not meet criteria "X" from content (in this case player no able to go online)

 

ME3's ending was a big deal - and it got a ton of coverage over it.  Bioware released the EC DLC to fix it.  Some people accepted it and others didn't.  If it makes you leery of DAI then don't buy it day 1.  There's nothing else you can do. 

 

Any "serious gamer" can look at something as a whole instead getting a chip on their shoulder and leaving it there.  Clearly, everyone doesn't have such a hatred for COMPLETELY OPTIONAL microtransactions the same way you do.  You can play all the DAMP content without paying a single cent.  So really, you're just in the wrong here with your refusal to let go of your 'MTs are teh debil' mindset.  If you want to create a game with zero MTs, no DLC, and all offline compatibility, there's nothing stopping you. 

 

The moral of the story is: with paid reviewers, closed treads, (and its not uncommon with employees trolling/leaking on bogus accounts too in both directions) that many "crappy/buggy/unfinished" games are sold to YOU the consumer. Always take the time to think, and never be afraid to point out if you don't like a feature/game... in todays "digital noise" you have to keep repeating yourself, never giving up, and just like with Mass Effect 3 and its ending you CAN make a difference!

 

 

This genuinely made me chuckle.  I have a job.  Having a job gives me money.  I'll spend my money on things that I deem appropriate and worthy.  You spend your allowance the same way.  If I were you, I'd start getting used to the 'digital noise' because it's not going away.  Welcome to the 21st century. 

[aaarcher86]

A tiny bit of news about the Keep:

http://www.wired.co....ion-interview-2

 

So there is two ways to fill in the story, the Tapestry and the interactive story. This may have been known but I believe this is the first time we are told about this in an official manner. Maybe today we will hear more about the Keep at PAX Prime because of a scheduled Keep demo.

Edit: Just as I posted the Dragon Age Keep team tweeted we won't be able to watch a stream of the demo but hopefully some of the visitors will write about it.

 

That's cool.  They had said there cinematic and stuff in the Keep but the photos we saw must have been the tapestry form of the Keep.  That's exciting!  Really looking forward to diving in! 

 

And that's definitely the first time they've really given an explanation like that, yeah.  Thanks for posting!

[Avalonica]

if you read what they write. The keep is too complicated for use like the genesis program in Mass Effect

 

Honestly though I dont know why anyone will bother trying to correct you. You have an opinion completely at odds with everyone else especially based on what we know about the keep.

 

Anyone can be the devils advocate as long its makes them happy, I don't mind anyones feedback on my arguments, but its' more than accepting limitations from a programming standpoint. The person telling you/the community that it's hard/impossible to implement a simple questionnaire form into a game (it's all there is actually) have gone on the same PR training as the person who told us that Sim City 2013 needs to constantly be online to function.

 

There is lots of costs and PR involved with Dragon Age: Inquisition. And with the Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco and Dragon Age 2 recycling there is "zero room" for PR distastes. EA is "playing safe" with DA:I, but still have not learned from all previous lessons, and it start to show as the facade is beginning to crack under pressure.

 

Lots of functions/content in DA:I is dependent on 3rd party services to operate, and if one cog fails to function the entire machine will fail. The Keep (scripts/homepage etc), EA servers (login/mp etc) can and will fail and when that happen DA:I will not function as intended. This is what I try to explain: Making a game that is solely DEPENDANT on constant online access (or even partial) is wrong and will backfire down the road.

 

Decisions that might look good in a powerpoint presentation, on paper and with stock holders has nothing to do with the final product and the customers that receive it. I am sure the Mass Effect 3 ending was a internal crowd pleaser at EA with huge cost saving, not even I could have come up with a 3 color ending, but look how the market reacted. It's just like with sports where all the "great gurus" generally are (with respect said) fat old men taking up a huge salary and can't even practice the sport they comment/advice in. Who are the people that "sponsor" the games? Never mix the "developers" (carpenters) with the ones that "fund" a gaming project.

 

The reason EA has produced so many terrible games is because (with respect said) incompetent old people that have zero clue on what games is about fiddle around/interfere with the games and developers/programmers/artists. DA:I is a great game, but with so much "hands that don't need to be involved" lots of bad (really bad) changes have made a healthy product it quite a sick product (mark my words). I really feel for DA:I and of course I'll get it with all the flaws it has BECAUSE the story and the work STILL is unbeatable by any other game (including the Witcher 3).

 

But why must every company that "slaves" game developers interfere and destroy their fantastic work? Let's just pray and hope that I am the only one that dislike server dependant co-op multiplayer and the lack of LAN/Direct Connect options with it or NO offline singleplayer support with the co-op multiplayer, and the messy overcomplicated "The Keep"... really... because as everything stands now: - if DA:I mess up in the trend of Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2 it's really not that solid rock fancy dandy we'll ever see a Dragon Age 4 or Mass Effect 4 (at least under the EA brand).

[movieguyabw]

The moral of the story is: with paid reviewers, closed treads, (and its not uncommon with employees trolling/leaking on bogus accounts too in both directions) that many "crappy/buggy/unfinished" games are sold to YOU the consumer. Always take the time to think, and never be afraid to point out if you don't like a feature/game... in todays "digital noise" you have to keep repeating yourself, never giving up, and just like with Mass Effect 3 and its ending you CAN make a difference!

 

While I agree with the sentiment, much of the points you keep bringing up have been addressed multiple times already - as almost every other day someone new comes to the forum who has only read the one FAQ regarding the DA Keep and immediately assumes they know everything there is to know about the system; and immediately assume it'll be the most complicated thing they can imagine.  If you haven't, I'd suggest taking a look at Ladyinsanity and/or Gamermd83's videos regarding the Keep - as they are beta testers, and talk about the site without breaking NDA.  Whether you choose to believe them, as they have a good relationship with Bioware and seem to have a very positive and optimistic view of the site, is entirely up to you.

 

Going by what they have said however and what was seen in the leak, I must say I'm reasonably optimistic as well.  But again, that is just me.

 

As for the multiplayer and the delay - I'll be brief since this is not a thread about multiplayer.  They have stated they've been working on the multiplayer aspect of the game for about 2 years now.  It has also been something that has been hinted at for quite a long time - a panel discussion from a couple years back shows one of the devs (I believe it's Mike Laidlaw) being very dodgy when asked if there would be multiplayer.  It essentially boiled down to "We can't talk about this right now" but he did say that *if* they did, it would be something along the lines of a co-op dungeon crawl experience - which is essentially what we were shown.  So yeah, pretty sure the addition of multiplayer didn't play in to the delay that happened only about a month ago. 

[aaarcher86]

 
The reason EA has produced so many terrible games is because (with respect said) incompetent old people that have zero clue on what games is about fiddle around/interfere with the games and developers/programmers/artists.

No, you're right. Your idea of how things should be done is much better!

[Shadowson]

You really do not have to defend the developers....

*snip*

 ...make a difference!

 

 

Anyone can be the devils advocate...

*snip*

...Mass Effect 4 (at least under the EA brand).

 

 

In all honesty.. i don't know what to say to you at this point. All the points you are making seem to stem from some irrational fear/hate of EA and are verging into conspiracy nut territory so ill just end this off topic discussion with 

 

 

and leave it there.

[Avalonica]

No, you're right. Your idea of how things should be done is much better!

 

your sarcasm aside, it's actually not my idea, it's plain common sense that a game should accommodate players that wont have internet access and thus somehow include a "offline mode" access to co-op multiplayer, even on consoles that can be done with a "split screen". And it's quite logical to include more "multiplayer connection" options especially considering how many products with multiplayer died when Gamespy shut down. How will a player without any form of internet access use "the keep"...?

[Ranadiel Marius]

No, you're right. Your idea of how things should be done is much better!

Viva le revolution! Random internet posters will now make every business decision about video game development. Because that can't go wrong.

[aaarcher86]

your sarcasm aside, it's actually not my idea, it's plain common sense that a game should accommodate players that wont have internet access and thus somehow include a "offline mode" access to co-op multiplayer, even on consoles that can be done with a "split screen". And it's quite logical to include more "multiplayer connection" options especially considering how many products with multiplayer died when Gamespy shut down. How will a player without any form of internet access use "the keep"...?

They won't. They'll have to use the default world state.

What you're failing to recognize is the additional cost and time that goes into creating a system for a small group of people, which I'd also argue, is common sense. Bioware is a business. If something isn't cost effective, they aren't going to do it. They'll put those resources elsewhere that make more sense.

The amount of things internet is utilized for these days is only growing. Best jump in the train or be left behind.

[Avalonica]

In all honesty.. i don't know what to say to you at this point. All the points you are making seem to stem from some irrational fear/hate of EA and are verging into conspiracy nut territory so ill just end this off topic discussion with 

 

and leave it there.

 

Yes, I begin to see the light! There have been no rushed games, no lies, no fake reviews, no scandals... sure... Well, the truth of the matter is; with EA's curriculum vitae I am amazed they still are in the market. There is no spoon!

[Shadowson]

your sarcasm aside, it's actually not my idea, it's plain common sense that a game should accommodate players that wont have internet access and thus somehow include a "offline mode" access to co-op multiplayer, even on consoles that can be done with a "split screen". And it's quite logical to include more "multiplayer connection" options especially considering how many products with multiplayer died when Gamespy shut down. How will a player without any form of internet access use "the keep"...?

 i just cant help myself but reply again... they are accommodating those that dont have internet its called Single player. You now want a single player game and a multiplayer game that will suit you as a single player game. And a player without any form of access to the internet will not use the keep, they will have to rely on the default world state provided. Which is bad for them but bioware cannot go out and provide internet access to everyone.

[movieguyabw]

The reason EA has produced so many terrible games is because (with respect said) incompetent old people that have zero clue on what games is about fiddle around/interfere with the games and developers/programmers/artists.

 

Isn't EA currently under new management as of late?  I could've sworn their old CEO stepped down and there's currently a new one.  While not a guarantee that the company will change - I'm more of a "wait and see" mindset myself.  The only reason I plan on buying DAI (and have actually preordered) is because everything I've seen has intrigued me; and unlike DA2 and ME3, I don't really have any lingering "well, I'm a little worried about this" thoughts.  If you are worried, then by all means, wait for it to come out before purchasing.

[aaarcher86]

i just cant help myself but reply again... they are accommodating those that dont have internet its called Single player. You now want a single player game and a multiplayer game that will suit you as a single player game. And a player without any form of access to the internet will not use the keep, they will have to rely on the default world state provided. Which is bad for them but bioware cannot go out and provide internet access to everyone.

It's like a goddam black hole, isn't it?!

[Shadowson]

It's like a goddam black hole, isn't it?!

 its like we are stuck in an infinite loop

[Sanunes]

They won't. They'll have to use the default world state.

What you're failing to recognize is the additional cost and time that goes into creating a system for a small group of people, which I'd also argue, is common sense. Bioware is a business. If something isn't cost effective, they aren't going to do it. They'll put those resources elsewhere that make more sense.

The amount of things internet is utilized for these days is only growing. Best jump in the train or be left behind.

 

Don't forget these forums are the same place where "multiplayer stole valuable resources from single player" is a common belief no matter what anyone else might have to say on the matter. I swear reading these forums people want a custom made game that meets all their personal criteria and will complain about any deviation from that criteria.

 

I keep trying to never come back here, but I just keep getting sucked back in.

[Sanunes]

 its like we are stuck in an infinite loop

 

Can we at least use the Stargate for golfing then?

[aaarcher86]

Don't forget these forums are the same place where "multiplayer stole valuable resources from single player" is a common belief no matter what anyone else might have to say on the matter. I swear reading these forums people want a custom made game that meets all their personal criteria and will complain about any deviation from that criteria.
 
I keep trying to never come back here, but I just keep getting sucked back in.

Oh god. I despise that reasoning.

This place really is a black hole. It's crazy lmao.

[Avalonica]

They won't. They'll have to use the default world state.

What you're failing to recognize is the additional cost and time that goes into creating a system for a small group of people, which I'd also argue, is common sense. Bioware is a business. If something isn't cost effective, they aren't going to do it. They'll put those resources elsewhere that make more sense.

The amount of things internet is utilized for these days is only growing. Best jump in the train or be left behind.

 

Where have I heard that before down the history lane? Pray tell me, how many living people do you "define" as a small group? My advice is that you urgently avoid to do further PR promoting on EA/Bioware's behalf with that rhetoric, really!

 

In the defense of Dragon Age and Mass Effect; minority groups/sexual orientation have always been well represented, and with DA:I they go even further! And that ALONE is a reason why people should get all the Dragon Age/Mass Effect games.

 

A persons access to the internet, racial or sexual orientation is not your or mine or anyones business, and "small groups" of people are still people and shall be treated as such and not second rate citizens.

 

But enough of that and back to the main topic: people with no internet access can't access the features of "the Keep" nor any form of substitutive "co-op multiplayer on the co-op maps, that has to be addressed.

[Avalonica]

Isn't EA currently under new management as of late?  I could've sworn their old CEO stepped down and there's currently a new one.  While not a guarantee that the company will change - I'm more of a "wait and see" mindset myself.  The only reason I plan on buying DAI (and have actually preordered) is because everything I've seen has intrigued me; and unlike DA2 and ME3, I don't really have any lingering "well, I'm a little worried about this" thoughts.  If you are worried, then by all means, wait for it to come out before purchasing.

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition is to good to pass up on! I'll get it, it's not the point of all my posts: I just try to make DA:I future compatible so 9-15 years from now we'll still somehow be able to play the co-op part when the EA servers wont support the game any longer. Also I want some sort of "offline" support with the co-op multiplayer so a single player can have fun without being online (maybe its to much to ask for in the form of a console split screen support), and I also want "the keep" to have some sort of "offline" feature... thats all...

[HK-90210]

 its like we are stuck in an infinite loop

 

[Ranadiel Marius]

Dragon Age: Inquisition is to good to pass up on! I'll get it, it's not the point of all my posts: I just try to make DA:I future compatible so 9-15 years from now we'll still somehow be able to play the co-op part when the EA servers wont support the game any longer. Also I want some sort of "offline" support with the co-op multiplayer so a single player can have fun without being online (maybe its to much to ask for in the form of a console split screen support), and I also want "the keep" to have some sort of "offline" feature... thats all...

So you want them to delay the game for a year plus while they meet your tastes? Because they don't have copies of the game like that lying around.

[aaarcher86]

Where have I heard that before down the history lane? Pray tell me, how many living people do you "define" as a small group? My advice is that you urgently avoid to do further PR promoting on EA/Bioware's behalf with that rhetoric, really!

In the defense of Dragon Age and Mass Effect; minority groups/sexual orientation have always been well represented, and with DA:I they go even further! And that ALONE is a reason why people should get all the Dragon Age/Mass Effect games.

A persons access to the internet, racial or sexual orientation is not your or mine or anyones business, and "small groups" of people are still people and shall be treated as such and not second rate citizens.

But enough of that and back to the main topic: people with no internet access can't access the features of "the Keep" nor any form of substitutive "co-op multiplayer on the co-op maps, that has to be addressed.

Omg lol. You can not compare internet service to sexual orientation or race AT ALL. One is a product, the others are people.

It's not an opinion some PR rep at Bioware made up. If you can google, it's pretty easy to see. In America, over 80% of the population had some form of internet service in 2012. That number is only growing. The number of gamers without internet is infinitely smaller than the general population I'd assume.

No one said people without internet aren't people, but they should fully expect to get left behind in a technology based era. That's just the way it goes. You can't have be pissed about not being able to watch your favorite television shows if you don't have cable.

There's nothing to be addressed any further about MP or the Keep. Without internet access you won't be able to use either.

[aaarcher86]

Dragon Age: Inquisition is to good to pass up on! I'll get it, it's not the point of all my posts: I just try to make DA:I future compatible so 9-15 years from now we'll still somehow be able to play the co-op part when the EA servers wont support the game any longer. Also I want some sort of "offline" support with the co-op multiplayer so a single player can have fun without being online (maybe its to much to ask for in the form of a console split screen support), and I also want "the keep" to have some sort of "offline" feature... thats all...

Running MP as a SP offline would be a flat version of SP. If that's what you want, just play SP.