It's baffling to see enemies drop from the ceiling when they could have just come out of the 3 doors in that area.
It simply means that someone screwed up the spawn points or did not have enough time to program them properly. The other point is that it reused programming code (like the reused areas). It is sloppy and should have been caught in QA. testing.
Curious. So that would make what many take to be a 'feature' of DA2 (dropping enemies) to actually be a 'bug'. 
I find myself speeding through games haha. Had to get Dragonfall done before South Park, which must be completed before Titanfall. Gamer problems I tell you! D:
In January I took one look at the calendar and just gave up on eating into my backlog this year. It'll probably get even worse.
It's an especially bad (or, rather, wonderful) year if you happen to be an adventure gamer as well. April will be Moebius and Tesla Effect, and at some point there'll be the second half of Broken Age, and hopfully Asylum will be out soon. And on the CRPG side, there's Pillars of Eternity also due by the end of the year. It's just as well Dark Souls 2 and The Witcher 3 aren't my thing, or I really would be in trouble.
I find myself speeding through games haha. Had to get Dragonfall done before South Park, which must be completed before Titanfall. Gamer problems I tell you! D:
Besides Pillars of Eternity, also coming this year (hopefully) are Wasteland 2 (well it's already in open access beta), and Torment: Tides of Numenera, a somewhat "spiritual" successor to Planescape Torment.
Yes, it IS a good year for the CRPGist. Even if you're less focused on action-rpgs and more on what one might consider 'grognardian'. Oh, and all three will have native Mac versions, too... 
There two different games so I have 2 separate opinions with little to no relation to each other.
Curious. So that would make what many take to be a 'feature' of DA2 (dropping enemies) to actually be a 'bug'.
Not a bug. This is sloppy programming. which is more deliberate. Most definitely not a feature, but it does keep you on your toes while in battle. The fact that it got through testing is the scary part.
Not a bug. This is sloppy programming. which is more deliberate. Most definitely not a feature, but it does keep you on your toes while in battle. The fact that it got through testing is the scary part.
Would it be sloppy programming or sloppy design?
I'm not sure the context by which you mean it was sloppy programming, reusing programming code, or whether one has enough visibility regarding QA?
For reference, the spawning code for Dragon Age Origins is extensively reused (since there's no need to reprogram a spawner, once the tool has been created... you just place it with references to different blueprints), because it makes sense to do that. Which is mostly why I'm confused because I think you might be talking about something different than how I am reading it.
Dunno, if the argument is that somehow by accident the fact that spawning points for enemies were set high in the air, due to a programming mistake ... and that dozens of instances of this (thing is, Realmz, it constantly keeps happening) slipped through beta testing ... I'm not sure I believe that.
No, I think the combat design team decided on it as a mechanic, and from what I've heard, it wasn't just for keeping players on their toes; it also apparently had to do with stability issues, problems with too many enemies being onscreen at once. So has been passed through the grapevine, anyway.
Still, as I said elsewhere, if one rabid critter drops out of the sky and attacks you, just for nostalgic-da2 lulz in DAI, well I could dig it.
Seriously, just keep reminding yourself that this is Varric's story, not the real version of events. Once you do that, a whole heap of stuff makes sense - the ridiculous, cartoony combat, the hyper-sexualised women, even the recycled environments can be a metaphor for Varric's lack of interest in describing scenery.
I know it's an ass-pull, but it's one that works really well.
Yes, it is one hell of an ass-pull, but that doesn't make it any better. You're still supposed to be playing Hawke, not playing Hawke through Varric's eyes. Which, I guess, could lead to some of the disconnect in that I never felt like I was playing Hawke, but I still think it was just an incredibly rushed game.
What we've seen of Dragon Age Inquisition has me very excited, but no, it has not rekindled my interest in Dragon Age as a series, as it was never lost. I loved both DA:O and DAII, although I enjoyed DAII more.
I find myself speeding through games haha. Had to get Dragonfall done before South Park, which must be completed before Titanfall. Gamer problems I tell you! D:
I can't personally do that. I think it would completely ruin games for me. Personally, I play games super slow. It allows me to take the world in more and notice the smaller details in a game. My favorite example is The Last of Us. If you play that game slow you notice just how incredible it really is and you'll likely notice things you didn't see before. That's why when I see an estimate for the gameplay length on a game I always add at least 25% to the total time for me. A game that should take 15 hours to complete often takes me 20-25 hours to complete. I guess this is why I'm not as big into multiplayer anymore because it forces me to play at paces that aren't mine.
For reference, the spawning code for Dragon Age Origins is extensively reused (since there's no need to reprogram a spawner, once the tool has been created... you just place it with references to different blueprints), because it makes sense to do that. Which is mostly why I'm confused because I think you might be talking about something different than how I am reading it.
Speaking of reused code, didn't NWN1 encounters show creatures dropping in from the ceiling too? Obviously, in practice you were supposed to set up the spawn point far enough from the trigger so players wouldn't see it happen. Or am I thinking of a different game?
Speaking of reused code, didn't NWN1 encounters show creatures dropping in from the ceiling too? Obviously, in practice you were supposed to set up the spawn point far enough from the trigger so players wouldn't see it happen. Or am I thinking of a different game?
It wouldn't surprise me. But within the OC, at least, they did that out of sight, so from the player's perspective everything was always where he found it. The dynamic spawning in NWN was there primarily to manage hardware resources.
My objection to DA2's spawing was that it meant that enemies would simply appear, rather than existing to be found should the PC look there. NWN's spawning, however, didn't cause enemies to be unfindable. If you went to a place where an enemy would spawn, he always spawned before you got there.
I can't personally do that. I think it would completely ruin games for me. Personally, I play games super slow. It allows me to take the world in more and notice the smaller details in a game. My favorite example is The Last of Us. If you play that game slow you notice just how incredible it really is and you'll likely notice things you didn't see before. That's why when I see an estimate for the gameplay length on a game I always add at least 25% to the total time for me. A game that should take 15 hours to complete often takes me 20-25 hours to complete. I guess this is why I'm not as big into multiplayer anymore because it forces me to play at paces that aren't mine.
That's fair. Though I'm not really *skipping* anything, but yeah I'm not going to say your way is wrong for you haha. I just knew if I didn't finish Dragonfall... it was in jeopardy of being finished in the near future 
Skyrim has a hand in it.
DA2 was pretty bad in my opinion and really took some of my interest away from DA.
The year was 2011. A friend of mine suggested I give TES a chance with the upcoming at the time Skyrim, in case I was giving up DA and needed an RPG replacement.
I did get Skyrim, and I fell in love with it. Just what I needed.
Devs working on Inquisition were/are looking at Skyrim for a few instances, and that is enough to make me wary, yet hopeful. Attentive for sure.
DA2 wasn't enough to guarantee I wouldn't get Inquisition, but the news I'm hearing about the upcoming game is making me hope to God that its Bioware's return to form.
I honestly haven't been paying much attention to the development of Inquisition, mostly due to RL and not being sure if I'd have a computer that could even run it. But since recent circumstances have allowed me to purchase a gaming laptop, well, my eyes are back on the prize, as it were.
That said, as disappointed as I was in DA2, I think the devs probably have a list at least 10 times longer than mine of things they wish they could have done or not done. They created the product and as much as they have to defend it, they know where they went sideways. A lot of people liked the game but that doesn't mean it didn't have some major flaws. I did love the political intrigue in Origins and hope the series gets back to that. I'm fairly certain there will be huge improvements in the dialogue system, even if they are sticking with the basics of the dialogue wheel. I'm hoping the combat isn't so over-the-top. I'm pretty certain that there won't be complaints of excessively re-used environments. It does not appear as if the environment itself will be as bland as Kirkwall was.
So, I guess all I'm saying is that regardless of what I have or haven't seen, I'd have expected Inquisition to be a big improvement over DA2. I still may not like it, but I'm definitely in the "will pre-order" category.
Considering that it was DA2 that introduced me to Bioware and made me want to play Origins, Mass effect, Baldur's Gate, etc, I think it's safe to say that DA2 didn't hurt my opinion of the Dragon Age story and universe, hahah. What I've seen so far is amazing. I can't wait to see more of the combat and how it looks and works, especially for mages etc. Even if the game is more like DA2 than DAO, I'm sure that I'll enjoy it plenty.
Considering that I played Origins first and still consider DA2 to be the more fun game (played both on PC), I'd say DA:I doesn't have much to worry about. It wasn't a perfect game, but the combat was more fun, and I liked the characters in 2 a lot more. I actually liked Dominant tone a lot, I thought it added replayability and brought identity and life to the character. It's too bad they're giving it up for DA:I, but I understand their reasons. There were things Origins did better, most notably the way your choices shaped the ending and the sense of epicness to the quests, and I have high hopes that those will be improved in DA:I based on the comments from developers.
Would it be sloppy programming or sloppy design?
I'm not sure the context by which you mean it was sloppy programming, reusing programming code, or whether one has enough visibility regarding QA?
For reference, the spawning code for Dragon Age Origins is extensively reused (since there's no need to reprogram a spawner, once the tool has been created... you just place it with references to different blueprints), because it makes sense to do that. Which is mostly why I'm confused because I think you might be talking about something different than how I am reading it.
Actually Mr. Schumacher. I could say both, but I would hate to believe that spawning in the air was a design decision. I suspect that the spawn points are in the wrong place or were not change appropriately when the code was reused. That would be both sloppy programming and a QA problem. I could be wrong, but the dlc did not seem to have those problems.
I know that one would not re-write a spawner and that Origins (as most games do) made use of it, but the spawn points have to be change or you get enemies in full plate spawning from the sky. Rogues in soft leather jumping off low rooftops or balconies are more believable, not warriors in full plate.
Well, if you went through the map in the order the designers intended, anyway. NWN2 's OC had a couple of maps where enemies could teleport in behind your party or even on top of it.It wouldn't surprise me. But within the OC, at least, they did that out of sight, so from the player's perspective everything was always where he found it. The dynamic spawning in NWN was there primarily to manage hardware resources.
My objection to DA2's spawing was that it meant that enemies would simply appear, rather than existing to be found should the PC look there. NWN's spawning, however, didn't cause enemies to be unfindable. If you went to a place where an enemy would spawn, he always spawned before you got there.
I know that one would not re-write a spawner and that Origins (as most games do) made use of it, but the spawn points have to be change or you get enemies in full plate spawning from the sky. Rogues in soft leather jumping off low rooftops or balconies are more believable, not warriors in full plate.
Retour en haut