Guest_Puddi III_*
I believe they're referring to people calling them a troll because of their signature.
I'm not sure 'rich' is a good synonym for a highly detailed setting with a big codex. Richness doesn't imply density of information but evocativeness.
Well, there's also how they've been discussing in off-topic what the best ways to rile this forum up would be. That's basically the definition of trolling.
Wow, I went to check it out and there is actually a thread where people are giving advice on how to rile people up in here... boredom does some pretty sad things. 
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
Actually that's an opinion, Dark Souls had a great story, great characters and the most depth of most videogames out now. What you're getting confused over is its narrative, a game doesn't have to force feed you with cutscenes and dialogue trees to have a good story. Darks Souls story was great and it didn't even force it down your throat.
Keep dreaming 
Keep dreaming
Not my problem if you can't taste quality.
a game doesn't have to force feed you with cutscenes and dialogue trees to have a good story. Darks Souls story was great and it didn't even force it down your throat.
Not my problem if you can't taste quality.
I'm seeing a lot of subtext from these posts.
I could agree with you in regard to some shalow characters when it comes to Dragon Age 2, though I personally believe that it was more related to short schedule to release the game than anything else. When it comes to Dark Souls, yes, the storytelling is certainly there, but it has a flow and a tone considerably different to the one present in Thedas (DA series continent). Gameplaywise, my experience playing the three games has made me enjoy Dragon Age the most because what really catches me is the interaction between characters and the lore supporting their abilities, aspects that felt flawed and way more generic in Skyrim and - when it comes to the npc/pc interaction - even worse in Dark Souls. The playstyle of Dark Souls is way more masochist (not a bad thing, if you enjoy replaying levels countless times for a couple of the game currency), focusing on "realism" with the pc chances of succeding.Dragon Age, otherwise, invites their player to immerse in that universe. Yes, you can play the game at some insane difficulty, but that's not the objective of the game. DA feels better done for me exactly because they give you that choice - you may kill that character, but he has been a keeper for his people and it may spoil your relationship to them later (even if later is in the next game). That said, I wonder if you fought againts Flemeth, in DA:O, or the Architect, or the Mother, or a Varterral, or the Arishok. Dragon Age has certainly a more high fantasy vibe than DS, but they generally know when to make a battle difficult enough to make it feel more rewarding and important to the plot.
From the information that has been released of DA:I, I'm hoping for a combination of the more free style of DS and Skyrim with the skillful ability of knowing when and where release more information and keep the plot entertaining to the players of bioware, in opposition to the bursts of information and corresponding hyatus that we get in DS and Skyrim. As for the more collorful and cartunesque scenario, an important part of the game will be leting us explore Orlais, the more fashionable and climate varied country in Thedas (so far), a characteristic that combined with the new platforms can lead to a balm for the fans who played DA2. When it comes to combat, you may indeed enjoy it since we'll probably need the strategic thinking of DS and DA:O with the action-packed explosion of effects of DA2.
If you haven't played the previous games of the series, please do, or you'll probably won't enjoy it as much as you could. 
Man... I must be reeaaaalllly bored to actually have read this thread. Meh, whatever.
... The game itself looks like Skyrim but with a more teenage targeted audience.
Not sure I like the generic characters and smaller fantasy dragons, Bioware should give us some big awesome dragon boss fights like Dark Souls.
The only similarity between Inquisition and Skyrim is the sorta-medieval(ish) fantasy setting. My only critique of the graphics is that they are a bit saturated for my taste, but that's more personal aesthetics than actual criticism, and I can overlook it because the detail is gorgeous, and I love the character designs (certainly more so than Skyrim's).
"More teenage targeted audience?" - in a story involving political intrigue/ideological conflict/crises of faith/morally grey decisions...? Really?
Also, I wouldn't call any of the characters generic - yeah, in DA2 they could have used a bit more nuance, but I blame that mostly on the cut development time, as with most flaws in that game.
And the new dragons look pretty damn big. Perhaps you should actually wait to fight one in the game before deciding how 'awesome' it is?
On that note, perhaps you should play the game before telling the devs what they did wrong and what they should do to improve it?
Also, this is not me getting mad. This is my opinion. About your opinion.
If you haven't played the previous games of the series, please do, or you'll probably won't enjoy it as much as you could.
I played both and I honestly didn't like them, it was a cross between cheesy characters and game controls that I didn't enjoy. And no before you wonder that's not me trying to get a reaction out of people, I just didn't like them.
Fine, I'll bite. DA and Skyrim are very different games. I've played both DAO and all of it's DLC along with DA2. I played a little of Oblivion at my cousin's house when I was younger, and my friend gave me a copy of Skyrim he had done some... things... to. I enjoyed Oblivion very much. I loved DAO. DA2 was, well, DA2. A fine game on it's own, but not the successor we had hoped for DAO. Skyrim, I made it through about 2 hours before having to turn it off. It just wasn't inspiring to me. I want games that make me feel like when I stop playing them (be it to take a break or complete the entire campaign) that I'm going to go out and "be in them", like grab some buddies and make our own stories in that universe or a universe similar. Dragon Age and Oblivion did that. Skyrim didn't.
For me, it mainly comes down to story and characters, be it the player character, companions, or the NPCs you interact with. If the story isn't there, it better be a good challenge or something that makes me feel part of the world. Dragon Age and Oblivion did that. The Assassin's Creed series does that for me. The newest Tomb Raider did that. Star Wars The Force Unleashed 1 and 2 did that. LEGO Stars Wars did that. The Witcher 1 (which I'm currently working my way through) is starting to do that for me. Call of Duty and Battlefield have done that for me. Freaking TOTAL WAR did that. A series that has virtually no story aside from history, but I felt like I was part of the world. Civilization didn't do that for me. Skyrim didn't do that for me.
The characters in DA, and all the games that "do it for me", seem real, like actual people, not just cut outs. BioWare excels at creating great characters that you can feel for. It's one reason I keep coming back. Skyrim, they felt lifeless, more like "Oh, a traveler". I didn't feel like I was going anywhere. The stories of BioWare also seem more cohesive as well.
Skyrim, a beautiful game that I'll give is an ambitious, even mesmerizing at the points I did enjoy, just didn't feel welcoming, for lack of a better word. I say welcoming not as in "Oh, come on in to my hut and have tea!" but more I could enjoy my time in that world. Tomb Raider barely interacted with anyone, but the world just felt right. I felt part of it, like there was something there I had to keep on my toes for. Dragon Age has (and hopefully will continue) to do that. Was DAO and DA2 as expansive as Skyrim? No, but the world felt, blah. Like nothing was going on.
I enjoyed the dark colors of Skyrim. I usually edit films to that sort of look. DA is just a totally different art style. The dragons in DA will take much longer to kill now. I think I took one out in DAO without mods in maybe 2 minutes.
Game controls, depends on how you're used to playing. I love DA's controls on my PC, they make sense. I'm slowly starting to accept The Witcher's controls. I love BF controls and have changed CoD to match. I love AC controls because they make sense. Skyrim's didn't for some reason, maybe it was the camera that threw me off, I don't know, but they felt clunky to me. The compass felt confusing and the abilities/trait menu just felt awkward. I get what they were doing, but it just felt like "Oh, look at this!" with no real substance. Execution in search of an idea, basically.
TLDR I have too much time on my hands to have replied to this
Yeah but it wont be as tough as a challenge, I don't know about you but I like hard bosses.
Have you ever played the DA games on Nightmare? The fights definitely take alot longer than what we've seen in the demo. It's reasonable to assume that the demo was probably played on Casual/Normal. Nothing's stopping you from getting DAI and playing it on Nightmare.
Have you ever played the DA games on Nightmare? The fights definitely take alot longer than what we've seen in the demo. It's reasonable to assume that the demo was probably played on Casual/Normal. Nothing's stopping you from getting DAI and playing it on Nightmare.
Yeah it seemed to be on easy and the characters were obviously over powered too.
Guest_Morrigan_*
Generic Characters? In a Bio Ware Game? COMPARED TO SKYRIM?!
Whatever you smoked, I don't want any of it.
And how did you get the Idea of the teenage targeted Audience? This Game can be expected to be the darkest DA Game yet and the other two weren't exactly happy-go-lucky Games either.
Is it the Color Palette? Does everything have to look bleak and greyish and brownish and dark for a Game to be Mature? Because the World actually is colorful, you know. That's more realistic than bleak.
Edit: Dark Souls? Rich Story? You could beat that game without any idea what the Hell is going on. Well, I did.
Yeah, I'm with you on this one. The game grapples with racism, religious intolerance, bigotry, social upheaval, religious and political conflicts ... there is a lot of meat to the story and it is not meant for the casual hack and slash RPG fans.
I love the color palette. I get sick of games that look like they took a dip in a mud bath. Bring on the color.
Yeah it seemed to be on easy and the characters were obviously over powered too.
I mean it's a demo afterall. No way the devs would let themselves lose when they're showcasing story and other things.
I believe they're referring to people calling them a troll because of their signature.
I'm not sure 'rich' is a good synonym for a highly detailed setting with a big codex. Richness doesn't imply density of information but evocativeness.
Just my personal opinion, but the evoking qualities of a story as a measure of "richness" could then be extrapolated into any game on the planet. I've seen feminist theories about Mario that'd make you think you were playing the manifesto of misogyny.
What's weird is Richness is usually a quality given to density, think of "Rich" foods. Or "Rich" people (Wealth Density).
I'd say the Dark Souls experience is Rich, but only because the story itself is intelligently minimalistic... is that a decent middle-ground?
You don't give me much to work with here so I'll try to make a case for what I dislike. Skyrim with a teenage audience isn't a good description of the game. Actually calling it Skyrim is wrong cause there is so much difference in narrative, interactivity, gameplay etc that it just doesn't make sense. Being "open world", which is still debatable, hardly allows for that comparison.
I disagree with your negative view of the characters as well. I think they are DA's strong point and pretty much the reason to play them. There are a few problems with character development, because some of them have lower quality development unless romanced, but I can overlook this easily for both DA games.
Now for the story and setting. I think it's pretty unimaginative compared to other games. A lot of people claim that DA deals with a lot of mature and controversial themes, but the conflict always feel contrived to me and this is true for many Bioware games, so controversy for the sake of it loses it's meaning in my opinion. I can summarize DAO as an obstacle run from A to B using a zero sum policy. It's always something bad followed by something good. There is minimal personal observation, exploration, understanding. Even the main objective, which is to use the treaties, is actually forgettable. I felt more like a professional errand boy rather than a person with authority. Request help, obvious problem, solve problem, get support, repeat 3 times. Now you have an army. Go to denerim to deal with loghain, same thing. Big problem, solve problem cause Anora got imprisoned for a reason I'm not really sure about yet. If it had to do more with the fact that we are outlaws, or the factions tried to go back at their word and betrayed us etc it would feel more organic.
I keep going back to Mask of the Betrayer to show the difference. In this game, the protagonist has to deal with his condition, and this takes him to all the crazy places. You want to go there because there is something to be learned. You want to bring the right person with you because he will help you navigate. You don't even know what you expect to find there, You just take it on faith. Skyrim does this, but on a much lower scale because it's pretty straight foward. There is no duality to his condition, just the promise of power, paid with the responsibility to save the world.
DA games never deal with the internal conflict of the protagonist. It always ends being about the others. We don't deal with what it is to be Warden, or a mage, or our origin stories. We just solve the world's problems. Even Hawke, where the game is supposed to be about his story, has that problem. After act 1 which is mostly about him, you just continue helping the same people you already helped. Reason? No reason. Arishok calls you to extend a courtesy cause you killed some mercenaries for gold...? I'm willing to bet that DAI won't focus on what it means to be touched by the fade, the internal conflict. They said that specializations will alter dialogue, but will they again expand on this? I doubt it. We will probably get "Oh you are a necromancer? Cool!". Or some variation.
Dark Souls has an obvious problem, it's way too minimalistic, and actually causes people to think that it's story sucks because they don't care too much. But it's very imaginative. It's a magical tale with a lot of intrigue and failure. DA stories are medieval setting with an obvious bad guy and mostly boring magic. I can only agree with the assessment that Dark Souls is richer.
For combat DA just falls behind imo. This is what happens when great ideas come second. Playing dark souls, you feel like an artist. It's a game where your ability to observe details makes all the difference in the world. Allows you to try something different. You feel that there is always a better way. You care about things like mechanics, muscle memory, spatial awareness. True mastery of the game is beautiful and it's evident if you watch some speedruns. DA is just modifiers and cheap tricks. Once you learn them, then it's an exercise in patience.
I actually think this will change in DAI. There is something about it. It feels like the game where you actually bother with coming up with a tactic instead of finding ways to become superman. Demo doesn't really show this, but I can see the need for more active abilities rather than stat boosters. Not every game has to test your mouse dexterity, but they certainly can try and test your ingenuity. I just hope they will bother and not just stay in the comfort zone, like "encounters are balanced for a mixed party". Cause what happens if a class turns out to be irrelevant, like rogue companions in DAO and warrior companions in DA2? Then the encounter is just not balanced and it will be open to exploits.
Yeah but it wont be as tough as a challenge, I don't know about you but I like hard bosses.
With pause&play and full-party control, I imagine Dark Souls wouldn't have been nearly as challenging.
With pause&play and full-party control, I imagine Dark Souls wouldn't have been nearly as challenging.
??? Pausing in Dark Souls wouldn't make any difference. And if you actually have to manage a full party, most of them will get oneshotted by the boss special attack. Dark Souls is an action combat game where you increase your stats to allow your character to use heavier weapons and that's pretty much it.
??? Pausing in Dark Souls wouldn't make any difference. And if you actually have to manage a full party, most of them will get oneshotted by the boss special attack. Dark Souls is an action combat game where you increase your stats to allow your character to use heavier weapons and that's pretty much it.
Are there not other characters in Dark Souls? Why doesn't the main character get one-shotted by that attack?
Because he avoids it, or for the smaller sized bosses he can block it with the shield if he has enough endurance. The bigger bosses, well lets say that you better dodge their attacks otherwise you die instantly. There are other characters who you can recruit to help you for certain bosses, but they usually don't do much, just tank some damage. Personally I don't use them.
Because he avoids it, or for the smaller sized bosses he can block it with the shield if he has enough endurance. The bigger bosses, well lets say that you better dodge their attacks otherwise you die instantly. There are other characters who you can recruit to help you for certain bosses, but they usually don't do much, just tank some damage. Personally I don't use them.
But with pause & play, they could all dodge those attacks. Pause & play allows you to control multiple characters simultaneously.
No you can't. You don't issue move commands. You control the character directly. Second most boss special attacks have very wide range and you have to run as fast as you can to be able to just get out of range. Some smaller bosses use more martial attacks, but the big ones can set the whole terrain on fire for example, and you have to find a safezone directly behind him and as far away as possible. It's perfectly possible that if you don't kite the boss well, you won't even have a safezone and you will die.
Think of it as an action game, lets say devil may cry, or god of war, prince of persia etc. That's the level of control you have for your main character. How can you control 2 of them together even with pause?
This threads on the road to lockdown town.
This threads on the road to lockdown town.
I had a pic up here too but I am assuming the mod removed it. But yeah...........
I sincerely hope DAI will be nothing like Skyrim. Got about half an hour in and quit. One-dimensional NPC's, and a weird compass system. I may be in a minority here, but I play games for the story and if it isn't big and enthralling then I'm not interested.
Retour en haut