357 réponses à ce sujet

[Jazzpha]

I preordered DAI because I knew I was going to buy it eventually anyway, and so I might as well get some cool extra swag in the bargain.

I really don't see the merits of comparing games within a genre to one another, mostly because the focuses of the games tend to be different in a way that renders comparisons skewed at best. For my part, I know I'll get at the very, very least 70 hours of enjoyment out of DAI, so I had no qualms dropping 70 bucks on a preorder.

I don't think the margin of error for whether or not the game is successful in the eyes of EA execs is going to rest in the hands of a potentially alienated fraction of the core fanbase, so I tend to just file away particularly apocalyptic doomsaying as empty sound and fury.

TL;DR thoughtful skepticism backed up by a clear argument and rational language? Good fodder for solid discussion. Overblown ranting that makes mountains out of molehills a month before the game comes out? Not so good.

[animedreamer]

Before Ostagar, there was (1) no crisis at the mage tower, (2) a stable king in Orzammar, (3) a Dalish clan unthreatened by werewolves, (4) a kind of incompetent Theirin ruling Ferelden alongside Anora, and (5) Arl Eamon raised Connor along with his wife Isolde.

 

By the end of DA:O, there was (1) no crisis at the mage tower, (2) a stable king in Orzammar who might have the anvil of the void and expand his people's lands, (3) a potentially dead Dalish clan or a cured werewolf clan, so that's a new thing; (4) a kind of incompetent Theiren ruling ruling alone and/or with Anora, or Anora ruling alone, and (5) Arl Eamon was alive, who either had a new daughter with Isolde or sent their kid off to the Circle. 

 

In either case, the changes were minor. We don't learn anything about the blight, and we don't really stop it - we just kill off an archdemon, which is the same stopgap it's been for centuries.

 

And for Flemeth, she's using you as a pawn regardless of whether or not you go along - and telling her off just means you're either consigning yourself or Alistair/Loghain to death. 

2.) Regardless of Ostagar, Bhelen had put his plans in motion, nothing changes because of Ostagar other than the Dwarf Noble possibly surviving the deep roads and becoming a Warden. 3.) The Werewolf threat was already around long before Ostagar, they were simply waiting to ambush Zathrian's clan specifically, and possibly any other Dalish clans that happened through that area. 4.) There was nothing incompetent about Cailan's rule, he was a well loved King, he may have been uninformed about many of the going ons in his lands but thats hardly his fault since he was rarely permitted to venture to certain areas unattended to see the truth for himself, the sounds of it you can tell he wasn't even aware of some of the injustices going on in his own city, or going on at court. Anora managed his lands and was a good administrator, and that's what he needed and thats what the people got. 5.) Eamon was poisoned before the events of Ostagar, by a agent of Loghain no less, a event that had severe psychological repercussions on Conner who understandably sought help or understand where ever he could, unfortunately it was in the arms of a Demon. Loghain had planned this long before the defeat at Ostagar, and undoubtedly didn't want Eamon there influencing Cailan or backing the young kings decisions. In fact if Eamon had been there with all his men things would have likely gone differently, as their would have been another advisor to help thwart Loghain and no doubt Renden Howes schemes. What surprised me is how few nobles gathered at Ostagar, more than half of the bannons apparently didn't join the fight until after the blight was in full swing. When you look at it that way it becomes obvious that Loghain was advising Cailan poorly, turning back Orlesian forces as well as the additional Wardens from Orlai, having most likely not asked or instructed the other nobles to send troops, and poisoning Eamon and keeping him out of the picture.

[Ianamus]

If it's a good game then it will sell well, it's as simple as that. 

[HTTP 404]

If it's a good game then it will sell well, it's as simple as that. 

 

people in marketing would disagree with you

[Dominus]

Am I the only one slightly worried?

Slight. There's always skepticism in my mind on upcoming games these days - it's generally easier to just toss out the expectations and choose to buy it or not.

A small worry is whether it'll feel like the changes are inspired by other games, or imitating them instead. I saw the healing changes, and I rather like them...though naturally people will have to play it to see how well it works for themselves.

Looks like it's gonna be gorgeous, high replay value, dark fantasy, it'll at least be one hell of a meal before digging into the rest. Not much to worry about on my end.

[TheLittleTpot]

I love how most of the criticism aimed at what we know so far about DA:I basically boils down to "It's not a carbon copy of DA:O! Rhaaah!" 

 

Seriously, I loved DA:O but it was far, FAR from a perfect game. If they just turned DA:I into DA:O with improved graphics, that wouldn't automatically make it good.

[RedWulfi]

Opinion: Ignore everyone else and wait to try the game yourself.

 

A lot of people nit pick.

[Messi Kossmann]

If you not want to see negativity, don't read ANY forum. Yes, it's frustrating, but things is this way and you cant change it.

[Master Race]

I also have been worried for a while. After Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 3 ending and Starwars the old republic launch Bioware just has a bad record recently and really needs Dragon Age Inquisition to be a hit and gain some momentum in my opinion.

 

A lot of this games success will ride on first impressions. The initial reviews from big names...word of mouth. I'm proof of someone who watched reviews/heard news about Dragon Age 2 and to this day i have not bought it or played it though i recently went to youtube and watch a let's play for the story.

 

It does not matter how good the game is if it is not advertised/received well by critics because sales are everything.

[Almostfaceman]

It can't just be me, can it? Literally everywhere I look outside of here, I see mostly negativity floating around this game. It seems like DA2 and ME3 have alienated so many people, that I'm starting to think the first-day numbers for release are going to be...less than substantial. Which would be bad for people like me who actually still enjoyed the past games and will in all likelihood enjoy this one. 

 

Am I the only one slightly worried? 

 

There's a lot to shoulder for everyone when it comes to worries, I say why add one that you have no control over? 

 

I wasn't going to buy DA:I, because of ME3. The more I looked at the game, however, the more I became convinced that Bioware is trying really hard to earn back my business. 

 

That's all I've been able to really worry about. They've sold me on this game. I don't have the time or inclination to worry about whether someone else will like it or not. I don't need someone else's approval to vindicate my choice about this game. 

 

It's going to be your hours you invest or not invest in this game. I've read positive and negative about many a product and usually I still have to try something out for myself to decide. DA2 was not as bad as the forums relate, DA:O was not as good, but it wasn't terrible either. ME3 was great and far more disappointing that I could have believed. They all had to be my experience, not this forum's or anyone else's. 

[FrontlinerDelta]

Some say "bloat." Others say "choice."

 

And those people are the ones who ruined the Battlefield franchise with their "choices" that are so numerous they are barely distinguishable and nearly impossible to actually balance. 

[Nyaore]

This will honestly be my last pre-purchased game from Bioware if something akin to the ending fiasco from ME3 or the cut content of DA2 happens once more. Not to say I won't buy another Bioware product, as they are my favorite company irregardless, but that they'd have exhausted all of my goodwill to take them at their word to produce a good product. However, I'm cautiously optimistic for this release so who knows?

[Star fury]

I also have been worried for a while. After Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 3 ending and Starwars the old republic launch Bioware just has a bad record recently and really needs Dragon Age Inquisition to be a hit and gain some momentum in my opinion.

 

A lot of this games success will ride on first impressions. The initial reviews from big names...word of mouth. I'm proof of someone who watched reviews/heard news about Dragon Age 2 and to this day i have not bought it or played it though i recently went to youtube and watch a let's play for the story.

 

It does not matter how good the game is if it is not advertised/received well by critics because sales are everything.

 

Don't worry, DAI will get high scores from gaming bloggers like IGN, Kotaku, Eurogamer irrespective of game's quality, it doesn't matter if DAI turns out good or bad.

[Bekkael]

I'm not worried at all, I think DAI will be a wonderful game and give me many pleasant hours of gaming escapism.

 

Maybe I'm different from many, but I look at each new game separate from others in the franchise and judge it on its own merits. I loved DAO, it was a really good hero story and had great characters. I loved DA2 as well. It was a unique and interesting story and I liked the framed narrative, as well as lots of awesome characters again. I have similar feelings about the Mass Effect franchise; there were things I liked and disliked about each of the 3 games. You take the good, you take the bad....

 

I can't speak for others, nor do I wish to, but I really think DAI will be a great game with more things that I will like than dislike because that has been the case with every BioWare game I have ever played going back to Jade Empire. Bring on November 18th.

[Ieldra]

I wasn't going to buy DA:I, because of ME3. The more I looked at the game, however, the more I became convinced that Bioware is trying really hard to earn back my business. 

I wouldn't let a failed game make me miss on something potentially good in a different series, but I agree that Bioware's vision for DAI appears to have quite a bit of what I'd been missing in the previous titles. This is the best pre-release impression I've ever had of a Bioware game, and the way they come here and explain things, that's simply great. 

[Paul E Dangerously]

1) Not true. For example, Artificer's tree has a passive with bonus to willpower. 

2) You just said that DA2 has ~twice as many daggers as DA:O, and then you say that you have more in DA:O? And besides, while you could theoretically use two handed swords as a rogue... what was the point? You didn't have any talents for them, and had to fullfill the strength requirement anyway. Also, what do you mean by "10 times more"? In Origins you had two-handed weapons, one-handed weapons, daggers, bows and crossbows. Plus staves, but those were mage only. 

3) Well, mages aren't supposed to wear plate. Only broken Arcane Warrior class made it happen in Origins. It was a mistake. Besides, I'm pretty sure that apart from crafting, you can find a ton of items. It was stated many times, that crafting just enables you to customize items, but it isn't obligatory.

4) Ekhm... what? Where was it stated, that boots or gloves are only availible through crafting?

5) No, you didn't. Apart from playing a mage, you could get all talents relevant to your class/spec by the end of the game. All Warrior+all sword&shield+both specializations for a warrior for example. 

6) While there might be less, I'll take abilities that make real difference in combat, over a lot of weak (most two-handed active talents) or even downright useless (all archery talents apart from Scattershot & maybe Slaying Arrow) talents from DA:O. And besides that, Warriors and Rogues actually have a similar number of talents in DA2, that they had in DA:O - but much more varied. Only mages lost - but quite rightly so. Many of mage talents were absolutely overpowered in DA:O, and a sheer number of spells made Mage a class with which you can quite easily solo the game on Nightmare. 

 

1) One whole willpower bonus? Wow! So glad I can't control my own gains.

2) Wrong. Due to the tier system in DAO (which has 9, because that DA2 list counts DLC, as well) you have many more than the 28. That's without taking any tier upgrades into account.

3) Wrong again. If you pump STR in DAO, your mage can wear armor. Is it optimal? No. But you can do it. It's not class-locked.

4) Inventory slots. You only have helmet and armor. Go look at the videos.

 

I don't really like being negative. I'll defend DA2 and ME3 in some aspects, even if one was half-finished and rushed out the door held together by twistees and duct tape, and the other dropped the ball more often than a running back with butterfingers.

 

Everything until a few months ago about this game was really pretty damned good. Races were back. Areas are more expansive. Crafting might even be good (even if I've seen it ruin game after game).

 

And then?

 

Blam. Shoehorned multiplayer, combat designed alongside multiplayer, the ability restrictions, the armor restrictions, the weapon restrictions, armor slot limits, and so on. It's like they didn't learn anything from DA2 but "recycled areas are bad". Hell, even ME3 fixed most of this - because Bioware did much the same thing in ME2. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect them to carry over one of DAO's strengths, which was the sheer flexibility of character builds. My melee rogue from weapons and attributes alone had at least eight different character builds. In DA2/DAI, it's one. Daggers. It's symptomatic of an elimination of player choice, and I can only see that as a bad thing.

[Scerene]

you two are still yapping and filling out the pages with that crap? At any rate there is no point in worrying about things we cant control, All we have infront of us is the release of DAI atm.Im also kind of tired of people listing DAO as the holy grail of what a rpg is. It is a wonderful game for sure, and the toolset is an amazing asset, but there are so many aspects of the game that were really sluggish and clumsy. I dont understand for example how people can think the combat in DAO is good enough to be held up as a standard that future titles should follow, i mean seriously. Your characters spent more time awkwardly shuffling around oneanother like a bunch of gorillas on crack than they did swinging a weapon. It was slow, clunky and looked awful.  ooh the gorilla like movements...It looked even more unsettling with female chars, especially with those weird stringy noodle like arms.

[The Elder King]

Everything until a few months ago about this game was really pretty damned good. Races were back. Areas are more expansive. Crafting might even be good (even if I've seen it ruin game after game).

And then?

Blam. Shoehorned multiplayer, combat designed alongside multiplayer, the ability restrictions, the armor restrictions, the weapon restrictions, armor slot limits, and so on. It's like they didn't learn anything from DA2 but "recycled areas are bad". Hell, even ME3 fixed most of this - because Bioware did much the same thing in ME2. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect them to carry over one of DAO's strengths, which was the sheer flexibility of character builds. My melee rogue from weapons and attributes alone had at least eight different character builds. In DA2/DAI, it's one. Daggers. It's symptomatic of an elimination of player choice, and I can only see that as a bad thing.

They actually confirmed the weapon restriction last year at PAX. They just didn't say how many weapon types every class will have (expect for mages: staff). Not sure about armour: They did say mages can wear heavier ones through crafting, but I don't recall when if was.

[HydroFlame20]

A game can have 99% positive and 1% negative and people will latch unto that 1% like a leech and drain the negativity out of that 1% until their delusions tell them that this 1% negative is actually a game breaking atrocity that will doom the game.
They will then take to the forums and explode, raining poisonous vile goo all over the forums and swear the game will fail on their mother's life.
Then on launch, casually walk over to the store and still buy the game. Not because they wanted to buy it, but because they then have more information on the game to whine on the forums about.
I swear these people DO seem to exist

Yes I have seen them and its just sad really kinda pathetic to.

[SofaJockey]

This will honestly be my last pre-purchased game from Bioware if something akin to the ending fiasco from ME3 or the cut content of DA2 happens once more. ...

 

Huh?

I wasn't aware that DA2 had more content cut than any other game?

DAI had content cut as well, that's just how normal game development works.

[Lyrandori]

To be honest, no, I am not worried.

 

Mostly because - and not wanting to sound like a douche towards BioWare - it is going to be excessively difficult to do worst than either Dragon Age 2 or Mass Effect 3 (especially Mass Effect 3, I mean think about it, they'd have to go all their way and give everything they can on purpose to do worse than either of those). Additionally, Dragon Age: Inquisition's team is NOT ME3's. Not to mention that they disposed of more time to work on DA:I (than either DA2 or ME3, especially much more time than they had for DA2, and something like an extra year compared to ME3) and probably more budget as well (not sure about the budget of course but definitely had more time). And, so far, from the revealed information and the media (videos, mostly) that I've seen of DA:I it actually looks good, whereas when I first saw footage of ME3's demo in action I was genuinely very worried right from the start even before I got to play it (just by watching the demo footage).

 

I have complete confidence that this time around they've done it right, they're back at it full swing like they were for Origins.

[MissOuJ]

I'm not too worried: too much hype would just mean too high expectations, and sometimes low expectations are a good thing.

 

Look at SoM: I didn't see too many people get all that exited when it was shown around in E3 and PAX (if memory serves) - people were kinda "Ehh, looks like Assassin's Creed meets LotR. Also: franchise game. Will probably be average at best. I'll pass."

 

And when it actually came out everybody went "Guys guys this is actually awesome let me tell you about the rivalry system and this epic tale about Talion and The Random Orc who got a lucky shot in, got promoted and became a commander and their epic final fight in the rain!"

 

Which is awesome: nobody expected it to actually be good and because of this they ended up enjoying its best parts instead becoming resentful the game wasn't as awesome as they'd hoped. People ended up being happily surprised rather than disapointed that it didn't meet their expectations. Hype can backfire spectacularly, and the lack of hype and actually be an advantage.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

I love how most of the criticism aimed at what we know so far about DA:I basically boils down to "It's not a carbon copy of DA:O! Rhaaah!" 
 
Seriously, I loved DA:O but it was far, FAR from a perfect game. If they just turned DA:I into DA:O with improved graphics, that wouldn't automatically make it good.

Thats a good example of how Bioware can't win with some so called "fans", the same people would likely criticise BW for not being original enough if Inquisition had been exactly like Origins, so would be criticism & hate either way

[Almostfaceman]

Thats a good example of how Bioware can't win with some so called "fans", the same people would likely criticise BW for not being original enough if Inquisition had been exactly like Origins, so would be criticism & hate either way

 

Customer service is always a tough endeavour. Just comes with the territory in any business. 

 

What I think a lot of folks may be missing is telemetry. I say "may" because I have no hard evidence, BUT, both DA:O and DA2 hook up to the internet and it's very possible that data taken from both games has guided the dev team in this change. Where a lot of people cry about "less choice" it may be indicated by telemetry that folks really only use a handful of powers (spells, talents) over and over again and it may be a wise use of resources (which are always limited) to whittle down choice in one area and expand it in other areas that customers seem to be more interested in. They already know they can't please everyone, it would behoove them to use whatever data they have to design a game that pleases most of their customers.

 

Games really are an experiment. It's evident in the evolution in each series I've played, Bioware to Bethesda. There is no hard science to this, it's always a minor miracle they pull these things off. That's no excuse for poor games or bad customer service, it's just a fact I take into consideration when evaluating games. 

[cronshaw]

It can't just be me, can it? Literally everywhere I look outside of here, I see mostly negativity floating around this game. It seems like DA2 and ME3 have alienated so many people, that I'm starting to think the first-day numbers for release are going to be...less than substantial. Which would be bad for people like me who actually still enjoyed the past games and will in all likelihood enjoy this one. 

 

Am I the only one slightly worried? 

 

All I know is that this site is the absolute worst place in the world to come for a measured perspective on BioWare games.