534 réponses à ce sujet

[Lennard Testarossa]

From an objective standpoint the game plays like a pile of dung compared to a lot of rpgs with far better gameplay, both modern and old.

 

Which rpgs with 'far better gameplay' are you talking about, exactly?

[wcholcombe]

Thats fine for you, what about those who like playing a healer?

Your in the same boat as those of us who like playing a warrior with a bow and arrow I guess.  Deal with it and move on.

[azarhal]

 

What kinda Annoys me is that even on the so posed 50 hour main story line it's looking like we are gonna have to de doing alot of side quest grinding to gain enough power to progress the main plot. (Like in MMO's)

 

It looks more like BioWare standard narrative structure to me: do X, Y and Z to unlock the next step in the storyline. They just gave the player more choices in term of X, Y and Z.

 

Now that I think of it, the game beginning is quite close to BG2 where you have to find 20k gold (15k) before you can continue the storyline.

[wcholcombe]

I've been playing all of them as well. Been gaming since I can remember. Probably about 23 years. DAO to me still stands as one of the best RPGS even best games out there. It has such depth  with a player and gives such great immersion. The combat is kinda dull and does show its age. But I prefer that to all the flash and silly acrobatics in DA2/DAI.  I love flash, but in games where it belongs. It just doesnt fit in a DA game. At least not for rogues and warriors so much. 

 

Its graphics are not the best, never were. But I have never really cared too much for them. Its a very low priority for me. Even so, the artstyle I feel is the best from the 3 so far. At least in terms of characters and whatnot.

 

Really I could see the passion in DAO from a team of people who truly believed in a CRPG.  in DAI, I am not seeing it much. In certain areas sure, but the open world, graphics, and perhaps most of all, Multiplayer, took away from character custimization depth.

Now I enjoyed DAO.  I did, a lot.  However, people tend to make it greater then it was.  It was a great game and I highly enjoyed it, but it wasn't a Fallout 1 or 2 or similar type RPG that offered a lot of choice and impacts to the story.  It was a game on rails story wise, there was no way to truly alter the direction of the game or how it would end up. you could alter the window dressing of who was sitting on the throne or who got killed in the tower and who didn't but there really wasn't a lot of choice or options to the game.  In FO you could join the bad guy at the end of the game if you wanted to, now in DAO that wouldn't have worked, but a good possibility might have been you allying with Uldred and his crew.  I assure you they would have been much more help against darkspawn then the mages or templars were. Not saying I would have done it, but it would have been a nice option, instead we get the largely meaningless(in DAO) option of letting the desire demon in connor live or not.

 

DAO was a a good even great game, but to act like it had no flaws or that its quest or story system was so much better then what we have seen of DAI is humurous.

 

The sidequests in DAI at least appear to have a reason for them---Helping/saving refugees you want to support the inquisition.

 

Whereas the mage/chantry quests were just oh I need to save the world from darkspawn but let me go off and do this meaningless quest right now for the 50 silvers it will pay me.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

[Meltemph]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

You say this, like what you are saying is objective truth. DAO's combat had tons of room for improvement, DA2 had much more enjoyable combat to me, despite the limitations. That isnt "turning" on DAO, it is being straightforward. 

[wcholcombe]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

Most would argue "gameplay" was DAOs biggest weakness.  Why do people care so much about attributes, it has been proven they had a minimal impact on anything in DAO or DA2, the illusion of choice is not the same as choice. 

 

Comments I have read on Tactics seem to say they work well, and seem much easier to use and actually get what you wanted to happen then previous games.

 

8 abilities bothers me less then no healing. It is a design decision built around combat balancing. If combat can become truly tactical and not a heal fest avoiding one hit kills, I welcome it.

[Paul E Dangerously]

You say this, like what you are saying is objective truth. DAO's combat had tons of room for improvement, DA2 had much more enjoyable combat to me, despite the limitations. That isnt "turning" on DAO, it is being straightforward. 

 

Yes, but the encounter design blew. There's no denying that. If you'd like to search my post history, I think you'll find at least twenty instances where I refer to DAO combat as "shuffle, shuffle, whack". I have never claimed it is perfect.

 

I have claimed that it has a more robust character build system that allows for far more variable builds than either of the successive games, however.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

 

Thing is, this stuff isn't objective in the least. 

 

I founds DA2 better gameplay wise (NOT encounter design wise, that was atrocious) because I had more than 1 skill path that was viable. In Origins, you were an archer, you took archer talents. You were a DW, you took DW talents. You were SnS warrior, you took SnS talents, etc. Specialization talents were the only leeway you had and most of them sucked. DA2 introduced skill trees that were independant of the weapon you used, allowing for stuff like CC focused archer rogues or tank-damage hybrid SnS warriors, burst damage dagger assassins or buff and auto-attack focused two-handed warriors. That's already far more actual options that were offered to non-mage classes in Origins, and non-standard builds in DA2 might be fewer than the possibilities in Origins but were far more viable.

 

I do think we should have more weapon choices. I'd like crossbows for warriors and single weapon, duelist style, for rogues. But the DA2-DA:I system is better if you ask me. We also actually have some amount of choice within weapon classes in Inquisition, warriors can choose mauls over swords/axes which do more damage to single targets, and rogues can get punching daggers that do more single-target damage than slashing daggers. That's better than in Origins, where the only difference was that maces had less damage than swords and more armor penetration which was actually a worthless stat.

[Angloassassin]

Thats fine for you, what about those who like playing a healer?

 

*No One* likes playing as a healer... /sarcasm.

 

I typically had one mandatory healer in my party - Anders, Wynne, or if I didn't want to Double-Mage, I'd make myself a healer. Or better yet, I'd just make/buy 1000+ Health poltices and never worry about it again.

 

I like the approach they are taking here (Not to say  mine is the only opinion that matters, people who liked standard healing are alright in my book), but... And this is a big, jiggly butt. 

 

The 'healing' in this game isn't about fixing damage that's already happened. But preventing said damaging from happening in the first place. Which is essentially the same concept - just two different methods. 

[Meltemph]

Yes, but the encounter design blew. There's no denying that. If you'd like to search my post history, I think you'll find at least twenty instances where I refer to DAO combat as "shuffle, shuffle, whack". I have never claimed it is perfect.

 

I have claimed that it has a more robust character build system that allows for far more variable builds than either of the successive games, however.

Outside of "thug" encounter design inside the city, I didnt find the designs to be much different then DAO. I've never been a fan of DAO or DA2's encounter design though if I'm being honest, either they were sitting in a random spot just waiting for you, or they would come from in accessible spots in the map(both did this in regularity). Hopefully they have improved on the things I didnt like in both DAO and DA2, because I dont completely disagree with you in terms of issues with DA2, I just had more issues with DAO's combat, but I admit both had room for improvement.

[Face of Evil]

What kinda Annoys me is that even on the so posed 50 hour main story line it's looking like we are gonna have to de doing a lot of side quest grinding to gain enough power to progress the main plot. (Like in MMO's)

 

Not really, according to this video. Supposedly the requirements to advance to the next point in the main storyline are relatively low.

 

[wcholcombe]

Not really, according to this video. Supposedly the requirements to advance to the next point in the main storyline are relatively low.

 

Yeah, if they wanted to the previewers could go to Val Royuex like 15 minutes into the game. The deal is that they new the preview ended when you went to VR so no one did.

 

Power is for a lot of things other then just the main quest stuff as well.  The 60 minute play through showed a lot of quests where you could use power if you wished to. I don't think he ever did, but it showed a lot of optional use for it.

[Nohvarr]

When I went back and rewatched 'Thundercats" I realized that may enjoyment of the show had more to do with the rocking intro than anything that occured in the series proper. The same goes for the book "Dune" which was the 1st  science fiction novel I ever read. I still love them....but I understand that neither one is the pinnacle of their field.

[Morroian]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

 

This is spot on, they've taken on board some criticism of DA2 but then made gameplay changes to the core part of the game making that aspect worse than DA2 and bringing it closer to being a shooter.  

[Kierro Ren]

Ghost - Sam Wheat: "Molly, the "New York Times" is some frustrated little critic with pimples on his ass who flunked out of art school. Who cares what they think."

 

Critics = Person with no real life, and just lives to b-tch. *cough* Carver *cough*

 

Also, aside from Spirit Healer, you only had 1 regular heal spell. Looks like we still get 1 regular heal, what's the problem?

[wcholcombe]

This is spot on, they've taken on board some criticism of DA2 but then made gameplay changes to the core part of the game making that aspect worse than DA2 and bringing it closer to being a shooter.  

Umm what?  Ok, please explain to me how on earth they have made DAI closer to being a shooter? I mean it this is going to take some explaining.

[N7 Spectre525]

Which rpgs with 'far better gameplay' are you talking about, exactly?

Dragons Dogma?

[wcholcombe]

Ye Gods, not even 4chan turned on Origins like this thread has.

 

In a purely gameplay sense, DA2 is weaker than Origins, and theoretically DAI is weaker than Origins as well.

 

The thing is, DAI's attempted to patch in some of the holes Bioware hacked out of the body for DA2 with putty (read: crafting system) and hope nobody really notices. All the goofy restrictions are still in place, the weapon choices are gimped, you can no longer choose your own attribute gains (outside of the supposedly optional crafting system and a handful of passives), the active ability choice is limited to eight, and the tactics are apparently barebones at best.

 

Now, I like DA2 for what it's worth. So many of the changes it made were unnecessary (read: weapon restrictions, armor restrictions) but the changes to the class trees themselves did improve class builds a bit, but the underlying foundation could never, ever change.

 

Take my rogue in DAO. The trees aren't as complex, but I can use four different melee weapons not including the three melee weapons that are auto-attack only. That combined with armor choice and mid-battle weapon switch give me a lot of options.

 

Now in DA2, I can be a melee rogue, but I only get one weapon choice. No matter what other trees I pick, it will only ever be one weapon choice. Shadow/Assassin? Daggers. Subterfuge/Sabotage? Daggers. Etc, etc, etc. I am literally incapable of getting out of the box.

 

I won't deny that DAI's added a lot from DA2, but they not only haven't strengthened the underlying foundation, they've actively weakened it more. The old "a mile wide but an inch deep" adage may very well apply.

Also, there was a lot of criticism to how limited your choices and actions were in DAO back on the BSN.  A lot of the Baldurs Gate players at the time talked about DAO after it came out like you are currently talking about DAI.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Outside of "thug" encounter design inside the city, I didnt find the designs to be much different then DAO. I've never been a fan of DAO or DA2's encounter design though if I'm being honest, either they were sitting in a random spot just waiting for you, or they would come from in accessible spots in the map(both did this in regularity). Hopefully they have improved on the things I didnt like in both DAO and DA2, because I dont completely disagree with you in terms of issues with DA2, I just had more issues with DAO's combat, but I admit both had room for improvement.

 

I had problems with DAO, yes, I'll point at things like the OHKO points in the Deep Roads where the Darkspawn Emissaries can hit you with a stun and finish you off within seconds. it's just that the foundation is so much stronger I could deal with it.

 

I had a lot less freedom in DA2 to act in so many respects. The ability trees were better, but everything else took ten steps backwards.

 

It also seems like they're almost embarrassed of Origins in a lot of ways, and are deliberately distancing themselves from it because of the reaction to DA2.

[DLaren]

So this thread has turned into "lets tear down Origins to prop-up Inquisition"...yikes.

 

Origins is one of the most heralded games of the last decade and you people are dragging it through the mud in defense of a game that is a complete question-mark at this point.

 

Embarrassing.

[Meltemph]

Umm what?  Ok, please explain to me how on earth they have made DAI closer to being a shooter? I mean it this is going to take some explaining.

As a huge fan of shooters, comments like the one you quoted is mind mindbogglingly foolish, I see no similarities at all. It makes me wonder if some people ever even play shooters, when the compare them to things.

[Nohvarr]

So this thread has turned into "lets tear down Origins to prop-up Inquisition"...yikes.

 

Origins is one of the most heralded games of the last decade and you people are dragging it through the mud in defense of a game that is a complete question-mark at this point.

 

Embarrassing.

So pointing out that not everyone loved Origins combat is dragging it through the mud? Who's getting defensive now?

[Angloassassin]

Dragons Dogma?

 

Oddly enough, Dragon's Dogma has been my filler for DA:I - that wait...