104 réponses à ce sujet

[Coyote X Starrk]

I really don't like this kind of attitude and mentality. 

 

I believe good mechanics, good gameplay, and good story elements can be addressed and assessed from RPGs. And what makes them good and what makes them bad. I can do so if you like, in a completely logical way. It will be a giant post, but it will make a point.

 

No problem. Just save yourself the time. it would still be what YOU consider to be advantageous in a RPG. Another person might have a completely different view on what their perfect RPG might be. Its a highly subjective thing, which is the point I was trying to make originally. 

 

What is a "Great RPG" for one person might not be for another person. 

 

As I said. We can simply agree to disagree. 

[Enesia]

No problem. Just save yourself the time. 

 

As I said. We can simply agree to disagree. 

 

And it's because of that type of response, we'll never get good RPGs again. 

[Coyote X Starrk]

And it's because of that type of response, we'll never get good RPGs again. 

 

No offense, but its because of that type of attitude that make people like me walk away from a discussion. 

 

Its obvious you have no interest in a meaningful discussion about what makes a good RPG. You simply want to impose what you consider to be a good RPG regardless of what anyone has to say in return. 

 

Video games are all based on opinion. Invariably no 2 people will have the exact same taste in all things. What makes a game good to me and what makes a game good to you can be completely different. Yes people can agree that games are good, but 99% of the time they will not have the same reasons on why its good. So in the end its all based on the personal taste and perspective of the person holding the controller or controlling the mouse. 

 

There is a long and consistant list of traits that can be agreed on when it comes to what makes up what one would consider an RPG, but every person will apply a different level importance to each trait. Therefore there is no single "Great RPG" blueprint that can be made.

 

You can only hope to come close to keeping as many people happy as you can and appeal to your majority audience. Now with that being said I am walking away. 

[ZipZap2000]

I got my mount and haven't left the hinterlands once yet just enjoying too much. I genuinely feel like i'm off on an adventure and I've only really completed a couple of mission after the prologue. Once I got my mount I was off in all directions doing everything I could find.

[KaiserShep]

And it's because of that type of response, we'll never get good RPGs again. 

Shenanigans, I say.

[Enesia]

No offense, but its because of that type of attitude that make people like me walk away from a discussion. 

 

Its obvious you have no interest in a meaningful discussion about what makes a good RPG. You simply want to impose what you consider to be a good RPG regardless of what anyone has to say in return. 

 

Video games are all based on opinion. Invariably no 2 people will have the exact same taste in all things. What makes a game good to me and what makes a game good to you can be completely different. Yes people can agree that games are good, but 99% of the time they will not have the same reasons on why its good. So in the end its all based on the personal taste and perspective of the person holding the controller or controlling the mouse. 

 

There is a long and consistant list of traits that can be agreed on when it comes to what makes up what one would consider an RPG, but every person will apply a different level importance to each trait. Therefore there is no single "Great RPG" blueprint that can be made.

 

You can only hope to come close to keeping as many people happy as you can and appeal to your majority audience. Now with that being said I am walking away. 

 

The majority of the audience was not the people who played DA2 first or only played DA2, it started with the people who played DAO, and those are the people they should have tried to keep close to them. 

 

Beside that you're right its 5:49am in the morning and I'm dead tired. So I am only writing half shelled responses.

 

All though you get tired of explaining your position to people after a while. It's this way on the Bethsoft forums as well. Me and several members who dislike Skyrim have explained logically without any insults or name calling involved, what makes Skyrim a bad game. 

 

It will never get through to the developers. They have new fans now.And the older fans are left to the side to waste away.

[DigitalMaster37]

I think the open world feels perfect. If you wanted a game that was just easy and you get all rewards for no work, then this is clearly not the game for that. The quest in my opinion make the game feel alive in so many ways. I love it!

 

It adds to the adventure

[AlanC9]

All though you get tired of explaining your position to people after a while. It's this way on the Bethsoft forums as well. Me and several members who dislike Skyrim have explained logically without any insults or name calling involved, what makes Skyrim a bad game.

It will never get through to the developers. They have new fans now.And the older fans are left to the side to waste away.

Sure. Whatever you personally think of Skyrim -- I think it was worth every bit of the $5 I paid for it -- it's hard to imagine that the TES guys are going to turn away from the approach now.

Not sure where you were going with the DA:O/DA2 point. It's not the DA2 fans who wanted an open world; anyone who really likes that wouldn't have liked DA2 in the first place.

[CronoDragoon]

And it's because of that type of response, we'll never get good RPGs again. 

 

I seem to be playing an excellent one right now.

[FrontlinerDelta]

I seem to be playing an excellent one right now.

 

Yes, agreed. I can't put it down. 

[House Lannister]

DA2 too small and nothing to do. DA:I too big and too much stuff to do.

Bioware can't win it seems.

[karushna5]

The majority of the audience was not the people who played DA2 first or only played DA2, it started with the people who played DAO, and those are the people they should have tried to keep close to them. 

 

Beside that you're right its 5:49am in the morning and I'm dead tired. So I am only writing half shelled responses.

 

All though you get tired of explaining your position to people after a while. It's this way on the Bethsoft forums as well. Me and several members who dislike Skyrim have explained logically without any insults or name calling involved, what makes Skyrim a bad game. 

 

It will never get through to the developers. They have new fans now.And the older fans are left to the side to waste away.

 

I started with DA:O, I found Skyrim boring, but I always recognized it is because I dislike open worlds. It is huge for a reason. It was loved for a reason. I have friends I like to call "super gamers" who practically manage to make playing games into a living who loved Skyrim and called it the ultimate RPG experiance. Me? it was boring with little character and less story and each time I try to play I got bored. I don't like wandering open spaces to "get to the good parts", all the mobs are boring and add nothing other than combat. Picking stuff up to make the perfect sword, because Smithing is a skill you need to tirelessly and endlessly do to ever be good at it. It sounds like a game someone specifically made for me to hate, but I mean people love it. Skyrim taught me open world bores me to tears. So I avoid open world. Some people it is the ultimate experiance so they want more. Tastes change over time and it often swings back and forth.

 

I think Inquisition is getting a lot of mixed reviews with some of us because we recognize it is a good game but unlike any experiance we buy Bioware for. As i think someone on here said, no one buys Bioware for its combat, we buy for the story. I think for many of us, we still enjoy the story but are confused because the experiance changed and a lot was added that we have no intrest in.

[Munktor]

Maybe i'm out of touch with today's gamer, but I find this highly enjoyable this time around.

 

A) Everything is right there on the map for you

There is MORE than what you need to do, so if you get bored of it, you can ignore it

C) The real joy for me in RPG's is leveling chars and progressing their builds

 

I feel this system allows for all of the above and more.  When I want story, I do a main mission.  When I want new items/crafting stuffs I wander.  When I want to gain more understanding of my companions, I chat them up.  Never do I feel forced to do anything and I always feel I can do whatever I wish.

 

As for enemies not scaling.  THANK GOD.  How boring is it in an RPG to always feel like "I got this".  I hate that.  I love feeling like somethings are out of my league and i'll need to go back there.

 

If people find the side-quests boring, just do rifts and campsites and you'll acquire the power points you need to advance the story.  They're nothing more than fast travel points really end of the day.

 

*shrug*

 

Just my 2 cents.

[LS2GTO2006]

While I am enjoying the game for the most part. I am roughly 10-12 hours into the game and the only "exploration zone" I have been in is the Hinterlands. I like the story, exploring, but honestly the quest design so far is some what lacking. The lore and overall background makes sense for some of the fetch quests, but there are just so many that is does feel a bit tedious. I have heard it opens up a bit farther into the game and I'll stay with it for the story, but I just wish there was a bit more variety in the quests up to this point.

I have played and liked many open world games, including Skyrim. I also notice that Skyrim has some huge faults, no story and boring tedious quests but I feel like some of the Hinterland quests are just as bad... Like I said most have interesting lore and story reasons for them, but most of that just masks the FedEx natural of the quests.

[Enesia]

I started with DA:O, I found Skyrim boring, but I always recognized it is because I dislike open worlds. It is huge for a reason. It was loved for a reason. I have friends I like to call "super gamers" who practically manage to make playing games into a living who loved Skyrim and called it the ultimate RPG experiance. Me? it was boring with little character and less story and each time I try to play I got bored. I don't like wandering open spaces to "get to the good parts", all the mobs are boring and add nothing other than combat. Picking stuff up to make the perfect sword, because Smithing is a skill you need to tirelessly and endlessly do to ever be good at it. It sounds like a game someone specifically made for me to hate, but I mean people love it. Skyrim taught me open world bores me to tears. So I avoid open world. Some people it is the ultimate experiance so they want more. Tastes change over time and it often swings back and forth.

 

I think Inquisition is getting a lot of mixed reviews with some of us because we recognize it is a good game but unlike any experiance we buy Bioware for. As i think someone on here said, no one buys Bioware for its combat, we buy for the story. I think for many of us, we still enjoy the story but are confused because the experiance changed and a lot was added that we have no intrest in.

 

And I absolutely disagree with this notion. It's not 5:48am in the morning so I am not tired.

 

I will use Oblivion and Skyrim as an example, for my position. I like Open World games and I have seen them done well. Fallout New Vegas and Oblivion are perfect examples of always having something to do and always having an interesting quest tied to something.

 

Skyrim and DAI are very much alike in a big, vast world, with nothing to do other than simplistic quest with no narrative or story.

 

In Oblivion despite its open world, every little nook and corner had a story involved. The very dungeon you ever delve into when you get as a prisoner has a quest tied to it, when you first play the game you didn't know this. So, when you sold that statue and someone wanted to talk to you it was a general surprise.

 

In Fallout New Vegas it was always the same thing. Every little nook and corner had a story involved with the NPCs giving out th quest and with the world it was involved in.

 

Open Worlds can be good and a fun experience.

 

If they are given directive. And narration. 

 

Fetch quest are not direction and not narration.

[DooomCookie]

That's your opinion, but it's definitely against the grain.  Bioware have been consistently praised for creating not only an open world, but one that is filled with stuff.  Forcing you to play it between story is gating and a necessity of game mechanics (otherwise you can finish the game having barely started your character arc and the pacing feels all wrong.)

[Father_Jerusalem]

With regards to the War Table and timed missions, I just wanted to add that after finding several landmarks in the Hinterlands, I opened up an Operation that took 21 hours to complete. It did, however, reward me with a fairly nice purple quality staff at the end, so...

[Father_Jerusalem]

The majority of the audience was not the people who played DA2 first or only played DA2, it started with the people who played DAO, and those are the people they should have tried to keep close to them. 

 

Beside that you're right its 5:49am in the morning and I'm dead tired. So I am only writing half shelled responses.

 

All though you get tired of explaining your position to people after a while. It's this way on the Bethsoft forums as well. Me and several members who dislike Skyrim have explained logically without any insults or name calling involved, what makes Skyrim a bad game. 

 

It will never get through to the developers. They have new fans now.And the older fans are left to the side to waste away.

 

I'm honestly curious, does your "I liked DAO more than DA2" $60 have some sort of magical property that my "DAO was okay, but I liked DA2 as well" $60 doesn't have?

 

Or, perhaps, should BioWare aim for as large an audience as possible, not just those who have an elitist mentality about what makes a "true" RPG?

[Element Zero]

I did start to get a bit tired of the endless walk through the Hinterlands, but the need to know what lay over that next hill kept me walking. Having experienced a good portion of the region now, I realize I can keep it fun by being much more efficient next time. (I never go straight for the main story quest first, but doing so in this region would've made everything else flow better, I think.)

I've turned off the game for the night to let my wife sleep (even though she just slept yesterday! Pfftt.) I've some crafting and an inventory purge to do before returning to the Hinterlands, and I'm eager to get back to it! I have new mounts, new companions, and a few quests I'm eager to pursue.

I think the open-world is growing on me. I am glad to hear that the other regions are more focused, but I think the Hinterlands have taught me a lesson. I am generally eager to advance the main story. That said, I also like to complete every single side-quest, so that I miss little to nothing. The Hinterlands, with its abundant quests, set my nerves on edge, making me impatient to advance the main plot. I had to reassess my expectations for this game. Realistically, a game this large is going to take a long while to play; I won't be able to plow through to 100% completion in a short time, as I do with pretty much every game. Accepting that as a good thing has changed my perspective on "the grind", at least for now.

In explaining to friends why I, the RPG-guy, don't like Elder Scrolls games, I always pointed to what I perceived as "not enough story". I'd tell them "Skyrim's size with BioWare's writing would be epic!". Well, maybe that's what I'm playing now. Time will tell.

[Ponendus]

There are things I like about it. Open world is great from an exploration point of view - but what I wish is that the areas were filled with much more story. A big world is great, but fetch quests and crossing off lists is really boring after a while. Not saying there isn't a lot of story, there is, but I'm saying 'story per square meter' is never enough for me - if that makes sense.

 

Of all the open world games I have played, this is easily the best use of the space I have seen, but if I had a choice I would still prefer a smaller world filled with consistently engaging content rather than a massive one filled with a combination of engaging content and 'filler'.

 

It's fine though, whatever.

[Enesia]

I'm honestly curious, does your "I liked DAO more than DA2" $60 have some sort of magical property that my "DAO was okay, but I liked DA2 as well" $60 doesn't have?

 

Or, perhaps, should BioWare aim for as large an audience as possible, not just those who have an elitist mentality about what makes a "true" RPG?

 

I'd have to write a very long post about why DAO was better than DA2. And why your 60 dollars towards DA2 was a start of trend of something ugly. But that's a long post. 

[goishen]

I started with DA:O, I found Skyrim boring, but I always recognized it is because I dislike open worlds. It is huge for a reason. It was loved for a reason. I have friends I like to call "super gamers" who practically manage to make playing games into a living who loved Skyrim and called it the ultimate RPG experiance. Me? it was boring with little character and less story and each time I try to play I got bored. I don't like wandering open spaces to "get to the good parts", all the mobs are boring and add nothing other than combat. Picking stuff up to make the perfect sword, because Smithing is a skill you need to tirelessly and endlessly do to ever be good at it. It sounds like a game someone specifically made for me to hate, but I mean people love it. Skyrim taught me open world bores me to tears. So I avoid open world. Some people it is the ultimate experiance so they want more. Tastes change over time and it often swings back and forth.

 

I think Inquisition is getting a lot of mixed reviews with some of us because we recognize it is a good game but unlike any experiance we buy Bioware for. As i think someone on here said, no one buys Bioware for its combat, we buy for the story. I think for many of us, we still enjoy the story but are confused because the experiance changed and a lot was added that we have no intrest in.

 

 

I bet'cha, if you played SR3 & 4, you'd have a blast.  And those games are considered open world. Games like Skyrim are EXTREMELY difficult to get into.  And that's what you don't like.  I don't like it either.  I played Morrowwind, hated it at first too.  'Till one day I just sat down with the game, and said...  I'm either gonna love it or hate it, but I'm gonna set aside five hours and play it.  And then, five more hours.  And then, five more hours.  It wasn't until I was about level 12-15 in that game, that I actually liked it.  And then it was just liking it.   It wasn't loving it.

 

But then going back after being out of it?   F that.

[AlanC9]

I'd have to write a very long post about why DAO was better than DA2. And why your 60 dollars towards DA2 was a start of trend of something ugly. But that's a long post.

And one that wouldn't answer his question anyway.

[Enesia]

And one that wouldn't answer his question anyway.

 

Actually it would. I'm a firm believer of this piece of information "We vote with our wallets" When you buy a game or buy a product of any kind, you are voting with your wallet what you will and won't accept as a consumer.

 

Putting 60 dollars towards DAO was me voting this is the type of game I want. It's been that way from the very beginning, I like FNV direction better than F3, I like Kingdoms of Amular, Two Worlds 2, Oblivion, Morrowind, Witcher both games. And those are the games I vote for and those are the games I want and I like.

 

When you put 60 dollars towards DA2, which was vastly different from DAO vastly different the comparisons between the two games is like night and day, you voted for games like DA2. Which is much different from the type of games I like.

 

Yes, they should try and get as many fans as they like, but and here's a big but. Which fans should Bioware listen to? The ones who originally voted with their 60 dollars for DAO or the ones who put that 60 to DA2? Clearly they chose DA2 even though they had such negative feedback of it, they still catered to those gamers.

 

I don't hate DAI, I don't think it's a terrible game, but it is clear to me which fan they pandered to. And they didn't pander to the fan who originally made DA what DA is.

 

I hear a lot of stories, even back then about how DA2 was either their first Dragon Age game or that they tried to play Origins but thought it was boring. So, Bioware decided that they stick with the people who knew less about it's beginnings than those who played DAO.

 

Which is fine.

 

But that isn't what this thread is about.

 

This thread is about the open world being tedious. And in regards to that in DAI it is and I have played other open world games where it isn't. I get tired of people throwing at the word "there is so much to do side quest wise" and I get the game and the side quest are a number of collection quest and fetch quest. So exciting. *rolls eyes*

 

Those become such a chore  as a questline and they begin to bore me as a player. 

[Father_Jerusalem]

I'd have to write a very long post about why DAO was better than DA2. And why your 60 dollars towards DA2 was a start of trend of something ugly. But that's a long post. 

 

Would the words "This is just my opinion, and other people having different opinions is just as valid. Implying otherwise makes me come off as a raging megadouche" be anywhere in that very long post?

 

Somehow, I'm thinking the answer is "no".