19127 réponses à ce sujet

[TobyJake]

Lmao...you calling people trolls...and calling bioware defenders louder than most...(including you...who literally just posted 3 posts in a row as you wrote this.) You are the loudest of them all, and you are as big of a troll as anyone.

 

People are annoyed with aspects of the game like every game in history, me included. The mass majority of people outside this forum are having little to no issues...which is why none of you will be getting your money back, and the over the top complaining about being scammed is hilarious. You guys act as if you have either never played another game, or your memory and time playing those games vanished from your brain once you found out how much you hate DA:I. DA:O was massively buggy for many people, as was Skyrim, as are 95% of fallout games. You guys are just yelling the loudest because it is the new fad. The sad thing is though, none of you will get anything out of it.

You are back again I see! Adding your contributions.

Issues like DirectX and CTD, etc take up little of this forum really.

A console port (bad one) does not make for a good game on PC.

382 pages is not a FAD. 379 without an appearance from Biohazard is not a reason to be forgiving.

[CatatonicMan]

You guys act as if you have either never played another game, or your memory and time playing those games vanished from your brain once you found out how much you hate DA:I. DA:O was massively buggy for many people, as was Skyrim, as are 95% of fallout games. You guys are just yelling the loudest because it is the new fad. The sad thing is though, none of you will get anything out of it.

 

There's a bit of a difference between accidental bugs and deliberate design choices.

 

All the Elder Scrolls and modern Fallout games are so big, and the engine so crappy, that bugs are inevitable. I accept that these large, complex, open-world games will have them. I even accept that DA:I will suffer the same issues - and, from what I've read, it does seem to.

 

That, however, doesn't say anything about whether the game is designed well.

 

Example? The basic Skyrim UI. That was a steaming pile of stupid. It was awful. Worse, it was designed that way, because the Bethesda devs make games for consoles first. They could have made a not-terrible PC UI (see SkyUI, for example), but they didn't. 

 

DA:I is pretty much in the same boat. They could have made a not-terrible PC UI, but they didn't. That was a deliberate design choice on their part, for whatever reason.

 

I can excuse bugs to an extent; they're often difficult to find, harder to reproduce, and harder still to fix. Intentional design choices, on the other hand, don't deserve a pass. Someone made the decision to make a quick and dirty UI port, and they should be called out for it.

[TobyJake]

All I want to know is when are they going to finish Inquisition? The preview created a bit of a stir admittedly, just waiting for the real game now!

You know, the PC one!?

[HozzMidnight]

All I want to know is when are they going to finish Inquisition? The preview created a bit of a stir admittedly, just waiting for the real game now!

You know, the PC one!?

 

My guess would be never.  Unless they think that patching in the 'PC game made by PC gamers' they promised will add significant sales, it aint happening.

[Muerte]

There's a bit of a difference between accidental bugs and deliberate design choices.

 

All the Elder Scrolls and modern Fallout games are so big, and the engine so crappy, that bugs are inevitable. I accept that these large, complex, open-world games will have them. I even accept that DA:I will suffer the same issues - and, from what I've read, it does seem to.

 

That, however, doesn't say anything about whether the game is designed well.

 

Example? The basic Skyrim UI. That was a steaming pile of stupid. It was awful. Worse, it was designed that way, because the Bethesda devs make games for consoles first. They could have made a not-terrible PC UI (see SkyUI, for example), but they didn't. 

 

DA:I is pretty much in the same boat. They could have made a not-terrible PC UI, but they didn't. That was a deliberate design choice on their part, for whatever reason.

 

I can excuse bugs to an extent; they're often difficult to find, harder to reproduce, and harder still to fix. Intentional design choices, on the other hand, don't deserve a pass. Someone made the decision to make a quick and dirty UI port, and they should be called out for it.

so, why not create both UI? For PC and for Consoles, different UIs, is that a problem? Low-budget? I don't think so. They don't have time for it? I don't think so.

[Eelectrica]

Is their any chance that climbing down ladders will be made a little easier with the new patch.

Gotta wonder how the testers missed how bad it is. Probably too busy twiddling sticks and mashing buttons to notice.

[Jackal19851111]

Skyrim UI is sh-t but Bethesda gets away with it thanks to moddability

[atlantico]

Is their any chance that climbing down ladders will be made a little easier with the new patch.

Gotta wonder how the testers missed how bad it is. Probably too busy twiddling sticks and mashing buttons to notice.

It's easy if you walk to the stairs.. oh wait. 

[Suhiira]

If DA becomes an action game rather than rpg EA should give the franchise to a studio that can make good action games.

There's no "if" about it.

DA:O was an RPG, with character stats and skills (besides combat only ones) and tactical combat.

DA:2 Took several steps toward "Action Game" and away from RPG.  Simple resuable maps, hordes of stuff spawning essentially on top of you.

Now we have DA:I ....

DA:4 will no doubt continue the trend away from RPG and toward "Action" game.

I expect DA:5 to be a full out FPS.

[Brogan]

They don't care if we enjoy it, or even if we play it. They only care that we buy it. I hate to be so pessimistic, but that is really how it seems now. Can't blame anyone but myself though. After the mess that was DA2 I should have never preordered DA3, but sadly I fell for the hype. I really did think that they would make a mends after the backlash that they got for DA2. I really would love an ask anything with Laidlaw to see him explain himself for the pre-release videos of DA3.

 

I think everybody here would.
 

[mkygod]

I'm sure it would be an easy fix, but the eight ability limit was a design decision (ostensibly to "balance the combat" or "make it more tactical" or something). It's an idiotic, gameplay/story segregated design, presumably implemented to cater to the new action-RPG gameplay direction, but it's not a bug.

 

I suppose it could be a design decision, but i see nothing tactical about taking away a couple of abilities that you've played many hours to unlock. The term tactical implies that you have many different choices in planning combat. Taking away abilities is the opposed to that idea.

[Brogan]

Lmao...you calling people trolls...and calling bioware defenders louder than most...(including you...who literally just posted 3 posts in a row as you wrote this.) You are the loudest of them all, and you are as big of a troll as anyone.

 

People are annoyed with aspects of the game like every game in history, me included. The mass majority of people outside this forum are having little to no issues...which is why none of you will be getting your money back, and the over the top complaining about being scammed is hilarious. You guys act as if you have either never played another game, or your memory and time playing those games vanished from your brain once you found out how much you hate DA:I. DA:O was massively buggy for many people, as was Skyrim, as are 95% of fallout games. You guys are just yelling the loudest because it is the new fad. The sad thing is though, none of you will get anything out of it.

 

 

Moving on...

[Brogan]

I can excuse bugs to an extent; they're often difficult to find, harder to reproduce, and harder still to fix. Intentional design choices, on the other hand, don't deserve a pass. Someone made the decision to make a quick and dirty UI port, and they should be called out for it.

 

It just seems like there was a point in the process where somebody (looking at Darrah and Laidlaw here) needed to step in and say, 'Hey, I realize the money is forcing us to prioritize this a particular way, but can we at least take a look at how the old team did this stuff before we try and reinvent the wheel for these pc controls?'

 

That is assuming that these 2 were involved at least to some degree during the actual pc section of the overall design.

[Amplitudelol]

Announcing a big patch containing a lot corrections of design choices along with bugs would make them look rather ridiculous after getting that many goty. I understand that, yet i cant sympathize.

[TobyJake]

It just seems like there was a point in the process where somebody (looking at Darrah and Laidlaw here) needed to step in and say, 'Hey, I realize the money is forcing us to prioritize this a particular way, but can we at least take a look at how the old team did this stuff before we try and reinvent the wheel for these pc controls?'

 

That is assuming that these 2 were involved at least to some degree during the actual pc section of the overall design.

You are joking, right? That was on a napkin while having coffee. And it ended up in the bin afterwards. 6 weeks, pffft!! What design?

[Jackal19851111]

Well, based on what Allan wrote in his posts earlier in the thread, seems he signed off the PC controls. However after testing on 4 platforms against 1, turns out he actually managed to forget the standards of Dragon Age's past PC controls and even industry standard KB+M controls (run/walk function for instance - especially when they put action adventure elements and environment puzzles into the game!!!).

 

Fresh eyes Bioware, fresh eyes. After working 3 years on a project you tend to develop tunnel vision. Closed beta testing will work wonders, especially if you want to release just before the holidays and then go on vacation while post-release support is in dire need!

[Dubya75]

Looking back, there were some very clear warning signs that this game was not going to be "the most dynamic RPG you will ever play", "Made by PC gamers for PC gamers" (and yet I was a fool to ignore them).

Who makes claims like that and then demo their new "RPG" with a XBOX controller in hand? And with a rich RPG history dating back to BG through to DAO, all they really have to show us are flashy combat animations, beautiful landscapes (granted) and a cast of new and returning characters? 

And then they go and announce Muliplayer??? WHAT?! Wasn't this supposed to be an RPG? What the hell is Multiplayer doing in the game?

 

Strip away the graphics, the awesome soundtrack, the massive landscapes and all the sugar coating.....what is left underneath? A SEVERELY nerfed shadow of an RPG - A game I am absolutely convinced was "intended" to be a truly amazing RPG.

But Bioware gave in to EA....

 

Design the game with Console as the main platform and highest priority - resulting in a very limited gaming experience as far as mechanics go (such as the limit of 8 abilities to choose from even if you have more in your character build). 

 

Reach a wider audience - No more "think" elements. Remove tactics, Attribute management, Make the combat more mainstream etc etc. Dumb the game down.

 

Bolt on Multiplayer - Severely limiting combat mechanics across the entire game to cater for it.

 

What is left is nothing more than a polished turd posing as an RPG.

 

In Bioware's attempt to please a wider audience, I believe they have completely alienated a large portion of the people who loved DAO, amongs other RPGs. But they have also attracted a new audience. The MMO/Multiplayer/Shooter crowd.

This is a MASSIVE shift that may result in success for Bioware. Perhaps now they can roll out a regular Co-Op Adventure game and systematically continue to strip our RPG elements from their games until they are left with a very straight forward and shallow game series.

 

Bioware no longer makes mature RPG games. Good luck to them.

 

But we still have CD Project RED for that, at least. I am sure they will not disappoint.

[LemonsMcLemon]

 

I'm so disappointed with DAI, that this sound like a good idea:

 

http://www.gamespot....t/1100-6424582/

 

New Baldur's Gate Game In Development

"We are interested in doing a Baldur's Gate III," Beamdog said.

 

 

Dear god i hope not. It'll probably be another shitty console port like Inquisition while Bioware says "it's made for PC gamers".

[Dubya75]

Dear god i hope not. It'll probably be another shitty console port like Inquisition while Bioware says "it's made for PC gamers".

 

Except, it is not Bioware that is developing it.

[TobyJake]

Now there is a game by visible developers!

Viconia rules!!

[glosoli]

 

I'm so disappointed with DAI, that this sound like a good idea:

 

http://www.gamespot....t/1100-6424582/

 

New Baldur's Gate Game In Development

"We are interested in doing a Baldur's Gate III," Beamdog said.

 

 

Since remastered versions brought a good profit to them, ofc they would be interested in a BGIII. It's also a good surprise for the player base so it's a win-win situation. As far as I read the comments on Steam and forums, there's a good amount of people tried the games for the first time with the remastered editions. It's really great to see the new generation is also interested in these gems.

[voteDC]

There's no "if" about it.

DA:O was an RPG, with character stats and skills (besides combat only ones) and tactical combat.

DA:2 Took several steps toward "Action Game" and away from RPG.  Simple resuable maps, hordes of stuff spawning essentially on top of you.

Now we have DA:I ....

DA:4 will no doubt continue the trend away from RPG and toward "Action" game.

I expect DA:5 to be a full out FPS.

I'd have less of a problem if they had made Inquisition an action game with the action controls to match.

They've made an action game though with controls that are a hybrid of action games and the older Dragon Age titles.

 

Design the game with Console as the main platform and highest priority - resulting in a very limited gaming experience as far as mechanics go (such as the limit of 8 abilities to choose from even if you have more in your character build). 

This is what I find annoying because the UI for Origins on the PC and consoles was great. They looked at what worked on both and what didn't, then made the interfaces around that.

[Brogan]

Apparently that new game by Beamdog is not BGIII, but a smaller title meant to fit between bg1 and bg2

[CatatonicMan]

so, why not create both UI? For PC and for Consoles, different UIs, is that a problem? Low-budget? I don't think so. They don't have time for it? I don't think so.

 

Ignorance? Apathy? Time? Budget? Management decision? Your guess is as good as mine. Only Bioware knows.