@FOE- remember, everyone's entitled to their own opinions (however baseless they may seem). Although it's somewhat suspicious that someone who's having a perfectly OK time with the game and enjoying it may come into the "PC Community Concerns" forum topic to post thus, they still have the right to do so much as you or I have. You'd think that someone who's fine with the game and has nothing pertinent to contribute to the discussion would be too busy playing the game, but I never assume that's the case.
Perhaps, like me they are okay with the game but, also see room for improvements and additions and, would, if possible for each of us, like to help others as well as keep abreast of what the community is saying, good or bad, about the game.
I enjoy the game, I play for 2-4 hours per day. I don't have a major problem with the PC controls and, yes I play on a PC. I do see room for improvement and, there are a few glitches or things that are not truly a glitch but, changing the order you do things in, causes them to fail. I don't consider that a bug, but an oversight that needs addressed (Mistress Poulan judgment/quest issue for one.)
There's a lot of facts that do tend to disagree your guess of time testing being either "a" or "the" factor:
Fact
The game has been out for almost 4 months now since release.
Fact
There have been 4 patches previously and yet one of them has to address PC controls in particular (other than adding a "walk" assignment it seems the focus was fixing Varric's leg). It also appears that Patch 5 will yet again evade addressing said controls, according to their own announcements so far.
Fact
They had over 4 years to test this game in development from the time it was announced. The game was even set back another year to "ensure they would bring us the best possible game".
With just these facts alone- do you still think "testing time" is a factor? Seriously?
You present very good points Sylveria, however in all three of those facts public betas can only help the process. Do you disagree?
As you mentioned already, the impression I'm getting is also Monolithic > Modular and yes, it is a console port, even though they will never admit it lol
3 months to add a walk toggle is shocking - and even that still breaks.
It's not just bug squishing, the beta program announced that it's limited to select players but will allow more transparency in terms of the development/feedback. It's still a two way street sure, but it's a potential turning point.
I'm not privy to what programming language was used (C++)? I have no idea, I haven't attempted to peel back the layers of this game and Mod them. I probably can, but I haven't. I'm not an idiot, nor am I an expert, but I'm smart enough to realize what's happening - NOW that I have this POS game, and NOW that I'm finally hearing back from this POS company. People can always back the company. Apologists will always be there, but I won't play this game with a controller.
Its not Frostbyte that's the problem, its bad design from the ground up.
If they have made the mistake I think they have, then a beta tested patch will not be enough to save them. If it is too hard to include a mouse button or an extra ability, then it is far too late. Shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic.
I'm not privy to what programming language was used (C++)? I have no idea, I haven't attempted to peel back the layers of this game and Mod them. I probably can, but I haven't. I'm not an idiot, nor am I an expert, but I'm smart enough to realize what's happening - NOW that I have this POS game, and NOW that I'm finally hearing back from this POS company. People can always back the company. Apologists will always be there, but I won't play this game with a controller.
The engine was probably C++ (as most every serious game engine is). Not sure if they used it for the game scripting as well, or if they used a different scripting language.
Jackal - You know. Four months for a buggy walk toggle button isn't worth my time. Introduce "auto-fire" and a good zoom-out camera function...I don't need "tac cam". That's a non-map-able abomination. Booware should REMOVE the "tac cam" for PC gamers. They should just allow zoom out, way up to a certain viewable point. Make it as close as possible as the OTHER Dragon Age games were. WHY did it have to change so horribly? WHY? I get that they hate PC gamers, but they F'd up.
You present very good points Sylveria, however in all three of those facts public betas can only help the process. Do you disagree?
That's exactly why I remarked earlier with Brogan- this is the "public beta".
However, we as paid customers should not be "beta testing" anyone's game- at least not without pre-consent, which I don't remember reading in either the EULA or the summary before my purchase.
Agreed. We aren't official testers....but we are. We shouldn't be, but we are. Now there are closed beta testings for patches. Yet they desire people to sign up for them, pushing back approval dates for approved beta testers.. WOW! I mean, I'm almost speechless. That reeks of a company that's short on people/interest, but is still trying to fix problems?? I'm skeptical, but I'm still laughing. What a product that we purchased. It's so great...(eyes roll out of my head and out the door)....
This article (particularly the concept of "experience dilution") explains why so many people believe DA:I "feels like an MMO", even though, strictly speaking, it doesn't have the exact same mechanics. MMOs thrive on experience dilution tactics--getting someone hooked by having them do the same thing over and over again until the next "new experience" (i.e., patch cycle/raid) comes out, which makes it all feel fresh again. It's the very basis of game-addiction psychology... NEWSTUFF!!, same, same, same, same.... NEWSTUFF (hopefully just before the "same" gets your player so bored they quit--the timing has to be right, as Blizzard found when they left too much time between the final patch of Cata and the new EP--and then, also between Panda and WoD). This works in an MMO that constantly churns out content. It is a silly thing to do in a SP RP (which should be story- and/or character-driven not mechanics-driven) game--unless they can very quickly churn out new content, which DA:I clearly cannot.
That also explains why don't open if you don't want the game mechanics/story spoiled for you
Spoiler
the ending then feels so much like an anti-climax. You have spent so much time with the experience dilution--and you have a plethora of unused power points as a result--that you just want the damned thing to end, and having the "ending" handed to you in manageable chunks (the Arbor Wilds is actually the beginning of the ending) in between fetch quests and closing rifts means the climax, isn't.
On a personal level, I found the "perks" annoying. A mage should already have the "magic" perk. Likewise, a noble, the "noble knowledge". I did not like how the perks didn't integrate with the RP of the game--they were internally inconsistent and that always shytes me. I mean, seriously, why would ANYONE with Varric in their party need the "deft hands" perk? The man is already a lockpicking expert!! *cough*
Nobles, however, also had special conversation stuff (just like mages, Dalish, carta)--then you could also get the noble (or magic, underworld) perk for conversation options that, strictly speaking, the noble (or mage or carta dwarf) should already know anyway--but you need both to have that knowledge/conversation (i.e., you still miss out on certain options if you say "oh, I'm a carta dwarf this playthrough; I don't need underworld because some of the conversations double up--because not all actually do so you still miss options you should actually know). The underworld perk allows you to, say, get lyrium smuggled to the Inquisition--at the same time as Josephine is already getting it through legal channels so you don't actually need to any more. They've doubled-up and done so arbitrarily. On top of that all these things could easily be covered by Josie's knowledge, or Leliana's. Or, for pity's sake, Varric's. As an in-game mechanic... sure, I understand it. It gives the illusion of difference between character options. But it is inefficient, and in practice screws both RP and experience, and is not actually different at all.
.
I guess it all boils down to the game internally working against itself, not just in the gaming logic; it's inefficient. So, it wouldn't surprise me if the inefficiency of frostbite is also causing problems. There seems to be an overall problem with internal inconsistency in much logic within the game--and that can happen on the coding side, too, not just in a story sense.
KilrB, Sylveria_Relden, Brogan et 1 autre aiment ceci
It's the very basis of game-addiction psychology... NEWSTUFF!!, same, same, same, same.... NEWSTUFF (hopefully just before the "same" gets your player so bored they quit--the timing has to be right, as Blizzard found when they left too much time between the final patch of Cata and the new EP--and then, also between Panda and WoD).
Oh look a shinee!!! NEWSTUFF.... ooooh SQUIRREL!
And yeah, the article eloquently points out in depth a lot of what's been previously said in this forum and others- it feels like a potential MMORPG that was turned into an SPRPG, and I can only speculate it was due to development time dragging on and someone at EA's decision to lay down a deadline for release regardless of its status. (which would also likely explain a lot of the other not-so-great things about the game, too)
I was following the game closely from the first announcement- and remember when they switched up the posting and there was a looooooooong silence. That's likely about the time that it happened, IMO.
I'd also have to agree with Wbino regarding Frostbite being forced down Bioware's throat by EA... it just seems to add up when you look at the bigger picture here. Budgetary constraints, development costs, expansion to include consoles as a release platform, etc.
Bottomline is that BiodegradeableWare is so devious, that they think that it's proper business to take preorders and blatantly lie to consumers for at least 6 months up until release. THEN rush to market a game that they sat on for 4 years..."developing". Then attempt half-hearted patches at appeasement, rather than addressing real PC-related issues. Now, we're at volunteer testing, and this Beta testing of limited fixes is just to appease bloggers here. To attempt to shut us up, and this isn't even addressing control fixes - maybe autofire. An approval process of said testers will push back any envelope by at least a week. It's a series of delays, always. Delete and censor me like you always do, I'm always back. If I have to buy more PC's and get more ISP's, then I will - this is beyond a company that is ruining my gaming experience. It's more than a matter of principle. Do the right thing, Booware/EA.
@Bethgael - Frostbyte3 can't be the cause of bad writing, and poor programming. A graphics engine just is. It's a tool, a matrix, with what to work with...a graphical palette for models....bad writing is just BAD, and bad programming is just lazy. We have it all here.
There's a lot of facts that do tend to disagree your guess of time testing being either "a" or "the" factor:
Fact The game has been out for almost 4 months now since release.
Fact There have been 4 patches previously and yet one of them has to address PC controls in particular (other than adding a "walk" assignment it seems the focus was fixing Varric's leg). It also appears that Patch 5 will yet again evade addressing said controls, according to their own announcements so far.
Fact They had over 4 years to test this game in development from the time it was announced. The game was even set back another year to "ensure they would bring us the best possible game".
With just these facts alone- do you still think "testing time" is a factor? Seriously?
Sleight correction: 3 months since release, I believe (ie; 11.18.14).
@Bethgael - Frostbyte3 can't be the cause of bad writing, and poor programming. A graphics engine just is. It's a tool, a matrix, with what to work with...a graphical palette for models....bad writing is just BAD, and bad programming is just lazy. We have it all here.
That's not what I said, but perhaps I was being unclear.
What I meant is that when I talk about there being a problem with internal inconsistency at Bioware, I was not just referring to "story" logic. There is also coding logic--which would mean the code is affected by how the engine handles the code, and would also explain why they're having so much trouble wrestling with the code that a "walk" toggle caused problems before it was sorted out.
Sleight correction: 3 months since release, I believe (ie; 11.18.14).
November 18th, 2014
December, 2014
January, 2015
February 15th (now), 2015
As I said - almost4 months since release.
Oh and I've yet to hear a dispute regarding the 4 years of development... for which beta testing could have been easily implemented.
Of course, if time was a "factor", I think we all know *why* that didn't happen at this point.
It's like saying Blizzard didn't have time to test Diablo III before it was released hence the reason it was so horrid as well. Because it got such great reviews on release, right?
It's three months, but it feels like four or five. Sometimes I say five, because I preordered. I feel like the fool. Maybe it's only three months since Booooware figured out that their game was broken? Is that possible?
So even at 3 months since release- considering we're not "beta testers" (i.e., we didn't agree to this previously or even on purchase) they had 4 years of prior development time to include "testing" in their schedules. I'm still trying to determine how time was a factor, here.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
