236 réponses à ce sujet

[Vox Draco]

And Mass Effect 2 is widely considered the best one in the series, it also sold more than Mass Effect by a fair margin.

 

Something I never really understood to be true. ME2 lived of the hype from part one .. and ironically because it hardly touched AYNTHING established in part one it was perfect to lure more people into the franchise without alienating them, or forcing them to play part one....but ME2 has to be seen with ME3, they are tied together. And sadly ... ME2 is then revealed to be nothing but failed and missed opportunities, gameplay and storywise...but if peeople like their stories going nowhere or being totally dissapointing ... well, I guess Bioware should make more of these games

[K3m0sabe]

the problem is not the map design, its the quest design. Every single map so far has been: unlock camps, search for stupid shards, do requisitions resource gathering, close a couple of rifts and find some random **** laying about that you need to either take to npc X or go to map location x to complete quest...

 

There are very few quests that even deserve the name, and all these shitty quests coupled with the pop-a-mole combat where you just spam the same abilities again and again on the same respawning mobs, gets very old... very fast. 

 

At least in DA:O we had quality quests in greater number, the maps had pourpose, the combat had impact, when you saw an ogre charge you or pick up one of your characters, it looked awesome and was scary to deal with... 

[Savber100]

No.

 

I didn't ask for your advice on what to do btw.

I'm not giving you advice. If this is a game that isn't for you, don't play it. You state you hate open world games yet here you are complaining that an open-world game (which dev has stated that Skyrim is an inspiration to Inquisition) is too open-world.
 

You are wasting your time. 

I'm applying the logical and more productive result of your personal tastes with this game. It's called logic. Perhaps we can start using some here. 

 

 

I'd definitely not classify "bring me 10 ram meat" or "bring these 2347842 dead people things to their 2384734 wives / husbands" as quality content.

 

You know what's funny? I never did those quests. I wasn't interested so I moved on. I love that there was the option to do it because it expanded the world for me in where NPCs have their own concerns and quests. 

Also no one cares about YOUR or MY definition. The only opinion that anyone should care about is yourself which is why I then said if you don't like it, don't play it. Why suffer through a game you don't like?

 

 

 

And Mass Effect 2 is widely considered the best one in the series, it also sold more than Mass Effect by a fair margin.

 

I think people are not considering the fact that if Inquisition wasn't such a "big" game we would already have Dragon Age 4 on the horizon.

 

You are delusional if you think Mass Effect 2 didn't have massive detractors. Also if we use your logic on sales, the popularity means nothing. 

...

 

Is your logic really that if Inquisition wasn't so big, we would have Dragon Age 4 on the horizon already? Wow. That's not how game development works, good sir. 

[Xamufam]

Same here

The thing i liked in DA2 it was more focused on your character, it had a better dialogue wheel. it showed your choices. you could be humerus wise & angry & that shaped your Hawke

Im sad they cancelled DA2 exalted march expansion pack (it's like awakening)

they did hint of an exalted march on sebastians dlc

[Rannik]

Is your logic really that if Inquisition wasn't so big, we would have Dragon Age 4 on the horizon already? Wow. That's not how game development works, good sir. 

 

It is exactly how game development works, good sir.

 

Smaller games need less content which means a shorter development cycle and therefore less time before everyone moves on to the next thing.

[Savber100]

It is exactly how game development works, good sir.

 

Smaller games need less content which means a shorter development cycle and therefore less time before moving on to the next thing.

Do you know what I just realized? 

BSN complained about how dev cycle for games were way too short (e.g. Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3) and that the products were all rushed. Now, we have people demanding that dev cycle be shorter so that devs won't "waste time" in making larger worlds so that we can have shorter release gaps between sequels. 

It sucks to be Bioware. 

EDIT: Also to address your point. "Shorter" games like Bioshock Infinite and Transistor all took 3-4 years to fully develop. Shorter games does not equate shorter development cycles. 
 

[N7recruit]

OP up dated

 

So after another 10 hours of play I finally feel like I'm playing a Dragon Age game.

 

The quest "here in lies the abyss", all three parts of it have been the best parts of the game I have played so far by quite some distance. 

 

Crest wood feels like the right balance of open world exploration & structured questing. The area changing both in tone (A Stormy night to a sunny day) & how the player explored it (Draining the lake, exploring the Dwarven taig)  was pretty cool. 

 

Also I found the Totally Linear nature of the siege on the wardens greatly enhanced the both the game play & story telling. Bringing some much needed focus & Drama to the narrative. Very engaging stuff.  

 

Plus it had the most compelling narrative hook of the game so far. To investigate the Wardens with Mike Hawke   It was pretty compelling story telling from Bioware & their best in quite some time IMO. 

 

So I'm off to do more grinding for a bit then we crash the assassination attempt & Val royeaux. Hope the main quests beats keep up this quality of gameplay & story telling. 

 

It's probably not a coincidence that the most linear quest of the game [so far] was also the most enjoyable. 

 

BTW I still feel like having to play the game for just over a hole day before it starts getting compelling highly questionable at best. 

 

I know I could have sped through it, but I want to play the most of it so I can have a proper Experience of it & to have an informed opinion on the whole single player package. 

 

But my experience & opinion are entirely subjective but what can you do. So if you think my preferences suck & or that I'm full of **** just talking out of my ass, let me know! 

[fizzypop]

Just focus on using your power to advance the story. Go out in the open world only to get enough power to move on. If you do that the game will go by much quicker.

[Savber100]

 

But my experience & opinion are entirely subjective but what can you do. So if you think my preferences suck & or that I'm full of **** just talking out of my ass, let me know! 

 

No. It's your opinion and everyone here should respect it. 

The only gripe I had in this thread are people that clearly don't enjoy this type of open-world RPGs and then complain about how the game is bad because it's not their tastes. 

There is a difference between a poorly-made game and games that aren't for you. 

[Kenshen]

I love the big open world design, and all the things to do in a level.  I am really glad to NOT see a narrow area to explore like in DA:O or the reused again and again tileset of DA2.  I also love running into a dragon or rift I CAN'T defeat until higher levels on a map.  I have had my butt handed to me several times by the Dragon in the Hinterlands with a sub-level 10 character, and just had to leave him alone until later.  Same with the higher level rifts there too, making it sweet when you go back and defeat it later.  Please Bioware, Please keep up making the more open maps for later games, work on maybe better story and such but keep the bigger maps.

 

I agree with you here and I shouldn't knit-pick but that dragon is a her not a him.

[Rannik]

Do you know what I just realized? 

BSN complained about how dev cycle for games were way too short (e.g. Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3) and that the products were all rushed. Now, we have people demanding that dev cycle be shorter so that devs won't "waste time" in making larger worlds so that we can have shorter release gaps between sequels. 

It sucks to be Bioware. 

 

That's because you fail to understand simple concepts like BSN not being some kind of hivemind and therefore not having a single opinion.

 

EDIT: Also to address your point. "Shorter" games like Bioshock Infinite and Transistor all took 3-4 years to fully develop. Shorter games does not equate shorter development cycles. 

 

Your two examples are an indie game made by 11 people and that massive blunder called Bioshock Infinite which killed Irrational Games.

 

Not sure if trolling...

[Rawgrim]

It is exactly how game development works, good sir.

 

Smaller games need less content which means a shorter development cycle and therefore less time before everyone moves on to the next thing.

 

Quite right.

 

They did switch to a different game engine this time, though. That would probably amount to a lot of the time spent on the game.

[LinksOcarina]

It is exactly how game development works, good sir.

 

Smaller games need less content which means a shorter development cycle and therefore less time before everyone moves on to the next thing.

 

Yeah, that is a dumb thing to say. Small games still have a lot of content in them, and the development time involved in a game does not equate content in the end either. Got to consider things like animation, the graphical engine, development cycle and budgeting, and so forth.

 

Case en point, look how fast they churn out Assassin's Creed games, which tend to have 2 year dev cycles on average, using four studios to churn it out on time. 

 

Or, if were going to be really technical, the two and a half year cycle currently for Pillars of Eternity, which by all accounts will not be a small game. 

 

So yeah, you are wrong on that. 

[Julia Luna]

Something I never really understood to be true. ME2 lived of the hype from part one .. and ironically because it hardly touched AYNTHING established in part one it was perfect to lure more people into the franchise without alienating them, or forcing them to play part one....but ME2 has to be seen with ME3, they are tied together. And sadly ... ME2 is then revealed to be nothing but failed and missed opportunities, gameplay and storywise...but if peeople like their stories going nowhere or being totally dissapointing ... well, I guess Bioware should make more of these games

I don't have any interest in all this stuff Bioware cares so much about that we do things that matter and things like that. I couldn't care less! Also if everything goes wrong or if he character jus does not make any difference I'm also ok with that, it doesn't matter, it is not my quest, the game just says go on, save the world, it is not me wanting to save the world it is just a mission they gave me so if I fail, bad for them, irrelevant for me.

[Savber100]

That's because you fail to understand simple concepts like BSN not being some kind of hivemind and therefore not having a single opinion.

 

 

Your two examples are an indie game made by 11 people and that massive blunder called Bioshock Infinite which killed Irrational Games.

 

Not sure if trolling...

 

Oh? Was not an common opinion among game media that DA2 and ME3 was rushed? This isn't some common sentiment from BSNers but the gaming community as a whole. 

But hey... apparently you don't believe that and think that the development cycle for both games were adequate. I can't persuade you either way. 
 

...

 

"Massive blunder called Bioshock Infinite that killed Irrational Games" 

Yeah. we're done here. The troll is too strong especially considering that lead developer Levine CLEARLY stated that he wanted to do more personal games after Infinite. It was his choice not Infinite that caused the team to move on. 
 

 

Quite right.

 

They did switch to a different game engine this time, though. That would probably amount to a lot of the time spent on the game.

Let me clarify my point. I have misspoken what I intended. 

Game development cycle isn't based solely on the quantity of content. Any self-respecting developer knows this. A simple idea can take years and thousands of dollars to make. Rubios' simplistic idea that if a game has less content it equates to shorter dev time is astoundingly illogical. 

Can a game with less content be developed faster? Sure? Just as a game with more content can be developed equally as fast with more people. 

More content does not equate more time. 


 

[Rannik]

Yeah, that is a dumb thing to say. Small games still have a lot of content in them, and the development time involved in a game does not equate content in the end either. Got to consider things like animation, the graphical engine, development cycle and budgeting, and so forth.

 

It was a comparison, which obviously implies that all other factors are somewhat constant.

 

For the same studio a fairly linear single player RPG will take way less time to develop than an MMO for example.

[Savber100]

It was a comparison, which obviously implies that all other factors are somewhat constant.

 

For the same studio a fairly linear single player RPG will take way less time to develop than an MMO for example.

 

Which is never the case hence the uselessness  of that comparison. 

 

We're not going to agree on anything at this point. 

Can we agree to disagree? PM me if you want to discuss more of this in detail so people can have this thread back. 
 

[pdusen]

I'd definitely not classify "bring me 10 ram meat" or "bring these 2347842 dead people things to their 2384734 wives / husbands" as quality content.

 

I might agree with you if it was "Bring me 10 ram meat" and not "Herald, these refugees are starving, we might want to consider finding some extra food for them"

[Applepie_Svk]

the joke is not the size of the areas, but repeating fetchquests which gave you nothing more than some golds or items instead of some proper story...

[Commander Michael]

As a person who always plays RPG's to 100% completion, DAI has been the most tedious Dragon Age game so far. Neither DAO or DA2 felt tedious at any time, even to 100% completion, so I'm kind of disappointed. I still don't understand why they changed the format to a "open" world game. It was just fine the way it was before, imo

 

I'm 30 hours in the game and I'm still in the Hinterlands, level 10 at the moment. I refuse to leave it or unlock new areas until I've done everything there is to do. Just closed the last Rift opening and gonna try to kill the dragon soon.

[mindw0rk]

Something I never really understood to be true. ME2 lived of the hype from part one .. and ironically because it hardly touched AYNTHING established in part one it was perfect to lure more people into the franchise without alienating them, or forcing them to play part one....but ME2 has to be seen with ME3, they are tied together. And sadly ... ME2 is then revealed to be nothing but failed and missed opportunities, gameplay and storywise...but if peeople like their stories going nowhere or being totally dissapointing ... well, I guess Bioware should make more of these games

 

Well, Mass Effect 2 is my second favourite computer game of all time (after modded Skyrim). And Ive been playing games since ZX Spectrum era. Its a pinnacle of storytelling imo

[Vormaerin]

The point of all those "story-less" quests is to establish the chaos and damage that the current situation has caused.  The story of the letter quest is reading the letters and seeing what kinds of things are going on around you and what is happening to people.  Same with the starving people or the homeless, etc.  It also shows up the contrast between the Inquisition in the early days (you have to personally handle stuff like refugees starving) and later on (you tell someone on the world map to deal with it).

 

A few are just whimsical, like lord Woolsley, but most of them are showing you what is going on and what you are trying to deal with.  Instead of just saying "oh yeah, he's bad. Should probably do something about it," but not have it have any real impact on the actual story.

 

The rifts everywhere are the reason why you are actually leaving Skyhold at all. You are the leader of the group.  Normally, riding around the countryside for weeks (which is what it would take to crisscross Orlais and Ferelden) would be silly.  But the fact is that no one else can deal with the rifts, so you need to go where they are.  If there's no rifts in a zone, there's no good reason for *you* to be there personally.

[SomeUsername]

As far as linear games go, I think they open more room for a good story that follows a specific order. In a story based game like Dragon Age, I would rather have a good linear game with a good story than an open world with lots of useless sidequests and the freedom to do whatever we want, that's more for sandbox games. I think DA:I has found a bit of balance between these two, but is leaning more on the open world side.

[Kinsz]

OP as people have said countless times find a balance between main story and quests , do some quests go back to your war table to do a bit of the main story , run around skyhold while you are at it and chat with your companions ( they are the most interesting companions of the series by far ) trust me you'd enjoy that way.

 

Staying in the Hinterland and not leave until you do all the quests there will just make you hate the game

[Reever]

Reading all those comments about the tedious side quests worries me, but since it appears to be an issue particular to the Hinterlands and people can skip them, it shouldn't be THAT big of a problem.

 

But of course, such a big game will have to take hits when it comes to the flow and pacing of the narrative. I can't really say much yet, since I've yet to play DA:I (nor DA2), but I really liked the narrative in DA:O.