392 réponses à ce sujet

[Ponendus]

 

Once you achieve all story goals in an area... why should the area be blocked off? You can block it off by not clicking on it and the rest who enjoys going back for taking awesome screenshots can do so. What is the harm in leaving an area open? How is it not logical? 

 

Old RPG fans has this bad habit of needing to click every single thing there can be clicked. Do everything that can be done. Even when they are utterly frustrated doing it, they have to do it. They cant treat optionals as optionals. I know, because I use to behave exactly like that once.

 

 

Firstly, I never suggested that areas be blocked off - like I stated I am perfectly fine with areas being there full of filler quests for those that enjoy it. You are correct, I have the choice to never go back and that's fine. My objection was that I must do filler in order to progress.

 

Perhaps I'm not doing it right, but at the point I'm at in the game, I have done some filler, most character quests to that point, and main story quests in about three areas. I still require 26 power before I can move on to the next main plot quest.

 

To your second point quoted here: I am actually trying to do exactly what are you suggesting I do. I am trying to focus on the main story and my companions. Can't - because not enough power. So I would love to have the option to choose like those that enjoy 'filler' quests do. But unfortunately I don't. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

-snip-

The problem with this sort of analysis is that we don't all agree about what makes any given gamr good or bad.

Moreover, we don't talk about those old games because we want them remade, but because they're convenient points of reference.

For exampke, I often point to NWN and KotOR as examples of BioWare doing a great job of presenting the player with a blank slate protagonist. And Inquisition has taken third place in that hierarchy, surpassing not just DA2 and the ME games, but also DAO and both BGs.

Each game does some things well (like NWN's UI), and some things badly (like ME2's interrupts). But even in a game that is bad, there will be good parts worth citing. I think DAO is a vastly better game than DA2, but I also think that DA2's overall plot structure was superior. And Inquisition has similarly avoided the pitfalls of DAO's plot.

Conversely, another area where DA2 surpassed DAO was in the Tactics system, but somehow Inquisition has gone in completely the other direction and offered us very little in the way of automation tools.

We don't talk about how great BG was because we want another BG. We just want modern games not to forget the lessons that the earlier games taught us. That BioWare has never revisited BG's shallower power curve perplexes me. And BioWare's explanation for why unused companions continue to gain XP is easily defeated by BG's exponential XP progression.

I will not allow modern game marketing to ignore these details. I will not permit the opportunity costs of design choices to be glossed over by said marketing.

[zeypher]

Finally, i am loving this game

[Sekondar]

No sure if this should be here but I really do not get people's obession with living in the past...

All the complaints are because people are saying how great BG and DAO are and how all the new games are "DAI is NOT DAO", "BG2 has much better content than DAI", "DA2 sucks soooo much compared to DAO".

BG1/BG2/DAO: perhaps they should just keep making remakes/graphical overhual of them and spend less time thinking of new ideas since people would compare and not like it. And remakes/remastered are excellent money-grabbers nowadays (both GTA V and Last of Us Remastered are selling very well). And surprise surprise, gamers are giving great reviews on them.

they somehow failed to see that new ideas are progressive. I think most people would want to see the new elements being introduced instead of having the same old thing again and again. I am pretty sure if the game mechanics remained the same throughout, people would say Bioware staff are not progressive and have run out of ideas blah blah blah.

Here is how I see it:

DAO: main complaint was the combat as it is not fast enough and offer little 'excitement'
DA2: they upgrade the combat system and make it faster and more flashy

DA2: lack of quests, lack of areas, repetitive areas, poor story (too linear and your choice does not matter), droves of enemies falling from the sky
DAI: full of quests (even though they are sidequests), areas too large to be explored, non-repetitive areas, a definite improvement in story-telling and cinematics, NO MORE enemies falling from the sky

but now we have:

DAI: awful controls and fps, SLOW! it plays like a MMO! the story is too 'over-the place' because of the boring neverending fetch quests

Haiz...

People are just never satisfied even though Bioware did try to take in the comments and try to improve.

I expect DA4 will be without any fetch quests, mostly linear, turned-based combat (to prevent awful tactical cam controls) and plays exactly like a JRPG. But expect complaints on those as well.

if you are sooooooooooooooooo good, please make a game and make sure it is a hit even after 20 years (much like BG and DAO).

if not, just stay in the past and be content with DAO and played it till the end of time because DAO is never coming back (though I wouldn't mind a remake).

I get where you're coming from. I really do. However, if a change is made for, subjectively speaking, the worse, aren't allowed to criticise? Not saying we need to hate, but criticism is healthy. And if the franchise previously did something better, one does wonder why they've gotten worse, no?

[old_dawn]

I get where you're coming from. I really do. However, if a change is made for, subjectively speaking, the worse, aren't allowed to criticise? Not saying we need to hate, but criticism is healthy. And if the franchise previously did something better, one does wonder why they've gotten worse, no?

 

Many fear change and will fight it with every fiber of their being. But sometimes, change is what they need most. Sometimes, change is what sets them free.

[Panda]

People should stop comparing things to DAO, I agree with that. It's old game. It's great but it's not even that awesome that everything BW does needs to be compared to that.

[Lebanese Dude]

Many fear change and will fight it with every fiber of their being. But sometimes, change is what they need most. Sometimes, change is what sets them free.

Bahaha

[dantares83]

I get where you're coming from. I really do. However, if a change is made for, subjectively speaking, the worse, aren't allowed to criticise? Not saying we need to hate, but criticism is healthy. And if the franchise previously did something better, one does wonder why they've gotten worse, no?

 

i am not focusing of the changes that actually make the game worse (e.g. lack of tactics in DAI, linear game in DA2 compared to DAO) but changes that Bioware did to make the game 'better' because of their past complaints. people are just no appreciative.

 

people are never satisfied and complaining about the very thing they demanded to change is just unbearable.

 

E.g. More flashy and faster combat in DA2 ended up being "I hate those enemies falling from the sky"

 

More open (large) and no repetitive areas ended up being "Bioware games should not be open-world. They are not TES. make it linear like DAO and DA2"

 

seriously, tf?

 

i would be seriously pissed as a developer if i heard such comments.

[ShadowLordXII]

True, every game has it's flaws and perhaps some people do hold older games above newer ones due to unfair standards.

 

But there are objective reasons why some older games (not all) were better implemented and had higher quality than newer ones.

 

Take comparing Origins to DAII for example, there's no contest. Perhaps you can favor some aspects of II over Origins on a personal level, but to say that DAII is a better game is just untrue. Origins had more environments and areas, more options for character customization both in combat and for RPG purposes, the quests were well-paced, well-written and had decent amount of variation on outcomes; party customization and relations were also much better handled to where you could potentially ****** off or murder every single party member depending on choices; and the main story was familiar territory that was done well.

 

DAII had good ideas here and there, combat was still fun, the main story was good for the first 2/3rds and the cast was memorable with the rival/friendship system being a nice change. But overall, you can tell that DA2 took a step backwards in too many ways to be acceptable. Options for class customization were removed (weapon restrictions being foremost); Crafting and party equipment were either streamlined or removed entirely; and it relied way too much on forced drama in order to advance it's main plot and choices are restricted with outcomes that don't matter because the plot says so. Again, 2 was a good game, but it's clear as to why Origins is superior between the two of them.

 

Inquisition has a few issues as well, but so far it's objectively better than 2 and may be better than Origins despite some inherent problems (continued weapon restrictions for one). The developers wanted to strike a balance between the good stuff from both previous games in addition to new stuff and addressing some of the problems from both games (primarily dragon age 2). For the most part, I'd say that they've succeeded.

 

But the idea that people who hate newer games or aspects in newer games are living in the past is just an untrue generalization. Not to say that nostalgic lenses don't exist, but myself and others are perfectly capable of judging a game (old or new) based on it's objective vices and virtues.

[Clive Howlitzer]

Isn't it possible for me to enjoy the game and still insist that the interface/control for the PC is sub par?  If anything, it says something for how much I do enjoy the game given that I've put up with it as long as I have.

 

Of course, I am strange in that technical issues like controls and interface rank more highly for me than even gameplay sometimes. Since if the gameplay is the best ever but is marred by terrible controls, it becomes even more frustrating when its trying to keep me out of it. That is what I feel like when I play DA: I. I am having a blast but I'd be having so much MORE fun if I didn't feel like I was fighting the interface half the time.

[Greetsme]

All of the best things have already been done, made and imagined.  It just takes time for them to come back around to be in fashion once more.  Nothing is ever really NEW, except things born of desperation in the search for something new, which always ends up being a mistake to be learned from.

[Akka le Vil]

No sure if this should be here but I really do not get people's obession with living in the past...

 

All the complaints are because people are saying how great BG and DAO are and how all the new games are "DAI is NOT DAO", "BG2 has much better content than DAI", "DA2 sucks soooo much compared to DAO".

Typical overused strawman detected.

 

Facts : people criticize REAL flaws (like interface or dumbing down the AI system), arguing that it's absurd they exist because Bioware actually got them right in the past.

 

Strawmen : somehow these valid critics are twisted into the usual two canned answers :

1) "you live in the past"/"don't go with the time"/etc. (this happens 100 % of the time, always, regardless of the change good or bad, if someone doesn't prefer the latest iteration, someone else will accuse him of that ; that's the Godwin's Law of sequels).

2) "you just want a carbon copy of X"

 

Perfect example of what is a strawman : arguing against imaginary points that obviously are easier to fight and are barely related to the real ones !

if you are sooooooooooooooooo good, please make a game and make sure it is a hit even after 20 years (much like BG and DAO).

And to round up an already pathetic post, another overused idiotic "argument".

I guess you can't judge the quality of a car if haven't build one yourself too !

Oh, and never ever say a house has bad insulation or is dirty or is not well-built unless you've built one too !

 

[Lebanese Dude]

Typical overused strawman detected.

Facts : people criticize REAL flaws (like interface or dumbing down the AI system), arguing that it's absurd they exist because Bioware actually got them right in the past.

Strawmen : somehow these valid critics are twisted into the usual two canned answers :
1) "you live in the past"/"don't go with the time"/etc. (this happens 100 % of the time, always, regardless of the change good or bad, if someone doesn't prefer the latest iteration, someone else will accuse him of that ; that's the Godwin's Law of sequels).
2) "you just want a carbon copy of X"

Perfect example of what is a strawman : arguing against imaginary points that obviously are easier to fight and are barely related to the real ones !

And to round up an already pathetic post, another overused idiotic "argument".
I guess you can't judge the quality of a car if haven't build one yourself too !
Oh, and never ever say a house has bad insulation or is dirty or is not well-built unless you've built one too !

And your argument that Bioware got it right in the past is no less subjective than his post that DAI got it right.

Considering many things have been vastly improved, and the developers have already acknowledged persistent problems that people have with some technical and design decisions and are working to resolve them, I find an aggressive entitled stance to be no less "idiotic" either.

[JCAP]

All I know is Inquisition is ruining my life. That's how much I am loving it. It was also like that when I played Origins.

 

Everything else, every hater opinion, are just background noise. Best thing we can do to ignore is just pick the headphones and play like there is no tomorrow.

[Han Master]

This logic is flawed, for one thing ME 2 controls and combat are really different from ME 1 and yet few gamers complain about the controls change. The reason is that it was implemented correctly and many see it as an improvement over ME 1, so most gamers just forgot about ME 1.

[Han Master]

And your argument that Bioware got it right in the past is no less subjective than his post that DAI got it right.
Considering many things have been vastly improved, and the developers have already acknowledged persistent problems that people have with some technical and design decisions and are working to resolve them, I find an aggressive entitled stance to be no less "idiotic" either.

Your right playing with a controller, those playing with a mouse and keyboard does not shared the view that everything is done right.

[Scerene]

honestly the large open space isnt bad, i love the game, but for example in skyrim you had the dark brotherhood, the mages guild, the warriors guild and thieves guild etc etc, which really gave a compelling reason to follow them, even though the storylines werent always that interesting they were still more interesting than dai's go kill 10 rams etc. You were sent to assassinate a target, or explore an area or steal a specific item, see what i mean? We dont dislike change or open world games, its just that with the limitations in the game, it makes it difficult to make that world interesting. You cant kill people, you cant be a mean inquisitor, no guilds or other factions. etc there are a very small amount of areas to explore that offer anything really interesting. i would have actually liked more quests where i had to kill templars, bandits and mages instead of fetching this or that item. On the other hand DAI offers a much better main story, far more interesting companions, with personalities and backgrounds who have their own agenda and are interesting to interact with. The voice acting is superb and the dialogues are super engaging imo, ive laughed more times than one.

 

Its just that gameplay portion can be so laborious and for the wrong reasons. The crafting is fun and sheer amount of customization is amazing, All the cool things you can do with armor, weapons etc and brewing potions, on the flip side the lack of auto loot makes the experience really frustrating. The highlight system is terrible, because you often cant see what it is highlighting anyway, and often times it could just be a door or something else, while you are scouring the area thinking there is loot. There is also so much vegetation and stuff going on the screen which makes it even harder to see. The detail isnt a bad thing at all, on the contrary i love it, the world is truly gorgeous, the most beautiful ive ever seen tbh. It completely blows away even a heavily modded skyrim. The character models look amazing, and im so incredbly happy to see that the textures on the main chars face, are equally as good as the companions. Its hard to believe its the same bioware, whose games everybody was always complaining about in regards to the visual aspects.

 

So no i dont fear progress but not all changes are actually progressive. The game is also very poorly optimized, with graphical bugs and poor performance on high end pcs, more specifically for those of us with nvidia cards.

 

For example in preparation for DAI ive been going to kotor 1 and 2, games that had far fewer side quests, but far more interesting ones. You could roleplay and solve situations in various and very fun ways. DAI has progressed the rpg scene in many areas, but regressed them in others. im sad to see those games go tbh. The crpgs that are coming out offer this experience but im not really a fan of the small character models and how the games are built. Ive been one of the people who has been very vocal in regards to the rose colored glasses a lot of people have of DAO, but pretending that DAI doesnt have some very glaring flaws is disingenuous at best. 

[Akka le Vil]

And your argument that Bioware got it right in the past is no less subjective than his post that DAI got it right.

Yeah, sure, the AI scripts being worse now or the UI being worse on KB+M, are clearly completely subjective

[Lebanese Dude]

Yeah, sure, the AI scripts being worse now or the UI being worse on KB+M, are clearly completely subjective

The tactics were changed. Whether you like the new system is entirely subjective. Many people found the old system to be overwhelming or on the other end, capable of running the game on autopilot. So yes, this is subjective,

in fact every other design issue you state is subjective. When a significant amount of people have issues with a certain design decision, it's up to the developer to do something about it to appease those who gave issues with it. They can also do nothing! The game is perfectly playable.

Given that Bioware actually gives a **** about its player base and is working to resolve it, how about you settle down a little yeah?

[Lebanese Dude]

Your right playing with a controller, those playing with a mouse and keyboard does not shared the view that everything is done right.

Lol I play with a KBM and am playing it just fine.

Some issues could use work, particularly mouse rebindings and tac cam usability, but Im pretty sure people have bitched enough for me and then some,

[Greetsme]

A controller will solve everything, as well has make me futuristic, modern and with the times....baby.

[Akka le Vil]

The tactics were changed. Whether you like the new system is entirely subjective. Many people found the old system to be overwhelming or on the other end, capable of running the game on autopilot. So yes, this is subjective,

in fact every other design issue you state is subjective. When a significant amount of people have issues with a certain design decision, it's up to the developer to do something about it to appease those who gave issues with it. They can also do nothing! The game is perfectly playable.

Given that Bioware actually gives a **** about its player base and is working to resolve it, how about you settle down a little yeah?

I guess if you're fanboyish enough, you can find excuse for ANYTHING and pretend it's always "subjective" (after all, some people like pain, so punching someone in the face isn't necessarily agressive ! It's all subjective man !).

[Rasande]

I guess if you're fanboyish enough, you can find excuse for ANYTHING and pretend it's always "subjective" (after all, some people like pain, so punching someone in the face isn't necessarily agressive ! It's all subjective man !).

 

Beacuse it is subjective you monumental hobnob. Saying the old tactics system is more complex is objective, whether you think that's good or bad is subjective. Also your example is ****** stupid and makes no sense, agressive isn't descriptive of value.

Besides, people who like pain usually prefer the nipplepinchy kind.

[Lebanese Dude]

I guess if you're fanboyish enough, you can find excuse for ANYTHING and pretend it's always "subjective" (after all, some people like pain, so punching someone in the face isn't necessarily agressive ! It's all subjective man !).

Comparing physical violence to interface issues? Alright...

Did the guy who got punched give you permission to do so?
If yes, there is a consensual agreement to engage in...face punching. In that case, there is no aggression because both parties are involved.
If not, then the punch was not consensual and by nature is an aggressive action.
Considering you can sue a guy for punching you in the street, while you can't do so if done by a paid dominatrix sex worker, I rest my case.

The typical hater resorting to half-assed arguments when presented with logic gives me life.

[ZipZap2000]

Well said, armchair critics everywhere who couldn't come close to matching the standards they expect from others (there's a word for that). It's not the Dragon Age that you're used to, it's better and if you don't like it that's your issue, seriously hope Bioware doesn't take all the whinging seriously and just ignores it. Last thing we need is for them to ruin the next game catering to a minority of gamers.