392 réponses à ce sujet

[DigitalMaster37]

Mispost... move along... nothing to see here :-p

[AshesEleven]

I will say the difference in DAO is that the sidequests are more "attached" to the main quests. Not the save the caravans but things like Ruck are a sidequest but they are sort of "on the way" while you are doing other things.  In DAI, they are very much not connected to the story and the power and influence are ways they try and tie them in very similar to the War Readiness from ME3. It does give the sides a different feel.

 

I actually disagree.  I'd say the vast majority of the quests in Origins had no attachment to the main story.  Ruck was there whether you accepted the quest or not, and besides that I can barely think of another quest in Orzammar that was at all related to getting the dwarves on your side.  The Brecilian Forest had some stuff involving helping the Dalish and saving a few hunters and whatnot, so you could count those.  The Circle's side quests were basically non-existent.  Redcliffe did have some cool side quests to help prepare the village.  And Denerim was filled with generally unrelated crap.

 

Whereas in Inquisition, I am wandering around the Hinterlands and stumble upon Apostates and Templars fighting, and then from letters looted from their corpses I learn of the existence of rebel bases.  I can then go to these bases and destroy the rebels, which ties into the story of the Mage-Templar War.  I can also go looking for an Inquisition scout that went missing, which is tied into being part of the Inquisition.  Then there's a pack of wolves that needs slaying, but they've gone crazy because of a Terror Demon which slipped through the sundered Veil that I need to fix, so I definitely should be killing that demon before it causes more harm.  And there are plenty of quests like that, that tie directly into my purpose.  

[AshesEleven]

Blah blah blah

 

Nah I think he was being sarcastic and talking about himself

[DigitalMaster37]

Nah I think he was being sarcastic and talking about himself

 

yeah I agree, I picked up on that the second time I read it. Sometimes I respond too quickly! I fixed my reply lol :-p

 

My apologies!

[AshesEleven]

yeah I agree, I picked up on that the second time I read it. Sometimes I respond too quickly! I fixed my reply lol :-p

 

My apologies!

 

I edited my post as well, now no one will ever know what has occurred here!

[DigitalMaster37]

I edited my post as well, now no one will ever know what has occurred here!

 

Lmao, this is hilarious!

 

awesome, my blunder is effectively hidden from society lol

[Ieolus]

... but it was broke...in a lot of ways.
 
Mages were blatantly overpowered. There was a significant discrepancy in player power across playthroughs.

I take no side on your list of Origin flaws; some I agree with some I don't. But I want to know why this one here would matter in the slightest for a single player RPG where you are given the choice of classes to play.

Mages being overpowered is PART OF THE DAMN LORE of Dragon Age. Get over it. I want that part back since its been taken out as of DA2 and DAI.

I have playthroughs from every origin and class and I enjoyed them all. Absolutely no reason to deposed mages for some kind of stupid abstract balance between classes nonsense.

[Lebanese Dude]

Lmao, this is hilarious!

 

awesome, my blunder is effectively hidden from society lol

 

I demand to know what transpired!!!!

[DigitalMaster37]

I demand to know what transpired!!!!

 

Ha! I misunderstood your post and responded incorrectly. the "fixers" came and cleaned it all up though lol

[Lebanese Dude]

I take no side on your list of Origin flaws; some I agree with some I don't. But I want to know why this one here would matter in the slightest for a single player RPG where you are given the choice of classes to play.

Mages being overpowered is PART OF THE DAMN LORE of Dragon Age. Get over it. I want that part back since its been taken out as of DA2 and DAI.

I have playthroughs from every origin and class and I enjoyed them all. Absolutely no reason to deposed mages for some kind of stupid abstract balance between classes nonsense.

 

Well if you insist on singling out one of the many many design problems...

There is a distinct segregation between gameplay and lore that games need to keep.

Technically speaking, HP should not exist if you wish to follow lore 100%. Stab a guy once and down he goes. Where's that?

 

Considering that this game is also a party-based game, class bias can become an issue. What's the point of picking Zevran or Oghren when you can just run with Morrigan and Wynne and blitzkrieg everything?

The fact of the matter is that mages did everything. 

 

Passing out some of their powers to other classes led to more fair and balanced party compositions and consequently promotes different experiences that BioWare wishes you to have.

 

In DA2:

Resource regeneration and both offensive and defensive buffs mostly became the province of warriors. 

AOE crowd control and defensive buffs were largely transferred to rogues.

 

So DA2 did combat better in this regard.

 

In DAI all party compositions are powerful. It was another improvement in this regard. (Although attempting a 4 mage party on Nightmare is not recommended if you don't like to micromanage  )

[Ieolus]

Well if you insist on singling out one of the many many design problems...
There is a distinct segregation between gameplay and lore that games need to keep.
Technically speaking, HP should not exist if you wish to follow lore 100%. Stab a guy once and down he goes. Where's that?
 
Considering that this game is also a party-based game, class bias can become an issue. What's the point of picking Zevran or Oghren when you can just run with Morrigan and Wynne and blitzkrieg everything?
The fact of the matter is that mages did everything. 
 
Passing out some of their powers to other classes led to more fair and balanced party compositions and consequently promotes different experiences that BioWare wishes you to have.
 
In DA2:
Stamina regeneration and both offensive and defensive buffs mostly became the province of warriors.
AOE crowd control and defensive buffs were largely transferred to rogues.
 
So DA2 did combat better in this regard.

Yes I insist because this one item is nonsense.

It is called choice. If someone wants to run Wynn Morrigan and a PC Mage, so the heck what? Does that hurt you in some way?

You are advocating for taken choice away from people on how they want to play. I HATED DA2 forcing me to rely on other NPCs to make a combo happen. Most of the reason why I only went thru it twice, once with a Mage once without. Combat was the same in all playthroughs

Origins gave us distinct combat for each class. They all played to different strengths and tactics. During my non-Mage origins I wasn't upset that mages were overpowered, why would someone be?

So again you mention balance. What does balance have to do with a single player RPG?

[Sylvius the Mad]

@Syvius the Mad: Except that every video game ever has told you how to play. The ones you feel didn't tell you how to play - are just rules and restrictions you liked.

They place restrictions on how you can play. I think those restrictions should be clearly defined so that players know what they're getting.

Within those restrictions, how you're told to play is irrelevant. And nothing about DA2's Tactics system (which was superior to DAO's) restricted your options compared to Inquisition's limited automation tools.

I never used the Tactics except to turn them off because the initial tactics told me how to play. Yes, a small thing that took all of 5 seconds.

I object to being told how to play. RPGs are toys. Once I have the toy, I'm free to do whatever I want with it. If ever I feel like the game is trying to tell me, the player, what to do, my first instinct is to do the opposite just to see what happens. When dropped into an environment with mu feet on a path, I almost always turn around to see what's behind me.

[Naitaka]

They place restrictions on how you can play. I think those restrictions should be clearly defined so that players know what they're getting.

Within those restrictions, how you're told to play is irrelevant. And nothing about DA2's Tactics system (which was superior to DAO's) restricted your options compared to Inquisition's limited automation tools.
I object to being told how to play. RPGs are toys. Once I have the toy, I'm free to do whatever I want with it. If ever I feel like the game is trying to tell me, the player, what to do, my first instinct is to do the opposite just to see what happens. When dropped into an environment with mu feet on a path, I almost always turn around to see what's behind me.

 

Just like to point out while vanilla DA:O tactic was in fact inferior to the one in DA2, with Advanced Tactic mod, you actually had access to even better Tactic system in DA:O than the sequel.

[DigitalMaster37]

I object to being told how to play. RPGs are toys. Once I have the toy, I'm free to do whatever I want with it. If ever I feel like the game is trying to tell me, the player, what to do, my first instinct is to do the opposite just to see what happens. When dropped into an environment with mu feet on a path, I almost always turn around to see what's behind me.

 

No game really tells you how to play, they tell what the game consists of and what to expect before you give your money though and that is where I take issue, because some people who complain forego the "proper" consumer buying process and just buy the game and then play it and say "I can't do this, I can't do that" and then expect us and the game company to come and say "aww, do you want me to fix that for you?"

 

That is really annoying... Please read the description, watch a few preview vids and articles before purchasing so that when you spend your money, you can be confident that whatever it is that you like to do in the games you buy, you can do in this one... I have learned a long time ago that this sort of common sense is not as contagious as I once thought. People operate from hope far more than they should. I believe in hope, but hope without common sense and a tad bit of planning is blind optimism... which more often than not leads to pain and frustration

[Lebanese Dude]

Yes I insist because this one item is nonsense.

It is called choice. If someone wants to run Wynn Morrigan and a PC Mage, so the heck what? Does that hurt you in some way?

You are advocating for taken choice away from people on how they want to play. I HATED DA2 forcing me to rely on other NPCs to make a combo happen. Most of the reason why I only went thru it twice, once with a Mage once without. Combat was the same in all playthroughs

Origins gave us distinct combat for each class. They all played to different strengths and tactics. During my non-Mage origins I wasn't upset that mages were overpowered, why would someone be?

So again you mention balance. What does balance have to do with a single player RPG?

 

What choice was taken away? You can still run with mages if you wish. What are you arguing exactly?

 

Are you complaining that you have more options now?

 

Cross-class combos were only relevant on Nightmare, and if you didn't run a balanced party then when would you?

 

And balance has everything to do with any game ever made, both towards the player and towards the enemy. Saying otherwise is ridiculous.

Would you not complain if a boss one-shot you? Where's the challenge in the game if you can one-shot everything yourself?

If you don't want challenge, run on the easier settings and enjoy yourself with whatever you want.

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

It's hard to say exactly where development of the next game will go. I don't think they will abandon the current course in favor of going backwards. Maybe they'll just not release the game on PC at all at launch rather than fix the controls for PC, similar to Rockstar. That seems to be where most of the issues are stemming from. To be honest the complaints about quest/world/combat design are largely superficial and (hopefully) will go as equally ignored.

 

My only wish for this franchise is that it avoid MMO territory. I actually like the MMO-lite mechanics in DA:I, that doesn't mean making an actual MMO in this series would be a good idea. It wouldn't be.

 

Regardless, people living in the past won't change. I still do it with my favorite games that are 10 years old. I just don't make the fatal mistake of comparing them to games that are released today. People that do that are telling me they're not really gamers as much as they are a fans of a particular game. You either adapt or prepare to be habitually disappointed. Those people only harm themselves.

[Scerene]

haha ive changed my stance, the game becomes so much better once you get skyhold, but i still wish all that time spent on the fetch quests in the hinterlands would have been spent on something more interesting

[AshesEleven]

 

 

My only wish for this franchise is that it avoid MMO territory. I actually like the MMO-lite mechanics in DA:I, that doesn't mean making an actual MMO in this series would be a good idea. It wouldn't be.

 

 

 

I think I had a nightmare of that happening, once.  *shudder*

[Lebanese Dude]

 

 

My only wish for this franchise is that it avoid MMO territory. I actually like the MMO-lite mechanics in DA:I, that doesn't mean making an actual MMO in this series would be a good idea. It wouldn't be.

 

 

I love MMOs... but I'd rather BioWare not take that route.

 

I'm still holding out for a Warcraft 4 RTS. Please Blizzard D:

[DigitalMaster37]

My only wish for this franchise is that it avoid MMO territory. I actually like the MMO-lite mechanics in DA:I, that doesn't mean making an actual MMO in this series would be a good idea. It wouldn't be.

 

I  once was interested in a ME MMO, but quickly changed my stance. The dynamic of an MMO story wise is jarring IMO. When you have 50,000 heroes, reality just has to automatically be suspended. SP games like this thrive much better IMO, because it is far more believable. 

 

I hope BioWare never goes the MMO route with either of these franchises. ME and DA.

[Scerene]

It's hard to say exactly where development of the next game will go. I don't think they will abandon the current course in favor of going backwards. Maybe they'll just not release the game on PC at all at launch rather than fix the controls for PC, similar to Rockstar. That seems to be where most of the issues are stemming from. To be honest the complaints about quest/world/combat design are largely superficial and (hopefully) will go as equally ignored.

 

My only wish for this franchise is that it avoid MMO territory. I actually like the MMO-lite mechanics in DA:I, that doesn't mean making an actual MMO in this series would be a good idea. It wouldn't be.

 

Regardless, people living in the past won't change. I still do it with my favorite games that are 10 years old. I just don't make the fatal mistake of comparing them to games that are released today. People that do that are telling me they're not really gamers as much as they are a fans of a particular game. You either adapt or prepare to be habitually disappointed. Those people only harm themselves.

lol the thoughts on the quests, world and combat are "superficial"? those are the most important aspects of the gameplay, and no matter how good the story is,  the rest of the gameplay needs to stand on its own feet. There is nothing fun about playing something where the quests, world and combat are intolerable, which im not saying DAI''s are at all, but suggesting that people having an opinion on it is "trivial" is just plain ridiculous  I like the combat, and the world is beautiful, and character interaction is wonderful, i like the story etc, but the quest system puts a major damper on it, and its clear that many other people feel the same way. Of course bioware could simply ignore all of that, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt voice our opinion about it. We are after all paying a huge amount of money to play their games, and obviously they need to give us reasons to continue paying for them.

[RedLens37]

Nostalgia is a good thing as long as you're not devoid of openness to the new. I have fond memories of NES games as a kid, and there are a few things some of those games did better than games of today. Then some great experiences with PC games like Baldur's Gate and Civilization provided hour upon hour of entertainment. But games of today offer their own strengths. I am blown away by the graphical experience of DAI, and the sheer scope of the game is amazing. Change is difficult for most people though, and some will always think the "good old days" were better than today. Some things were better, but being stuck in the past seems fruitless and sad, imho.

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

lol the thoughts on the quests, world and combat are "superficial"?

 

Yes, they are. The game functions fine (on console, I did acknowledge that PC users have genuine troubles) if you don't like it, it's simply because it's not your gig. And hence not really anymore valid than someone saying it's the greatest game ever created.

 

Point being, it's hardly a reason for them to go changing the formula because a handful of malcontents aren't pleased with the design direction, like the OP suggested they might do. DA:I is likely going to get many game of the year awards, they should focus on improving what they have.

 

As DigitalMaster said it was fairly easy to do a little bit of research and find out what the game was about before spending any money on it. Most complaints about game mechanics are just a lack of common sense issue.

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

I  once was interested in a ME MMO, but quickly changed my stance. The dynamic of an MMO story wise is jarring IMO. When you have 50,000 heroes, reality just has to automatically be suspended. SP games like this thrive much better IMO, because it is far more believable. 

 

I hope BioWare never goes the MMO route with either of these franchises. ME and DA.

 

I'm not much of a ME fan, it's a great series though.

 

I guess because I'm not an overt fan of it I wouldn't be as bothered if they did a ME MMO. There are a shortage of good sci fi MMO's and ME is one of the greatest fictional sci fi worlds I've ever seen.

 

But seeing how Bioware did TOR, yeah probably not the best plan.

[Ieolus]

 

Point being, it's hardly a reason for them to go changing the formula because a handful of malcontents aren't pleased with the design direction, like the OP suggested they might do. DA:I is likely going to get many game of the year awards, they should focus on improving what they have.

 

lol, how many game of the year awards did Origins receive, and yet they sure changed its formula.