320 réponses à ce sujet

[samuelkaine]

Then consider yourself ridiculously lucky, or play some other games.  Check out the bug reports thread sometime.  Just for myself, my Skyhold was all over the place buggy.  I had the DX error until changed to fullscreen windowed, seen my characters spawn in the air and take huge damage exploring... This game has had terribad bugs - dont even get me started on the "post game" bugs.

 

The "Bioware polish" also takes into account things like fleshed out features.  Its not just "can you play it to completion" which is a ludicrously low bar for ANY company.  People expected things like Skyhold, strongholds, and the crafting to be fleshed out.  Not this "its technically in the game so... have fun!" design that we got.

 

People go on and on about the keyboard bugs, but I dont know what they expect for a "fix".  Combat on PC was designed with an mmo concept in mind.  Either you like mmo combat or you don't, so I don't know what there is to fix.

You declared unanimity, you were wrong.

 

You declared that Bioware games are typically more polished than this at release, yet can't name a single example.

 

Yeah, some people have bugs. This is a massive 100+ hour game released across five platforms. The people who don't have bugs don't come on the forum to announce it. If the game shifts a million copies, and 0.5% of users have problems, that provides plenty of people to populate bug threads.

 

But, as you go on to state, this isn't actually about bugs. This is about them not making the game you imagined, which in the cases cited would have required essentially making a fully 3D-rendered Crusader Kings on top of an rpg. And hey, I'd love that, but I can't see how anyone could demand it as a minimum. 

 

And the MMO point makes me chuckle, when Origins' (blessed be thy name) shuffling, delayed animation, staff-poking number-crunching is exactly like WoW's. The combat shift is in the opposite direction, more towards the action-RPG 'twitch' based system.

[Fast Jimmy]

Eh, I personally don't see why they need to choose one over the other.  It's possible to improve upon both systems - unless your argument is that you don't want people to have the option to play a more 'action-geared' style at all.  In that case, not sure what to say.  Bioware has made it pretty clear that they want to give players the option for both.  You might think that's impossible - I personally don't see it that way.

 

It is because you can't have one without handicapping the other. People complained Origins was too sluggish, slow and choppy - this was because animations occurred after the dice roll of the hit - there was no dodging by the player's reflexes or way to aim a hit to be more or less likely based on player skill. This was intentional, as it allowed segregation between player reflex and character stat skill.

 

In order to make combat faster and more reactive, the began introducing action elements. Now these action elements handicap players who don't want to use them - players who don't want to use player reflex skills like button mashing or barrel roll dodges are put at a disadvantage. And this is not an "increased gameplay challenge" disadvantage, but one that the game balances against, resulting in the player being on the receiving end of cheap shots and extra damage.

 

 

 

Give tactical autoattack, allow players to stack commands, find a way to fix how the camera works in certain areas; those sort of things seem like the main issues people have brought up in regards to tacticam.  As for my playstyle, the only thing I'm really looking for is more options when setting up our party's AI; and possibly enemies with smarter AIs themselves (I almost never see an enemy archer do something like Leaping Shot in order to get away from melee combat - unless they're a boss level character).  I don't really see how that would hamper your playstyle - I imagine you would see those things as an improvement as well.  Then again, what do I know?  *shrug*

 

I agree this would help tip the balance back towards the tactical side. It would certainly make it easier to engage in that playstyle. But inevitable, it will slant towards the favor of single-character control. As long as someone who controls a single character can do more damage, avoid more hits and manipulate the system, it will not be an equal system.

 

 

Example: Skyrim allows a player with zero archery or sneak skill to go into sneak mode, pull out a bow and arrow and perform crit attacks against enemies if the player knows the direction in which the arrow lists. It completely removes the need for any character stats or skills and allows the player's skill to trump what the game rules should make impossible. DA:I isn't to that point currently, but is an exact example of an ARPG which circumvents character-skill mechanics for player-skill mechanics. In PnP RPGs, you couldn't dodge an attack every single round just because you had memorized the enemy's attack animation. You shouldn't be able to do so in a party-based RPG, either.

[AlanC9]

It is because you can't have one without handicapping the other. People complained Origins was too sluggish, slow and choppy - this was because animations occurred after the dice roll of the hit - there was no dodging by the player's reflexes or way to aim a hit to be more or less likely based on player skill. This was intentional, as it allowed segregation between player reflex and character stat skill.

Note that the causality doesn't run both ways. Someone who didn't like the sluggish, slow, and choppy combat didn't necessarily want player reflexes to be part of the combat, even if combining lack of player reflexes with relatively complex animations is what caused the slowness. Part of being a player, rather than a dev, is being able to not think about those tradeoffs.

The main conceptual problem I see with the DA:O design approach is that it's incoherent. Some animations are real in the game world, others merely cosmetic. While a player can certainly train himself to know which is which, and to put up with arrows curving around corners to find their targets and so forth, it's hard to train yourself to like the presentation.

[SBMWaugh]

Seems to me that most of the backlash for this game comes from the PC players.  Playing it on the PS4, I haven't personally run into any game breaking bugs and find the controls to be adequate.  The tactical cam could use some work.  I don't like how it moves around like a character that can't jump and so has ti circumvent any obstacles that get in its way.  But in that regard I have found the game playable from the standard cam, entering tactical only when I absolutely need to.  In terms of the quality of the game though, I am finding it difficult to wrap my head around everyone's apparent expectations of where Inquisition was going to go.  DA:O was a good game for its time.  I personally think it aged poorly but that is mostly to do with the fact that I never played a modded version of the game, being mostly a console player.  DA2 was fun when it came out but the gameplay hasn't held up as well as Origins but I think its style has.  So with those two experiences under my belt, when they announced DA:I what I saw was some middle ground between the two.  And to me that is exactly what we got and then some.  We now have a bigger more fleshed out world.  A skill system that feels much more like DA2 with a tactical cam resembling more DA:O.  The scrapped attribute points allocation but gave us instead a decent crafting system where we could optimize our characters how we'd like.  I haven't run into anyone who knows the level cap so who knows how many skills we can unlock which then gives you more abilities to mix and match, even if you can only use eight of them at once.  I really only found that I liked using a couple of skills from each tree anyway, caring more about getting the passives when it came to levels.

 

So is Dragon Age:  Inquisition a perfect game?  Hell no.  It has its flaws.  Some bigger than others.  But does it deserve the backlash that it has been getting in some of these threads?  I don't think its always justified.  A long while ago now I came to the conclusion that developers won't be able to make the ideal gaming experience in the near, to maybe even distant, future.  That I, if not we, then have to pick and choose our games with more caution than before because we are going to be let down more often than not.  Also don't believe what Developers tell you.  Look at what is presented.  Sift out the general feel of the game, so how the pc moves and interacts with its immediate surroundings, and base your judgement of whether or not you want to play the game on that.  Throw the rest of the "gameplay" advertised right out the window.

 

You know what.  Here is a thought experiment.  Lets take the biggest map of DA:I and wonder what the game could have been like if the devs crammed all the content into that space.  The thought is that we would have a completely fleshed out "experience" in regards to more production time going towards a more limited space thus enabling them to include more into the game.  So maybe we could have scalled walls Assasins Creed/Shadow of Mordor style.  Yet combat would still have been focused around a party based system.  There would have been fewer high dragons to kill but they would have been tougher and more dynamic, instead of just hoping around leaving to to attack just their legs we might have been able to interact with more parts of their bodies and differently depending on the skills and class we chose.

 

I want to see a dev team take on this type of project.  Optimize for a better gaming experience at, possibly, the expense of having such a vast playspace.  I think that is a lot of games issues these days.  They bite off more than they can chew and don't put enough thought into optimizing a smaller but still AAA budget game.  There has to be a proper balance to size vs interactivity, if the two even really stunt each other as much as I suspect.  Not being a games developer, I can't say for certain.

[movieguyabw]

 In PnP RPGs, you couldn't dodge an attack every single round just because you had memorized the enemy's attack animation. You shouldn't be able to do so in a party-based RPG, either.

 

But you're acting like the party AI is incapable of, or doesn't already dodge out of the way of attacks that are coming at them on their own.  0o  At least that's what I gather from how you suggest it is exploiting the system to be able to dodge when we know an attack is coming.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvY22mC2Px0

 

Edit:  the last one is less about showing the character dodging and more showing that the AI can actually handle itself, if set up right.

[Corto81]

 

 

If DA:O came out today, it would be picked apart and destroyed. That we hold it in such high esteem (which, don't get me wrong, it certainly deserves) seems to come from a place of nostalgia more than anything. 

 

 

 

What would there be to pick apart and destroy, assuming it came out in modern graphics and engine (though still moddable!)?

 

Game was tailor-made for people who enjoy deep, tactical, party-based, story-driven RPGs.

 

It never felt like it was catering to the CoD/GTA/etc. crowd.

 

It wanted to be as good an RPG as it could be, and it was awesome.

 

There's still a massive market for good RPGs... Skyrim never went from their own RPG formula.
I mean, even games like Divinity:OS sold great and got great reviews.

 

Sure, the odd shallow "professional" site might not like it (most of these games are reviewed by people who have to review everything, and are by no means RPG gamers primarily), but those are the same sites who give DA2 9/10 and DA:I 100/100 while failing to see any and all issues that are positively glaring to an RPG gamer.

[AlanC9]

But you're acting like the party AI is incapable of, or doesn't already dodge out of the way of attacks that are coming at them on their own.  0o  At least that's what I gather from how you suggest it is exploiting the system to be able to dodge when we know an attack is coming.

Hmm. Leaving aside the question of whether active dodging is any good on the merits, I can see a conceptual problem with using it in a party game. It's easy enough to make the AI-controlled party members never dodge, dodge better than any human player could, or dodge at whatever percentage in between the dev wants them to. But I don't see a good way to make it not matter which character the player is controlling at the moment the attack is launched.

[Megakoresh]

I would add a correction there: the tactical camera is useless on PC. It's made with controller in mind and FOR controller, and it's abhorrent zoom level made with weak console hardware in mind (less zoom, less stuff to render). With a controller, the little stupid pointer is rather comfortable to move around. And if you can get around having to scroll for a minute to actually be able to judge the battlefield due to zoom level, then I'd say this is one of the better strategy views the consoles have seen.

 

On PC though it is utterly useless. And what's more baffling about it, is that despite it costing barely anything to release patches on PC, they still don't do it. They could have released 2 or 3 patches already, but they are testing for consoles so they can release some huge motherlode of a patch somewhere next year perhaps, that will probably break more than it will fix and not fix most of these problems. And then they will deem their work done and move on to making DLC. This just makes me so angry! If they do it like that, Inquisition will be the last chance I would have given to BioWare.

 

The state in which the game was released and balanced, especially on PC with so many obvious, stupid failures, like the cursor not being locked to the game's window. All these are just ruining the whole experience and are inexcusable given the hype, even discounting the quality of actual characters, side quests and progression. Even the guild management - by far the best feature of the game, at least in my opinion, is plagued by stupid oversights like the table being too zoomed in so I can't click on the top missions. Or the cursor randomly stopping to be responsive (I have to alt-tab out and back to get it to work again).

[AlanC9]

I would add a correction there: the tactical camera is useless on PC. It's made with controller in mind and FOR controller

"Useless" strikes me as a bit much. Isn't the camera controlled pretty much like the Total War camera? I can understand taking a few moments to get used to the controls, but I don't see why a PC gamer should go all to pieces over it. I've only had a few minutes with DAI PC myself, but I didn't see any problem with the controls. (Zoom level, OTOH....)

[brzoz]

"Useless" strikes me as a bit much. Isn't the camera controlled pretty much like the Total War camera? I can understand taking a few moments to get used to the controls, but I don't see why a PC gamer should go all to pieces over it. I've only had a few minutes with DAI PC myself, but I didn't see any problem with the controls. (Zoom level, OTOH....)

i think that's the point. if you play on KB&M PC once in a while for a short time, you don't see any problem. if you don't touch the controller, you have no clue how this sick idea of controls/UI was born

[Razir-Samus]

 

But you're acting like the party AI is incapable of, or doesn't already dodge out of the way of attacks that are coming at them on their own.  0o  At least that's what I gather from how you suggest it is exploiting the system to be able to dodge when we know an attack is coming.

 

Edit:  the last one is less about showing the character dodging and more showing that the AI can actually handle itself, if set up right.

those videos contradict your statement that the AI can handle dodging, when in both cases they clearly took a hit to the face and THEN dodged... what they should have done was anticipated the attack and dodged before it landed

[Bladenite1481]

 

But you're acting like the party AI is incapable of, or doesn't already dodge out of the way of attacks that are coming at them on their own.  0o  At least that's what I gather from how you suggest it is exploiting the system to be able to dodge when we know an attack is coming.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvY22mC2Px0

 

Edit:  the last one is less about showing the character dodging and more showing that the AI can actually handle itself, if set up right.

This AI is ridiculously simplistic and for no reason. Go watch some videos on DA2 with fully set up tactical options. Its a well oiled machine. BW needs to put true tactics back in the game.  

[AlanC9]

i think that's the point. if you play on KB&M PC once in a while for a short time, you don't see any problem. if you don't touch the controller, you have no clue how this sick idea of controls/UI was born

I really don't follow you here. Like I said, the camera controls played like other PC games' camera controls. Actually, the entire control scheme looks like it was lifted from the recent breed of MMOs.

And I still don't see what a controller would improve except for the walking thing; not having a toggle on PC was kind of bizarre, yep.

[Siegdarth]

Came here only to say "LOL".  First CRPGs are point and click, MMOS came and they are point and click, CRPGS became WASD, like  other games (Kotor? Anyone?), MMOS became WASD, now CRPGS that are made as WASD have MMO gameplay.  Same thing for camera control. 

DAO : This game graphics are horrible/the weapons look the same/ there is no crafting/the medium armors and robes/staves look dumb, animations are shallow/ there are no one handed axes / dumb game have horrible animations / The combat is too slow and automatic, i never control other party members because of that/ Playing a rogue sucks, warrior have all the same weapon skills plus heavy armor / This game lacks true exploration / Why my male Warden can't romance Alistair?! / This game story is shallow and overused Good vs Evil / Some characters personal quests are oversimplified / The sex animations are lame! / The Warden lack of voice bothers me! / Mages have few useful spells ! / Mage is not worth it since it also hits my party/ Nightmare is too easy with my broken arcane warrior. 

Some years later 

DAI : This game is just eye candy/ There are few weapons/ The crafting is too complex, don't want to gather mats/ animations are too flashy/ there are too many one handed axes / Dumb game have too many animations / Where is my auto attack, the combat is too much action based, and there is no AI to hold my hand/ Hate my warrior, it does not have dual wield or archery!/ This game is too much open, it ruins the narrative!/  Why my male inquisitor can't romance Sera!/ There are too much gays on this game!/There is no sex scene for Josephine, i want to bang her , all that trouble for 2 kisses!/Why i can't bang Leliana/ Morrigan!?/ Some characters back story are too long.

Short story, people like being annoying. 

 

[Whooster]

Go be a play tester for bioware. Boom

[movieguyabw]

those videos contradict your statement that the AI can handle dodging, when in both cases they clearly took a hit to the face and THEN dodged... what they should have done was anticipated the attack and dodged before it landed

 

Yeah, a few times.  Other times though they didn't.  They acted exactly as you said - anticipated the attack, dodged, and took no damage.  Point was the potential is there to improve upon.  This isn't a system where if you leave them alone they'll just stand there and take the attack.  If they have enough stamina left, or the ability has cooled down, they'll dodge out of the way.

 

Keep in mind, dodge-roll is an ability that requires stamina, and has a cooldown (albeit a brief one).  If you're out of stamina you can't dodge.

 

This AI is ridiculously simplistic and for no reason. Go watch some videos on DA2 with fully set up tactical options. Its a well oiled machine. BW needs to put true tactics back in the game.  

 

Hey, I agree with you.  Read my earlier posts - that's exactly what I'd like to see.  I was posting the videos in response to earlier comments which seemed to suggest that because you can physically dodge away from attacks (what, every 2 seconds?) it somehow broke gameplay - because you could know an attack is coming and dodge it.  (I imagine the implication was that the party AI weren't capable of such things.)

 

Personally, I think the ability to dodgeroll away from an oncoming attack is less of an "abuse of gameplay" than having the ability to dump points into Dexterity until you reach 100% evasion and nothing outside of AOE attacks can hit you.

 

Or (and this is something I actually did with my Warden) dump enough points into Constitution to where you could auto-attack everything to death, without worry of being dropped.  Wound up with around 130 constitution by the end of Witch Hunt.  If I *really* wanted to, I could've had at least 200 (my magic base was in the 50's, after all)  Personally, that comes across more as an abuse of the system, to me.  I mean, hell, you can solo the Archdemon with only 55.  *shrug*

 

Edited: Accidentally wrote "70"s instead of "50"s originally.  XD

[AlanC9]

I was posting the videos in response to earlier comments which seemed to suggest that because you can physically dodge away from attacks (what, every 2 seconds?) it somehow broke gameplay - because you could know an attack is coming and dodge it.  (I imagine the implication was that the party AI weren't capable of such things.)

People might be reacting to those boss fights DA2 introduced where the attack animations were so slow that a manually-controlled tank wouldn't ever be hit. I'm no longer sure if Bio intended us to play that way or if this was an accidental byproduct of the design.

[Kinghaplo]

Sacrificing Magic for Constitution makes little sense though since mages are meant to be kept at a distance due to their weakness in close-quarters.  

 

And if one actually tries to make a mage who can take a lot of damage yet is ineffective when attempting to do what they are meant to do, everything, as you wrote, is tied into armour, enchanted jewellry, and other gimmicks in order to compensate for their lack of ability.

BLOOD MAGE!!

[Altima Darkspells]

Yeah, some people have bugs. This is a massive 100+ hour game released across five platforms.

To be fair, a lot of that 100+ hours is padding.

I'm beginning to think the most enjoyable path through the game would be main quest, companion quests (for the ones you like), and killing dragons. Because just about everything else is balls-ass boring and/or pointless.

[Bladenite1481]

There is a very popular mod for DAO called Skip the Fade. 

 

To play this game again I need a Skip the Fade, Skip the Ball, Skip the schematic farming, Skip the Fetch Quests Mod

[SomeUsername]

Its sad to see a game series like this take a down turn considering they had Origins so right. The game as mentioned plenty of times is not bad, but I just don't get why they have to make every rpg aspect of it so dumbed down. Does its simplicity really appeal to more people? I can understand the story becoming more boring or uninteresting in a series, but why do they have to change something they have more control over, for the worse? I am talking about combat and character combat customization primarily. I was really disappointed at it. But I would let go of that considering I bought the game for the story, characters, and consequences. Now I don't want to get into why I was a bit disappointed with those too, but can anyone truly consider this game better than Origins? The only thing that seemed better to me were the graphics, bigger world, and landscape. But all of those are expected in modern games today. If this game lacked those but made up with the story, characters, and consequences, and the combat, I would have been very happy for it and would gladly pay that $60 to continue the events and story of DAO and DA2. It also seems to me that a lot of people including myself, give this game a "thumbs up" because its not as bad as DA2 and as long as its not that bad, its okay and acceptable. I am not sure exactly when or how it happened, but apparently our expectations of big games like these are pretty low and as long as it exceeds those low expectations, the game is "good" and its okay if it still sucks in general. Origins was perfect for me and I am pretty sure for many other people. Inquisition is decent, and I doubt there are more Inquisition fans than DAO right now. Although who knows, it seems the "wider audience" prefers the simplistic and repetitive Skyrim over DA. If they don't, then hopefully Bioware will again try to learn from this and return the next game to its former place, where all the other DA games should have been. Anyways, this is my opinion, and while it looks like I have some hate for Inquisition I must say that I still love the game and the series and will probably be spending plenty of time in Inquisition before making another turn in Origins. All I am hoping for is that Bioware looks at what made Origins what it is and follow its way rather than trying to "change" the games.

 

Also one thing that Inquisition did well, was to make me appreciate Origins more.