934 réponses à ce sujet

[Darkly Tranquil]

I've grown to appreciate DA:I quite a bit. DA:O is a better game but DA:I has a lot of strengths - especially the expansive (quasi-)open world-ness of it. Looking back, DA:O was fairly linear.

Linearity is not a bad thing if your goal is to tell a compelling story. Open worlds are great if you are basing the game on exploration and emergent gameplay, but not so much if you are trying to deliver a narrative. Skyrim is great for giving players the freedom to just get out there and do what they wanted, but it's story is weak, whereas DAO was much more linear and restricted in what you could do, but it was much more structured and told a better story as a result. For mine, DAO had the right mix of freedom of choice and linearity to give players options while still delivering a strong narrative. DAI, on the other hand is too open in its structure and lacks control in its narrative pacing and delivery as a result.

[elrofrost]

You're joking, right?

Really. I remember seeing death threats over the PC UI. That's how bad the complaints got.

But they stopped once the Creation Kit was released and the modders got to work. Once SkyUI hit most of the complaints stopped.

[elrofrost]

Skyrim certainly had its fair share of criticism. I don't feel it's fair to compare the two. They are both High Fantasy games but that is where their similarities end. BioWare has always been focused on character-based development and interactions. I couldn't even tell you the names of my followers in Skyrim, but recall clearly every single party member from all three Dragon Age games and their respective personalities. 

 

 

There's a mod for that. Next time you play Skyrim, install the InterestingNPC's mod.

If DAI had a modding kit, we wouldn't be here bitching about the game.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

This was the best DA game so far.  It's just not very replayable for me because I don't have the time for long runs any more, and the console cheats haven't been unlocked.  Once auto-attack and some kind of kill command are enabled, I'll be back to playing.  I want the fun battles and conversations, but I refuse to do the grindy parts more than once.

[Frybread76]

My problems with the game are the grinding, short main quest, numerous fetch quests and lack of a modding toolkit.

Modding extends the life of a game for me, but it seems BioWare now frowns on this.

[Seraphim24]

It was halfway between Origins and DA:2, seems like it ultimately didn't totally satisfy or dissatisfy either.

 

The bigger problem is that the DA series as a whole doesn't really reflect BG for me.

[Qun00]

New game syndrome.

DA4 will get an even greater amount of whining for not being a carbon copy of Origins.

People will play it the **** out of it regardless.

[Qun00]

New game syndrome.

DA4 will get an even greater amount of whining for not being a carbon copy of Origins.

People will play it the **** out of it regardless.

[Riven326]

It was halfway between Origins and DA:2, seems like it ultimately didn't totally satisfy or dissatisfy either.

 

The bigger problem is that the DA series as a whole doesn't really reflect BG for me.

I've been saying it for years. BioWare doesn't know what to do with the Dragon Age setting outside of writing lore. The lack of consistency in everything, from gameplay to graphics, and everything in between, is proof enough of that. Compare and contrast with Mass Effect. Outside of some bad design decisions in ME3, the games are far consistent from a visual and gameplay stance.

[keesio74]

Linearity is not a bad thing if your goal is to tell a compelling story. Open worlds are great if you are basing the game on exploration and emergent gameplay, but not so much if you are trying to deliver a narrative. Skyrim is great for giving players the freedom to just get out there and do what they wanted, but it's story is weak, whereas DAO was much more linear and restricted in what you could do, but it was much more structured and told a better story as a result. For mine, DAO had the right mix of freedom of choice and linearity to give players options while still delivering a strong narrative. DAI, on the other hand is too open in its structure and lacks control in its narrative pacing and delivery as a result.

 

Agreed. Linearity helps for building a strong plot/story. I play cRPGs more for exploration so I am much more forgiving to games that have a more open world concept at expense of story. I tend to play FPS games for story. But DA:O did have a near perfect mix of delivering a strong story and and a little bit of freedom. It wasn't so locked as say Bioshock Infinite or Half-life 2 (both FPS games), which had a facinsating story but was a very linear game.

[frostajulie]

the world is gorgeous, the companions are well done and act 1 was phenomenal.  character customization is awful combat on pc is a nightmare and lack of hairstyle options and cinematic conversations were a huge disappointment.  its a mixed bag for me. I'm actually back in a heavily modded skyrim

[Sidney]

I've been saying it for years. BioWare doesn't know what to do with the Dragon Age setting outside of writing lore. The lack of consistency in everything, from gameplay to graphics, and everything in between, is proof enough of that. Compare and contrast with Mass Effect. Outside of some bad design decisions in ME3, the games are far consistent from a visual and gameplay stance.

 

 

To some extent i think that is a product of ME being a consistent story. DA isn't and wasn't built to be "a" story the way ME was so they feel more free to play around with the look and feel. ME still was a whole different game under the hood. ME1 was more pointless wandering than even DAI for example while ME2 was a much more tighly bounded game than even DA2. You had wildly different combat from 1 -> 2 and the looting and crafting elements across all 3 were very different as were character development.

[Riven326]

To some extent i think that is a product of ME being a consistent story. DA isn't and wasn't built to be "a" story the way ME was so they feel more free to play around with the look and feel. ME still was a whole different game under the hood. ME1 was more pointless wandering than even DAI for example while ME2 was a much more tighly bounded game than even DA2. You had wildly different combat from 1 -> 2 and the looting and crafting elements across all 3 were very different as were character development.

I disagree. I think ME is a far more consistent IP, primarily because BioWare had a vision of what they wanted from the very beginning. Dragon Age started off as the spiritual successor to BG and then it changed into something else, and it's been changing ever since. Now it's closer to a generic fantasy RPG than ever before, and BioWare still hasn't been able to nail down things like general art style direction and gameplay.

 

The art and gamepay both continue to suffer from drastic changes with each sequel, which only serves to drive a wedge between each game and the player. This is very bad for a series that relies so much on past events from the previous entries, which often don't even feel or look like they happened within the same series of games.

 

We've had three Dragon Age games so far. That's three games that both look and feel completely different from each other. I don't believe this is on purpose. I think BioWare just can't figure out what to do with Dragon Age. I dare say that the only thing in this series that has been consistent is the romance options.

[Linkenski]

yeah, I have to be honest. I did play it twice and I feel like I'm all out of steam and I feel kind of indifferent about it now.

 

But still, 2 playthroughs, that has to count for something. I guess I liked it but it certainly wasn't all epic and hype like Dragon Age Origins, and I might add I played Origins the first time in 2013 which is relatively recent and after DA2 so I don't have that nostalgia-bias.

[AlanC9]

One of DAI's main downfalls is its lottery, randomized looting system, which makes farming a boring chorefest. You can be level 23 and still end up farming level 4 - 5 items from downed enemies. I realize this is a common feature in RPG's but DAI takes it to the extreme. Even moreso than Mass Effect 3. 

 

Did you maybe mean ME1? That had random loot, while the other ME games did not. Though the way scaling works in ME anyone who tries to farm is pretty much an idiot. But yeah, the RNG can screw you over if you need more bio amps or something and you just keep getting ammo you've already got.

[Fireheart]

I'm just going to answer # 2 because I really feel like telling this to somebody. First off, I don't know anything about Bioware. I've only ever played the dragon age games. Second, I really hated DAI. I was filled with RAGE when I completed it. It didn't help that I tried to get my character a "certain way" in the CC so much so, that I literally, honest to God, spent 3 hours in CC, and just gave up and went with a default. So I went into the game a little angry. I then proceeded to play the game waiting for it to "start". There were a lot of bad moments, like that elf girl that gets scared when you wake up in Haven. Then found out I was, supposedly, the Herald of Andraste. I thought it was pretty bad how I was given this title for the mere fact I just so happened to survive an explosion. Skip ahead, Haven is destroyed, which I believe was supposed to be the "start" of the game, equivalent to Ostagar. It still didn't feel like much. Nothing really surprised me in the game. Then Cass and her party decide to force on me the title of Inquisitor, something I believe I didn't even rightfully earn. After Haven, Corypheus was no longer much of a threat, he was just a dude we had to kill. The game failed to surprise me at all after this point. The Orlesian ball was boring, I spent 3 or 4 hours there because I didn't know what I was supposed to do, and the Fade was pretty uneventful(Hawke/Stroud in my game). It did not even look/feel creepy like it did in DAO and 2. It doesn't make any sense how the Inquisition has the authority to exile the GWs. Hmm, what happens after those? Arbor Wilds, I believe? Again, Corypheus is made to look like a fool. Fast forward to the end (the only interesting part), Corypheus is dead, Flemythal killed by Dread Wolf Solas.

 

After this bad experience, I ruminated over the game, thinking it couldn't possibly be as bad as I thought it was the first time, and started a second and as yet, incomplete playthrough. For weeks now, I've been contemplating trying to break from my obsession with the series because DA2 was subpar, and DAI imo had just gotten worse. DA4 might just be more of the same. But just now, I received the Dragon Age Origins Ultimate Edition and Dragon Age 2 for PS3 I ordered from Amazon... To be completely honest, I've only played some of the DLCs from Origins but it was not legal, as well as DA2....... But now I actually have the physical copies, and taking them out the shipping box and holding them and seeing the cases, fills me with something... Maybe nostalgia or joy. I'm so happy to finally do a real playthrough of Awakenings and all the DLCs, to be able to dive in and see some of them for the first time. I remember all the good times I had with them, will have with them and I feel so happy. I enjoyed playing them on pc... that's why I decided to buy them for real. My hope for the series had diminished but just looking at dao and da2's cases just respark the love I had for the series, so I will continue to hope for the best and that Bioware listens to the fan's feedback, and maybe just maybe, DA4 will be a great game like I feel DAI could have been. I'm not giving up on them yet.   plus I got the comic Library Edition too... it's the size of a textbook.

[kingjezza]

It's a total mess of a series which lacks any sort of coherant direction.

 

They have massacred the series since Origns.

[Archerwarden]

I disagree. I think ME is a far more consistent IP, primarily because BioWare had a vision of what they wanted from the very beginning. Dragon Age started off as the spiritual successor to BG and then it changed into something else, and it's been changing ever since. Now it's closer to a generic fantasy RPG than ever before, and BioWare still hasn't been able to nail down things like general art style direction and gameplay.
 
The art and gamepay both continue to suffer from drastic changes with each sequel, which only serves to drive a wedge between each game and the player. This is very bad for a series that relies so much on past events from the previous entries, which often don't even feel or look like they happened within the same series of games.
 
We've had three Dragon Age games so far. That's three games that both look and feel completely different from each other. I don't believe this is on purpose. I think BioWare just can't figure out what to do with Dragon Age. I dare say that the only thing in this series that has been consistent is the romance options.

just wanted to say agree.

[Seraphim24]

I've been saying it for years. BioWare doesn't know what to do with the Dragon Age setting outside of writing lore. The lack of consistency in everything, from gameplay to graphics, and everything in between, is proof enough of that. Compare and contrast with Mass Effect. Outside of some bad design decisions in ME3, the games are far consistent from a visual and gameplay stance.

 

I'm guessing that's because ME had Casey Hudson as kind of driving and consistent force throughout the series. DA was a spiritual successor to BG which was really Muzyka and Ohlen I guess. I feel like the collection of writers like Kirstjansen, Gaider, etc, are all cool people that get excited about different ideas and execute them but it never felt to me like there was that guy at the very top going, lets go in this direction, lets make it like this and be bold.

 

At a minimum the DA team seems to learn pretty heavily on the character people, the game design side seems to be by committee without a ton of investment necessarily... hence the sub-quest-a-thon.

 

Honestly, I think they've been trying too hard really, it's ok to ignore certain ideas if you yourself are committed to it and can get behind the idea. They should relax and just let the ideas come =-)

[frostajulie]

Linearity is not a bad thing if your goal is to tell a compelling story. Open worlds are great if you are basing the game on exploration and emergent gameplay, but not so much if you are trying to deliver a narrative. Skyrim is great for giving players the freedom to just get out there and do what they wanted, but it's story is weak, whereas DAO was much more linear and restricted in what you could do, but it was much more structured and told a better story as a result. For mine, DAO had the right mix of freedom of choice and linearity to give players options while still delivering a strong narrative. DAI, on the other hand is too open in its structure and lacks control in its narrative pacing and delivery as a result.

I disagree.  Some of the open areas were actually really awesome and it was because they tied in to the story, I think and this is my opinion but I think that if all the areas had tied in more deeply to the game story wise then it would have been perfect but the hook for me as a player in a bioware game has always been the cinematics give me a beginning middle and end cut scene and conversation that ties me into the story and makes what I am doing in that area meaningful to the plot and characters and this game would have been golden.  If each area of exploration contained its own Noveria stylized plotline and accompanying cinematics and cutscenes this game would have been historical in combining the joy of open world exploration and bioware storytelling.  I just feel in this game one was sacrificed for the sake of the other.

 

And the hairstyles were really awful.

[Maniccc]

Well, I'll answer #2 because it's the only question I (or anyone else, for that matter) can actually answer.  

 

I at first was enjoying DA2, and then I experienced a series of disappointments starting with the pointlessness of those requisition "quests", if you can call them quests.  

 

Anyway, in the end, I lost complete interest in the series.  I will not buy any DLC, will not buy DA4.  I have absolutely zero desire to play anything DA related.  So for me, at least, DAI did what DA2 did not: killed the franchise.

[Hildegard]

In the immortal words of Dana Scully, 'Well I am pretty happy. So that's something."

 

I do not speak for vox populi, nor do they speak for me. I play BioWare games because of the story & characters. I love their games as a book.

So for me, the purchase was worth it. I had quite a few giggling monents along with funny,sad,embarrassing & one or two genuinely heartwarming ones.

 

And what's more, it introduced me to Sera. Just like ME2 introduced me to Mordin. DA:O introduced me to Morrigan. These, alone, made each of the games worth it.

 

To put it bluntly, I could not care less for the 'fan' reaction. I, as a consumer, love this product. Its fine by me.