168 réponses à ce sujet

[Lukas Trevelyan]

Just one thing I'd like to add. Accept the game for what it is, rather than what you want it to be. Dear God just have fun and stop thinking about 'this could've been better' 'this is bad' 'this is cut'. Stop it! It's not your job, and while feedback is pretty great, it's become excessive to the point where people are basically begging to be disappointed.

Art is never perfect. It'll never be perfect. There are so many things I would've liked from DA:O but didn't get yet I still enjoyed the game. A TON of things I craved in DA2 but never got yet I still enjoyed the game. Lots of things I would've loved to see in DA:I, but guess what I'm still enjoying the game. The purpose of the game is to provide entertainment and all the games provide that one way or the other. So accept it, love it or hate it is up to you and your preferences, but start enjoying it. Look at the positives of the game and hang on to them instead of clinging to what could have been but was not and continuously tell yourself that you're 'disappointed'. Well what now? You still bought the game, it still have a ton of stuff to experience and enjoy.

 

As another note, while there were stuff that got cut, in no way has this game changed so drastically from the pre-alpha (which must be noted that is VERY possible to undergo massive changes). That'll require me to write a pretty lengthy argument but my time is short and I'm disinterested.

[Moondoggie]

At that stage of development they are working on all sorts of ideas for the game it's just like making a movie. You present the grand idea and then there are long discussions about what would be practical and what can be done under the budget and time constraints. Granted i think they should have done better with the Keeps looking at the ideas they had but i think people misinterpreted a lot of their promises about what is basically what the War Table does. On paper it sounds like you'll have forces all over the world you can interact with and send to areas which you can but you just do it via War Table and get a report on what happened. The one thing that worries me is how much was given up on to make room for multiplayer. For much of development Bioware were completely denying any multiplayer and then suddenly late on there it is and surprise it's a big money spinner i guess because EA want to start making some of their budget back quickly before they start throwing DLC at us. They would have wanted multiplayer finished and ready for release. 

[viperidae]

 even though it is kind of sad to think about these things, every game that comes has a  "could have been" every single great RPG over the last 10 years has had cut content, DLC and restoration mods. deadlines are just a fact of life.

[Elfyoth]

I am sad they removed that cresswood fort and village quest. 

[helpthisguyplease]

At that stage of development they are working on all sorts of ideas for the game it's just like making a movie. You present the grand idea and then there are long discussions about what would be practical and what can be done under the budget and time constraints. Granted i think they should have done better with the Keeps looking at the ideas they had but i think people misinterpreted a lot of their promises about what is basically what the War Table does. On paper it sounds like you'll have forces all over the world you can interact with and send to areas which you can but you just do it via War Table and get a report on what happened. The one thing that worries me is how much was given up on to make room for multiplayer. For much of development Bioware were completely denying any multiplayer and then suddenly late on there it is and surprise it's a big money spinner i guess because EA want to start making some of their budget back quickly before they start throwing DLC at us. They would have wanted multiplayer finished and ready for release. 

Well that is the thing it was not on paper it was in the game actually featured in the game it was not a idea they said wanted to have it has a feature they actually showed us. That is why I am confused when you speak of ideas that could not be made thanks to time constraint they were not ideas they were features in the game actual features shown to us in the game no ideas but features that where implemented.  Bioware showed us the features and then took them away. It pissed me of that they had them and took them not that they did not exist in the first place on in the f form of a idea of dev or on a paper. They existed and were featured in the game.

[berrieh]

The game could have (and should have) been so much better. It's such a shame, but we're talking about EA here. ROI is most important, never quality.

 

I really hate large publishers.

 

I wanted these things too, but I think the game is still quality, and some of these things probably went so that they could polish and give us quality in other areas. ROI is always going to be important, and any studio to whom they are not important doesn't stay open to make games. I'm hoping some of this stuff can be implemented in DA4, assuming EA studios and BioWare continue to use Frostbite and evolve the engine, rather than having to use a new one each game. 

 

The only way we will get features like this, though, is if they also improve ROI. That's the thing - this is an industry. We shouldn't expect profit not to matter. 

 

I definitely wanted the Crestwood choice thing. I wanted to assign flavor to Keeps and have it mattered. I'd love more with the War Table that feels meaningful - all of this is stuff I want. It's the kind of thing I'd buy as DLC if they still have any interest in developing it for this game. But I think they delivered a game well worth $60 and therein lies a problem in gaming - too many games go for the same price, no matter the development cost. ROI is the name of the game because this is a business; people work there, they need salaries just like you do. People invest; they expect to make their money back and more for their trouble, etc. The gaming industry and EA are hardly the greediest of industries (let's talk about kids sewing shoes for 16 cents an hour and then selling them for $150 if you want to talk greed), so I just don't get the complaints about "profit." 

[Mushashi7]

It's a matter of choice.

This game is much more advanced than the previous ones.

Bioware used more ressources on graphics and interface with this game. 'A lot of tech' some would say.

The story is good as any story can be. I think it is told well. The cinematics/cutscenes and the sound are beautiful.

I also think the RPG part is missing a bit. It has been pushed aside for the Hollywood movie style. But it is still a choice Bioware made. It's up to us If we like it or not. It's still a hell of a game. And the GOTY award is well placed.
 

[Giubba]

at least the people at projekt cd red are taking their time.

Bioware changed the relase date 2 time same as witcher 3 (without promising after the first time they did that that was the final relase date) and for the info that are coming up witcher 3 fanboy should brace themselves because if there is a game that strike as over ambitious that's witcher 3 and over ambitious game are the one with the greatest chunk of content cut (let's not talk about bug and such)

[NUM13ER]

There were at lot of factors: ambition outstretching time and budget, a new game engine and concerning themselves cross-platform development.

It all just makes me look forward to that possible instalment in the future that's purely for the new gen. They'll be more familiar with the engine and tech at their disposal and be able to focus their efforts on just delivering a enjoyable follow-up.

[katokires]

There were at lot of factors: ambition outstretching time and budget, a new game engine and concerning themselves cross-platform development.

It all just makes me look forward to that possible instalment in the future that's purely for the new gen. They'll be more familiar with the engine and tech at their disposal and be able to focus their efforts on just delivering a enjoyable follow-up.

I don't know how people loved or hated Legacy here but for me it "fixed" all my complaints about DA2. So perhaps we will see very good improvements before a next title, DLC and/or expansions can be great if Bioware wants. (Also loved Mark of Assassin)

[WarBaby2]

This game is much more advanced than the previous ones.
 

Is it really? I'm not so sure, actually... it cost more and has higher production values, that's appearent, but other then that? Compared with DAO/DA2 it got the shorter main story, less indepth side quests and characters, still simpler character/skill/combat systems then DAO, and the weaker presentation.

 

Sure, it looks alot nicer and has open areas, but that's about it, really...

[jamesw849]

Priority 2 – Features and content

As massive as Dragon Age: Inquisition already is, there were some things the team wanted to get in at launch, but we just ran out of time. We’ll be creating these new features and content and adding them into your game over time because we love our DAI players. Multiplayer will also be receiving regular content updates.
http://blog.bioware....for-dragon-age/

Here’s my take on the game after having played through it and looking back at what I saw and heard a year ago, which made me take notice of the game.
The game that we have now is great and I felt almost compelled to keep playing. Not as good of a PC game as Origins, for obvious reasons, but that's another topic entirely. 
I am curious about one thing though, why was the final game less ambitious than the version shown a year ago? The game that we ended up with seems to be more of a standard CRPG than what I was expecting, lead to believe that we would get. Was it simply too much to expect, taking the timeframe into account? Was this the reason why they pushed the game back a year?Were they not able to tie this kind of gameplay into the storyline?
For those whom don't remember or didn't know about what we were shown back in 2013, here are some examples:
 
https://www.youtube....xJMWRI-cA#t=753
 
http://www.gametrail...-world-unveiled
 
http://www.rockpaper...ge-inquisition/
 
On to the list of design changes that I’ve noticed.

• 
  
• Regional choices were cut from the game in favour of linear progression through an area. From each area having an interactive storyline to areas serving more as standard RPG areas, that basicly just serve to level and gear up. The two examples that we know of that show this change are Crestwood and the Western Approach. In both cases we were shown the possible choices you could make. In Crestwood you had a choice between protecting a keep or Crestwood village. While Western Approach had you make stronghold choice after liberating the warden keep there, I'll get back to that later on, and opening up a new area by using your agents. I can only assume that Bioware had plans for each region to have its own storyline with important choices that would in turn have had a profound effect. "Gut-wrenching choices" as Bioware explained it.  
• A year ago Bioware had designed the game with a larger focus on managing your forces. Different forces being able to strengthen the Inquisition in different ways and you having to choose how to best manage your limited amount of agents/power. This role was presumably moved over to your advisor missions, in its limited fashion. The changes to the Inquisition forces leads me to the next point.
• Bioware had plans for a completely different stronghold/outpost system than what is currently in the game. As mentioned before, they showed players being able to make important choices on how to deal with captured strongholds: Have it focus on economy, military or espionage. Improve the stronghold by adding ressource buildings to it etc. As opposed to what we have now that have the keeps serve as quest and vendor areas. 

Now to my thoughts on the matter. 
 
Interaction
 
The previous system seemed to have been focused more on interaction  as opposed to what we have now which is a largely static experience.  By this I mean that when I played the game I got the feeling that I was the figurehead and martial champion while all the administrative decisions were left to my advisors, without my knowledge or advice. Fair enough, but other games (Neverwinter Nights 2 comes to mind) allowed you to give broad orders to your underlings whom would then do their best to fullfill your wishes. (Obviously this just amounted to them doing what you told them to, but it still seemed to give a feeling of macromanagement)
Bioware was probably planning on having the player manage the Inquistion to a far greater degree by giving the player more direct control over the direction of the Inquisition and actually watching it grow in power.
In the final version I never got the feeling that the Inquisition was spreading across a region, nor that the Inquisition was gradually becoming bigger. (The player just gets updates from time to time that the Inquisition is growing in power after doing quests and war table missions)

Another area that I found lacking was the ability to command your Inquisition or at least participate in larger scale conflicts between Inquisition forces and the enemies in a region that need clearing up. All we got are static camps and troops here and there that don’t actually do anything. The game made me feel like I was there to clear the way for the Inquisition to move in instead of helping/leading them to victory in an area against armies of enemies. In other words I missed actually seeing the Inquisition armies, why are all of the big battles offscreen? Engine limitations?

 
War Table
 
For the next part I'm going to split the missions up in forces and advisor missions.
Overall the war table isn't all that interesting, at least not to me. The missions themselves aren’t interesting nor rewarding enough and mostly seem like they are only there because they had something bigger planned, but still had to give the player some resemblance of control over the Inquistion. (Another thing that I’ve found to be a strange design choice is the sheer amount of power you’re able to gather. You will never be able to spend them all which makes the mechanic rather pointless)
The use of forces on the mission map seems to be rather pointless. For the most part you’re not given a choice between them and they seem to lead to the same result: An area being unlocked. I'm sure that Bioware had planned for forces, or agents as I believe they are called back then, to play a major part in shaping your version of the Inquisition.  
influence which is rather vague. 
The advisor missions are a mixed bag. We have the more interesting mission chains that sometimes have consequences tied to them and then we have the more standard missions that make up the majority of them, which I found to be largely pointless given the reward to time investment ratio. 
 
Customization
 
Another area that seemed rather lacking or rather tacked on was the ability to upgrade Skyhold. The three upgrades that we got seem rather pointless as only one of them actually give the player anything that can be used and the other two are simply cosmetic changes. The main customization feature is obviously focused on changing the appearance of the main keep, which is fine if not a tad limited. Of course I don’t know if they ever intended for Skyhold to be upgradeable to any real degree. The sheer amount of lumber yards and quarries makes me think that they had something more planned though.
An area that you never get to perform any upgrades are your troops. In other games, and even a previous Dragon Age expansion, players are given the ability to directly upgrade ones troops. The only instance were we see this in a requisition that doesn't directly do anything except give you a point of power. 
Neverwinter Nights 2 is a good example of a stronghold system done right. 
 
Conclusion
 
Since Bioware made the call to show important gameplay features that would never make it into the final game I can’t help but feel a bit mislead. Granted all of this was shown last year and things do change.  However Bioware did nothing, as far as I am aware of, to shown that they had indeed cut/changed said content. A case of marketing jumping the shark in order to hype the game?
What we have now is a great game that is very much in line with CRPGs, however I feel like it could have been so much more judging from what Bioware showed us last year. Having areas that would have been interactable to a far greater degree, with player choices actually changing the area, would have been far more interetesting and engaging as opposed to what we have now that feels more like a traditional MMORPG. As in they mostly serve as a leveling and gearing area before you venture deeper into the far more enjoyable main story missions. Although I should note that I have no problem with areas being static, when it comes to your choices having profound consequences, as it’s just in line with most CRPGs.
 
Is anyone else a bit dissapointed at what could have been? What are your thoughts on why they ended up backing away from their more ambitious plans.

[Korhiann]

I am certainly looking forward to seeing what they add onto the game to make it more like they originally wanted. 

[JJDXB]

Things getting cut is all part of project management.  You almost always start with a grand vision, then you must whittle it down else it will never be profitably completed.

[Yosharian]

Excellent post.  And it's key to note that it's not graphical changes, but rather important gameplay that is completely cut.

[Siven80]

I get the feeling that they used focus groups too much and so all the "hard choices" were dropped because some people in the focus groups preferred a simpler approach.

 

Dissapointing really, as the regions in DAI are nowhere near as good as the DAO areas, their storyline and choices to be made.

[Norwood06]

With respect to OP and those here, of course DAI could have been better.  I imagine that all games sound more amazing at concept stage than at release. 

 

What BW managed to actually realize of that concept is great.  Flawed, sure, but its good stuff.  Thinking like this, of how it fell short of the ideal / goal, is just going to sour you on the franchise needlessly, for a reason that I'm confident all games have in common. 

 

As others have said, enjoy what's there. And with luck, we'll be able to mod what we don't like. 

 

Cheers to all. 

[Korhiann]

Doesn't seem likely that anyone will be able to mod anything of real significance.

No, it will up to Bioware as to how much they want to add to the game with DLC. 

[The Spanish Inquisitor]

So I should point out to you all the video we have from DigiExpo was done behind closed door, the video was not officially released.
Yes fans like Me watched and got hyped. But its not the same thing, it clearly shows us content that was cut but it is not Bioware's

attempt to deceive us.

[stonerbishop]

The simplest solution is just not watch the pre-release footage. At all. I didn't and I quite enjoy the game.

You control what you watch

[RepHope]

Inquisition doesn't feel like stuff was cut out, but it does feel like stuff is missing. Skyhold, shaping the Inquisition, Cory sending his forces against yours, all these things are either missing or are rather hollow in-game. I enjoyed DA:I but man do I hope they patch this stuff in. I'll be po'd if I have to pay 10$ to fix the damn holes in Skyhold.

[Korhiann]

The simplest solution is just not watch the pre-release footage. At all. I didn't and I quite enjoy the game.

You control what you watch

 

What a silly notion. 

[Mr.House]

I guess I'm not as riled as I probably should be because I had no hype for the game, I was looking forward to play it but I didn't buy into the hype or believe that everything they showed would make it, yet they still succeed my expectations. Something I learned after ME2,DA2 and ME3.

 

Just me and being weird, don't mind me.

[Korhiann]

I guess I'm not as riled as I probably should be because I had no hype for the game, I was looking forward to play it but I didn't buy into the hype or believe that everything they showed would make it, yet they still succeed my expectations. Something I learned after ME2,DA2 and ME3.

 

Just me and being weird, don't mind me.

 

No reason to apologize for that. [Video game] History has shown that, that is the most reasonable/practical stance to take. 

[Mr.House]

No reason to apologize for that. [Video game] History has shown that, that is the most reasonable/practical stance to take. 

Personally I based my purchase off building an organization, rebuilding the south and getting along with my companions while beating up a ****** wannabe god. DAI succeed in all of that for me. Could it have been better? Yes, as much as I do like the final quest and ending, there needed to be more missions, Hissing Waste it self should not exist, the time spent making that useless area could have been spent on the Crestwood mission and making a version where the Venatori attack instead, more keeps to take, a proper mission to get an invitation to the Ball, a meet up with Barris before you go to Redoubt, a sieg on SKyhold ect. There was laot of missed opportunities, but it did not ruin the fun for me and in the end, as long as I had fun, Bioware succeed in their product.