130 réponses à ce sujet

[Seraphim24]

You never asked me about anything being good. Do I think what is good? Filler quests? I don't see the harm in a moderate amount of them, but Xenoblade and Skyrim (and now DA I) really take the cake. Skyrim and DA especially with their infinite quests (Radiant and DA's Requisitions).

 

Well at the time I just wanted to point out that it's not really true that RPGs, or CRPGs, or whatever, just always had pointless filler fetch quests, or even that current RPGs always have fetch quets. So defending DA:I on those grounds seems kind of silly when RPG makers have had and continue to develop any number of alternatives and distinct paths to create more detailed environments and characters.

 

But really I don't even know why that matters at this point. The fact is one way or another they caught on to a bunch of stuff and I personally find them pretty disappointing in their way.  I never considered people would actually like them though so that's kind of er.... surprising.

[Fishy]

it's funny how I was reading the name of this thread while I was actually listening to this.

 

 

 

Sadness and melancholy started to fill me. Has I watched helplessly the downfall of my favorite video game studio. Alone in my dark and humid computer room. Miserable for eternity..

 

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!

[spinachdiaper]

I lowered my expectations for DAI to expect a little kid DA2 dressed up in big boy Skyrim clothes and have enjoyed the game for what it is instead of wanting a true DAO sequal, also I've been jonesing for the next Bethesda FO/TES game and this is a kind of hold over.

[Il Divo]

That's really just not true, RPGs were kind of always fundamentally about at least your main character progression and making that as rich and interesting as possible. The glory of D&D was that you had this highly specific individual campaign that was limited only by the DM's imagination. Role playing did not mean "tons of XP quests where the only purpose is to level up." It was an adventure, it's only modern gamers and their obsession with mini-mico power increases at every turn did all the 'other stuff' kind of fall away.

 

You were just as likely to go on a quest because you might come across a god from the planes here visiting or deciding whether to aid or assault Drizzt (as in BG1 and 2). Sure, they gave exp, but I completely hear people's complaints that they're just kind of pointless filler. Quests doesn't have to mean boring quests, "plot" related or not.

 

Also there are JRPGs which in the past had virtually no or little filler type quests. If you did a side-quest it was going to give you some kind of fascinating unique backstory or something.

 

I don't think this notion that you are being "forced" to do them makes any sense though.

 

I have to disagree on this one. Going back to Baldur's Gate 1, there were more than a few quest lines that consisted of simply "kill this npc, collect this wolf skin", with virtually no other in-depth content to supplement it. Even the context for some of the moral decisions were pretty bland. 

 

I'm not saying those quest types are the most interesting and I acknowledge that DA:I has even more than most, but BG1 at least was not just about rich and interesting side quests (imo). I will admit that Tales of the Sword Coast was a bit better in that regard, though. 

[Il Divo]

The game's elements work perfectly for the game, *but* it draws more from titles I was already aware of than bringing something new, or at least *feels* new to the table. All games take inspiration; Even Shadowrun Returns, one of my favorites, draws heavily from Fallout, V:tmB, X-Com, Deus Ex, maybe a little Mass Effect. Breaking beyond imitation into inspiration is harder for me to see for Dragon Age: Inquisition.

DA:I's my favorite of the Dragon Age Series, and I wouldn't really put it down as a 'decline'.
Really? o.O I thought the opposite on characterization. Some of them seriously bug me due to their personality traits, but I've never thought they were uninteresting or boring.

 

Awesome avatar, Dom.

 

 

And gonna agree regarding DA:I. Granted I still have three quests left to finish out before I'm done with the main, but so far I think it's Bioware's best games released, with its combination of open world, environments, and interactive narrative. It also helps that DA2 lowered expectations a bit so it my hopes weren't quite as high as during the ME3 fiasco. 

[Katiefrost]

Clydesdales. Bioware needs Clydesdales. Look what they do for Budweiser...

http://www.thestloui...om-480x480.jpeg

[Seraphim24]

I have to disagree on this one. Going back to Baldur's Gate 1, there were more than a few quest lines that consisted of simply "kill this npc, collect this wolf skin", with virtually no other in-depth content to supplement it. Even the context for some of the moral decisions were pretty bland. 

 

I'm not saying those quest types are the most interesting and I acknowledge that DA:I has even more than most, but BG1 at least was not just about rich and interesting side quests (imo). I will admit that Tales of the Sword Coast was a bit better in that regard, though. 

 

Well that's why I also said that the CRPGs were arguably the first step in a reduction of the kinds of detail in the adventure itself. D&D had no budget constraints or whatever so the DM was free to make the worlds and characters as interesting and cool as possible. That meant you could be doing a "fetch quest" and suddenly 3 gods came in. At least in the D&D campaign I played things were never normal, you ended up stuck on a ship with a bunch of Tanaari who then suddenly fell into a conflict with Baatezu and the opportunity to escape arises, but you have to fight both sides who are fighting each other, and yet you have to leave one behind, or whatever.

 

Also in BG2 there are basically just 8-9 lengthy story type quests, Harper, Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, Druid (which was a little more boring, sure), Mage, with tons of interesting highly detailed things like the silence of the lambs guy in the one district, the thief guild.

 

See but take BG1 also, coming across Drizzt, that's cool, cause he's such a major character. Or going and doing the Gnoll Stronghold with the Edwin and Minsc, both of which are after Dynaheir for different reasons, and you go over like at least a couple zones to get there.

 

Finally, at least once upon a time, what are now called "fetch quests" were considered somewhat cool. The idea of going out to fight gnolls was interesting because gnolls were new and unique as was questing and being a paladin, at least in video games. It's long since past that point, though.

 

I would say it was WoW as much as anything that spawned the generation of thousands upon thousands of quests. Cataclysm had literally 3000 quests! Skyrim is somewhat similar, although many of those were in at least a somewhat detailed manner.

 

A company like Bioware doesn't have the resources really to make that kind of volume, but also, why would they? It's just a form at this point, an expectation that there be lots of grinding. There's a massive disparity there but it shouldn't really come as a surprise at this point.

[Dermain]

Well that's why I also said that the CRPGs were arguably the first step in a reduction of the kinds of detail in the adventure itself. D&D had no budget constraints or whatever so the DM was free to make the worlds and characters as interesting and cool as possible. That meant you could be doing a "fetch quest" and suddenly 3 gods came in. At least in the D&D campaign I played things were never normal, you ended up stuck on a ship with a bunch of Tanaari who then suddenly fell into a conflict with Baatezu and the opportunity to escape arises, but you have to fight both sides who are fighting each other, and yet you have to leave one behind, or whatever.

 

Also in BG2 there are basically just 8-9 lengthy story type quests, Harper, Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, Druid (which was a little more boring, sure), Mage, with tons of interesting highly detailed things like the silence of the lambs guy in the one district, the thief guild.

 

See but take BG1 also, coming across Drizzt, that's cool, cause he's such a major character. Or going and doing the Gnoll Stronghold with the Edwin and Minsc, both of which are after Dynaheir for different reasons, and you go over like at least a couple zones to get there.

 

Finally, at least once upon a time, what are now called "fetch quests" were considered somewhat cool. The idea of going out to fight gnolls was interesting because gnolls were new and unique as was questing and being a paladin, at least in video games. It's long since past that point, though.

 

I would say it was WoW as much as anything that spawned the generation of thousands upon thousands of quests. Cataclysm had literally 3000 quests! Skyrim is somewhat similar, although many of those were in at least a somewhat detailed manner.

 

A company like Bioware doesn't have the resources really to make that kind of volume, but also, why would they? It's just a form at this point, an expectation that there be lots of grinding. There's a massive disparity there but it shouldn't really come as a surprise at this point.

 

I''m going to nitpick here.

 

Drizzt isn't' a major character...he's a major Mary Sue. At least BioWare never really created a character that rivals Drizzt's Mary Sue level... 

[Mashiro Yuki]

Alright, I'll bite.

 

I haven't played Assassin's Creed Unity, admittedly, nor have I played Inquisition yet, but I have been stalking the crap out of them both on YouTube and such. Exactly what parts of Dragon Age plays like Assassin's Creed? I'm extremely lost there.

 

And I'm kinda sick of people comparing anything with "Open-World" in the synopsis to Skyrim. DA isn't open-world. It never was. It was never intended to be. Is it big? Yeah, but it's not open-world. It's no more open-world than Ocarina of Time is. It's large outdoor rooms. 

[NeonFlux117]

They lost their touch with DA2 then it continued with ME3 then SWOTOR, from there it's been a slow steady downfall and key departures from the old bioware. The new bioware is just an EA shill. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I''m going to nitpick here.

 

Drizzt isn't' a major character...he's a major Mary Sue. At least BioWare never really created a character that rivals Drizzt's Mary Sue level... 

 

Felicia Day's character in DA 2 was quite the Mary Sue. Revan too.

 

But yeah, Drizzt is one of the most obvious cases of Mary Sue in all of fantasy RPG fiction.

 

As for the aspect of filler, most if not all RPGs have filler. Filler being quest content that is not relevant to the main plot or to secondary plots. That said, filler doesn't necessarily mean bad. There are many filler quests that exist merely to flesh out the world and make it more interesting. Or to give new light to lore, dialog or backstory the player has been given.

 

The problem lies in uninteresting filler content. It can occasionally work if the game world and gameplay is designed as such to be challenging and/or engaging in it's own right - Skyrim may or may not fall under this category depending on personal opinion. Dragon Age: Inquisition is less fortunate. Why?

 

The world is smaller, it's less open, it's less random and the motif of exploration takes a backseat to story.

 

Personally to me, it's the big sandbox RPGs like Mount & Blade, Daggerfall, etc that can really take advantage of filler content like no other. Filler content is a good thing, because it's a way for the player to engage with the game's stronger elements.

 

But going back to BioWare, I think they had the right idea. But the execution is far from flawless. Mainly because they opted to have copious amounts of filler content in a story oriented game in faux-open environment with a limited amount of real exploration. Again, it really does remind me of a) Guild Wars 2 and Baldur's Gate 1. 

[Dermain]

Felicia Day's character in DA 2 was quite the Mary Sue. Revan too.

 

But yeah, Drizzt is one of the most obvious cases of Mary Sue in all of fantasy RPG fiction.

 

I still have to play that DLC in order to fully judge it.

 

Revan is/was a main character. By default, all main characters (and by extension most companions) are Mary Sues which is why I detest the term. This of course ignores it's constant misuse by people who hate X character.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Revan is/was a main character. By default, all main characters (and by extension most companions) are Mary Sues which is why I detest the term. This of course ignores it's constant misuse by people who hate X character.

 

More games do need to incorporate permanent but non-crippling failure states in which they're allowed to fail but still continue. I like how sports and grand strategy games so easily get around this issue by having the story essentially play out as a cascade of victories and losses, with the game reacting appropriately to each event. I'm not sure how it's tackled in RPGs though.

 

There are games like PS:T which sidestep the issue, games like Fallout that offer non-standard endings but by and large for a story to come to conclusion, it is implied that the character is successful every single encounter (reloading when not) unless the game wants a forced failure. There are some games that manage to evade it and newer ones like Shadow of Mordor that attempt to integrate it into the game with the wonderful Nemesis system. But it's still an issue the overwhelming majority of games struggle with.

[Cassandra Saturn]

They lost their touch with DA2 then it continued with ME3 then SWOTOR, from there it's been a slow steady downfall and key departures from the old bioware. The new bioware is just an EA shill.

wtf?
this is not EA.
seriously.

SWOTOR? hell no. it is called SWTOR. not KOTOR. completely different. Bioware is in charge of SWTOR. not EA.
do not blame Bioware for EA thing.

[TheChosenOne]

........... I liked DA:I :c

[SlottsMachine]

Alright, I'll bite.

 

I haven't played Assassin's Creed Unity, admittedly, nor have I played Inquisition yet, but I have been stalking the crap out of them both on YouTube and such. Exactly what parts of Dragon Age plays like Assassin's Creed? I'm extremely lost there.

 

And I'm kinda sick of people comparing anything with "Open-World" in the synopsis to Skyrim. DA isn't open-world. It never was. It was never intended to be. Is it big? Yeah, but it's not open-world. It's no more open-world than Ocarina of Time is. It's large outdoor rooms. 

 

I would say DA: I is definitely like Skyrim not only because there is a ton of fetch quests but more importantly because the best thing about either game is the exploration. As for Assassin's Creed, Inquisitions art style is very similar but that's all I'm seeing. 

[mybudgee]

They lost their touch with DA2 then it continued with ME3 then SWOTOR, from there it's been a slow steady downfall and key departures from the old bioware. The new bioware is just an EA shill. 

This post reflects my thoughts exactly^tm

[Cheech 2.0]

At the end my DAI playthrough, my game clock was over 120 hours. I admit it wasn't a very fun 120 hours, and so many little things added up to me not enjoying it all by the end.This is the first time in a Bioware game that I had no intention of starting a new play through immediately after finishing the first one. I'm glad other people are enjoying it, but it wasn't my cup of tea at all.

[SlottsMachine]

^Haha. I personally am enjoying it, but once I finish I don't see myself replaying it for a very long time. But then again I didn't replay Origins either. 

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Obviously it doesn't  have the replayability of ME1, ME2 or even NWN 1.

[Mashiro Yuki]

I would say DA: I is definitely like Skyrim not only because there is a ton of fetch quests but more importantly because the best thing about either game is the exploration. As for Assassin's Creed, Inquisitions art style is very similar but that's all I'm seeing. 

 

Inquisition does take place in a French inspired country, which is also where Assassin's Creed is based. Paris, I mean. It's not really that either is the same as the other, they're just both drawing inspiration from an actual existing culture. 

 

And I suppose I can agree that Inquisition has emphasis on exploration, but the gameplay is really different. It certainly doesn't feel anything like Skyrim to me. 

But maybe that's just my opinion. I also explored a lot in GTA, but it doesn't feel like Skyrim.