Ce sujet est fermé
Or it's been like two months since we heard from bioware and it's fecking long.
Wrong. Last patch : 9 of december. And we are : 11 of january. One month since the last BioWare's words, including the christmas and new years' period.
Me too, I'm waiting for a patch, and I'm exhausted to wait, but we need to stay objective.
No patch news still?
Blimey! It's been a while now. I'd really love to start a new game but am fearful of investing time into it only to have the war room crashes stuff it up again (only had these crashes since patch 2 and the associated hotfix)
Here's hoping that they've not forgotten us , although the silence is begining to resemble Ubisoft in a lot of ways.
Ahh well back to Elite Dangerous I go - see you all in a few weeks time 
Yes.. it started to crash insanely more after their grand patch 2. All over the place and appears completely random.
Man this is by far the slowest patching i have seen. SO nearly 2 months and only 1 patch, no communications from the dev.
Seems they just dont care.
Every third game in Multiplayer is completly broken since release. No keys to preceed, no textures / monsters when by entering the next map. Cant move when entering a game. random crash to desktops, hooking in enviroment bug etc etc.... DAMP is pretty much in APLHA STATE.
IM never ever going to preorder a BW game again.
Maybe the entire team had off from Dec 9th till this week (a full month), and they are taking this time to start putting everything together for the next patch. Maybe there really was nothing done since then, and things are just now ramping up again.
I hope that wasn't the case. I would hope they'd have at least a skeleton crew of software people working on things throughout the holiday. But then you have to think they'd have at least been able to post some quick notes here.
That video and commentary about the combat being great tells me you really don't play games,listen up son:
RPGs are generally split into two categories where combat is concerned; active and turn based.
Some people are very hardcore RPG enthusiasts and will tell you if the combat is not turn based (i.e. combat is essentially frozen until a player carries out an order on his 'turn'; think FFT) then it's not a true RPG! However, RPGs have been popular with active combat as well (FFVII being a good example).
Now, give me a list of all the games you know which essentially merge the two? You see, as soon as elements from one break into the other it becomes counter intuitive; it doesn't bring the best of both worlds, it destroys the combat system as it is.
This game, for all intents and purposes, is a hack and slash game. Now, in Dynasty Warriors (Or insert any hack and slash game here, maybe even the one my hawt as fawk avatar is from) and add in an element where occasionally your ****** teammates need to be reminded who to attack; where to stand; who to protect. etc etc and in doing so you need to effectively pause the game (Pausing is not a tactic where real time action is confirmed. If you do this in a fighting game in any tournament you will be disqualified yknow) breaking up the combat and being a completely needless mechanic.
BW fanboy; The usage of tac-cam (Essentially a glorified pause button) really adds to the tactical value of such an amazing game!
In reality; The glorified pause button does nothing to add to the value of the combat in the game, but only serves to mask the glaring issues in combat and detract from the combat itself (I myself have had to use the pause button because my ****** vivienne would shield nothing in particular rather than Cass which I set her to protect in the "tactics" menu; another glorification in itself, don't get me started on it...).
The amazing thing is, they've masked it very well because evidently people are posting videos of the incredible tactical combat in DAI because you need to pause it every few seconds because the artificial intelligence in this game more closely resembles artificial stupidity. I think you should go play some other games with good combat systems and then come back, I'd be genuinely intrigued.
The amazing thing is, they've masked it very well because evidently people are posting videos of the incredible tactical combat in DAI because you need to pause it every few seconds because the artificial intelligence in this game more closely resembles artificial stupidity. I think you should go play some other games with good combat systems and then come back, I'd be genuinely intrigued.
its a matter of playstyle. for me it makes no sense to have a party and let the ai playing it. micromanaged all of them since baldurs gate myself, so no bigger problems with da:i. but wonder how people complain about dumped down mechanics and tactics while they wish to let 3/4 of their possibilities played by an ai
its a matter of playstyle. for me it makes no sense to have a party and let the ai playing it.
But no, it's not, you are missing the point. There are a few games I know of which have some hybrid element of combat to it for the purposes of being able to 'chain' attacks together (Magna Carta 2 comes to mind, while the game itself wasn't incredible the combat was one of the better points) but it wasn't for the purpose of doing so for a flawed system, it was to enhance an already GOOD system to make the player feel REWARDED for carrying out synchronization of attacks or abilities. It's like 'Yeah cool you managed to manipulate more than one character with strict timing, you get bonus damage!' or something, and not 'Oh look your ****** rogue is in melee range again, better pause the game and tell them to gtfo because they're stupid to do it themselves' That's not rewarding. Where is the reward in that?
The AI in DAI is just plain bad, and you are forced to go into pause mode if; cassandra uses charge, misses the enemy and will keep going until out of stamina; you want your mages to barrier tanks; you want your rogues to use abilities they should be doing in flask mode, and further more which flask to be using, etc. Why bother having a party if they're all just going to be stupid. Why bother having a tac-cam, ok sorry I can't even call it that anymore, it's a pause mode; why have a pause mode if it's only good for righting wrongs and not for added benefit. You don't even need to use it to chain attacks together, not that you'd want to because most enemies would be resistance to one of the elements and you'd get more damage by spamming spirit blade or w/e it is with KE; hidden blade procs on rogue, etc etc.
idk I'm still not convinced and I still think you are giving the fanboys (Of which you are one of) too much credit for a combat system that is bad. If the argument is, 'Well I like crap systems that are counter intuitive and I could not handle a game with no pause button' then ok fine, but if the point is the combat system is good then sorry, go play a different game and find out you're just wrong.
edit: the whole thing sounded like I was disagreeing with your whole post, when actually I was just pointing out the matter of playstyle bit. It ended up ranty.
My biggest fear is that the lack of word has to do with maybe them not being able to fix the banter bug as well as other bugs adequately.
Re: party banter ...
Are you playing on PC? If so, you might have already tried all the various user tips out there but I've had really good luck with prompting more party banter by making sure I "sleep" at camps at least once a game session ... and also, even though I'm set on a favorite party roster, changing my party members up at least once a game session too (after I do change the party roster, I simply use that party for a few minutes and then change back to my standard/favorite member choices and continue the game)....
With a party of Sera/Cassandra/Solas, I get banter content very frequently as I travel about (of course, not when on a horse) ... not sure if it has to do with the above tips, which I got elsewhere and from other users, but it seems to have really made a difference ... some of the Sera/Cassandra commentary is hilarious ...
But no, it's not, you are missing the point. There are a few games I know of which have some hybrid element of combat to it for the purposes of being able to 'chain' attacks together (Magna Carta 2 comes to mind, while the game itself wasn't incredible the combat was one of the better points) but it wasn't for the purpose of doing so for a flawed system, it was to enhance an already GOOD system to make the player feel REWARDED for carrying out synchronization of attacks or abilities. It's like 'Yeah cool you managed to manipulate more than one character with strict timing, you get bonus damage!' or something, and not 'Oh look your ****** rogue is in melee range again, better pause the game and tell them to gtfo because they're stupid to do it themselves' That's not rewarding. Where is the reward in that?
The AI in DAI is just plain bad, and you are forced to go into pause mode if; cassandra uses charge, misses the enemy and will keep going until out of stamina; you want your mages to barrier tanks; you want your rogues to use abilities they should be doing in flask mode, and further more which flask to be using, etc. Why bother having a party if they're all just going to be stupid. Why bother having a
tac-cam, ok sorry I can't even call it that anymore, it's a pause mode; why have a pause mode if it's only good for righting wrongs and not for added benefit. You don't even need to use it to chain attacks together, not that you'd want to because most enemies would be resistance to one of the elements and you'd get more damage by spamming spirit blade or w/e it is with KE; hidden blade procs on rogue, etc etc.
idk I'm still not convinced and I still think you are giving the fanboys (Of which you are one of) too much credit for a combat system that is bad. If the argument is, 'Well I like crap systems that are counter intuitive and I could not handle a game with no pause button' then ok fine, but if the point is the combat system is good then sorry, go play a different game and find out you're just wrong.
edit: the whole thing sounded like I was disagreeing with your whole post, when actually I was just pointing out the matter of playstyle bit. It ended up ranty.
first, when you using tac cam all the time the ai works mostly fine (f.e. hold position works there), so again its a matter of playstyle. second, i dont find the combat system very good its just to basic, the same as in da:o, so it delievered what expected. third, the combat system would not be magically better because of better controls, its still to basic and just a little bit easier to handle.
i like the game for what it is, it has the possibilty for at least a little tactic gameplay (on highest difficulty) unlike f.e. the witcher which only has action focused combat, i like the game for beautiful worlds to explore when in the mood for it and i like the game for a more than average story that is very well presented. the combination of it makes the game good and unique for me.
when i want to play a great story i play telltale games, when i want tactical depth i play a rts in pvp or a really complex turn based strategy game, when i want a action focused game with a lot of skill i play battlefield, when i want big character progression i play an mmo.
i like all of these games for their strenghts and dont expect from one game to satisfy all my desires. there would only 1 game in 5 or 10 years that would manage to do that.
i informed myself about the game before buying, not a year before buying because alpha footage means absolutely nothing, but watched a few reviews, streams and lets plays a few days before release. i did exactly knew what to expect from the game, so no reason to bitching around afterwards. sure there are things that could and should be better (f.e. tac cam that is affected by objects) but that doesnt mean i dislike the game.
who is the bigger fanboy? the one who preorders a game, absorb every information of it since early alpha footage, expect it to be as great as one of his most loved games ever, or the guy who like the game for his strenghts and is not impacted by its weaknesses so much because........well, its just a game?
That video and commentary about the combat being great tells me you really don't play games
I didn't post the video to say that the combat is "great," ... just that it operates as advertised (mostly, anyway ... minus that one demo video I've seen that shows the controlled character auto attacking Origin's-style) ...
It's not turn based, obviously, but it has elements of a turn based system as one certainly can micro manage/delegate each party member during combat, and as my own video demonstrates, the actions are carried out quite consistently ... and your right, Inquisition can certainly be played hack 'n slash as well ... is it either or? Not really ... it's certainly not pure turn based and certainly not pure hack and slash ... more so a combination of the two with any sort of "turn" being defined by the user (a facet I totally dig as watching my characters behave according to some auto-script routine is about as counter to a personal gaming experience as I can imagine) ...
Personally, with any such game where micro management is possible, I *always* do so. Coming from an extensive history of pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons game playing (both DM'ing and playing) ... any sort of personal control I can take over the proceedings just adds exponentially to my enjoyment of a game ... it's why I found DA: Origins so epic ... as, with certain tactic refinement mods, I could do some serious hands on player management. Inquisition, though not hardly as granular in that regard, is still fun to play in a "pause/delegate/pause/delegate" fashion... I would have preferred to see more emphasis on the combat/tactics "nuts and bolts" ... but I can easily suspend my own personal idiosyncrasies to simply enjoy what the devs/publisher decided to release and for whatever reasons they chose to do so; it's hardly a wasted effort in my experience, even though the publisher had quite a few palettes to paint for (all the various consoles and PC configs out there; that's no small task) ...
And if careful and OCD enough? Inquisition (and Origins) can be played to "feel" very similar to a turn based system ... albeit, it's self imposed turns wherein actions are delegated and then realized but it's "turns" of a sort, nonetheless.
This long winded history with "analogue" Dungeons and Dragons gaming is also why I was initially quite put off by the simplification of character development in Inquisition: no personal management of character stats/attributs? WTF is that all about!? ... I honestly could not believe that when I saw/realized it. But again, once I set aside the decisions I would personally make if developing my own game and simply resigned myself to enjoying what this particular developer had made? All such personal insult quickly evaporated and I've since been enjoying the game for what it is ... a game that sits somewhere between attempting to be a cinematic, "movie goer" experience crossed with simple elements of traditional RPG gaming ... as other review sites have said repeatedly, the whole thing smacks *very* much of the Mass Effect franchise in that regard and this is a very enjoyable thing in many ways...
Some RPG's I've played and loved? Might and Magic (early 90's turn based releases), Baldurs Gate and the early Fallout games ... Morrowind, Oblivion, etc ... pretty much the standard cult favs ... some hard turn based stuff (especially the epic, tile based progression first person games such as Might and Magic IV where so much is left up to the imagination of the player) and some a combination of user delegation and hack/slash (Oblivion, etc.) ... all are different in varying degrees, some more buggy of an experience than others, all with supporters/detractors on both sides of the aisle ... but all that I've immensely enjoyed all the same. Inquisition, among them ...
Or it's been like two months since we heard from bioware and it's fecking long.
Playing Elite: Dangerous ---> wait a week --> check to see if DA:I's been updated ---> check to see if Diablo 3's been updated since Rasputin ran around in dipers --->back to start and repeat
I wanna respond to the points above, because they're well written and some things have left me confused.
first, when you using tac cam all the time the ai works mostly fine (f.e. hold position works there), so again its a matter of playstyle. second, i dont find the combat system very good its just to basic, the same as in da:o, so it delievered what expected. third, the combat system would not be magically better because of better controls, its still to basic and just a little bit easier to handle.
Pause mode is bad, offers nothing besides masking the shortcomings of the game. The sooner this is accepted the sooner people can move on to more useful discussions.
i like the game for what it is, it has the possibilty for at least a little tactic gameplay (on highest difficulty) unlike f.e. the witcher which only has action focused combat, i like the game for beautiful worlds to explore when in the mood for it and i like the game for a more than average story that is very well presented. the combination of it makes the game good and unique for me.
The worlds are good, yes, but you spend what % of this game in combat? More than 50%? Less? Maybe it's comparable to exploring. Potentially exploring is the largest overall % of what you are actually doing in this game. It's for that reason alone I ran through this game twice and put up with the combat.
Combat on the highest difficulty.....
Ok I need to address this one, it gets brought up a lot and I haven't touched on it yet. For those of you who have yet to play the game and read all this about 'Oh it's so much better on nightmare you need to use the pause mode' etc etc. let me first tell you this does in no way increase the difficulty of the game. Adding numbers is a very, very, lazy way of making the game appear more difficult. All it means is enemies scale higher. They have higher base atk, def, hp. The AI is unchanged, the combat is unchanged. It's the exact same with the numbers less in your favour. It's like playing a roulette wheel with two zeros as opposed to one zero. All that happened was the numbers fell out of your favour. Difficulty does not play into it. And it brings another issue of combat into play; interactivity.
There is very little reaction in this game. In many others you need to pay attention to what the enemy is doing and react accordingly (Even in some hack and slash games wouldyabelieveit!). But this doesn't (Maybe dragon fights, but that's it). At every other point in the game combat is mindlessly running in, casting barrier, and press the buttons™. It's disengaging and not rewarding at all.
So in nightmare mode you have no room for creativity. You have to (In the early levels) play with the highest damage delivered and the lowest damage received. There is only one path for this. You are funneled in combat. Wanna do a full dps party? Forget about it. Wanna run a mageless party? Forget about it. Where's the fun? You're saying it's more difficult but do I find myself having to be more aware of what the enemy is doing? Nope. Do I need to react quicker? Nope. There's no difficulty increase. There is only hidden difficulty increase through the inability to play how you want to! That's not good game design! Wake up, sheeple.
when i want to play a great story i play telltale games, when i want tactical depth i play a rts in pvp or a really complex turn based strategy game, when i want a action focused game with a lot of skill i play battlefield, when i want big character progression i play an mmo.i like all of these games for their strenghts and dont expect from one game to satisfy all my desires. there would only 1 game in 5 or 10 years that would manage to do that.
So what does this game achieve? It's a chimera and does nothing exceptionally well. besides maybe the open world environments.
i informed myself about the game before buying, not a year before buying because alpha footage means absolutely nothing, but watched a few reviews, streams and lets plays a few days before release. i did exactly knew what to expect from the game, so no reason to bitching around afterwards. sure there are things that could and should be better (f.e. tac cam that is affected by objects) but that doesnt mean i dislike the game.
The first trailer I watched for this game was about 3 months before release. I bought this game on the basis of BW being a stellar game developer that create unique and interesting games. A perception that no longer remains, and a loyalty that, too, has now disappeared.
who is the bigger fanboy? the one who preorders a game, absorb every information of it since early alpha footage, expect it to be as great as one of his most loved games ever, or the guy who like the game for his strenghts and is not impacted by its weaknesses so much because........well, its just a game?
The bigger fanboys are the ones who are saying this game is good.
I didn't post the video to say that the combat is "great," ... just that it operates as advertised (mostly, anyway ... minus that one demo video I've seen that shows the controlled character auto attacking Origin's-style) ...
I'm not arguing the operation of the combat to what it was intended to be. I'm simply saying it's bad.
It's not turn based, obviously, but it has elements of a turn based system as one certainly can micro manage/delegate each party member during combat, and as my own video demonstrates, the actions are carried out quite consistently ... and your right, Inquisition can certainly be played hack 'n slash as well ... is it either or? Not really ... it's certainly not pure turn based and certainly not pure hack and slash ... more so a combination of the two with any sort of "turn" being defined by the user (a facet I totally dig as watching my characters behave according to some auto-script routine is about as counter to a personal gaming experience as I can imagine) ...
So it's not turn based rpg. It's not hack 'n slash. What is it? Again, it's a chimera with no real identity. That's not GOOD design.
Personally, with any such game where micro management is possible, I *always* do so. Coming from an extensive history of pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons game playing (both DM'ing and playing) ... any sort of personal control I can take over the proceedings just adds exponentially to my enjoyment of a game ... it's why I found DA: Origins so epic ... as, with certain tactic refinement mods, I could do some serious hands on player management. Inquisition, though not hardly as granular in that regard, is still fun to play in a "pause/delegate/pause/delegate" fashion... I would have preferred to see more emphasis on the combat/tactics "nuts and bolts" ... but I can easily suspend my own personal idiosyncrasies to simply enjoy what the devs/publisher decided to release and for whatever reasons they chose to do so; it's hardly a wasted effort in my experience, even though the publisher had quite a few palettes to paint for (all the various consoles and PC configs out there; that's no small task) ...
And if careful and OCD enough? Inquisition (and Origins) can be played to "feel" very similar to a turn based system ... albeit, it's self imposed turns wherein actions are delegated and then realized but it's "turns" of a sort, nonetheless.
Have you played age of wonders 3? I'm just surprised you have experience with such hardcore and old school turn based RPGs (Can't get more hardcore than PnP eh) and you seek to defend this game still? It's ok man. I understand, it's BW, we both want this game to be what it isn't. We both feel used. The difference is I took the blue pill.
It's not turn based, obviously, but it has elements of a turn based system as one certainly can micro manage/delegate each party member during combat, and as my own video demonstrates, the actions are carried out quite consistently ... and your right, Inquisition can certainly be played hack 'n
This long winded history with "analogue" Dungeons and Dragons gaming is also why I was initially quite put off by the simplification of character development in Inquisition: no personal management of character stats/attributs? WTF is that all about!? ... I honestly could not believe that when I saw/realized it. But again, once I set aside the decisions I would personally make if developing my own game and simply resigned myself to enjoying what this particular developer had made? All such personal insult quickly evaporated and I've since been enjoying the game for what it is ... a game that sits somewhere between attempting to be a cinematic, "movie goer" experience crossed with simple elements of traditional RPG gaming ... as other review sites have said repeatedly, the whole thing smacks *very* much of the Mass Effect franchise in that regard and this is a very enjoyable thing in many ways...
I would not, in a million years, consider this at all cinematic. I've played games on the PSX with better interaction, cutscenes, and plot development through absence of gameplay. I'd play any of the ME's 10 times over before I play through DAI again even once.
Some RPG's I've played and loved? Might and Magic (early 90's turn based releases), Baldurs Gate and the early Fallout games ... Morrowind, Oblivion, etc ... pretty much the standard cult favs ... some hard turn based stuff (especially the epic, tile based progression first person games such as Might and Magic IV where so much is left up to the imagination of the player) and some a combination of user delegation and hack/slash (Oblivion, etc.) ... all are different in varying degrees, some more buggy of an experience than others, all with supporters/detractors on both sides of the aisle ... but all that I've immensely enjoyed all the same. Inquisition, among them ...
Just can't believe you've played all of those games and still defend this game. It's bad, man. I guess if EA can buy out/fool the major gaming review sites they can do the same to ordinary gamers as well. It's sad. And the sad thing about it is it's because of people like you of the mind where 'yknow what it's good for what it is' is the same reason BW will release DA4, DA5, DA5 Resurrection, DA6, DA6: Extreme, DA6: Extreme Legends, and the chimera will develop, the cancerous nature of the 'hybrid' elements of game will push further into pressing (insert button here) repeatedly with uninvolved and uninspired quests in large glorious open-worlds.
Dragon Age is dead. BW killed it. And the gamers gave them the go ahead to animate the cadaver.
As a fan of the original one, I'm as sad as when From Software killed my beloved Tenchu series.
Thanks guys. Thank you all.
...who is the bigger fanboy? the one who preorders a game, absorb every information of it since early alpha footage, expect it to be as great as one of his most loved games ever, or the guy who like the game for his strenghts and is not impacted by its weaknesses so much because...
He is actually right. When you are informed they borrow **** from skyrim (Its just so LOL) and see devs playing this pc game for pc gamers with a controller in hand yet bought the game the shame is on you. And me. The only thing anyone can do is either leave it and dont look back or troll here on this forum because even moderators wont give a **** anymore.
BTW this exploring. What do you explore in the big mmo-zones of the game beside how many flag is plantable in Thedas, how shiny the collectible shards are? Or you explore how shiny and nice looking the waterfalls and trees of Thedas are? You got 10 zone full of this and the
you got 10 huge maps and you tell the story in missions in instanced zones they didnt spend enough time study skyrim) God, just dont make open-world if you dont now how to make it properly. Dont answer the question. Or answer me, feed the troll.
.....When you are informed they borrow **** from skyrim (Its just so LOL) and see devs playing this pc game for pc gamers with a controller in hand yet bought the game the shame is on you....
Seems they just dont care.
Every third game in Multiplayer is completly broken since release. No keys to preceed, no textures / monsters when by entering the next map. Cant move when entering a game. random crash to desktops, hooking in enviroment bug etc etc.... DAMP is pretty much in APLHA STATE.
IM never ever going to preorder a BW game.
LOL. Not at you but the fact that the game being so bad, EA still advertises MP downloadable content!
Maybe MP players need to buy a PATCH?
I didn't post the video to say that the combat is "great," ... just that it operates as advertised (mostly, anyway ... minus that one demo video I've seen that shows the controlled character auto attacking Origin's-style) ...
It's not turn based, obviously, but it has elements of a turn based system as one certainly can micro manage/delegate each party member during combat, and as my own video demonstrates, the actions are carried out quite consistently ... and your right, Inquisition can certainly be played hack 'n slash as well ... is it either or? Not really ... it's certainly not pure turn based and certainly not pure hack and slash ... more so a combination of the two with any sort of "turn" being defined by the user (a facet I totally dig as watching my characters behave according to some auto-script routine is about as counter to a personal gaming experience as I can imagine) ...
Personally, with any such game where micro management is possible, I *always* do so. Coming from an extensive history of pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons game playing (both DM'ing and playing) ... any sort of personal control I can take over the proceedings just adds exponentially to my enjoyment of a game ... it's why I found DA: Origins so epic ... as, with certain tactic refinement mods, I could do some serious hands on player management. Inquisition, though not hardly as granular in that regard, is still fun to play in a "pause/delegate/pause/delegate" fashion... I would have preferred to see more emphasis on the combat/tactics "nuts and bolts" ... but I can easily suspend my own personal idiosyncrasies to simply enjoy what the devs/publisher decided to release and for whatever reasons they chose to do so; it's hardly a wasted effort in my experience, even though the publisher had quite a few palettes to paint for (all the various consoles and PC configs out there; that's no small task) ...
And if careful and OCD enough? Inquisition (and Origins) can be played to "feel" very similar to a turn based system ... albeit, it's self imposed turns wherein actions are delegated and then realized but it's "turns" of a sort, nonetheless.
This long winded history with "analogue" Dungeons and Dragons gaming is also why I was initially quite put off by the simplification of character development in Inquisition: no personal management of character stats/attributs? WTF is that all about!? ... I honestly could not believe that when I saw/realized it. But again, once I set aside the decisions I would personally make if developing my own game and simply resigned myself to enjoying what this particular developer had made? All such personal insult quickly evaporated and I've since been enjoying the game for what it is ... a game that sits somewhere between attempting to be a cinematic, "movie goer" experience crossed with simple elements of traditional RPG gaming ... as other review sites have said repeatedly, the whole thing smacks *very* much of the Mass Effect franchise in that regard and this is a very enjoyable thing in many ways...
Some RPG's I've played and loved? Might and Magic (early 90's turn based releases), Baldurs Gate and the early Fallout games ... Morrowind, Oblivion, etc ... pretty much the standard cult favs ... some hard turn based stuff (especially the epic, tile based progression first person games such as Might and Magic IV where so much is left up to the imagination of the player) and some a combination of user delegation and hack/slash (Oblivion, etc.) ... all are different in varying degrees, some more buggy of an experience than others, all with supporters/detractors on both sides of the aisle ... but all that I've immensely enjoyed all the same. Inquisition, among them ...
Listen,
It's great that you enjoy the game.
PC gamers like myself who played DAO +DA2 to prepare ourselves for DAI have a totally different mental attitude. Our expectations were , amongst other things, based on the two previous games plus the famous ".. made by PC gamers for PC gamers.." and oh, the other famous Laidlaw line..."... we went back to our roots...".
So, no, this game is crapola based on:
1. UI interface
2. Poor KB+M controls
3. Loss of tactical list
4. Inventory management
5. Poor menu navigation to get at things
6. No auto attack
7. None to poor key to mouse binding
8. Tac cam that "works only for the blind"
9. A frigging f****g" AI
10. Last but not all, we expected a RPG with RPG type combat
So, if you like the game, enjoy the game, have no hardware problems with the game,...
Why are you here?
I wanna respond to the points above, because they're well written and some things have left me confused.
Pause mode is bad, offers nothing besides masking the shortcomings of the game. The sooner this is accepted the sooner people can move on to more useful discussions.
pause mod is not bad, you can do everything necessary in it, same as in da:o. if you have to use pause mod to compensate shortcomings in the action mod the action mod is bad, not the pause mod.
The worlds are good, yes, but you spend what % of this game in combat? More than 50%? Less? Maybe it's comparable to exploring. Potentially exploring is the largest overall % of what you are actually doing in this game. It's for that reason alone I ran through this game twice and put up with the combat.
Combat on the highest difficulty.....
Ok I need to address this one, it gets brought up a lot and I haven't touched on it yet. For those of you who have yet to play the game and read all this about 'Oh it's so much better on nightmare you need to use the pause mode' etc etc. let me first tell you this does in no way increase the difficulty of the game. Adding numbers is a very, very, lazy way of making the game appear more difficult. All it means is enemies scale higher. They have higher base atk, def, hp. The AI is unchanged, the combat is unchanged. It's the exact same with the numbers less in your favour. It's like playing a roulette wheel with two zeros as opposed to one zero. All that happened was the numbers fell out of your favour. Difficulty does not play into it. And it brings another issue of combat into play; interactivity.
There is very little reaction in this game. In many others you need to pay attention to what the enemy is doing and react accordingly (Even in some hack and slash games wouldyabelieveit!). But this doesn't (Maybe dragon fights, but that's it). At every other point in the game combat is mindlessly running in, casting barrier, and press the buttons™. It's disengaging and not rewarding at all.
So in nightmare mode you have no room for creativity. You have to (In the early levels) play with the highest damage delivered and the lowest damage received. There is only one path for this. You are funneled in combat. Wanna do a full dps party? Forget about it. Wanna run a mageless party? Forget about it. Where's the fun? You're saying it's more difficult but do I find myself having to be more aware of what the enemy is doing? Nope. Do I need to react quicker? Nope. There's no difficulty increase. There is only hidden difficulty increase through the inability to play how you want to! That's not good game design! Wake up, sheeple.
yeah the myth of advancing the numbers doesnt raise the difficulty
sure, it would be nice there would be AI's that could afford to cancel advanced tactics or make intentional mistakes in lower difficulties, but reality is that AI's have to work even in low difficulties with full potential to not be totally dumb. dont know why the development in AI's is so minor, but because it is in every game (even in tactical and strategy focused games) it looks like its a hard thing to do. take for example chess, a game with always the same battleground and just movement rules. normal chess AI's dont think, they choose from situations saved in libraries. if you want a thinking AI playing chess on the level of a clever human you need hardware in the size of a closet. and that is for a game with only movement rules on tiles, no skill/spell variety, no free movement and no changing battlegrounds.
so yeah it would be nice to have smarter AI's but it will not happen for a long time
So what does this game achieve? It's a chimera and does nothing exceptionally well. besides maybe the open world environments.
as i said, its the combination of things that make a game fun. no perfect ui or controls make a game good when there is nothing more. its the interaction of different elements that makes a whole. you can take the drummer of a good band, only hearing the drummer would let you hear a good drummer and not a good song. but you can have a mediocre drummer and with the other instruments of the song it can come together to a good song, even if every part is not good in itself.
this doesnt mean it fits for everybody, tastes are different. but only to look at one part and state the whole is bad doesnt work
The first trailer I watched for this game was about 3 months before release. I bought this game on the basis of BW being a stellar game developer that create unique and interesting games. A perception that no longer remains, and a loyalty that, too, has now disappeared.
just from my experience of a gamer since 30years, never believe the hype, never believe anything connected with marketing, never get too attached to a studio and never expect the next thing to be the holy grail of gaming (witcher3 anyone?). you could have known everything what the game is about when you would have looked a little more what was on the screen and not heard what they told about it
The bigger fanboys are the ones who are saying this game is good.
maybe some people enjoy the game just for what it is and not what they want it to be? the game is good, could be better could be worse. and to be honest, many of the critic is so hillarious over the top and just an outcry of dissapointed EXPECTATIONS that sometimes they have to be slamed with a little reality in the face
bold is the answer (doing jedi things with my hand)
Listen,
It's great that you enjoy the game.
PC gamers like myself who played DAO +DA2 to prepare ourselves for DAI have a totally different mental attitude. Our expectations were , amongst other things, based on the two previous games plus the famous ".. made by PC gamers for PC gamers.." and oh, the other famous Laidlaw line..."... we went back to our roots...".
So, no, this game is crapola based on:
1. UI interface
2. Poor KB+M controls
3. Loss of tactical list
4. Inventory management
5. Poor menu navigation to get at things
6. No auto attack
7. None to poor key to mouse binding
8. Tac cam that "works only for the blind"
9. A frigging f****g" AI
10. Last but not all, we expected a RPG with RPG type combat
So, if you like the game, enjoy the game, have no hardware problems with the game,...
Why are you here?
He/She does not want Bioware to ruin the game he/she enjoys with correcting the the problems you listed. Well, who am i kidding, most important ones of it cant be corrected by patching but still.
Why are you here?
Cause it's the "Dragon Age Inquisition: Patch 2" thread (and not the "Dragon Age Inquisition: It makes my butt hurt!!" thread) ...
This seems to be a great thread to post general comments about Dragon Age Inquisition (w/ Patch 2), positive or negative both ... can't say I can think of another more appropriate thread...
??
Cause it's the "Dragon Age Inquisition: Patch 2" thread (and not the "Dragon Age Inquisition: My Butt Hurts Because of it..." thread) ...
This seems to be a great thread to post general comments about Dragon Age Inquisition (w/ Patch 2), positive or negative both ... can't say I can think of another more appropriate thread...
??
This is the "complain about patch 2 and rage at anyone who doesn't despise the game and Bioware" thread.
Retour en haut
