133 réponses à ce sujet

[Lianaar]

@scrutinizer

You seem to misunderstand what I write. I have played males and females in various, even table top RPG, I have DM-ed both table top and text based rpgs, so gender alone is not an issue whatsoever. I do prefer to play women when I play, but roleplaying males do not cause any problems, since I am playing males in my playthroughs in DA and ME and other games where it is possible too. It does give a different perspective. My issue with Witcher is still not the fact that I can only play a male in it.

[scrutinizer]

Oh, I see. Sorry!

 

Sooo... Quite a mess we have with this patch thingy, don't we?

[Deadmuskrat]

Nah, it is just Witcher is not really for women. It is not for another company, it is against a wasted potential of witcher.

/facepalm

I'm so glad we have people like you who speak for all women. You're ideas of gender roles is a bit twisted.

[Elsariel]

I've done the tower, courtyard, and garden quests. What others are there and where do I find them? Are they requisitions or regular quests?

If you've done all those then I think you're done. I've not yet finished the game but I hear that those upgrades are it. Other people have said similar things - that when you finish, Skyhold still isn't 100% fixed up.

[Lianaar]

You took out a part from my text. By no means do I speak for all women.
But many women are put off with it. None can speak for anyone, no matter how much you try to twist my words

[Myrmedus]

Forgot on this forum there are like 100,000 fanboys... any post like this was going to be bait wasn't it haha

No it's just your post comes across like pointless moaning rather than anything constructive.

 

I personally think the issue isn't with the open-world at all but the side content in the game mostly being fetch quest stuff. Skyrim isn't 90% kill 3 rams and bring me their hides etc. almost everything you can do is an experience.

If that would've taken too much time for BW to release the game this century then they should've scaled back on the quantity in order to bolster the quality. And I think that's really all one can blame them for: their reach exceeding their grasp.

[Dandynermite]

If you've done all those then I think you're done. I've not yet finished the game but I hear that those upgrades are it. Other people have said similar things - that when you finish, Skyhold still isn't 100% fixed up.

 

You're correct, Bioware couldn't be arsed to finish it off lol.

 

Can't wait for Witcher, delaying a game so its properly finished, following through on gamestyle (you don't see them making Witcher open world because it sells although its always had fairly big maps), and free dlc. Bioware should take a long hard look tbh. 

[Dandynermite]

No it's just your post comes across like pointless moaning rather than anything constructive.

 

Yeah because Bioware care about their fans opinions so much don't they, what would be the point of making my moans constructive? They are never going to look at them anyway.

[Myrmedus]

Yeah because Bioware care about their fans opinions so much don't they, what would be the point of making my moans constructive? They are never going to look at them anyway.

If they don't care why bother posting in the feedback forum lol.

 

By the way I added to my original post.

[Leo]

 

 

Can't wait for Witcher, delaying a game so its properly finished, following through on gamestyle (you don't see them making Witcher open world because it sells although its always had fairly big maps), and free dlc. Bioware should take a long hard look tbh. 

 

Bioware also delayed their game.

 

Didn't the Witcher devs also state that they wanted to make Witcher 3 more open world?

[Dandynermite]

If they don't care why bother posting in the feedback forum lol.

 

By the way I added to my original post.

 

Skyrim isn't kill 5 rams and they still managed to finish it this century.

 

The side quests in Star Wars are actually rinse-repeat but disguised so they are actually very interesting, and have plenty of dialogue and small choices in them DAI completely lacks, some of my best moments of are the side quests in this game.

 

The fact they managed to introduce a shoddy multiplayer to cash in on down the line (when the game is already ridiculously overpriced, £50 direct download from Origin.....) shows they chose not to bother to add to the side quests and exploration, and they were happy with the fetch quests making up 90% of the game.

 

There is no excuse for a rushed single-player when you have time to develop a completely un-necessary multiplayer that lots of players are never ever going to even use. 

[Myrmedus]

Bioware also delayed their game.

 

Didn't the Witcher devs also state that they wanted to make Witcher 3 more open world?

Lol correct. TW3 is open world.

And both TW games had issues on release, quite a few issues in fact. I still remember the difficulty tuning in TW2 on release rofl. Geralt getting two-shot by random guys.

[Myrmedus]

Skyrim isn't kill 5 rams and they still managed to finish it this century.

 

The side quests in Star Wars are actually rinse-repeat but disguised so they are actually very interesting, and have plenty of dialogue and small choices in them DAI completely lacks, some of my best moments of are the side quests in this game.

 

The fact they managed to introduce a shoddy multiplayer to cash in on down the line (when the game is already ridiculously overpriced, £50 direct download from Origin.....) shows they chose not to bother to add to the side quests and exploration, and they were happy with the fetch quests making up 90% of the game.

 

There is no excuse for a rushed single-player when you have time to develop a completely un-necessary multiplayer that lots of players are never ever going to even use. 

It's not rushed ffs, stop saying that. Game had a 3 year dev cycle it wasn't rushed.

They just tried to pack too much stuff into the game is all and ended up with more quantity than quality (at least when it comes to side content).

 

Also don't forget that Skyrim doesn't really have much in the way of cinematics at all. There's no real cutscenes or scripted events in dialogues etc. which are all tailored work (and thus take alot of time).

However, ultimately the difference is that Skyrim came after Oblivion and Fallout 3 (and Morrowind before that) and incorporated everything they'd learned from those games. I know BW wanted to aspire to that level but I never expected it with Inquisition yet because they're simply not as experienced or practiced in producing such a game yet.

Oblivion had some awesome side quests but its wandering content (ie. stuff you could do just by wandering around) wasn't very good really. It wasn't like Skyrim where you could sneeze and find something interesting. The amount of times I delved into Ayleid ruins in Oblivion and found nothing except a Weak Potion of Magicka and 53 gold is innumerable.

I won't say Inquisition is without its problems because it does have shortcomings, especially in its side content, but I still think it's a pretty awesome game overall and a solid effort from BW. More than though, it's the first real attempt at an open world RPG (outside of MMO) so things can only get better.

[Dandynermite]

It's not rushed ffs, stop saying that. Game had a 3 year dev cycle it wasn't rushed.

They just tried to pack too much stuff into the game is all and ended up with more quantity than quality (at least when it comes to side content).
 
Also don't forget that Skyrim doesn't really have much in the way of cinematics at all. There's no real cutscenes or scripted events in dialogues etc. which are all tailored work (and thus take alot of time).

However, ultimately the difference is that Skyrim came after Oblivion and Fallout 3 (and Morrowind before that) and incorporated everything they'd learned from those games. I know BW wanted to aspire to that level but I never expected it with Inquisition yet because they're simply not as experienced or practiced in producing such a game yet.

Oblivion had some awesome side quests but its wandering content (ie. stuff you could do just by wandering around) wasn't very good really. It wasn't like Skyrim where you could sneeze and find something interesting. The amount of times I delved into Ayleid ruins in Oblivion and found nothing except a Weak Potion of Magicka and 53 gold is innumerable.

I won't say Inquisition is without its problems because it does have shortcomings, especially in its side content, but I still think it's a pretty awesome game overall and a solid effort from BW. More than though, it's the first real attempt at an open world RPG (outside of MMO) so things can only get better.

 
Yes it was rushed, there is evidence of it all over.

 

Do you notice a trend with Skyrim. Bethseda made awesome open-world exploration games, they didn't do cut-scenes that often. What did they change about this for Skyrim? Very little, they stuck to what they were good at and because of that made a very good game.

 

Why didn't Bioware do the same, especially in a sequel.

 

If they wanted to test an open world game, start a new one...

Instead they have disregarded what they were good at, cutscenes, dialogue, real character building, and tried to make a Skyrim lookalike (tbh its more Kingdoms of A than anything else). They should have made it Origins sized, DA2 was a tad small, but it was more the re-cycled building than anything (and their answer to this was to just make everything outside ) and done what they are good at. The open world aspect of this game is a failure. Compare the exploration and side quests to Fallout/Elder Scrolls and you'll see its a failure, all you do is kill x collect x, capture keep... bar the dragons here and there.

 

They have admitted on twitter it was rushed dude...

[Leo]

 

They have admitted on twitter it was rushed dude...

 

You got a link to prove this?

[Myrmedus]

 
Yes it was rushed, there is evidence of it all over.

 

Do you notice a trend with Skyrim. Bethseda made awesome open-world exploration games, they didn't do cut-scenes that often. What did they change about this for Skyrim? Very little, they stuck to what they were good at and because of that made a very good game.

 

Why didn't Bioware do the same, especially in a sequel.

 

If they wanted to test an open world game, start a new one...

Instead they have disregarded what they were good at, cutscenes, dialogue, real character building, and tried to make a Skyrim lookalike (tbh its more Kingdoms of A than anything else). They should have made it Origins sized, DA2 was a tad small, but it was more the re-cycled building than anything (and their answer to this was to just make everything outside ) and done what they are good at. The open world aspect of this game is a failure. Compare the exploration and side quests to Fallout/Elder Scrolls and you'll see its a failure, all you do is kill x collect x, capture keep... bar the dragons here and there.

 

They have admitted on twitter it was rushed dude...

But how do you think Bethesda got good at that kind of thing to begin with? Trial and error. And none of their games have been without weakness.

Skyrim's combat, for example, is pretty dour to be honest. In Oblivion, blocking etc. was actually meaningful and without it you'd get destroyed for much of the game. Skyrim's blocking is virtually useless and it just comes down to a click-mash fest. That's just one example. Another example is that the guild quests in Skyrim are sub-par, especially when compared to Oblivion's guild quests which are amazing, especially the Thieves' and Dark Brotherhood questlines.

Ultimately, this is how a series evolves and how a developer evolves. I already said that alot of the side content in Inquisition is not up to par when compared with those games, you don't need to harp on about it. I don't, however, think the game is a failure because unlike the games we're comparing it to it offers a great deal that they never will. Never will I really care about what happens to my character in a Bethesda game, nor will I ever connect with another character in the game on any level really. In fact, it speaks volumes the character I care the most about in Skyrim is Paarthurnax lol.

And to be honest, I think even without it half the side content in Inquisition there's more than enough content in the game. In fact, if I was leading the development team I personally would've just ripped out half of the side content. It's not needed and at times jars the narrative flow. Take out half the side content and you're still looking at a 60 hour game which is incredible. So no, I don't deem it a failure, I just think the balance is off and they tried to do too much, too soon.

 

On the rushed argument: I simply don't think the right word is "rushed" and I get the impression you're putting words in their mouth. What they HAVE said is they weren't able to get everything in that they wanted to. And that is vastly different for two reasons:

1. Judging by the size of the game we DID get it's more that the scope of the project was probably too large - again, reach exceeding grasp.

2. That's pretty normal for game development. Very few games get everything put into them they wanted, very few MOVIES do in fact (hence Director's Cuts).

They've said they plan to add in the extra stuff they missed out on putting in, which by the way is a significant thing to do as many games studios would just shoehorn that into paid DLC.

[Dandynermite]

You got a link to prove this?

 

http://blog.bioware....for-dragon-age/

 

Bottom paragraph "we ran out of time"...

[Dandynermite]

But how do you think Bethesda got good at that kind of thing to begin with? Trial and error. And none of their games have been without weakness.

Skyrim's combat, for example, is pretty dour to be honest. In Oblivion, blocking etc. was actually meaningful and without it you'd get destroyed for much of the game. Skyrim's blocking is virtually useless and it just comes down to a click-mash fest. That's just one example. Another example is that the guild quests in Skyrim are sub-par, especially when compared to Oblivion's guild quests which are amazing, especially the Thieves' and Dark Brotherhood questlines.

Ultimately, this is how a series evolves and how a developer evolves. I already said that alot of the side content in Inquisition is not up to par when compared with those games, you don't need to harp on about it. I don't, however, think the game is a failure because unlike the games we're comparing it to it offers a great deal that they never will. Never will I really care about what happens to my character in a Bethesda game, nor will I ever connect with another character in the game on any level really. In fact, it speaks volumes the character I care the most about in Skyrim is Paarthurnax lol.

And to be honest, I think even without it half the side content in Inquisition there's more than enough content in the game. In fact, if I was leading the development team I personally would've just ripped out half of the side content. It's not needed and at times jars the narrative flow. Take out half the side content and you're still looking at a 60 hour game which is incredible. So no, I don't deem it a failure, I just think the balance is off and they tried to do too much, too soon.

 

Compare the side content in this, to the side content in Fallout 3, a game where the background was a top down RPG, and look at how right they got it...

 

How old is Fallout 3....? Does anybody think Bethseda are going to screw up the next Fallout? Cut out the characters, the side quests? No.

Do I think the Witcher 3 will be worse than the Witcher 2, do I think they will cut down on the actual content, the dialogue's, the characters, to make the maps bigger? No.

Do I think the next Mass Effect is going to be even more CoD like and even less like the Mass Effect we loved, will it be bigger, but have a sub-par story, and will the main focus be drawing extra cash from the ongoing multiplayer, and abandoning the single player with plot holes and only very expensive paid for dlc... I have 100% certainty in it.

[Leo]

http://blog.bioware....for-dragon-age/

 

Bottom paragraph "we ran out of time"...

 

Okay, that doesn't come off as "we rushed the game" at all.

[Myrmedus]

Compare the side content in this, to the side content in Fallout 3, a game where the background was a top down RPG, and look at how right they got it...

 

How old is Fallout 3....? Does anybody think Bethseda are going to screw up the next Fallout? Cut out the characters, the side quests? No.

Do I think the Witcher 3 will be worse than the Witcher 2, do I think they will cut down on the actual content, the dialogue's, the characters, to make the maps bigger? No.

Do I think the next Mass Effect is going to be even more CoD like and even less like the Mass Effect we loved, will it be bigger, but have a sub-par story, and will the main focus be drawing extra cash from the ongoing multiplayer, and abandoning the single player with plot holes and only very expensive paid for dlc... I have 100% certainty in it.

Noone knows with TW3 at all, it's impossible to.

 

Inquisition has not cut down on dialogues, characters etc. at all, what it hasn't succeeded in doing is upscaling it well enough to the new size of the world, which gives the IMPRESSION of things having been cut down. TW3 may suffer from the same issue, it's impossible to say until it releases. TW2 was a relatively small game actually, it just did a good job with giving the illusion of size. Moving from that to genuine big, open world and POPULATING that world? Massive task.

And again, Fallout 3 is huge and all that but very little cinematic content. And to be honest I personally found it a bit meandering until The Enclave turn up 80% through the game, at which point it feels the game finally comes alive. Without DLC such as Broken Steel, Fallout 3 feels somewhat devoid to me personally.

[Aurok]

Kind of hard to give any credibility to an organization that has RUST - an unfinished game (still early access) as a finalist in the "BEST SOCIAL GAME – LARGE STUDIO" category. Very hard indeed.
 
I think their choice detracts from the legitimacy of any award given by them, They were seriously considering giving an award to a game that is NOT EVEN DONE.

They gave GOTY to a game that is not even done.

[Dandynermite]

Noone knows with TW3 at all, it's impossible to.

 

Inquisition has not cut down on dialogues, characters etc. at all, what it hasn't succeeded in doing is upscaling it well enough to the new size of the world, which gives the IMPRESSION of things having been cut down. TW3 may suffer from the same issue, it's impossible to say until it releases. TW2 was a relatively small game actually, it just did a good job with giving the illusion of size. Moving from that to genuine big, open world and POPULATING that world? Massive task.

And again, Fallout 3 is huge and all that but very little cinematic content. And to be honest I personally found it a bit meandering until The Enclave turn up 80% through the game, at which point it feels the game finally comes alive. Without DLC such as Broken Steel, Fallout 3 feels somewhat devoid to me personally.

 

The hundreds of varying side quests with all sorts of ending and choices and interesting gameplay...?

 

Big-Town, Megatron, Tenpenny Tower, Underworld, Rieley's Rangers,

 

New Vegas was even better.

 

Both games I would scour the map looking for more things, interesting places, new towns, never once did I think, aw man, got to go and kill 10 ghouls and bring their heads to this guy in this town for the tenth time.

 

Inquisition there are zones I have no interest in even loading because I've seen to much of the same re-hashed rinse repeat kill this, click flag, yay, you spawned two npcs crap to even bother. 

 

If Bioware want to make "open-world" games, they have to be able to hold their own against other open world games, Inquisition can't hold a candle to Fallout or Oblivion, and I expect it won't be able to do so to Witcher 3 or the next-gen Fallout either.

What you seem to keep saying is that making an open-world game and staying true to the Dragon Age series (character development, cutscenes etc) is too big a task for Bioware, and that's true. It's exactly why they shouldn't have tried to do it.

 

Hell Fable didn't even resort to gather 10 hides quests as far as I can remember...

[saladinbob]

I'm now getting all manner of sound glitches during cut scenes which weren't there before. The same conversation playing over itself simultaneously, dialogue cutting out prematurely, dialogue skipping syllables mid-sentence (difficult to explain in text this one but that's what it sounds like; like a very miniature jump in the dialogue). None of these where there prior to my downloading the patch. Anyone else suffering from this?

[Dandynermite]

I'm now getting all manner of sound glitches during cut scenes which weren't there before. The same conversation playing over itself simultaneously, dialogue cutting out prematurely, dialogue skipping syllables mid-sentence (difficult to explain in text this one but that's what it sounds like; like a very miniature jump in the dialogue). None of these where there prior to my downloading the patch. Anyone else suffering from this?

 

Might want to try making yourself a thread for that problem rather than a reply here

[Myrmedus]

The hundreds of varying side quests with all sorts of ending and choices and interesting gameplay...?

 

Big-Town, Megatron, Tenpenny Tower, Underworld, Rieley's Rangers,

 

New Vegas was even better.

 

Both games I would scour the map looking for more things, interesting places, new towns, never once did I think, aw man, got to go and kill 10 ghouls and bring their heads to this guy in this town for the tenth time.

 

Inquisition there are zones I have no interest in even loading because I've seen to much of the same re-hashed rinse repeat kill this, click flag, yay, you spawned two npcs crap to even bother. 

 

If Bioware want to make "open-world" games, they have to be able to hold their own against other open world games, Inquisition can't hold a candle to Fallout or Oblivion, and I expect it won't be able to do so to Witcher 3 or the next-gen Fallout either.

What you seem to keep saying is that making an open-world game and staying true to the Dragon Age series (character development, cutscenes etc) is too big a task for Bioware, and that's true. It's exactly why they shouldn't have tried to do it.

 

Hell Fable didn't even resort to gather 10 hides quests as far as I can remember...

Different strokes I guess. I personally found the direction in Fallout 3 very jarring until towards the end. It started off with a particular story and then just forgot about it. It lacked direction for me which is what made it feel meandering, there never felt like there were high stakes like I was at risk until The Enclave turned up.

 

Anyway, no, I'm not saying it's too big of a task for BW. What I'm saying is it's too big a task to do on your first attempt, for any developer in fact not just for BW. Especially the case when you offer more than those other games in other areas. Like I said, I have never felt engaged with my character or the NPCs in a Bethesda world. They are fun games, great to lose yourself in but that's all. Dragon Age games make me care, pull me in, make me experience emotions and make me sit there for 10-15 minutes solid unable to make a decision sometimes (Iron Bull quest). Do I ever experience that in a Bethesda game? No.

 

So yes, I agree, I think they made the scope of the game too large compared to how much they could fill it with. And to compensate for that, they added alot of fetch/generic content. I do think they should've downsized their scope somewhat. However, it feels like you're being very blind-sided in your view. You're keen to pinpoint on the aspects that Inquisition lacks without giving any credence to things it does that Fallout 3, NV, Skyrim etc. have never done and likely will never do. Inquisiton is NOT a sandbox game, you need to take that into consideration.

People slated Watch Dogs because it wasn't as good at sandbox as GTA5 - I didn't because I never expected it to be, it was Ubisoft's first attempt at such a game vs. Rockstar who could make such games in their sleep these days (and GTA5 was an exceptional game even for them). It did, however, offer cool new ideas and concepts that GTA never did. Again, all those seem to be ignored and people treated it like it was just a sandbox game like GTA: it wasn't.

Process of improvement. Try, fail, learn, retry, succeed. That's how you grow and improve, and I fully expect the next instalment (or even Inquisition through content additions) to catch up. I also suspect TW3 will suffer from similar issues, all I can't guess is whether they'll be better or worse than Inquisition.