848 réponses à ce sujet

[Lintton]

I certainly like the faster pace of combat and more ambiguous system of approval for that 1st play through. Though I can see players wondering about an unlockable "relationship hint" for future playthroughs.

[dlux]

(cue obligatory "zomg console peasants")

 

Yep.

 

 

ZOMG CONSOLE PEASANTS. xD

 

 

 

Now try and find a low user score for DA:O. That might help you guys with your denial trip, i.e. "people whined about DA:O too".

[Giubba]

The forum was a good 20% Bioware is not right to call it the spiritual successor to BG2. Plus do you remember the occasional "why can't we create or own party posts"? Those were always a good time.

Still I miss the old forum. People were nicer.

There was an actual time where BSN wasn't a polluted wasteland of haters?

[Sanunes]

Is funny that BW pretty much gets a "this game is the final nail in their coffin" from certain "fans" after every game release, they should have been put out of business years ago if true

 

 

Honestly those things have been said after every BioWare game released after Baldur's Gate.  Mass Effect 1 wasn't Knights of the Old Republic 2 so the company would die, Jade Empire wasn't on the PC so the company abandoned its core fanbase.  New game same old arguments against BioWare.

[Kevorka]

I was hoping that DAO2 would be inquesion. But with a different name. However it grew on me and now I love it.

[In Exile]

There was an actual time where BSN wasn't a polluted wasteland of haters?

 

Yes and no. It ebbs and flows. Post-NWN1 it was a nightmare. It calmed down (ish) by KoTOR. JE was touch and go. ME1 and DA:O was generally pretty friendly with some exceptions. ME2 was a nightmare and that's where the metacritic hate started since Bioware publicly said they take pride in having 90+ user/critic reviews on metacritic. 

[Sanunes]

Yep.

 

 

 

ZOMG CONSOLE PEASANTS. xD

 

 

 

Now try and find a low user score for DA:O. That might help you guys with your denial trip, i.e. "people whined about DA:O too".

 

Did you actually look at MetaCritic for Origins? There are people who dislike the game even now.

[Giubba]

Yes and no. It ebbs and flows. Post-NWN1 it was a nightmare. It calmed down (ish) by KoTOR. JE was touch and go. ME1 and DA:O was generally pretty friendly with some exceptions. ME2 was a nightmare and that's where the metacritic hate started since Bioware publicly said they take pride in having 90+ user/critic reviews on metacritic. 

 

Point is that i don't remember that time anymore.

[In Exile]

Point is that i don't remember that time anymore.

 

I'm short. Points miss me easily? 

 

Seriously though, should have seen the sarcasm. >_>

[Lebanese Dude]

These threads though.

[vnth]

ha the answer is obviously never. Origins is simply not "exciting" enough to play on console, which is why Bioware tried so hard to make DA more like ME, because ME is a masterpiece "action RPG." Anyways complain all you want it makes no difference. No matter what anyone says Bioware will reply with he same old "we'll combine the best of both worlds" while incorporating various new bizarre choices into their new DA games. Overall it's not bad really. You just need to try very very hard to forget how good DAO gameplay is.

[Maverick827]

I hope I wasn't as much of a jerk as a lot of people here are when I was defending DA2/ME3.

[Sanunes]

ha the answer is obviously never. Origins is simply not "exciting" enough to play on console, which is why Bioware tried so hard to make DA more like ME, because ME is a masterpiece "action RPG." Anyways complain all you want it makes no difference. No matter what anyone says Bioware will reply with he same old "we'll combine the best of both worlds" while incorporating various new bizarre choices into their new DA games. Overall it's not bad really. You just need to try very very hard to forget how good DAO gameplay is.

 

Honestly Dragon Age: Origins feels just as exciting as Dragon Age: Inquisition on the consoles to me.  The difference is you don't have the hassle of trying to program tactics to automate the game.  

[Reymoose]

Honestly Dragon Age: Origins feels just as exciting as Dragon Age: Inquisition on the consoles to me.  The difference is you don't have the hassle of trying to program tactics to automate the game.  

 

What you call automation, most people who play anything other than action oriented games would call 'tactics', or 'strategy'. For example, assigning a warrior to shatter a frozen target, which is in line with a tactical game with a 'pause' command to have an overview of the fight at hand.

 

If that is a hassle to you, I suggest a game such as Goat Simulator may be more your style.

[ORTesc]

this forum may seem full of haters but I only see the same three people complaining basically those who can't move on from Origins ( their mentality: OMG BEST GAME EVER)

 

Inquisition isn't perfect but its still a very good game just like Origins was but nope apparently Origins is now the perfect game everyone loved it...

 

It's not that we can't move on, we simply can't understand why something that wasn't broken needed to be fixed. When a game sells as well as Origins did, you generally want to improve on it with sequels... not throw out the entire formula and make a totally different game. That's what Bioware did with Dragon Age 2. The issue with Inquisition is that Bioware basically lied. They said it would be a pc game made for and by pc gamers. That was a lie. They said it was going back in the direction of Origins, but that was a lie. All that was done was an improvement on Dragon Age 2 with an added sloppy tactical cam. PC controls are completely broken unless you're using a controler. The game was made for consoles, not pc users.

 

We can sit here and argue until the cows come home about if Origins was a good game or not. The sales numbers speak for themselves... so does the fact that threads like this one end up with 13+ pages in 2 days. And we're not talking about a game that was made in the 1980s. This is less than 10 years ago. With the success of Divinity, don't even tell me there's not a market for a proper CRPG... especially made by Bioware. Origins wasn't perfect, but it had the Bioware charm... something lacking in their new releases. And not everyone cares about action packed combat, story is what makes people like me stick around.

[ORTesc]

ha the answer is obviously never. Origins is simply not "exciting" enough to play on console, which is why Bioware tried so hard to make DA more like ME, because ME is a masterpiece "action RPG." Anyways complain all you want it makes no difference. No matter what anyone says Bioware will reply with he same old "we'll combine the best of both worlds" while incorporating various new bizarre choices into their new DA games. Overall it's not bad really. You just need to try very very hard to forget how good DAO gameplay is.

 

How exactly is Origins not "action packed" enough? Are you implying that all console gamers need constant action in their games to play them? And even so, there's combat in Origins. Just because you don't like the combat, doesn't mean the entire series is a failure. The Witcher didn't have the best combat, but that didn't make them throw out everything that worked well in that game. And honestly, if you're playing Bioware games for the "action", you're playing the wrong game. Bioware games have always been about the story and deep characters, decisions that matter. Maybe Call of Duty is more your thing?

 

At the end of the day PC gamers out number console gamers 10:1. For all the "next-gen" talk, Steam still has more users than both "next-gen" consoles combined. I'll never understand why this industry chooses to cater to a minority within a minority when there's such an obvious audience for that which has always worked.

[ORTesc]

These threads though.

 

I know right! People that hold an opinion other than yours are capable of making a 13 page thread in 2 days. Blasphemy! Silence the heretics! Heathens!

[Ashen Nedra]

Yes please.

[bzombo]

I have said this before, and I will say it again. If something isn't broke, then you don't fix it. Witcher never changed their gameplay up so much just to fit with a broader audience.

 

Now the argument goes, well it would be boring if it was the same game over and over again.

 

The best way I can counteract this argument is with an analogy. 

 

One night you make spaghetti, DAO, and it taste all right. Some things you need to fix. Then some nights down the road, you want to try that recipe out again and make it better. Instead of following your recipe, you make ravioli, DA2. Well now all your house guest expecting spaghetti are disappointed because they got ravioli and not spaghetti. So you go back to the kitchen down the line, have another house party, you actually make spaghetti this time, DAI, but it taste nothing like the original spaghetti you made and your house guest are happy its spaghetti, its definitely better than ravioli, but it's not better than that one recipe they really liked. 

Combat from the first Witcher to the Witcher 2 was completely overhauled. Not sure what you're talking about.

[Vilegrim]

A remastered version of Origins and Awakening, with Inquisition's engine? Sure.

 

But, " Origins 2 "? Why? About what, the Sixth Blight? Too predictable story-wise, and frankly unoriginal this time around, we've had a Blight-related story, it's called Origins, why that again? Ok, yes it kicked some ass, that game was (and still is) a masterpiece, I get that.

 

But right now we're already going somewhere potentially very interesting with the whole Dread Wolf / Mythal thing, it's not completely over yet. There's place for a fleshed-out DLC or certainly for another expansion for the main story. If not, the next "big" Dragon Age game that we'll inevitably have in about 4 years from now could well be the "sequel" of Inquisition (I do mean direct sequel; I.E. it starts exactly where Inquisition left off) and maybe we'll have something with a different scale to it, more "Origins-like", something more quantifiable and personal. We'll see I guess.

 

But honestly, another Blight, another Origins? That won't happen, simply because most developers out there can never replicate/reproduce the "same thing" two times over, especially not when the success comes from the original game of a franchise. That "rule" applies to most developers in the industry and can be extended to the movie industry as well. It seems that on a creativity/originality/artistic level it's almost impossible to create spin-offs or prequels or sequels that are just as good, much less "better" than the original creation. Either it's different but it's still good (not better), or it's different and it's much worse, but it's never "the same", it's never "just as good".

 

I would, however, certainly pay full price for "Origins HD", definitely.

 

 

In terms of gameplay, class structure adn all round mechanics, DA:O is still the best game in the series.  Use that.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Woo, let's belittle anyone who actually liked Origins and dislikes DA2 or DAI, because those opinions aren't valid. Take a shot every time you read "nostalgia", "old", "time to move on", and the like.

 

I've said this elsewhere, but:

 

DAO: A tactical RPG.

DA2: More of an action game.

DAI: A flat-out action game.

 

All three have fans. A lot of people don't like one of the other games in the series. A DAO fan might not like DA2 or DAI. A DA2 fan might not like DAO. A DAI fan may not like either of the previous. Guess what? They're all valid. And it's partially because Dragon Age has no identity as a franchise, because Bioware's always desperately grasping on whatever is popular at the time.

 

What I personally miss from DAO is the freedom. I could wear whatever I wanted, use whatever weapons I wanted, and have whatever skills I wanted in whatever combination I wanted. DAI actually goes farther in cutting off options than DA2 did. Armor is now race restricted as well as class restricted, weapon choice is even more limited, and items are level-restricted as well, but not when it comes to the oh-so-vital crafting system. Who needs rewarded for exploration when you can go build your own items?

 

It might have made "rogues and warriors too similar" or whatever nonsense, but you could very easily tie multiple weapon trees (Weapon/Shield, Two Handed, Dual, Archery) into the expanded class trees (Vanguard, Battlemaster, etc) from DA2/DAI. Bioware's just lazy.

 

And you know what the crazy thing is? Mass Effect actually fixed this. ME1 was an RPG with some pretty clunky mechanics. ME2 vastly oversimplified it, removing a vast swath of options but improving combat in the process. ME3 actually brought back those RPG elements, removed class armor and weapon restrictions entirely, and actually improved the systems from ME1 that had been left out.

 

Sounds kind of like Dragon Age, doesn't it? Instead of doing what the ME team did, the Dragon Age team swept Origins under the rug and stuck their fingers in their ears.

 

Insane, isn't it? Imagine if DAI had done the same. A game where my rogue wasn't stuck with daggers, my mage didn't have to wave around a stick (that he can't even hit people with), or where my warrior can use a bow. Where I can wear anything I want if I meet the requirements, load up my skills any way I want, assign tactics (No, Dorian, do not run headlong into the dragon. Yes, Varric, please stay at range. Cassandra, actually use those Guard abilities..) and combine that with a more sensible crafting system (read: put things where they belong, damn you) and the things DAI actually did well?

 

I like it, but it's not hard to see how it could have been so much better. And yet, any time someone goes "Origins really did this better" they're ridiculed for it.

[Angloassassin]

How exactly is Origins not "action packed" enough? Are you implying that all console gamers need constant action in their games to play them? And even so, there's combat in Origins. Just because you don't like the combat, doesn't mean the entire series is a failure. The Witcher didn't have the best combat, but that didn't make them throw out everything that worked well in that game. And honestly, if you're playing Bioware games for the "action", you're playing the wrong game. Bioware games have always been about the story and deep characters, decisions that matter. Maybe Call of Duty is more your thing?

 

At the end of the day PC gamers out number console gamers 10:1. For all the "next-gen" talk, Steam still has more users than both "next-gen" consoles combined. I'll never understand why this industry chooses to cater to a minority within a minority when there's such an obvious audience for that which has always worked.

 

 

Highlighted and Underlind... I never understood this argument: "You're Playing the Wrong Game" and "You're Playing the Game Wrong". The fact is, that DA:O sold it's majority on Consoles, and many people criticised it for being too dull - after playing 2 and Inquisition, I can't even go back to touch one because of it's Auto-attack combat and terrible AI Positioning that required you to move your character around constantly so they weren't doing nothing the entire battle.

 

As for PC Gamers outnumber Console Gamers - what are we talking about? WoW? Or any other MMO? Because Origins - the game we all seem to keep idolising as "The best since the old-school", Was sold more on Consoles (As I stated in the previous paragraph), meaning, us Console Plebs were the reason it was initially selling so well. Longevity for the game came from the wonderful Modders, whom I personally ascribed to when I had the game on my PC.

 

And then: Really, did you *Really* Need to add that last part? People want more engaging combat to liven up their time between meaningful dialogues, and it's "Call of Duty is more your thing?" No, just... Please, never say that again. I've never owned a *SINGLE* CoD game, *And* I've been a part of Bioware since before KotoR - so I'm not new to the party. But one thing that always bothered me about KotoR, and Origins, was the Psuedo Turn-based combat. It made things feel slow, and clunky. 

 

Tactics would be a welcome addition, don't get me wrong. 

 

But seriously, that's no reason to go around telling people "CoD's the Game for You."

[In Exile]

How exactly is Origins not "action packed" enough? Are you implying that all console gamers need constant action in their games to play them? And even so, there's combat in Origins. Just because you don't like the combat, doesn't mean the entire series is a failure. The Witcher didn't have the best combat, but that didn't make them throw out everything that worked well in that game. And honestly, if you're playing Bioware games for the "action", you're playing the wrong game. Bioware games have always been about the story and deep characters, decisions that matter. Maybe Call of Duty is more your thing?

 

At the end of the day PC gamers out number console gamers 10:1. For all the "next-gen" talk, Steam still has more users than both "next-gen" consoles combined. I'll never understand why this industry chooses to cater to a minority within a minority when there's such an obvious audience for that which has always worked.

 

Have you seen the steam hardware survey? A lot of it is comically out of date hardware that's a gen or three behind. There are lots of PC users who game, but that's not the best measure of the AAA PC market. 

 

Edit: And I don't know what you're on about re: TW1-2. They wholesale changed the combat, UI etc. to make it a console game for the 360 release that didn't even do that much for them financially.