848 réponses à ce sujet

[Vader20]

Yes, make an open world with the game mechanics of origins and a great story.. problem solved.

[Fandango]

Isn't it kind of the point that the large sandboxes of Inquisition dilute the things some people most enjoy about the game? Even as someone who likes Inquisition and appreciates the scale and beauty of its environments, I certainly fall into that category.

In any case, another game in similar vein to Origins would be fantastico from my point of view *crosses fingers*.

[Essorance]

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. 

 

The better analogy would be one night you make ice cream and it all tastes good and the next you serve a plate of ****.

 

gg dai

[Maconbar]

DA:I needs a chantry board.

[SirJoeofthePub]

I don't think I have seen so much foaming at the mouth here since DA:II, and at least there were some very valid reasons. Had some choice words myself here back then. DA:I is a fine RPG and one that fits quite well in the DA series of games.

 

So, they opened up what would normally be just a tunnel you run through with mobs scattered here and there so you could jump from cutsceen to cutsceen, dialog choice to dialog choice and they did it where it's for the most part optional.

 

Funny how back in the DA:II threads everyone was up in arms about taking away options, now that they added them... well, I think peeps just got used to raving.

 

I can see that maybe at the most, they could add some more up close and personal NPC conversations scattered about the open areas, like even in just the zone camp areas.

 

Personally I do not miss the tunnel running at all. I thought DA:O was a fine game, however I always loved exploring the world around me, or at least having a game I could actually spend time "playing" DA:I has so far given me my "playtime" Money well spent in my eyes.

[AppealToReason]

So everyone hates the jump button is what I'm getting from all this.

[Uccio]

And drop the MMO button mashing. Atleast make a option for point to-click move and autoattack for pc.

[In Exile]

Honestly to me its to the point people are just looking for a reason to say "Its not enough like <insert previous BioWare game>" for any reason to prevent them from trying to enjoy a game.

One of the complaints I am now seeing more often elsewhere is "Dragon Age: Origins doesn't have the MMO fetch quests like Dragon Age: Inquisition" and that still baffles me, for I remember many quests in Origins where I had to go bring something back to the start NPC.

It would be one thing if people used BG2 as an example. BG2 is really different from BG1. The problem is pretending that BG1 was BG2 which happens an insane amount on this forum.

[In Exile]

Well, yeah. If you think being able to build a mage with 18 CON is a very important thing and a prime hallmark of a Bioware game to you, then you're maybe not going to like DAI. (18 CON is a stupid waste of points -- but that was the point, right?) Note that Bio has done games without stat control before, so it isn't very sensible to think of DAI as some major deviation from Bio's house style.

If you want to get into a list of specific areas where DAI is different from BG1, go right ahead. There should be plenty since they're not the same game. Thing is, not everyone's going to agree with you on the importance of those specific differences.

A high CON mage with the RNG health growth in vanilla BG and low INT is clearly a great build every game should support. It's an art form - you're not just nerfing yourself; you're specialising in stats you're going to be weaker in than every other class anyway (literally wasting 2 points since I think 16 CON is the best for any non warrior/paladin) and actively sabotaging your own ability.

[Bethgael]

I do think Bioware made a mistake trying to make a Skyrim clone.

Skyrim sold so well because (UI issues and bugs aside), thematically, it gave Bethesda's customer base exactly what Bethesda's customer base is used to from Bethesda: open world action minor storyline. Skyrim was built off the base of Oblivion built off the base of Morrowind built off the base of... you get the idea. Bethesda stayed with its strength. The one time it tried to cater to a different market and move away from its roots.... well, the less said about ESO the better.

Bioware has a different customer base that, apparently, it has moved away from in an attempt to pick up a different market share. In doing so, Bioware made the exact same mistake Bethesda did with ESO: in trying to keep both camps (old customers and different customers) happy, neither have been completely satisfied, it seems.

Origins was, partly, a time-and-place phenomenon: you cannot reproduce the one important thing inherent in many of these successes: market conditions.

But the one thing all markets know (or should know): alienating the customer base that made your success is never the smartest idea.

Whether Bioware has done this is a matter of conjecture and opinion (and I'm not stating mine). But it is clear they have moved away from what has made this company successful and into a different sphere, and that they haven't learned the pitfalls of having done this, yet.

[Enesia]

I do think Bioware made a mistake trying to make a Skyrim clone.

Skyrim sold so well because (UI issues and bugs aside), thematically, it gave Bethesda's customer base exactly what Bethesda's customer base is used to from Bethesda: open world action minor storyline. Skyrim was built off the base of Oblivion built off the base of Morrowind built off the base of... you get the idea. Bethesda stayed with its strength. The one time it tried to cater to a different market and move away from its roots.... well, the less said about ESO the better.

Bioware has a different customer base that, apparently, it has moved away from in an attempt to pick up a different market share. In doing so, Bioware made the exact same mistake Bethesda did with ESO: in trying to keep both camps (old customers and different customers) happy, neither have been completely satisfied, it seems.

Origins was, partly, a time-and-place phenomenon: you cannot reproduce the one important thing inherent in many of these successes: market conditions.

But the one thing all markets know (or should know): alienating the customer base that made your success is never the smartest idea.

Whether Bioware has done this is a matter of conjecture and opinion (and I'm not stating mine). But it is clear they have moved away from what has made this company successful and into a different sphere, and that they haven't learned the pitfalls of having done this, yet.

 

Hop on the Bethsoft forums. 

 

Personally I have played all the TES games, Skyrim was not what we old TES fans wanted.

 

With Skyrim Bethseda is going to have the same issue as Bioware later on

[Sondermann]

 

 

I do think Bioware made a mistake trying to make a Skyrim clone.

Skyrim sold so well because (UI issues and bugs aside), thematically, it gave Bethesda's customer base exactly what Bethesda's customer base is used to from Bethesda: open world action minor storyline. Skyrim was built off the base of Oblivion built off the base of Morrowind built off the base of... you get the idea. Bethesda stayed with its strength. The one time it tried to cater to a different market and move away from its roots.... well, the less said about ESO the better.

Bioware has a different customer base that, apparently, it has moved away from in an attempt to pick up a different market share. In doing so, Bioware made the exact same mistake Bethesda did with ESO: in trying to keep both camps (old customers and different customers) happy, neither have been completely satisfied, it seems.

Origins was, partly, a time-and-place phenomenon: you cannot reproduce the one important thing inherent in many of these successes: market conditions.

But the one thing all markets know (or should know): alienating the customer base that made your success is never the smartest idea.

Whether Bioware has done this is a matter of conjecture and opinion (and I'm not stating mine). But it is clear they have moved away from what has made this company successful and into a different sphere, and that they haven't learned the pitfalls of having done this, yet.

Of course, customer bases are static, and there isn't the slightest possiblity that many people like both Bethesda and Bioware games and don't mind some cross-over...

 

[AlyssaFaden]

I might be wrong on this ... but I'm working on a hunch that it might be a tad late at this stage.

[Bethgael]

 

 

 

Of course, customer bases are static, and there isn't the slightest possiblity that many people like both Bethesda and Bioware games and don't mind some cross-over...

 

 

Of course--and I was looking for an obvious analogy, which is of course not perfect.

I, likewise, play both.

Enesia: Of course there are/were people who were unsatisfied with Skyrim. Dear gods, but it had its problems, and it's the modding community that has really "made" the game. (However, see analogy comment above). Having said that, its basic tenets have remained the same (even if moving around them has caused some ripples). I think this is, kind of, what some people in the thread have been trying to get at.

[Enesia]

Of course--and I was looking for an obvious analogy, which is of course not perfect.

I, likewise, play both.

Enesia: Of course there are/were people who were unsatisfied with Skyrim. Dear gods, but it had its problems, and it's the modding community that has really "made" the game. (However, see analogy comment above). Having said that, its basic tenets have remained the same (even if moving around them has caused some ripples). I think this is, kind of, what some people in the thread have been trying to get at.

 

Problem is Skyrim did what all the RPGs seem to be doing is gutting content for mage players.

[WillieStyle]

I suppose it's too much to ask that folks don't speak for others; it is the internet after all. But seeing as how I've bought every Bioware game since Baldurs Gate, I think I count as part of Bioware's original customer base. And I absolutely love Inquisition.

[WillieStyle]

Also, DnD has a lot to answer for because it made a bunch of terrible gameplay features sacred cows. A gazillions different spells with little gameplay difference between them doesn't count as extra content. Also, if you have N gameplay options where N-1 options are inferior to one option in every single way, then you really only have one option.

[Shadow Fox]

Dragon Age is apparently now Final Fantasy.

 

"Unless it's VII 2.0 it sucks!"

 

"XII changed the battle system RUINED FOREVER!!!"

[Paul E Dangerously]

Dragon Age is apparently now Final Fantasy.

 

"Unless it's VII 2.0 it sucks!"

 

"XII changed the battle system RUINED FOREVER!!!"

 

Yeah, that's the spirit. Just mock 'em for liking something that they felt actually worked.

[Shadow Fox]

Yeah, that's the spirit. Just mock 'em for liking something that they felt actually worked.

I'm mocking an annoyingly loud vocal minority who think their opinions equal fact just as I *and many others* did then.

 

And amusingly enough XII is now regarded as one of the best FFs and most people who hated the game admit they over reacted to the changes.

 

Also the SNES and PS2 crowd and VIII and IX fans generally take umbrage at the VII fanboys who insist that VII was the absolutely flawless pinnacle of FF that SE should just clone.

 

Much like old school Bioware and DA2 fans are mocking the Origins fanboys now.

 

I thought it an amusing parallel.

[Paul E Dangerously]

I'm mocking an annoyingly loud vocal minority who think their opinions equal fact just as I *and many others* did then.

 

And amusingly enough XII is now regarded as one of the best FFs and most people who hated the game admit they over reacted to the changes.

 

Also the SNES and PS2 crowd generally take umbrage at the VII fanboys who insist that VII was the absolutely flawlesspinnacle of FF that SE should just clone.

 

Much like old school Bioware and DA2 fans are mocking the Origins fanboys now.

 

I thought it an amusing parallel.

 

Except, you know, Origins was only in 2009. Five years ago.

 

It's not exactly ancient times, here. It had a lot of fans, was seen as a breath of fresh air, and never got a sequel at all. Worse, people who liked it and wanted to see something with similar strengths are actively being mocked for it, sometimes by fans, and sometimes by the developers.

 

Except, you know, when it comes time to marketing the new game, then it's time to lie as much as humanly possible.

[Natureguy85]

 

And amusingly enough XII is now regarded as one of the best FFs and most people who hated the game admit they over reacted to the changes.

 

Is it? I only got to play a little on a friend's PS2, but I couldn't get over it's copying of Star Wars as far as it's character archetypes.

[Zanallen]

Except, you know, Origins was only in 2009. Five years ago.

 

 

Five years is a hell of a long time in terms of video game advancement. BG to KotOR? Five years. BGII to Jade Empire? Five years. KotOR to ME? Four years. Bioware changes things up with pretty much every game they make and have been progressing to more Action RPG games since the very beginning.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Five years is a hell of a long time in terms of video game advancement. BG to KotOR? Five years. BGII to Jade Empire? Five years. KotOR to ME? Four years. Bioware changes things up with pretty much every game they make and have been progressing to more Action RPG games since the very beginning.

 

None of those are sequels. Or if not sequels, in the same franchise.

 

At least with BG and KOTOR you're running on rule sets (D&D 2e and D20 respectively). They wouldn't handle the same because of that.

[Zanallen]

None of those are sequels. Or if not sequels, in the same franchise.

 

At least with BG and KOTOR you're running on rule sets (D&D 2e and D20 respectively). They wouldn't handle the same because of that.

 

Bioware only has three franchises with sequels: BG, ME and DA. ME and DA have changed quite a bit with each game. There are huge differences between ME and ME 2 and that was only a three year difference. Bioware has a track record of making fairly large changes in terms of gameplay with each game they make and those changes have often been in favor of making the game more action oriented.