848 réponses à ce sujet

[ORTesc]

It is too late.

 

Every major title in Dragon Age "franchise" was, at its core, designed very differently. As a result BioWare created one giant mess where barely anything makes sense. They might have been experimenting, but it feels more like they either didn't know what they were doing or what they wanted to do, likely both. 

 

And I just don't understand why. You look at a game like Origins that went tripple platinum. Why would you change something that sold so well? I honestly want to know who, what or why came up with DA2 and actually thought it was a good idea. I mean, with inquisition, I can see where they were going. Skyrim was a huge success, that's where the audience was. But Bioware didn't make Skyrim... if they had, fine. But it's some sort of mix between their mmo and dragon age 2.

 

Again, why change what isn't broken? When something sells so well it makes no sense to me.

[Al Foley]

This is really a strange thread for me to read through kind of surreal really.  Since my list goes DA Awakening, DA 2, and Origins in terms of my preferred list of Dragon Age games.  

[ORTesc]

The thing is that once DA2 hit you had fans of both core mechanics. Inquisition tried to split it and have some of both, but there are people who will never be happy unless it is Origins 2.0

 

If they did make Origins 2.0 then there would be complaints that they threw all the other stuff away they've done since then and went back to the slow paced combat.

 

I think Origins with more refined combat and a new engine would be just fine. But the direction should have been more towards Origin and less towards the failure that was Dragon Age 2.

[hwlrmnky]

OP, I tried to consider your argument but you lost me completely with the South Park clip which seems to have no relevance. The joke in the clip is about the effect of money on behavior...and? Rich Monkey is...? Who is Rich Monkey screwing?

[ORTesc]

OP, I tried to consider your argument but you lost me completely with the South Park clip which seems to have no relevance. The joke in the clip is about the effect of money on behavior...and? Rich Monkey is...? Who is Rich Monkey screwing?

 

Well the people in the lab coats are EA. The monkey is Bioware.

 

We're the rest.

[Paul E Dangerously]

I'm not sure where this metaphor leads us. Do all of the house guests really want to eat the old spaghetti recipe forever?

 

If you have a successful recipe, you don't throw it out or worse, change it up so it's unrecognizable.

 

Bioware's seemingly gone a long way to distance themselves from DAO, and from the RPG mechanics in particular.

 

• I can no longer control my own attribute gains. No, the crafting system does not count, as the "class" armor / specs are naturally geared to force you down the stats you use. Magic armor has primarily magic and willpower, and not say, constitution.
• Restrictions, restrictions everywhere. Armor is class-restricted. Armor is race-restricted. Weapons are class-restricted. Dropped/bought items are level-restricted. How the blazes do you take so much "inspiration" from the Elder Scrolls and still do this? Go play Morrowind, Bioware. Even Skyrim more or less got this right, and Bethesda took the hatchet to that game.
• Skills in general are screwy. The tree format makes it harder to get a skill you want, and with the increase on passives you wind up taking actives you won't want to use - or can't because you're handicapped with eight abilities max. Given the butchery Bioware gave to what's left of the tactics system, you'll have to baby NPCs to make sure they don't turn off one of the handful of abilities that gives barrier/guard because they're essential. Meaning every character has to use those skills, especially on higher difficulty. Great job allowing for build variety, that.
• Lack of reward. The gold you receive for quest completion is a pittance, and item drops/rewards are more often than not, a joke. Sale prices are a joke as well, heavily biased in favor of the buyer.
• Nothing item-wise makes any sort of sense. I go into a dwarven ruin. There are no dwarven items there, despite dwarves being in residence. I break into an ancient dwarven vault, only to find that there are also no dwarven items there, either. Elf ruins are pretty much in the same boat.
• Related to the above, elf and dwarf characters only have access to a tiny handful of racially allowed items, while Human-only items are around every corner. Qunari characters don't have anything at all except for the MS Paint-quality facepaint they try to pass off as helmets. None of the factions have access to their own armor items or schematics except the Orlesians, and you can't even buy Orlesian armor in Val Royeaux, only the schematics. The Templars, Wardens, and Dalish don't have access to their own items at all.

Origins had some things that made me twitch and I'll admit it, but it more-or-less made sense. Inquisition just handwaves everything without a single thought to the world setup or toward mechanics.

[Cyonan]

I think Origins with more refined combat and a new engine would be just fine. But the direction should have been more towards Origin and less towards the failure that was Dragon Age 2.

 

I was always meh about Origin's combat mechanics even as somebody who enjoys tactical gameplay, so I can't say that I'm terribly broken up that they kept the faster paced combat.

 

Especially with the "1 more wave" mechanic thrown out the window.

[dlux]

DA:O "only" sold 5 to 6 million copies, which obviously wasn't enough.

I guess EA thought that a "Dragon Age: Sykrim" would sell better, which would explain why they completely changed everything. I don't think DA:I will sell anywhere near as good as DA:O though. Maybe EA can try a "Dragon Age: Grand Theft Auto Carriage" for their next iteration of Dragon Age... maybe that will finally sell 20-30 million copies.   

Anyway, it was pretty dumb of EA to mutilate the franchise, especially from a financial aspect, but oh well. Typical EA I guess. They have driven many franchises into the ground over the years so it isn't really anything new actually.
 

You can win if you like Inquisition.

But it sucks.
 

and if you don't, there's always Pillars of Eternity.

Bah, PoE sucks too.

But we have Divinity: Orignal Sin, Shadowrun Returns, Wasteland 2, Blackguards, Torment: Tides of Numenera, Dead State, Lords of Xulima, etc... so much RPG goodness.

[DemGeth]

Haven't bought a CoD in ages.

Don't need an rpg version.

[Enesia]

And I just don't understand why. You look at a game like Origins that went tripple platinum. Why would you change something that sold so well? I honestly want to know who, what or why came up with DA2 and actually thought it was a good idea. I mean, with inquisition, I can see where they were going. Skyrim was a huge success, that's where the audience was. But Bioware didn't make Skyrim... if they had, fine. But it's some sort of mix between their mmo and dragon age 2.

 

Again, why change what isn't broken? When something sells so well it makes no sense to me.

 

What I really miss from Origins, was specifically that the Origins. I was so excited for DAI to bring back race and thought, perhaps they'd bring that feature back. Nope. You can only be a Human Noble, You can Only be a Dalish Elf, you can only be a Carta Dwarf.

 

In Origins, you could be a Dalish Elf of any class, or you could be a City Elf. You could be an Elf in a circle, or you could be an Elf in an Alienage.

 

In Origins you could be a common Human, noble Human, etc.

 

It would have been awesome to add this in and add sequences BEFORE THE Conclave.

 

Such as your Lavelan Keeper choosing you to spy on the Conclave. Shows the journey to the Conclave, Dragon Age Inquisition title pops up when you see the Conclave or screen goes black, THEN the explosion.

 

Just give me a tie to this world.

 

Make me care.

 

Make me feel like I was living in this world before the Herald and Inquisitor business. Much like Origins did.

[ORTesc]

What I really miss from Origins, was specifically that the Origins. I was so excited for DAI to bring back race and thought, perhaps they'd bring that feature back. Nope. You can only be a Human Noble, You can Only be a Dalish Elf, you can only be a Carta Dwarf.

 

In Origins, you could be a Dalish Elf of any class, or you could be a City Elf. You could be an Elf in a circle, or you could be an Elf in an Alienage.

 

In Origins you could be a common Human, noble Human, etc.

 

It would have been awesome to add this in and add sequences BEFORE THE Conclave.

 

Such as your Lavelan Keeper choosing you to spy on the Conclave. Shows the journey to the Conclave, Dragon Age Inquisition title pops up when you see the Conclave or screen goes black, THEN the explosion.

 

Just give me a tie to this world.

 

Make me care.

 

Make me feel like I was living in this world before the Herald and Inquisitor business. Much like Origins did.

 

Absolutely agree 100% Inquisition is like starting Origins at Ostagar.

[ironhorse384]

I'm not sure where this metaphor leads us. Do all of the house guests really want to eat the old spaghetti recipe forever?

Isn't it fair to say sequels are made based on the success of the first endeavor? If I go to a restaurant and the spaghetti is to die for chances are I'm going to order it again when I go back to that restaurant. You take what was successful about origins and you build on top of that rather than taking things away. They didn't do that with DA2 instead they gave us a mass effect style conversation wheel. They took away companion inventories and restricted what equipment could be used by companions. They did away with tactical camera which infuriated a lot of people, myself included. DA2 was a good game in its own right and had I not played origins I would've thought it to be an absolutely amazing game. So what did they do this time around? They did away with tactics and gave us a sort of neutered tac cam. They did away with lock on auto attack. They went back to the mass effect 1 playbook with generic side quests. Change for the sake of change is not always the best course of action.

[OctagonalSquare]

DA2 was not better than DAO.

 

DAI is not better than DAO.

These are opinions. Stop stating them as though they were facts.

[Enesia]

Absolutely agree 100% Inquisition is like starting Origins at Ostagar.

 

My points exactly. Glad you understand. Do you know how hard it is to communicate this to people?

[Natashina]

My points exactly. Glad you understand. Do you know how hard it is to communicate this to people?

I know, it's like people might have different opinions and different tastes. 

[Kierro Ren]

First time I've done this.....

 

Arishok: "No."

[ORTesc]

These are opinions. Stop stating them as though they were facts.

 

Going by sales they are facts.

[Enesia]

I know, it's like people might have different opinions and different tastes. 

 

This isn't about opinions. I'm a writer. As a writer, you have to make the audience care for your story. The same concept and idea is STILL in video games. Its still a concept to be added in.

 

I was half expecting at the Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts quest to see the Inquisitors parents, roflcopter that would be awkward. 

 

Something to attach me to my character. Something to make me feel like I live in this world. 

 

edit-

 

The only thing I know for the most part about my Inquisitor is he is a dalish elf, likes the forest, and wants to go back home. Oh and he was sent as a spy to the Conclave. Wow great.

 

I want a relationship with my Keeper or those War Table quest the two Keep in Contact with clan Lavelan and Protect Clan Lavelan mean nothing to me. So that way I have more stake and something my Inquisitor can work towards.

 

All DAI establishes is helping a bunch of religious strangers. Who are shoving their cods in my face. Believe in the Maker. Chantry this, save the world, you have a glowy hand, etc. 

[Natashina]

If I was to judge quality based upon sales, I would have sat through a lot of bad movies over the last 10 years.  I'm sorry, but using sales figures to dictate whether or not something is quality is a very bad idea as a consumer, regardless of opinion.

 

 

This isn't about opinions. I'm a writer. As a writer, you have to make the audience care for your story. The same concept and idea is STILL in video games. Its still a concept to be added in.

 

I was half expecting at the Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts quest to see the Inquisitors parents, roflcopter that would be awkward. 

 

Something to attach me to my character. Something to make me feel like I live in this world. 

I respect that you're a writer, but you're still listing your opinions about the game.

 

I did care about the story, in all three games.   Yes, even DA2.  I loved Wicked Hearts.  I had a much different experience than you did.  I'm no stranger to RPGs or the fantasy genre for that matter.   So I'm sorry, but as with pretty much all media and art, this is subjective.  

[Foxbat Killer]

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.

Lol you have no idea what you're talking about. Witcher 2's combat is way different from The Witcher and way more action oriented. The Witcher 3 is is taking the combat even further in the action direction and is going to be "open world" which seems like the mainstream thing to do now and not at all like the previous Witcher games.

[Enesia]

Lol you have no idea what you're talking about. Witcher 2's combat is way different from The Witcher and way more action oriented. The Witcher 3 is is taking the combat even further in the action direction and is going to be "open world" which seems like the mainstream thing to do now and not at all like the previous Witcher games.

 

My point was missed.

 

Witcher and Witcher 2 do have differences, YES. But the recipe is similar and the taste is similar enough. If there is a thing a sequel should DO is be better than the game before it. Witcher 2 succeeded this. And I give it high praise because of it. 

[ZipZap2000]

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. 

 

Problem is you want to go back 7 years and bring back a game that is gone, it's not some ancient treasure waiting to be rediscovered it had it's time and it was good while it lasted but they've moved on now. You don't throw away steak because one of your guests would prefer to be eating seafood. 

[Al Foley]

This isn't about opinions. I'm a writer. As a writer, you have to make the audience care for your story. The same concept and idea is STILL in video games. Its still a concept to be added in.

 

I was half expecting at the Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts quest to see the Inquisitors parents, roflcopter that would be awkward. 

 

Something to attach me to my character. Something to make me feel like I live in this world. 

But even this can be an opinion because I cared way more about the characters in DA 2, for instance, then I did for any of the characters with the possible exception of Allistair in Dragon Age Origins.  I adored my Hawke and related to her on such a level and thought she was much better, and I got...most of the characters in Dragon Age 2 and they resonated with me.  I never got the equivalent moment of Anders blowing up the Chantry where I felt shivers on my arm and my mouth opened in shock...AND I KNEW WHAT WAS COMING.  I never felt that pissed at a companion either when he went all Tim McVeigh on me and asked me to help him make the ruddy bomb in the first place.  But yet complicated because my Hawke was rather fond of Anders.  I never got any of that in Origins.  I never cared about any of my companions in my first playthrough of Origins like I did in 2.  Never cared about my Warden as much as my Hawke.  And thus, I cared way more for the story, and the setting.  Though I will admit I am rather fond of Ferelden.  

[TristynTrine]

You can win if you like Inquisition.

 

and if you don't, there's always Pillars of Eternity.

Why not both? But I do hope they add more magic schools in the next game... this selection is pitiful all from the primal DA:O school... and some barriers... Depressing D:

[Foxbat Killer]

My point was missed.

Witcher and Witcher 2 do have differences, YES. But the recipe is similar and the taste is similar enough. If there is a thing a sequel should DO is be better than the game before it. Witcher 2 succeeded this. And I give it high praise because of it.

Your point was missed because you failed. There are many people who prefer the first Witcher to the 2nd. There are people making the same arguments about TW as you are about DA.

Anyways I think I'm done with this place. DA:I is doing great both critically and among actual gamers but all the haters seem to infect this forum with their negativity. I don't understand people who put so much energy into something they hate.