530 réponses à ce sujet

[Akka le Vil]

(to I Miss Minc) That may be because the oldest of the threads are labeled (empty). According to some who were around during Origins' release, it recieved it's fair share of blows especially in regards to being compared to the games predating it.

 

DAO was a very good game, but it had its share of head-against-wall flaws. The reason it's hailed as the best thing since sliced bread is mainly due to how WORSE the sequels were, especially as they were worse in the parts that were actually strong in DAO !

That is, few things are done better in the sequels (and even if they are done better in some way, the execution ends up ruining it, like the much larger and more beautiful zones which end being boring fillers) and many are done worse.

[In Exile]

DAO was a very good game, but it had its share of head-against-wall flaws. The reason it's hailed as the best thing since sliced bread is mainly due to how WORSE the sequels were, especially as they were worse in the parts that were actually strong in DAO !
That is, few things are done better in the sequels (and even if they are done better in some way, the execution ends up ruining it, like the much larger and more beautiful zones which end being boring fillers) and many are done worse.

Aside from the PC UI DAO does nothing better. The only other arguable point is having more dialogue in side quests than DAI but DA2 does side quest dialogues way better.

[AlanC9]

Tactical doesn't mean controlling every character fool I.E making all the choices yourself..  Its about setting up the combat field in your favor.  Issuing commands/executing those commands/doing your own strategic combat which you can't do .

So you don't mean that you can't play a "tactical" game, you mean that you can't do it without controlling all of the companions? It's a pity people don't say that when that's what they mean. But I suppose saying that "DAI isn't tactical" sounds a lot more assertive, or something.
 

There is almost zero tactical usage in this game, besides only able to que 1 skill at a time and then fast forwarding till they use that skill.  Who wants to pause and play all day?

Lots of people play that way, actually. When DA:O shipped there was plenty of chatter about how Tactics dumbed down the game because now it could run on autopilot. Not a big issue since people who didn't like Tactics could simply turn them off.

[AlanC9]

Not really. Imagine, if they acknowledged their mistakes, broke their ties with EA and turned to kickstarter to make a game they always wanted to make without compromises, the players would go mad and stuffed money in their pockets, no questions asked.

Assuming they actually think they've made mistakes, which is a big assumption.

[In Exile]

Assuming they actually think they've made mistakes, which is a big assumption.

And that kick starter could fund they game they want to make, even assuming DAI isn't the game they want to make.

[AlanC9]

Ya, of course, it is from a design point of view. I mean, I hope it's clear that a lot more work went into say, 'Wicked Hearts' or the companion quests than anything on the war table or the shards or any side-fetch quest. I doubt anyone can argue that.
 
The point is, by filling up the 'content' of the game, as in what choices the player has, by easily repeatable gameplay that you can cut and paste from one zone to the next, that doesn't deviate in gameplay terms you're essentially creating an atmosphere development-wise to *avoid* putting resources in unique content in favor of assets that are modular.
 
This is an important point, because you could argue without much debate, that Bioware could have (and should have from experience) left many of the 'filler' quests that, by simply changing text, or enemy type or even requisitions for example, they could have left these on the cutting floor, given you a fully fleshed out zone story or incorporated many war table missions as playable setpieces without anyone saying "I wish I could wander more of the Hinterlands and find 4 more mage caches."

I don't really follow the argument in the italed paragraph. Can you give me an example of what you're talking about doing here? What gets cut, what gets added, and are we talking about the same resource level or some fantasy version?

[wolfhowwl]

Sounds about right, yes.

 

The game needs another year of development to reach its potential. What we have now is... meh.

 

Another year seems risky given the typical sales numbers BioWare games put up.

 

Guess the game should have just been more focused to begin with.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Another year seems risky given the typical sales numbers BioWare games put up.

 

Guess the game should have just been more focused to begin with.

 

Probably. It's too late now anyway. ^^

[scrutinizer]

Plus, they needed to push the game well before TW3 release (which was then set to February), so the two giants do not collide, which always results in a loss in sales. I personally know at least several people who bought DA:I to sweeten the time left to TW3 release. 

On a side note; I have a solid hunch that the TW3 delay (to May 19th) at least partly stems from DA:I having a rocky launch. It's always better to learn from others' mistakes.

[Reymoose]

I don't really follow the argument in the italed paragraph. Can you give me an example of what you're talking about doing here? What gets cut, what gets added, and are we talking about the same resource level or some fantasy version?

 

I meant that Bioware could have, from their own previous experience, cut out all of the very minor quests (I hate to use that term for things like 'return the stone to the altar' in the Hinterlands, it's very thin), I'd even argue things like Astrariums (which I did like), and Ocularums/Shards, and the requisitions, and used that time/resources to give 8 or 9 or 10 zones a DA2 style fleshed out side story (or even a SWTOR linear zone story) that brought you along the zone.

 

And those things to cost a lot of resources even though they are the same thing in every zone they are in (an Ocularum in Storm Coast doesn't show you anything different than Hinterlands for example), so there is level design, how the player is supposed to move through the zone/areas to collect those objects.

 

So a substantial amount of work goes into planning what amounts to the player moving from point A to point B and collecting items (or returning stones/rings/what-have-you).

 

My point being, again, all of that could have cut in pre-development and DA:I's 'content' would have been the main story, companion stories, zone stories, and meaningful side-quests (like Master Dennet's I'd say is a very meaningful side-quest) you would still have all the codex/lore entries, all the things that I would think that made a Bioware game a Bioware game.

[axlerzero]

All I can say is that I'm glad I paid $45 for DA:I. It definitely isn't worth the full $60.

[Akka le Vil]

Aside from the PC UI DAO does nothing better.

 

You're so laughably ridiculous that I wonder why I grace you with this answer.
 

[Razir-Samus]

You're so laughably ridiculous that I wonder why I grace you with this answer.
 

i so wanted to respond to the absurdity of his comment but i couldn't find a way to word it just right... you did!

[Gambit458]

Objectively speaking Inquisition is a good game, so congratz to Bioware, and to the players who enjoy it.

 

Subjectively it's in many ways a huge disappointment for me. My expectations were way off compared to what I experienced when I tried the game. Couldn't stand playing for more than a few hours, after that I gave up on the awful controls, stupid UI, simple combat, and so on.

 

I thought that after the 180 degrees turn Bioware made with DA2, they would not make yet another huge turn with Inquisition. Thought they would build upon what was great in Origins and DA2, and then make a few tweaks to improve overall gameplay. But Inquisition IS yet another huge turn. Many parts of the design have been reinvented into what IMO are worse features than some of the brilliant design features from Origins and DA2.

 

I could create a list of 50+ issues I have in the game that combined make Inquisition an awful experience for me, but it's all in my previous posts. I'll end my rant by only repeating one: the removal of customizable tactics is a stupid design

It's easy to sum up what DA I's real problem was. They tried to be like Skyrim. When they talked about how they looked at Skyrim for inspiration, guess they meant it in the literal sense

[TweetyTheBird]

Generally, the game is good, but I expected much more from Bioware especially from a new DA game. What I liked were the missions on war table (although a 20 hour mission is too much in my opinion), crafting of armor/weapns/runes, update of potions/granades.

 

Some of the things that I did not like:

 

1. Awful AI for companions + no tactics to correct it and even when I give a direct command I don't always get the desired result;

2. Enemies often stay without attacking, take too long to react or run around aimlessly (even on hardest difficluly).

3. NPC-s on map do not help you in battles, don't care when you take out your weapon (and you can do that everywhere) and start shooting, and they also cannot be hurt so it feels fake.

4. It kinda gets tiresome and boring to collect herbs, shards, letters etc. etc. all the time. They could have reduced the time it takes to complete such missions and the resource misions could bring higher results - especually when on higher levels the making of a single potion takes 3 herbs.

5. Missions like chase a druffalo here, and a hala there and a special ram to the other side of the map - a "suitable" and "exciting" job for the inquisitor.

6. The main plot itself is rather short and there are no meaningful side quests (like the one with Connor or Dagna in DAO or even Merill's quest in DAII). The choices are very limited and the graveness of your decisions is not felt throughout the game - there is a lack of moral choices and so there is also a lack of emotional attachment.

7. Relationships between characters - romantic and otherwise - are flat. Dialogues are not good enough especially in the first part of the game. Again - there aren't many emotions, moral choices and even the cut scenes are not very good - e.g. the sloppy work of inqisitor and josephine kissing. The only relationship that was nicely made was between Cassandra and Varric.

8. The small skill trees (also the lack of trap detection, lockpicing, persuasion etc) + the fact that you are limited to only 8 skills + the possoblity to respec points all the time leads to very limited number of distinct class builds that you can actually make.

9. Too few and "cosmetic" upgrades of skyhold - even if they do not increase them, they should have at least made them functional.

10. There is absolutely no need to upgrade all of the characters because they are never required to fight together - there should be some point in upgrading all of your characters - both in terms of skills and armor. Now I can only upgrade 4 and leave the rest naked if I wanted to.

 

Well, I could go on, but I think it is already too much. Bottom line is - bad mechanics, bad dialogue, lack of intertwined and complex missions and moral choices, as well as limitations in skills and skill trees all make the game to feel less challenging, less addicting, fake and flat compared to the previous games.

[Sartoz]

All I can say is that I'm glad I paid $45 for DA:I. It definitely isn't worth the full $60.

You got cheated. Origins has it for 30% savings... at least for today.

[Razir-Samus]

Generally, the game is good, but I expected much more from Bioware especially from a new DA game. What I liked were the missions on war table (although a 20 hour mission is too much in my opinion), crafting of armor/weapns/runes, update of potions/granades.

 

Some of the things that I did not like:

 

1. Awful AI for companions + no tactics to correct it and even when I give a direct command I don't always get the desired result;

2. Enemies often stay without attacking, take too long to react or run around aimlessly (even on hardest difficluly).

3. NPC-s on map do not help you in battles, don't care when you take out your weapon (and you can do that everywhere) and start shooting, and they also cannot be hurt so it feels fake.

4. It kinda gets tiresome and boring to collect herbs, shards, letters etc. etc. all the time. They could have reduced the time it takes to complete such missions and the resource misions could bring higher results - especually when on higher levels the making of a single potion takes 3 herbs.

5. Missions like chase a druffalo here, and a hala there and a special ram to the other side of the map - a "suitable" and "exciting" job for the inquisitor.

6. The main plot itself is rather short and there are no meaningful side quests (like the one with Connor or Dagna in DAO or even Merill's quest in DAII). The choices are very limited and the graveness of your decisions is not felt throughout the game - there is a lack of moral choices and so there is also a lack of emotional attachment.

7. Relationships between characters - romantic and otherwise - are flat. Dialogues are not good enough especially in the first part of the game. Again - there aren't many emotions, moral choices and even the cut scenes are not very good - e.g. the sloppy work of inqisitor and josephine kissing. The only relationship that was nicely made was between Cassandra and Varric.

8. The small skill trees (also the lack of trap detection, lockpicing, persuasion etc) + the fact that you are limited to only 8 skills + the possoblity to respec points all the time leads to very limited number of distinct class builds that you can actually make.

9. Too few and "cosmetic" upgrades of skyhold - even if they do not increase them, they should have at least made them functional.

10. There is absolutely no need to upgrade all of the characters because they are never required to fight together - there should be some point in upgrading all of your characters - both in terms of skills and armor. Now I can only upgrade 4 and leave the rest naked if I wanted to.

 

Well, I could go on, but I think it is already too much. Bottom line is - bad mechanics, bad dialogue, lack of intertwined and complex missions and moral choices, as well as limitations in skills and skill trees all make the game to feel less challenging, less addicting, fake and flat compared to the previous games.

some great points...

 

there's enough in the game to "balance it out" so to speak, but the heavy hitters have been crippled... mainly the combat tactics, proper behaviors (dropdown), the tactical camera (which is now awful), and character control fluidity... plus the technical flaws due to the frostbite engine's shortcomings

[Xatasha]

The game feels a lot like a single player MMO similar to SWTOR. 

 

 

Editted for mistype

[Razir-Samus]

The game feels a lot like a single player MMO similar to KOTOR. 

edited: you corrected your mistake!

[wolfhowwl]

I assume they meant SWTOR.

[In Exile]

You're so laughably ridiculous that I wonder why I grace you with this answer.

Probably because you want to continue to be wrong in your evaluation of DAO. That's okay.

[Elhanan]

The game feels a lot like a single player MMO similar to SWTOR.   
 
Editted for mistype

Agreed; liked it in solo style, too.

[Razir-Samus]

Probably because you want to continue to be wrong in your evaluation of DAO. That's okay.

that comment comes off as a bit trollish, do you really think that's the case? you would just as easily put down a glorious rpg as you would hail a fake one awesome?

 

man...

[In Exile]

that comment comes off as a bit trollish, do you really think that's the case? you would just as easily put down a glorious rpg as you would hail a fake one awesome?

man...

I didn't say DAO wasn't a great RPG. It very obviously is great. I just don't see it doing anything better than DAI beside its PC UI. A lot of other aspects are purely subjective (quality of story and characters) and the only other major element, side quests, are arguable depending on how much you value dialogue and flavour choices.

People need to stop assuming that when I say X>Y I am somehow saying that Y is bad. That's just not a possible conclusion.