530 réponses à ce sujet

[DragonAddict]

DAO had an excellent long ending and with the DLC Witch Hunt, would of allowed you to import your warden with or without Morrigan to DA2 and beyond......like most were expecting from Bioware.....

[Shechinah]

(to Razir-Samus) Bioware is made up of about 800 employees according to Wikipedia. I truely doubt all of them are developers and I very seriously doubt all of them has a say in how a game turns out. 

[Razir-Samus]

(to Razir-Samus) Bioware is made up of about 800 employees according to Wikipedia. I truely doubt all of them are developers and I very seriously doubt all of them has a say in how a game turns out. 

man... come on... i obviously didn't mean the entire company, just the relevant folk that were actually working on DA:I

[Shechinah]

(to Razir-Samus) I did not say you did.

 

Xralius commented that he hoped Bioware fell into dust which I took to mean he hoped the company would go under which would more people than just the developers would lose their jobs.

 

You apparently took that to mean that I defending the developers as just puppets being controlled by a master which had nothing to do with what I was saying.

 

Unless, of course, you are Xralius and just forgot to login to your other account *dun dun duuuuuun*

I'm kidding

[wolfhowwl]

I don't know if its the worst Bioware game ever, but it is much worse than DAO.

 

 

DAO offered:

 

- true RPG

- attributes, crafting, materials, make your own items or buy, sell and trade them

- no swearing

- romance and intamcy but done properly and not like DA:I

- interact with NPC's

- proper skill trees

- many armor sets

- not linear

- your choices did matter

- huge game

- excellent DLC's and expansion

- even longer with the DLC's and expansion

- very well thought out and written

- excellent storyline, plots and sub quests

- tactical view among other options

- worked fine with PC, keyboard and mouse

 

 

DA2 and DA:I are not these things and not what a true RPG is all about. DA2 and DA:I are linear, action games, simplified, and dumbed down but with excellent graphic to cover this all up and they both had a short main story with almost useless sub quests to help fill in time. Endings in both weren't that great either like DAO.

 

What is a "true RPG?"

[DragonAddict]

True roll playing game:

 

 

- you can pick male or female

- different classes

- different races

- choose and distribute your attributes

- distribute other characters attributes, levels and armor and weapons, items, etc.

- choose all party members skill sets in detail

- your choices actually do matter in the game and imported to the next

- will work fine with controllers and keyboard / mice combinations from the beginning

- well thought out story line, plots and sub quests

- long game, not short story with many useless sub quests to fill in time

- not hack and slash action game

- not simplified or dumbed down, complexity is a good thing

- romance and choices but not over the top, not all about sex sex sex

- emotions and dialog without swearing

 

You don't need the best graphics at that time, only the above and a well thought out story line, plots and sub quests. If you have the option to save game and import your character to the next game, you actually can do so instead of doing a 180 and nothing.

 

I would say, if you never played DAO, then DA2 and DA:I give them a try but if you did play DAO and all the DLC's, which is what got Bioware's DAO going in the first place, then I'd say no to both. Maybe DA4 will be different......I can always dream and hope?!

 

DA2 was none of these things and DA:I is a step in the right direction but still has a long ways to go.

[Razir-Samus]

DA:I is a hack n slash that desperately tries to be an rpg

[Elhanan]

It would seem that any pre-planned event seen at a Convention is not a true RPG, be it PnP or for computers. The Witcher and Mass Effect series fails. Skyrim fails; do not know about earlier TES games. Etc.

While I agree that I would like to see many of the listed opinions and options, they do not define RPG's.

[JCFR]

Geez, that's a really strict definition. Ok, let's see...
 

- you can pick male or female
- different classes
- different races

1. Ok, given in Inquisition.
2. yup, given - eventhough it's the barest minmum
3. Given as well - eventhough race-choice doesn't matter much (no pros or cons in terms of classes nor story).
 

- choose and distribute your attributes

Ok, that's true, this is a big fail of inquisition (I mean... geez, bioware, do you think we're too dumb to do that?).
 

- distribute other characters attributes, levels and armor and weapons, items, etc.

Yes and no. I mean, it`s in the game (except of attributes) but it's again bare minimum. And in terms of items: Really, Bioware... still mostly the same things as in the previous two games? Where's your innovation?
 

- your choices actually do matter in the game and imported to the next

Well, that's something which is not really mandatory to qualify as an Rpg... at least not to my understanding of this genre. It's a nice thing and adds pretty much to replay-value - no doubt but still it's not what makes an Rpg an Rpg.
 

- will work fine with controllers and keyboard / mice combinations from the beginning

Oh geez... if that was really a "must have" for all Rpgs to be called "true" then there would be close to none.
 

- well thought out story line, plots and sub quests

Story is an important factor, that's true - but let's be frank... how many Rpgs were really favoured with a "well thought out story". To my knowledge not that much. In my mind the last one which had a well thought out story was Planescape Torment.
I think it's enough if the story is "gripping" and makes you wanna see the final moments. DAo was - no doubt - gripping.
inquisition, well... it started really strong. I enjoyed it much until the battle of haven... after this it lost pace very fast. in the middle it felt dragged out (because of the quest-system) and the ending feeled rushed. Entertained i was nontheless.
 

- long game, not short story with many useless sub quests to fill in time

Ah, the MMO-Destiny-Syndrome. I think, you're halfway right. Content is an important aspect of any Rpg... but it should not feel padded and stretched, that's true.
 

- not hack and slash action game
- not simplified or dumbed down, complexity is a good thing

Certainly not, if it's a party-based-Rpg. Within games like the Witcher 2, it works... but Inquisition is a party-based-Rpg.

With this, i'm a bit conflicted. I certainly enjoy a good portion of complexity, but i'm aware that many gamers enjoy the "light" aspect. You could call it the Diablo3-effect.
To me, inquisitions shallowness hurts... but then again i'm someone who grew up with legends like the BG-saga. Don't know if the younger gamers feel the same as me.
 

- romance and choices but not over the top, not all about sex sex sex
- emotions and dialog without swearing

Once again, i don't think it's a "must-have" to be called "true" Rpg... eventhough i prefer if there are some romantic encounters inside a game and yes also a tiny bit of sex (since that is part of any deeper relationship).

Really? No swearing? To me, that part makes some dialogues believable (again, the Witcher 2 shows how it'S done right). I mean, did you ever have a longer talk with someone who did not cursse when he/she was complelty against something or somthing extremly annoyed him/her? It's a natural, human behavior.
And emotions are really difficult to generate and some gamers may be more empathic than others. F.E.: The NPCs. Some like them, some hate them and in my opinion, they're average.

Yes, graphics are not the most important thing for a good Rpg (eventhough some eyecandy doesn't hurt the game).

To me, Inquisition feels like product, made to raise the amount of sold copies. It's not a bad game because of this but it certainly doesn't feel as if it was made with the fans or Origins and older, deeper Rpgs in mind. Bioware seems to wish to compete with Bethesda (Skyrim).

[DragonAddict]

Don't get me wrong, DA:I isn't a horrible game but its no true RPG or DAO either. It is mediocre and an average game at best and will not last long term, just like DA2.

[Chiramu]

DA:I is a hack n slash that desperately tries to be an rpg

 

Diablo 3 pulls this off better than Inquisition, though Diablo 3 is still boring as shite.

[tmp7704]

I'll bite again, just to make you admit you are wrong.
Here is a better site for TW2 side quests - http://uk.ign.com/wi..._1_-_Sidequests(that's chapter 1 only)
17 side quests in chapter 1.

A number of these quests are 'acquired automatically as part of the main storyline' according to the other page (and as such I don't consider them side quests) follow-ups from the prologue, or both. This affects the math you post later on.

Your long description of the content in question doesn't really challenge what I said -- you're making an argument that some of these basic quests are more memorable/involved because they're "a little spiced up". But you know, these details didn't make these quests any more memorable or interesting for me, as evidenced by the fact I didn't remember any of these details until you brought them up now. So I stand by what I said -- based on personal experience I don't believe this kind of extra work put into DAI quest would make them that much more memorable for me. Just like it didn't help these Witcher 2 quests.
 

Do you also realize that most quests in cRPG history has a basic nature of 'kill X' or 'bring X to Y'. It's all about the presentation of them, how fleshed out and meaningful they are - then we can safely say they are universally good.

Yes, obviously. Considering our opinions of Witcher 2 side content drastically differ, I have to conclude the level of presentation and 'fleshing out' used in that game (still) isn't enough to consider the results universally good.
 

I insist you respond to this, since you conveniently skipped that part:
 
Whereas in DA:I, all those fetch quest, shards collecting and whatnot - look, you are the leader of the Inquisition. Can't you send your people to do that? It's a minor thing for your minions, right? Or is bringing 10 elfroots to a peasant so crucial to the cause of stopping the demons and protecting Thedas? Come on, mate, answer with honesty. 

I'm at fault here, this issue popped in another thread so just didn't feel like repeating myself. I'm sorry. My stance on this boils down to: yes, from the reasonable point of view the Inquisitor's actual tasks would be limited to travelling with large troop and doing nothing but closing the Fade breaches. Because that's one task where he/she is irreplaceable, and allowing the inquisitor to risk their life travelling the countryside with three other people and picking flowers instead, that's insane.

Except if you actually did DAI the way it'd "make sense"... there would be very little of actual "game" left there, and what's left would be basic and extremely repetitive, far more so than what we currently get. So as it is, the game offers you all these activities which the players who played other RPGs demonstrated to enjoy, and which are largely optional. And so for any of these tasks, you can do them either because it happens to be something that's fun to you, or because you believe the character you are role-playing would do it "for the little people" or whatever... or you can tell yourself "no, that's not the sort of work my inquisitor would be wasting time on".

That's all there's to it. And I think this sort of semi-sandbox allowing you to shape your own experience and spend anything between 20-100+ hours on it, that DAI currently is? It works out ok. At this point, while i can agree it'd be nice to see more fleshed out content, I'm not convinced it'd be a good tradeoff if it came at expense of removing a number of the zones from the game. Done this way it'd likely still wind up as "Doesn't have stuff DAO did, hence worse" for the folks who already think DAO did it better, while at the same time lacking the sheer size that DAO didn't have. So a lose-lose.

As usual, the mileages will vary.

[DragonAddict]

All Bioware had to do was continue from DAO to DA2 but they didn't.

 

If something works, why try and fix it?

 

By trying to fix what wasn't broken and go a totally different route, this has cost Bioware core fans, money and their DA games are now mediocre and meh.

 

Other companies that had really great games, built off them and actually continued to number 2 and number 3 and it works.

 

Look at Blizzard with the Dialbo series. Diablo 1 PC game and a hit.......improved it and Diablo 2 and a hit...........improved it and made it also for console controllers without ruining it for PC's, a smashing hit. I have Diablo 3, put hundreds of hours into it and will play it more when season 2 comes out. Blizzard didn't fix what wasn't broken, they only improved upon it and didn't do a 180 on their core fans. Bioware didn't get this.

[Elhanan]

All Bioware had to do was continue from DAO to DA2 but they didn't.
 
If something works, why try and fix it?
 
By trying to fix what wasn't broken and go a totally different route, this has cost Bioware core fans, money and their DA games are now mediocre and meh.
 
Other companies that had really great games, built off them and actually continued to number 2 and number 3 and it works.
 
Look at Blizzard with the Dialbo series. Diablo 1 PC game and a hit.......improved it and Diablo 2 and a hit...........improved it and made it also for console controllers without ruining it for PC's, a smashing hit. I have Diablo 3, put hundreds of hours into it and will play it more when season 2 comes out. Blizzard didn't fix what wasn't broken, they only improved upon it and didn't do a 180 on their core fans. Bioware didn't get this.

Also seems to have gained some fans; those GOTY awards come from somewhere beyond our control.

Quit after two campaigns in Diablo 1; never bothered with the rest and cannot recall playing another Blizzard product. I try and not denigrate those games as I have chosen not to play or research them; have no interest. However, that does not seem to stop others from doing so here.

DAI has already seen 380+ hrs from my various campaigns, and has been a worthwhile investment for myself; easily my GOTY, too. Perhaps after finally playing it yourself your opinion might shift from this seemingly prejudicial mindset.

@ tmp7704 - And sometimes great leaders do not mind getting their hands dirty with the 'little people'; too many examples to list here. While leaders do delegate authority, some prefer to lead by example. For my Inquisitors, accepting quests depends on the task, personality, and goals of that particular leader. Just another perspective.

[In Exile]

I don't claim you said DAO is bad, I said you're laughably ridiculous pretending DAO did nothing better than DAI beside the UI.
And that's to keep it polite.

I'm not pretending. You can't pretend to have an opinion. Beyond that, you can keep dodging a discussion of the games' features if you like; you'll be just as wrong whether we talk about it or not.

[SATG87]

Other than beautiful vistas, graphics and solid voice acting, this game has nothing to offer. The combat is weak, the story is uninteresting and keyboard/mouse controls are subpar. It's basically a hack-and-slash game done wrong.

[Gambit458]

True roll playing game:

 

 

- you can pick male or female

- different classes

- different races

- choose and distribute your attributes

- distribute other characters attributes, levels and armor and weapons, items, etc.

- choose all party members skill sets in detail

- your choices actually do matter in the game and imported to the next

- will work fine with controllers and keyboard / mice combinations from the beginning

- well thought out story line, plots and sub quests

- long game, not short story with many useless sub quests to fill in time

- not hack and slash action game

- not simplified or dumbed down, complexity is a good thing

- romance and choices but not over the top, not all about sex sex sex

- emotions and dialog without swearing

 

You don't need the best graphics at that time, only the above and a well thought out story line, plots and sub quests. If you have the option to save game and import your character to the next game, you actually can do so instead of doing a 180 and nothing.

 

I would say, if you never played DAO, then DA2 and DA:I give them a try but if you did play DAO and all the DLC's, which is what got Bioware's DAO going in the first place, then I'd say no to both. Maybe DA4 will be different......I can always dream and hope?!

 

DA2 was none of these things and DA:I is a step in the right direction but still has a long ways to go.

You give DA O far too much credit. When you brought up their DLC, their DLC is mediocre at best. Witch Hunt, Stone Prisoner, the one about the Warden keep, and revisiting Ostagar were the only relevant DLCs. The rest were pretty pointless. For ex Leliana's song. Sure it gave more insight into Leliana's background but it didn't really contribute much to the story and wasn't something worth playing again. Your reasons for what a "true RPG" is are also all wrong. That's not what a true RPG is, that's just what YOU think a true RPG is. Bioware made our choices stop mattering all the way back in Mass Effect 2 so don't act like this is a problem that's happening just now. "Emotions and dialogue without swearing"..DA O had swearing in it bud, just not to the extent of the other games.  Not only that but out in the real world not everyone speaks without profanity. 

"Hack and slash action game"..Smh. One of DA O's problems was that that auto-attack bit may have appealed to PC players who like that old school RPG bit but to the rest that combat system was incredibly boring. I much rather be in control of my attacks instead of sitting there watching my guy auto attack something and hope that he actually hits his target instead of chasing after him like a fool when he misses. Some of your reasons are ridiculous. Picking classes and races? What do you think picking between a human, elf, dwarf, or quanari means? What does picking between a rogue, warrior, or mage mean? People overrate the skill system in Origins as well. I'm replaying it right now and it's not as spectacular as people try to make it sound. You get a point and pick a skill every time. What a surprise, you do the same in the other games. DA 2's problem was that it never got the time to be fully finished. It was rushed and obviously the quality wasn't as great as it could have been. When you bring up other companies, sure Diablo 3 is fun..But it's no where near as enticing as 2 was. The story isn't as dark as 2 and the game feels too..Cartoony compared to the previous. The only truly great thing about Diablo 3/Reaper of Souls was its gameplay. Don't know why you're trying to bring up Blizzard though because they have changed their games. Look at World of Warcraft for ex or Starcraft 2

 

To me, you just sound like someone who is incredibly picky and is upset with Bioware all because they didn't keep their game the way you wanted to play it. 

[Hollerboller]

I think DA:I would be very good if we had the combat and tactics from DA2. The only part  that was good anyways in DA2.

 

My ranking is

 

Story:

 

DA:O

DA:I

DA2

 

Combat

 

DA2

DA:O

DA:I

 

Companions

 

DA:O

DA:I

DA2

 

Sorry for my bad english

 

 

[C0uncil0rTev0s]

Wow. People are actualyy complaining over DA:O combat.

And I gotta say I've played my first ten playthroughs in DA:O with tactical cam only. And I enjoyed it.

[Chaos17]

What is a "true RPG?"

Go play some pen and papers games or some gamebooks like Lone Wolf so you get some culture.

They're the ancestors of video game rpg, they're the paper version of it and the root of the genre.

It's just amazinf how in the 80 century they alrady though about rpg on paper version, so much depth (dual class anybody?).

 

The closest games that I know which reproduced the pen and pape of dunjeons and dragons (ADD) is Baldur's gate serie.

So really anyone who doesn't know what make a game an rpg, they just lack of culture and need to read about the genre.

[Hollerboller]

Go play some pen and papers games or some gamebooks like Lone Wolf so you get some culture.

They're the ancestors of video game rpg, they're the paper version of it and the root of the genre.

It's just amazinf how in the 80 century they alrady though about rpg on paper version, so much depth (dual class anybody?).

 

The closest games that I know which reproduced the pen and pape of dunjeons and dragons (ADD) is Baldur's gate serie.

So really anyone who doesn't what make a game an rpg then they lack of culture and need to read about the genre.

Yeah, Baldurs Gate, i loved it, still do. Nostalgica...

 

Sorry for my bad english

[AlanC9]

- romance and choices but not over the top, not all about sex sex sex
- emotions and dialog without swearing

I don't see how these things have anything to do with the definition of "RPG." I get that you have preferences in this area, but the thread isn't about "games DragonAddict likes."

[AlanC9]

Go play some pen and papers games or some gamebooks like Lone Wolf so you get some culture.
They're the ancestors of video game rpg, they're the paper version of it and the root of the genre.
It's just amazinf how in the 80 century they alrady though about rpg on paper version, so much depth (dual class anybody?).
 
The closest games that I know which reproduced the pen and pape of dunjeons and dragons (ADD) is Baldur's gate serie.
So really anyone who doesn't know what make a game an rpg, they just lack of culture and need to read about the genre.

I've played PnP; lots of it. I don't think BG was any better at emulating PnP than later Bio games have been. I think Bio's been far better at emulating PnP than most other RPG devs have been, though.

[robertthebard]

You sound exactly like every other fan boy that posts in every other game thread when a game doesn't live up to the hype. You could have copied and pasted that post and no one would know the difference. You also never addressed any points. You just said, "Meh, I like this game." lol... good for you I guess?

philosophy : relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind

: based on feelings or opinions rather than facts

Subjective

What is it that someone's supposed to say about your subjective rant? Is it going to be limited to "If you're not agreeing with me, you're stupid"? I know that's pretty common here. I could blast you for the "you have to grind side quests for power thing", I guess, because that's just objectively false. You don't have to grind anything, unless you're wanting to craft, but really, what would be the point? It's not like you can just go straight to the farm in the Hinterlands and gain enough power to progress the story... Oh, wait, you actually can. This is pretty handy, if you actually want a mount. It's not like any rogue mages or rogue Templars you kill on the way are in any way shape or form tied to the main story... Oh wait, they are, dammit man, I'm really trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on these subjective opinions, but they just keep falling a bit flat.

The combat stuff is also subjective, there are some that like it, some that don't, and some that just don't care. I guess I do have to admit that the tactical camera controls are wonky though, so there's one thing you got right, as far as I'm concerned, but really, that's subjective too, since some people aren't having many issues with it. So tell me; did any of my counter points change your mind? No? So I guess we're back to my original question, yes? "What is it that someone's supposed to say about your subjective rant?" that justifies your decision to go all 4chan on someone?

[C0uncil0rTev0s]

RPG is about choosing a role and paying it.

 

For example, there is a role of Dalish Inquisitor (Lavellan), which was a hunter back home (if choosing rogue).

 

Can I choose the role? Ofc I can. Tho all I know and feel about my character is ... nothing. Just some white letters over there saying I was sent to attend Conclave for **** knows why.

 

Can I play it? Ofc I can't.

 

a) Origin doesn't take any significent role in the game. Few wartable missions with a textwall? Ty, I feel so rewarded.

 

b ) Origin impact on choices throughout the game. The lack of it, actually.

Well, ya, I can choose Dalish banner to stick everywhere I go, which doesn't make any sense as I'm Inquisitior now.

Do I have any benefits from being Dalish when interacting with Dalishes? No.

Do I have any race-specific missions? No.

Do I have any race-specific dialogue options? I do. Like 10 for all the game which don't matter anything in the end.

 

c) Origin makes me able to use elvish-restricted gear. It would be even nice if:

- gear was scalable (it is not);

- gear was nice-looking (naked armpits in Dalish set make me feel disgusted);

- gear was useful for someone outside my party (which can't be as only party member who has elvish training is Solas. And he's a mage).

But SUDDENLY it is not useful.

 

d) Origin should be influental over exploring the world or lore. Well, if the game focuses on 'open-world' and 'exploring' origins must have an impact on the exploring process. It could be more dalish-related info in my case, or maybe some info on common events from Dalish perspective, race-related places to see...

 

e) Origins should be important in character customization. But it's not.

I can make same bald, semi-bald or bobcutted elves just as they could be dwarves, shemlens, Tel Vashoth.

 

Still nothing.

 

CONCLUSION: DA:I isn't an RPG.