530 réponses à ce sujet

[Reymoose]

That...really only works when you have a handful of preset characters and actors that you can straight up capture acting out the scene together in real time in a setting that does not involve 9 foot horned giant people, Dwarves and 4 armed demons that can walk with their ass above their head.

 

Given the sheer size and range of DA:I's cast and PC you would have to basically re-film The Lord of The Rings in green bodysuits. 

 

No it absolutely can work, because mo-cap has dropped so much in cost and production time. I'm not talking about character interaction, which is not bound to mo-cap by the way.

 

It is also much, much, much faster than 'working by hand' especially for the simple interactions of walking around, talking, gesturing that most DA:I cutscenes are made of. The Halamshiral dance sequence for example, is an especially complex thing to capture and animate either way.

 

Capture isn't restricted by size or type of model, as long as it fits a basic profile, so yes, it's possible to do 4 armed demons. 

 

The range of DA:I is regards to the 'cutscene' animation is much smaller than you think it is. Because of the third-person conversations, the amount of animated cutscenes is less, and since all cutscene animations are pre-set, it isn't hard to generate a set of base motion captures to work from.

[scrutinizer]

I'm really tired of these hyperbolic posts.  The gist seems to be if it is not the exact game you wanted or it is not the perfect game it is the absolute worst.  I loved Inquisition.  Like ME3 it built the world.  The environments told a story, NPC's added to it, and then there was the main quest, which in many ways is secondary to looking at what Thedas is and who its people are.  Is this different than RPG in days of yore?  Yes, they did not have the ability or the history to let much beyond text tell a story.  RPG's are evolving with the technology and the games that came before.  I feel like a number of the whingers are just missing the point.  

RPGs are not evolving (or at least not in the sense you imply) - Divinity OS, Pillars of Eternity, Torment ToN, Wasteland 2, Age of Decadence, Lords of Xulima, Legend of Grimrock, Loren the Amazon Princess, and more actionish ones like Grim Dawn, Path of Exile, Aarklash Legacy, The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing... the list goes on. These are all successful RPGs (with the exception of Pillars and Torment - they are yet to be released) that stick to the old formula. Not much evolving here.  

Huge molochs like EA are evolving to extend their reach. And the more reach you have, the more money you milk. For some, such state of affairs is displeasing, as they see their beloved series (which started, and this is key here, as a true-to-roots RPG and they, as fans, have the right to voice their concerns regarding the sequels, which depart for the original formula) turn more casual-action-game with every next installment. For some though, it's all good. 

But do not dismiss those hardcore RPG gamers that hoped DA:I would at least resemble DA:O in its overall mechanics. First, there was an RPG, then it became an action game.

 

Peace.

[Rawgrim]

The only time I've seen this happen is in The Expendables movies, and that's sad...

 

Didn't watch the PG-13 travesty of a third movie, did you?

[Seraphim24]

In your opinion, but it's regularly included in "Great RPG's of all time" lists and Hordes of the Underdark was an amazing game. It was easily better than this game.

 

I also support NWN as a rather strong RPG, had a lot of fun with that one and also had Aribeth, a more compelling female character than those in any of the recent BW games IMO.

[Cmpunker13]

Knights the Old Republic is better than Baldur's Gate to me. DAI and DA2 are the worst of the lot, but still playable.

[Elhanan]

I also support NWN as a rather strong RPG, had a lot of fun with that one and also had Aribeth, a more compelling female character than those in any of the recent BW games IMO.

NWN is my reigning fave RPG due to HotU, mods, m/p campaigns, and PW's that are still extant. But I only played the OC a single time. I am currently into my second campaign of DAI, with several planned ahead. And as good as the story was for KOTOR (possibly better than the filmed prequels), the mandatory mini-games also restricted my sessions to a single campaign. Again for myself, DAI is a better experience.

[hwlrmnky]

I've been wondering, is it necessary to be a fan of Star Wars to enjoy KOTOR? I've seen all the movies and enjoyed some more than others; I would not describe myself as a fan, more IP neutral.

[scrutinizer]

I've been wondering, is it necessary to be a fan of Star Wars to enjoy KOTOR? I've seen all the movies and enjoyed some more than others; I would not describe myself as a fan, more IP neutral.

Well, I'm definitely not a Star Wars fan (seen all the movies and wasn't impressed), yet KOTOR appealed to me. It's just a good game.

[Rawgrim]

I've been wondering, is it necessary to be a fan of Star Wars to enjoy KOTOR? I've seen all the movies and enjoyed some more than others; I would not describe myself as a fan, more IP neutral.

 

I think you would enjoy it very well. It takes place 4000 years before the movies, so you don't need to have watched anything at all.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

All this discussion about "true RPGs" and how Inquisition isn't a "true RPG" has led me to conclude that should genres and the game's genre get treated that way then it's only purpose is to limit creativity. Honestly you hate the game because it's not a 'true RPG', yet does it matter? You create an Inquisitor who you are very much able to make your own (there's no debate here), you can choose your class based on what your lore provides you, you can forge a personality- choosing from various dialogue options that allow you to express yourself, but in a fantasy game where you're living the life of another character- one you can strongly identify with and shape based on your whims. 

The game provides countless opportunities for you to express yourself, some lines your character says can even hit home (mine sure did). It also does a decent job at acknowledging choices you've made that were never acknowledged if you made similar choices in previous games- such as faith and specialization decisions. The Wartable is an excellent RP feature, where you choose how you want to handle your organization- whether through military, intelligence or diplomacy, which ultimately affects what your Inquisition is known for in the end. You might argue that it's 'flavor of text', I wouldn't disagree, but it's well done considering evolving so many variables from 'flavor of text' to something of a larger scale is either implausible or simply extremely difficult or expensive- software development ain't a walk in the park- more like a walk in hell.
 

I'm a very 'by the book' kind of guy, but when it comes to art I've started believing that genres are nothing more than categories to make it easier for people of different tastes to find what they like, and guidelines to those who are intending to create an art that identifies to that genre. By no means should that guideline get followed to the letter, because ultimately it's contents are subjective. I see RPGs as games that allow me to play a story of a character who I'm not, it's elements include but not limited to character customization, dialogue options and an interactive story. You may want to allocate your stats, I certainly do not care- in fact I find the issue so unimportant I am liking the stats distribution of DA. You claim that a true RPG should have a non-linear story (lol), again I do not care, so long as the story is good and interacts with my choices (which the DA series have very much been able to accomplish).

[Rawgrim]

All this discussion about "true RPGs" and how Inquisition isn't a "true RPG" has led me to conclude that should genres and the game's genre get treated that way then it's only purpose is to limit creativity. Honestly you hate the game because it's not a 'true RPG', yet does it matter? You create an Inquisitor who you are very much able to make your own (there's no debate here), you can choose your class based on what your lore provides you, you can forge a personality- choosing from various dialogue options that allow you to express yourself, but in a fantasy game where you're living the life of another character- one you can strongly identify with and shape based on your whims. 

The game provides countless opportunities for you to express yourself, some lines your character says can even hit home (mine sure did). It also does a decent job at acknowledging choices you've made that were never acknowledged if you made similar choices in previous games- such as faith and specialization decisions. The Wartable is an excellent RP feature, where you choose how you want to handle your organization- whether through military, intelligence or diplomacy, which ultimately affects what your Inquisition is known for in the end. You might argue that it's 'flavor of text', I wouldn't disagree, but it's well done considering evolving so many variables from 'flavor of text' to something of a larger scale is either implausible or simply extremely difficult or expensive- software development ain't a walk in the park- more like a walk in hell.
 

I'm a very 'by the book' kind of guy, but when it comes to art I've started believing that genres are nothing more than categories to make it easier for people of different tastes to find what they like, and guidelines to those who are intending to create an art that identifies to that genre. By no means should that guideline get followed to the letter, because ultimately it's contents are subjective. I see RPGs as games that allow me to play a story of a character who I'm not, it's elements include but not limited to character customization, dialogue options and an interactive story. You may want to allocate your stats, I certainly do not care- in fact I find the issue so unimportant I am liking the stats distribution of DA. You claim that a true RPG should have a non-linear story (lol), again I do not care, so long as the story is good and interacts with my choices (which the DA series have very much been able to accomplish).

 

Rpgs are about creating your own character. Gender, race, motivations, beliefs, goals, and then playing the game with all that in mind.

 

DA:I has most of these on board, so it is actually a truer rpg that most. Its the level up system and the combat that is lacking all over the place.

[spellekesgarnaal]

Put the game more tru the test of players befor selling my opinion.

[AlanC9]

Rpgs are about creating your own character. Gender, race, motivations, beliefs, goals, and then playing the game with all that in mind.

So The Witcher isn't actuallly an RPG? (Just making trouble)

As for the substance of the debate, I don't see why CRPGs can't be as diverse in their approach as PnP RPGs. Or even more so, since CRPGs can handle mechanics that aren't workable in PnP.

[Elhanan]

So The Wicher isn't actuallly an RPG?

(Just making trouble)

To be fair, he said nothing about having a choice about those characteristics; only that they were included....

[ThreeF]

So The Witcher isn't actuallly an RPG?

(Just making trouble)

Some people are wondering exactly that, actually. To some it's an hack and slash action game with RPG elements (or even fantasy elements), so things with Witcher are murky at best.
 

[Googleness]

in short,

I finished DA:I once took me around 100+ hours then I had no urge to try something different. all other bioware games I played over 3-4 times each.

[Numbnumb27]

I must reluctantly agree that this is the worst DA game to date.  The first was great.  DA:II was a big disappointment to me, so much so that I vowed never to buy another one.  My weakness for a big discount was my undoing and I bought DA:I.   I didn't thing EA could make a DA game worst that DA:II.  I was wrong.  This one is the most boring, had to understand game they have made todate.  If I could get a refund I would accept it gladly but that won't happen.

Hopefully I won't be such a sucker for any other EA games.

[EvilChani]

Some people are wondering exactly that, actually. To some it's an hack and slash action game with RPG elements (or even fantasy elements), so things with Witcher are murky at best.
 

 

Exactly. I had this argument with a friend of mine. He loves Witcher and thinks it's the best RPG ever, but I don't consider it a true RPG. Is it a fun game? Yes. Does it have a good story? Yep. Does the story change based on my choices? Hell yeah. But I have no choice but to play as Geralt and it is, in the end, basically a hack and slash action game. Same goes for AC - it has a few RPG elements to it, but it's hack and slash. And though I loved Brotherhood and the rest of the games where I played as Ezio (and yes, I love him because he's hot, I love his accent, and he's a badass, so add a fangirl squeal here), I don't really care for the others. The first AC game is annoying to play and I hate the PC and the others...well, meh. If they let me make my own assassin, who can be female and have traits that affect how the world reacts to her, then I'd consider it an RPG.

 

When I think of RPG, I think of KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, NVN, DA:O, DA2, etc. Witcher is awesome, but I don't consider it an RPG.

 

On a side note, does it annoy anyone else that, when you choose a Qunari character, you have the same voices as the human/elven/dwarven characters? I watched my nephew play a Qunari for a bit and realized I'll never play as a Qunari. It just knocks me out of the game when I hear that proper British accent from the Qunari. Plus, they tried to make them too "pretty". I want an Arishok-looking character with a deep, growling voice, not a shiny, metrosexual girly man who sounds like he would rather go shopping than go out and bathe in dragon's blood!

[DaySeeker]

RPGs are not evolving (or at least not in the sense you imply) - Divinity OS, Pillars of Eternity, Torment ToN, Wasteland 2, Age of Decadence, Lords of Xulima, Legend of Grimrock, Loren the Amazon Princess, and more actionish ones like Grim Dawn, Path of Exile, Aarklash Legacy, The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing... the list goes on. These are all successful RPGs (with the exception of Pillars and Torment - they are yet to be released) that stick to the old formula. Not much evolving here.  

Huge molochs like EA are evolving to extend their reach. And the more reach you have, the more money you milk. For some, such state of affairs is displeasing, as they see their beloved series (which started, and this is key here, as a true-to-roots RPG and they, as fans, have the right to voice their concerns regarding the sequels, which depart for the original formula) turn more casual-action-game with every next installment. For some though, it's all good. 

But do not dismiss those hardcore RPG gamers that hoped DA:I would at least resemble DA:O in its overall mechanics. First, there was an RPG, then it became an action game.

 

Peace.

You're listing RPG's that use their retro-ness as a selling point.  I don't know if calling something the worst ever is voicing concerns.  I don't see that games becoming accessible to more players and expanding their story-telling capabilties and complexity as a bad thing.  I can't see DAI as some sort of betrayal because it wasn't as punishing as DAO.  I didn't find Divinity compelling.  We can argue the combat was better, but I found it repetitive and the story really weak.   I will readily admit I love the stories Bioware tells and the worlds it creates; I don't think anyone does it better.  The killing stuff part is not nearly as interesting to me.  There are games that are pure strategy.  Dragon Age has never been one of them.  So, to me, there is no way it can be the worst.  It works, it has a little something for everyone, and it does what Bioware does best- tell a good story and create an interesting world. 

[katokires]

..Because it was boring? Turned based combat doesn't bother me, but the whole auto-attack bit needs to be a thing of the past

No it doesn't. It is RPG, boring is the most desireable feature of combat. Want something even a bit not boring, go play action/adventure games.

It is like playing Assassin's Creed and saying jumping is a thing from the past and that they should focus on tactical combat paused camera with automatic jumps so that the player can focus on the strategy against the enemies... that is how much sense it makes

This they did in Inquisition is as ridiculous as letting Michael Bay direct an european drama movie so that he puts on explosion, giant robots and Megan Fox in lingerie... this is as stupid as it gets. European dramas are supposed to be boring for retarded children who like action, it is not past, it is just different. But it is market right? DId any of you bother reading what Tolkien's grandson think of what they did to LOTR and Hobbit movies? That's what I think of Inquisition. He didn't even agreed to meet the director so disgusted he was.

But again.. it sells. Shallow retarded games for shallow retarded people. As many say in these forums... to each their own.

[Realmzmaster]

Hello AlanC9, I see that posters here are debating what is a true cRPG? That definition changes depending on who is doing the defining.  Are posters going to say that Eye of Beholder I-III, Dungeon Hack, Dungeonmaster, and Ultima Underworld, Fallout 3 and NV are not cRPGs? Ultima Underworld was the first first person crpg with first person action. I assume that disqualifies it from being an cRPG?

 

Do all cRPGs have to be based on the D & D system to qualify? What about Gurps, RuneQuest, World of Darkness (does that mean the Vampire: The Masquerade Redemption and Bloodlines are out as cRPGS?) Does having a pre-defined character whose role the gamer assume mean it is not a cRPG?

 

Inquiring minds would like to know. The definition of cRPG is all over the map. It is fine to have your personal definition, but that does not make it universal. In fact in most dictionaries I have used words tend to have multiple meanings.

 

But, YMMV. 

If a poster thinks that DAI is the worst Bioware game that is fine. It is their opinion. But the opposite is also true if a person thinks the game is great that is their opinion. 

That is the nice point of opinions everyone can have one.

[Nightdragon8]

ah geez people seriously, take the "Is this an RPG" debate somewhere else geez, Its an RPG, and if you use that defintion, the only 'real' RPGs out there are the tabletop games where you can fully 100% make up your own character, well 95% as you still have a selection of races and classes.

 

There is no computer game in existtance that gives you the freedom of a Tabletop RPG. So please learn that computer RPG will ALWAYS be limited.

[Xhaiden]

The range of DA:I is regards to the 'cutscene' animation is much smaller than you think it is. Because of the third-person conversations, the amount of animated cutscenes is less, and since all cutscene animations are pre-set, it isn't hard to generate a set of base motion captures to work from.

 

Except the problem is that Dragon Age already uses mocap in this fashion and has used mocap since Origins. They already do exactly what you're suggesting. But to capture the fidelity of something like The Last Of Us you need preset actors with preset models in a scene together.

[AlanC9]

Do all cRPGs have to be based on the D & D system to qualify? What about Gurps, RuneQuest, World of Darkness (does that mean the Vampire: The Masquerade Redemption and Bloodlines are out as cRPGS?) Does having a pre-defined character whose role the gamer assume mean it is not a cRPG?

Let's add Champions and original Traveller. In Champions there's no such thing as loot because all abilities have to be paid for out of your character points. In Traveller there was no such thing as experience. Still RPGs?