50 réponses à ce sujet

[vnth]

Well clearly some people prefer tactical rpg of the first and others action rpg like the sequels. The solution for solving this rift (sorry) is simply to make both. Multiple genres of the same universe is nothing new. Fans of one series can to some extent appreciate the other, and hardcore fans will obviously buy both, so if anything BW can double the revenue for their overlord. And why just actional rpg and tactical rpg? BW can make mmo for DA and other genre too and no one would complain about exclusion or selling out or whatever. I honestly dont think this is too unrealistic.

[bzombo]

I don't think multiple styles of games like that is feasible. I think a happy medium can be had, though. Inquisition is a good game. I think if Bioware improves the tactical camera and sticks with the open world we're good. Inquisition is definitely better than DA2. They're not going to make another Origins. It's just not realistic at this point with the kind of engine they have.

[RepHope]

BURN IT TO THE GROU-

Oh. Yeah guess we could try that. It's never going to happen though, and honestly if Bioware improves on Inquisitions groundwork, I don't think they'd really have to change much.

[Vagrant91684]

The solution is detach from EA...but that is impossible.

[dreamgazer]

The solution is detach from EA.

Quick, name a Dragon Age game that doesn't have EA's label on it.

[Sanunes]

So your solution is to fragment the game even more? I get you might not have liked what happened with Inquisition, but really do we need another thread with "make me the game I want and ignore the people who might like it this way"?

[katokires]

Well clearly some people prefer tactical rpg of the first and others action rpg like the sequels. The solution for solving this rift (sorry) is simply to make both. Multiple genres of the same universe is nothing new. Fans of one series can to some extent appreciate the other, and hardcore fans will obviously buy both, so if anything BW can double the revenue for their overlord. And why not just actional rpg and tactical rpg? BW can make mmo for DA and other genre too and no one would complain about exclusion or selling out or whatever. I honestly dont think this is too unrealistic. 

It is the solution. And man I am SURE that a low budget game like a Baldur's Gate in Thedas would be ridiculously easy for Bioware to make. I couldn't care less about this Inquisition bullshit if they gave me low low low budget old style RPG in Thedas. It is happiness for everyone. They would spend 1cent to make a crappy old rpg game we would GLADLY pay them trillions of euros + our souls, and everybody would be happy. But no, they want console dumbs to be happy and **** the others.

[Precursor Meta]

Tactical camera could you a bit more micro options but other than that, it was pretty solid.

[naughty99]

Well clearly some people prefer tactical rpg of the first and others action rpg like the sequels. The solution for solving this rift (sorry) is simply to make both. Multiple genres of the same universe is nothing new. Fans of one series can to some extent appreciate the other, and hardcore fans will obviously buy both, so if anything BW can double the revenue for their overlord. And why not just actional rpg and tactical rpg? BW can make mmo for DA and other genre too and no one would complain about exclusion or selling out or whatever. I honestly dont think this is too unrealistic. 

 

I might be in the minority, but for me DA2 was essentially a turn based game with respect to the combat system (real time with pause, but I played entirely in the pause menu).

 

It was more challenging on Nightmare mode compared to DA:O on Nightmare mode. My problems with DA2 were not with the tactical combat system. The maps were very small and recycled, and there were not enough interesting side quests IMO, but the tactical combat was fun and challenging, and I had no problem using keyboard and mouse.

 

Haven't had a chance to try Inquisition yet, and I understand there have been some changes to the tactical menu compared with DA2; however, I'm hoping I can play the same way I played the previous games (entirely in the pause menu, micromanaging every party member action with all the companion A.I. disabled, using keyboard/mouse).

 

As for the people who enjoy more of the action combat, can't they simply play using one character at a time, without pausing? I imagine that would be sort of like playing Skyrim where your companion NPC has its own AI, and you simply control your own character.

[Chidy1776]

Inquisition is my favorite so far. The tactical style rpg is fun, but dai's open world and action make it feel so much more imersive and action packed to me.
I will say that its not perfect. I would reaply like to see more depth added to the tactical camera and more options for the ai. Speaking of, i feel the ai is what makes it feelso akward sometimes. Its not the worst ive played with, but sometimes it makes me feel like i have to micromanage ever little thing. I would love to see options like prefercing ranged or spell casting enemies.
I understand some ppl really love tactical combat, but for me a mix of the two is the perfect medium. I feel like im in the action and my character, giving out orders and wading into the frey.

[Aurok]

Put someone in charge who has a clear and coherent vision of what they want Dragon Age to be.

Stop making it a mix of what it started out as and whatever random thing happens to be popular at the time.

Hire better writers.

[AlanC9]

As for the people who enjoy more of the action combat, can't they simply play using one character at a time, without pausing? I imagine that would be sort of like playing Skyrim where your companion NPC has its own AI, and you simply control your own character.

There seem to be two problems with that; one I understand and one I don't.

The one I understand it that the Tactics system has been, well, gutted. AI-controlled companions will perform somewhat worse than DAO/DA2 characters did, and substantially worse than previous companions did if you went in for modifying the default Tactics. I'm not sure how serious the issue is, since DAI is as easy as other Bio games are. But I can see how the harder difficulties might be borderline unplayable in action mode.

The one I don't understand is that some players, particularly PC kb/m players, don't seem to be able to handle the action controls well. I don't really see the issue, since it's basically Skyrim with a weird default key layout (copied right from DAO, but I guess everyone used click-to-move there.) But this seems to be a thing

[Giubba]

Quick, name a Dragon Age game that doesn't have EA's label on it.

But...But..... *insert Sera babbling scene*

[SofaJockey]

Just no.

 

I'm sure DA4 will be a refinement of the Frostbite 3 model of DAI, as it should be.

[Sidney]

Well clearly some people prefer tactical rpg of the first and others action rpg like the sequels. The solution for solving this rift (sorry) is simply to make both. Multiple genres of the same universe is nothing new. Fans of one series can to some extent appreciate the other, and hardcore fans will obviously buy both, so if anything BW can double the revenue for their overlord. And why just actional rpg and tactical rpg? BW can make mmo for DA and other genre too and no one would complain about exclusion or selling out or whatever. I honestly dont think this is too unrealistic.

 

 

Because there aren't two games to be had. The problem isn't that this is action, people who use that word apparently do not understand what it means. This is not an action game, it isn't TRYING to be an action game. Neither was DA2. They were both trying to be more exciting in the same way the reboot of XCOM tried to be "exciting" by having the action kills. Like the DA2/I issues it is an issue of animation not of substance in the case of that game. DA2 and DAI BOTH are still point and click affairs where your control your entire party. The combat systems across all 3 games differ in details not at a higher level. If Bioware had really wanted an action game they could have made the jump to full on Skyrim or Witcher style combat which is a lot more action-y and interactive.

[Akka le Vil]

Quick, name a Dragon Age game that doesn't have EA's label on it.

 

DAO was developped mainly before EA bought BIoware. And you know it, you're just purposedly playing dumb, which is hardly a good way to argue in good faith.

[Farangbaa]

DAO was developped mainly before EA bought BIoware. And you know it, you're just purposedly playing dumb, which is hardly a good way to argue in good faith.

Stop lying to yourself. EA bought Bioware in october 2007. Dragon Age: Inquisiton was released november 2009.

Who's purposely playing dumb here? I can assure you it's not dreamgazer.

Mass Effect was developped mainly before the acquisition. Maybe you have them mixed up or something?

(and I feel like I need to add: the, in my opinion, vastly overpraised Mass Effect 2, was developped COMPLETELY under the wing of EA)

[vnth]

Personally the problem with DAi isnt simply about it being an action rpg but Im not gonna get into that here. My point is that instead of BW keep making weird combination of of the 2 genres to varying degrees of failure and reinventing the franchise with every new title, they should just separate the 2. That should keep everyone happy. Also, more games.

[Dreamer]

The suggestion that EA is incapable of poo'ing their own bed is laughable. EA is EA's greatest enemy and has been for some time.

 

/SimCity

[His Majesty Lord Crash]

I don't think multiple styles of games like that is feasible. I think a happy medium can be had, though. Inquisition is a good game. I think if Bioware improves the tactical camera and sticks with the open world we're good. Inquisition is definitely better than DA2. They're not going to make another Origins. It's just not realistic at this point with the kind of engine they have.

 

Inquisition is in no way better than DA2, apart from pure visuals. Everything else is just worse, sorry. Especially the lackluster open world  have a look here how immersive worlds should look like: http://www.theastron...-game-worlds/).

 

And we don't need an improved tactical camera. We want the all-in-one system back that worked well in both DAO and DA2.

 

I agree with the OP that the franchise makes little sense like that. They should finally decide what they want to offer and finally FOCUS again. Do they want to make a real MMO (which means MP) with button mashing gameplay and filler content? Or a real action (and actually skill/reaction-based) game? Or a tactical game? An exploration game? Or a story-driven game? A wannabe jack-of-all-trades game is usually lacking and doesn't offer a really well done experience in ANY of these various directions. It's time to stop with this mediocre-by-design approach and time again to focus. It seemed like their answer to the criticism of DA2 was to make the game as big as possible (for the sake of being big) and as expansive as possible (for the sake of being expansive) without having a clear vision. That's not how you make good video games, sorry.

 

I recommend that Bioware should read that (again?) before they plan their next DA game: http://www.theastron...your-aaa-brain/

 

But then again we still have the problem with EA and we all know how little clue EA has about gaming in general and game design in specific. And how little they care. With EA in charge Bioware will probably never shine again, I'm afraid...

[Akka le Vil]

Stop lying to yourself. EA bought Bioware in october 2007. Dragon Age: Inquisiton was released november 2009.

 

And DAO started development before 2004, so how exactly am I wrong ?

[katokires]

Quick, name a Dragon Age game that doesn't have EA's label on it.

All good ones: Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights for instance.

Unless you are one of those dellusional people who think that people would even bother about a Bioware RPG if not for those D&D games.

There was no Dragon Age, there was "building on top of D&D fame"

Of course with the name Origins they wanted to make their own road from there on. And they did.

I just hated them for using me and other fans of old for creating this shitty world they did, this not-D&D.

Yeah, I loved this game, perhaps I should call it not-D&D Origins.

Then came not-D&D 2.

Now we have not-RPG Origins which means the next one will probably be not-RPG 2.

Then I'm sure it will be just-another-random-action-game

Sad thing they tried to lure the fans that gave them money to create this shitty not-D&D into liking their "original" (ROFLMAO) world

But happily Inquisition made sure never again

[Deebo305]

The solution is detach from EA...but that is impossible.

I really never get this "blame EA mentality"

[His Majesty Lord Crash]

I really never get this "blame EA mentality"

 

Why not? It's pretty obvious that Bioware is in free fall mode since they sold out to EA. So yeah, it's both Bioware and EA who are responsible.

[Akka le Vil]

I really never get this "blame EA mentality"

 

Look at EA's history with acquired studios ?