293 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

You don't think people can be hypnotized by music?  Besides that it is a fantasy world afterall.

 

No, I can see a bard using song as distraction and putting curare in person's drink much like a magician uses sleight of hand.

[mutantspicy]

If you really insist on the spirit helper aspect.  That's not necessarily unrealistic either.  Tibetan Monks use chants and meditation to "enter higher planes of existence"  A bard could simply have to chant herself into a meditational state where she can enter the fade and gain access to certain magics in the same manner a mage does.

[Realmzmaster]

I have no problem with anyone criticizing a game especially constructive.The problem I have (and this goes to both sides) is when it is not done in a civil manner. For example in this thread Dakota Strider and I along with other have been having a civil conversation on our differences. I respect what Dakota Strider has to say and I hope Dakota Strider respects what I have to say. 

The conversation has been kept civil. We can agree to disagree. 

 

Yes, we are both selfish in how we want Bioware to proceed with in the future.

 

The problem comes when posters want to name call, personally insult or denigrate someone for their opinion. For me when that happens no matter how valid or invalid the opinion I stop reading.

 

I know full well some of the problems in DAI. Some which have been voiced in this thread. It simply does not affect me the way it does others. But, YMMV.

[mutantspicy]

No, I can see a bard using song as distraction and putting curare in person's drink much like a magician uses sleight of hand.

Well its known in the actual real world that certain very low frequencies can people to become nauseous.  Also a sonic blast of the right magnitude can in fact knock a person out.  I don't see how in a fantasy a realm a bard couldn't produce such a shout to stun a person.  Is it really that far of a stretch?  I was also going to bring up sirens, for a fantasy reference but someone already did.

[Realmzmaster]

If you really insist on the spirit helper aspect.  That's not necessarily unrealistic either.  Tibetan Monks use chants and meditation to "enter higher planes of existence"  A bard could simply have to chant herself into a meditational state where she can enter the fade and gain access to certain magics in the same manner a mage does.

 

Nice theory, but it is not supported by the DA lore in any manner.

[Bioware-Critic]

While we all know that any AA game must be a cross platform game, I do not think that many of the console uusers like the changes either.  I think the "Niche" RPG market is a lot larger than EA believes it is.   There not many here that like the dumbed down action oriented combat, and I do not think the console users are any different in this regard.  It is just hard for EA to be satisfied with the DAO sales when they see the sales that COD gets.  As a result they get greedy and try to make changes to drag in the COD croud.

 

Of course this fails because those people would just buy another COD game or Battlefield or some other shooter, not an RPG.  EA does not understand the concept of Brand Recognition when it comes to that.  People who like COD won't buy an RPG just because it adds action elements.  They know what the DA series is and it isn't for them, just like adding RPG elements would not make me buy a COD game for the same reason.

 

None of this is what their consumers want.  Not the PC players, and not the console players.  It is just that EA assumes RPGs won't sell, that DAO was a fluke, it was nice that it sold well, very well, but it was just an accident because that genere is dead.   So they make changes to bring in people who like action games.  Unfortunately, I do not have the numbers they have, but I have a strong feeling that they are acting purely out of speculation and vastly underestimating the true size of the market.

 

@otis0310

 

I agree 100%

 

I think that these guys form EA and many other business guys misunderstand a whole lot of things. And I think they are trying to shoot for goals that are so hilariously far away from what is possible ... ugh ... I don't even want to think about how long they will go on and try to create these monstrous constructs of theirs that will bring them a never ending cash-flow with an "ultimate formula" !?!? I really believe they would like to mix all genres and make all genres feel the same and play the same - so that they can bring us to buy everything without thinking. I mean they care so less about the games, that their only thoughts are about influencing us, the gamers! The average gamer is statistically 35 years old ... so in reality they are trying to influence grown-ups with fully developed personalities and preferences !!!

 

>>> They will never succeed with any of their rediculous plans ... <<<

>>> RPG-gaming will always be the genre for complexity and depth and nuance and so on ... <<<

 

If anything ... these RPG-trademarks will bleed into every other genre as well! Even if the economy guys will not recognize this until they switch to another field of operations entirely! There is a lot of money to be made here in the gaming industry.

 

But they have to learn how to do it! And I will not surrender just because they apply force!

 

I will laugh in their faces ...

[Realmzmaster]

Well its known in the actual real world that certain very low frequencies can people to become nauseous.  Also a sonic blast of the right magnitude can in fact knock a person out.  I don't see how in a fantasy a realm a bard couldn't produce such a shout to stun a person.  Is it really that far of a stretch?  I was also going to bring up sirens, for a fantasy reference but someone already did.

 

Sirens are products of the River god Achelous. Therefore they possess inherent divine power. Unless the bard can produce notes that low or high the answer is still no. The human voice has been known to shatter glass in the right conditions, but still no.

[Sidney]

You don't think people can be hypnotized by music?  Besides that it is a fantasy world afterall.

The question is do non Mages have magical powers and the answer is short of a lot of tortured explanation...yes. Music isn't THAT hypnotic or inspiring and let alone explaining how they sing during melee combat.

The fact that the graphics make them look more magic in DAI doesn't change the basic nature of the magical/supernatural/uncanny abilities every class has possessed since DAO.

[Owlbear]

(Clear example from another industry; all-season tires. If you've ever driven with a good set of summer performance tires and a good set of winter tires, you'll never want all-season tires again, because they do everything kind of poorly. You don't get a tire that's a great summer tire and a great winter tire, you get a tire that's a mediocre summer tire and a mediocre winter tire. And while there are a lot of drivers who do understand tires, the vast majority of drivers seem perfectly happy driving on tires which are mediocre in nearly every way, with no understanding that truly GOOD tires can potentially save your life, the life of your family members, the life of others, or the life of that adorable little squirrel confused about where to run...)

 

 

Ok, I’ll bite. I live somewhere where winter tires in the winter are really important and will probably soon be required by law, but a lot of people stick with all seasons. Notwithstanding that I don’t recommend this, the reason drivers use all-season tires has nothing to do with embracing mediocrity. If you ask people why they don’t use winter tires, they will most likely tell you that two sets of tires, even if technically better, are unnecessary and using all seasons saves money (which can be used to buy many other things besides tires, many of which are considered more exciting or important by many people). Their conclusion is valid in the sense that you don’t have to pay for twice annual tire changes and seasonal storage (or the equipment, time and space to do it yourself) and you don’t need to purchase two sets of wheels. Also, if you only keep your car for a few years, you may not drive enough to wear out a set of tires, meaning you pay for two sets of tires and end up wearing out neither. On the issue of performance, most people do not engage in driving spirited enough to benefit from a good set of performance summer tires. Each one of my summer performance tires costs as much as an entire set of cheap, skinny all-seasons and they last maybe half as long (and I rarely push them anywhere near their limits). That is not an insignificant expense. On the issue of safety, something like 90% to 100% of drivers think they are above-average and cannot imagine getting into a situation where their tires will mean the difference between a collision and not, so they don’t think twice about it.

 

To further torture the analogy between tires and computer games, we could say that there are many aspects to what constitutes good value in a video game. Some gamers place a very high premium on a few of those aspects to the exclusion of all others, while others don’t care so much if one particular attribute is first rate or not, but they maybe do care about the overall experience. Some people want a game to challenge the limits of their abilities and punish them for making mistakes; others want something to entertain them while they relax for a few hours between other things. Some people start in one camp and drift into another, as their life circumstances change.  (To bring it back around to cars, whether you think the 1978 Porsche 911 Turbo or the 2014 Honda Civic is the superior car depends on whether you value something that is safe, efficient, economical and gets you and 3 passengers from A to B in comfort over something fast, classic and fun that is actively trying to murder you. It's not that one is more mediocre than the other; it's that they do different things.) Furthermore, some gamers are what we might call hardcore: they take games very seriously and the nature and quality of the games they play is an important part of the quality of their life. Other gamers are not so hardcore: they are looking for some light entertainment, a fun diversion or a way to kill time. They will not be so concerned about a game being great as long as it is pretty good because they find value in other things. Or maybe they enjoy a challenging or demanding game but have limited time to play and don't wan't something that requires an enormous commitment of time or that can't be easily set aside on a few minutes notice.

 

It is not about one group valuing quality and one being okay with mediocrity. For most everything you do in life, there are people who take it very seriously and cannot understand why people would even bother if they’re going to do it the "dumbed-down" way you do. Likewise, there are things that you are passionate about and most people cannot understand why you take them so seriously and can’t just sit back and enjoy the easy, low-cost, low-effort way that everyone else does it.

[Lianaar]

Either we claim EA is an economic company that focuses on gaining profit, then we accept they have people actually knowing which target group the money is on, and thus makes games for people with purchase power. We have to accept that a money hungrey company able to afford people good with maximasing profits will make that: maximise profit. In which case the games will be profitable and thus base for new games.

 

Or we claim, that EA massively misundertands the players, will not be profitable and decides to do whatever pleases iteven if it doesn't bring money... in which case we should stop saying they are money hungrey.

 

The two just seem to be controversial to me again.

 

The game is getting GOTYs all over. And apparently people buy the game. You are free to hate it, parts of it, express your preferences for something else (after all, there were things in this very thread I expressed displeasure with and which I preferred differently), but don't pretend that you know the market of such a company with the ability and money to actually have market survey more then they do. I don't claim to have that knowledge, but I bet they have market surveys and base their decision on that. This is the very reason they still exist.

 

So yes, niche market doesn't offer enough income for video games, or there'd be way more niche items of this budget with way higher prices to balance things out. That is economic necessity. At least how presently we consider economy to work. Who knows what we'll think valid in 50 years.

[Eralrik]

Ah winter tires and the memory's of putting Tire Chains on them, wish I could still do that albeit loud as they were I never got stuck. ok back on topic

[Bioware-Critic]

Either we claim EA is an economic company that focuses on gaining profit, then we accept they have people actually knowing which target group the money is on, and thus makes games for people with purchase power. We have to accept that a money hungrey company able to afford people good with maximasing profits will make that: maximise profit. In which case the games will be profitable and thus base for new games.

 

Or we claim, that EA massively misundertands the players, will not be profitable and decides to do whatever pleases iteven if it doesn't bring money... in which case we should stop saying they are money hungrey.

 

The two just seem to be controversial to me again.

 

The game is getting GOTYs all over. And apparently people buy the game. You are free to hate it, parts of it, express your preferences for something else (after all, there were things in this very thread I expressed displeasure with and which I preferred differently), but don't pretend that you know the market of such a company with the ability and money to actually have market survey more then they do. I don't claim to have that knowledge, but I bet they have market surveys and base their decision on that. This is the very reason they still exist.

 

So yes, niche market doesn't offer enough income for video games, or there'd be way more niche items of this budget with way higher prices to balance things out. That is economic necessity. At least how presently we consider economy to work. Who knows what we'll think valid in 50 years.

 

@Lianaar

 

First off ...

NOBODY is hating here! Quite the contrary!

 

We discuss and criticise because we want the best for Bioware, the franchise and maybe even for EA - since they are the ones who help starting it all!

 

And secondly ...

I feel like, we ARE the market and we KNOW the products inside-and-out! Also, in the end: The consumers finance EVERYTHING - not EA ...

When the RPG fans leave - they have to find other loyal paying customers! But where?

I know what I and my friends and colleagues are thinking and discussing outside of this forum in the real world.

And the forum you are reading right now expresses a lot of things to be worthy of change and improvement as well!

 

Again: I am not hating on EA - I express my frustration ... And I try to bring forth my honest thoughts which I wish to discuss and to exchange with others here in the forum. It is an informed discussion.

 

And lastly ...

After years of market surveys from the side of EA they brought up something I and many, many, many, many, many other are NOT happy with!

Even EA knows this and there is only one thing they would love more than anything else: Sell more copies! And if we can tell them what we think they can make use of this information. It will help no one if I sugarcoat things!

 

So as far as I am concerned - this forum is helping them ...

 

Do you get me?

[Lianaar]

Of course. I have voiced over and over again, that this forum is place for expressing wishes and I also see it as a good thing. Even niche target groups should express their views, for it might bring in new ideas. I always said and believe that the more perspective we observe something from, and the more views we listen to, the better we can formulate what we want. Come on, I am the nichest market in many aspects My reaction was to this statement of yours, which I might have misunderstood, if so, then sorry:

"It is about marketshares and potential earnings - which they will never receive, btw, because they underestimate the power all the fans have as consumers!"

 

Because this to me means, you claim they don't make good money and profit and market share. And I think this is not the case. I think if this was true, there would not be games as we see them now, but differently. I think a company of this size doesn't allow itself sentimentalism and goes where the money is. If in these 'constructs' as you call them is no buying power, they won't make them. As long as we buy these games, they will make it. If a niche frees up, then someone else will try to fill it. So I didn't think the 'never receive' part is true. IN order to be be able to make such statements we should know many things such as a) how do they define DA's market who is their target group c ) what market share goal do they have / what money they want to make for calling it success d) what time frame they gave themselves for it and e) do they reach it? Without these data, there is little we can validly came in regards of economy, imho.

 

And I also understand we are all passionate about the game, for it offers a promise for very different people, but because it offers such to a lots of people, a lots of people will have issues and disapointments. None of those views are any less valid in their own setting, so I do value your input as well, despite me having different options. I didn't think you were hateful. I thought you were exeggarting though. The world and the lore is amazing and very engaging.

What I understand DA and ME offers two sort of styles, if we make a comparision in P&P, then DA would be loosely tying stories that fit in the same era within an RPG, so they are not continuous from the player perspective (different areas, different focus, different hero). WHile ME so far was a life-quest sort of DMing style, where you always return to the same storyling and same people. In RL I always prefer the life-quest stories. I have characters I play for 10 years now. But I see why DA is more aimed at the other. Because they made a franchise of their own and they want to be able to make different games in it. It was meant to part from D&D, to replace it. So making a life-quest format has many dangers. Wether it pays of, will be decided at the counters.
 

[Bioware-Critic]

Of course. I have voiced over and over again, that this forum is place for expressing wishes and I also see it as a good thing. Even niche target groups should express their views, for it might bring in new ideas. I always said and believe that the more perspective we observe something from, and the more views we listen to, the better we can formulate what we want. Come on, I am the nichest market in many aspects My reaction was to this statement of yours, which I might have misunderstood, if so, then sorry:

"It is about marketshares and potential earnings - which they will never receive, btw, because they underestimate the power all the fans have as consumers!"

 

Because this to me means, you claim they don't make good money and profit and market share. And I think this is not the case. I think if this was true, there would not be games as we see them now, but differently. I think a company of this size doesn't allow itself sentimentalism and goes where the money is. If in these 'constructs' as you call them is no buying power, they won't make them. As long as we buy these games, they will make it. If a niche frees up, then someone else will try to fill it. So I didn't think the 'never receive' part is true. IN order to be be able to make such statements we should know many things such as a) how do they define DA's market who is their target group c ) what market share goal do they have / what money they want to make for calling it success d) what time frame they gave themselves for it and e) do they reach it? Without these data, there is little we can validly came in regards of economy, imho.

 

And I also understand we are all passionate about the game, for it offers a promise for very different people, but because it offers such to a lots of people, a lots of people will have issues and disapointments. None of those views are any less valid in their own setting, so I do value your input as well, despite me having different options. I didn't think you were hateful. I thought you were exeggarting though. The world and the lore is amazing and very engaging.

What I understand DA and ME offers two sort of styles, if we make a comparision in P&P, then DA would be loosely tying stories that fit in the same era within an RPG, so they are not continuous from the player perspective (different areas, different focus, different hero). WHile ME so far was a life-quest sort of DMing style, where you always return to the same storyling and same people. In RL I always prefer the life-quest stories. I have characters I play for 10 years now. But I see why DA is more aimed at the other. Because they made a franchise of their own and they want to be able to make different games in it. It was meant to part from D&D, to replace it. So making a life-quest format has many dangers. Wether it pays of, will be decided at the counters.
 

 

@Lianaar

 

I thank you for your interesting and open minded response. And I am glad that you do not take me for a nutcase And you certainly do not have to appologise for anything. Although you have misunderstood my last message in some points. I will try to clarify some of it - but at the moment I am really tired and should go to bed by now - uuaahh!

 

In any case ...

 

I do not think that the sales numbers are bad. I just think because of the impression I got from the design choices they made here that the devs and publishers were aiming higher than 2.89 mio hard copies! DA:O sold 4.76 mio and I would guess with the new engine the already existing lore and everything else you could take into consideration here they were aiming higher (for the lifetime salesnumbers which are still in its infancies for DA:I admittedly). They want to beat the sales numbers of DA:O!

But my point is that I have the impression that they try too hard to please EVERYBODY ...

... like, Skyrim fans who could come aboard, MMO fans who could join in, casual gamers who could try it out, old fans for which they made great PR (which was in many cases a big fat lie!) and so on and so on. Also the world is enormously big, without real benefit to it. So many game-aspects are more disappointing than satisfiing. The complex systems like for instance the skill-tree's, the specializations, the tactics department and much more got dumbed down to be able to cater to different crowds of buyers with different expectations. To simply please people who do not know the DA series ... I mean I really know that they try to finance these always growing production costs. But they cannot "sell two houses just to finance a new garage!" or whatever !?! I am convinced that if you make a really great game that is a polished gem of its genre then people who try out another genre (when playing a DA-title / a RPG game for the first time) because they have seen a really great game in an article for example, these newbies will have to spend some time to get into it. Just like everyone of us did before! Everyone has to start someday. I cannot go and simply try to make a RPG that is easy to pick up for someone who has exclusively played racing games before in his life. There SHOULD be a learning curve. If this person does not need to learn anything - you have made a shitty RPG! The industry and the idiotic financing strategies are currently running on hot air - puff! They try to make PR campaigns that are so big and so loud that even the gods will have to take notice! They try and tell us everything what we want to here and to imply as much as possible even if none of it is true just to get you to pre-order and to believe in promises they will never deliver on!  All publishers do it currently! Everything is EXTREMELY overhyped! And nobody delivers. I mean look at the game "Destiny" for crying oiut loud! It had cost 125 mio dollars to produce ... And for what ??? NOTHING really!

I could name a lot of things here that blow into the same horn ...

 

But instead I will just say: They are going about it all wrong! Enough with the stupid strategies straight from business school! That s*hit does not work on us and it does not apply in RPG games! ... Instead ...

Make great games, give the consumers what they really want and EXPAND ON THAT! It's really easy ... AAA-RPG-players want AAA-RPG stuff - the end! We don't want this copying of other games, copying of other genres, cross-breading with other genres, etc, etc, etc.

I don't mind when they try to turn "traditional" things on their heads. But they simply deleted and gutted many aspects of the DA franchise. I have nothing against experiments and I have nothing against evolution. But they cannot CUT  OUT COMPLETELY EVERYTHING what people WERE expecting (or dumb it down to the point where everyone goes: WTF?) an then go: "Here my friend, this stuff will from now on replace everything you ever held dear - and we are convinced you will love it, because it is easier to produce it".

I firmly believe they (EA) were looking at it from the wrong angle when they decided which long term strategies they go for.

 

To reduce the complexity and to reduce the player-agency (tactics, skill variety, etc) is not acceptable!

 

The short of it is: They cannot simply try to copy everything all at once that had some sort of success in the last five years, hop on every trending-train they can find and just by "market-positioning" ... "hit the motherload" ... just by trying to "calculate the exact formula" and so on.

 

It is NOT about calculation and positioning here! It is NOT about "thinking" to know people or trying to "calculate" their needs!

It is about experience, respecting tradition, respecting the "science" behind the tradition and about working with people !!!

It is about people and culture!

 

 

(And I really think that people who went to a renowned business school should be able to grasp that!)

 

 

Anyways ...

Thanks for listening Lianaar!

 

 

Please guys, try to take this posting of mine with a grain of salt or two ...

I am practically sleep walking here, seriously ...

[Moirnelithe]

You know, it wouldn't be so bad if there were still some traditional cRPG's coming out on a regular basis. We'd at least have a choice of games to play. However that is not the case and hasn't been for years. To see one of the main developers of cRPG's turning away from it leaves those of use that love those kind of games without anything to play. I really hope Obsidian and InExile will turn this around and it will become more interesting for publishers again to invest in these kinds of games.

[katokires]

I have no problem with anyone criticizing a game especially constructive.The problem I have (and this goes to both sides) is when it is not done in a civil manner. For example in this thread Dakota Strider and I along with other have been having a civil conversation on our differences. I respect what Dakota Strider has to say and I hope Dakota Strider respects what I have to say. 

The conversation has been kept civil. We can agree to disagree. 

 

Yes, we are both selfish in how we want Bioware to proceed with in the future.

 

The problem comes when posters want to name call, personally insult or denigrate someone for their opinion. For me when that happens no matter how valid or invalid the opinion I stop reading.

 

I know full well some of the problems in DAI. Some which have been voiced in this thread. It simply does not affect me the way it does others. But, YMMV.

If Inquisition was serious and civil I would be. As I pointed several times in my posts it is the first Bioware game I go all crazy on hating. It is like asking a victim of rape to be calm and coherent while she is still in shock and feeling pain, not even aware of her surroundings. Sorry, can't do that. If instead of spitting in my face Bioware tried to act civil I would surely be, like I was through all the changes from 1999 to DA2. The level of submission needed to be civil when someone hits you that hard in the face is not in me.

[mutantspicy]

Please don't compare yourself to a rape victim.  That's just uncalled for.  

[Sidney]

You know, it wouldn't be so bad if there were still some traditional cRPG's coming out on a regular basis. We'd at least have a choice of games to play. However that is not the case and hasn't been for years. To see one of the main developers of cRPG's turning away from it leaves those of use that love those kind of games without anything to play. I really hope Obsidian and InExile will turn this around and it will become more interesting for publishers again to invest in these kinds of games.

I hope you find the games you want and that those games never, ever, ever, ever, ever change. It takes a lot of effort, and gods know you and others make it, to make a DAI not sit firmly in the community with BG, Fallout, the old gold box games and so forth. This IS a traditional CRPG if you don't see that then the problem is not in DAI.

[Sidney]

If Inquisition was serious and civil I would be. As I pointed several times in my posts it is the first Bioware game I go all crazy on hating. It is like asking a victim of rape to be calm and coherent while she is still in shock and feeling pain, not even aware of her surroundings. Sorry, can't do that. If instead of spitting in my face Bioware tried to act civil I would surely be, like I was through all the changes from 1999 to DA2. The level of submission needed to be civil when someone hits you that hard in the face is not in me.

Seriously, you went for THAT analogy over video game design choices?

[Moirnelithe]

I hope you find the games you want and that those games never, ever, ever, ever, ever change. It takes a lot of effort, and gods know you and others make it, to make a DAI not sit firmly in the community with BG, Fallout, the old gold box games and so forth. This IS a traditional CRPG if you don't see that then the problem is not in DAI.

 

I'm not sure how cinematic 'gameplay', twitch combat, no stats allocation, a dumbed down magic system, barely any quests that allow you to flesh out your character's personality, an overabundance of redundant fetch quests and very little roleplaying diversity are anything like a traditional rpg :/

[Tsunami Chef]

I'm not sure how cinematic 'gameplay', twitch combat, no stats allocation, a dumbed down magic system, barely any quests that allow you to flesh out your character's personality, an overabundance of redundant fetch quests and very little roleplaying diversity are anything like a traditional rpg :/

I love how people who say no stats allocation conveniently forget that the crafting system in DA:I lets you alter your stats way more than any other DA game has. Just because the stat allocation has moved from the level up screen to the crafting screen doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

There are a ton of quests that let you flesh out your characters personality...what game did you even play?

[Sidney]

I'm not sure how cinematic 'gameplay', twitch combat, no stats allocation, a dumbed down magic system, barely any quests that allow you to flesh out your character's personality, an overabundance of redundant fetch quests and very little roleplaying diversity are anything like a traditional rpg :/

Twitch combat...what.? Seriously. You are kidding, right? There is nothing twitch about this. I select a target, my avatar attacks it based in his skills and the skills of the foe and combat resolves. That is EXACTLY the mechanism in BG1 or Fallout 1. There is no aiming (TES) no timing for counters (TW2) or anything.

You have stat allocation via power buying and items. Not sure why that is "wrong" compared to just doing it on. Maybe it isn't the way you think stat allocation should occur but I have seen it occur because I have some very different stats on my two Mages.

Dumbed down magic system? Well since something like Fallout didn't have a magic system I guess it isn't a traditional RPG either. I guess BG1 where they limited spell casting via the rule set wasn't traditional because that was simple. I'm not sure how complex the DAO spells system was either but obviously people thought having a lot of spells doing the same thing made it very different.

Fetch quests, once more time go pop open DAO ( I assume traditional enough for you) and look at all the mindless fetch quests in there.

As I said, this is the same sort of game as all those old time games. I played 'them all. The details are different but the game remains the same. The problem is people who are obsessed with playing the same game mechanics not the same type of game.

[Moirnelithe]

I love how people who say no stats allocation conveniently forget that the crafting system in DA:I lets you alter your stats way more than any other DA game has. Just because the stat allocation has moved from the level up screen to the crafting screen doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

There are a ton of quests that let you flesh out your characters personality...what game did you even play?

 

You mean that crafting system that makes you pick up rocks when you're the head of the inquisition and you're supposed to have people to do that for you? Only to craft pre-defined gear that has stats I don't want?

 

And the quests to flesh out my characters personality....where? Because my inquisitor is all sorts of bland and did not give me an opportunity to be anything else but an interviewer.

[AlanC9]

I'm not sure how cinematic 'gameplay', twitch combat, no stats allocation, a dumbed down magic system, barely any quests that allow you to flesh out your character's personality, an overabundance of redundant fetch quests and very little roleplaying diversity are anything like a traditional rpg :/

Some of those don't strike me as being hallmarks of traditional RPGs in the first place. I'll give you cinematic gameplay since early PCs couldn't handle it, but there are plenty of traditional RPGs with lots of fetch quests, no roleplaying diversity, and very few quests that let you flesh out your character's personality. BG1 comes to mind, for instance.

[Realmzmaster]

I am still waiting for someone to tell me what stat allocation is available in any early crpg outside of the character creation screen. The only ones that come to my mind are TES and Fallout series which is based on SPECIAL. In the SPECIAL system the maximum value of an attribute was 9. Implants and certain perks were the only way to get it above that number in Fallout. No games based on the D & D ruleset had stat allocation or re-allocating outside of character creation. 

 

The only way to improve the stat scores was through equipment like DAI or using a wish or ioun stone (the last two being extremely rare).

 

If you want to say it did not have stat allocation like the first two DA games that is fine.  I just find the system used in DAI to be better.

 

Using equipment to augment attributes (stats) is nothing new. 

 

The fact that DAO had stat allocation on level up was because that was a feature borrowed from MMOs and TES along with regenerating health and mana. Some of the early crpgs did not even allow reallocating stats in character creation. The old Gold box games did not. You could re-roll to you hearts content until you got the numbers you wanted for that character.

 

In games like Alternate Reality that was not even possible unless you wanted to keep restarting the game to go through the stat allocation RNG gate.

 

Fetch, kill quests, escort and explore quests are in every crpg known. BG1 had them by the boat load especially fetch quests which you had to do or be under leveled. DAO even made a joke of it if you play the human noble. One of the first quests in BG1 is to go into a house and kill some rats. Ser Gilmore in DAO comments about killing rats that Dog finds in lauder in DAO.