293 réponses à ce sujet

[Lianaar]

Interesting. But yes, there are some authors that keep to their never-changing style. Usually after the 3rd book I just stop  buying. They build their own cliches and there is no point in revisiting them. I expect the writer to try something new. Even if it doesn't work for me, I know next time I'll have some surprise element again, so it is worth returning. I am drawn to new things, to experimental things. Be that food, book, painting or video games for that matter.

 

Also, at times I can not list what exactly makes that game or book the best, it just touches a chord in me, that vibes. So while I try to formulate as much as I want, what I like in most games, and I ask people to be explicit about their dispreferences, I also know it is very very difficult to pinpoint what in a story touched you exactly. And at times we can also be wrong about what we 'want' or 'need'.

 

I kept wondering about this a bit, and I can't help to think if my opinion on DA:O would be better if I didn't play it that often back in time. I find the game boring, despite having loved it and I still hold it dear. But replaying it? With all my deliberate attempt to do so, I failed. Would I have failed if I played it less often? DA:I still has so much more to offer in surprise and novelty.

But I also don't want DA:I - 2. A good DLC, or expansion pack yes.

[Dakota Strider]

I certainly expect them to create DLCs for DAI.  It is simply economics, and they need to try to gain some profits, off of what was probably a very costly process of producing this game.  And it easier to use all the same mechanics, and just change the story, or add to the story.

 

But, I am not lobbying for them to stop making DAI DLCs.  But, there will be a Dragon Age 4, someday.  Just as others in the forums are hoping to influence what direction that game will go, I am trying to make my voice (and hopefully others) heard, that I wish they would return to the style that was most entertaining for me.  I know, I am a selfish pig.  But, are we not all looking out for our self interests, when we post here?

[Lianaar]

Well, my hope of influencing things my way died with the backlash of DA:2 :D
But there we go
- personal - character focused story

- tight paced story arch(s)

- focus on character/npc reaction, not on battle/character math

- emotional high points at the end of the story, or more emotional high points then one

- lots of lore

- political parts (such as the wicked hearts)

- lots of companion side quests

 

My preferences.

[Dakota Strider]

I figure, I just didn't try hard enough, long enough, after DA2.  Damn that real life, for getting in the way. 

[MKfighter89]

The problem with going back to what people liked or if they want it like origins is that some will praise it, others would like it regardless its DA, and some like this game will hate it for not progressing with the times and being the same as a game from 09. You can cater some peoples wants, but no matter what some people can't be pleased. I think opinions are great if they didn't have any life would be boring, but for example when it was first announced people said we want Skyrim aspects. They gave some, but while some love its open worlds and filler missions (every open world and MMO game I have every played has these and most don't make sense or add anything to story) others hate it for them. You just can't please everyone thats the problem with games, movies, and books, you lose some fans gain others. While that happens all we can do is hope they listen to what we like and dislike and other fans and make the best choice. I love the game I can wander for hours and never get bored, but I like games like this others don't thats my 2 cents anyway.

[Lianaar]

I figure, I just didn't try hard enough, long enough, after DA2.  Damn that real life, for getting in the way. 

I am not native ENglish so I might have misunderstand. But you don't have to try hard enough to enjoy something. I mean, this is entertainment. It is not something that you must force yourself to do or like. You play a game, and if you love the game, but there are aspects that you hate in it, coming to the forum to formulate your issues is the best thing to do.  Even if we don't agree, I think you are doing the right thing in the proper form. No complaints on my part on that

And yep, real life is the best. Nothing beats it >.< Even if it is fun to run off into a fantasy every now and then.

[giveamanafish...]

Yeah sure whatever you say. I'm starting to believe that when people on the BSN use the phrase "dumbed down" what they really mean is "not pretentious".

 

Edited for clarity.

[scrutinizer]

@ Dakota Strider,

 

That may be where we differ even with books and authors I expect the author to offer something different. It may be a complete change in style within the same series. As long as the product (book, movie etc) is something I believe I will enjoy I will purchase it. I never go in thinking that the product will be the same or have the same style. I like it when an author changes up styles within a series. 

 

The same with games. I play different ones to experience the variant systems that are basically built on the D & D system, but I really appreciate the ones that diverge from it like Vampire Masquerade Bloodlines and Redemption. Even within those two games they do not play the same.

 

If the game is good and I can role play in it I will adapt to the mechanics.

I see.

However, in both movie industry and publishing authors tend (are expected) to retain the same style throughout a given series. A particular style is considered to be a staple of the series, it's what audiences expect. Imagine if Harry Potter took a major style shift somewhere between the third and the fourth book. Now. I believe it's an entirely different story when we discuss separate series (where a breath of fresh air is more than welcome), but again, trying something new usually means getting out of your comfort zone, especially for writers.

Obviously, video game industry differs and is governed by distinctive rules. Major companies need major profits, and they achieve it by adjusting the product to the market's needs.

 

In this regard, I agree with Dakota Strider - Bioware, while adjusting its product to appeal to as many as possible, is out of their comfort zone with DA:I.

 

Nevertheless, I'm happy you find enjoyment in the game. 70$ dollars and ~100h (minimum) are a lot of both time and money to invest and come out disappointed. 

And you mentioning Bloodlines makes me want to reinstall it.

 

Peace.

[Dakota Strider]

@JillBSuiT :  "The problem with going back to what people liked or if they want it like Origins is that some people will praise it, others would like it regardless (if) its DA, and some like this game (DLI) will hate it for not progressing with the times and being the same game as 09."

 

Very true.  However, one of the arguments that many (not all) that oppose my views about going back to the successful DAO style of game, is that Bioware/EA has to change to make money.  My counter is, that by changing, they are losing money. A) They are upsetting loyal fans, who expect when they purchase a sequel to any series, whether it is a game, books, movies or what have you, will stay true to the theme that caused them to enjoy the original;  B )  Is there any argument that it would cost far more money to create a brand new system of play, reinventing combat and spell mechanics, and every other change that has happened?  Even if DAO 2 would have sold less than DA2 or DAI (which is not a given), the amount of money they would have saved from production costs, I believe would have by far made up the difference. 

 

And people are going to complain if they don't progress...  They are complaining now, because they have abandoned the past.  So far, complaints don't seem to bother them overly much.  And there is nothing that says that a DAO 2, would not progress.  Technology advances alone would guarantee that.  They could tell a more compelling story.  Heck, because of all the time they would save, because they do not need to re-invent everything, should give them so much more time to work on the actual story, that it should far exceed what we have seen in any of the previous 3 Dragon Age games. 

 

As far as trying to be Game of the Year.  I am pretty sure, what is more important, is game sales, and the bottom line.  Besides, when a game receives GotY award, before its fans even have a chance to play it, the award seems a little bit hollow. 

 

And I agree that you cannot please everyone.  Thank goodness, there are so many other games on the market to choose from. So, why should the Dragon Age franchise need to morph into one of the other games, instead of concentrating on what made it popular in the first place?  Nothing wrong with considering ideas that work with different franchises, but they should not be abandoning what made us like DA in the first place.

 

@Lianaar : Did not mean I had to try harder to enjoy DA2.  I meant that I needed to try harder, making my voice heard about my displeasure in the direction DA2 was going.  Just a bit of tongue-in-cheek, self depreciation. 

[scrutinizer]

Dakota Strider makes a good point. I'd like to add/clarify:

 

And people are going to complain if they don't progress...  They are complaining now, because they have abandoned the past.  So far, complaints don't seem to bother them overly much.  And there is nothing that says that a DAO 2, would not progress. 

I've noticed that people here (and I'm not referring to you, Strider) tend to identify any instance of change as progress, claiming 'change is good' or 'you cannot live in the past' or 'it is good they did something new'. Change has two sides - progress and regress. If a new product is changed (as compared to a previous product of the same series), so that the new features clearly show regress, I would rather choose the previous, 'old' product (which paradoxically looks more progressive in comparison).

In the eyes of many, DA:I's is an epitome of change, unfortunately, the regressive type of change.

 

Peace.

[Fast Jimmy]

No it is NOT! Over the course of 6-12 month (hopfully) - especially if there are DLC's coming out - they will be making patches constantly! It is a long distance and it is frustrating for us who cannot play because they are waiting for something to be implemented (I am waiting for weapon-switching), I give you that!

But all is not lost ... Not until it's over!

But I will buy no DLC's as long as I do not see the appropriate reaction and devotion from Bioware. This much is certain for me as well ...

This company could potentially get a lot of money from me in the future for DA and ME products. I am here to check out if this will be the case.

This reminds me of the desperation posts following ME3.

[Xhaiden]

"Because this is the Internet"

[CronoDragoon]

In the eyes of many, DA:I's is an epitome of change, unfortunately, the regressive type of change.

Many is a relative term, and considering all the Reader's Choice swag Inquisition is picking up, I'm having a hard time believing it applies here.

[Realmzmaster]

I see.

However, in both movie industry and publishing authors tend (are expected) to retain the same style throughout a given series. A particular style is considered to be a staple of the series, it's what audiences expect. Imagine if Harry Potter took a major style shift somewhere between the third and the fourth book. Now. I believe it's an entirely different story when we discuss separate series (where a breath of fresh air is more than welcome), but again, trying something new usually means getting out of your comfort zone, especially for writers.

Obviously, video game industry differs and is governed by distinctive rules. Major companies need major profits, and they achieve it by adjusting the product to the market's needs.

 

In this regard, I agree with Dakota Strider - Bioware, while adjusting its product to appeal to as many as possible, is out of their comfort zone with DA:I.

 

Nevertheless, I'm happy you find enjoyment in the game. 70$ dollars and ~100h (minimum) are a lot of both time and money to invest and come out disappointed. 

And you mentioning Bloodlines makes me want to reinstall it.

 

Peace.

 

Bioware made BG1 so I do not believe it is out of its comfort zone. It may be making design decisions that some are not use to seeing especially if some have not played BG1 & BG2.

NWN saw Bioware moving away from the design choices in BG1 & BG2. NWN did away with permadeath. In BG1 series if the main character died it was game over. Now in DA series it requires a full party wipe. DA series up to Inquisition had regenerating health which is an MMO staple. I did not have the option to turn it off. I do not remember an early western crpg before having regenerating health or mana other than TES. That point alone changes how combat is designed.

 

The combat in both DA2 and DAi tend to be more realistic (well as realistic as possible in a fantasy game) than in DAO. Yes, I know all about the waves and warriors dropping from the sky in full plate. I would expect rogues in leather armor to be able to accomplish that feat if from a reasonable height. But that shows to me that DA2 was a rushed product because the spawn points were not properly set.

 

The wave combat should have been broken up. The party may get attack by one wave in one battle, but maybe two waves in another and three waves in a third separate occurrence. I do like the fact that the enemy came from anywhere in the streets and alleys. DAO had to many set combat situations. The enemy became too predictable and certain spells made combat laughable (like Mana cCash). It was easy to set your squishes (mage and archer) in one place and let them rain defeat on the enemy without fear of them being attacked.

 

So as far as Bioware changing that has been the case since NWN. Change can be good or bad, but that is also subjective. One person may see the change as a positive and the other person may see it as a negative. But no change can mean stagnation or lack of innovation.

 

Actually more of same can mean that the company is milking the cow for all it is worth which can be seen as greedy.   I can keep putting out the same thing and they will keep buying it. Change always requires risk  . Attracting new players involves risk. Not changing involves risk. 

 

Many a company has missed the shift change in their audience and are no longer in business. Just my two cents, but as always YMMV.

[CronoDragoon]

PC Community Concerns: 848,093 views
 
If that thread was a youtube video I'd say it's pretty popular. So from a PC m/kb perspective, I'd say "Many" is a fair term.

Sure, from a PC KB&M perspective I'd agree the changes have been received negatively overall. The sample pool wasn't designated as such, though. We were talking about DA: I's changes in total, and presumably the reception of those who played it in total. Moreover, YouTube videos have far far less repeat viewers than a thread, so I don't think the comparison fits (not that I think you were really trying to say it was a good analogy).

Histrionics and hyperbole from certain forum members aside, I'm sympathetic to the disappointment of the KB&M tactical camera. BioWare billed it as a return to the Origins camera for PC players. It wasn't, so they are catching a lot of flak for it, rightfully so.

[Dakota Strider]

@Realmzmaster:  I know you keep hammering the point that DAI is mirroring the BG series, but I am really having a hard time seeing it.  (I played the series, out of order, due to priorities in personal life, did not buy games for several years... So for me, it was NwN1, then BG2, and long, long time later BG1). 

 

When you say that DA2 and DAI combat is more realistic than DAO, I assume you are referring to the removal of any sort of turn-based combat in the sequels?  That certainly is not a return to BG's roots.  And while non-stop, live combat without turns may be more realistic, it drastically removes the ability to react for a tactical game.  How realistic is it to be able to jump, shoot, cast spells at the push of a button, anyways?  It is one thing to react to things in real life to threats around you, but when you are talking about a game, trying to equate realism to being able to manipulate a game controller quick enough, does not seem that realistic.  And maybe you got an improved version of DAI than I did, but my companions behavior certainly did not behave very realistically in combat.  And it was damn near impossible to attempt to puppet each member of your team in combat.  As soon as you left one, to command the other, the previous member decided to do something else than what you originally tasked them with.  Hell, in the Marines, we could at least get a Private to remember orders for 10-20 seconds at a time.

 

Also, I have always argued the point that DAO combat animations look more realistic than either DA2 of DAI.  Obviously this is a matter of taste.  I guess I can come from the school where in a Swords and Sorcery style entertainment (whether books, movies or games), I prefer the characters to be able to do almost anything physically that a well trained Olympic athlete could accomplish.  With magic added on top.  So, with this scale of measurement, I thought DAO feels much more realistic.   In DA2 and DAI, there are far too many cases of characters making acrobatic moves that are impossible without wires.  I thought it was great in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, but just don't want it in a medieval setting game I am playing.  Like I said, personal preference.

 

I really am not trying to be combative with you Realmzmaster, because you make some good points, and it is easy to see you are insightful with your comments.  Some of your statements though, will need a bit more explanation for me to accept, though.

[CronoDragoon]

Isn't DA: O RTwP like the sequels?

[Dakota Strider]

@CronoDragoon:  RTwP??????

[Dakota Strider]

Gotcha.  And explained very well, MauveTick.   Yes, DAO was a step away from turn by turn combat.  But, the ability to tell each of your companions what you wanted them to do, several steps at a time, allowed the flexibility of turn based, combined with the flow of real time.  Usually, I would micromanage the combat if it was tough, up until the time it was mostly won, then just let AI take over with my companions as we coasted to the win.  And I had confidence enough in the tactics I was able to preset, that I did not worry about them doing too many things that were stupid/suicidal.  If you did not choose to pause, nothing was forcing you to do that either. 

[Lianaar]

PC Community Concerns: 848.093 views

 

If that thread was a youtube video I'd say it's pretty popular. So from a PC m/kb perspective, I'd say "Many" is a fair term.

Well, I viewed it 5 times, but I love the game. So viewing alone is not necessarily meaning people are not supportive of the changes made in the game.

I am not saying the game has no issues for PCs, merely saying views alone don't necessarily mean agreement with the topic, as this thread proves.