94 réponses à ce sujet

[mLIQUID]

skyrim is so repetitive by the 2nd hour you've done every quest in your head.... go here listen to blah blah blah with no emotion. Choices are black and white and are driven by trinkets... Your character has absolutely zero identity. Zero.... You save the world and people don't bat an eye. I can be in every faction of the game at once. you're showing your colors now. Skyrim was drivel in a pretty box... The highlight is the lore.

[Kleon]

MadDemiurg I've never seen so many wrong things in one sentence.. probably in my whole life. On that note, I'm done with this post. If you think the game is broken due to controls, you're wrong and you should seek help in fixing that... for your own sake. If you think the game is boring you probably exposed too much of it trinket hunting in wiki and should look up what an actual RPG is before destroying your experience in the future. Nuff said.. Bioware. why oh why do you let it simmer. It's in your power to make a simple video showing people how to play a game. They can't handle it.

 

Can you be more absurd than that? I really want to see how far you will go.

[AlanC9]

In DAI you could faceroll and win 95% of the fights, Not to mention that EAWare's idea of difficulty is bigger hp pool and higher resistances, what most of the time only makes fights longer and more tedious. On several ocasions while playing on highest difficulty in DAI I was literally bored because of thoughtless tank and spank. In DAO you could at least be playful with spell combos and aim for a fight as you imagined it.

So DA games are always too easy, and the difference is that in DAO you could press different buttons and pretend you were doing something useful?

[Kleon]

So DA games are always too easy, and the difference is that in DAO you could press different buttons and pretend you were doing something useful?

 

Yes, combat in DA games was always rather easy. 

 

What I meant with DAO is that I could plan how I wanted the fight to play out and try to execute it on screen. There was a finesse to it which I found appealing. 

 

There were far more options at how you could approach combat in DAO. You could even make the game more difficult for yourself if you so wished without overly ridiculous activities, but for example making an unussual character build.

[mLIQUID]

yeah cause there's definitely no mods for skyrim... he was right on target. And the fact that DA:I has about 10 open worlds means it's pretty much on rails... good looking out I'm definitely taking this one over the edge. Your trying to defend skyrim which is a sandbox loot generator not an rpg. Imagine that world if they story arced and gave characters an identity. I pointed out what your true comparison is. I think your definition of rpg is tainted a little bit by your ideal of Barbie armor fashion show.

[Kleon]

yeah cause there's definitely no mods for skyrim... he was right on target. And the fact that DA:I has about 10 open worlds means it's pretty much on rails... good looking out I'm definitely taking this one over the edge. Your trying to defend skyrim which is a sandbox loot generator not an rpg. Imagine that world if they story arced and gave characters an identity. I pointed out what your true comparison is. I think your definition of rpg is tainted a little bit by your ideal of Barbie armor fashion show.

 

You are getting more ridiculous with each post. Thanks for the spectacle.

[mLIQUID]

I love your statements of how easy it is... when you can't even deny you needed wiki to get through it. I guess that comes with skyrim autistic rituals. Barbie armor simulator is more up your alley.

 

All your "easy" comments are backed by nothing. You say that you spammed health through the whole game. That sounds like you failed a bit. All you admit to is ruining your experience to get the same place I did. Boring, well yeah... I bet there was all kinds of game that got in your way once you looked up a few things. That's your problem in the end.

[Ashen Nedra]

I couldn't manage a nightmare run on my first playthrough of DAO, except after getting the AW spec, which was op.  I did it with melee rogue in DAI, despite the abysmal control scheme, while NOT enjoying myself.  there is so many ways to break the game (more than in TES even) it's difficult for an experienced RPG player to NOT accidentally use one of them.

 

Full range party strafing. Tempest or assassin, crafting early, use a tank well, vivienne...

[Kleon]

I love your statements of how easy it is... when you can't even deny you needed wiki to get through it. I guess that comes with skyrim autistic rituals.

 

What wiki? There are wikies on how to play DAI? 

 

I must say that this projection of yours is starting to be bothersome.

[mLIQUID]

so is your self proclaimed skill lvl. You stroll around and dump on things with not one shred of comparative. Everything sucks and is boring... compared to ****ing what? lol you're a clown. I spent this whole conversation with you trying to pry one justification. You compare it to skyrim which fails 3x harder in every story driven element or redundant questlines. Where are you going with it. You just want your apparent skill lvl to be law. It's not. I make bold statements but I can back them up with more than "boring" Because the only comparative you gave me is 1000x more boring in the perspectives that we are discussing. MAKE A VALID POINT.

[Kleon]

so is your self proclaimed skill lvl. You stroll around and dump on things with not one shred of comparative. Everything sucks and is boring... compared to ****ing what? lol you're a clown. I spent this whole conversation with you trying to pry one justification. You compare it to skyrim which fails 3x harder in every story driven element or redundant questlines. Where are you going with it. You just want your apparent skill lvl to be law. It's not. I make bold statements but I can back them up with more than "boring" Because the only comparative you gave me is 1000x more boring in the perspectives that we are discussing. MAKE A VALID POINT.

 

I'm afraid that I even if I formed my valid point into a sledgehammer and flattened you with it, you would still not see it.

[mLIQUID]

That's what I thought. Move along. I can see I wasted an hour on you.

[AlanC9]

I couldn't manage a nightmare run on my first playthrough of DAO, except after getting the AW spec, which was op.  I did it with melee rogue in DAI, despite the abysmal control scheme, while NOT enjoying myself.  there is so many ways to break the game (more than in TES even) it's difficult for an experienced RPG player to NOT accidentally use one of them.

How'd you manage to avoid the DAO game-breakers? I can understand not stumbling onto the spell combos, but health poultice cooldown cycling and Force Field on the tank work for everyone.

[Kleon]

That's what I thought. Move along. I can see I wasted an hour on you.

 

Voluntarily.

[Draining Dragon]

It's far too easy not to take ownership of your own short-comings. You could have just as easily asked for help. Instead what you can't control or understand is broken. That's the real problem with DA:I. It's largely too difficult. Someone like yourself sits down and wants to mash buttons like witcher 2... and yes I beat that on the hardest difficulty I know what the game is.

I button mashed and did just fine in DAI.

[dlux]

skyrim is so repetitive by the 2nd hour you've done every quest in your head.... go here listen to blah blah blah with no emotion. Choices are black and white and are driven by trinkets... Your character has absolutely zero identity. Zero.... You save the world and people don't bat an eye. I can be in every faction of the game at once. you're showing your colors now. Skyrim was dribble in a pretty box... The highlight is the lore.

Yep.

 

And it sold so well that Bioware EA decided to turn Dragon Age into Skyrim (and Assassin's Creed). Now Dragon Age is also completely soulless and boring drivel with terrible combat.

 

BTW, the lore in Skyrim is pretty terrible too.

[agonis]

@OP: I see. EA is evil. Bioware bad. Inquisition dissapointing.

 

You are still using an Inquisitor as avatar.

 

It´s never enough, isn´t it?

[schall_und_rauch]

Actually, our money is the product. EA sees gamers as a mine needing to be emptied so their profits increase, share holders are happy and CEO gets a bonus.
 
Just like you need equipment to dig out a mine, you need to build games to get money out of gamers. Bioware has been bought up by EA  and is re-purposed to get as much money as possible out of as many people as possible. Not to deliver the best game gamers can make.
 
DA: I is a tool to get your money. It's measure of success does not come from the consumer response, but from sales.
 
It's sad, but especially after playing Witcher 2 I see that Bioware will never be what it used to be. I'm setting my sights on games like Divinity: Original Sin and Witcher 3. Not on DA: 4.

And you really think CD Project Capital Group, the company that owns the development studio responsible for Witcher 1, 2 and 3, listed at the Warsaw Stock exchange, doesn't care about money? Do you think their shareholders all think "now that we bought those stocks, we don't care about money anymore, we just want to deliver excellent games to videogamers, no matter what cost"?

For an investor, video games are always a tool to make money. Every video game developer has to think about development costs. Your accusation that this or that video game is bad and the company horrible because somebody wants to make money just demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of how the video game industry works.

Actually, your misconception about the terms product and customer show your lack of understanding of economics in any way.

[harlekein]

And you really think CD Project Capital Group, the company that owns the development studio responsible for Witcher 1, 2 and 3, listed at the Warsaw Stock exchange, doesn't care about money? Do you think their shareholders all think "now that we bought those stocks, we don't care about money anymore, we just want to deliver excellent games to videogamers, no matter what cost"?

There's a difference and that's the majority of the stock is still in the founders hands. They are dedicated to quality foremost.

 

They could have rushed off Witcher 3 in November, the originally planned date, and they would have sold a lot. It would have been a good game with a painful amount of flaws, like DA:I.

 

It would have been a financial success, they could promise to make up for it in Witcher 4 and probably get away with it. They didn't though. They decided to choose for quality an push back the date instead.

 

More publishers have done this and it's always obvious when you play a game that truly shines, even if it's flawed, you know it didn't cut corners. The last couple of EAware titles cut corners all over the place. I can just see the nth project manager looking at the list of things and decide what is in scope and what isn't.

 

The flaws are openly discussed in this feedback forum, but I bet nothing much will happen with it, because DA: I was a financial success.

[schall_und_rauch]

They could have rushed off Witcher 3 in November, the originally planned date, and they would have sold a lot. It would have been a good game with a painful amount of flaws, like DA:I.
 
It would have been a financial success, they could promise to make up for it in Witcher 4 and probably get away with it. They didn't though. They decided to choose for quality an push back the date instead.
 
More publishers have done this and it's always obvious when you play a game that truly shines, even if it's flawed, you know it didn't cut corners. The last couple of EAware titles cut corners all over the place. I can just see the nth project manager looking at the list of things and decide what is in scope and what isn't.

You realize that DAI was in development since spring 2011, giving it 3.5 years of development time, which is not exactly rushed.
You realize that DA:I was initially slated to be released much, much earlier (reported one year), but only contain one single playable class?
You realize that even after the announcement of the release date of October 7, the release date was pushed back to November 21?

Your statement that DAI had a cut development cycle and was released with a minimum set of features at the earliest possible date because of EA is just laughably false.

[keyip]

There's a difference and that's the majority of the stock is still in the founders hands. They are dedicated to quality foremost.

 

Which is why the Witcher 2 paled in comparison to the original in terms of complexity and depth. I suppose it had a decent rolling simulator though, so I guess that makes up for it.

[Ashen Nedra]

And you really think CD Project Capital Group, the company that owns the development studio responsible for Witcher 1, 2 and 3, listed at the Warsaw Stock exchange, doesn't care about money? Do you think their shareholders all think "now that we bought those stocks, we don't care about money anymore, we just want to deliver excellent games to videogamers, no matter what cost"?

For an investor, video games are always a tool to make money. Every video game developer has to think about development costs. Your accusation that this or that video game is bad and the company horrible because somebody wants to make money just demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of how the video game industry works.

Actually, your misconception about the terms product and customer show your lack of understanding of economics in any way.

 

Except that this listed company is controlled by the guys who founded CD Projekt in the nineties.  The same guys who appear on the videos promoting the Witcher 3 or give master-classes.

 

Very different.  EA's Board of directors... Not the same thing.  Although when you think about it, DAI does look a lot like NBA 2015 'Dragon AGE'.

 

If it's in the game, it's in the game (motto of EA in the nineties)

[Ashen Nedra]

How'd you manage to avoid the DAO game-breakers? I can understand not stumbling onto the spell combos, but health poultice cooldown cycling and Force Field on the tank work for everyone.

 

DA Mages are for sissies that's how.

[Nerevar-as]

Which is why the Witcher 2 paled in comparison to the original in terms of complexity and depth. I suppose it had a decent rolling simulator though, so I guess that makes up for it.

What? 

[Ashen Nedra]

There's a difference and that's the majority of the stock is still in the founders hands. They are dedicated to quality foremost.

 

They could have rushed off Witcher 3 in November, the originally planned date, and they would have sold a lot. It would have been a good game with a painful amount of flaws, like DA:I.

 

It would have been a financial success, they could promise to make up for it in Witcher 4 and probably get away with it. They didn't though. They decided to choose for quality an push back the date instead.

 

More publishers have done this and it's always obvious when you play a game that truly shines, even if it's flawed, you know it didn't cut corners. The last couple of EAware titles cut corners all over the place. I can just see the nth project manager looking at the list of things and decide what is in scope and what isn't.

 

The flaws are openly discussed in this feedback forum, but I bet nothing much will happen with it, because DA: I was a financial success.

 

I still think they should be delisted asap but thtat's my own personal opinion grudge against stock markets in general.  Do you know perchance where I could find a structure chart of the CD Projekt group? This got me curious.