187 réponses à ce sujet

[FaWa]

It was like that from dao.

Are people who make this point trolling? Have you even played DAO? The two are worlds apart.

 

Explain why fans love Dagna from DA:O, a side quest that was strictly fetch in nature.

It's because some actual soul and thought was put into the quest and the characters invovled. I hear no one saying "bring back random NPC 274 who asked me to collect 25 Spindleweed!"

Yes, DA:O had similar boring quests, like the Mage Collective or Chantry Board quests, but even these occasionally had options (such as turning into the Templar who was being bribed) AND they were in the minority of the game's content (as opposed to the vast majority like in DA:I).


There are side quests and then there are MMO quests. There is a huge difference.

 

Thank you for this post, I can not agree with it enough.

[Biotic Flash Kick]

then go to the BBB like we did when ME3 came out.

 

Let them know about bioware selling broken unplayable messes for 60 dollars. 

 

I've already sent my email.

[katokires]

1. Only for the voice. What's stated is still stated. It's not like the voiced line don't have emotions.

2.No really. All the choice boil down to be nice, mean or indifferent with time one can be funny. Both da2 and dai has that.

3. The background stories just makes making a role easier. da2 has a bit of the and dai lets you develop your characters background as the story develops.

1. But the voice is everything, if something doesn't sound like me, it isn't me. As simple as that. There is someone talking and it is not me.

2. What the hell? I can't relate your comment on 2 to what I said in 2.

3. Are you kidding? There is no background and no development at all. People consider text and **** talking with Josephine as background LOL

We don't play ANYTHING related to our origin, our background. Information and **** for me are the same. In DAO we played no only our Origin but later in the game we could do quests related to the origin like the Carta, the dalish, Howe, alienage...

 

Your points are one of the archetypes I documented previously: The "everything was already like that". No it wasn't. So I will give the same asnwer I always give to this archetype:

- Quantity is everything. 1 fetch quest is ok, 10 fetch quests is ok, 20 is ok, 100 is ridiculous. So the problem is not having it, but having so much of it you can't spread through your playthrough and balance it with the main quest, there is not enough main quest to counter the fetch quests. Not even close. Main quest is even smaller than Origins and fetch quests are like 10 times more.

- I didn't need to hold button to attack in Origins, I didn't jump in Origins, I didn't have huge maps in Origins, EVERYTHING CHANGED, there is nothing barely resembling Origins as much as you try to make it look that way

- Removing core differences to make them look the same (DAO and DAI) do not make them the same. Saying both have fetch quests and ignoring the amount perhaps looks clever for you, or smart, don't know, but it isn't, you're just ignoring something important so that you argument work

- If we go by proportions it becomes ridiculous, Dragon Age had less smaller maps and more choices. Each map presented a huge choice (like Mages x Templars or Werewolves x Elves) and various minor ones like how to get through brecillian forest. The amount of land you walked without mindless killing is minimun when compared to DAI

- Respawn. MMORPGs have respawn, DAO didn't, DAI do. DAO wasn't meant for you to spend time with repeatable quests (another MMO thing) or materials farming (MMOthingy), DAI is. So how is it this strange MMO where you can't kill enemies over and over again? Go figure...

I could go on how ridiculous it is to compare the games if you don't just ignore CORE CHARACTERISTICS of what you are comparing. Saying both have fetch quests so they are the same is like saying the moon is no different from a soccer ball because both are somehow spheric. Except they are completely different.

[KaiserShep]

Yeah, true enough, it's clearly easier to see character development with Shepard than with, say, the Inquisitor or Hawke. It's an interesting process that makes for interesting characters.

 

The main problem with Shepard's character development is that the emotional side was increasingly out of your control. I lurve Shep and all that and she's still one of my favorite video game protagonists, but there are numerous occasions in ME3 where this character is hijacked to express emotions that I'd prefer to either suppress or ignore entirely. At least with Hawke, I could deflect with humor or aggression, regardless of whether or not it was appropriate. Where Shepard proved the most interesting was through the connection to the other characters, like Wrex or Garrus, Liara or the League of Extraordinary Crazies from ME2.

 

yet it made no difference to the choices you could make, you still had to listen to the priestess at the cross roads(instead of giving her what she deserved, death), still had to put up with that idiot of an andrastrain at Haven, still couldn't (if elf) invoke your own gods in a meaningful and powerful way, as character overwhelming as the faith of the cookie cutter Maker Cultiists....

 

Yuo got a little lip service to your choices and played the game exactly the same..sorry boring, done.  Yet again the biggest villain in thedas gets a pass, the chantry continues it;s brutal oppression of the entire continent.

 

Hold on a second. Mother Gisselle deserves death? What the hell for? Wasn't this woman basically just running a makeshift field hospital to help refugees and fallen soldiers, and is actually on your side and wants you to spread doubt among those in the Chantry that are actually against you? I like how she also provides enough influence to have you become Inquisitor with seemingly no direct benefit for herself.

 

It would have been interesting if we had the option to kill her on the spot, but I would accept no better than a game over if you did, since killing her would derail the entire thing and there would be no reason why anyone in Thedas would work with you.

[Melca36]

I believe that it's a waste of time to complain that getting a new main character with every instalment doesn't let you go very deep.

 

Yeah, true enough, it's clearly easier to see character development with Shepard than with, say, the Inquisitor or Hawke. It's an interesting process that makes for interesting characters.

 

But that's not what Dragon Age is, is it? The focus is not there, never was, and never was said it would be. So basically it's a complaint based on different expectations for the game, if not unrealistic ones. You cannot say that devs "did that wrong". They didn't do it because they weren't aiming for that.

 

 

People need to stop comparing them. They are two completely different franchises.

[X Equestris]

then go to the BBB like we did when ME3 came out.
 
Let them know about bioware selling broken unplayable messes for 60 dollars. 
 
I've already sent my email.

This ignores the fact that plenty of people, even on PC, don't consider it to be broken or unplayable.

[Sanunes]

Explain why fans love Dagna from DA:O, a side quest that was strictly fetch in nature.

It's because some actual soul and thought was put into the quest and the characters invovled. I hear no one saying "bring back random NPC 274 who asked me to collect 25 Spindleweed!"

Yes, DA:O had similar boring quests, like the Mage Collective or Chantry Board quests, but even these occasionally had options (such as turning into the Templar who was being bribed) AND they were in the minority of the game's content (as opposed to the vast majority like in DA:I).


There are side quests and then there are MMO quests. There is a huge difference.

 

I disagree saying their were the minority of the quests in the game, I finished a playthough of Origins recently and a lot of the quests left me with the exact same feeling as Inquisition a couple of lines of dialogue for doing nothing.  There are a handful of side quests for each area in Origins from what I recall and maybe one for each area was something more then "Please do this for me" and then you follow up with completing the quest and return to them with the item or "I killed them". As far as the gathering missions if you don't count the boxes in the camp (which is far worse then anything Inquisition offers in my opinion), I think both games have the same amount of NPCs looking for specific items if you choose to do those quests.

Modifié par Sanunes, 21 janvier 2015 - 09:54 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I disagree saying their were the minority of the quests in the game, I finished a playthough of Origins recently and a lot of the quests left me with the exact same feeling as Inquisition a couple of lines of dialogue for doing nothing. There are a handful of side quests for each area in Origins from what I recall and maybe one for each area was something more then "Please do this for me" and then you follow up with completing the quest and return to them with the item or "I killed them".

"Handful" doesn't equate "hundreds." DA:I copies some of the worst/boring quest concepts in DA:O, true... but then multiplies them like a game design bunny. They saturate DA:I while lightly season DA:O.

As far as the gathering missions if you don't count the boxes in the camp (which is far worse then anything Inquisition offers in my opinion),

I wojlsnt count them as quests because A) they aren't listed as quests in your journal/any official guides/etc. and because they basically were a variation of rune crafting, except for your army recruits for the end game. You (optionally) collected or bought items that made your units more powerful.

I think both games have the same amount of NPCs looking for specific items if you choose to do those quests.

Not even close.

http://dragonage.wik...uests_(Origins)

Notice - I'm not comparing the number of side quests (of which I'll say DA:I still has quite a bit more) but the number of banal, shallow, NOTHINGNESS quests. Like you'd see in WoW or another MMO. DA:O has the Chantry Boards, the Mage Collective, Favors for Certain Interested Parties and the Blackstone Irregulars (which allows for multiple outcomes in some instances and many of which entrail a cutscene or other meaningful interaction). In addition, you have some quests that require you read the Codex and piece together that there even IS a quest, like the Summoning Sciences in the Mage Tower, the Topsider's Pommel or Gaxkang (I feel sacrilegious even lumping these in with the banal quest section).

But THEN look at the list of detailed quests, like smuggling lyrium or Slim Cauldry's thief-only quests, or helping out the Antivaan Crows or Heeren & Wade's armor making or helping Ser Otto fight against a demon-possessed house. I challenge you to find me side quests in DA:I that compare to that level of detail and engagement outside the main story or companions.

[leaguer of one]

Are people who make this point trolling? Have you even played DAO? The two are worlds apart.

 

 

 

Have you not played a modern mmo. It's just hotkey cooldown abilities with point and click auto attacks. Outside of not being able to jump how is dao different?

[leaguer of one]

1. But the voice is everything, if something doesn't sound like me, it isn't me. As simple as that. There is someone talking and it is not me.

2. What the hell? I can't relate your comment on 2 to what I said in 2.

3. Are you kidding? There is no background and no development at all. People consider text and **** talking with Josephine as background LOL

We don't play ANYTHING related to our origin, our background. Information and **** for me are the same. In DAO we played no only our Origin but later in the game we could do quests related to the origin like the Carta, the dalish, Howe, alienage...

 

Your points are one of the archetypes I documented previously: The "everything was already like that". No it wasn't. So I will give the same asnwer I always give to this archetype:

- Quantity is everything. 1 fetch quest is ok, 10 fetch quests is ok, 20 is ok, 100 is ridiculous. So the problem is not having it, but having so much of it you can't spread through your playthrough and balance it with the main quest, there is not enough main quest to counter the fetch quests. Not even close. Main quest is even smaller than Origins and fetch quests are like 10 times more.

- I didn't need to hold button to attack in Origins, I didn't jump in Origins, I didn't have huge maps in Origins, EVERYTHING CHANGED, there is nothing barely resembling Origins as much as you try to make it look that way

- Removing core differences to make them look the same (DAO and DAI) do not make them the same. Saying both have fetch quests and ignoring the amount perhaps looks clever for you, or smart, don't know, but it isn't, you're just ignoring something important so that you argument work

- If we go by proportions it becomes ridiculous, Dragon Age had less smaller maps and more choices. Each map presented a huge choice (like Mages x Templars or Werewolves x Elves) and various minor ones like how to get through brecillian forest. The amount of land you walked without mindless killing is minimun when compared to DAI

- Respawn. MMORPGs have respawn, DAO didn't, DAI do. DAO wasn't meant for you to spend time with repeatable quests (another MMO thing) or materials farming (MMOthingy), DAI is. So how is it this strange MMO where you can't kill enemies over and over again? Go figure...

I could go on how ridiculous it is to compare the games if you don't just ignore CORE CHARACTERISTICS of what you are comparing. Saying both have fetch quests so they are the same is like saying the moon is no different from a soccer ball because both are somehow spheric. Except they are completely different.

1.Which is why bw added emotion cues with the dialogue now.

3. Sorry but that is background for your character. I can agree it may not be enough for some people but it is background. Also, that not what I mean anyway. I meant how you character reacts to the things going on and why. That's also part of roleplaying.

 

And on you points on gameplay. I'm not arguing detail of controls on them being the same or not. That's a taste on preference. My point is that foundations are still the same. MMO combat are usally uses hotkey abilities with cooldowns with combat that point and click auto attack. How does dao not feel like playing an mmo when has the same basic control schemes. The only difference is the lack of jumping which is not much. And dao also has plenty of fetch quest. Trust me, I did every single quest in the game. Every Chanter's Board quest is a fetch quest. Every The Trial of Crows quest is a fetch quest. Every crime wave quest is a fetch quest. I could go on. All of them are optional and all of them barely add to the story in any way.And they were in the majority. It's the same case with the most of the quest in dai.  Added, it's not the only type of quest on the side you can do. Like for example the more dynamic still ruins quest. Or the quest to block of darkspawn openings in Emprise du Lion and so on.

And lastly the only reason why each map had a major story choice in it because of limited resources restricted them to that. If that were bg1 or bg2 we would have multiple map just for exploration. Seriously, bg1 just had map just to see side characters, and do side things.  Your point with dao maps is not a boon because it shows it's restriction and limits.

[VanguardCharge]

1.Which is why bw added emotion cues with the dialogue now.

3. Sorry but that is background for your character. I can agree it may not be enough for some people but it is background. Also, that not what I mean anyway. I meant how you character reacts to the things going on and why. That's also part of roleplaying.

 

And on you points on gameplay. I'm not arguing detail of controls on them being the same or not. That's a taste on preference. My point is that foundations are still the same. MMO combat are usally uses hotkey abilities with cooldowns with combat that point and click auto attack. How does dao not feel like playing an mmo when has the same basic control schemes. The only difference is the lack of jumping which is not much. And dao also has plenty of fetch quest. Trust me, I did every single quest in the game. Every Chanter's Board quest is a fetch quest. Every The Trial of Crows quest is a fetch quest. Every crime wave quest is a fetch quest. I could go on. All of them are optional and all of them barely add to the story in any way.And they were in the majority. It's the same case with the most of the quest in dai.  Added, it's not the only type of quest on the side you can do. Like for example the more dynamic still ruins quest. Or the quest to block of darkspawn openings in Emprise du Lion and so on.

And lastly the only reason why each map had a major story choice in it because of limited resources restricted them to that. If that were bg1 or bg2 we would have multiple map just for exploration. Seriously, bg1 just had map just to see side characters, and do side things.  Your point with dao maps is not a boon because it shows it's restriction and limits.

About Side Quests

 

There certainly were side quests in DA:O. But their amount is a fraction of the amount of side quests in DA:I. Proportions come into play. DA:O had small, linear maps and that were main quest focused, it was okay to implement a few fetch side quests. DA:I has enormous empty maps that are littered with fetch quests. Hinterlands, the only map that feels like an open world to in DA:I to me, becomes a burden after you realize that its an MMO fetch quest arena. The whole argument of  "if you don;t like fetch quests, don't do them!" doesn't roll well with me, because if you choose to ignore them the maps become completely empty. 

 

Let's compare DA:O and DA:I maps/quests with the example of cuisine. For me, DA:O was a meal on a medium sized plate, the steak (main story) was excellent and that pesky blue cheese was on the side (Chantry Board, etc). It did not effect the taste of the dish since it was very clearly optional. DA:I is a meal sized on an enormous plate, but the steak is pretty much the same size as the previous one . The real problem is that this time, the blue cheese is not on the side, but all over the steak. Its pretty darn hard to eat the stake with out having that blue cheese, and oh boy does it certainly impact the taste. 

 

Of course, some people like blue cheese. I don't. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Have you not played a modern mmo. It's just hotkey cooldown abilities with point and click auto attacks. Outside of not being able to jump how is dao different?

Unit placement and party management. Which was required at higher levels of DA:O.

[Melca36]

This ignores the fact that plenty of people, even on PC, don't consider it to be broken or unplayable.

The game works fine on my mid range rig.   If people are playing this with low end rigs, or trying to play this on operating systems that the game doesn't support its on them.

 

Its not expensive to add extra ram and a mid range videocard for better performance.

[KaiserShep]

Unit placement and party management. Which was required at higher levels of DA:O.

 

On PC. The console version wasn't as fortunate.

[Lewie]

Or, you know, NOT and save themselves $60 for a game they know they will like. There are tons out right now and more coming out in the future. I'm not going to gamble to see if I agree with someone.

So you are assuming that people should not buy a game unless they know 100% they will like it? 

 

Maybe I am missing something. 

 

Jeez i feel like I should be on a bandwagon of some sort. 

[Fast Jimmy]

So you are assuming that people should not buy a game unless they know 100% they will like it?

Maybe I am missing something.

Jeez i feel like I should be on a bandwagon of some sort.

No.

But if I look at a game and say "man, this does not look enjoyable" then I'm not going to pay $60 just so I can feel validated in saying the game does not look good. Especially since many people on this forum bought the game, feel the game was not enjoyable, and then still get told their opinions are invalid because a sample of stock responses that include such hits as "I didn't have any bugs," "do you even know what an MMO is" and, my favorite "go back and play DA:O and remain stuck in the past."

People on here seem to be under this weird impression that people are willing to pay $60 to buy and play a game just to prove critics on Metacritic right or wrong.

[Biotic Flash Kick]

This ignores the fact that plenty of people, even on PC, don't consider it to be broken or unplayable.

dont worry

it was only one ten page email with 57 attachments 

 

they will get the gist 

[Fast Jimmy]

On PC. The console version wasn't as fortunate.

Which ironically enough, were Mike Laidlaw and Mark Darrah's first foray into their roles as Lead Designer and Producer, respectively.

[Lewie]

No.

But if I look at a game and say "man, this does not look enjoyable" then I'm not going to pay $60 just so I can feel validated in saying the game does not look good. Especially since many people on this forum bought the game, feel the game was not enjoyable, and then still get told their opinions are invalid because a sample of stock responses that include such hits as "I didn't have any bugs," "do you even know what an MMO is" and, my favorite "go back and play DA:O and remain stuck in the past."

People on here seem to be under this weird impression that people are willing to pay $60 to buy and play a game just to prove critics on Metacritic right or wrong.

I was going to respond in kind but if your talking about metacritic and proving i will digress and leave you to it.

[leaguer of one]

Unit placement and party management. Which was required at higher levels of DA:O.

Ok. dao does place you at 4 places at once. But at the core it's still mmo combat.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ok. dao does place you at 4 places at once. But at the core it's still mmo combat.

Agreed... just like if you ripped VATS out of Fallout: New Vegas, it was an First Person Shooter.

Just like FO:NV, I accepted this because there was a combat "workaround" to get the experience I wanted PLUS the game offered a deep world with plenty of intricate quests that weren't even tied to the main plot, an excellent story with multiple ways to approach the main quest, a character design system that allowed for different attribute builds + non-combat skills and multiple, varied endings that took into account choices you made that were both big and small to make it seem like the game truly was a unique experience and made me want to replay it right away to explore what I could do, say and see differently.


DA games after DA:O seemed to grab onto the worst things about DA:O and embrace them, while leaving the things that made them unique as a series behind in pursuit of features other games just flat out do better.

[leaguer of one]

No.

But if I look at a game and say "man, this does not look enjoyable" then I'm not going to pay $60 just so I can feel validated in saying the game does not look good. Especially since many people on this forum bought the game, feel the game was not enjoyable, and then still get told their opinions are invalid because a sample of stock responses that include such hits as "I didn't have any bugs," "do you even know what an MMO is" and, my favorite "go back and play DA:O and remain stuck in the past."

People on here seem to be under this weird impression that people are willing to pay $60 to buy and play a game just to prove critics on Metacritic right or wrong.

You do understand that the vast majority of the people on the forum like the game and the people you say who hate it are few in number and are only the loudest right?

 

Because we already know what the forums would be like if the game was truely hated by the majority from da2 and me3.

[katokires]

1.Which is why bw added emotion cues with the dialogue now.

3. Sorry but that is background for your character. I can agree it may not be enough for some people but it is background. Also, that not what I mean anyway. I meant how you character reacts to the things going on and why. That's also part of roleplaying.

 

And on you points on gameplay. I'm not arguing detail of controls on them being the same or not. That's a taste on preference. My point is that foundations are still the same. MMO combat are usally uses hotkey abilities with cooldowns with combat that point and click auto attack. How does dao not feel like playing an mmo when has the same basic control schemes. The only difference is the lack of jumping which is not much. And dao also has plenty of fetch quest. Trust me, I did every single quest in the game. Every Chanter's Board quest is a fetch quest. Every The Trial of Crows quest is a fetch quest. Every crime wave quest is a fetch quest. I could go on. All of them are optional and all of them barely add to the story in any way.And they were in the majority. It's the same case with the most of the quest in dai.  Added, it's not the only type of quest on the side you can do. Like for example the more dynamic still ruins quest. Or the quest to block of darkspawn openings in Emprise du Lion and so on.

And lastly the only reason why each map had a major story choice in it because of limited resources restricted them to that. If that were bg1 or bg2 we would have multiple map just for exploration. Seriously, bg1 just had map just to see side characters, and do side things.  Your point with dao maps is not a boon because it shows it's restriction and limits.

Only thing I can ask after this post is... how old are you to think this is MMO...?

Core MMO? AIUSHAIUSHIAUHSIUHAUIS LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Ok child, you must have like what 20 yo to think this? Or less?
Because if you are older and said that point and click and cooldown are from MMO I'm so sorry...

EVEN DnD, pen and paper, have abilities with cooldown, like dragons that can use breath in intervals... jesus crist dude, you are so out of place

and point and click... SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?!?!?!

can't you just crawl into a bush and...

[Ianamus]

I like the fact that we get a new protagonist in every Dragon Age game. Bioware tried using the same protagonist throughout three games with Mass Effect and it ended in complete disaster.

 

In the end they couldn't handle all of the different worldstates properly, which shows a lot more if you are playing the same character. They also failed to get a balance betwen having Shepard speak on their own and feel like the players own character, with many dialogues in Mass Effect 3 making little sense based on certain past decisions and opinions they had. Not to mention the difficulty of writing a protagonist that will fit for people who played and made choices in the previous games but also to newcomers.

 

Mass Effect 3 was a complete trainwreck with regards to Sheaprds character and past decisions, resulting in an ending to the story and characters that for many players ruined not only that game, but the entire franchise.

 

It is the perfect example of why Bioware should never, ever do it again.

[Anaeme]

Everyone on this thread will buy the next Bioware game. DA or ME...each of you will buy the next game.

That is why the negativity and whining going on here is makes no sense