201 réponses à ce sujet

[LPPrince]

So, the subject came up in another thread, and I think its a good enough question that people should all hop in on it.

 

Dragon Age as a franchise has had little consistency between titles. Dragon Age Origins set the expected framework for the franchise in the minds of many, but Dragon Age 2 released soon after and changed many a thing. Radically different that it was, its reception wasn't entirely positive. Knowing this, Bioware aimed to change things up again, and several years later came Dragon Age Inquisition. Inquisition has been doing better than its immediate predecessor, but the question should be posed-

 

Is Dragon Age Inquisition a worthy framework for the Dragon Age franchise to connect with and should the Dragon Age development team continue building games around that framework?

 

Inquisition has some qualities that neither of its predecessors had, while taking a few of the old and changing them. Inquisition has its flaws, but flaws can be worked upon and improved to the point of being enjoyable positives, rather than being scrapped and replaced for something different entirely.

 

Should Inquisition be the style of Dragon Age game that Bioware makes from this point forward? Should Bioware continue to change things up, not really having a consistent style of game for the DA franchise?

 

What sorts of evolutions should be made? What framework would you more readily accept if Inquisition isn't quite fitting?

 

Lay down some thoughts.

[Vilegrim]

Bland, goody two shoes pro tag and vast amounts of filler? Hope not.

[LPPrince]

I'll copy something I said elsewhere-

 

 

Think of quest importance being broken down like this-

 

1. Primary/Main Quests- quests that advance the story forward, those that you cannot avoid if you intend to reach end game, these quests are of the highest importance 

 

2. Secondary/Side Quests- quests that are of lesser importance than main quests but compliment them, they are avoidable but if completed add much to the experience, these are usually very well integrated into the main narrative

 

3. Tertiary Quests/Assignments- quests that have little importance to the plot, the player loses nothing of value if skipping them, these typically add to play time and are often in the background, adding small details to the world, usually lack the cinematography that primary and secondary quests have

 

Past DA games were fine with their questing systems(even DA2), but I felt Inquisition made its secondary quests feel more like tertiary quests. I believe this is due to the choice in cinematic design.

 

DA games made primary quests very obvious, and secondary quests were full of cutscenes so you knew to separate them from tertiary quests, as those had no cutscenes. But in Inquisition, many quests had the new in-universe camera panning style of focus put on characters, making quests of importance not feel so important. That was something I hope they work on in the future, as it felt as if Inquisition was tertiary city. hahaha

 

 

I feel like this in particular is something that definitely needs work, and I don't think Inquisition's questing system is something that should be carried over into later titles.

[Ashagar]

I do think that Inquisition has some very good choices to it, for one thing, I think I've yet to heard background characters repeat the same banter and it seems to change and evolve as the game moves along. The banter between your party members and between the party members and the inquisition is also extremely good, some of the best in the series so far.  Another thing is unlike the previous games I genuinely liked all the companions and regretted not being able to have all of them in my party instead of just liking some of them. I also greatly liked the concept of the war table and the advisers, I would not mind seeing that again in the next game.

 

The world it self is very well done, a vast improvement over the DA2 and better than origins but it is a bit empty both in people and animals.

 

I think it some of the emptiness could be improved on if the next game doesn't appear on last generation consoles but only on PC and Current generation systems so it isn't so limited by technology. 

[SofaJockey]

Much was changed by the change in generation.

 

The Frostbite 3 engine is sound, though its shooter heritage is clear.

There are some improvements to make, Tactics being an obvious one.

 

With some fine tuning and care not to lose sight of player engagement,

it's heading in the right direction.

[Apollexander]

Of course DAI has more potential as a framework than its precedents. Open world & exploration, dynamic world & environment-narrative, character customization, interesting combat. Bioware needs to make good use of the big maps and develop more depth in narrative. There also needs some novel concepts about the interaction of followers.

[AlanC9]

I've never cared for open-world, and I'd be fine if they dropped that.

[Fireheart]

I think the games have been so inconsistent because DA was never meant to be a series. I think in da2 and dai that Bioware isn't really sure where they want to go with the series so they're pretty much making things up as they go along. They are grasping at straws trying to come up with a consistent, overarching plot...

But to answer the question. No, I don't think dai is a good framework. I don't like how the main quest missions are kind of like their own map? You have to go to the war table and choose, then get teleported. Then when the quest is over, you can never go back there. I want the quests to be more like Origins, where they're integrated into the map and can be revisited. I wnt there to be a long story. Again, the reason I think dai is so short is because Bioware doesn't know what they want to do with the series. Dai just feels like sequel bait like da2 was. I hope they get rid of that ping exploration, and fix the damn mini map. I can't even complain about the side quests because in my only pt I could not figure out how to read the map to get where I needed to complete a fetch quest. There was always a cliff or whole bunch of trees, etc in the way. If they continue with these huge maps, I hope they put in a glowing trail like Fable. Or just make everything flat like Hissing Wastes, which is the only map I completed. My only real gripe about the game was the story. I play rpgs for story and dai was severely lacking, it was boring. I have no complaints about controls, characters, ui/interface, graphics etc etc. Only the story. And the story ruined the whole game for me.

Still. I know for fact, even if they do improve the story in the next game, if they mke it another open world style game, I will not buy it. I HAAATEEEE open world games. I thought da might change my mind, especially since it had dragon age on the title, if it did not, I would not have bought this game. I thought dai would change my opinion on open world games but it just made my hatred for the genre more justified. If anything, I would pirate or rent da4. Just please, no more open world, and they need to decide on a consistent storyline. Then I will be content.

[AresKeith]

I think the games have been so inconsistent because DA was never meant to be a series. I think in da2 and dai that Bioware isn't really surr where they want to go with the series so they're pretty much making things up as they go along. They are grasping at straws trying to come up with a consistent, overarching plot...

 

Bioware already said in the past that the DA series are about the events that happens in the Dragon Age, there never was gonna be an overarching plot 

[Beomer]

No.

Inquisition is too much like an MMO to be a good Bioware RPG.

Unless they want to completely lose their identity they need to go back to their roots and to more traditional design.

Open world is fine. Voiced protagonist is fine. Companions, characters are good, Even the story is fine. They can improve on all this slowly. But what needs work right now, a lot of work, is length of the main story and the quality of the peripheral content. Furthermore if they're going to force voiced protagonist down the throats of the people who preferred otherwise, they should at least add cinematic dialogue to go along with it.

Apart from that most of the niggles are relatively minor on the overall scale but still pretty seriously. PC controls and UI for instance were absolute crap in DAI. Controls should not take getting used to for people who've played games of the kind for well over a decade. If they do then something is wrong with the control scheme.

In short DAI leaves a lot of stuff that needs to be fixed.

[SofaJockey]

I've never cared for open-world, and I'd be fine if they dropped that.

 

It's the new model they adapted Frostbite 3 for.

I think open world is now a certainty.

 

There may be improvements to how the story is told within that setting,

but that's the setting.

[Korva]

The biggest mistake IMO is how badly they neglected the main story in favor of absurd amounts of optional filler content. Morrigan vomiting exposition all over me instead of the game letting me discover things for myself, with my resources, my agents and my own efforts in the field, was basically a game-breaker for me (and not just because I hate the character with a passion). The plot needs to be longer and far more deeply tied to the zones we visit -- the "hooks" are even already in place for some of these optional zones, but they don't have any effect. If they'd culled a third or half of the zones but extended the main story to all the remaining ones, the experience would have been much more intense.

 

Not to mention that farting around in content that has zero impact on the enemy also flies right in the face of a plot that NEVER lets up in urgency. Logically speaking, we NEVER have time for all these optional zones. That could so easily have been avoided by the combination of 1) tying these zones into the plot and 2) having to discover the enemy's plans instead of being hand-held through everything like a pre-schooler on a trip to the museum.

 

In terms of mechanics, I REALLY wish they'd move away from the arcade-combat BS and go back to a more tactical approach. The combat is an annoying mess as it is. The UI is also a noticeable step backwards from Origins. Also, we need storage -- who the hell decided to give us a fortress but not a single chest or armor stand or trophy rack? The utterly random and unreliable banter system also needs to be changed so crucial character development/bonding moments aren't lost to the whims of the RNG.

 

I do like the more open world -- the bigger zones and the much greater freedom of movement. That's something I've wanted for a long time. Ever since BG2, the areas in Bioware games have been pathetically small, and the move from isometric 2D to third-person 3D made all the movement restrictions in past games really annoying. Past characters were a martial arts prodigy and even a Jedi who could leap 50+ feet from a standing start ... but couldn't step over a knee-high fence or cross a tiny trickle of water.

[Ashagar]

I never understood the MMO charge, it always seems to me its a charged leveled by people who never played older RPGs like the old Might and Magic series and other older series.

[AresKeith]

Well I hope they come up with something interesting soon because at this point, I'm bored as hell with the series.

 
Sorry to hear, but what you find boring others like
 
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[MonkeyLungs]

DA:I doesn't feel really open world to me. It just has big giant maps. It feels like a really loud reply to the complaints of DA:2. BTW, I really like the level design this time around so I'm not complaining about the level design itself, just saying it does not feel open world.

 

I do think the ratio of side to critical content is skewed too far in favor of side content.

 

I feel like I need to preface this next statement though, so preface: I love Dragon Age. It is one of my favorite game series. However ...

 

I think the story of The Dragon Age needs to reach a conclusion soon. I don't feel like Bioware should continue beyond one more game and I would have been much happier if they planned it out as a trilogy. I hope they really FOCUS and tell us a satisfy conclusion to this tale instead of drag it out and string us along for too much longer.

[AresKeith]

DA:I doesn't feel really open world to me. It just has big giant maps. It feels like a really loud reply to the complaints of DA:2. BTW, I really like the level design this time around so I'm not complaining about the level design itself, just saying it does not feel open world.

 

This, DA:I's map is really just a bigger version of DAO's 

 

Bioware themselves even called it semi-open world 

[X Equestris]

I would say that the basic formula is fine, it just needs to be refined. More meaningful side quests, cutscenes for the main quest of each zone, maybe a bit meatier of a main story.

[LPPrince]

Open world would be Elder Scrolls.

 

DA has never had a true open world design.

[Wulfram]

I think DAI is a decent starting point for the next DA.

But they do need to have a better ratio of quality content to filler/"exploration".
The combat is OK. Bring back if/then Tactics, and auto-attack in regular camera and I'd be basically fine with it. Oh, and cut down the enemy AoE attacks so running multiple melee characters isn't a chore.
The crafting could do with quite a rethink. It's ludicrously overpowered by the end, the resource gathering is tedious and it feels like it gives me less control over my character's appearance than previous games did.
I don't think the war table needs to come back.

Aesthetically I think DAI is largely a success. So don't change too much there.

[Morroian]

Lay down some thoughts.

 

I think the broad framework is fine but they need to work on:

1. Questing, each zone needs a stronger story as well as the overarching story, funnily enough I think ESO and SWTOR did better with this aspect. Yes swtor had lots of filler quests but the main story in each planet was quite strong.

2. They need to bring back character building aspects changed from both DAO and DA2 ie. the ability and attribute frameworks

3. No 8 ability limit

4. Tactics

5. Power needs to be more of a scarce resource leading to actual branching decisions involving its use

6. Wartable decisions need to be better reflected in the game itself. 

[LPPrince]

I think the broad framework is fine but they need to work on:

1. Questing, each zone needs a stronger story as well as the overarching story, funnily enough I think ESO and SWTOR did better with this aspect. Yes swtor had lots of filler quests but the main story in each planet was quite strong.

 

Can you touch on this one a bit more? I haven't played SWTOR, but I might play ESO when it reaches Xbox One.

[Vilegrim]

Can you touch on this one a bit more? I haven't played SWTOR, but I might play ESO when it reaches Xbox One.

Your class story takes you to a world, while their you can take actions to help your faction with a lighside/darkside twist (for instance booby trapping battlefield salvage, do you do items at random, thus risking civilians but hard to pin point, or put 0 second fuses on grenades, always hit combatants but easier to avoid) a voice acted quest giver and another voice acted guy give you alternatives and are pleased/angered depending on which you choose, this for a 10min side quest.

[LPPrince]

Your class story takes you to a world, while their you can take actions to help your faction with a lighside/darkside twist (for instance booby trapping battlefield salvage, do you do items at random, thus risking civilians but hard to pin point, or put 0 second fuses on grenades, always hit combatants but easier to avoid) a voice acted quest giver and another voice acted guy give you alternatives and are pleased/angered depending on which you choose, this for a 10min side quest.

 

I mean how it works and how it can be translated into the Dragon Age setting.

[Morroian]

Can you touch on this one a bit more? I haven't played SWTOR, but I might play ESO when it reaches Xbox One.

 

As I said both of them have main stories in each zone/planet you go to as well as the overarching story. SWTOR has a lot of filler as well though, whereas ESO has a strong zone story in each zone but the filler is less prevalent and stronger, less like just simple fetch quests.  

[LPPrince]

As I said both of them have main stories in each zone/planet you go to as well as the overarching story. SWTOR has a lot of filler as well though, whereas ESO has a strong zone story in each zone but the filler is less prevalent and stronger, less like just simple fetch quests.  

 

I would hope DA games feel richer for their size, as I felt DAO was. DA2 as well, especially compared to Inq.