542 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

 

SomeoneStoleMyName, on 17 Mar 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

I blame consoles. And multiplayer.

Bethesda should have bought Bioware, not EA

 

Bethesda is...not good...at the stuff Bioware is renowned for.

[Realmzmaster]

I blame consoles. And multiplayer.

Bethesda should have bought Bioware, not EA

 

Bethesda Game studios is owned by ZeniMax media. Bethesda cannot buy anyone because they are a division of another company. ZeniMax also owns id Software, ZeniMax Online studios,  Arkane Studios, Tango Gameworks, MachineGames and Battlecry Studios. ZeniMax had no place for Bioware in its makeup since it already had a division that did crpgs.

 

In fact ZeniMax acquired all the other studios except Bethesda and ZeniMax Online Studios. I also doubted that ZeniMax wanted to get into a bidding war with EA.

 

P.S. ZeniMax is into multiplayer and consoles. So ZeniMax buying Bioware would not change that. Bioware would still be developing for consoles and multiplayer.

[Rawgrim]

Bethesda is...not good...at the stuff Bioware is renowned for.

 

Neither is Bioware anymore.

[Lilithor]

If is pretty clear Obsidian should own both Bioware and Bethesda.

I'm gonna make Obsidian "Tinted" weapons and armors for all my characters in Inquisition. I'm also gonna name them Obsidian (like Obsidian Sword).
As for the characters Neeshka, Qara and Safiya come to mind. I will play prostesting xD

[AlanC9]

Bethesda should have bought Bioware, not EA

I can just see it now. The weaknesses of both, the strengths of neither.

[Wurm_king]

I have to agree with the OP. this game had huge potential, what we got was a watered down single player MMO. I am only slightly less disappointed in this then I am in DA 2.

 

I mean between agent recruitment, fort liberation and your home base, you could have gone the suikoden route and had army battles as a mini game. you could have even made the multiplayer matter by having the promoted multiplayer characters be parts of said army. I honestly thought that was where you were going. but nope, no such luck. hell some of the issues don't even seem to be dumbing down but rather a combination of laziness and poor planning. like the relationship system, where you removed any way of seeing how your own party views you.

[ardarn]

I have to agree with this. Right now this game feels like a shell for future dlcs to fill the empty world.

i mean, come on, it is an rpg for God sake. Only in Skyhold they could add features for the:
-use of the bedrooms
-use of the dungeon
-use of the awesome looking old library
-chess to play as it was in the trailer
-use of the completely empty mage tower( practise-have fun with your spell like in Origin)
-use of the actual Skyhold ( battle of Skyhold)
-interactive environment ( bedroom-use of the musical instruments, books to read, play with your bird)
-use of the huge building of the blacksmith with talking NPCs( what was the point of that building anyway? )

Overworld:
-desert- discover the long last surface dwarfs
-fix that damn bridge in Redcliffe and get into the castle to meet old characters ( it bugs the hell out of me that bridge)
-meet long lost tevinter mage in frozen in time desert place ( maybe other chance to see and interact with 1000 years old mages from that area, to learn how nasty, twisted and power hungry, careless they are, to see what really Cori wants yo restore)
-seeing how they create the skull looking stones from tranqilles ( it would add more drama and chance to show what horrible consequences it has the lack of control and the war)
-much much more semi important NPCs with actual personality and face, u can get attached to and finally care about the overall world.

I do believe that just put a close up camera for dialogues would help to create a more personal feeling for even the fetch quests. So finally you could actually see whom you are talking to.

I don't know. This game has/had huge potential. Right now it does not stand out from the crowd.

Edit: there are great background stories but NONE of them you can see or interact with. Or meet with. Only u can find info in the codex or letters. It is a pity.

[Dread-Reaper]

Bethesda is...not good...at the stuff Bioware is renowned for.

You do realize Bethesda is also the name of the publisher. 

[didjamom]

no we don't we want the gold and crafting exploit back

[DWareFan]

I am a huge Bioware fan but mostly play MMOs.  I have 2 degrees, working on the third one and oh how I love shooters.  I know...I know...that wasn't the point of the OPs post but it is what it sounded like. 

 

I think Bioware tried to include too many different gaming elements and should have stuck with what they did in DA2 minus the reused environments. 

 

DAI (except the main quest) is a frustrating mess, especially playing it on a PS3.  I still can't play it on my computer whilst I can play every other game on the market.  The side quests are boring, the mini games shouldn't even be there, areas have no continuity leaving you guessing if you're heading into an area way over your level even though it's in the same map as the one you just leveled in. 

 

It just doesn't work....for me.  I'll go back to playing my MMOs which have continuity and my shooters because I like them.

 

Games should be entertaining whether you're saving Thedas or you're killing giant bugs in the Copa Cabana (Firefall).

[Saphiron123]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the AI in this game really isn't that bad if you just fiddle with the targetting behaviour and the preferred/disabled skills.

Hell, I've managed to play Iron Bull as a pure two hander, not a single vanguard skill, and I never took control of him, aside from having him drink potions.

I honestly can't believe you guys went out of your way to set up the tactics in DA:O, but somehow can't find your way around the DA:I tactics screen. It's just baffling.

It's baffling you think we can't find our way around it. We hate it because it's terribly done. Use often, On, off. Those aren't tactics.

Every character in past dragon age games could use any ability in their trees. Now if I get blizzard, it's off by default because the ai is so dumb the devs know it will waste all it's mana.

Yes, I set up tactics, I like a party that would fight like a unit and work as a team , and use their skills when it made the most sense and had the best effect.

Now I have a Mage who casts barrier when he sees an enemy, and by the time we're close enough to attack, the barrier is mostly gone.

It's not that we can't figure it out, it's that the ai is dumber and our team is less effective then it was 6 years ago. That's a problem.

Varrick wastes his dodge moves for no reason. Vivianne will stand in a fire until she dies. There's a few abilities our teammates can't have "on" becuase they're too stupid to cast them effectively.

That's the problem. The AI is terrible, and that's by outdated DAO standards, nevermind current gen standards. We used to have the ability to customize, they took that away, and the game is poorer for it.

[Saphiron123]

I'm tired of having "meaningful" discussion about this in this thread, I think I've had it 3 maybe 4 times? It has become a circle jerk.

Wanting to have an intuitive gameplay is not the same as dumping down.
Not succeeding at making an intuitive gameplay is not the same as dumping down.
Having behavior management tool does not make the game "intelligent" and the players "smart"
Not wanting to use the said behavior management tool does not make the player "stupid"

I dunno.... I've had my fill, I'm good.

Having intuitive systems already, ripping them out an replacing them with no options for people who loved them and terrible ai would definitely be considered "dumbing down".

Tactics may not have been for you, and that doesn't make you stupid, but removing them for a crappier system did not improve the game.

Not attribute points, no tactics, basically we auto level now aside from a skill point every level... Why take control away from the players?

Next time maybe they'll just make our skills roll out automatically, or one or two per level to choose from... Would that be fun to you? An extreme example, but that's how most of us feel about taking away the systems we enjoy.

[Draining Dragon]

Bioware should just have you press a button and instantly win.

Can't get much more intuitive than that.

[ThreeF]

Having intuitive systems already, ripping them out an replacing them with no options for people who loved them and terrible ai would definitely be considered "dumbing down".

Tactics may not have been for you, and that doesn't make you stupid, but removing them for a crappier system did not improve the game.

Not attribute points, no tactics, basically we auto level now aside from a skill point every level... Why take control away from the players?

Next time maybe they'll just make our skills roll out automatically, or one or two per level to choose from... Would that be fun to you? An extreme example, but that's how most of us feel about taking away the systems we enjoy.

Havens forbid if someone tries to do something new for whatever reason.

 

I actually like tactical games a lot, they are my favorite type, I but I don't play DA games for tactics. I see that some people are very particular about class and combat system, I'm not. If I like the game, I'll play it. I don't buy a game to play a particular class and combat system. I've played games that had a random stat roll on level up and had limiting class skills without any input from the player and they were/are very fun and challenging to play, I still play them. I've played games where winning a boss battle was more or less matter of luck and it was fun.

 

So while I may understand your frustration, your example means nothing to  me.

[PhroXenGold]

Trying new things is fine. But removing something that worked extremely well and replacing it with something that not just doesn't work well, but is a downgrade from the previous system in every aspect is downright stupid.

[Lilithor]

Havens forbid if someone tries to do something new for whatever reason.

 

I actually like tactical games a lot, they are my favorite type, I but I don't play DA games for tactics. I see that some people are very particular about class and combat system, I'm not. If I like the game, I'll play it. I don't buy a game to play a particular class and combat system. I've played games that had a random stat roll on level up and had limiting class skills without any input from the player and they were/are very fun and challenging to play, I still play them. I've played games where winning a boss battle was more or less matter of luck and it was fun.

 

So while I may understand your frustration, your example means nothing to  me.

Yeah but you can SURELY relate to something you like in games and that would make you sad if they took away. Even if there is not a "general rule" when it comes down to particular games you can still understand him by thinking how you would react. Like Street Fighter without jumping can be incredibly awesome for some people or totally boring for others, same with Harvest Moon without romance or Chrono Trigger without time travelling. Sometimes what is "core" for some poeple for other is but a useless feature and that is ok but saying you are unable to relate to is kind of alien. I'm sure you can, you just need to try, think about something dear to you and what it means to lose it.

[Lilithor]

And it never even crosses your mind that the reasons could be something else, or at least not only that one.  EA has an evil masterplan, no need to think outside of that. This argument  reminds me of a horse with blinders.

So you are saying that EA does not want to sell more? That they have some kind of altruistic reason for taking some direction in game development?
Are you saying that Bioware wants their games played only by people who are into stats and tactics? You know they want to sell and that they want to please more and more people. I don't even know how you can argue things like that when it's been said that they were looking Skyrim agressively because of the sales.
They want to sell, Skyrim is simple and open world, they made Inquisition simple and open world. If you didn't read this interview yet you should, they explain in depth why Skyrim "changed RPG development".

This is the evil masterplan. And yes, for a lot of players it is evil.

[ThreeF]

Trying new things is fine. But removing something that worked extremely well and replacing it with something that not just doesn't work well, but is a downgrade from the previous system in every aspect is downright stupid.

You don't know why this happened though, for instance when DAO was out was it obvious that people loved it or where there comments about the combat being too slow? What was the impression BW got? I don't care much for DA2 combat system, but I've seen many people praising it for being more "natural" and more "fun" (aside the wave thing that is) and in DAI I feel that they did tried to bring the old system back, but for some reason were not able to do it to the extend they wanted it, maybe it was the fact that they moved on different engine or maybe it was the fact that the game runs on many platforms, DAI as a whole doesn't feel entirely "polished" as a game to me. I have no problem with people saying that they want the old system back, thing is we don't really know why BW does things the way it does and I'm not about to wear a tinfoil hat every time EA is mentioned.

 

 

Yeah but you can SURELY relate to something you like in games and that would make you sad if they took away. Even if there is not a "general rule" when it comes down to particular games you can still understand him by thinking how you would react. Like Street Fighter without jumping can be incredibly awesome for some people or totally boring for others, same with Harvest Moon without romance or Chrono Trigger without time travelling. Sometimes what is "core" for some poeple for other is but a useless feature and that is ok but saying you are unable to relate to is kind of alien. I'm sure you can, you just need to try, think about something dear to you and what it means to lose it.

Actually I tend to adapt. For instance I'm not all that hot with what was done with levels design in Fire Emblem: Awakening, but on the other hand I liked the new children system it has and the banter system, so it balanced it out for me. I don't play games I know I won't like, so typically if one aspect of the game let me down, I shrug and focus on others that I like and there are a number of things I like in games, there is no one "core" thing.

 

And btw I did said that I do understand why people get upset over particulars, it's just asking me personally if I would mind if skills roll out automatically, or one or two per level to choose from means very little as I'm not that sort of player.

[ThreeF]

So you are saying that EA does not want to sell more? That they have some kind of altruistic reason for taking some direction if game development?
Are you saying that Bioware wants their games played only by people who are into stats and tactics? You know they want to sell and that they want to please more and more people. I don't even know how you can argue things like that when it's been said that they were looking Skyrim agressively because of the sales.
They want to seel, Skyrim is simple and open world, they made Inquisition simple and open world. If you didn't read this interview yet you should, they explain in depth why Skyrim "changed RPG development".

This is the evil masterplan. And yes, for a lot of players it is evil.

erm.. no, but of course you can read what I write in any way you want.

[Duelist]

It's baffling you think we can't find our way around it. We hate it because it's terribly done. Use often, On, off. Those aren't tactics.

Every character in past dragon age games could use any ability in their trees. Now if I get blizzard, it's off by default because the ai is so dumb the devs know it will waste all it's mana.

Yes, I set up tactics, I like a party that would fight like a unit and work as a team , and use their skills when it made the most sense and had the best effect.

Now I have a Mage who casts barrier when he sees an enemy, and by the time we're close enough to attack, the barrier is mostly gone.

It's not that we can't figure it out, it's that the ai is dumber and our team is less effective then it was 6 years ago. That's a problem.

Varrick wastes his dodge moves for no reason. Vivianne will stand in a fire until she dies. There's a few abilities our teammates can't have "on" becuase they're too stupid to cast them effectively.

That's the problem. The AI is terrible, and that's by outdated DAO standards, nevermind current gen standards. We used to have the ability to customize, they took that away, and the game is poorer for it.

There's always been a ton of skills AI can't use.

In the first two installments it was any AOE spell or talent and in DAO, talents for rogue companions were annoying and difficult to set up with Zevran being particularly bad.

Even fiddling with tactics didn't make AI any better at using them.

[katokires]

It is always the "bissexual" talk here when someone dislikes the game. You are a heterossexual man and married a woman. Your woman decides to take magical sex change and become a man (including genitalia and behavior), your male gay friend says "hot", your male heterossexual friend says "ew", your male bissexual friend says "whatever right? variation is good". They are missing the point that you loved her and married her for the woman she was in everything, the way she walked, she talked, her body, the sex, everything. Then comes your "4fun" friend and says: "Well just break up and find some other people or dozens of other people, time to get laid!" Except for the fact that I loved her. Now you have two options, either you bear the pain of doing something you hate and disgusts you (homossexual sex) or you break up and try to find another relationship.

 

And this is what Bioware did, they changed game so much my only choices are doing something I hate to keep in Thedas or breaking up with Thedas and looking for something else (my choice). But I will forever hate Thedas for luring me into such a wonderful relationship only to hurt me so much, I was into Thedas, heart, mind and soul, and she just broke me beyond any fix. Something you people who goes with whatever **** they throw at you will never understand. She was always free to do whatever she wanted but not to lie to you about it all for years and then stabbing you in the back. On the contrary, she promised you she would not become something else, promised you day after day, in fact just before the magical sex change she promised she would be a little more like the old days, then she just comes at you looking like Vin Diesel, out of a sudden, NOTHING like old days.

She claims she is more happy as she once was, she wants to travel again, she wants to go out and dance, but she completely misses the point, she is not a woman anymore, and for you, a heterossexual man, that is all that matters. She insists on how she is like before, somehow in her mind she thinks you can just change your sexuality and adapt to her changes, she misses the point. And this is Thedas/EA/Bioware, somehow in their minds they think exploration makes up for completely losing all interesting features the series had and delivering me a retarded action game. Way to go Bioware =)

[PhroXenGold]

You don't know why this happened though, for instance when DAO was out was it obvious that people loved it or where there comments about the combat being too slow? What was the impression BW got? I don't care much for DA2 combat system, but I've seen many people praising it for being more "natural" and more "fun" (aside the wave thing that is) and in DAI I feel that they did tried to bring the old system back, but for some reason were not able to do it to the extend they wanted it, maybe it was the fact that they moved on different engine or maybe it was the fact that the game runs on many platforms, DAI as a whole doesn't feel entirely "polished" as a game to me. I have no problem with people saying that they want the old system back, thing is we don't really know why BW does things the way it does and I'm not about to wear a tinfoil hat every time EA is mentioned.

 

 

Given that we were primarily discussing the tactics system, I'm not quite sure where all this stuff about the combat comes from. The previous tactics system worked well and added depth to the game. The current system doesn't work well and removes a large amount of options previously available to the player. Thre is nothing about the new tactics system which is better than the previous one.

 

The only possible  justification I can see for making this change is "we couldn't do it in the new engine". At which point one starts to wonder why the hell they used an engine built for an FPS for a completely different type of game....

 

edit: Just to note, I'm not against all the changes they've made over the course of the DA series, nor am I neccesarily against simplifying things if the complexity of the original added nothing to the game. Far too often, complexity seems to exist purely for the sake of complexity, without actually making thigns more enjoyable to play, and in these cases, simplifying is more like "distilling" than "dumbing down". But the tactics system in the previous games are a well designed, deep and enjoyable aspect of the game. What we've got now is none of those things, and it's made doubly bad by the fact that the game really encourages you to control only one character and leave the to the AI.

[ThreeF]

 You can't discuss tactics without discussing combat.

 

The only possible  justification I can see for making this change is "we couldn't do it in the new engine". At which point one starts to wonder why the hell they used an engine built for an FPS for a completely different type of game....

Sometimes I have the same exactly thought.

[Lilithor]

 

Actually I tend to adapt. For instance I'm not all that hot with what was done with levels design in Fire Emblem: Awakening, but on the other hand I liked the new children system it has and the banter system, so it balanced it out for me. I don't play games I know I won't like, so typically if one aspect of the game let me down, I shrug and focus on others that I like and there are a number of things I like in games, there is no one "core" thing.

 

And btw I did said that I do understand why people get upset over particulars, it's just asking me personally if I would mind if skills roll out automatically, or one or two per level to choose from means very little as I'm not that sort of player.

I said the even if you didn't have something that works for all games you had in each specific game. So in Fire Emblem: Awakening you focused on what you liked there, what if they took it away in that particular game? The thing is you completely missed the point, I'm talking exactly about when they take EVERYTHING that makes the game interesting for you. And in this case in a series where you invested so much.

I think you can perfectly understand these people and have sympathy for them, unless you want to go "I don't care, it doesn't bother me", which is also fine as long as it is honest and explicit from you so that I don't need to bother trying to making you understand.

[PhroXenGold]

 You can't discuss tactics without discussing combat.

 

Yes you can. The implementation of tactics has nothing to do - or at least should have nothing to do - with the changes to combat. Put the DA:O/2 tactics into DA:I, and the game would be better full stop. The fact that some of the combat mechanics have changed is irrelevant.