542 réponses à ce sujet

[G00N3R7883]

Just want to say I agree with everything in the first post except the multiplayer bit.

 

Dragon Age is a single player game. Don't dumb down the tactics in the singleplayer game, for the benefit of balancing a multiplayer mode that nobody cares about.

[Bioware-Critic]

Between trying to make the game appeal to the "I want it now and all I want to do is point and click) generation and, trying to be politically correct, DAI took a hit, a big one. Not much can be done save DLC for the to non controversial stuff now, but maybe at least a good bit of the dumbed down can be corrected. I hope so at least. With the Beta program, they are getting feedback from real players and, they are listening so, that's a big step in the right direction.

 

Yes!

 

 

"There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom!" (<< Link!)

(Richard Feynman, 1959)

 

 

They don't have to add anyting that was not present in the other franchise titles and they do not have to do things other than make some miniscule adjustments! Should not be hard. But they would have to get down from their "high horse" - naturally!

[DanteYoda]

Look, it's another person deciding they can speak for everyone.

They speak for some of us.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Yes!

 

 

"There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom!" (<< Link!)

(Richard Feynman, 1959)

 

 

They don't have to add anyting that was not present in the other franchise titles and they do not have to do things other than make some miniscule adjustments! Should not be hard. But they would have to get down from their "high horse" - naturally!

 

What bugs me the most is that they HAD a perfectly working formula with Dragon Age Origins, yet they SCRAPPED almost all of it away in Dragon Age 2 and Dragon Age Inquisition. 

 

It must be because of the change of creative directors and many of the developers. Origins was under Brent Knowles whereas 2 as well as Inquisition is under Mike Laidlaw. 

 

I mean now Knowles is working on Sword Coast, a D&D style game with many of the Dragon Age Origins element in it.

 

I bet you anything if Laidlaw gets to direct another fantasy game it will be the "dumbed down action with almost no strategy" style that 2 and Inquisition is known for. 

 

Its as if this new team disliked everything the old team did and as such are doing a complete 180. 

 

Suffice to say there was a philosophical paradigm shift in Dragon Age franchise when the Origins creative director left. I very much doubt that under Laidlaw, we will be getting Dragon Age Origins version 2 or any element of Origins back. 

[AlanC9]

Suffice to say there was a philosophical paradigm shift in Dragon Age franchise when the Origins creative director left. I very much doubt that under Laidlaw, we will be getting Dragon Age Origins version 2 or any element of Origins back.

Probably not. Doesn't bother me since I liked DA2 and DAI fine; they kept most of what I liked about DA:O, while mostly changing stuff I didn't really care about or didn't even like. Those of you who didn't like DAI or DA2 ... yeah, you should probably be making your way to the exits.

[Bioware-Critic]

What bugs me the most is that they HAD a perfectly working formula with Dragon Age Origins, yet they SCRAPPED almost all of it away in Dragon Age 2 and Dragon Age Inquisition. 

 

It must be because of the change of creative directors and many of the developers. Origins was under Brent Knowles whereas 2 as well as Inquisition is under Mike Laidlaw. 

 

I mean now Knowles is working on Sword Coast, a D&D style game with many of the Dragon Age Origins element in it.

 

I bet you anything if Laidlaw gets to direct another fantasy game it will be the "dumbed down action with almost no strategy" style that 2 and Inquisition is known for. 

 

Its as if this new team disliked everything the old team did and as such are doing a complete 180. 

 

Suffice to say there was a philosophical paradigm shift in Dragon Age franchise when the Origins creative director left. I very much doubt that under Laidlaw, we will be getting Dragon Age Origins version 2 or any element of Origins back. 

 

I think it also has to do with EA and their own goals. Apart from that you are probably right 100% we will never know this for sure - sadly. But I also think that Laidlaw and EA can react to us in a positive way and give us back these elements. They will just mix it with the new style ( ) of the franchise they tried to create since DA2. I have no clue whatsoever if they are gonna meet us half way - or if they are pushing us old fans of real/classical RPG's with complexity, depth and strategy and tactics aside. (To better be able to sell "fluff-games" without any substance ...)

 

What bugs me the most ... is the FACT that the whole industry is now ruled be these big companies who have all the developers in their (big) pockets! And that they push them around to release shallow games throughout the whole spectrum! No matter what you care for and what title you get excited for ... you practically have to assume, that it will be worth less than can of coca cola ... or something along those lines. The big companies try to manipulate "the easiest of the prey" ... the most gullible consumers ... AND THEY HAVE REAL SUCCESS WITH IT! If they can make this big enough ... they can sell mobile games for 100 Dollars "a pop" then charge for DLC's, subscription fees, microtransaction, and so on ... ON TOP OF IT! The former business of deveopling games is being - very fast - transformed into this business of "making money - no matter with which practices ..." That is really making me shake my head!

[DanteYoda]

What bugs me the most is that they HAD a perfectly working formula with Dragon Age Origins, yet they SCRAPPED almost all of it away in Dragon Age 2 and Dragon Age Inquisition. 

 

It must be because of the change of creative directors and many of the developers. Origins was under Brent Knowles whereas 2 as well as Inquisition is under Mike Laidlaw. 

 

I mean now Knowles is working on Sword Coast, a D&D style game with many of the Dragon Age Origins element in it.

 

I bet you anything if Laidlaw gets to direct another fantasy game it will be the "dumbed down action with almost no strategy" style that 2 and Inquisition is known for. 

 

Its as if this new team disliked everything the old team did and as such are doing a complete 180. 

 

Suffice to say there was a philosophical paradigm shift in Dragon Age franchise when the Origins creative director left. I very much doubt that under Laidlaw, we will be getting Dragon Age Origins version 2 or any element of Origins back. 

Why i will buy Sword Coast, but Inquisition will be my last purchase, its really the only way i can show what i think to the Developers one way or another..

 

Still waiting on this patch 5&6 hoping it will help my current purchase, but i think it's wishful thinking.

[Eelectrica]

Looking at Sword Coast too. I'm not familiar with the D&D ruleset it's based on, but with the talent working on the game, well can't anoint it awesome until we've played it, but expectations are fairly high.

[Rawgrim]

Looking at Sword Coast too. I'm not familiar with the D&D ruleset it's based on, but with the talent working on the game, well can't anoint it awesome until we've played it, but expectations are fairly high.

 

Actually d&d ha been dumbed down too. Happened with the 4th edition. 5th edition is a bit better but...Sorry if I am bursting your bubble. The game might still be fun, though.

[Ncongruous]

Agree mostly OP. Disagree on decisions.
 
Decisions, decisions:
I don't think DAO or DA2 did a very good job of masking outcomes. Both went to certain lengths to demonstrate what will happen if you do one thing over the other. Masking the outcome makes the choice interesting for me. It makes for a tough decision as I assume that's what you want. In game however most choices you knew the outcome before they occurred. If you were pursuing the Hero of Justice mentality you knew what choices to pick to get it. If you wanted to roleplay Snidely Whiplash that too was made easy. Bhelen and Harrowmont was a hard one for me being a noble Dwarf. Even then they spelled out what it meant to pick either candidate.

 

Wasn't a huge fan of the painted flecks of red. It was unnatural. Blood should smear and stain.

[SnakeCode]

Agreed. The campy evil choices just feel out of place and stupid when the overall tone of the game is supposed to be mature and grounded. Going from letting a village fall because you need to infiltrate a castle (a pragmatic "evil" choice) to taking and resurrecting the fallen village's inhabitants as zombies for no discernible reason is just needlessly cruel.

I agree, but many things are out of place if Bioware are/were aiming for a "mature and grounded" experience. The constant barrage of bad jokes/humour feels just as out of place as the campy evil for the sake of being evil choices.

[Eelectrica]

Actually d&d ha been dumbed down too. Happened with the 4th edition. 5th edition is a bit better but...Sorry if I am bursting your bubble. The game might still be fun, though.

Ah thanks for the heads up on that. As long as they provide plenty of opportunity to role play the character, I can work around the rest.

[Vader20]

Between trying to make the game appeal to the "I want it now and all I want to do is point and click) generation and, trying to be politically correct, DAI took a hit, a big one. Not much can be done save DLC for the to non controversial stuff now, but maybe at least a good bit of the dumbed down can be corrected. I hope so at least. With the Beta program, they are getting feedback from real players and, they are listening so, that's a big step in the right direction.

 

I have some serious trouble understanding this current generation wanting a "button mashing" madness. As a gamer why would you want a dumbed down, easy to understand, shallow game ? Seriously...

 

Sometimes it sounds just like an excuse ? I mean it's easier to make.. costs less resources and time ?

 

Ok, I might sound stupid, but I still don't want to believe that anyone who pays 50 bucks for a game will complain that the game is too complex and it should be easier.

 

The problem may be the fact this current generation is like a heard of sheep without expectations and you can almost sell them everything.

[Farangbaa]

Ok, I might sound stupid, but I still don't want to believe that anyone who pays 50 bucks for a game will complain that the game is too complex and it should be easier.

You'd be surprised. I know a guy who buys a game and doesn't even touch it before finding a walkthrough on the internet.

Some people don't play for the complexity.
 

Between trying to make the game appeal to the "I want it now and all I want to do is point and click) generation and, trying to be politically correct, DAI took a hit, a big one. Not much can be done save DLC for the to non controversial stuff now, but maybe at least a good bit of the dumbed down can be corrected. I hope so at least. With the Beta program, they are getting feedback from real players and, they are listening so, that's a big step in the right direction.

Get over yourself.

'Real players'. What does that even mean?

What the hell are those? Where do I get my official player card?

Are you seriously going to argue your 50-70 bucks are worth more than from Joe Schmuk who just bought his second game?

Seriously, all you guys you who keep saying everything was better in the past need to make your own games. Show them how it's done, or just stop whining and don't feed Bioware your money anymore.

[Fade-Touched-in-the-head]

'Real players'. What does that even mean?

I could be wrong, but I think you misunderstood him. I took it to mean the devs are getting feedback from players as opposed to leaving players out of the equation and trying to figure things out all on their own.

[Farangbaa]

Oh, you might be right there... Oh well

[ThreeF]

I agree, but many things are out of place if Bioware are/were aiming for a "mature and grounded" experience. The constant barrage of bad jokes/humour feels just as out of place as the campy evil for the sake of being evil choices.

Balance is important I think. And ideally if someone wants to play evil stupid they should be able to even if it is outside of the scope of the game's tone, but it also shouldn't be the only "evil" choice. In the same way stupid good shouldn't be the only choice. Options are good if there is a way to add them, makes more people happy.

 

That  said, generally I don't like playing good vs evil, I find idealism vs pragmatism and chaos vs law when they don't automatically imply right and wrong to be better opposites, this way you can avoid forced drama too. 

 

(btw after running through some clips of DAO and DA2 I'm noticing less campiness in terms of dialogues in DAI that I didn't noticed before. This is why actually the pro-mage speech feels so out of place.)

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I have some serious trouble understanding this current generation wanting a "button mashing" madness. As a gamer why would you want a dumbed down, easy to understand, shallow game ? Seriously...

 

Sometimes it sounds just like an excuse ? I mean it's easier to make.. costs less resources and time ?

 

Ok, I might sound stupid, but I still don't want to believe that anyone who pays 50 bucks for a game will complain that the game is too complex and it should be easier.

 

The problem may be the fact this current generation is like a heard of sheep without expectations and you can almost sell them everything.

 

You would be surprised. I am, due to my age of 23, related to this Instant Gratification generation and many of them are...  Just cannot imagine how I am supposed to be around people like this for the rest of my life....

 

There are plenty of gamers who play games for the feelsuh, teh romances and the graphics...Just look around in other sections of the forum and see what I mean...

 

If this Instant Gratification generation is a generation that truly desires to play games for both challenge and for entertainment...You would not see the record sales for DAI. 

[Vader20]

You'd be surprised. I know a guy who buys a game and doesn't even touch it before finding a walkthrough on the internet.

Some people don't play for the complexity.
 

Get over yourself.

'Real players'. What does that even mean?

What the hell are those? Where do I get my official player card?

Are you seriously going to argue your 50-70 bucks are worth more than from Joe Schmuk who just bought his second game?

Seriously, all you guys you who keep saying everything was better in the past need to make your own games. Show them how it's done, or just stop whining and don't feed Bioware your money anymore.

I have a friend who is big shooter junkie and he will never touch an RPG. The reason ? He says there too much talk and less action. Talking, reading... too complicated.

 

Now if you look at this game and the previous ones, I sayt it has a lot less dialogue and  less TALKIN'. I watched a video of the architect from Awakening and he was talking a LOOT. I was actually shocked of how deep the dialogues were back then.

 

But hell.. some people don't like to have too much talk.

 

If this trend follows, the next game will be even more action oriented.

 

I have a theory that people who love RPG's are a lot different intelectually than those who are into shooters... and *simpler* things. This is somethig I have observed and am interested in since I started playing playing rpg's in 2003.

[R0vena]

I have a theory that people who love RPG's are a lot different intelectually than those who are into shooters... and *simpler* things. This is somethig I have observed and am interested in since I started playing playing rpg's in 2003.

Can people enjoy something just because they enjoy it without being called names?

 

I know plenty of very intellectual people who enjoy shooters. Know a lot who enjoy both, too. 

 

If you enjoy RPGs it really doesn't make you intellectually superior to the ones who don't. It just means you enjoy RPGs.

 

Btw, I love RPGs, have played them since BG 1. My husband (PHD and University Professor) prefers shooters. So what?

[b10d1v]

Saphiron123

I get you and it is not only the game industry, but Government and others that "believe" "we" are uneducated 10 year olds, hence are you smarter than a 5th grader.  You would think an aging community would counter this thinking at least to some degree.  

 

Games should make you "think" and promote new ideas to keep brains healthy (luminosity), not simply some muscle movement repetition ala point and shoot.  I apologize to any pure fans of point and shoot, my view is jaded after beta testing some games of late and finding the keys that flew off the keyboard.

[Vader20]

Can people enjoy something just because they enjoy it without being called names?

 

I know plenty of very intellectual people who enjoy shooters. Know a lot who enjoy both, too. 

 

If you enjoy RPGs it really doesn't make you intellectually superior to the ones who don't. It just means you enjoy RPGs.

 

Btw, I love RPGs, have played them since BG 1. My husband (PHD and University Professor) prefers shooters. So what?

 

You misunderstood...

[R0vena]

You misunderstood...

I am sorry. I apologize if so.

 

I just see a lot of attitude lately "you don't like what I like hence you are inferior somehow."

[Farangbaa]

I have a friend who is big shooter junkie and he will never touch an RPG. The reason ? He says there too much talk and less action. Talking, reading... too complicated.
 
Now if you look at this game and the previous ones, I sayt it has a lot less dialogue and  less TALKIN'. I watched a video of the architect from Awakening and he was talking a LOOT. I was actually shocked of how deep the dialogues were back then.
 
But hell.. some people don't like to have too much talk.
 
If this trend follows, the next game will be even more action oriented.
 
I have a theory that people who love RPG's are a lot different intelectually than those who are into shooters... and *simpler* things. This is somethig I have observed and am interested in since I started playing playing rpg's in 2003.

There's a lot more talk in DA:I than in DA:O. Probably more than in DA:O and DA:A combined. It's just spread out over a lot more characters.

Oh and eh.. if you just pick investigate options the conversations can get pretty deep. In DA:O they just didn't flag the investigate options as such, making it seem like you have a 7 options, where in reality it's just 2 + investigate.

[Dinkledorf]

I enjoy both genres (and many others), for different reasons and at different times.  Mood plays a huge factor into which game I power up when I game.  But yeah, any put down of another regarding their choice of games is not going in the right direction.  I attribute the majority of it to fans of the series being disappointed that DAI ended up not being the successor that was expected and hoped for.  Not possible to please everybody all the time hence no matter what is delivered will be met with some scorn, inevitable.  

 

I have a level of disagreement that games should have a primary goal of "teaching" at some level or another although it can be said that the goal of "games" and "play" in nature is just that.  To me games are about entertainment, if I learn something along the way, all the better but certainly not for the sake of "learning".  

 

A significantly better tool to learn the the virtues of delayed gratification is something like learning/mastering how to play a musical instrument in my opinion.