217 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

One difference is that the ME1 sidequests are (more obviously) worthless. Nobody ever thinks that they need to do them. XP and loot don't matter since everything scales, and there's plenty of Power.

[Il Divo]

I actually think ME1 is a good parallel for DAI. The side quests got the exact same amount of care and investment.

 

Man, there is just a whole host of issues with ME1's quest design. What killed that for me was everything felt so homogenized in terms of delivery. Enter new star cluster, locate single planet Shepard can land on, drive to single easily identified base, clear 2-3 rooms which look identical, travel back to source of quest, complete. It was especially painful on the 360's load times. 

 

I still maintain that Bioware would do better to have longer, more involved quest lines. When I think back to KotOR and Jade Empire, my favorite quest lines were typically more involved: the Sunry Murder Trial, the murder on Dantooine, the Imperial Arena, etc. But I'm not sure fewer side quests would mesh well with Inquisition's large world.  

[phantomrachie]

Thanks for the reply. Believe it or not, I actually defended ME3's MP back in 2012 on the very same grounds - that they were done by separate teams (and we knew exactly who they were - BW Edmonton and BW Montreal) with separate budgets. (We then even knew which team worked on what DLC and we know what team is working now on ME4)

 

The problem here is that in DAI I don't see this clear distinction. I don't know who is responsible for the MP part. And then also because of the state of the MP and because of post-launch care. In ME3MP we could clearly see they had it planned out pretty well, balance changes every week, free DLCs, active presence on the forums, etc. I don't see any of this in DAI, I only see a shoehorned MP with a serious lack of content and the skeleton crew trying to take care of it.

 

That is a very good point about the difference between DA:I multiplayer and ME3 multiplayer. I actually have yet to play DA:I multiplayer, I've been having fun in SP and DA:I multiplayer doesn't have the same incentive as ME3 multiplayer did i.e. finally getting to play as another race. 

 

Most of my points were made with ME3 multiplayer in mind, but again I don't see it as shoehorned because is is not something that players have to do. For me somthing is 'shoehorned' if it doesn't fit into the game and I have to put up with it anyway.

 

Even if the lines aren't as clear cut this time, I still think it is unlikely that MP affected SP budget negatively.The 8 skills in SP is an example of SP & MP using the same mechanics, which would mean if the MP team developed that, then the SP team would save on time and money to develop something else.

 

Although because it is not as clear cut this time, it is harder to provide evidence for either opinion.

 

My hope for MP in MENext and DA4 is that it will be clear which team is developing what, like ME3, if only to help put a stop to naysayers claiming MP will ruin SP.

[Jeffry]

(snip)

 

I actually looked forward to DAI MP, since I was kinda expecting it would be similar to ME3's MP in the terms of quality. Let me tell you, I was very skeptical about ME3MP at first, because I didn't think the game actually needed it, but ever since they released the demo one month before the game, I fell in love with it. Too bad there was no demo this time...

 

Feel free to try the DAI MP out, if you can get a few friends to play it as well, using voice chat, it is not half bad in small doses. But the problem is the lack of content and I mean a serious lack of one - 3 enemy factions, 3 maps, 12 classes (half of them viable). Also remember those constant balance changes in ME3? 49 weekly posts in a year, which means hundreds of balance tweeks. How many there were in DAI? 2 meager tweaks, in three and a half months (one of them an uncalled for nerf and one of them a boost to an already OP ability). Oh and one boss nerf, that turned the most difficult faction into a cakewalk. And no, it is not because the game would be that well balanced, I don't know why it is so. Either because they don't care at all, or they can't care much, since there are so few people taking care of the game they don't know what to do first. Then there are also many different issues with it (progress, paywall, grind, loot, etc.), but I don't wanna go into details that much, since I think you have an idea what you would be dealing with here.

 

And honestly, before DAI I was looking forward to ME4 (since ME is without question my favourite franchise of all time). Now I dread what it might turn out to be after I have seen the new BW/EA approach with DAI.

[Joe-Poe]

They need to fix/finish the core game first (pc bugs & controls) before even thinking of releasing a DLC. If not, then it will sell less and die faster than DAII did

[Keitaro57]

Each time they released a patch, he corrupted a fully functionnal part of the game. So, what will happen if they release a big DLC? hum?

[wolfhowwl]

Pretty much how I feel. In terms of quality, I believe Bioware games have been all over the place, but I suspect the issues with Inquisition are less to do with time/money and more to do with Bioware overextending themselves in terms of total content. Mass Effect 3 was similar in that sense; there wasn't enough reactivity given what Bioware wanted to pull off. 

 

Would this be a project management issue with overestimating your abilities?

[xdonnyliciousx]

No, I don't think they're taking long at all. I just bought the game a month ago because I knew it was going to be loaded with bugs, so I wait for a few patches and the price goes down. Win Win. Anyway, I would rather have a good DLC rather than a fast lame one.

[Kynare]

In this respect, I'm glad I'm unable to play this game because I don't have a good enough device yet. By the time I have enough money to buy a proper PC (probably several years) the game will be patched and all the DLC will be released.  Fun.

[Monster20862]

I'd rather they fix the game breaking glitches before adding anything else. That'll just cause a whole mess of new problems that will never be resolved.

[Torrential]

The Bethesda teams shifted from Oblivion to Fallout 3 as soon as their work was finished on Oblivion and then to Skyrim. They've been working on their next project since Skyrim is finished. They just don't like talking about a project until it's pretty much done.

 

Their next project was an MMO though, thusly we've been waiting longer than usual. That's the simple truth of it. So back to my original comment on wanting beth to move their behinds, and get a decent single player moddable RPG out again that many of us know and love them for. - This was made in response to someone commenting on a lack of RPG games coming out originally.

 

Also why I was hoping Bioware would have finally gotten their act together and released some DLC to tide me over.

 

 

I'd rather they fix the game breaking glitches before adding anything else. That'll just cause a whole mess of new problems that will never be resolved.

 

 

Implying a company this size can't both work on a quest or two, and fix a bug, is odd. 6 Months from now is too late for DLC, really now is getting too late for DLC, if they want it to sell well anyway. A major expansion could pull it off but not normal DLC to revive interest.

[Il Divo]

Would this be a project management issue with overestimating your abilities?

 

It very well could be, although as a mere consumer I don't have an insider's perspective. For myself, all of Bioware's games which have emphasized exploration (BG1, ME1, DA:I) have led to significant issues in several departments, side quest design being key. 

 

I think you can have a number of factors at play. With ME3, we also had Bioware constantly hyping the import function and giving us too many world-altering decisions with ME1 and 2. ME3 was certainly better in the reactivity department, but still fell short in many areas of divergent consequences (Collector Base anyone?). 

 

That's why when comparing DA:I to older Bioware games, regardless of their quality, I don't get the impression it's the result of a cheaper budget. DA:I for example has 12 companion characters (including  your advisors) with multiple cinematic conversations for each in addition to non-cinematic conversations, multiple race options, four voice options, attempts to account for DA imports albeit badly, mutually exclusive quest lines (Mages vs. Templars), cinematic companion quests, and huge areas for exploration.

 

Either the game price has to rise to make sure everything is done well, or Bioware's got to cut something on the list back. 

[JLSBeth]

I believe one of the reasons DA2 wasn't that great was because they rushed it. Didn't it only take like a year to finish it? I also believe that's why DA:I is great, because they took their time. I am SO ready for a Sola's DLC, but if I have to choose between a quick unsatisfying DLC or wait longer for a good one, I'll wait. Although it might kill me first. Plus, if they want to make many outcomes from your choices, its going to take a minute. Also, they have to make some things different based on the Keep and choices from DA:I. A DLC is no small feat. That's not including the voice over......At the same time....PLEASE HURRY. I wanna knock Sola's unconscious for breaking my heart, then make up

[Jeffry]

Their next project was an MMO though, thusly we've been waiting longer than usual. That's the simple truth of it. So back to my original comment on wanting beth to move their behinds, and get a decent single player moddable RPG out again that many of us know and love them for. - This was made in response to someone commenting on a lack of RPG games coming out originally.

 

Just to clear stuff up, it wasn't, Bethesda Game Studios' last game was in fact Skyrim. The Elder Scrolls Online was developed by a completely different studio - ZeniMax Online Studios. But they are both subsidiaries of ZeniMax Media.

[Torrential]

Just to clear stuff up, it wasn't, Bethesda Game Studios' last game was in fact Skyrim. The Elder Scrolls Online was developed by a completely different studio - ZeniMax Online Studios. But they are both subsidiaries of ZeniMax Media.

I am sure that is the company line. I can't believe it had no effect at all on the production speed of the next game, surely they shared developers and resources, especially as it's part of the same series, and they certainly had to have things checked at the very least to fit the lore. I say this set against the backdrop that we've been waiting longer than usual for any kind of update on the next release. 

 

 

Oblivion Release Date, March 20, 2006

 

Fallout 3 Release Date October 28, 2008

 

Fallout NV Release Date, October 19, 2010

 

Skyrim Release Date November 11, 2011

 

**** Here is where the MMO fits.

 

Now - March 12, 2015

Expected release - 2016-2017? Guessing.

 

See what I mean? That's a huge gap of nothing singleplayer related. If I put the MMO in there, it would seem more reasonable.

Either that or someone thought skyrim or fallout didn't sell well enough, which I can't believe winning game of the years and such like.

[AxholeRose]

Far Cry 4 just released their major DLC, and they launched a week earlier than DAI.  And they also have to contend with multiplayer and patches and whatnot.

[Jeffry]

I am sure that is the company line. I can't believe it had no effect at all on the production speed of the next game, surely they shared developers and resources, especially as it's part of the same series, and they certainly had to have things checked at the very least to fit the lore. I say this set against the backdrop that we've been waiting longer than usual for any kind of update on the next release.

 

I honestly have no idea what have they been up to. They very well could have helped with the development of TESO in some way, but it certainly wasn't the only thing they were working on.

[Eelectrica]

Meh. Pillars of Eternity is a week and a half or so away.
Happy to wait for a polished DAI DLC with more interesting content then go to this point and plant a flag.