380 réponses à ce sujet

[Uccio]

 

Dropping like 80% of the meaningless fetch quests and empty maps would do for starters. That would give time and resources to work on the actual story and conversations.

This is pretty typical -- "if they remove the stuff I don't like, they'd obviously have more time to work on the stuff I do like".

I'm afraid it's comparing apples to oranges, however. You could remove all the exploration content in the entire game, and that still wouldn't amount to a single additional major plot on the crit path. Different people, cinematic designers in particular, who did little to no work on the exploration content as it was.

 

 

That is strange. Does he say they made the additional maps and fetch quests without any cost? Because that´s what it sounds like.

 

Frankly, I am willing to put 100e on the table if I will receive a game like DAO. But not 60e for another DAI.

[RedLens37]

certain elements Are too much to digest.

 

[CronoDragoon]

That is strange. Does he say they made the additional maps and fetch quests without any cost? Because that´s what it sounds like.

 

No, what he's saying is that the manpower isn't interchangeable. What employees are going to make those extra cinematic scenes? Which writers will do the writing for it? They are already working crunch with the current level of work they have for their relevant aspect of the game.

[Uccio]

No, what he's saying is that the manpower isn't interchangeable. What employees are going to make those extra cinematic scenes? Which writers will do the writing for it? They are already working crunch with the current level of work they have for their relevant aspect of the game.

 

So the hours/money put to the maps and fetch quests cannot be directed to someone working on cinematics/writers?

[PhroXenGold]

No, what he's saying is that the manpower isn't interchangeable. What employees are going to make those extra cinematic scenes? Which writers will do the writing for it? They are already working crunch with the current level of work they have for their relevant aspect of the game.

 

You hire different people - less "open world designers" as it were, and more "writers" and "cinematic designers".

[CronoDragoon]

You hire different people - less "open world designers" as it were, and more "writers" and "cinematic designers".

 

Eh, I'd never go so far as to ask for somebody to be fired. I realize they are a corporation and we are customers, but I am also fairly open with my gaming preferences while also feeling for people who do this type of work.

[FieryDove]

You hire different people - less "open world designers" as it were, and more "writers" and "cinematic designers".

 

There still would not be enough money to fill all the areas with heavy story/cinematic that people are asking for. That would take a TOR budget. Not feasible.

[Uccio]

There still would not be enough money to fill all the areas with heavy story/cinematic that people are asking for. That would take a TOR budget. Not feasible.

 

And yet in DAO they somehow managed to do it.

[correctamundo]

And yet in DAO they somehow managed to do it.

 

I doubt that that is true. I find I spend more time in dialogue in DAI than DAO. If there is a difference it cannot be much. There are however more stuff to do on the side in DAI.

[Realmzmaster]

And yet in DAO they somehow managed to do it.

 

DAO which had a six year development cycle and barely made a profit according to David Gaider. It reminds me of Planescape Torment which was a critically acclaimed game that also barely broke even which was stated by Chris Avellone.

 

Many fail to remember or do not know that before EA bought Bioware which was then part of VG Holding (along with Elevation Partners and Pandemic) Bioware could not raise the money to get DAO to market. Bioware partnered with Elevation Partners (equity firm) who also owned Pandemic. Elevation Partners invested $300 million into the partnership which gave Elevation partners controlling interest.

 

Bioware did not have the necessary funds to bring DAO or its other games to market. Mass Effect 1 made it because of an exclusive deal with Microsoft and by then EA had bought VG Holding.

 

Bioware was on the ropes and going down for the count.

[CronoDragoon]

And yet in DAO they somehow managed to do it.

 

Well, sure. If you put ALL the cinematics in Inquisition into the Hinterlands it'd be jam-packed with cinematics and story.

 

(The Hinterlands is bigger than all of Origins together)

 

Now it's perfectly fine to say they shouldn't have made Inquisition so big in the first place (I'd agree with that) but it remains that filling Inquisition's current game worlds with enough story was never feasible.

[pdusen]

And yet in DAO they somehow managed to do it.

 

...no, they definitely did not.

[VelvetV]

he player's ego. Which is what Dragon Age Inqusition is doing. I really don't see how this can be argued against. Your character has carte blanche to act in all matters, despite not having earned that right, and not being in any way qualified to do so. And not only that - you succeed. All the time. Because you're just that amazing. Isn't that rather undermining people who practice these things as their profession. Lawyers, judges, dancers, strategists, diplomats etc.

 

I really like your posts. And I agree. The main char has no charisma, leadership qualities or education, yet everyone is behaving as if she is fit to be a ruler and a general. Being herald is not enough for that, there are savvy people with a lot of power and knowledge who'd leap at the opportunity to use such a herald, for the better or worse. And this herald, being clueless about politics and everything, would be none the wiser.

 

The story would greatly benefit if instead of being a random guy the player was an heiress\heir to the throne of some country whose parents just died and she just came into her power. Skyhold could be the fortress at the kingdom's border. Silly and self-serving? Maybe, but this would explain why people listen to you and adhere to your decisions on matters you aren't qualified to know much about. In medieval times royalties could do whatever they wanted and noone could say a word.

 

I'm not bashing the game, though, it's still nice. It has both brilliant sides (main quest, companions and advisors, banter, the keep) and underwhelming sides (main char, side quests, combat [the latter is "imho"]). All in all, the biggest offender timewise is sidequest design, I suspect that if I only played main quest and inner circle quests, I'd love the game many times more.

 

And since you mentioned CDProjekt, I'm looking forward to its upcoming release to see if they actually manage not to fall into the same groove as DA:I with its less than exciting presentation of side quests. Too bad you can't actually role-play in this upcoming game because of its predefined character, but I hope they'll make up for it in other aspects.

[VelvetV]

There still would not be enough money to fill all the areas with heavy story/cinematic that people are asking for. That would take a TOR budget. Not feasible.

 

How do you people know how much something costs? Why is it more expensive to hire cinematic people than those who write simple fetch quests? Whoever wrote such a lengthy Codex, plus all letters and notes and missions and dialogues must've spent an insane amount of time doing it, and do I read all those entries? No, not really, except in rare cases. Do you? I kind of appreciate it, but I hate to think that we have low-quality side quests just because of a novel-length Codex.

 

All in all, I'd rather have a shorter game with 50-60% quests of great quality than a huge game with 5% brilliant and 95% tedious quests.

 

As for cinematics, I think the last horror game I played had the same amount of cinematics as DA:I's main quest line. It can't be all that expensive. But maybe I'm wrong.

 

Another solution: hire people from a third-world country. Not from its capital, too, those tend to be richest cities. This way you can pay dozens of times less and people who work for you are ok with it, because they'd never earn as much in a local company anyway.

 

That wouldn't solve the problem of hiring voice actors, of course, but that's something.

[FieryDove]

How do you people know how much something costs? Why is it more expensive to hire cinematic people than those who write simple fetch quests? Whoever wrote such a lengthy Codex, plus all letters and notes and missions and dialogues must've spent an insane amount of time doing it, and do I read all those entries? No, not really, except in rare cases. Do you? I kind of appreciate it, but I hate to think that we have low-quality side quests just because of a novel-length Codex.

 

All in all, I'd rather have a shorter game with 50-60% quests of great quality than a huge game with 5% brilliant and 95% tedious quests.

 

As for cinematics, I think the last horror game I played had the same amount of cinematics as DA:I's main quest line. It can't be all that expensive. But maybe I'm wrong.

 

Another solution: hire people from a third-world country. Not from its capital, too, those tend to be richest cities. This way you can pay dozens of times less and people who work for you are ok with it, because they'd never earn as much in a local company anyway.

 

That wouldn't solve the problem of hiring voice actors, of course, but that's something.

 

Because I was there when there were Devs who talked to lowly peons like myself and others before they got canned. Tor couldn't even maintain that level and it was a huge budget MMO. They could not expand the class story lines due to cost. Cinematic and voice acting. That is very expensive as well as time consuming. Writing codex is not. And yes I read them, I adore lore in most forms.

[Das Tentakel]

The story would greatly benefit if instead of being a random guy the player was an heiress\heir to the throne of some country whose parents just died and she just came into her power. Skyhold could be the fortress at the kingdom's border. Silly and self-serving? Maybe, but this would explain why people listen to you and adhere to your decisions on matters you aren't qualified to know much about. In medieval times royalties could do whatever they wanted and noone could say a word.

Interestingly, an older RPG that did this was Summoner II by volition. Your character starts out as a ruling Queen and the incarnation of a Goddess and a variety of political decisions are part of the game. You DO play a young ruler 'burdened by destiny' in that game and it makes sense there.

 

 

You do end up leading a party adventuring across the land though. The main reason seems to be that your (fixed) character is a stubborn young queen with leadership by example ideas etc.
 

However, you're wrong if you think medieval rulers could what they liked. There were laws and customs and power was shared across a fairly complex hierarchy. If the ruler did what he or she wanted, or ran roughshod over serious internal political opposition, that ruler was in trouble. Rulers then, as now, needed a degree of consent and cooperation by the ruled and, in the absence of an effective, repressive police state, they couldn't just do what they wanted.

[Uccio]

Because I was there when there were Devs who talked to lowly peons like myself and others before they got canned. Tor couldn't even maintain that level and it was a huge budget MMO. They could not expand the class story lines due to cost. Cinematic and voice acting. That is very expensive as well as time consuming. Writing codex is not. And yes I read them, I adore lore in most forms.

 

I´m still not convinced about it. The disparity between costs making cinematics/writing vs huge maps/fetch quests seems to be too exaggerated. However, would that actually be the case I personally am willing to put more money on the table to receive a game more like DAO with fleshed out story and cinematics.

[tanerb123]

To me it feels like Swtor guys designed the game, and made it a MMO instead of a RPG

[Greetsme]

Yes, the most disappointment I have ever experienced with a BW game.  Not to worry, all is not lost, the Witcher wild hunt shall be with us very soon.

[correctamundo]

To me it feels like Swtor guys designed the game, and made it a MMO instead of a RPG

 

Perhaps you should look up the  meaning of those two abbreviations?

[Wolven_Soul]

So I loved Dragon Age, within the first few minutes of game-play I was hooked. Then came Dragon Age II, I was excited and played through the whole game, while hugely disappointing, I did finish it twice.

 

Now that I've finally found a bit of free time, I picked up Dragon Age Inquisition. It is so boring I can't bring myself to play it. While the game is pretty looking and smooth (PC) Its damn bland, there hasn't been a "hook" for me. I feel bad having spent the money and not even enjoying the game. 

 

I'm not sure if anyone else has had this experience with DAI. I find none of the characters interesting, or worth spending time with. I typically love Bioware games, so somehow I feel this might be just me, but I can't get over it.

I hear ya man.  I picked the game up day 1 and I have still never gotten around to finishing it, probably never will.  I just have absolutely no desire to get back into it.  It was a disappointing game for me.

[Elhanan]

To me it feels like Swtor guys designed the game, and made it a MMO instead of a RPG

Believe I got both, as with SWTOR. I played it solo, and was able to improve the setting with fewer crowds and Pause and Tac-Cam functionality. The worst part of a MMO are the throngs; fixed for a solo version, IMO.

[Geth Supremacy]

So I loved Dragon Age, within the first few minutes of game-play I was hooked. Then came Dragon Age II, I was excited and played through the whole game, while hugely disappointing, I did finish it twice.

 

Now that I've finally found a bit of free time, I picked up Dragon Age Inquisition. It is so boring I can't bring myself to play it. While the game is pretty looking and smooth (PC) Its damn bland, there hasn't been a "hook" for me. I feel bad having spent the money and not even enjoying the game. 

 

I'm not sure if anyone else has had this experience with DAI. I find none of the characters interesting, or worth spending time with. I typically love Bioware games, so somehow I feel this might be just me, but I can't get over it.

 

I don't go out of my way to bash this game every chance I get or anything.  I try not to be extremely negative as much as I'm just honest and hope things improve although most of the time I just read and say nothing anymore.

 

This is true.  DAI is terrible.  I wasn't the biggest fan of DA2.  The rushed money grab feel of the recycled zones and things really stood out for that game, but DAI makes that game look good.  There is nothing I find fun about DAI.  I played the MP for a little while, but it was broken and had lots of bugs.  Not much content there at all...few weapons that are all useless as you get better stuff and 3 Map....THREE MAPS!!!!!  As far as the SP goes its bad.  I wouldn't even call DAI a game.  DAI is just a poster boy for equality and SJW.  That's what it is.  I'm pretty sure I am completely done with the DA series.  I have some hope for ME4 though...even if the Mako is coming back.......

 

Good on you for saying what needs to be said.  The games progressively get worse and groveling at their feet isn't going to improve things.  It makes them worse and will get the dev complacent.  People with standards do need to speak up and hope for an improvement of the steady decline in this series.  It's bad.

 

My prediction for DA4 is more of the same though.  More a soap box to preach from while the SJW march with a little gameplay added in to pass itself off.  Playing what I could stomach of DAI (yes, I made it a lot farther than the hinterlands although it was a chore and I had to force myself through) it was more than obvious games and gameplay aren't whats important anymore and that is why I play video games.  To play them.

[Thandal N'Lyman]

Thanks NextArrishok308;

 

Just so you know, anyone who would throw "SJW" into a critique of DAI loses all credibility with me. 

 

One of the best features of DAI is the ability to ignore the aspects you don't like, and concentrate on the ones you do. 

But if you focus on the parts of the game that you dislike or that disappoint you, guess what? You'll be disappointed.

[VelvetV]

Interestingly, an older RPG that did this was Summoner II by volition. Your character starts out as a ruling Queen and the incarnation of a Goddess and a variety of political decisions are part of the game. You DO play a young ruler 'burdened by destiny' in that game and it makes sense there.

 

I have such an itch to play this I played the first Summoner in the past but never got my hands on the second one. An incarnation of a Goddess, omg, and there are political decisions? I'd love to see how people react to you in that game, although it's probably wrong to expect something from an old game that isn't even well-known.

 

Fable 3 is alike, except without the herald \ reincarnation of goddess thing added on top.

 

However, you're wrong if you think medieval rulers could what they liked. There were laws and customs and power was shared across a fairly complex hierarchy. If the ruler did what he or she wanted, or ran roughshod over serious internal political opposition, that ruler was in trouble. Rulers then, as now, needed a degree of consent and cooperation by the ruled and, in the absence of an effective, repressive police state, they couldn't just do what they wanted.

 

Really? I stand corrected. The Game of Thrones series is closest to how I brushed with medieval times in ages, so I guess it's not entirely accurate. I remember being surprised at how much power an underage king had and noone could say a word. He wasn't all that interested in making big decisions, but if he was I thought they'd have to listen to him.