15875 réponses à ce sujet

[correctamundo]

Have we played the same game here?  Unless I am understanding your post incorrectly (for which I apologize in advance), there is no such thing, even remotely similiar to "v" and "f" spamming in TW3 to my knowledge (which was ungodly annoying and unintuitive in DA:I). It's just a simple loot system that is present in other RPGs. With a possibility to use your Witcher sense to highlight items (some of which are already highlighted enough without even using the sense)

 

Also, all of the exclamation and question marks can be turned off (and see majority of people actually doing so.) Don't think there is such an option in DA:I? And if not, I would welcome it for their future titles.

 

"Witcher sense" (rmb) - spamming, move up to thing and e for loot. Same-same but with some other button. You don´t have to use v in DAI either. But BW got a lot of criticism for it and it was supposed to be "fixed" in TW3 but is essentially the same ;-) For some reason...

 

So the difference is you turned signs off in TW3? That is not really how it was presented up there in the post i replied to. ;-) But yeah hud/map sign customization isn't a bad thing. Even so I don't se this huge difference in the world between the games, yet.

[Sasie]

You're missing my point entirely, I did not imply that he should step back into the closet or immediately return to tevinter. I've got no problem with his lifestyle, however, the moral 'lesson' in his quest is cut and dried and shoved down your throat, dorian good, actions right, father bad and you are given no option but to be confined to one perspective of events, that is to say the game automatically assumes that you're siding with dorian, without any other options, which seems rather obnoxious. Personally my quizzy would've left the inn out of sheer embarrassment, it's a family matter in which I really don't have the right to judge.

Witcher 3 does exactly the same thing several times with far more auto dialogue to go with it. No matter what the player might feel Geralt will always lecture Nilfgaardians on their harsh rule, going as far as showing moral outrage when a noble doesn't show concern for peasants who only moment ago harassed her and might even have worst in mind if Geralt had not killed/bribed them.

[Steelcan]

Witcher 3 does exactly the same thing several times with far more auto dialogue to go with it. No matter what the player might feel Geralt will always lecture Nilfgaardians on their harsh rule, going as far as showing moral outrage when a noble doesn't show concern for peasants who only moment ago harassed her and might even have worst in mind if Geralt had not killed/bribed them.

and your point is what?

 

Geralt has a much more defined personality than the Inquisitor, he isn't big on nobles trampling the little guy, usually you can choose to ignore it but that doesn't mean his character isn't offended

[Rawgrim]

Not true. Pillars of Eternity does that quite well I feel and we have total choice of what and who our character is. Race, gender, homeland.

It's not a really a story about saving the world, it is a personal story about saving your characters sanity. 

Granted it doesn't have the family stuff, but I think even that could be done if they wanted to and had time.

 

Also your stats matter in conversation. A physically strong person can lift people up and shake them til they talk etc. Great option to have.

[yawnandshrug]

Witcher 3 does exactly the same thing several times with far more auto dialogue to go with it. No matter what the player might feel Geralt will always lecture Nilfgaardians on their harsh rule, going as far as showing moral outrage when a noble doesn't show concern for peasants who only moment ago harassed her and might even have worst in mind if Geralt had not killed/bribed them.

What steelcan said. Quizzy and Geralt are two different kinds of characters. With Geralt, as an established character in his own right who has likes and dislikes that are independent of player choice, you are given an idea on the bandwidth upon which he would act and so pick your options. Whereas for the inquisitor, I feel like Dragon Age is built on the implication that you are free to customize a blank slate and thus it is disappointing when you are clumsily shoehorned into a certain direction.

[Sasie]

and your point is what?

 

Geralt has a much more defined personality than the Inquisitor, he isn't big on nobles trampling the little guy, usually you can choose to ignore it but that doesn't mean his character isn't offended

It's a bit hypocritical in my opinion to accuse Bioware of offering limiting choices in a thread arguing that they could learn from Wicher 3 when Witcher 3 in fact is much, much worse in that very same area. Not to mention who Geralt is seems to change from game to game and depending on the player. Geralt can be played from anything from someone who is strictly neutral and don't judge (Berengar, Letho) to someone who very much judge (same people + a whole bunch of others). 

Honestly Bioware offered a lot more choices with how players react to Dorian then Witcher 3 does when it comes to these peasants. It's especially annoying to me that Geralt feels moral outrage on the behalf of possibly would-be-rapists that he himself might have killed.

[Steelcan]

It's a bit hypocritical in my opinion to accuse Bioware of offering limiting choices in a thread arguing that they could learn from Wicher 3 when Witcher 3 in fact is much, much worse in that very same area. Not to mention who Geralt is seems to change from game to game and depending on the player. Geralt can be played from anything from someone who is strictly neutral and don't judge (Berengar, Letho) to someone who very much judge (same people + a whole bunch of others). 

Honestly Bioware offered a lot more choices with how players react to Dorian then Witcher 3 does when it comes to these peasants. It's especially annoying to me that Geralt feels moral outrage on the behalf of would-be-rapists.

the two games differ a lot, and when it comes to choices they differ quite a bit, TW series has never advertised itself as offering the same plethora of options that one might find in a BioWare hame, so when in a BioWare game it feels as if your choices are restricted artificially that's a valid complaint

[Sasie]

the two games differ a lot, and when it comes to choices they differ quite a bit, TW series has never advertised itself as offering the same plethora of options that one might find in a BioWare hame, so when in a BioWare game it feels as if your choices are restricted artificially that's a valid complaint

Bioware also always been completely honest on where they stand on the social issues. Developers told players to get over it when they didn't like Anders hitting on them in Dragon Age 2, same thing with Inquisition. Bioware never said they would allow players to take a homophobic stance in their games yet people still get annoyed at limited options when it comes to Dorian. Aka Bioware once again did their game the same way they advertise them.

Is there any examples of where Bioware offer these limited choices that isn't tied to the social stuff that internet loves to argue about?

[correctamundo]

It's a bit hypocritical in my opinion to accuse Bioware of offering limiting choices in a thread arguing that they could learn from Wicher 3 when Witcher 3 in fact is much, much worse in that very same area. Not to mention who Geralt is seems to change from game to game and depending on the player. Geralt can be played from anything from someone who is strictly neutral and don't judge (Berengar, Letho) to someone who very much judge (same people + a whole bunch of others). 

Honestly Bioware offered a lot more choices with how players react to Dorian then Witcher 3 does when it comes to these peasants. It's especially annoying to me that Geralt feels moral outrage on the behalf of possibly would-be-rapists that he himself might have killed.

 

I would say that it is good to be able to play Geralt in different ways but even better if you could build your own witcher from the ground.

[yawnandshrug]

Bioware also always been completely honest on where they stand on the social issues. Developers told players to get over it when they didn't like Anders hitting on them in Dragon Age 2, same thing with Inquisition. Bioware never said they would allow players to take a homophobic stance in their games yet people still get annoyed at limited options when it comes to Dorian. Aka Bioware once again did their game the same way they advertise them.

Is there any examples of where Bioware offer these limited choices that isn't tied to the social stuff that internet loves to argue about?

To repeat for the third time, with regards to Dorian's quest, an alternative view does not necessarily mean a homophobic stance, you can choose to be neutral, choose to walk away, argue that it's not a matter of gender but duty etc etc there are dozens of ways one can react but the game restricts us to one. I think there's a very clear difference between Anders hitting on you and you being allowed to respond to that and having your response explicitly defined as in the case of Dorian's quest, so I'm not quite sure why you're using that as a counterargument. 

 

And actually yes, back in the DAO days there was a measure of criticism of the mage tower quest line because it was built in a manner that was so obviously skewed towards the mages and I'm sure there are more examples other people can name.

[Sasie]

To repeat for the third time, with regards to Dorian's quest, an alternative view does not necessarily mean a homophobic stance, you can choose to be neutral, choose to walk away, argue that it's not a matter of gender but duty etc etc there are dozens of ways one can react but the game restricts us to one. I think there's a very clear difference between Anders hitting on you and you being allowed to respond to that and having your response explicitly defined as in the case of Dorian's quest, so I'm not quite sure why you're using that as a counterargument. 

 

And actually yes, back in the DAO days there was a measure of criticism of the mage tower quest line because it was built in a manner that was so obviously skewed towards the mages and I'm sure there are more examples other people can name.

Yet Bioware didn't want to do neutral in the same way Witcher 3 didn't do neutral toward peasants/Nilfgaard and again Bioware was honest/upfront about that years before the game was released. So tell me again how one is worse then the other?

[yawnandshrug]

This is really going nowhere if you keep ignoring what I'm trying to say, I've repeated my point thrice and I really have no inclination to do so again. Besides, Geralt's stance on the war is far more complex than you give it credit for, there are nationalist, socioeconomic and racial dimensions to it. That you reduce it to peasants/Nilfgaard hints to me that you either haven't really played much of the game or that the point has gone over your head. 

[The Hierophant]

Yet Bioware didn't want to do neutral in the same way Witcher 3 didn't do neutral toward peasants/Nilfgaard and again Bioware was honest/upfront about that years before the game was released. So tell me again how one is worse then the other?

It's because people like to tout Bioware as a shining example of character freedom in dialogue choice versus what CDPR provides for a predefined character like Geralt.

[correctamundo]

The narrative of the game doesn't point you towards them or provide you with a reason to contest these areas, when skyhold opens it tells you to be ready for the ball and to meet Hawke which logically leads to those two quests and so you are free to do that but once those are finished, that's it, Cory is in the arbor wilds and the narrative urges you to rush there, you are not compelled, save for a short text description of things to wander off the beaten path. Contrast this to the witcher 3, after milking all the information about Ciri I can get from the Baron, I owe him nothing and have no real reason to stay. Yet I agreed to help him get his wife back because the main quest before has made me invested in events. It's a clever way of melding main quests and side quests which bioware can learn from.

 

 

 That's the problem you see, you have a village consisting of half a dozen houses being threatened as representative of the world at large and several nearby skirmishes (as in the case of the hinterlands) to represent this apocalyptic battle. There's just too much telling and not enough showing.

 

 

 

Actually exclamation points in the witcher 3 don't appear on the minimap until you find them. And a ? denotes an optional place of interest, what I mean is that level design in DA:I can benefit from a healthy does of subtlety. As for your opposition to voiced quests, well skip the narrative, the spacebar is there for you.

 

 

You're missing my point entirely, I did not imply that he should step back into the closet or immediately return to tevinter. I've got no problem with his lifestyle, however, the moral 'lesson' in his quest is cut and dried and shoved down your throat, dorian good, actions right, father bad and you are given no option but to be confined to one perspective of events, that is to say the game automatically assumes that you're siding with dorian, without any other options, which seems rather obnoxious. Personally my quizzy would've left the inn out of sheer embarrassment, it's a family matter in which I really don't have the right to judge.

 

Well if you don´t contest the red templars and venatori you are basically giving the world to Cory. They could have used the war table more, like xcom or something like that but would probably be a little to much for a rpg.

 

Can you chop of the barons head? He seems to deserve it.

 

It is a little more than a village. There is just so much our hardware can take however. But the exalted plains is total war zone, crestwood and emprise full of unnatural weather situations, doomdark etc.

 

In a replay I will use the spacebar not in the first playthrough. Cut scenes are nice but I think TW3 could benefit with a little less. I read a post somewhere on BSN where the poster claimed that there were no cut-scenes in EDL. I could have sworn there were when encountering Imshael. But maybe that is true. Maybe my memory is at fault. In that case anyway a cut scene would be redundant. I am immersed enough as it is.

 

Generally I agree that it would be a plus if BW had tied what the venatori were looking for closer to the main-quest line but incitament to hunt them down and stop them and the red templars should not be needed more than their alliance to Cory.

 

I agree on the sublety by the way, at least make the hud optional. Will look in on that in TW3.

 

Dorian, I don't see how it would be realistic to sway him. But you can avoid the quest can you not? I have only done it once and I was very open and supportive to Dorian. It was a bit funny with all the rumours abound about Dorianand my male Inquisitor all the while my IQ was romantically involved with mlle Montilyet. ,-)

[Elhanan]

This is really going nowhere if you keep ignoring what I'm trying to say, I've repeated my point thrice and I really have no inclination to do so again. Besides, Geralt's stance on the war is far more complex than you give it credit for, there are nationalist, socioeconomic and racial dimensions to it. That you reduce it to peasants/Nilfgaard hints to me that you either haven't really played much of the game or that the point has gone over your head.

Curious if one that has not played the prior games or read the books would feel as displaced as this poster.

Skyrim was my first TES game, but did not have to know the lore to become involved with the character and world. DAI had The Keep for backstory, but seemed to require much past experience to play the Inq. Wonder if the complexity mentioned of Geralt is a good thing, if one is required to go beyond the scope of TW3 to gain it.

[Rawgrim]

TES games skips 100 years or more ahead with each title, so a player can start off fresh at any title.

 

The witcher is different. It is 3 parts of a more immediate story. Like LOTR, maybe. The Witcher 3 being Return of the King.

[correctamundo]

Curious if one that has not played the prior games or read the books would feel as displaced as this poster.

Skyrim was my first TES game, but did not have to know the lore to become involved with the character and world. DAI had The Keep for backstory, but seemed to require much past experience to play the Inq. Wonder if the complexity mentioned of Geralt is a good thing, if one is required to go beyond the scope of TW3 to gain it.

 

Well like any series you will probably gain immersion by diving in all the lore, but you can of course play the game and enjoy anyway. At least I can. I just don't see that TW3 is superior to DAI yet. I have really enjoyed DAI though.

[yawnandshrug]

Well if you don´t contest the red templars and venatori you are basically giving the world to Cory. They could have used the war table more, like xcom or something like that but would probably be a little to much for a rpg.

 

Can you chop of the barons head? He seems to deserve it.

 

It is a little more than a village. There is just so much our hardware can take however. But the exalted plains is total war zone, crestwood and emprise full of unnatural weather situations, doomdark etc.

 

In a replay I will use the spacebar not in the first playthrough. Cut scenes are nice but I think TW3 could benefit with a little less. I read a post somewhere on BSN where the poster claimed that there were no cut-scenes in EDL. I could have sworn there were when encountering Imshael. But maybe that is true. Maybe my memory is at fault. In that case anyway a cut scene would be redundant. I am immersed enough as it is.

 

Generally I agree that it would be a plus if BW had tied what the venatori were looking for closer to the main-quest line but incitament to hunt them down and stop them and the red templars should not be needed more than their alliance to Cory.

 

I agree on the sublety by the way, at least make the hud optional. Will look in on that in TW3.

 

Dorian, I don't see how it would be realistic to sway him. But you can avoid the quest can you not? I have only done it once and I was very open and supportive to Dorian. It was a bit funny with all the rumours abound about Dorianand my male Inquisitor all the while my IQ was romantically involved with mlle Montilyet. ,-)

Sure you have to contest the templars and venetori but I'm saying that quests can be better designed to tie all the areas into a greater whole. Like the Baron's storyline which you have no reason to be involved in if it hadn't been tied to the main quest. So exalted plains could be tied to the winter palace to create a large overarching civil war narrative etc it's really a waste of opportunities when you don't do it.

 

No you can't chop his head off but you can call him scum, a waste of skin and kick the ever loving crap out of him. Does that make up for it?

 

That's the thing, the Witcher 3 proved that we do have the tech for it and that it can be done. Look at Novigrad, hundreds of individual buildings, thousands of dynamic npcs going out their lives (not simply standing there) and all around a pervasive sense of doom and religious hysteria and witch burning. Go to the witcher reddit and view some screenshots of the place if you don't believe me. You get concerned for your mage friend in city because the results of what could happen to her are all around you, it draws you in.

 

As for Dorian's quest, see my replies to Sasie above.

 

 

Curious if one that has not played the prior games or read the books would feel as displaced as this poster.

Skyrim was my first TES game, but did not have to know the lore to become involved with the character and world. DAI had The Keep for backstory, but seemed to require much past experience to play the Inq. Wonder if the complexity mentioned of Geralt is a good thing, if one is required to go beyond the scope of TW3 to gain it.

 Yes, I haven't read the books etc but the Witcher 3 takes great care in world building and within the space of the tutorial lets you know exactly what your place in the social strata is.

[Torgette]

Sure you have to contest the templars and venetori but I'm saying that quests can be better designed to tie all the areas into a greater whole. Like the Baron's storyline which you have no reason to be involved in if it hadn't been tied to the main quest. So exalted plains could be tied to the winter palace to create a large overarching civil war narrative etc it's really a waste of opportunities when you don't do it.

 

No you can't chop his head off but you can call him scum, a waste of skin and kick the ever loving crap out of him. Does that make up for it?

 

That's the thing, the Witcher 3 proved that we do have the tech for it and that it can be done. Look at Novigrad, hundreds of individual buildings, thousands of dynamic npcs going out their lives (not simply standing there) and all around a pervasive sense of doom and religious hysteria and witch burning. Go to the witcher reddit and view some screenshots of the place if you don't believe me. You get concerned for your mage friend in city because the results of what could happen to her are all around you, it draws you in.

 

As for Dorian's quest, see my replies to Sasie above.

 

 

 Yes, I haven't read the books etc but the Witcher 3 takes great care in world building and within the space of the tutorial lets you know exactly what your place in the social strata is.

 

I think you have to appreciate the amount of time and hours that went into TW3 regardless of whether you like the game or not, it's an amazing amount of stuff that's well made in that game. That said I do think what other developers should take away from TW3 isn't so much the quantity of stuff as it is the effect of stuff - the effect of npc's doing jobs, the effect of cutscenes for even minor side quests, the effect of actually showing a major city, the effect of showing what all the unimportant people think, etc. It would be unrealistic to expect everybody to match what CDPR did when they're even outmatching developers like rockstar, but the reasons behind what they did should be taken to heart for sure.

[correctamundo]

Sure you have to contest the templars and venetori but I'm saying that quests can be better designed to tie all the areas into a greater whole. Like the Baron's storyline which you have no reason to be involved in if it hadn't been tied to the main quest. So exalted plains could be tied to the winter palace to create a large overarching civil war narrative etc it's really a waste of opportunities when you don't do it.

 

No you can't chop his head off but you can call him scum, a waste of skin and kick the ever loving crap out of him. Does that make up for it?

 

That's the thing, the Witcher 3 proved that we do have the tech for it and that it can be done. Look at Novigrad, hundreds of individual buildings, thousands of dynamic npcs going out their lives (not simply standing there) and all around a pervasive sense of doom and religious hysteria and witch burning. Go to the witcher reddit and view some screenshots of the place if you don't believe me. You get concerned for your mage friend in city because the results of what could happen to her are all around you, it draws you in.

 

 

Basically agree on that ;-)

[Aren]

 

 

Another thing I think TW3 did exceptionally well was insert choice into almost every conversation in the game, and the consequences of those choices are felt throughout the playthrough, culminating at the end. When I say “end”, I should say “endings”, because there are quite a variety of different outcomes, many of which will catch you by surprise. DAO had variety (although those endings were based on far less choices than you have in TW3), but sadly since then, the concept of different endings was kinda lost. I’d love to see it brought back for the next game.  

 

 

The concept of differents endings is more valuable if these endings have consequences and are addressed somehow.

Regarding the DAO ending i haven't anything to say,because i honestly believe that BW developers have put a great efforts to address these variety with different outcomes in this Title,Witcher games are not so good when it comes to save import so yes i greatly appreciate DA for it's keep,,at least our old character decisions are still there somehow even if many of them are not addressed yet.

Aside from Leliana, DA team has put a great effort to avoid retcon over the players decisions.

[Medhia_Nox]

I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum - you get to put numbers into stats and change your gear - and that's an RPG for some folks.  

 

I'm not interested on Geralts stance on anything at all - telling me who Geralt is, what Geralt thinks and how Geralt would act is what makes this not an RPG to me (I stress "to me").

 

I'll take weaker mechanics and stronger agency over "more mechanics" and less agency any day. 

 

Not at all saying that DA:I was the pinnacle of agency... just that, having played the Witcher 2, agency is at a minimum.  And from what's been described to me - Witcher 3 is more of the same.  

Deciding whether one bad guy or another gets to do whatever isn't "roleplaying" to me.  I could just as easily make those choices in the DA Keep.  

 

Bioware - you do you and we'll be fine.

[Br3admax]

The Inquisitor is one of the weakest characters I've ever seen, I say one of because the Warden is even worse, so BioWare doing BioWare definitely isn't fine for anyone.Especially when this is the result. I'd rather play an actual character than be a plot device, which is what BioWare protagonists have been reduced to. Even Shepard in all their idiocy is one of the strongest characters BioWare has ever produced. That's not a good thing. And putting in stats at level up won't make up for the hours of boring dialogue that needs to be sat through. 

[Elhanan]

The Inquisitor is one of the weakest characters I've ever seen, I say one of because the Warden is even worse, so BioWare doing BioWare definitely isn't fine for anyone.Especially when this is the result. I'd rather play an actual character than be a plot device, which is what BioWare protagonists have been reduced to. Even Shepard in all their idiocy is one of the strongest characters BioWare has ever produced. That's not a good thing. And putting in stats at level up won't make up for the hours of boring dialogue that needs to be sat through.

Anyone? Sorry, but I shall choose for myself, and I prefer Bioware titles to most. But thanks for your opinion.

[Rawgrim]

 

The concept of differents endings is more valuable if these endings have consequences and are addressed somehow.

Regarding the DAO ending i haven't anything to say,because i honestly believe that BW developers have put a great efforts to address these variety with different outcomes in this Title,Witcher games are not so good when it comes to save import so yes i greatly appreciate DA for it's keep,,at least our old character decisions are still there somehow even if many of them are not addressed yet.

Aside from Leliana, DA team has put a great effort to avoid retcon over the players decisions.

 

 

Cole's background, and his current state, is pretty much utterly dependant on Wynne, though. If she dies in DA:O, Cole is kind of a plot-hole. That means him showing up kind of retconned your desicion to kill her during you playthrough.

 

The same goes for Anders, I think. You can avoid recruiting him in Awakening, and have him never meet Justice in the first place. Or he can die during Awakening as well, without having met Justice. That there is one enormous retcon. It started a war.