15862 réponses à ce sujet

[VelvetV]

I  just like the identity that is equally willing to try and ignore everyone's opinions.

 

You say so because you assume that your opinions won't be ignored and the end product will be to your liking

[Seraphim24]

You say so because you assume that your opinions won't be ignored and the end product will be to your liking

 

Well no I wouldn't mind being overwhelmed in a video game by someone really bada** in this respect.

 

In general though if someone has a really, really strong opinion independent of societal standards etcI definitely enjoy the experience of trying to meet them in a field. When DA doesn't try so hard the games not even being played.

[KBomb]

I discovered tonight that all video games need a little Johnny. Whoever said CDPR wrote boring characters obviously hasn't met Johnny. He is so ugly he is cute and freaking hilarious. He is also adorable. 10/10

[FiveThreeTen]

Make the world a lot more uniform. Make the spells, the combat, the gameplay a lot more uniform. Before DAI, there was little to no green magic in the game. Now there are tons of it. Before DAI, mages are powerful and even from a gameplay stance you can see why you need Templars. In DAI, it appears mages a puny weaklings compared to their DAO & DA2 counterparts and instead we should have Anti-Archers. This is going to be fascinating if we take things North where magic is supposedly more prevalent and more developed. Wonder how being a Tevinter mage would feel like with such a puny system ? I guess a lot like Dorian where you will have low mana regeneration and forget most of the spells you learn except 8 of them.

That's all I got for now. 

I really don't understand that point.

For one, comparing TW combat to DA is kind of moot. One is an heavily action based RPG with a single protagonist to control, and the other is a party based RPG with 3 distinct classes.

Secondely, lore/gameplay segregation has always been a thing since DAO. Is it realistic that a Rogue could carry hundreds of grenades on them?

Every class can be overpowered with the right build. Berzeker/Reaver could kill things more quickly in DA2 than mages. Rogues in DAO and DA2 dealt more raw damage than any other class.

I played all 3 classes on NM (well, I actually finished 2 playthroughs but played enough of the other to form an opinion) in Inquisition and frankly, all were pretty powerful. Mages remain incredibly useful for crowd control and elemental based damage.

And I don't see how people having fun obliterating Dragons with their Rogue somehow ruins the setting.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well, sure. I agree totally with you on that, as I repeatedly said. I just think that "fetch quests" are the equivalent of that random treasure map stuff. I absolutely think TW3 found a much better way of adding in filler content for the open world without making their quests feel like they're poor - but a lot of that IMO flows from the fact that they also have good and clever (and unique!) quest design, not just because they have a few cutscenes with at, most, 2 dialogue options per conversation tree.

I totally agree and believe this is exactly the point... CDPR realized every single piece of content in a wide open world couldn't be top-tier quality. So instead of dividing their efforts equally amongst all side content, they instead had "busywork" content that had no NPC interaction, while having fully fleshed out side quest content in key areas. Bioware, on the other hand, spread the entire word budget and quality efforts across all side content evenly, such that aside from the truly story-sparse quests like the astrariums, all quests involved a static NPC quest giver with no dialogue deviation or development.

When people point at DA:O and say "look, DA:O had fetch quests like the Mage's Collective - it's the same thing with DA:I," this same issue is in play. It's not the presence of such "filler content" that is the problem, but the fact that there is variety in the quality - you had the Mage's Collective quests right alongside the Ostagar prisoner right alongside The Topsider's Pommel right alongside Gaxkang. All very different quests and all with varying levels of detail, content and reward for the player. DA:I, on the other hand, handles nearly every bit of side quest practically the same - find NPC or codex entry, complete task, return for reward... it all has the same flavor, the same... sameness.

You never get the feeling that you could try something new or do something with a different result - it was linear and straight shot for everything. Which gives the impression to some players that they are just doing the same type of task over and over again.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I discovered tonight that all video games need a little Johnny. Whoever said CDPR wrote boring characters obviously hasn't met Johnny. He is so ugly he is cute and freaking hilarious. He is also adorable. 10/10

 

LOL, Johnny is awesome. Godlings in general are awesome. You will meet another one in Novigrad. 

 

Thing is Godlings are in a sense, ugly mischievous human children and Bioware don't have a track record of doing kids well at all.

[Shechinah]

*snip*

 

I can agree with most of it though I feel I should note that when some people, myself included, mention that DA:O has fetch quests that match those in DA:I it is for the most part in response to people claiming that there are no such fetch quests in DA:O when there is. It may not be in the same amount but they still exist. It's the same when some people claim DA:O had none of the "colorful" combat DA:I has when it did before and was something that bothered more than a few people. It is not as much an opinion on whether or not the quests are good but to remind people that some of the things they criticise DA:I for introducing has been a part of the franchise for better or worse since DA:O.
 

[Fast Jimmy]

The static NPCs in Skyhold don't bother me in the slightest. If they moved around, they'd be harder to navigate through.

The smaller scope of Val Royeaux I also like, because I don’t enjoy urban adventures, so I'm happy to be able to spend less time there.

The multiple VOs were vital to my enjoyment of the game. The multiple races were similarly vital. I wouldn't even consider giving either of those up.

The Tac Cam issues are grossly overblown.

I'll agree that the loss of environmental reactivity and the multiple keep system is unfortunate, but that doesn't diminish what the game actually is. The game could possibly have been better, yes, but even as it is it is brilliant.

The UI is bad, but BioWare hasn't made a good PC UI since NWN, more than a dozen years ago.

But I think you skimmed over the part about NPCs that I feel took the biggest hit (granted, I could have done a better job shining a light on it in my response) - their blandness and linear interactions for anyone not involved in the core plot. Nearly all side quests, dialogue and interactions fall flat with NPCs. Bioware went through a lot of effort to make an open world with large areas, but then may as well have had cardboard cutouts inhabit it. The lack of substance can be found everywhere, with a pretty veneer being pretty much the only thing to distract from the one-dimensional reality of 95% of the game.

One could also argue this seeped over to encounter design due to trying to make combat be all things to all people, to leveling by trying to offer class options while making progression simple or to equipment by trying to have randomized loot while also making unique items, but I think it is best crystallized in the NPCs. There is a distinct lack of craft and care such that you can tell just be the dialogue and its presentation if the character is important to the plot at all in a way that may as well have a big, flashing arrow pointing down at them when the player talks to them.

That is what I mean when I say the ambitious nature of all Bioware's endeavors takes it's toll on the game's quality.

[Fast Jimmy]

I can agree with most of it though I feel I should note that when some people, myself included, mention that DA:O has fetch quests that match those in DA:I it is for the most part in response to people claiming that there are no such fetch quests in DA:O when there is. It may not be in the same amount but they still exist. It's the same when some people claim DA:O had none of the "colorful" combat DA:I has when it did before and was something that bothered more than a few people. It is not as much an opinion on whether or not the quests are good but to remind people that some of the things they criticise DA:I for introducing has been a part of the franchise for better or worse since DA:O.

No argument - anyone saying DA:O didn't have fetch quests was fooling themselves.

That being said, even many of the quests that were obviously fetch in DA:O still had some great character to them. Dagna, for instance, is a simple example of "talk to NPC, go to destination, return back, end quest," but it was done with such an interesting premise and with such great delivery that not only did it not feel like a fetch quest, but it was followed up on in the Epilogue slide in the game's ending and was a fan-favorite character that sound up returning for a future game.

To me, presentation and delivery are what really set content above filler to the point where you enjoy it as much (or possibly even more) than content that is part of the main quest itself.

[Shechinah]

No argument - anyone saying DA:O didn't have fetch quests was fooling themselves.

That being said, even many of the quests that were obviously fetch in DA:O still had some great character to them. Dagna, for instance, is a simple example of "talk to NPC, go to destination, return back, end quest," but it was done with such an interesting premise and with such great delivery that not only did it not feel like a fetch quest, but it was followed up on in the Epilogue slide in the game's ending and was a fan-favorite character that sound up returning for a future game.

To me, presentation and delivery are what really set content above filler to the point where you enjoy it as much (or possibly even more) than content that is part of the main quest itself.

There is a quest in KOTOR where a woman on Tatooine asks you to buy an animal trophy from her because she does not have the license to sell it to an on-planet buyer but needs whatever money she can get from it so her and her children can survive after husband's death. While there is a lot of ways this can end, the primary line of the quest is based on talking. You can talk to her and buy it then and there or you can convince her to let you sell it for her with a few variables in that you can basically steal it from her by never fufilling your end of the deal. You can talk to a Czerka employee to buy a license so you can sell it to a trophy-interested lodge keeper.

 

The main point of it is that it is based entirely on talking and potentially running back and forth but it does not feel dull because of its emotional content and RP-oppertunities to establish your character. You can even give her more money than it was actually worth if you sell it to the lodge keeper and she never learns that those 200 additional credits came out of your own pocket.

 

It was very much the writing, the character establishing variables and voice acting that made the difference since the characters have no actual facial expression and have one body language to express distress or fear with. In addition, it also needed no special cutscene movement since since it was basically, to my understanding, "framing" the character speaking without making a cutscene around it. I cannot quite remember what that is called. Point being that I think it is possibly to make minor quests with variables and cutscenes without them being financially-draining though it should be noted, I'm no expert on this so it is just my no-knowledge theory.

 

TL:DR; Granted, not everyone would like cutscenes where the NPCS show basically no facial expressions but I think it would be a reasonable compromise between cutscenes and close-up as well as relying on voice acting to make up the additional difference of having little-to-no NPC facial expressions.  

[Fast Jimmy]

There is a quest in KOTOR where a woman on Tatooine asks you to buy an animal trophy from her because she does not have the license to sell it to an on-planet buyer but needs whatever money she can get from it so her and her children can survive after husband's death. While there is a lot of ways this can end, the primary line of the quest is based on talking. You can talk to her and buy it then and there or you can convince her to let you sell it for her with a few variables in that you can basically steal it from her by never fufilling your end of the deal. You can talk to a Czerka employee to buy a license so you can sell it to a trophy-interested lodge keeper.

The main point of it is that it is based entirely on talking and potentially running back and forth but it does not feel dull because of its emotional content and RP-oppertunities to establish your character. You can even give her more money than it was actually worth if you sell it to the lodge keeper and she never learns that those 200 additional credits came out of your own pocket.

It was very much the writing, the character establishing variables and voice acting that made the difference since the characters have no actual facial expression and have one body language to express distress or fear with. In addition, it also needed no special cutscene movement since since it was basically, to my understanding, "framing" the character speaking without making a cutscene around it. I cannot quite remember what that is called. Point being that I think it is possibly to make minor quests with variables and cutscenes without them being financially-draining though it should be noted, I'm no expert on this so it is just my no-knowledge theory.

TL:DR; Granted, not everyone would like cutscenes where the NPCS show basically no facial expressions but I think it would be a reasonable compromise between cutscenes and close-up as well as relying on voice acting to make up the additional difference of having little-to-no NPC facial expressions.

Agreed.


Your example reminds me of the lyrics smuggling quest in DA:O, actually. A shady Carta thug comes out of the alley and asks if you want to make some money. You can say no, or you can say yes... and even if you say yes, if you appear too "goody two shoes," you can't do the quest anyway. Then you get the lyrium. Which is an actual item that you could actually sell (for next to nothing, so it's not a smart move, but it is an option). Then you take it to be "buyer" in the Mage Tower, who you can potentially blackmail and squeeze for more money or a discount. Then you can go back to the Carta thug and collect your reward or threaten him for more money, resulting in payment or potentially a fight with the thugs.

So many ways for the quest to play out, so many ways your character can twist the events to their advantage or role-playing personality. And, again, a simple fetch quest given by a random NPC.



I don't think cutscenes are crucial for any of this, btw. Heck, I would have been glad if they stuck with a silent PC. But the lack of choice and linear, cookie-cutter nature of the vast majority of content if what drags a lot of the experience of DA:I down, in my opinion. And I think Bioware would be wise to take note of that (although who knows... with the way Bioware works, they may likely WAY overcompensate and make the next game a 20 hour affair that plays like a TellTale game with full cinematic content and focus on story-sensitive choices).

[Zinho73]

I can agree with most of it though I feel I should note that when some people, myself included, mention that DA:O has fetch quests that match those in DA:I it is for the most part in response to people claiming that there are no such fetch quests in DA:O when there is. It may not be in the same amount but they still exist. It's the same when some people claim DA:O had none of the "colorful" combat DA:I has when it did before and was something that bothered more than a few people. It is not as much an opinion on whether or not the quests are good but to remind people that some of the things they criticise DA:I for introducing has been a part of the franchise for better or worse since DA:O.
 

It is all about execution.

Some little quests have unexpected consequences, some is just to get a treasure (but the treasure is good and somewhat memorable), some have just a bit more of dialogue and sound much more interesting than it should, some just add a bit more experience than it should and feel rewarding even if it is just delivering something, some branch out and reveal themselves to be not so little.

In the Witcher 3 and in DAO, most quests feel like they are worth your time, they are more varied in presentation and reward and, very important, most of them are quite appropriate for the character you are rolepleying (not all, of course, and that ended up being part of the variety).

 

I kept playing DAI expecting more from the game, but the "more" never happened, the main plot kind of concluded, the side quests were dull and repetitive. Some character quests were very good, though.

 

On paper, TW3 side quests are quite similar, but the execution is way more interesting.

[Rawgrim]

It is all about execution.

Some little quests have unexpected consequences, some is just to get a treasure (but the treasure is good and somewhat memorable), some have just a bit more of dialogue and sound much more interesting than it should, some just add a bit more experience than it should and feel rewarding even if it is just delivering something, some branch out and reveal themselves to be not so little.

In the Witcher 3 and in DAO, most quests feel like they are worth your time, they are more varied in presentation and reward and, very important, most of them are quite appropriate for the character you are rolepleying (not all, of course, and that ended up being part of the variety).

 

I kept playing DAI expecting more from the game, but the "more" never happened, the main plot kind of concluded, the side quests were dull and repetitive. Some character quests were very good, though.

 

On paper, TW3 side quests are quite similar, but the execution is way more interesting.

 

Spot on. Its like a meal, really. The DA:I quests are bare bones. The quests in DA:O and TW3 are spicy meat.

[Shechinah]

Since it seems the problem lies in making cost-efficent cutscenes, I would like the compromise that is in how KOTOR handles it if would be financially-solid since I think it would allow them to make variable quests in a way that could also help solve some people's issue with the lack of quest cutscenes. It could possibly leave the important cutscenes that require characters to move or interact with the enviroment or the player intact while maintaining the illusion of a cutscene for NPCs.     

 

Again, this is me speculating because I think this is more the root of the problem since they can and have made great quests in Inquisition and just need to find a way to make it possible to make them cost-efficent.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But I think you skimmed over the part about NPCs that I feel took the biggest hit (granted, I could have done a better job shining a light on it in my response) - their blandness and linear interactions for anyone not involved in the core plot. Nearly all side quests, dialogue and interactions fall flat with NPCs. Bioware went through a lot of effort to make an open world with large areas, but then may as well have had cardboard cutouts inhabit it. The lack of substance can be found everywhere, with a pretty veneer being pretty much the only thing to distract from the one-dimensional reality of 95% of the game.

I'll agree that I can't think of any NPCs whose interactions were particularly memorable (nothing to match the greedy merchant in Lothering, who was especially well done), but then I think that was a short list in DAO as well - and I don't recall any in DA2, either. NPCs are not generally interesting, to me. I like characters I get to play. Characters I don’t may as well not exist. This was my criticism of Mass Effect - all of the characters felt like NPCs to me (even Shepard), so they may as well have been cardboard cutouts.

And now that I think about it, the reason I remember the Lothering merchant so fondly is not because of his personality, but because of the roleplaying opportunities he provided me. I like First Enchanter Irving for the same reason. But in both cases, I think the roleplaying freedom I was offered in those NPC interactions stemmed primarily from having a silent protagonist. So that they didn't arise in DA2 or DAI isn't surprising, and to me has nothing to do with the scope of the game.

I guess I just don't find NPCs interesting for their own sake. Take the tavern in Redcliffe in DAO. There were a bunch of conversations to be had in there, and I barely remember them, because thw choices they offered were not interesting to me. When the Keep asked me how I handled Bella, for example, I had no idea who she was.

One could also argue this seeped over to encounter design due to trying to make combat be all things to all people, to leveling by trying to offer class options while making progression simple or to equipment by trying to have randomized loot while also making unique items, but I think it is best crystallized in the NPCs.

Chess is a fairly simple game. The rules that govern each piece are easy to learn. But they key to playing chess well is using those pieces in combination attack, and that's much harder to learn.

I think DAI works similarly. The progression for any given character (or class) is fairly straightforward. It's easy to learn what the abilities do or how the prerequisites work. The complexity arises from the interaction between abilities and passives across characters. When you choose an ability or passive, it's greatest impact may not be on the effectiveness of that character, but of another.

This would be even more interesting if the game were more challenging (I just killed the end boss using basically 2 abilities), but even without the need to learn this the opportunity to do so still exists.

[Zinho73]

Since it seems the problem lies in making cost-efficent cutscenes, I would like the compromise that is in how KOTOR handles it if would be financially-solid since I think it would allow them to make variable quests in a way that could also help solve some people's issue with the lack of quest cutscenes. It could possibly leave the important cutscenes that require characters to move or interact with the enviroment or the player intact while maintaining the illusion of a cutscene for NPCs.     

 

Again, this is me speculating because I think this is more the root of the problem since they can and have made great quests in Inquisition and just need to find a way to make it possible to make them cost-efficent.

I do think it is a matter of cost, but a different one.

 

My guess it is more associated with overall development time and bad management.

 

The migration to the new engine made them lose a lot of time with mundane things like adding quadrupeds and jump to the game. They also built a giant world with no idea on how to populate it.

 

DAI could easily be a smaller, more focused game with still some 60, 70 hours and lots of replayability or they could have produced an intermediary game with the same old engine focused only on story, gameplay and art assets, with lots of content, like a 200- hour plus involving RPG (while cooking DAI a bit more). Or they could give it another year of just polishing (like CD Project did).

 

Of course, in a game of this is scope, you must finish at some point and there will always be space for more polish, but as it is,  a lot of things were very unfinished in DAI, like side quest design, tactical combat implementation, UI and even the game engine itself was very poorly optimized.

 

I guess EA couldn't wait more given the time and money already spent on the game.

[Zinho73]

One thing that really worries me when comparing TW series and DA series is this:

 

The Witcher series is improving and the DA series is not.

 

TW3 is almost unanimously considered the best game in the series.

 

DAO is (not as unanimously, true)  is considered the best game in the series. And even if you think the subsequent games are the overall better ones, there are a lot of areas in which those games are clearly inferior products.

 

Most people loved DA2 because of its intimate (and fatalist) story and quick, flashier combat. But there is no denying the repeated assets and the rushed ending with very little player agency.

 

DAI is very loved, but the quest design is atrocious and the tactical combat (even if you like it - or do not bother) is inferior in every single way to DAO and DA2.

 

Also, TW 3 series seems to be  gaining new fans while maintaining the fans of the series around. It has not gone mainstream overnight (and it still isn't as popular as Bioware games), but TW3 is a very important RPG title.

 

DA decided to go more simple, more mainstream and Bioware is clearly losing some of his old fans (which is also happening in the Mass Effect series). How many threads you have seen with fans urging Bioware to go back to its roots. You have some of this in TW series, but not nearly as much;

 

Well, just food for thought.

[Shechinah]

According to people who were around before Origin's release, I believe, the fanbase being divided on the games is nothing new nor is Inquisition's style with it actually being what some old fans of Bioware consider closer to it's pre-Origin style from what I understand. Apparently this happened upon Origin's release. In addition, you may see it as mainstream while others may see it as returning to an old style.

[CronoDragoon]

DA decided to go more simple, more mainstream and Bioware is clearly losing some of his old fans (which is also happening in the Mass Effect series). How many threads you have seen with fans urging Bioware to go back to its roots. You have some of this in TW series, but not nearly as much;

 

Because BioWare is an old studio (compared to other game studios) and CDPR is not. Case in point: inb4 Sylvius explains how DA: I is a return to BioWare's roots a la Baldur's Gate 1.

 

BW games mean different things to different people. They've made some really different games over the years. TW3 is CDPR's 3rd game. Origins was BioWare's 10th.

 

You're right that the Witcher fanbase is less divided than Dragon Age's though (or Mass Effect's for that matter).

[Vandarr1]

I think TW3/Skyrim comparison is more of a discussion than TW3/DA:I.The more I play TW3(which is great)the more I see DA:I isn't the same type of game.DA is a great game but a different beast imo

[Hazegurl]

That is why I said "noble", not noble. He's not really noble as in being ideal. But a lot better than other characters. He believed in something good. Iorveth just killed out of spite.

 

He also has positive personal traits. Would Iorveth save Geralt's life if Geralt ran away from him and joined his enemy? Not for any rational reason, but just because! I'll go with "no".

 

And my absolute love for Roche was cemented when... too spoilery, so here it goes under spoiler tag:

Spoiler

when he chose to give Anais away to Radovid to avoid causing a civilian war in Temeria. That was "my" choice, so to speak, but the explanation and reasoning were his own. The guy actually gives a damn about people and their lives, he isn't just an obstinate patriot who wants to see a legal heiress on the throne and a country named Temeria on the map, no matter what it costs others. He even states outright that there's no warranty that Radovid ever places Anais on the Temerian throne and yet he was fine with it. Iorveth? Kills women and children out of anger at humans and only stops because Saskia is a dragon and he worships them. Whatever he is, a changed man or not, I find Roche shines too much in comparison. And even without comparison, he just sold me on his personal traits and care for people's lives in Temeria.

I agree, I even tried to argue against Roche making that decision but he convinced me in the end and so I went with what was essentially his choice.  Roche is one of my favorite characters. Iorveth is okay but siding with him was boring and one sided.  I never felt like he truly had my back like Roche.

[Drantwo]

One thing I absolutely love about TW3 is Gwent. It is so foolishly amazing!

[Seraphim24]

I totally agree and believe this is exactly the point... CDPR realized every single piece of content in a wide open world couldn't be top-tier quality. So instead of dividing their efforts equally amongst all side content, they instead had "busywork" content that had no NPC interaction, while having fully fleshed out side quest content in key areas. Bioware, on the other hand, spread the entire word budget and quality efforts across all side content evenly, such that aside from the truly story-sparse quests like the astrariums, all quests involved a static NPC quest giver with no dialogue deviation or development.

When people point at DA:O and say "look, DA:O had fetch quests like the Mage's Collective - it's the same thing with DA:I," this same issue is in play. It's not the presence of such "filler content" that is the problem, but the fact that there is variety in the quality - you had the Mage's Collective quests right alongside the Ostagar prisoner right alongside The Topsider's Pommel right alongside Gaxkang. All very different quests and all with varying levels of detail, content and reward for the player. DA:I, on the other hand, handles nearly every bit of side quest practically the same - find NPC or codex entry, complete task, return for reward... it all has the same flavor, the same... sameness.

You never get the feeling that you could try something new or do something with a different result - it was linear and straight shot for everything. Which gives the impression to some players that they are just doing the same type of task over and over again.

 

Mmm.... I think it's more that the depth and intrigue of the main quests in TW spill over into the side quests, whereas it's the opposite in DA some of the laconic aspects spill into the side quests.

 

I guess I just keep thinking of DA's issues as more structural, re-allocating resources and such seems like kind of a band-aid fix.

[Zinho73]

According to people who were around before Origin's release, I believe, the fanbase being divided on the games is nothing new nor is Inquisition's style with it actually being what some old fans of Bioware consider closer to it's pre-Origin style from what I understand. Apparently this happened upon Origin's release. In addition, you may see it as mainstream while others may see it as returning to an old style.

Old stile like KoTOR? Baldur's Gate?

DAI is nothing like Baldur's Gate, which was a pausable, isometric game, based on D&D rules. Or Am I missing something?

 

In any case, I am not talking about the developer, but the series.

It is of course natural to have some outcry when a developer stops producing a beloved series and starts another - even if it is a "spiritual successor"

[CronoDragoon]

Old stile like KoTOR? Baldur's Gate?

DAI is nothing like Baldur's Gate, which was a pausable, isometric game, based on D&D rules. Or Am I missing something?

 

The ruleset is different, but both games are RTwP and therefore functionally similar in terms of how battles proceed mechanically. Additionally, the game structure is very similar, with large, optional, light-on-cinematics-and-dialogue areas consisting of most of the gameplay.