15887 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreadstruck]

Stopped reading at 'almost perfect', as I still believe that DAO is a better game. While I have still enjoyed DA2 and DAI, the initial game was a more enjoyable experience. Thus, I believe there are some things I believe that could be done to improve DA4 such as Player controlled Attributes, more quickslots, unrestricted weapon proficiencies, combat from mounts, etc. And if TW3 has such designs, these could be researched to improve the future DA title.

What could be done to improve TW3: Pause functionality, tactical combat options, fewer cut-scenes, etc

 

Just a note: I was talking mostly about Inquisition, not DA in general. But alas.

 

And see? It wasn't that hard. Just needed someone to push you a bit into the helpful area.

 

DA:O to this day remains my favourite game from the franchise as well and I consider it the pinnacle of the DA experience (it's standing in my TOP4 next to The Witcher 3, New Vegas and Alpha Protocol).

 

If the next game would indeed take the best of DA:O and mix it up with TW3's strong points, it would definitely be something to look forward to. That is all.

[Elhanan]

See? It wasn't that hard. Just needed someone to push you a bit into the helpful area.
 
DA:O to this day remains my favourite game from the franchise as well and I consider it the pinnacle of the DA experience. If the next game would indeed take the best of DA:O and mix it up with TW3's strong points, it would definitely be something to look forward to. That is all.

Not quite all. This is another decent example of someone assuming something when the facts already were available to indicate otherwise.

I have been criticizing some changes in DAI before launch, and have stated crit about the game on these forums many times. No need to be pushed.

[MoonDrummer]

Then what is the point of your presence in this thread?

 

No offense intended dear sir,  but since all you do here is trying to somewhat convince us DA is already perfect, defending its shortcomings and downplaying anything remotely positive about the Witcher, you kinda have nothing to offer in the terms of feedback. Hell, I don't know if I'd be too far from truth to call you too biased to even offer *any* kind of feedback.

 

It's like the person who dislikes Soccer games, yet sticks around for years on the FIFA forums to remind everyone how much inferior it is to NHL and it's akin to the level on unhelpfullness of the rest of the rabble that comes here only to propose how much they hate The Witcher and nothing else.

(like that guy who came here just to announce he uninstalled the game. lol! reminds me of people on VGA videos who also need to announce they unsubscribe everytime they do so only for Fraser to roll his eyes.)

 

Frankly, it is starting to feel like some of you people are feeling kinda threatened that TW3 does well. So well that it makes even hardcore DA fans acknowledge that Bioware could learn a lot from it (and see or question DA:I's shortcomings in comparison).

 

From an objective point of view, a real fan, instead of fanboying the Bioware Defense Forces card would take up to the opportunity and help Bioware improve. I know I do. And I want the next Bioware game to be as good or hell, even better than TW3. But if I stay in my bubble pretending everything's perfect and ignoring what's going on in the rest of the gaming world - well, that's not gonna happen very soon eh?

 

Also, please don't take this as an personal attack or something. I may be preaching a bit but I am just wondering about your reasons to be here, since you'd be more than suited in a "Bioware appreciation thread" kind of thread, rather than a thread that talks about its problems.

I managed to like this comment despite you calling football soccer. That is an achievement on your part. 

[Dreadstruck]

Not quite all. This is another decent example of someone assuming something when the facts already were available to indicate otherwise.

I have been criticizing some changes in DAI before launch, and have stated crit about the game on these forums many times. No need to be pushed.

 

I don't follow you around or stalk your posts, friend. I am simply going by what you are presenting in this thread. Pretty much what you do when it comes to TW3.

[Zinho73]

No more odd than the posters that comment and complain about Bioware products here.

Although there are exceptions, most complains I see are from people that like the franchise, wanted to like the game, played it extensively in the hopes that it would get better and ended up disappointed.

 

The game actually gives a good first impression, but, to me at least, never evolved beyond the graphics and voice overs.

 

I played it a lot in the hopes that it would get better, but maybe it was just me.

[Dreadstruck]

I managed to like this comment despite you calling football soccer. That is an achievement on your part. 

 

Is the achievement part meant to be sarcastic or...?

[Torgette]

Is it just me or is movement in TW3 extremely janky? It feels a lot worse than 2 and makes me mad, what's up with that?

[Dreadstruck]

Although there are exceptions, most complains I see are from people that like the franchise, wanted to like the game, played it extensively in the hopes that it would get better and ended up disappointed.

 

The game actually gives a good first impression, but, to me at least, never evolved beyond the graphics and voice overs.

 

I played it a lot in the hopes that it would get better, but maybe it was just me.

 

I wouldn't say exactly dissapointed per se. I played Inquisition and I thought it was just ....ok. Not on the same level of Origins, but still passable (and quite enjoyable at times).

 

Only playing The Witcher 3 made me think what would happen if the game was realized with full potential and without EA's leash on their neck.

[Elhanan]

I don't follow you around or stalk your posts, friend. I am simply going by what you are presenting in this thread. Pretty much what you do when it comes to TW3.

Has nothing to do with stalking or knowing about my history; has more to do with the lack of research and assumptions made before posting an opinion. As mentioned, informed ones have greater merit.

[Spectre Impersonator]

Yeah so this is the other problem, if you want my opinion? Skyrim has plenty of issues when it comes to representing women. How many powerful women are there anyway? Every major leader, every major city, everything is run by men, and most organizations also. The only counter-examples I can think of are the Dark Brotherhood and maybe that one western city. There isn't a single opportunity (basically) outside of your followers or your PC itself to interact with females in a powerful sense.

 

All these simpletons are using very base logic, oh my god! A woman is shredded into pieces! Oh my god! A woman is beat up. Look, I saw a quest in the Witcher where one woman bashes another woman's head into a table, just because something is raw doesn't make it "misogynist." It's just violence, it just is, it's just reality (at times). In my experience, it's people who are actually more comfortable with issues of sexuality that tend to express these issues in a game (TW, GoT), the people who are afraid don't do anything and lob bombs at the ones that do in order to try push the spotlight away from them and their own disabilities in this respect.

 

And lets just pretend Ciri and Triss aren't infinitely more empowered and interesting than every female in Skyrim or DA combined because then we won't have to ignore the enormous gaps in logic or sense of treating all these other games as somehow better at all this than the one game that's actually pretty good at it.

 

Just because a game doesn't directly deal with the issue of females (or males) and their sexuality (i.e. see sexless universes like LOTR or Skyrim) doesn't mean the issue isn't there, 99% of the time it means they actually have a razor thin grasp on the issue and are simply dodging the issue (which is much worse, generally).

Well said. I think there's a tendency to see naked female breasts and leap to the conclusion that a game is misogynistic, despite many feminists wanting the right to be publicly bare-chested, as men are.

 

There's really no right answer over sexualization equating to misogyny either, as many women will choose to sexualize themselves deliberately, including various characters in this game. Criticism of these choices as "sexist" ends up being a criticism of freedom to choose one's style or behavior.

[Dreadstruck]

Has nothing to do with stalking or knowing about my history; has more to do with the lack of research and assumptions made before posting an opinion. As mentioned, informed ones have greater merit.

 

Which is kinda why people are giving you a hard time for commenting on TW3 without playing it. For exactly same reasons.

 

I could also try to pass myself off as an (internet) expert on guns but I am pretty sure no one would take me seriously after hearing that I actually never held one in my hands  to back my claims. Nothing compares to the real experience in my opinion.

 

But I digress, I didn't come to this topic to give you a hard time, all I care about is improvement for Bioware. You are more than welcome to add your piece to the feedback anytime.

[Spectre Impersonator]

Out of curiosity, since one of the topics right now involves political correctness, how do you all think CDPR will handle those kinds of things in Cyberpunk 2077?

 

Their reasoning for it not really existing in the Witcher franchise is because it is in a medieval setting so it's them trying to match that, but Cyberpunk 2077 is the opposite end of the spectrum since it takes place in our future, so logically would be even moreso than we are now. 

No idea, but I can't wait!

[AlanC9]

Only playing The Witcher 3 made me think what would happen if the game was realized with full potential and without EA's leash on their neck.

Why would EA going away change Bio's financial realities?

[Dreadstruck]

Why would EA going away change Bio's financial realities?

 

Financial realities? I was mostly thinking of the creative process, pushing deadlines, forcing certain DLC policy and overall having a big say in how's the game done, what demographics should be aimed for etc.

 

Also, CD Projekt must have like half of the budget EA's giving them, and they still manage to pump out a pretty good game, 3 cinematic trailers, countless free DLCs, constant support and patches and upcoming 2 Expansions. And they don't have a publisher breathing down their neck, only publishers who are *actually* tasked with publishing (all around the world) and the effect is seen on the final product.

 

It's really not about how much finances you have, but how do you allocate them IMHO.

 

Maybe I am wrong and maybe EA is simply not *the* culprit here, but I am just trying to imagine what it would look like if Bio was making their games independently of anyone else like CD Projekt RED and managed to distribute the games themselves as well. Just some food for thought.

[Spectre Impersonator]

I personally love games that offer non-lethal ways to deal with enemies or at least have situations where you don't have to kill.

Creates more roleplaying opportunities. 

I was a huge fan of some of the Splinter Cell games for allowing a button that strictly did non-lethal takedowns and for little details like pulling bodies out of the wreckage of an airplane leading to asides where Sam Fisher would comment on morality. I remember once hiding an unconscious body in a shallow pool of water and failing the mission a minute or two later because the man had drowned. I was quite impressed by this bit of depth they added into the game.

 

For me, Chaos Theory was the pinnacle of that series and the games since haven't gotten to that level of storytelling. The lack of Michael Ironside in the most recent games (which I never played) probably doesn't help.

[Aren]

Watching this, right now,interesting

[Spectre Impersonator]

might have had something to do with the fact that she was playing him in order to use to A. Get the lamp then B. Clear Fyke Isle

I had the sense Keira was playing me from the start but it was cool because 1. I used her abilities to track the Wild Hunt through the tomb and fight golems and 2. yeah, she got naked. Me and Geralt like non-prudes.

[AlanC9]

Financial realities? I was mostly thinking of the creative process, pushing deadlines, forcing certain DLC policy and overall having a big say in how's the game done, what demographics should be aimed for etc.

Don't those have to do with financial realities? Except for creative process, and we don't know of EA interfering with that.
 

Also, CD Projekt must have like half of the budget EA's giving them, and they still manage to pump out a pretty good game, 3 cinematic trailers, countless free DLCs, constant support and patches and upcoming 2 Expansions. And they don't have a publisher breathing down their neck, only publishers who are *actually* tasked with publishing (all around the world) and the effect is seen on the final product.

Half the budget, yep, but paying about 1/3 of the salaries, according to such data as have. It's not like Bio is just setting fire to EA's money when they get it.

But I agree that Bio and EA could learn from the free DLC scam. Plan to finish some parts of the game after it ships. You ease your deadline pressures and earn some easy goodwill.
 

It's really not about how much finances you have, but how do you allocate them IMHO.

Sure. Where has Bio money been allocated that shouldn't have had money? You could cut MP, but then the MP revenue goes away. I don't see how Bio ends up ahead. The whole point of doing MP is a cheap cash-grab, isn't it? No grab, no cash. So... what else?
 

Maybe I am wrong and maybe EA is simply not *the* culprit here, but I am just trying to imagine what it would look like if Bio was making their games independently of anyone else like CD Projekt RED and managed to distribute the games themselves as well. Just some food for thought.

That's just it. An independent Bio, with the same cost structure as the real Bio has, would be just as risk-averse as the real Bio, if not more so. They'd have independence but they wouldn't have security, since any failed game would blow them up. Why do you think Bio sold out in the first place?

Edit: Look, I get that it's comforting to think that Bio would makes stuff you'd like better if only those meanies at EA weren't forcing them to turn profits. But as the old Broadway saying goes, there's a reason it's called show business. Can you show me an alternative plan for DAI that would have been as profitable or more profitable than the one we got?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Frankly, it is starting to feel like some of you people are feeling kinda threatened that TW3 does well. So well that it makes even hardcore DA fans acknowledge that Bioware could learn a lot from it (and see or question DA:I's shortcomings in comparison).

From an objective point of view, a real fan, instead of fanboying the Bioware Defense Forces card would take up to the opportunity and help Bioware improve. I know I do. And I want the next Bioware game to be as good or hell, even better than TW3. But if I stay in my bubble pretending everything's perfect and ignoring what's going on in the rest of the gaming world - well, that's not gonna happen very soon eh?

Also, please don't take this as an personal attack or something. I may be preaching a bit but I am just wondering about your reasons to be here, since you'd be more than suited in a "Bioware appreciation thread" kind of thread, rather than a thread that talks about its problems.

There are some aspects of TW3 I very much want BioWare not to copy. The less well TW3 does, the less likely they are to copy them.

Specifically, I'm talking about the increased use of cutscenes, the fixed protagonist, and the action combat.

And the things I would really like BioWare to do differently, I don't see anyone saying that TW3 does them particularly well (UI, mappable controls, mechanical symmetry).

[Dreadstruck]

Don't those have to do with financial realities? Except for creative process, and we don't know of EA interfering with that.

 

We don't. I am willing to give them the benefit of a doubt but given their track record it's not that far fetched. How many companies they bought and subsequently went defunct after some rather questionable design choices under them? (Mythic, Pandemic, Westwood etc.). Granted, it's probably not going to happen to Bio any time soon but I would definitely hate it if it would.

 

Half the budget, yep, but paying about 1/3 of the salaries, according to such data as have. It's not like Bio is just setting fire to EA's money when they get it.

But I agree that Bio and EA could learn from the free DLC scam. Plan to finish some parts of the game after it ships. You ease your deadline pressures and earn some easy goodwill.

Free DLC "scam"? Do you even know what scam means? I am pretty sure an alternative costume for Yennefer that has to be set up from the options does not really count as a fraudulent business scheme, nor content that was made *after* the development (and which was announced years ago before the release). A scam would be if I had to actually pay for it. Like that stupid Horse Armor DLC.
 

Sure. Where has Bio money been allocated that shouldn't have had money? You could cut MP, but then the MP revenue goes away. I don't see how Bio ends up ahead. The whole point of doing MP is a cheap cash-grab, isn't it? No grab, no cash. So... what else?

 

A MP would by my choice. I really didn't care for the MP, I found it extremely bland and boring. If I want to play a gear treadmill I'll go to an MMO that's considered a theme park with lots to do. DA:I MP is more like paying to get into Disney World but only getting to access the carousel. I get what they're trying to do, I just don't feel it translates well to a game meant for players to spend hours upon hours investing in a character and lore. It feels incredibly tacked on.

 

Also, where would I put the money ... Perhaps better designed side quests that are not 90% of the fetch kind? More voice acting content like choices or reactions to your race? Weapons not restricted to classes? More variety in the art department (like more hairstyles, possibility to change your bodytype, multiple animations depending on your combat class etc. etc.), better mounts and perhaps even a combat from them, a  Toolset or an editor of some kind?
 

That's just it. An independent Bio, with the same cost structure as the real Bio has, would be just as risk-averse as the real Bio, if not more so. They'd have independence but they wouldn't have security, since any failed game would blow them up. Why do you think Bio sold out in the first place?

Edit: Look, I get that it's comforting to think that Bio would makes stuff you'd like better if only those meanies at EA weren't forcing them to turn profits. But as the old Broadway saying goes, there's a reason it's called show business. Can you show me an alternative plan for DAI that would have been as profitable or more profitable than the one we got?

Where did I ever said that I am againts them gaining profits? Who are you, some employee over at Bio who is afraid that he wouldn't be able to feed his family if the EA overlords had left him?

 

I didn't think DA:I was bad, but it could have been much better. If you think it was so impossible simply because your only justification is "money bruh" then whatever, man.

 

As I said, because CD Projekt knows how to pull off an independent project, I was kinda wondering what it would look like if Bioware was in their shoes. They were never really independent. They were subsequently below Interplay, Lucasarts and Microsoft when they released their greatest games before EA.

 

And yes I am AWARE one game has to rely on multiple protagonist roles/voice acting talents, but given how the games turned out, one would think that Inquisition would smash TW3 all around on all fronts considering quality with that kind of backing behind them. Unfortunately, given the feedback in this thread it's more of a evidence to the contrary.

 

But in their defense, they have a pretty good live chat support. Right.

[Dreadstruck]

There are some aspects of TW3 I very much want BioWare not to copy. The less well TW3 does, the less likely they are to copy them.

Specifically, I'm talking about the increased use of cutscenes, the fixed protagonist, and the action combat.

And the things I would really like BioWare to do differently, I don't see anyone saying that TW3 does them particularly well (UI, mappable controls, mechanical symmetry).

 

Yes, you've said so numerous times before. I don't think you've actually ever mentioned something else other than these three. We all know you dislike the combat and don't want it in DA. And I agree. DA is fundamentally different to make use of Witcher's more action-oriented sword fight.

 

But TW3 in my opinion still does side quest (both cinematic or consequences aspect), visual presentation and overall fidelity, consistency, reactivity of the open world which feels alive much, much better than Bioware (more akin to RDR than Skyrim).

 

I wouldn't mind if Bio took a stab at that, and brought something like that to the table in the next title.

 

Also, the mappable controls are already ajdustable since the newest patch. Meanwhile, Bioware still struggles to fix the boot texture /tan pants glitch, varying degrees of performance on powerful PCs and the scars issue, which are seen only with shaders set on High or Ultra (didn't happen pre-patch and and there are even freaking guides on how to downgrade from the newest patches). So yeah, add the patching process from CD Projekt to that list as well.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yes, you've said so numerous times before. I don't think you've actually ever mentioned something else other than these three. We all know you dislike the combat and don't want it in DA. And I agree. DA is fundamentally different to make use of Witcher's more action-oriented sword fight.

But TW3 in my opinion still does side quest (both cinematic or consequences aspect), visual presentation and overall fidelity, consistency, reactivity of the open world which feels alive much, much better than Bioware (more akin to RDR than Skyrim).

I wouldn't mind if Bio took a stab at that, and brought something like that to the table in the next title.

Also, the mappable controls are already ajdustable since the newest patch.

I thought the patch still didn't let you remap WASD.

On the earlier point, Skyrim did really well, and the BioWare made a mich more open world game. If TW3 does really well, who knows what they might copy from it.

[Eelectrica]

I thought the patch still didn't let you remap WASD.

On the earlier point, Skyrim did really well, and the BioWare made a mich more open world game. If TW3 does really well, who knows what they might copy from it.

After spending so much time getting the tac cam working and adding the pause & plan mechanic it's hard to see BW removing them.
Switching back to a fixed protagonist is a worry though.

[Dreadstruck]

I thought the patch still didn't let you remap WASD.

Well, it does for me at least.

I just remapped the entire WSAD moveset to IJKL (which were locked before, but with a new patch it can be unlocked and also remapped to something else).

 

Hell, even the basic arrows are working. Can post a pic if you want as well.

 

Which brings me to question this JPR guys's claims of the controls being hardcoded. But if he uninstalled the game because of it, then joke's on him I guess.

[TheOgre]

Is it just me or is movement in TW3 extremely janky? It feels a lot worse than 2 and makes me mad, what's up with that?

 

it isn't just you honestly but I didn't notice it until you posted. Moreso in combat but I like the combat style myself. If I'm going to have fast combat, I like it.

 

I slightly noticed it out of combat.