949 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

I disagree that it takes the simplest possible route - what it does it simply tricks people into thinking that it's that way. 

 

How does it trick people?

[midnight tea]

Did you read the rest of my comment?

[Morroian]

The resurgence of a lost elven past? I guess I don't see that as carrying much depth in terms of theme or narrative.

[Hiemoth]

 

I disagree that it takes the simplest possible route - what it does it simply tricks people into thinking that it's that way. Mind you, I'm not saying that what they're doing is revolutionary or that there's an endless amount of depth found underneath the surface (if we chose to scratch it), but it's hard for me not to appreciate and enjoy the type of subtle subversion and nuance they've added to the tale. At worst, I could call it solid and that's aside from the fact that many elements of this tale aren't set in stone.

 

I mean, with everything that happens aside from fighting Cory as well as the slow, but inevitable resurgence of Thedas' lost past in form of ancient elven beings and whatnot, it's hard to accuse DAI of being just a simple story about good heroes defeating the Big Bad. On surface, yes - just like on surface it's a story all about Andrastian beliefs and Maker's chosen...

 

Corypheus should probably be better characterized, but at the same time I wonder how much it would take from his 'red herring' status... not in a sense that he wasn't a legit threat (he almost got mages, templars, Wardens, Tevinter supremacists and an army of demons led by ginormous Fear monster, ready to march and conquer) up until we've pulled all but last ace from his sleeves - I just can't help but to think of him as a flashy villain that was supposed to pull our attention from the - slowly, but steadily - real story and conflict unfolding in he background.

 

 

I struggled with how to answer to this quite a bit, not because I felt it was so outrageous, but rather because I could simultaneously compeltely understand the viewpoint and yet disagree with it.

 

I agree that there was a certain presence of the past and what was thought of it as opposed to what it was in the game, but while it to you seemed to come across as subtlety and leaving things vague, to me it felt not really committing to tell a story with that, instead of just leaving it there. It is similar to hope and faith, I could see both of them as themes in the game, but the game really hesitated to truly diving in to that for whatever reason. This is not to say that your interpretation is wrong, it is as valid as mine, but mine is what I walked away with. Does that sentence make any sense?

 

And the Cory thing is that he was never a red herring. He was supposed to legitimate threat with all those forces, but that story was never told. His forces never truly were represented as an actual threat with the Inquisitor steamrolling through any opposition with a smile on their face and while I can easily see how there is the story of this mythological god-like magister revealed to be an insecure man seeking his lost faith, but that story was never really told. It was left to the player to tell almost completely and that is not good storytelling to me.

 

I guess, thinking about it a lot over the last couple of days, for me a core example of the lack of real commitment in DAI are the companions. In both the previous DA games I felt that the companions and their stories tied really well in to the central themes of the story. DAO was, even if I felt it lacking ambition, a traditional heroes journey of combining forces against an overwhelming threat. The companion stories fitted this, with most characters trying to find their new place in the world through the story. While they were largely stereotypical characters, again my opinion, it fit the story as they were the kinds of characters usually belonging to a story like that. In DA2, major themes of the games dealt with the thin lines between commitment, obsession, devotion and fanaticism and with all the characters struggling with those themes. Thus their personal stories helped built up the themes of the story itself, reflecting those different sides of the question. For me, they succeeded, for others, they did not. But for DAI, I have real difficulties seeing how the companions and advisors helped to built the larger story themes, except for the obvious two companions.

[Majestic Jazz]

Ironic that you say that when you obviously miss the point completely. I'm sorry, but thinking CDPR have been incredibly hypocritical in their treatment of DLC isn't ''hating'' on them- it's calling out a practice I (and many others) dislike. They have shouted up and down that paid DLC is bad and anti-consumerist and that any DLC they would publish would be free. Now they ask people to pay for DLC, but attach the tag ''expansion'' so that it feels less like a complete 180. Cripes, the worst bit was when they had a press release about the ''expansion'' pass saying ''wait guys, don't buy it yet, wait for the game to be released!''... then put it up for release anyway a good 2 months before the game went live.

This is the kind of doublespeak that I detest, and CDPR has been indulging in it heavily, including in the downgrade debacle when they swore that the game wasn't downgraded and closed forum posts about it, even when it was obvious the game was. Now they just went ''well, In Development means In Development, don,t get sucked in'' like every single other developper ever does.

For reference, I'm currently enjoying the hell out of TW3, and if it keeps up the pace it will beat Inquisition in my books. But that doesn't mean I have to fawn over everything CDPR does and stop myself from criticising the bad actions they make PR and marketing wise, just because their games are good. Because that would be the definition of being a fanboy. And we wouldn't want that, would we?

 

1) Yes, CDPR did take a 180 on their policy on DLC. They said that developers should never resort to DLC and that everything should be available at launch. Now they are offering a $25 Season pass that offers two DLCs that add a total of 30 hours to the game. So if you want to attack them on that, then go ahead, throw tomatoes at CDPR. However, what cannot be ignored is that while CDPR might be taking this 180, at least they "seem" to be going all out with their story related DLC. I have always said that the three best DLCs ever were those created by Rockstar Games: Undead Nightmare, Ballad of Gay Tony, and Lost and the Damned. These weren't just small 2-3 hour DLCs that offered some tibits to the story, but actual expanions that were technically separate games within themselves. In fact, Rockstar released Ballad of Gay Tony and Lost and Damned together as a separate game from GTA4 called Episodes from Liberty City. I believe the total price was like $40 and totaled around 20-30 extra hours of gameplay. If CDPR can capture the same level of quality in their two DLC expansions then I believe that most of the anti-CDPR rhetoric regarding their DLC will be put to rest. I mean, haters are going to hate, but what can you expect?

 

2) Outside of DLC, CDPR DOES do a lot if things well with TW3 that either Bioware is weak on or Bioware could learn from. Again, hate on TW3 or CDPR all you want, but here are a list of things that TW3 gets right that not only DAI failed at, but the entire ME trilogy:

 

A: Live and vibrant cities/towns/hub locations. Unlike the towns in DAI where people just stand there like movie set props, people in TW3 actually go about and live their lives. During the day they walk the city, engage in chatter. At night all the shops close down and people go home. Go into someone's house at 3AM and you can even see them in their little beds sleeping and snooring. Then the next day comes and it starts all over again. It is almost a continuation of what Shenmue started back on the Dreamcast. 

 

B: Hair. Need I say more? TW3 isn't perfect with hair, but it is lightyears ahead of what DAI offered.

 

C: Sidequest. This is a big one. Essentially TW3 features fetch quest as well. The difference is that CDPR masked them in such a way where you don't "realize" you are technically doing a fetch quest. You think you are on some cool journey but really it is just a fetch quest. At lot of this has to do with the layers of storytelling that TW3's side mission has. Unlike DAI where you receive your mission and you go out and do the particular action to complete the mission, in TW3 you end up going to different locations talking to different people all in this one chain of events in the quest. The famous DAI widow elf who wants her husband's ring found would have been VERY different in TW3. While the quest would still have you finding the ring, you would be immersed in the emotion of the widow because of the cinematic cutscenes.

 

D: NPC body variance. One thing that always irked me in Bioware games is that all the NPCs have the same body type. In Dragon Age games it is somewhat different cause you have elves, humans, and dwarfs. But even then, all the humans looked as if they all weighed the same. At least in TW3 you see different styles of NPCs. You see old women hunched over walking really slow. You see little children running around, you see the heavyset NPC, you see the skinny NPC, you see the average build NPC. With Mass Effect and Dragon Age, you do not get that same variance in body types/movements.

 

 

 

I know everyone is going to disagree with what I just said which is to be expected considering where this post was made. I make a similar post in TW3's forums and everyone supports it, I make it here and everyone will disagree with it. So go ahead and disagree with what I said and pick it apart, I expect you to do that. 

 

In the end though, I am finally glad that TW3 is finally out. Now we can REALLY see just how good/bad of a game DAI was because it now has competition. DAI is no longer the sole current gen AAA WRPG game out. I even still wonder how DAI would have sold had TW3 game out fall 2014 like it was orginally supposed to. 

 

As some others hinted at, I still believe that DAI really got a free pass because #1 2014 was a slow year for gaming. #2 There wasn't any competition in the WRPG field when DAI came out so it was only natural that people glamoured over DAI because it was the first WRPG for the new consoles. 

 

So year, DAI is successful for Bioware and EA, but now that Witcher 3 is out, will people look back and still say that DAI was a game that deserved all it's initial praise? Or will people now compare the two games and be able to point out how TW3 did things sooooooo much better than DAI?

 

I mean, look at this thread. The general mood is that The Witcher 3 is a better game than Dragon Age: Inquisition. 

[blahblahblah]

1) Yes, CDPR did take a 180 on their policy on DLC. They said that developers should never resort to DLC and that everything should be available at launch. Now they are offering a $25 Season pass that offers two DLCs that add a total of 30 hours to the game. So if you want to attack them on that, then go ahead, throw tomatoes at CDPR. However, what cannot be ignored is that while CDPR might be taking this 180, at least they "seem" to be going all out with their story related DLC. I have always said that the three best DLCs ever were those created by Rockstar Games: Undead Nightmare, Ballad of Gay Tony, and Lost and the Damned. These weren't just small 2-3 hour DLCs that offered some tibits to the story, but actual expanions that were technically separate games within themselves. In fact, Rockstar released Ballad of Gay Tony and Lost and Damned together as a separate game from GTA4 called Episodes from Liberty City. I believe the total price was like $40 and totaled around 20-30 extra hours of gameplay. If CDPR can capture the same level of quality in their two DLC expansions then I believe that most of the anti-CDPR rhetoric regarding their DLC will be put to rest. I mean, haters are going to hate, but what can you expect?

 

2) Outside of DLC, CDPR DOES do a lot if things well with TW3 that either Bioware is weak on or Bioware could learn from. Again, hate on TW3 or CDPR all you want, but here are a list of things that TW3 gets right that not only DAI failed at, but the entire ME trilogy:

 

A: Live and vibrant cities/towns/hub locations. Unlike the towns in DAI where people just stand there like movie set props, people in TW3 actually go about and live their lives. During the day they walk the city, engage in chatter. At night all the shops close down and people go home. Go into someone's house at 3AM and you can even see them in their little beds sleeping and snooring. Then the next day comes and it starts all over again. It is almost a continuation of what Shenmue started back on the Dreamcast. 

 

B: Hair. Need I say more? TW3 isn't perfect with hair, but it is lightyears ahead of what DAI offered.

 

C: Sidequest. This is a big one. Essentially TW3 features fetch quest as well. The difference is that CDPR masked them in such a way where you don't "realize" you are technically doing a fetch quest. You think you are on some cool journey but really it is just a fetch quest. At lot of this has to do with the layers of storytelling that TW3's side mission has. Unlike DAI where you receive your mission and you go out and do the particular action to complete the mission, in TW3 you end up going to different locations talking to different people all in this one chain of events in the quest. The famous DAI widow elf who wants her husband's ring found would have been VERY different in TW3. While the quest would still have you finding the ring, you would be immersed in the emotion of the widow because of the cinematic cutscenes.

 

D: NPC body variance. One thing that always irked me in Bioware games is that all the NPCs have the same body type. In Dragon Age games it is somewhat different cause you have elves, humans, and dwarfs. But even then, all the humans looked as if they all weighed the same. At least in TW3 you see different styles of NPCs. You see old women hunched over walking really slow. You see little children running around, you see the heavyset NPC, you see the skinny NPC, you see the average build NPC. With Mass Effect and Dragon Age, you do not get that same variance in body types/movements.

 

 

 

I know everyone is going to disagree with what I just said which is to be expected considering where this post was made. I make a similar post in TW3's forums and everyone supports it, I make it here and everyone will disagree with it. So go ahead and disagree with what I said and pick it apart, I expect you to do that. 

 

In the end though, I am finally glad that TW3 is finally out. Now we can REALLY see just how good/bad of a game DAI was because it now has competition. DAI is no longer the sole current gen AAA WRPG game out. I even still wonder how DAI would have sold had TW3 game out fall 2014 like it was orginally supposed to. 

 

As some others hinted at, I still believe that DAI really got a free pass because #1 2014 was a slow year for gaming. #2 There wasn't any competition in the WRPG field when DAI came out so it was only natural that people glamoured over DAI because it was the first WRPG for the new consoles. 

 

So year, DAI is successful for Bioware and EA, but now that Witcher 3 is out, will people look back and still say that DAI was a game that deserved all it's initial praise? Or will people now compare the two games and be able to point out how TW3 did things sooooooo much better than DAI?

 

I mean, look at this thread. The general mood is that The Witcher 3 is a better game than Dragon Age: Inquisition. 

As long as CDPR promises a 10 to 20 hours of game content, most of their fans will ignore their hypocrisy. 

[Giantdeathrobot]

1) Yes, CDPR did take a 180 on their policy on DLC. They said that developers should never resort to DLC and that everything should be available at launch. Now they are offering a $25 Season pass that offers two DLCs that add a total of 30 hours to the game. So if you want to attack them on that, then go ahead, throw tomatoes at CDPR. However, what cannot be ignored is that while CDPR might be taking this 180, at least they "seem" to be going all out with their story related DLC. I have always said that the three best DLCs ever were those created by Rockstar Games: Undead Nightmare, Ballad of Gay Tony, and Lost and the Damned. These weren't just small 2-3 hour DLCs that offered some tibits to the story, but actual expanions that were technically separate games within themselves. In fact, Rockstar released Ballad of Gay Tony and Lost and Damned together as a separate game from GTA4 called Episodes from Liberty City. I believe the total price was like $40 and totaled around 20-30 extra hours of gameplay. If CDPR can capture the same level of quality in their two DLC expansions then I believe that most of the anti-CDPR rhetoric regarding their DLC will be put to rest. I mean, haters are going to hate, but what can you expect?
 
2) Outside of DLC, CDPR DOES do a lot if things well with TW3 that either Bioware is weak on or Bioware could learn from. Again, hate on TW3 or CDPR all you want, but here are a list of things that TW3 gets right that not only DAI failed at, but the entire ME trilogy:
 
A: Live and vibrant cities/towns/hub locations. Unlike the towns in DAI where people just stand there like movie set props, people in TW3 actually go about and live their lives. During the day they walk the city, engage in chatter. At night all the shops close down and people go home. Go into someone's house at 3AM and you can even see them in their little beds sleeping and snooring. Then the next day comes and it starts all over again. It is almost a continuation of what Shenmue started back on the Dreamcast. 
 
B: Hair. Need I say more? TW3 isn't perfect with hair, but it is lightyears ahead of what DAI offered.
 
C: Sidequest. This is a big one. Essentially TW3 features fetch quest as well. The difference is that CDPR masked them in such a way where you don't "realize" you are technically doing a fetch quest. You think you are on some cool journey but really it is just a fetch quest. At lot of this has to do with the layers of storytelling that TW3's side mission has. Unlike DAI where you receive your mission and you go out and do the particular action to complete the mission, in TW3 you end up going to different locations talking to different people all in this one chain of events in the quest. The famous DAI widow elf who wants her husband's ring found would have been VERY different in TW3. While the quest would still have you finding the ring, you would be immersed in the emotion of the widow because of the cinematic cutscenes.
 
D: NPC body variance. One thing that always irked me in Bioware games is that all the NPCs have the same body type. In Dragon Age games it is somewhat different cause you have elves, humans, and dwarfs. But even then, all the humans looked as if they all weighed the same. At least in TW3 you see different styles of NPCs. You see old women hunched over walking really slow. You see little children running around, you see the heavyset NPC, you see the skinny NPC, you see the average build NPC. With Mass Effect and Dragon Age, you do not get that same variance in body types/movements.
 
 
 
I know everyone is going to disagree with what I just said which is to be expected considering where this post was made. I make a similar post in TW3's forums and everyone supports it, I make it here and everyone will disagree with it. So go ahead and disagree with what I said and pick it apart, I expect you to do that. 
 
In the end though, I am finally glad that TW3 is finally out. Now we can REALLY see just how good/bad of a game DAI was because it now has competition. DAI is no longer the sole current gen AAA WRPG game out. I even still wonder how DAI would have sold had TW3 game out fall 2014 like it was orginally supposed to. 
 
As some others hinted at, I still believe that DAI really got a free pass because #1 2014 was a slow year for gaming. #2 There wasn't any competition in the WRPG field when DAI came out so it was only natural that people glamoured over DAI because it was the first WRPG for the new consoles. 
 
So year, DAI is successful for Bioware and EA, but now that Witcher 3 is out, will people look back and still say that DAI was a game that deserved all it's initial praise? Or will people now compare the two games and be able to point out how TW3 did things sooooooo much better than DAI?
 
I mean, look at this thread. The general mood is that The Witcher 3 is a better game than Dragon Age: Inquisition.

Do you even read the posts you're responding to, or are you just here to show everyone how much of an axe you have to grind on the subject? I already said that I really like TW3, slightly more than Inquisition even. You need not convince me that it does things well, I saw it with mine own eyes, thank you very much. TW3 is competition for Inquisition, yes, and it's healthy competiton. They're both good RPGs, but TW3 wins out because of its better side-quests and quest design in general. It suffers from worse combat and variety in locales if you ask me, but not enough to sink it by any means.

Again, it's not hating to point out that CDPR has induged in the kind of practices it denounced not too long ago (selling paid DLCs, shutting down forum posts, vertical slicing of graphics pre-release) and could very well pay the price in some fashion. This may (or may not, we'll see) have damaged their reputation, perhaps permanently, regardless of how good TW3 is. I go to their forums from time to time and there seems to still be loads of people angry at the downgrade still.

You seem determined to see ''hate'' when there is little. Criticism is not hate. It's healthy and should be encouraged. CDPR is most definitely not immune to it, nor should it be.

And finally, I can form my own opinions on these two games, and I do not need some reddit thread to validate it. Thanks.

[Artemis_Entrari]

 

 

Personally, I'm with you. In terms of story, I don't think it stacks up with the rest of the games under BioWares name. Characters, yeah, BioWare usually always get there characters right and DA:I is no exception to that. Loved them all, except for Solas but that isn't because he's a bad character. The world... I think it's to big. There isn't enough gripping, thrilling content in the large world to keep me interested in it. I like open worlds. I prefer them to be filled with things for me to do and invest in, without tons of uninteresting, minor, nameless characters who just want me to do things they could do themselves.

 

So much this.

 

For me, the story we did get, I thought was pretty good.  My issue was the main story was so damn short, the length of which was at the expense of spending so much time doing boring fetch quests from random NPCs you come across in the "open world".  I still think the main story could have been longer (and better/more depth) if BioWare cut down on 2 or 3 of the "sidequest maps" and utilized that time and energy adding to the main story.

 

So in short for DA4: more main story, less boring sidequests

[Sanunes]

Spoiler

1) Yes, CDPR did take a 180 on their policy on DLC. They said that developers should never resort to DLC and that everything should be available at launch. Now they are offering a $25 Season pass that offers two DLCs that add a total of 30 hours to the game. So if you want to attack them on that, then go ahead, throw tomatoes at CDPR. However, what cannot be ignored is that while CDPR might be taking this 180, at least they "seem" to be going all out with their story related DLC. I have always said that the three best DLCs ever were those created by Rockstar Games: Undead Nightmare, Ballad of Gay Tony, and Lost and the Damned. These weren't just small 2-3 hour DLCs that offered some tibits to the story, but actual expanions that were technically separate games within themselves. In fact, Rockstar released Ballad of Gay Tony and Lost and Damned together as a separate game from GTA4 called Episodes from Liberty City. I believe the total price was like $40 and totaled around 20-30 extra hours of gameplay. If CDPR can capture the same level of quality in their two DLC expansions then I believe that most of the anti-CDPR rhetoric regarding their DLC will be put to rest. I mean, haters are going to hate, but what can you expect?

 

2) Outside of DLC, CDPR DOES do a lot if things well with TW3 that either Bioware is weak on or Bioware could learn from. Again, hate on TW3 or CDPR all you want, but here are a list of things that TW3 gets right that not only DAI failed at, but the entire ME trilogy:

 

A: Live and vibrant cities/towns/hub locations. Unlike the towns in DAI where people just stand there like movie set props, people in TW3 actually go about and live their lives. During the day they walk the city, engage in chatter. At night all the shops close down and people go home. Go into someone's house at 3AM and you can even see them in their little beds sleeping and snooring. Then the next day comes and it starts all over again. It is almost a continuation of what Shenmue started back on the Dreamcast. 

 

B: Hair. Need I say more? TW3 isn't perfect with hair, but it is lightyears ahead of what DAI offered.

 

C: Sidequest. This is a big one. Essentially TW3 features fetch quest as well. The difference is that CDPR masked them in such a way where you don't "realize" you are technically doing a fetch quest. You think you are on some cool journey but really it is just a fetch quest. At lot of this has to do with the layers of storytelling that TW3's side mission has. Unlike DAI where you receive your mission and you go out and do the particular action to complete the mission, in TW3 you end up going to different locations talking to different people all in this one chain of events in the quest. The famous DAI widow elf who wants her husband's ring found would have been VERY different in TW3. While the quest would still have you finding the ring, you would be immersed in the emotion of the widow because of the cinematic cutscenes.

 

D: NPC body variance. One thing that always irked me in Bioware games is that all the NPCs have the same body type. In Dragon Age games it is somewhat different cause you have elves, humans, and dwarfs. But even then, all the humans looked as if they all weighed the same. At least in TW3 you see different styles of NPCs. You see old women hunched over walking really slow. You see little children running around, you see the heavyset NPC, you see the skinny NPC, you see the average build NPC. With Mass Effect and Dragon Age, you do not get that same variance in body types/movements.

 

 

 

I know everyone is going to disagree with what I just said which is to be expected considering where this post was made. I make a similar post in TW3's forums and everyone supports it, I make it here and everyone will disagree with it. So go ahead and disagree with what I said and pick it apart, I expect you to do that. 

 

In the end though, I am finally glad that TW3 is finally out. Now we can REALLY see just how good/bad of a game DAI was because it now has competition. DAI is no longer the sole current gen AAA WRPG game out. I even still wonder how DAI would have sold had TW3 game out fall 2014 like it was orginally supposed to. 

 

As some others hinted at, I still believe that DAI really got a free pass because #1 2014 was a slow year for gaming. #2 There wasn't any competition in the WRPG field when DAI came out so it was only natural that people glamoured over DAI because it was the first WRPG for the new consoles. 

 

So year, DAI is successful for Bioware and EA, but now that Witcher 3 is out, will people look back and still say that DAI was a game that deserved all it's initial praise? Or will people now compare the two games and be able to point out how TW3 did things sooooooo much better than DAI?

 

I mean, look at this thread. The general mood is that The Witcher 3 is a better game than Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

I sat down with a friend's copy of The Witcher 3 for a couple of hours last night and it was exactly as I expected for there were things I liked, things I disliked, and definite improvements with the game over the two previous games.  The problem I have with your posts is on a BioWare board you want everyone to agree with you and of course on The Witcher boards you will find the majority of people that will agree with you. Here people enjoyed what BIoWare offered it might not be something you like, but at the same time there has been plenty of people that agree with your points here, but just not to the same degree you are talking about.

 

I will be perfectly fine if CDPR lives up to the 30 hours of content, but like any developer I am not going to believe what they say they are going to need to prove it to me just like any other developer and I have felt that way for years for actions speak louder then words and CDPR is currently just saying their content will take that long.  

 

With the NPCs and Hair, yes The Witcher 3 is going to be better and there could be reasons for that, but to me that doesn't add anything to the game so for me its not a large reason to dislike or like a game.  For if you start listing about how great the hair reacts in The Witcher I know people that will hold it against the game you are only playing a pre-defined protagonist.  The are aspects that some people notice and others really don't care much about.

 

I don't think anyone here has said that Inquisition has done side quests better then The Witcher, but The Witcher also has its own grind content with how the contracts work, I am pretty sure they will get more and more repetitive for me just as grinding rifts did in Inquisition for I think it will get old spending so much time in Detective Mode tracking down an enemy and then engaging combat with it.

 

Thankfully I live in a society that I can enjoy two games for two different reasons while both having their faults.  After playing a friends copy of The Witcher I probably will buy it, but right now I am too broke to do so.

[Kresa]

So i finished the witcher 3 just now and i must say as a big fan of DA and someone who never finished a witcher game, those guys nailed it hard! 
Thats what you get when the game is in production for more then 2 years... the amount of content in the game is crazy... while DA:I got a main quests, companions and side quest fillers : ( . I will always like DA more cuz of Origin but darn guys why you couldnt delay DA:I for 2 more years and make it at the level of witcher 3, that game is very well done and beside few minor issues i only got praise for it.

[In Exile]

So i finished the witcher 3 just now and i must say as a big fan of DA and someone who never finished a witcher game, those guys nailed it hard! 
Thats what you get when the game is in production for more then 2 years... the amount of content in the game is crazy... while DA:I got a main quests, companions and side quest fillers : ( . I will always like DA more cuz of Origin but darn guys why you couldnt delay DA:I for 2 more years and make it at the level of witcher 3, that game is very well done and beside few minor issues i only got praise for it.

Bioware did delay DA:I for almost two years compared to the original release schedule. DA:I's development is a lot like ME1's. And its project management continues to be poor. Not that I want to take this thread into a different direction but sometimes I think Bioware needs an injection of new talent not at the lower levels - programming and writing - but at the top, in terms of how to allocate resources and create a consistent vision.

 

Bioware's biggest issue since DA:O (and including DA:O) is just stumbling blind into what they're developing. Loghain's schizoid plot is an example of this, and you get a similar issue with the breach in DA:I or Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts. 

[Sanunes]

So i finished the witcher 3 just now and i must say as a big fan of DA and someone who never finished a witcher game, those guys nailed it hard! 
Thats what you get when the game is in production for more then 2 years... the amount of content in the game is crazy... while DA:I got a main quests, companions and side quest fillers : ( . I will always like DA more cuz of Origin but darn guys why you couldnt delay DA:I for 2 more years and make it at the level of witcher 3, that game is very well done and beside few minor issues i only got praise for it.

 

Inquisition was in development since about 2011, the two year "lazy" development was Dragon Age II which was release after only 18 months of development.  They added another year to development to add additional playable races and other features to the game.  Dragon Age: Inquisition will always have more limitations then The Witcher 3 because they had to make sure the game worked on five different platforms where the The Witcher 3 is only for three platforms.

[Shadeling]

Bioware did delay DA:I for almost two years compared to the original release schedule. DA:I's development is a lot like ME1's. And its project management continues to be poor. Not that I want to take this thread into a different direction but sometimes I think Bioware needs an injection of new talent not at the lower levels - programming and writing - but at the top, in terms of how to allocate resources and create a consistent vision.

 

Bioware's biggest issue since DA:O (and including DA:O) is just stumbling blind into what they're developing. Loghain's schizoid plot is an example of this, and you get a similar issue with the breach in DA:I or Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts. 

 

 

I think the generous development extension for DA:I had less to do with Bioware and more to do with EA being in crisis mode after a string of humiliating releases, including Mass Effect 3 and SimCity 2013, which is one of the reasons it was so painfully obvious that the Sims 4 was released as a sad shell of a game because the majority of its development time had been focused on it being an always online experience, the very last thing the fanbase wanted, just like with SimCity 2013 which failed miserably.

 

EA has a long, rich history of ignoring requests and feedback from its fanbases because there's this belief that gamers in general are stupid and will buy anything. Now with the advent of crowdfunding and indie game releases, EA can no longer be so smugly confident that their fans will buy whatever they dish out and they're reacting accordingly.  It's about damn time too, IMO.

[In Exile]

I think people put crowd funding on a pretty big pedestal. Even a game like POE which was a smashing success for a crowd funded game didn't match even AAA releases considered flops.

[Shadeling]

Crowdfunding is on a big pedestal for good reason because without it gamers would still be at the mercy of corporate publishers like EA who would continue to focus solely on the console market with continually regurgitated, well-known franchises that are sure to turn a profit.  Crowdfunding has renewed the gaming industry because developers can finally be creative and innovative much like they were in the 90s during gaming's golden age. 

 

Games like Divinity: Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity have none of the astronomical marketing overhead that most AAA titles do and no middleman to worry about.  I'm sure Obsidian is making a lot more money right now with their own homegrown IP than they ever did when they were on the corporate publisher treadmill.

[AlanC9]

There is something faintly ridiculous about EA spending all that money on making AAA games if gamers really would be happier without all that high-cost stuff.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Crowdfunding is on a big pedestal for good reason because without it gamers would still be at the mercy of corporate publishers like EA who would continue to focus solely on the console market with continually regurgitated, well-known franchises that are sure to turn a profit.  Crowdfunding has renewed the gaming industry because developers can finally be creative and innovative much like they were in the 90s during gaming's golden age. 
 
Games like Divinity: Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity have none of the astronomical marketing overhead that most AAA titles do and no middleman to worry about.  I'm sure Obsidian is making a lot more money right now with their own homegrown IP than they ever did when they were on the corporate publisher treadmill.

That's very poetic and all, but let's not act as if crowdfunding doesn't have its own pitfalls. From projects that are left unfinished/rushed to prima donna devs quitting and running with the money, not to mention stuff like Broken Age turning out to be disappointing because Tim Schaefer can't manage a project to save his life.

Sure, it has success stories, such as Divinity, Shovel Knight and more recently Pillars of Eternity, but it's far from the be all and end all of funding methods. Most of the stuff that you find up on Kickstarter is about as mediocre as any AAA title if not worse, and is always niche. That's good, because we need ways to finance niche games, but loads of good games wouldn't be possible to fund via Kickstarter, we still need big publishers for those.

[Majestic Jazz]

So i finished the witcher 3 just now and i must say as a big fan of DA and someone who never finished a witcher game, those guys nailed it hard!
Thats what you get when the game is in production for more then 2 years... the amount of content in the game is crazy... while DA:I got a main quests, companions and side quest fillers : ( . I will always like DA more cuz of Origin but darn guys why you couldnt delay DA:I for 2 more years and make it at the level of witcher 3, that game is very well done and beside few minor issues i only got praise for it.

Well said. One can be a DAI fan all they want but they cant ignore how well CDPR developed TW3. Again, TW4 might not be your style of gaming but at least CDPR clearly focused on quality rather than quanity which was the case for DAI.

You dont have to be a fan of something to appreciate something.

I am beating a dead horse here but I will continue to say that had TW3 released last fall, DAI would not have been as successful sales wise and reviews wise. DAI had the luxury of coming out late 2014 in what was a slow year in gaming. DAI also had the luxury of being the first AAA wrpg released for current gen consoles so DAI was a bit of a novelty in that regards.

Putting the two games side by side, it is clear to see that the level of quality is greater in TW3 than DAI.

[Shadeling]

That's very poetic and all, but let's not act as if crowdfunding doesn't have its own pitfalls. From projects that are left unfinished/rushed to prima donna devs quitting and running with the money, not to mention stuff like Broken Age turning out to be disappointing because Tim Schaefer can't manage a project to save his life.

Sure, it has success stories, such as Divinity, Shovel Knight and more recently Pillars of Eternity, but it's far from the be all and end all of funding methods. Most of the stuff that you find up on Kickstarter is about as mediocre as any AAA title if not worse, and is always niche. That's good, because we need ways to finance niche games, but loads of good games wouldn't be possible to fund via Kickstarter, we still need big publishers for those.

 

Oh, there are definitely pitfalls and it's not a perfect system, and the onus is on the consumer to be careful and research any game before buying in. It's also not for everyone, to some the risk is too great, for others, like myself, I'm over the moon with the new possibilities crowdfunding brings to gaming and I've backed many titles with money I set aside just for that purpose.

 

And funny you should mention Tim Schaefer because his Spacebase DF9 is currently the only crowdfunded game I've bought into that has failed so far and that was the one I was certain would be a sure bet because it's Double Fine! Surely a well-respected, long standing development company like them would honor their commitments, yeah...not so much.  Even though I'll never buy a Double Fine game ever again, I'm still a fan of crowdfunding.

[wolfhowwl]

I think people put crowd funding on a pretty big pedestal. Even a game like POE which was a smashing success for a crowd funded game didn't match even AAA releases considered flops.

 

Pillars of Eternity also wasn't very good.

 

 

Obsidian promised the story of PS:T, combat of IWD and the exploration of BG, but somewhere along the road they got confused, and what they gave us instead was the story of BG, the combat of PS:T and the exploration of Gothic 4.

This is literally the worst Obsidian game I’ve played to date. That’s right, I even had more fun with Dungeon Siege 3 - at least it was a fun beat ‘em up, as opposed to this lifeless, uninspired husk. Disappointment, thy name is Pillars of Eternity.

 

http://www.rpgcodex....ent.php?id=9867

[Shadeling]

Pillars of Eternity also wasn't very good.

 

 

In your opinion, anyway.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Pillars of Eternity also wasn't very good.
 
 
http://www.rpgcodex....ent.php?id=9867

Gonna heavily disagree here, and say that I think this review is trash. The author is more interested in grinding his axe at Obsidian than fairly reviweing the game as I see it. I mean, no surprises since it's on the Codex and that's how they usually roll, but still.

[Morroian]

Pillars of Eternity also wasn't very good.

 

 

http://www.rpgcodex....ent.php?id=9867

 

Yeah it was and the opinion of the codex is worth exactly squat.

[In Exile]

Gonna heavily disagree here, and say that I think this review is trash. The author is more interested in grinding his axe at Obsidian than fairly reviweing the game as I see it. I mean, no surprises since it's on the Codex and that's how they usually roll, but still.

It says unfortunate things that the codex had a similar reaction to DAI and POE, two games that couldn't be more dissimilar. And yet VoTM:B gets high marks.

I thought - aside from the usual railroads by Obsidian (ala MoTB) - POE was a strong game that started weak.

[BSpud]

RPG Codex lol