Aller au contenu

How successful is DA:I for Bioware?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
949 réponses à ce sujet

#626
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

DA2 had no tactical camera. You can't convince me that a game that barely let's you zoom out from one character with your view was designed to be focused on managing your entire party.


Because let's focus on that - managing your party. I'm not talking about checking your party's health and pausing to use healing or buff magic periodically. I'm not talking about making sure all the cooldown Attacks have been ticked off for all members at all times to make sure the highest DPS is active. These are things you do in Mass Effect and it doesn't make it a party-based game.

Let's review the word "tactics" to explain what I think you are missing.

Tactics
noun

1. (usually used with a singular verb) the art or science of disposing military or naval forces for battle and maneuvering them in battle.

2. (used with a plural verb) the maneuvers themselves.


Tactics is specifically dealing with unit placement and utilization of those units to achieve your goals. A game that does not let you see the battlefield does not allow tactical gameplay. Not to mention the unit speed and Attack of DA2 made unit placement TOTALLY irrelevant. Enemies will cross the entire screen in three seconds, so trying to divert Attacks or protect units or flank enemy forces all were next to useless endeavors. Not to mention the spawning waves of combat made any use of unit placement effective only for the first round, while completely disrupted and ineffective each subsequent wave.

The game had some STRATEGY, in terms of ability choice, level building and the application of both against different enemies, but the game is not an exercise in tactics. Hence, it is not a tactical game. Nor is it a party-based one in terms of combat, because the game is focused in nearly every way possible on controlling one party member at a time instead of issuing orders out to each unit in order to work as a cohesive group.

 

So if we can't convince you otherwise on a feature that doesn't exist in one game...what is the point of this conversation again?

 

Strategy and tactics are not the same thing, we all agree on that, but to call the companies focus on Strategy over tactics a mistake and all the other stuff you said...well, that's just sour grapes if you ask me when we knew that wasn't really the focus to begin with with a game like Dragon Age II. I remember the marketing focusing on things like strategy and action-combat over tactics, with many guys saying the 'dice rolling in the background' was tedious, so it was clear they were going a different way, and had ideas on how to do it. 

 

And calling Dragon Age II not a party based game is also very misguided in of itself, when you have A.I commands that are designed for situations that the party does for you. No control over that is the same as not clicking people in Pillars of Eternity for a minute, they just stand there like a lump, removing any strategic value from them in the process. This is the up and downs of tactical games; but people tend to forget how difficult tactics are.

 

Hell, in the tabletop realms I can name only one game that tried to combine tactics into the gameplay aggressively, and it was 4th Edition DnD. For all of it's faults, it is the only game on the tabletop I remember playing recently where people actually have to work together as a cohesive party, and use their abilities tactically to get ahead.  Outside of that and the old school versions of DnD and the massive war-games...most tabletop games are far from tactical, primarily because their mechanics tend to keep players individuals in the party without consequence at times, GM permitting of course. 

 

As for the rest of the arguments made here...look I never had an issue with the tactical camera, but I also never really used it because I don't like the overhead view in Dragon Age. It is bad enough many of the other mechanics and abilities have been catered to the use of tactics and planning that way, some of which  detriment the ability to implement actual strategies in the thick of combat. But to each their own I guess.

 

I will say this, I still don't understand the issues with the tactical camera in the end though. But I doubt I ever will, since I never saw any issues with it to begin with outside of how it affects the whole game. 


  • Ariella aime ceci

#627
canarius

canarius
  • Members
  • 238 messages

CDPR just announced they sold 4 million copies in the first 2 weeks. Bioware should be ashamed of this. The first Witcher game was a PC exclusive and it sold less than 2 million. Dragon Age Origins sold more than 5 million. Dragon Age sales went down since the first game while Witcher sales skyrocketed since the first game. The reason for this is Bioware is alienating their fans who loved Origins. They have changed so many things for the worse since the first game. One of the main reasons is the change of the main character. They should have at least given us a trilogy with The Warden as the main character. Just look at how successful Mass Effect and The Witcher have become by the 3rd game compared to Dragon Age. This is mainly because the main characters haven't changed after every game. Also turning your fantasy RPG into a LGBT simulator doesn't help your sales. It only alienates the majority of your fanbase. So you guys need to stop pushing this stupid political correctness in your games. Dragon Age had the potential to become one of the best fantasy franchises in the world. Bioware has ruined it. I hope Bioware won't ruin the Mass Effect franchise like this or I will hate them forever.


  • The Antagonist, kensaileo et Aren aiment ceci

#628
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

CDPR just announced they sold 4 million copies in the first 2 weeks. Bioware should be ashamed of this. The first Witcher game was a PC exclusive and it sold less than 2 million. Dragon Age Origins sold more than 5 million. Dragon Age sales went down since the first game while Witcher sales skyrocketed since the first game. The reason for this is Bioware is alienating their fans who loved Origins. They have changed so many things for the worse since the first game. One of the main reasons is the change of the main character. They should have at least given us a trilogy with The Warden as the main character. Just look at how successful Mass Effect and The Witcher have become by the 3rd game compared to Dragon Age. This is mainly because the main characters haven't changed after every game. Also turning your fantasy RPG into a LGBT simulator doesn't help your sales. It only alienates the majority of your fanbase. So you guys need to stop pushing this stupid political correctness in your games. Dragon Age had the potential to become one of the best fantasy franchises in the world. Bioware has ruined it. I hope Bioware won't ruin the Mass Effect franchise like this or I will hate them forever.

 

GIF-Amused-Chuckle-Chuffed-Pleased-Point


  • Ariella, Heimdall, FiveThreeTen et 7 autres aiment ceci

#629
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

 One of the main reasons is the change of the main character. They should have at least given us a trilogy with The Warden as the main character. Just look at how successful Mass Effect and The Witcher have become by the 3rd game compared to Dragon Age. This is mainly because the main characters haven't changed after every game. Also turning your fantasy RPG into a LGBT simulator doesn't help your sales. It only alienates the majority of your fanbase. So you guys need to stop pushing this stupid political correctness in your games. Dragon Age had the potential to become one of the best fantasy franchises in the world. Bioware has ruined it. I hope Bioware won't ruin the Mass Effect franchise like this or I will hate them forever.

 

Have you been paying attention, it was never their intention to have the Warden be the star of Dragon Age. The point was to always tell the story of Thedas, not the Warden. 

 

It has nothing to do with the characters changing, Consider say: Final Fantasy where not only did the characters change but the entire world. It's possible to do.

 

As for an LGBT simulator? I did't realize acknowledging that gay, lesbian and transgendered people exist turned the game into a "simulator". You are under no requirement to recruit those characters who are, unlike in ME3 where you HAD to have a pilot who's gay and who's whole plot revolves around his grief over the loss of his husband, and a lesbian com officer. For me, I find Sam to be as cute as a button, and Steve is as much a sib as Garrus, but by your standard, you've got two openly homosexual crewmembers on the Normandy. In DAI the only character who is not straight who you have to have is Josephine. You don't have to recruit Bull (which means you don't have to deal with Krem either), you can tell Dorian to take a hike, and you don't need to go get Sera either. So claiming that this is the point of the game (lgbt "simulator) is crap.

 

These people exist. Get over it. It's not political correctness to acknowledge that you have a fan base beyond straight white men.

 

Bioware is putting out the game they planned to put out, not the game you imagined that they should put out.


  • lady8jane aime ceci

#630
Valkyrja

Valkyrja
  • Members
  • 359 messages

CDPR just announced they sold 4 million copies in the first 2 weeks. Bioware should be ashamed of this. The first Witcher game was a PC exclusive and it sold less than 2 million. Dragon Age Origins sold more than 5 million. Dragon Age sales went down since the first game while Witcher sales skyrocketed since the first game. The reason for this is Bioware is alienating their fans who loved Origins. They have changed so many things for the worse since the first game. One of the main reasons is the change of the main character. They should have at least given us a trilogy with The Warden as the main character. Just look at how successful Mass Effect and The Witcher have become by the 3rd game compared to Dragon Age. This is mainly because the main characters haven't changed after every game. Also turning your fantasy RPG into a LGBT simulator doesn't help your sales. It only alienates the majority of your fanbase. So you guys need to stop pushing this stupid political correctness in your games. Dragon Age had the potential to become one of the best fantasy franchises in the world. Bioware has ruined it. I hope Bioware won't ruin the Mass Effect franchise like this or I will hate them forever.

 

"Dragon Age Origins sold more than 5 million."

 

Your source is vgchartz, right?



#631
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 703 messages
We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?

I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.

#632
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?

I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.

 

Well, if Mass Effect is any indication...yes.

 

But honestly, I like the Dragon Age approach too. I say there is room for both. 


  • Heimdall aime ceci

#633
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?

I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.

 

I say both have merit depending on how the story is done

 

DA has a different way of doing it


  • Shechinah aime ceci

#634
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?

I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.

 

Well, as I pointed out, Final Fantasy has done just fine with not only new characters each game but new worlds and only a few connecting themes. I think it's possible, even probable to do, but it does cut against the grain, which in my opinion is not a bad thing.

 

I think you can tell stories in a world without hanging on to one character for their pov. It's a more difficult thing, but I believe it can be more rewarding and freeing story wise.



#635
DarkKnightHolmes

DarkKnightHolmes
  • Members
  • 3 603 messages

Oh boy, now that Witcher 3 has sold 4 mil. I like to believe next DA game Bioware is gonna be all like "We're influenced by TW3" just like they jumped on the Skyrim train for DAI. 



#636
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

Oh boy, now that Witcher 3 has sold 4 mil. I like to believe next DA game Bioware is gonna be all like "We're influenced by TW3" just like they jumped on the Skyrim train for DAI. 

 

They didn't jump on the Skyrim train. They were pushed by fans yelling they wanted open world like Skyrim. Credit where credit is due.



#637
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

They didn't jump on the Skyrim train. They were pushed by fans yelling they wanted open world like Skyrim. Credit where credit is due.

 

That is slightly revisionist.

 

They were pushed by fans wanting a more open world. 

 

Skyrim was not the example given, and Inquisition is not like Skyrim in any way.Truth be told, anyone expecting it to be like Skyrim was making a mistake anyway...



#638
DarkKnightHolmes

DarkKnightHolmes
  • Members
  • 3 603 messages

They didn't jump on the Skyrim train. They were pushed by fans yelling they wanted open world like Skyrim. Credit where credit is due.

 

I don't remember many people screaming for open world when it was announced, just that we don't want to be restricted to one city for a whole game like DA2. Most of the semi-open world area's in the game are boring anyway. No proper city and 3 deserts is over kill.

 

Edit: And honestly, I would not mind if the open world was more like TW3 in DA4. Hopefully, they'll drop last gen by then.



#639
FiveThreeTen

FiveThreeTen
  • Members
  • 1 395 messages

I say both have merit depending on how the story is done

 

DA has a different way of doing it

That is a nice way of saying something without actually saying something :P

 

No but seriously, maybe a returning PC would be better for sales, because I gather there is this "episodic" factor that works really well and attachment. And a sequel is easier to market with an identifiable character.

 

Not sure it would make a better story though (I mean, if we take ME, I find the writing really uneven between the 3 games).  I rather like DA approach, with the main focus being Thedas.



#640
Valkyrja

Valkyrja
  • Members
  • 359 messages

That is slightly revisionist.

 

They were pushed by fans wanting a more open world. 

 

Skyrim was not the example given, and Inquisition is not like Skyrim in any way.Truth be told, anyone expecting it to be like Skyrim was making a mistake anyway...

 

Or open world games dominating the sales charts.



#641
Bfler

Bfler
  • Members
  • 2 991 messages

Bioware is putting out the game they planned to put out, not the game you imagined that they should put out.

 

They didn't jump on the Skyrim train. They were pushed by fans yelling they wanted open world like Skyrim. 

 

I see a contradiction here.


  • canarius aime ceci

#642
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

Or open world games dominating the sales charts.

 

Even then, it's not an open world so the point is moot. 



#643
FKA_Servo

FKA_Servo
  • Members
  • 5 618 messages

CDPR just announced they sold 4 million copies in the first 2 weeks. Bioware should be ashamed of this. The first Witcher game was a PC exclusive and it sold less than 2 million. Dragon Age Origins sold more than 5 million. Dragon Age sales went down since the first game while Witcher sales skyrocketed since the first game. The reason for this is Bioware is alienating their fans who loved Origins. They have changed so many things for the worse since the first game. One of the main reasons is the change of the main character. They should have at least given us a trilogy with The Warden as the main character. Just look at how successful Mass Effect and The Witcher have become by the 3rd game compared to Dragon Age. This is mainly because the main characters haven't changed after every game. Also turning your fantasy RPG into a LGBT simulator doesn't help your sales. It only alienates the majority of your fanbase. So you guys need to stop pushing this stupid political correctness in your games. Dragon Age had the potential to become one of the best fantasy franchises in the world. Bioware has ruined it. I hope Bioware won't ruin the Mass Effect franchise like this or I will hate them forever.

 

The bolded is the funniest part of a hilarious post.

 

I'd bet money that the number of people who were actually "alienated" by the inclusion of inclusive content to the point that they passed on the game statistically nonexistent. It doesn't seem to have prevented this courageous free thinker from swallowing his Ethics and buying the game.

 

No one cares about it outside of a few noisy and spectacularly misinformed people who primarily frequent internet forums. Everyone else is playing the game and not concerning themselves with it. LGBT friendly content is only gonna make sales for Bioware.



#644
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

That is slightly revisionist.

 

They were pushed by fans wanting a more open world. 

 

Skyrim was not the example given, and Inquisition is not like Skyrim in any way.Truth be told, anyone expecting it to be like Skyrim was making a mistake anyway...

 

I remember a LOT of screaming about DA2 being far too small, and it needed to be big and open, just like Skyrim, post Skyrim release in November of 2011.  It isn't much different than what we're seeing now in Feedback and Suggestions with fans yelling "Be more like Witcher 3". 



#645
Valkyrja

Valkyrja
  • Members
  • 359 messages

Even then, it's not an open world so the point is moot. 

 

Yeah it has zones instead of a true open world. So what?

 

It is still obvious what they were going for with the game.



#646
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

I see a contradiction here.

 

No contradiction, just pointing out that the fans had a major impact some characteristics. However the individual I was commenting on has been running around here screaming (metaphorically) at the top of his lungs that the franchise must be about the Warden, that we must go back to how DAO was etc etc.

 

In other words, he's built up what every detail of what the game should be in his mind that he can't accept any change at all.

 

I'm not a fan of pure open world like Skyrim or Fallout. However, I don't mind how Bioware used the concept in DAI. I tend to take each game on its own merits rather than building something in my head before release. I will admit it took a little longer for me to warm up to the game than the last two (not counting DAA) but that was mostly engine change.



#647
Ariella

Ariella
  • Members
  • 3 693 messages

Even then, it's not an open world so the point is moot. 

 

You're right, it's not. I was answering Holmes' comment about jumping on the Skyrim train. As soon as Skyrim was released, the game became a paragon of "how things should be". I didn't agree with it then, and don't now.

 

I enjoyed that the spaces were more open in DAI, but I also would love to go back to say a story set entirely in a city. All I can about is if the spaces serve the story in the end.



#648
Valkyrja

Valkyrja
  • Members
  • 359 messages

We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?

I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.

 

It probably does help to have a face and focus for a series.

 

Of course both his examples, Witcher and Mass Effect, involve characters that are voiced and varying degrees of defined instead of a silent, customizable stand-in for the player like DA:O that can't be given a voice, history, or face lest people throw tantrums about their headcanons.

 

Both those games also have arcs across a series that involve Geralt and Shepard where in Dragon Age the Warden dealt with their arc, the darkspawn, in their game.

 

Bringing the Warden back for unrelated arcs would feel less like telling a story about a character and more about pandering to people that can't let go of their self-inserts.



#649
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

Yeah it has zones instead of a true open world. So what?

 

It is still obvious what they were going for with the game.

 

Well, it matters a lot.

 

If they said they were going to copy Skyrim, they failed on that. Note how their marketing was always "were looking at Skyrim and what they did for inspiration", and basically combined that with what they did with Origins, only expanded the worlds further.

 

As to whats obvious....if you mean the part about them doing the game because they were told to, then they failed at their job because they didn't make a game even close to Skyrim in terms of design. And even if it was a mandate by EA, the fact that BioWare made a game that was not like Skyrim at all and be praised for it says a lot about that statement too.

 

Basically, either you are right, but BioWare then has a lot of autonomy to convince EA otherwise about a said mandate, or a lot of freedom to work within it. Or you are wrong about the assertion that it was forced, assuming that is the assertion.

 

If it's not, then I have no idea what you are saying. 



#650
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 541 messages

It probably does help to have a face and focus for a series.

 

Of course both his examples, Witcher and Mass Effect, involve characters that are voiced and varying degrees of defined instead of a silent, customizable stand-in for the player like DA:O that can't be given a voice, history, or face lest people throw tantrums about their headcanons.

 

Both those games also have arcs across a series that involve Geralt and Shepard where in Dragon Age the Warden dealt with their arc, the darkspawn, in their game.

 

Bringing the Warden back for unrelated arcs would feel less like telling a story about a character and more about pandering to people that can't let go of their self-inserts.

 

Well when Hawke came back, was it pandering?

 

How Hawke was used was really good, and made sense considering his status in the world of things. He was still the major everyman of this series, and one that I would love to play as again.