149 réponses à ce sujet

[MoonblaDAI]

See, this apples vs oranges argument is just ignorant.

 

<snip>

 

[Torgette]

Both games have zones and each zone has its own story.

 

Not exactly apples and oranges.

 

Yeah, in the landscape of rpg's they're actually very similar games in many respects.

[Majestic Jazz]

Also I would like to add that people here is ignoring the OP's main points. The OP is not saying that TW3 did EVERYTHING right and that DAI did EVERYTHING wrong. No, the OP limited it to side quest, open world, and the protagonist. With that being said:

 

- The Side Quest in TW3 have more depth/emotion, integrate more into the main quest, and is far more cinematic.

 

- The open world is far more immersive than the open regions of DAI. The Day/night cycle adds a level of realism and improv gameplay scenarios. The NPCs feel living live people that have daily schedules and what not whereas those in DAI are just talking mannequins. Compare the atmosphere of DAI's Val Royouex to that of Novigrad or Oxenford in TW3 and come back and tell me that DAI's atmosphere is superior to that of TW3

 

- Finally the protagonist in TW3 is better than the Inquisitor. Yes, Geralt is a set race and gender, but at least like the OP said.....you actually feel like a Witcher whereas I never truely felt like the all powerful Inquisitor, leader of a large organization. The Warden felt like a Grey Warden/Hero of Fereldan. Hawke felt like the Champion of Kirkwall. Revan felt like the almighty powerful Jedi/Sith. And Shepard felt like a N7/Spectre. I do not feel like this almighty leader when I am hunting down someone's lost Halla or finding a ring for a sad widow.

 

These are the points that the OP is hitting on and yet people just ignore them and want to go off and talk about other stuff like DAI being party based and what not. True, CDPR can learn A LOT of things from DAI and Bioware in general in moving forward with their titles such as Cyberpunk 2077. However, to sit there and act like DAI is above criticism is simply just being a blind fanboy. I am a MAJOR Mass Effect fan and even I will admit to the MANY flaws of the series and how it can learn a thing or two from Dragon Age, Bethesda, and CDPR.

[Ariella]

Both games have zones and each zone has its own story.

 

Not exactly apples and oranges.

 

You reduce it to that, then yes, however if you look it at as:

 

Dragon Age: original IP with variable protagonists and customization of said protagonist

The Witcher: Based on an existing novel thus cannot deviate. Single predefined protagonist.

 

Then yes, it is apples meet oranges.

[The Elder King]

Also finished DAI, but have chosen not to start TW3 at all due to chosen mechanics and content. And DAI is a story based RPG; not an Open World. Apple; meet orange.

Both DAI and the TW3 Are story Based rpg, and both have a open world approach. The only difference is that DAI's area è arrivato separate from each other. It doesn't change the fact that DAI has a massive world area.

[Suledin]

To be honest I like DA: I story more than TW3. I didn't really enjoy it in TW3, it was really meh. Side quests are really decent though. 

[Milan92]

You reduce it to that, then yes, however if you look it at as:

 

Dragon Age: original IP with variable protagonists and customization of said protagonist

The Witcher: Based on an existing novel thus cannot deviate. Single predefined protagonist.

 

Then yes, it is apples meet oranges.

 

Both games are story based. Your points don't change that.

[The Elder King]

You reduce it to that, then yes, however if you look it at as:
 
Dragon Age: original IP with variable protagonists and customization of said protagonist
The Witcher: Based on an existing novel thus cannot deviate. Single predefined protagonist.
 
Then yes, it is apples meet oranges.

The comparison is due the fact both Are story based RPGs.

[TK514]

Save for Gender and class, and looks and relationships that are predefined and don't change with your actions. And he's certainly not like Hawke in that you know anything really about him or his past unless you have either played the game or read the books. You have to pick the correct options in conversation to get that info or look it up on line.
 
Hawke, you start OFF with your family running from the Blight. You have these people and how you act toward them and how they REACT toward you is important. I found nothing of that in TW3.
 
In fact I commented to my husband that you could scratch the names Geralt and Ciri off and replace them with Logan and Kitty and get a similar game.

I would suggest that your issue has less to do with Geralt and more to do with starting a trilogy at the third installment. I wouldn't expect to have the same attachment to or any understanding of the motivations of characters if I started watching a play at the last act. I find that expectation a little absurd, just as I did when BioWare told us that ME3 was an excellent entry point to the series.

[Majestic Jazz]

And finally, you all can continue with the Apples vs Oranges argument all you want but at the end of the day, Bioware WILL NOT ignore the success of Witcher 3. This is what has made Bioware so great over the years in comparison to say, the Call of Duty developers in which they just live in their own bubble and rarely make any overhauls to the game. No, Bioware is dynamic and no game is exactly similar to the previous. Bioware will look at Witcher 3 as well as other titles that are not even in the WRPG field as ways to improve Dragon Age 4. This is a simple fact. Bioware has openingly said that Skyrim gave some inspiration to the team for the development of DAI and yet Elder Scrolls games are different from those of Bioware games (apple and oranges right?) and yet Bioware still drew inspiration from that game such as the open world environment and dragon fights. So whether TW3 and DAI are apples and oranges or apples and apples is irrelevant cause Bioware will look at other games and genres to improve their own. 

[Elhanan]

Both DAI and the TW3 Are story Based rpg, and both have a open world approach. The only difference is that DAI's area è arrivato separate from each other. It doesn't change the fact that DAI has a massive world area.

But a difference is that in DAI, not every NPC is viewed as an essential part of the tale; no need for each NPC to have schedules, dialogue, etc.

Also, The mechanics differ. in DAI there is no need for a Day/ Night cycle; the story told for each area is specific for the time. TW3 is an Action only game; optional in DAI. Etc.

While both may be fruit, one is still much unlike the other.

[Sasie]

- Finally the protagonist in TW3 is better than the Inquisitor. Yes, Geralt is a set race and gender, but at least like the OP said.....you actually feel like a Witcher whereas I never truely felt like the all powerful Inquisitor, leader of a large organization. The Warden felt like a Grey Warden/Hero of Fereldan. Hawke felt like the Champion of Kirkwall. Revan felt like the almighty powerful Jedi/Sith. And Shepard felt like a N7/Spectre. I do not feel like this almighty leader when I am hunting down someone's lost Halla or finding a ring for a sad widow.

Geralt is an awful choice of a protagonist in an RPG, just look at all the troubles it caused them with the story. The fact that the entire game is based on what comes after a "happily (or not) ever after" ending in a book should tell you how bad of an idea he is for a main character. While the game had a lot of choices over the years CD Red Project been even worse then the Mass effect crew in allowing the player's choices to transfer between the games. 

Just look at the whole Triss/Yennefer situation in the third game. A lot of fans are unhappy that Red Project decided that Geralt already broken up with Triss and gone hunting for Yennefer before the game starts, all because they made the story closer to the actual books again and this again comes from having a character with the kind of background that Geralt has. Not to mention Geralt already is an expert swordmaster/"max level" Witcher before the game starts. This again limits the leveling system and what new abilities he could gain, aka he already knew them all.

Even if all of this didn't matter Bioware would still win because they allow the player to shape their character. I wouldn't care about Bioware games nearly as much if I was forced to only play the male version of the hero in each game and romance the character Bioware chosen for me in the way CD Red Project choose the romance plots for Geralt.

[Ariella]

The comparison is due the fact both Are story based RPGs.

 

But the factors I pointed out dictate HOW that story can be told, and the limits, especially in the Witcher's case, of how the IP can be used. That completely changes what can be DONE with the story and how it's is implemented.

 

Ninja'd... Sasie said it better

[TK514]

But a difference is that in DAI, not every NPC is viewed as an essential part of the tale; no need for each NPC to have schedules, dialogue, etc.Also, The mechanics differ. in DAI there is no need for a Day/ Night cycle; the story told for each area is specific for the time. TW3 is an Action only game; optional in DAI. Etc.While both may be fruit, one is still much unlike the other.

I'd say less Apple v Orange than Golden Delicious v Granny Smith.

[Iakus]

Except that he doesn't.

 

But let's play the ignorant ape, far more easier than doing some proper research.

OOK!

 

And guess what?  I have played the first game, And researched the latter two games before deciding NOT to get them.  So I think I speak with a certain degree of knowledge.

 

They certainly appear to be finely crafted games.  I do not dispute that.  But the setting, the characters, and the stories are big turnoffs for me.  I certainly hope Thedas (and future protagonists) don't start to reflect the Witcher games.

[Ariella]

And finally, you all can continue with the Apples vs Oranges argument all you want but at the end of the day, Bioware WILL NOT ignore the success of Witcher 3. This is what has made Bioware so great over the years in comparison to say, the Call of Duty developers in which they just live in their own bubble and rarely make any overhauls to the game. No, Bioware is dynamic and no game is exactly similar to the previous. Bioware will look at Witcher 3 as well as other titles that are not even in the WRPG field as ways to improve Dragon Age 4. This is a simple fact. Bioware has openingly said that Skyrim gave some inspiration to the team for the development of DAI and yet Elder Scrolls games are different from those of Bioware games (apple and oranges right?) and yet Bioware still drew inspiration from that game such as the open world environment and dragon fights. So whether TW3 and DAI are apples and oranges or apples and apples is irrelevant cause Bioware will look at other games and genres to improve their own. 

 

No one is saying they will, however, they're also going to listen to their fan base. I certainly don't want a Witcher clone for the next game, and it seems I'm not alone. So while they'll pay attention, it's not going to have as BIG of an effect as some people might hope it will, especially since Bioware's going to be paying attention to ALL the rpgs that come out on the market and see what works and what doesn't and how they can improve their own games.

[robertthebard]

How does one WRPG developer failing help progress the WRPG genre? That is a very selfish statement.

And btw, I am a Mass Effect fanboy, not Witcher, but real recognizes real and at least I am honest enough to see and appreciate success when it is there.

DAI fanboys may not care about TW3 but guess what? Bioware does and they will use TW3 as a benchmark for their next DA game alongside the positive and negative feedback from DAI. Live in your bubble, but the WRPG world does not begin and end with DAI.

Nor did it begin with anything like the Witcher. In fact, initially, the Witcher was built on an Engine that powered, you guessed it, a BioWare game. So whilst you Witcher fanboys run all over the 'net trashing BioWare for DA, CDPR thanks them profusely for the use of their engine. You see, despite how nasty fanboys either way like to get, BW gave them a huge kickstart on their franchise by allowing them to use their engine as a starting place.

Here's the other thing, for all of you comparison junkies out there:

CDPR started with an established franchise; the story is already written, they are, in essence, developing a screenplay based on existing lore. They did not create anything, not even the engine they used to build the game, although they did make some marked improvements, props where they're due, to the point where I did purchase their first two installments, despite not finishing the first one, and I will eventually get around to getting the third one, despite being unable to complete the second one, and it's not hardware that's limiting me, it's the game itself that makes it almost impossible for me to play it. I can't get immersed enough in it to enjoy it.

On the other hand, the IP that we're comparing CDPR's screenplay to is a unique IP. It was created from the ground up, and recreated twice, for that matter, by the company that's developing it. This is a feather that CDPR can't put into their hat with the Witcher series, they didn't create the IP, they got permission to turn it into a video game. The cast, including the protagonist, are fleshed out by the creator of the series of books, all they had to do was, essentially, copy/paste the script.

So, let's see an original IP by CDPR to compare to DA, ok? Let's see something that isn't riding on the backs of somebody else's work to say how great they are. I'm told that all three games are great, but owning the first two, and being unable to complete them sort of flies in the face of that assessment as far as I'm concerned. But here's the rub; I'm not the end all be all of what games are good, bad or indifferent. I am one person, in a sea of gamers, that didn't find the setting/story/protagonist interesting enough to keep me engaged long enough to finish a playthrough. In that regard, every DA game has the Witcher series beat, since I have multiple completions of all three. Context is everything, and not everyone goes for the same things. So no, I don't care that people think one or the other is the best thing since sliced bread, because my rating has to be based on what I think. What I think so far is that since the I am unable to complete the first two games, DA wins, because I was able to complete them w/out feeling like I had to force myself to play.

[Aren]

? Because it feels like simply put, CD Projeckt RED put far more effort into TW3 than Bioware did with DAI.

i believe that Bioware have put great effort for this engine, Likely for DA4 they will spare a lot of time and money because now they already possess it.

[The Elder King]

But a difference is that in DAI, not every NPC is viewed as an essential part of the tale; no need for each NPC to have schedules, dialogue, etc.Also, The mechanics differ. in DAI there is no need for a Day/ Night cycle; the story told for each area is specific for the time. TW3 is an Action only game; optional in DAI. Etc.While both may be fruit, one is still much unlike the other.

There are differences, yes. It doesn't mean they can't the compared.
ME and DAO presented a lot of differences between each other, and they can be compared. Now I'm not saying that the differences between DAO-ME and DAI-TW3 Are the same. My point is that the fact that there Are differences doesn't mean Two games aren't part of the same sub-genre.
Ne

But the factors I pointed out dictate HOW that story can be told, and the limits, especially in the Witcher's case, of how the IP can be used. That completely changes what can be DONE with the story and how it's is implemented.

Ninja'd... Sasie said it better

I honestly don't understand. How is this related To the fact the games can or can't be compared as the Apple/oranges example?

Both Are story based rpgs. Both present a PC that you can control in dialogues, with. Choices on various plots. Both present a massive open world.
There Are differences that cause people fan of one to not like thenother, but I don't think they're enough to male them Two games from separate sub-genres.

[MisterJB]

OOK!

 

And guess what?  I have played the first game, And researched the latter two games before deciding NOT to get them.  So I think I speak with a certain degree of knowledge.

 

They certainly appear to be finely crafted games.  I do not dispute that.  But the setting, the characters, and the stories are big turnoffs for me.  I certainly hope Thedas (and future protagonists) don't start to reflect the Witcher games.

Out of curiosity, what about The Witcher 2's story and characters would you not want to see in DA games?

[Cobra's_back]

Read the post again...I listed several things where TW3 is better at.

 

All consumers have an opinion that is their own. I for one absolutely enjoy DAI. 

[TK514]

I'm certainly not suggesting BioWare make a Witcher clone. My criticisms, and I think others will agree, aren't with Thedas as a setting or with customizable characters. Rather, my criticism is that TW3 is, in general, a better crafted game when it comes to presenting their setting, giving depth to their quests and story, and how the character's choices effect both. What I want BioWare to take away from TW3 is the scope and depth of things. I don't want a repeat of the Inquisitor attending a single party to end a civil war and pick a new monarch, for example. Or doing two quests and suddenly the Mage-Templar war is over. I not only want those to be the end of their own epic quest lines, but I want their outcomes to be effected by other side quests, and I want them to effect each other.

In short, I think future BioWare games could benefit from CD Projekt's attention to depth, complexity, interconnection and overall story presentation.

[Cobra's_back]

OOK!

 

And guess what?  I have played the first game, And researched the latter two games before deciding NOT to get them.  So I think I speak with a certain degree of knowledge.

 

They certainly appear to be finely crafted games.  I do not dispute that.  But the setting, the characters, and the stories are big turnoffs for me.  I certainly hope Thedas (and future protagonists) don't start to reflect the Witcher games.

 

Exactly how I feel. I never cared to play Witchers. I didn't care for the characters or stories in Witchers. I'm sure they have a strong fan base, but I'm glad DAI has their own group of characters and stories.

[MelissaGT]

 

So sick of seeing DA:I compared against every other big title coming out...can't we just be allowed to enjoy DA:I in it's own right?

[Milan92]

OOK!

 

And guess what?  I have played the first game, And researched the latter two games before deciding NOT to get them.  So I think I speak with a certain degree of knowledge.

 

They certainly appear to be finely crafted games.  I do not dispute that.  But the setting, the characters, and the stories are big turnoffs for me.  I certainly hope Thedas (and future protagonists) don't start to reflect the Witcher games.

 

Right, Witcher 1. Well I do agree that the game had issues, the sex cards for example went to far.

 

But they realized that and avoided it for the second and third game.

 

However other than that, the witcher games are not sexist. Geralt rarely has sex with woman in the games that followed and when it happend it was also on their terms.

 

Geralt himself is also not sexist, he treasts every woman he comes across with respect.