69 réponses à ce sujet

[daveliam]

The constant TW3/DA: I comparison threads are getting ridiculous.  They are two different types of RPGs with completely different designs.  Think of a Venn Diagram.  Some people will like DA: I.  Some will like TW3.  Some will like both.  Neither are objectively "better" than the other.  It comes down to preference.

 

Personally, I haven't played TW3 because I found TW2 to be a total snoozefest:  Geralt couldn't be more cliché if they tried; the combat mechanisms were not interesting (not saying that DA is better); and while the story seemed like it could have gotten interesting, I just wasn't invested enough to get there.  I played for about 4 hours and sold it back for in-store credit.  To me the ability to create a customizable PC is critical to me.  I don't want a PC that is pre-defined in my RPGs.  Shep and Hawke were as close to that as I'm interested in getting.  It's a deal breaker for me.

 

That being said, I'm not saying that TW2 or TW3 are bad games.  I'm positive that they aren't.  They just aren't for me.  I could create dozens of threads explaining why I think the DA series is better, but to what end?  I honestly don't understand why people continue have these debates since they can't possibly go anywhere. 

 

It sounds like they might be able to pull a little from TW3 in order to improve upon the DA series and I encourage them to do so.  I trust them not to abandon what's made them so successful to try to copy another game that is pulling in a largely different audience. 

 

To the person whining about it has to do with being able to play a 'girl or gay':  Yes, and your point?  I've lurked and posted a handful of times in these threads and there have always been people who openly admit that Geralt is a major reason why we aren't interested in TW3.  Unless you are insinuating that every single person who dislikes TW3 does so because they want to play as a 'girl or gay', then I'm not sure your point, because a bunch of people already admit to exactly what you are 'accusing' of us. 

[Dreadstruck]

Most people who create these "DAI>TW3" threads in their salty rage seem to be missing a few important things:

 

No one here advocates for a fixed character. Hell, no one is even advocating for completely copying CDPR's formula!

 

In my view, TW3 has better structured side quests, better presentation, consistent narrative and a lively and reactive open world that does not feel dull or empty (as opposed to DA:I lifeless zones). All of this isn't any less immersive even with a "fixed" protagonist, which is rather impressive.

 

These are the things most of us are talking about and wouldn't mind seeing them in next DA games. Why not advocate for the best of both worlds, instead of being a fanboy that is unable to see any faults in his or her favourite game?

 

Yes, I get it. No fixed protagonist for Bioware games, and I agree. But it feels like this and romances is pretty much the only ammo some TW haters can use (and repeat ad nauseum), even if it's completely irrelevant to the main point.

 

Also, Geralt is far from a one-dimensional, static Gary Stu. I believe KBomb has already explained enough about that.

[Super Drone]

 

To the person whining about it has to do with being able to play a 'girl or gay':  Yes, and your point?  I've lurked and posted a handful of times in these threads and there have always been people who openly admit that Geralt is a major reason why we aren't interested in TW3.  Unless you are insinuating that every single person who dislikes TW3 does so because they want to play as a 'girl or gay', then I'm not sure your point, because a bunch of people already admit to exactly what you are 'accusing' of us. 

 

I don't believe I was whining. I was being belligerently agressive, there's a difference.  I said if it matters to you, then own it. Don't come up with lame strawman reasons why DAI is better. DAI is better for you because you can play a gay character. It does not make DAI objectively better, and it doesn't mean Bioware needs to ignore everything CDPR did with the Witcher series. Which is what the people coming up with lame justifications are saying.

 

Which is exactly what you said above, I know. I'm just defending myself.

[ProphetOfDoom666]

Most people who create these "DAI>TW3" threads in their salty rage seem to be missing a few important things:
 
No one here advocates for a fixed character. Hell, no one is even advocating for completely copying CDPR's formula!
 
In my view, TW3 has better structured side quests, better presentation, consistent narrative and a lively and reactive open world that does not feel dull or empty (as opposed to DA:I lifeless zones). All of this isn't any less immersive even with a "fixed" protagonist, which is rather impressive.
 
These are the things most of us are talking about and wouldn't mind seeing them in next DA games. Why not advocate for the best of both worlds, instead of being a fanboy that is unable to see any faults in his or her favourite game?
 
Yes, I get it. No fixed protagonist for Bioware games, and I agree. But it feels like this and romances is pretty much the only ammo some TW haters can use, even if it's completely irrelevant to the main point.
 
Also, Geralt is far from a one-dimensional, static Gary Stu. I believe KBomb has already explained enough about that.

I agree on the sidequests for example but i don't agree on calling out "fanboy" etc.It's all personal preference and like i said what you expect from a rpg.As for Geralt he is still as unteresting as a sack of rice for me.

[TheOgre]

The constant TW3/DA: I comparison threads are getting ridiculous.  They are two different types of RPGs with completely different designs.  Think of a Venn Diagram.  Some people will like DA: I.  Some will like TW3.  Some will like both.  Neither are objectively "better" than the other.  It comes down to preference.

 

Personally, I haven't played TW3 because I found TW2 to be a total snoozefest:  Geralt couldn't be more cliché if they tried; the combat mechanisms were not interesting (not saying that DA is better); and while the story seemed like it could have gotten interesting, I just wasn't invested enough to get there.  I played for about 4 hours and sold it back for in-store credit.  To me the ability to create a customizable PC is critical to me.  I don't want a PC that is pre-defined in my RPGs.  Shep and Hawke were as close to that as I'm interested in getting.  It's a deal breaker for me.

 

That being said, I'm not saying that TW2 or TW3 are bad games.  I'm positive that they aren't.  They just aren't for me.  I could create dozens of threads explaining why I think the DA series is better, but to what end?  I honestly don't understand why people continue have these debates since they can't possibly go anywhere. 

 

It sounds like they might be able to pull a little from TW3 in order to improve upon the DA series and I encourage them to do so.  I trust them not to abandon what's made them so successful to try to copy another game that is pulling in a largely different audience. 

 

To the person whining about it has to do with being able to play a 'girl or gay':  Yes, and your point?  I've lurked and posted a handful of times in these threads and there have always been people who openly admit that Geralt is a major reason why we aren't interested in TW3.  Unless you are insinuating that every single person who dislikes TW3 does so because they want to play as a 'girl or gay', then I'm not sure your point, because a bunch of people already admit to exactly what you are 'accusing' of us. 

 

Agreed with some of your post but this.. I could EASILY SAY that about the inquisitor, and a lot accuse the hero of that too. I'd say the inquisitor as a whole is cliche.

 

Then again, am I saying your wrong? Nope!

[Graywolfe]

I like both series and I like TES but I like each and every one for completely different reasons and I do not want to see them trying to copy each other. That said every game has room for improvement and it is not a bad thing to get ideas from other games but what ever changes they do make and regardless of where the idea comes from they need to do it in their own way. If I was going to suggest a game for BW to look at for ideas for DA4 it would be Drakensang.

[KBomb]

I never said that people want a single fixed character.I said that i think having a costumizable character is a aspect that i think a rpg should have.But that is personal perference of course.

You open the thread talking about other threads and how they compare TW3 as to being better than DAI, then go into why you think they're wrong, one being because DAI allows you to customize your own character and how TW3 "sticks you with a bland character".

 

Why compare those threads with this one if not for the examples you presented? Why just not mention those threads and go into the real meat of it: "This is why I think Dragon Age Inquisition is a great RPG". and not even compare it to TW3 at all? By comparing this thread to those and using the example of customization, it implies that those other threads are making that an issue--or again, why bring up other threads in the first place when none of them are wanting to change any of the examples you've given?

 

All the things you mentioned as being representative of an rpg, as far as I know, has never been discussed, implied, asked for or even been used as an example as to why TW3's formula can be beneficial to future DA titles. As I said, instead of making yet another thread about comparing the two games, since that's what you're really doing, just make a thread as to why you feel DAI is a great rpg. That would make more sense.

[Seraphim24]

Hey folks,

I've seen alot topics, threads about the Witcher 3 and how it is better, superior over DAI.The like of " be more like witcher 3" and " what Witcher 3 does better than DAI".I own both games and have completed both.

Now why do i think DAI is a better "rpg"? Both games are decent games that look simular on the surface although very different inside.It depends on what you think of a rpg and how that relates to the combat, gameplay, story and characters.
Dragon age has the better character developement and character progression.Witcher 3 has a fixed and very plain, one dimensional protagonist.You are stuck with Geralt and his dull voice, personality untill the end.He never evolves or grows in his personality, he stays a very static character.In DAI you can choose your race, gender, class and even specialize into different weapons aswell as skill trees within the class of your choice.That is what i expect from a rpg.I want to create a character that i have in mind and make the decisions to express and form his/her personality.The combat is as terrible as in the witcher 2 and the small amount of skills and character progression doesn't help it either.Nothing flashy or interesting, no real strategy to speak of in the witcher 3 combat.

Don't get me started on the menus in Witcher 3.All in all the gameplay,which is very important too is alot better in Dragon age inquisition than in the witcher 3.

The witcher 3 has the more intresting story.But you can skip a cutscene, dialogue but you can't skip the combat and gameplay.

So please Bioware improve on the good aspects in DAI but don't just go the "be more like game x" route.Bioware games have their own strengths aswell as weaknesses like any other game.

Edit: i like both games but for different reasons

Cheers

 

Having gotten deeper into TW3 I must confess the gameplay system is a bit inferior to DA:I.

 

The bigger problem on that front though for DA:I though is that it regressed from DA:O, which was actually pretty great in many respects, especially before they nerfed it with the patch shortly after release. It was very near Baldur's Gate's quality.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Having gotten deeper into TW3 I must confess the gameplay system is a bit inferior to DA:I.

The bigger problem on that front though for DA:I though is that it regressed from DA:O, which was actually pretty great in many respects, especially before they nerfed it with the patch shortly after release. It was very near Baldur's Gate's quality.

I'd say the combat in DAI and TW3 is roughly equally bad, and both of them are far behind the combat in DA2, which was the best of any other game in either series. However, TW3 beats out DAI in most other design element apart from character customisation, which is nothing more than a design choice. As someone who is a die-hard DA fan and only a fairly casual Witcher player it hurts to say that TW3 is simply a much more skilfully executed piece of game design.

Edit: Having said all that, I don't want Bioware to copy CDPR either, since copying others is not the solution. I want Bioware to go back to their own previous design approach and make what Origins was trying to be - a modern successor to Baldur's Gate, with current style graphics, cutscenes, voice acting, etc. and old school tactical gameplay and character customisation depth.

[ProphetOfDoom666]

You open the thread talking about other threads and how they compare TW3 as to being better than DAI, then go into why you think they're wrong, one being because DAI allows you to customize your own character and how TW3 "sticks you with a bland character".

Why compare those threads with this one if not for the examples you presented? Why just not mention those threads and go into the real meat of it: "This is why I think Dragon Age Inquisition is a great RPG". and not even compare it to TW3 at all? By comparing this thread to those and using the example of customization, it implies that those other threads are making that an issue--or again, why bring up other threads in the first place when none of them are wanting to change any of the examples you've given?

All the things you mentioned as being representative of an rpg, as far as I know, has never been discussed, implied, asked for or even been used as an example as to why TW3's formula can be beneficial to future DA titles. As I said, instead of making yet another thread about comparing the two games, since that's what you're really doing, just make a thread as to why you feel DAI is a great rpg. That would make more sense.

I don't see it the way you do but that is your problem.At least you got yourself some fans to pad your back.

PS: Don't twist the words in my mouth as i never said it is anything more than what i see, want from a rpg.Nothing more nothing less.A little comparison can't hurt.

Also i made another thread not long ago about what i like and don't like in DAI.

[ashwind]

I recalled in the old Bioware forum, a dev commented that debating what an "RPG" is or how an "RPG" is more "RPG" is like debating what are the best pizza toppings. So your definition of "RPG" does not hold water until you can tell me what are the best pizza toppings that is agreed by everyone

 

Like so many have said, nobody is asking Bioware to make TW3. Once Bioware learned from Skyrim and some people were so scared that they ran all over the forum claiming how bad Skyrim is and how un-rpg Skyrim is. It turned out pretty well didnt it? Umless of course if you are one of those who prefer DA2 - not judging but if Bioware made another DA2 - it will be the end of Bioware.

[ProphetOfDoom666]

I recalled in the old Bioware forum, a dev commented that debating what an "RPG" is or how an "RPG" is more "RPG" is like debating what are the best pizza toppings. So your definition of "RPG" does not hold water until you can tell me what are the best pizza toppings that is agreed by everyone
 
Like so many have said, nobody is asking Bioware to make TW3. Once Bioware learned from Skyrim and some people were so scared that they ran all over the forum claiming how bad Skyrim is and how un-rpg Skyrim is. It turned out pretty well didnt it? Umless of course if you are one of those who prefer DA2 - not judging but if Bioware made another DA2 - it will be the end of Bioware.

True hehe and i only see it as my personal idea of a rpg nothing more.But some people read more into it and try to put words, ideas in my mouth that i never talked about.The location recycle did put me off.Well they definetly made better games, true.

[ashwind]

True hehe and i only see it as my personal idea of a rpg nothing more.But some people read more into it and try to put words, ideas in my mouth that i never talked about.The location recycle did put me off.Well they definetly made better games, true.

 

Haven said all that... I standby my claim that pepperoni & cheese are the best pizza toppings and any who disagree cant tell the difference between a pizza and a jelly sandwich   

[Realmzmaster]

Haven said all that... I standby my claim that pepperoni & cheese are the best pizza toppings and any who disagree cant tell the difference between a pizza and a jelly sandwich   

 

Hogwash! A pizza with Canadian bacon, Italian sausage and double cheese is the best.

[ProphetOfDoom666]

Haven said all that... I standby my claim that pepperoni & cheese are the best pizza toppings and any who disagree cant tell the difference between a pizza and a jelly sandwich

It's all good innit right?..hehe
I prefer black olives with bacon and pepperoni.

[Realmzmaster]

Others can say the Witcher 3 is better until the earth ends. The Witcher is not what I personally want in an rpg. I want the ability to customize my character.I want the ability to play an elf, dwarf, human or qunari. I want to be able to play a rogue, mage or warrior.  I want a party based crpg with party banter. I want exploration  I do not wish to sacrifice those basic wants.

 

I have no interest in playing a set protagonist. Hawke was about as close as I wish to get. Hawke was far less set than Geralt.  I can even play a single protagonist rpg like Kingdoms of Amalur  because it allows me to customize my protagonist.

 

It is not just a matter of playing a gay or female character. For me it boils down to choice. The Witcher does not give me the choice I want.  Give me crpgs like DA series, Wasteland 2, Fallout series  that allow me the choice of creating my character. I will leave the set protagonist crpgs to those who enjoy them.

[TheOgre]

Others can say the Witcher 3 is better until the earth ends. The Witcher is not what I personally want in an rpg. I want the ability to customize my character.I want the ability to play an elf, dwarf, human or qunari. I want to be able to play a rogue, mage or warrior.  I want a party based crpg with party banter. I want exploration  I do not wish to sacrifice those basic wants.

 

I have no interest in playing a set protagonist. Hawke was about as close as I wish to get. Hawke was far less set than Geralt.  I can even play a single protagonist rpg like Kingdoms of Amalur  because it allows me to customize my protagonist.

 

It is not just a matter of playing a gay or female character. For me it boils down to choice. The Witcher does not give me the choice I want.  Give me crpgs like DA series, Wasteland 2, Fallout series  that allow me the choice of creating my character. I will leave the set protagonist crpgs to those who enjoy them.

 

No love for Hawke

 

Hawke did nothing wrong..!

 

I like that DA has the create your own character aspect. What would have been nice for me personally for the next DA game is to have a Hawke for each race/gender. Enough of a strong background with the ability to create an actual personality that isn't dictated by the story. Each race having their own prologue with a family of their own that you get to see and interact with during the game. One play through, people from the prologue you recognize from a different playthrough. I.e., a Qunari prologue character or antagonist recognizes a Qunari player later in the game, but it's completely different for a Dwarf.

 

It'd be really ambitious I admit.

[Realmzmaster]

No love for Hawke

 

Hawke did nothing wrong..!

 

I like that DA has the create your own character aspect. What would have been nice for me personally for the next DA game is to have a Hawke for each race/gender. Enough of a strong background with the ability to create an actual personality that isn't dictated by the story. Each race having their own prologue with a family of their own that you get to see and interact with during the game. One play through, people from the prologue you recognize from a different playthrough. I.e., a Qunari prologue character or antagonist recognizes a Qunari player later in the game, but it's completely different for a Dwarf.

 

It'd be really ambitious I admit.

 

I actually like Hawke especially sarcastic Hawke. In fact, I like DA2. Hawke is not as set as Geralt except Hawke has to be human. I also like your idea about a prototype Hawke for each race as long as the race and sex is noted in dialogue and sometimes choices to be made.

[Innsmouth Dweller]

DAI has absolutely no character development, nor progression unless you're talking about headcanon... which is not a part of the game. You cannot skip boring and repetitive combat in DAI either, there's no pacifist path (positioning is not the same as strategy), stats are basically useless outside of combat (which is action-oriented). Game introduces heavy, MMO grinding which is apparently one of open world's features. tbh, I think both games (DAI and TW3) are mediocre RPGs. They work as singleplayer MMO action-adventure running sims, but it's a long way to RPG.

I never wanted DA to copy other games, be it Witcher, AssCreed, WoW, or Skyrim.

[line_genrou]

The combat is as terrible as in the witcher 2 and the small amount of skills and character progression doesn't help it either.Nothing flashy or interesting, no real strategy to speak of in the witcher 3 combat.

 

I think you played a different game or was just button mashing in Story Mode or maybe you just watched someone else playing and didn't touch the game yourself

[Cz-99]

Inb4 all of these W3 vs DAI arguments are done by undercover developers and stakeholders of said games.

 

It's gotta be true. Why else would anyone not affiliated with one of these two companies or receiving money from 'em bothering arguing for one game over the other? It only makes sense.

 

Now that I've uncovered the truth of it all, I expect I will either be offered money to silence myself, or they'll skip the offering part and get straight to the silencing part.

[I saved Star Wars :D]

Now i haven't read the books nor did i play the first witcher game.But if you could give some reasons why you think he is not a static one dimensional character i would appriciate it.
Also i would appreciate it if you could keep your tone a little less agressive, offensive.Post something productive instead.
Cheers

I don't think I was aggressive tbh, but I do think that if you're going to make a statement like that then you need to provide the evidence. Whether people like DA, TW ot both (like me) is entirely subjective - as is whether you like Geralt as a character.

However, Geralt is most certainly not one dimensional. Duke Nukem is one dimensional.

[rashie]

Does anyone seriously think people are talking about actual combat mechanics when comparing the two? 

 

Even if we were to do that, as far as the action gameplay goes if we compare action gameplay to action gameplay, the witcher 3 blows DA:I out of the water in terms of how refined it works for an action game, while DA:I is a horrible hybrid that doesn't quite know what it wants and thus is mediocre in both tactical and action combat.

 

Much of that is coming from TW3 not trying to combine two different genres instead of playing on the strengths of one of them alone.

[Xetykins]

Now i haven't read the books nor did i play the first witcher game.But if you could give some reasons why you think he is not a static one dimensional character i would appriciate it.
Also i would appreciate it if you could keep your tone a little less agressive, offensive.Post something productive instead.
Cheers

You don't need to read the books. You only need to play to determine that.


I haven't read the books, never played W1 and 2, I've never even played a male character before W3 because I can't connect with them. So I came playing the game with a lot of prejudice. But even then,I really do not see this one dimentional character you're speaking of. The opening scene alone with Ciri proves otherwise.

[correctamundo]

Mostly agree with op but want bw to look closer on TW 3 sidequests. As for Geralt he clearly has more than one dimension in my opinion ;-)