65 réponses à ce sujet

[Lee80]

I'm not too phased either way about the texture changes, but the character appearance change was a big improvement in my opinion.  Everyone looks much nicer now.  

 

I personally am glad the timed missions that take place even if you are trying to do something else were axed.  I don't want the game to abruptly force me to drop whatever I'm doing to go save the same npc's (for what could potentially be a third or fourth time).  That sounds like a facebook game from hell to me personally. -shrug- I got tired of tending my crops a long time ago.  

[Thermopylae]

Well, the alpha game as described had amazing potential, and thats because the game as described existed pretty much in "your" and admittedly "my" imagination. I'm just glad that the game was able to surprise me occasionally. Some of its content I would not have believed possible years ago, I think you may know what I mean.

 

It would be interesting if the multiplayer or non story driven combat situations were taking place on a kind of moving front that was tied to the strategic map, such that the bad guys were able to push your forces back if you failed key objectives or were not able to mobilize conventional forces or key assets to the front in time.

 

But I agree with Lee80 about the timed missions issue, it would very easy for this game to end up like a medieval Phoenix program or horrifying Crusade, which though illuminating may not be exactly "fun". Save that for the next incarnation of Game of Thrones, whatever that may be.

[thewatcheruatu]

Even the pre-alpha video, however, sort of highlights what would prove (to me) to be some of the major issues with the game. For example, story getting short shrift compared with exploration (which I often hate in this game because the environments are too large, too empty, not really interesting enough to reward exploration, and with waaayyy too many obstructions). The fact that progression would be tied to nonsense abstractions like "Agents" (eventually, in the launched game, "Power"), as opposed to questing (e.g., capping the sulfur vents in any of the other Dragon Age games would have been something tied into a story quest).

 

That last one in particular is a fundamental design problem where they've elevated the importance of the Inquisition, itself, over your actual protagonist. Some notable significance to capturing keeps could have been a good thing, but even here, they got it all wrong in my opinion. Capturing a keep should have given you another questing hub, with NPCs to which you could talk to initiate new quests. But instead, keeps were merely a staging platform for the Inquisition to do stuff on your behalf. That's boring. Sorry.

 

In the released game, we no longer have to even capture the keeps (and to be sure, I don't bother, because they just take a long time and offer little reward), but I'm not sure that's an improvement either.

[Kantr]

It always makes me sad watching the pre-alpha footage seeing the game we could have got. I suppose it changed when they put in the multiple races.

Modifié par Kantr, 24 août 2015 - 04:44 .

[SharpWalkers]

It always makes me sad watching the pre-alpha footage seeing the game we could have got. I suppose it got all thrown out when they put in the multiple races.

 

I can't imagine such an overhaul had anything to with that. None of the footage in the pre-alpha shows anything that would logically require changing because of adding multiple races. It could've played out exactly the same if it was an elf.

 

It probably had everything to do with the limitations of 10 year old consoles. . . Looking at you X360 & PS3! Yeah you better ru-- Oh, you're inanimate objects? Thanks for making it easy!

[Kantr]

I can't imagine such an overhaul had anything to with that. None of the footage in the pre-alpha shows anything that would logically require changing because of adding multiple races. It could've played out exactly the same if it was an elf.

 

It probably had everything to do with the limitations of 10 year old consoles. . . Looking at you X360 & PS3! Yeah you better ru-- Oh, you're inanimate objects? Thanks for making it easy!

It would seem odd that they threw it out over the last gen limitation. When next gen was not out yet.

[TraiHarder]

It's the same video that has been going around online. I prefer what they've done with the official game but I'm disappointed with the lack of actual repercussions to our actions and the lack of Keeps management. The game runs smooth on my PS4 and I don't have any problem with it now that I know how to tweak the strategy system to work to my likings.

Your gross the pre alpha was waaaay better. It put you into the world far more than what they have given us now. I want u to go back and watch ea h of the pre alpha and tell me you didn't want those keeps they had WHERE IT ACTUALLY looked like a strong hold

Where it was customizable
U don't want the crestwood village quest where the enemy is already attacking them before you even get their like actually war
U down want to be able to actually command your troops? To help the village or go home or go help the wounded
You don't want the more strategic gameplay of a interactive environment.

[TraiHarder]

I'm not too phased either way about the texture changes, but the character appearance change was a big improvement in my opinion.  Everyone looks much nicer now.  
 
I personally am glad the timed missions that take place even if you are trying to do something else were axed.  I don't want the game to abruptly force me to drop whatever I'm doing to go save the same npc's (for what could potentially be a third or fourth time).  That sounds like a facebook game from hell to me personally. -shrug- I got tired of tending my crops a long time ago.  

What timed mission? Do u mean crest wood

Why would you not what something like that in the setting your put in in the game

What because you don't wanna make a actual decision that would have a actual impact on the game? That was only one of the amazing point to the one alpha having to actually make a decision worth something. Which is something everyone has been wanting.

[pdusen]

I feel like I'm watching some cult undergo a massive group hallucination.

[TraiHarder]

I can't imagine such an overhaul had anything to with that. None of the footage in the pre-alpha shows anything that would logically require changing because of adding multiple races. It could've played out exactly the same if it was an elf.
 
It probably had everything to do with the limitations of 10 year old consoles. . . Looking at you X360 & PS3! Yeah you better ru-- Oh, you're inanimate objects? Thanks for making it easy!

I don't think it had to do with last gen to be honest because I had to get da:I on the PS3 first and it looks horrible and they can't blame it on it being last gen because there were games before it that looked so much better

[TraiHarder]

I feel like I'm watching some cult undwergo a massive group hallucination.

Explain plz

[pdusen]

Explain plz

 

Because as someone who watched the video this topic is about many times, the game we ended up with isn't that different. Yes, graphically, I can tell the difference, but it's not significant. Gameplay-wise... the difference is even less. And yes, they replaced that specific Crestwood quest. Big deal.

 

So, my only conclusion is that those of you who are crying about not getting the pre-alpha content must be having a massive group hallucination, because you certainly aren't talking about reality.

[TraiHarder]

Even the pre-alpha video, however, sort of highlights what would prove (to me) to be some of the major issues with the game. For example, story getting short shrift compared with exploration (which I often hate in this game because the environments are too large, too empty, not really interesting enough to reward exploration, and with waaayyy too many obstructions). The fact that progression would be tied to nonsense abstractions like "Agents" (eventually, in the launched game, "Power"), as opposed to questing (e.g., capping the sulfur vents in any of the other Dragon Age games would have been something tied into a story quest).
 
That last one in particular is a fundamental design problem where they've elevated the importance of the Inquisition, itself, over your actual protagonist. Some notable significance to capturing keeps could have been a good thing, but even here, they got it all wrong in my opinion. Capturing a keep should have given you another questing hub, with NPCs to which you could talk to initiate new quests. But instead, keeps were merely a staging platform for the Inquisition to do stuff on your behalf. That's boring. Sorry.
 
In the released game, we no longer have to even capture the keeps (and to be sure, I don't bother, because they just take a long time and offer little reward), but I'm not sure that's an improvement either.

We didn't even get to actually see what all keeps offered in the pre alpha to be honest I think they would have offered more Npcs to give us quest such as ambassadors coming on behalf of someone asking for an alliance or help or the people of that land asking for help from the Inquisition so do you help them and gain their respect or deny them help and potentially allow the village to be over run with bandits us know? Something like that would have been amazing OMG.

And keeps were soooooo much bigger before and I can't count how many keeps we actually fight in that we don't been occupy for the inquisition which make me so freaking mad.

[TraiHarder]

Because as someone who watched the video this topic is about many times, the game we ended up with isn't that different. Yes, graphically, I can tell the difference, but it's not significant. Gameplay-wise... the difference is even less. And yes, they replaced that specific Crestwood quest. Big deal.
 
So, my only conclusion is that those of you who are crying about not getting the pre-alpha content must be having a massive group hallucination, because you certainly aren't talking about reality.

You must be looking at something different some other game?

Because THERE ARE HUUUGGGGE DIFFERENCES IN THE GAME FROM THE ALPHA

They were TWO DIFFERENT GAMES

What we have now no longer gives us massive keeps that we can customize to reflect how we want to inquisition to look in that land. The keeps I'm sure also offered far more than they do now.

We no longer have meaningful quest such as the crestwood one where I am fairly sure there were many other quest like the crestwood one so you and I don't know what other quest they took out that was only a small portion of the game to highlight some of its strong point at the time.

And WTF big deal us it's a big deal it was a quest THAT ACTUALLY MEANT SOMETHING there is not one quest that actually means something and actually has repercussions like that one showed.

They allowed the choice of letting your army take care if it or making them leave or even showing your soft side and making them tend to the wounded. Something we all wanted but can't do now in the final version.

Gameplay wise there's been kinda if a change I would have preferred the old mage auto attacks allowing them to move is so much better for sure. Allowing them to re position themselves in a fight is far better than it is now.

So REALITY IS that the pre alpha game was headed is a much different direction than what we got. And in my opinion and a lot of other it was headed in a far better direction that we wish they would have stayed with.

[pdusen]

So REALITY IS that the pre alpha game was headed is a much different direction than what we got. And in my opinion and a lot of other it was headed in a far better direction that we wish they would have stayed with.

 

Even if your whole diatribe is true, the video was of a short vertical slice and not a complete game. There's no indication whatsoever that the rest of the game looked anything like that. 

 

But, again, you're imagining massive differences that just aren't there. At least, not in that video.

[SharpWalkers]

It would seem odd that they threw it out over the last gen limitation. When next gen was not out yet.

 

Ehm... according to the description this demo was played on the Xbox One. Developers get the consoles a lot earlier than they are released to the public - they need to develop games on them, after all - because if they didn't there wouldn't be any games at launch.

 

I don't think it had to do with last gen to be honest because I had to get da:I on the PS3 first and it looks horrible and they can't blame it on it being last gen because there were games before it that looked so much better

 

You don't think it had to do with that because you got the game on last-gen and it looked bad? That's exactly why it has to do with last-gen. It can barely handle the game we got in the end.

Last-gen are 10 year old consoles - if you want to make a somewhat ambitious game on current-gen (which I assume was Inquisitions intent - to be ambitious), you can't have last-gen weighing it down. Which it did - considerably. It's like developing for X360 & N64 at the same time (also 10 years apart). And both last-gen and current-gen players suffered for it. Last-gen because they got a game that barely functions, current-gen because they got a game weighed down by the old consoles. 

There's a reason other open-world RPG's like The Witcher 3, Fallout 4 and Kingdom Comes: Deliverance aren't coming out on last-gen. It can't handle it anymore.

[TraiHarder]

Even if your whole diatribe is true, the video was of a short vertical slice and not a complete game. There's no indication whatsoever that the rest of the game looked anything like that.

But, again, you're imagining massive differences that just aren't there. At least, not in that video.

WTF you really just want to start crap where there is none.


I have not pointed out anything we don't have in the final game that wasn't in the alpha gameplays

But in your mind I have so please tell me what have I said that are this MASSOVE DIFFERENCES that I have point out please your turn?

[TraiHarder]

Ehm... according to the description this demo was played on the Xbox One. Developers get the consoles a lot earlier than they are released to the public - they need to develop games on them, after all - because if they didn't there wouldn't be any games at launch.


You don't think it had to do with that because you got the game on last-gen and it looked bad? That's exactly why it has to do with last-gen. It can barely handle the game we got in the end.
Last-gen are 10 year old consoles - if you want to make a somewhat ambitious game on current-gen (which I assume was Inquisitions intent - to be ambitious), you can't have last-gen weighing it down. Which it did - considerably. It's like developing for X360 & N64 at the same time (also 10 years apart). And both last-gen and current-gen players suffered for it. Last-gen because they got a game that barely functions, current-gen because they got a game weighed down by the old consoles.
There's a reason other open-world RPG's like The Witcher 3, Fallout 4 and Kingdom Comes: Deliverance aren't coming out on last-gen. It can't handle it anymore.

If you read what I said I said I don't think that was the reason for them changing the game in the way they did because if you look back there would be no reason to change it because of the last gen the last gen would Ben able to handle the new mage auto attacks or the different over the shoulder perspective km the crestwood attack.

Like I said there were games that came way before inquisition that looked MUCH and played MUCH better for example crysis 3 looked far better and still played great

[pdusen]

WTF you really just want to start crap where there is none.


I have not pointed out anything we don't have in the final game that wasn't in the alpha gameplays

But in your mind I have so please tell me what have I said that are this MASSOVE DIFFERENCES that I have point out please your turn?

 

Nah.

 

This actually has been discussed quite a lot before, so you could search if you really care.

[TraiHarder]

Nah.

This actually has been discussed quite a lot before, so you could search if you really care.

WTF you just said I AS IN ME I was stated massive differences that weren't there and then go and tell me to research what's not there dude stfu

Your just trying to start stuff when there's no reason to if you not gonna back your statement up with actual proof,I mean there is none because like is said I never pointed out anything that wasn't in the alpha, Then you can leave.

[SharpWalkers]

If you read what I said I said I don't think that was the reason for them changing the game in the way they did because if you look back there would be no reason to change it because of the last gen the last gen would Ben able to handle the new mage auto attacks or the different over the shoulder perspective km the crestwood attack.

Like I said there were games that came way before inquisition that looked MUCH and played MUCH better for example crysis 3 looked far better and still played great

 

Yes I know what you said. Problem was it only confirms my point - not oppose it. Camera view and mage auto-attacks are only two small things, and that there are games on last-gen that look and play better has no impact on last-gen DA:I. Crysis 3 is a shooter, not a (semi-)open world game. Open world take up more resources than a shooter, because it has to handle everything in that open world. Games like that will always look better.

Look at it like this:

If all your console had to process was a small box - you'd get one amazing looking small box. If you make it a huge F*$&ng box, you can't add the same details, because it takes up more resources. Now if you have to make that same huge F@%^ng box on two consoles, and one is 10 years older, you'll have to scrap even more, just to make it work on the 10 year old console. Unless, perhaps, you want to develop both completely separated and not give the 10 year old the same features and same size box as the newer console. 

 

So yes, coming back to the post I originally replied to, I think it's highly more likely that the changes to DA:I, from that pre-alpha to the final game, had to do with accommodating the last-gen consoles, rather than with adding multiple playable races.

[TraiHarder]

Yes I know what you said. Problem was it only confirms my point - not oppose it. Camera view and mage auto-attacks are only two small things, and that there are games on last-gen that look and play better has no impact on last-gen DA:I. Crysis 3 is a shooter, not a (semi-)open world game. Open world take up more resources than a shooter, because it has to handle everything in that open world. Games like that will always look better.
Look at it like this:
If all your console had to process was a small box - you'd get one amazing looking small box. If you make it a huge F*$&ng box, you can't add the same details, because it takes up more resources. Now if you have to make that same huge F@%^ng box on two consoles, and one is 10 years older, you'll have to scrap even more, just to make it work on the 10 year old console. Unless, perhaps, you want to develop both completely separated and not give the 10 year old the same features and same size box as the newer console.

So yes, coming back to the post I originally replied to, I think it's highly more likely that the changes to DA:I, from that pre-alpha to the final game, had to do with accommodating the last-gen consoles, rather than with adding multiple playable races.

Like I said there were many other games that looked better cyrisis it self was a pretty big game aswell sure a open world take more to run but it's not like it hasn't been done before hell skyrim looked better and it's one huge open world instead of multiple places like dragon age.

Like I said the camera view had no reason to be change and neither did the auto attacks nor did they need to take out showing what your inquisitor would actually say from your response pick yet they took those things out too.

You did not get my point when I stated those thing. Which was all these small things that people were so excited about and added on to the game customization of the keep another thing that's gone that would not have been a problem is gone

These things can not be blamed on a last gen console because these things have been done before

Do you understand my point now?

[SharpWalkers]

Like I said there were many other games that looked better cyrisis it self was a pretty big game aswell sure a open world take more to run but it's not like it hasn't been done before hell skyrim looked better and it's one huge open world instead of multiple places like dragon age.

Like I said the camera view had no reason to be change and neither did the auto attacks nor did they need to take out showing what your inquisitor would actually say from your response pick yet they took those things out too.

You did not get my point when I stated those thing. Which was all these small things that people were so excited about and added on to the game customization of the keep another thing that's gone that would not have been a problem is gone

These things can not be blamed on a last gen console because these things have been done before

Do you understand my point now?

 

And like I said, that other games looked better has no effect on DA:I and how it runs on those same machines. This isn't other games. All it shows is how much they already had to downgrade DA:I for old-gen consoles.

That changes like camera and auto-attack might've worked is not somehow proof it wasn't because old-gen held the game back. Those are small things they might've changed for whatever reason, and has little impact on the point I argued.

 

Also, you don't know if multiple customizable keeps, and sieges of those keeps - including seeing those templars land in the distance (even that requires processing power - notice how many things are static in DA:I? Apparently even more so on last-gen...) and burning their boats - wouldn't have been a problem. Again, this isn't other games - that you've seen it work elsewhere doesn't matter.

That - like my original point: that I think it's endlessly more likely (not arguing it as fact, just that it's more likely and logical) things changed to accomodate last-gen, rather than because they added multiple race selection - is complete assumption. Which is all we can do, because at the end of the day we simply don't know why changes where made.

 

I assume the, to me, most logical reason. And the points you've argued against it aren't irrefutable enough to change that view. 

Let's leave it at that. 

 

 

PS. By the way, it doesn't show what you where going to say, it shows the result of those actions - which is still in the game: what you do with the grey-wardens for example.

[pdusen]

WTF you just said I AS IN ME I was stated massive differences that weren't there and then go and tell me to research what's not there dude stfu

Your just trying to start stuff when there's no reason to if you not gonna back your statement up with actual proof,I mean there is none because like is said I never pointed out anything that wasn't in the alpha, Then you can leave.

 

Because there's no point. The way you're responding makes it clear you're not interested in an actual discussion. I'm only still here because you asked me a question.

[TraiHarder]

And like I said, that other games looked better has no effect on DA:I and how it runs on those same machines. This isn't other games. All it shows is how much they already had to downgrade DA:I for old-gen consoles.
That changes like camera and auto-attack might've worked is not somehow proof it wasn't because old-gen held the game back. Those are small things they might've changed for whatever reason, and has little impact on the point I argued.

Also, you don't know if multiple customizable keeps, and sieges of those keeps - including seeing those templars land in the distance (even that requires processing power - notice how many things are static in DA:I? Apparently even more so on last-gen...) and burning their boats - wouldn't have been a problem. Again, this isn't other games - that you've seen it work elsewhere doesn't matter.
That - like my original point: that I think it's endlessly more likely (not arguing it as fact, just that it's more likely and logical) things changed to accomodate last-gen, rather than because they added multiple race selection - is complete assumption. Which is all we can do, because at the end of the day we simply don't know why changes where made.

I assume the, to me, most logical reason. And the points you've argued against it aren't irrefutable enough to change that view.
Let's leave it at that.


PS. By the way, it doesn't show what you where going to say, it shows the result of those actions - which is still in the game: what you do with the grey-wardens for example.

No your still not getting it IT DOESNT MATTER IF ITS ANOTHER GAME

If another company can do it then can do it simple as that there's not much to understand going into that.

You don't get the point that they changed things that didn't need to be changed the hand mage auto attacks are still in the game the enemy npcs do it.


And I do know that customizable keeps wouldn't be hard because all it is, is just revealing something that's already there kinda how it works.

And ps WTF are u talking about now?