855 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

Funny since I'd consider the entire Brecilian Forest a poor, disjoined, weak story, with annoying combat, lousy pathing.

*shrug*

That's fine, but DAI still isn't a failure. It never will be a failure. Because it did exactly what EA expected it to do. It made money. In fact, it did better than expectations.

We can ****** and moan back and forth about what's wrong with the game. We can even get pretentious about it, but nothing changes that one little fact.

Yes, it's interesting how two people can experience the same thing and have opposite opinions on it. Anyway, I never said DA:I was a financial failure. I personally never even said the game was a failure at all, just that I didn't like it and I feel the weaknesses outweigh the strengths. I realize people have different likes and priorities. CoD and WoW aren't failures by a long shot, but you couldn't pay me to play them.

 

So the game should only be remotely good, if you are willing to fork an additional 10€ out for the DLC?

 

And you don't get nearly enough money to buy tomes, without doing sidequests or soulcrushing farming. So no matter how you play the game, you will at some point be forced to go waste time doing tedious, mindnumbingly boring sidequests, which holds zero bearing to the main quests, just so that you can gather enough "power" to continue the already slow main quest.

I agree, I hope they decide against having this type of power mechanic in any future games. It adds nothing and forces people to grind. Some enjoy the grind, others don't but it shouldn't have been forced.

[SharpWalkers]

But keep plinking away if that is all one can imagine.

 

Ever considered that of all things you mentioned, none of those things negate or disprove the criticism I have? Because you keep making assumptions about how I play this game, and use those assumptions in an attempt to argue a way of playing where my criticisms are false. Frankly, it's annoying, and I'm tired of arguing against that.

[Ariella]

Making money, is not the only criteria for being a success you know. EA had high hopes, beyond just making money, for DA:I, and it failed to deliver.

That's funny... And wrong. DAI did so well, that EA called it out in its earning call for the quarter. Said that DAI was responsible in part for the success of EA in that quarter.

"Dragon Age: Inquisition and Battlefield Hardline are both terrific examples of the focus we have today. Moving launch dates is never easy, but we are committed to making the hard decisions that will benefit our players. With Dragon Age: Inquisition, those extra few weeks of polish allowed BioWare to deliver a truly epic new experience. Not only did it win dozens of Game of the Year awards, more importantly, our players gave it the highest form of praise with nearly 200 million hours of Dragon Age: Inquisition played live to date."

http://www.thestreet...transcript.html

"Calendar year 2014 EA was the #1 publisher on PlayStation®4 and Xbox One consoles
in the world, driven by the success of Dragon Age™: Inquisition, FIFA 15, NHL®15,
Madden NFL 15, EA SPORTSTM UFC®, TitanfallTM, Battlefield 4TM, and FIFA 14.
• SimCity™ BuildIt just launched in December and has already achieved 22 million
downloads to date and has reached the top 5 iOS game downloads in more than 100
countries.
• Dragon Age: Inquisition captivated fans and critics worldwide and it quickly became the
most successful launch in BioWare™ history in addition to being named to more than 200
“Game of the Year” lists. The single player campaign alone has been enjoyed for more
than 113 million hours"

http://files.shareho...ngs_Release.pdf

Those are for Q4 and Q3 2015 respectively. And considering DAI got mentioned with the big boys (ie its sports titles), I think we can take it that DAI did well.

[Elhanan]

Not good enough.  Blaming the player for bad game design is a non-starter for me, and the power system is badly designed.  If the game is played 'normally' (as most new players will), the power system doesn't work.
 
Edit PS:  Think about this from an RP Pov.  Are you seriously suggesting that most decent people would let innocent refugees freeze and starve while you go away to meet with some stuck-up Chantry Sisters who hate your guts anyway?  I think not.  You put out the fires around you NOW and then worry about the aftermath later....it doesn't matter why you went there originally, letting people die and leaving your tasks undone is simply not something most heroically aligned players should reasonably be expected to do. 
 
PPS:  Blaming the player for what amounts to bad game design and structure is a complete non-starter with me.

Each Player can choose whether to follow the suggested path or not; am personally glad for the freedom and option to do so. This is the case whether one accepts it or not.

And any RP scenario will differ from a particular character POV. Some have stated that they do not wish to help the refugees at all. And ceasing hostilities between the two factions while setting the Chantry opposition aside may be rather important for many. Options; gotta luv 'em.

[Elhanan]

So the game should only be remotely good, if you are willing to fork an additional 10€ out for the DLC?
 
And you don't get nearly enough money to buy tomes, without doing sidequests or soulcrushing farming. So no matter how you play the game, you will at some point be forced to go waste time doing tedious, mindnumbingly boring sidequests, which holds zero bearing to the main quests, just so that you can gather enough "power" to continue the already slow main quest.

I am not forced to do much of anything; have no idea how little it takes others to perform tasks that may not be to their liking. Investing in the lower cost Tomes early, and the more expensive ones later aids my gameplay a great deal, and I skip the majority of Requisitions.

And while the Trials may be linked to the DLC, the patches and Golden Nug are not.

DAI is a financial and critical success; they have the evidence in which to prove it.

[Elhanan]

Ever considered that of all things you mentioned, none of those things negate or disprove the criticism I have? Because you keep making assumptions about how I play this game, and use those assumptions in an attempt to argue a way of playing where my criticisms are false. Frankly, it's annoying, and I'm tired of arguing against that.

If one chooses to not utilize mechanics and combos that are available to aid combat, that is on the Player. Personally choose mot to use any throwing chains or earthshattering abilities, as I prefer not to have those animations. I accept the possible loss of effectiveness. But I do not contend the game is a failure because options that others may like are included.

The opposition has health bars; true, but they are not the damage sponges some attempt to name them. One may whittle, or use another method to better cleave said HP; I prefer the latter method, if possible.

The criticisms are not necessarily false, as they may have been experienced in that game, but it is inaccurate to indicate that there are no other, better options. I present info to the contrary to indicate that fact.

[SharpWalkers]

If one chooses to not utilize mechanics and combos that are available to aid combat, that is on the Player. Personally choose mot to use any throwing chains or earthshattering abilities, as I prefer not to have those animations. I accept the possible loss of effectiveness. But I do not contend the game is a failure because options that others may like are included.

The opposition has health bars; true, but they are not the damage sponges some attempt to name them. One may whittle, or use another method to better cleave said HP; I prefer the latter method, if possible.

The criticisms are not necessarily false, as they may have been experienced in that game, but it is inaccurate to indicate that there are no other, better options. I present info to the contrary to indicate that fact.

 

The assumption being that the criticism levied against the combat must be coming from someone not doing (any of) the things you've mentioned over the course of this discussion. Which is simply not the case. Yet, in my opinion, the combat is still very tedious. 

[Incantrix]

I don't want to discard the open world, that would probably set the next game's development behind by years. I think Bioware is going to keep the environmental structure of larger zones, which is fine. To do otherwise would be to indicate that the zones didn't work as well as they intended. They just need to fill those zones with quality material and flesh out the characters and quests. I would say that DAO offered replayabliity through the different origins, multi-path quest lines, both major quests and side quests, and DA2 offered it with diverging paths and dialogue tones.

Most definitely. I think everyone needs to keep in mind that they have NEVER used the frostbite engine before and this game was pretty much the tip of the iceberg as far as the game design is concerned. They'll most definitely improve.  Furthermore, they also had to keep environmental detail at a minimum because they put the game out for prev gen consoles as well as current gen. 

[vbibbi]

Funny since I'd consider the entire Brecilian Forest a poor, disjoined, weak story, with annoying combat, lousy pathing.

*shrug*

That's fine, but DAI still isn't a failure. It never will be a failure. Because it did exactly what EA expected it to do. It made money. In fact, it did better than expectations.

We can ****** and moan back and forth about what's wrong with the game. We can even get pretentious about it, but nothing changes that one little fact.

Yeah the title of the thread is derailing the discussion, because I don't think most critics on this thread are saying DAI is a failure. I'm certainly not. This is just a thread that has sparked a dialogue between fans who enjoy most aspects of the game and those who want significant changes. All of whom are still fans of DA.

 

So I would say read criticisms in this thread with a grain of salt that we're not saying it's a failure just because we're posting in a thread with that title.

[ESTAQ99]

Most definitely. I think everyone needs to keep in mind that they have NEVER used the frostbite engine before and this game was pretty much the tip of the iceberg as far as the game design is concerned. They'll most definitely improve.  Furthermore, they also had to keep environmental detail at a minimum because they put the game out for prev gen consoles as well as current gen. 

 

 

Well, it's a pretty idiotic excuse. The excuse for DA2 failure was insufficient time and now that they had all the time they needed, their excuse would be that they decided to sabotage their own game going for an engine they didn't know how to make it work. Interesting, I wonder what will be the excuse for the next game epic shortcomings (if after DAI, there is another DA game). Solar wind interfered with the development process? A giant cheese wheel fell from the sky and destroyed the devs working place?

[Elhanan]

The assumption being that the criticism levied against the combat must be coming from someone not doing (any of) the things you've mentioned over the course of this discussion. Which is simply not the case. Yet, in my opinion, the combat is still very tedious.

No assumption. What I describe is not fighting inflated Health bar opponents over the course of several minutes. That label is erroneous.

[Elhanan]

Well, it's a pretty idiotic excuse. The excuse for DA2 failure was insufficient time and now that they had all the time they needed, their excuse would be that they decided to sabotage their own game going for an engine they didn't know how to make it work. Interesting, I wonder what will be the excuse for the next game epic shortcomings (if after DAI, there is another DA game). Solar wind interfered with the development process? A giant cheese wheel fell from the sky and destroyed the devs working place?

No excuse needed for the 2014 GOTY.

[IanPolaris]

Each Player can choose whether to follow the suggested path or not; am personally glad for the freedom and option to do so. This is the case whether one accepts it or not.

And any RP scenario will differ from a particular character POV. Some have stated that they do not wish to help the refugees at all. And ceasing hostilities between the two factions while setting the Chantry opposition aside may be rather important for many. Options; gotta luv 'em.

 

Except it really isn't freedom.  By the time you do even the minimum of what you are told a responsible herald should (close the breaches immediately around the refugees and neuter both sides from fighting and thus killing the refugees) you STILL already have much more power and level than you really should for the rest of the game....and that's assuming you think it's in character for a hero to let helpless people freeze to death and starve in the wilderness when you can take immediate action to see that they won't (and I argue most players would take such action).

 

Basically it's a non-choice.  The power system only *works* for the most insensitive and minimalist of players and by making this argument you are essentially blaming the player for the faults of the game.  This is an attitude I find all to often in game designers and it's an attitude I find reprehensible.

[SharpWalkers]

No assumption. What I describe is not fighting inflated Health bar opponents over the course of several minutes. That label is erroneous.

Complete assumption, considering otherwise there was no need for any comment on how combat wasn't tedious if doing certain things, rather than thinking, "Gee that person finds it tedious, regardless. Ok."  

Situation dependant hyperbole - not erroneous. 

 

Now let's just quit it.

[IanPolaris]

No excuse needed for the 2014 GOTY.

 

I have two:

 

1)  Bought and Paid for.  The CRPG reviewing process especially in the last few years has become notoriously unreliable and corrupt.

 

2) Weak field.  If Witcher 3 had come out six months earlier (just to name but one example), there's no way that DAI would have sniffed any GOTY awards.   2014 was a particularly bad year for CRPGs.

[Nefla]

Complete assumption on how I play the game. Situation dependant hyperbole - not erroneous. 

 

Now let's just quit it.

Take it from me, arguing with this person is like beating your head against a stubborn and illogical brick wall. Just put him on ignore.

[ESTAQ99]

No excuse needed for the 2014 GOTY.

 

You know why they got 2014 GOTY. Everybody knows it. It's like saying DAI had excellent critics reviews so the game must be excellent. I still remember all the DA2 critics reviews

[Majestic Jazz]

As does DAI. Every area has side content that can be tied to the story. Thankfully, not every bit of side content was set with a cut-scene.

I think what he meant was that some sidequest in TW3 actually effected the outcome of the main story. In DAI, sidequest can be tied into the main story but did not have a bearing or influence on the main story.

The Hinterlands sidequest had no affect on who won between the Mages and Templars

The Exalted Plan and The Dales sidequest had no affect on the outcome of who rules Orlais

[Al Foley]

I think what he meant was that some sidequest in TW3 actually effected the outcome of the main story. In DAI, sidequest can be tied into the main story but did not have a bearing or influence on the main story.

The Hinterlands sidequest had no affect on who won between the Mages and Templars

The Exalted Plan and The Dales sidequest had no affect on the outcome of who rules Orlais

And nor should it have.  

[vbibbi]

And nor should it have.  

Why not? I thought our actions and choices were supposed to matter?

[Al Foley]

Why not? I thought our actions and choices were supposed to matter?

They are but given the story structure of the rest of DA I, something I do not want to see change....well at least too much...well at least none of the major choices lets put it that way...except for maybe the Temple of Mythal....ahem...anyways but with the rest of the choices in the game and the story structure it would have been silly if say doing the quest 'Templars on the Road' would have locked you out of being able to have free allies with the mages.  Or if pacifying the Dales, in general, would have locked you into having Grand Duke Gaspard as Emperor.  I agree those quests could have had some impact on the story and it would have been an improvement to DA I but actually effecting the quests in a major way?  I think it would annoy more people then satisfied. 

 

Also as an aside, especially in Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts many of our choices do matter.  And then in Here Lies the Abyss and Trespassers even though your choices do not take options off the table your choices in the game will effect, or should effect, your choices in those quests. 

[Incantrix]

Well, it's a pretty idiotic excuse. The excuse for DA2 failure was insufficient time and now that they had all the time they needed, their excuse would be that they decided to sabotage their own game going for an engine they didn't know how to make it work. Interesting, I wonder what will be the excuse for the next game epic shortcomings (if after DAI, there is another DA game). Solar wind interfered with the development process? A giant cheese wheel fell from the sky and destroyed the devs working place?

 

Oh please. Your cynicism does you no credit. Dragon age needed to evolve and getting in tune with a new engine was the way to go, no DA will NEVER be like Origins again. People like you need to finally accept that and either stop playing DA games only to complain about it because you expected something impossible or just get with the program and enjoy the game for what it is. 

 

I'm glad they decided to use a new engine. They will grow with this engine and do so many cool things. I'm very excited for the future. 

[Elhanan]

Except it really isn't freedom.  By the time you do even the minimum of what you are told a responsible herald should (close the breaches immediately around the refugees and neuter both sides from fighting and thus killing the refugees) you STILL already have much more power and level than you really should for the rest of the game....and that's assuming you think it's in character for a hero to let helpless people freeze to death and starve in the wilderness when you can take immediate action to see that they won't (and I argue most players would take such action).
 
Basically it's a non-choice.  The power system only *works* for the most insensitive and minimalist of players and by making this argument you are essentially blaming the player for the faults of the game.  This is an attitude I find all to often in game designers and it's an attitude I find reprehensible.

What you consider to be responsible and any other Player may differ, but every Player is given the freedom of choice to RP as they deem fit. You may have selected a path that was unpleasant to you; does not define the game, mechanics, etc of another, even if they select that same path.

Opinions; everyone has them, but does not make them facts.

[Elhanan]

Complete assumption, considering otherwise there was no need for any comment on how combat wasn't tedious if doing certain things, rather than thinking, "Gee that person finds it tedious, regardless. Ok."  
Situation dependant hyperbole - not erroneous. 
 
Now let's just quit it.

Again you misunderstand. What you find tedious is an opinion; not factual. The description given earlier is not the only methodology one may choose to use for Combat; thus is inaccurate.

[Elhanan]

You know why they got 2014 GOTY. Everybody knows it. It's like saying DAI had excellent critics reviews so the game must be excellent. I still remember all the DA2 critics reviews

And yet, there it is whether or not one approves of it. DAI is the 2014 GOTY, and have the actual accolades to prove it.