855 réponses à ce sujet

[Ariella]

So what makes DA:I special? Because I can't see anything special about DA:I. At least witcher has action then.

Very simple: Dragon Age is what makes Dragon Age special. It is an original IP, and not simply playing in someone else's toy box.

I found combat fine, in fact this is the first time I've enjoyed playing a mage. The menus worked well, so I don't understand the complaint about being counterintutitive.

You can't compare the combat systems of DAI and Witcher at all. One is party based combat using skills mapped to keyboard/controller buttons, the other is single combatant based where most combat skills trigger based on a sequence of buttons, ala SoM. It's a different design philosophy.

As for lack of variety in classes? As compared to what? Not the Witcher certainly. We have the same three classes that have been in every DA game. Numerically we have one less specialization than either DAO or DA2, but the specializations in DAI are superior to Origins in that fact DAI specializations give a great deal more than an Origins specialization.

Assassin in Origins has 3 passive skills and one active.

Same specialization in DAI has 3 actives, each with two togglable upgrades, and 4 passives.

Templar in DAO has 2 passive 2 active.
Templar in DAI: 3 active, each with upgrades and 4 passive.

And that doesn't even get into focus skills.

And yes, I'm not including Awakenings as it's practically a new game in and of itself. You can't start a completely new character and just play Trespasser unlike Awakenings were you can or,if you did the US in Origins, have to.

Comparing a gaming shop to the Gaming Industry itself. Yeah; seems objective to me....

Some people like their echo chambers

[Ariella]

Point: Missing it.  What the picture shows is a game shop has to reserve an entire shelf for games that got "GOTY" all in the same year.  That indicates how many different game gets this award in one fashion or another, making it essentially worthless as an objective tool to evaluate the quality of the game.

Considering EA made a point of calling out DAI's nods to its *investors* I'm unsure of your point. A major gaming company isn't going to point out such a thing to stockholders if *they* don't think it means anything.

[Elhanan]

Point: Missing it.  What the picture shows is a game shop has to reserve an entire shelf for games that got "GOTY" all in the same year.  That indicates how many different game gets this award in one fashion or another, making it essentially worthless as an objective tool to evaluate the quality of the game.

The DICE Awards do not appear to be just another award for the shelf. Those inside the Industry might be able to say which are the most prestigious, but this one seems to be among them. DAI won the Top Spot for 2014. That appears to be The Point.

[MonkeyLungs]

I don't find DA:I to be a failure at all. Either from observing fan reaction, critical acclaim, or my own personal opinion. Love this IP and have played DA:I more than any other game this gen. Dragon Age: Inquisition is fantastic in my opinion.

[IanPolaris]

Considering EA made a point of calling out DAI's nods to its *investors* I'm unsure of your point. A major gaming company isn't going to point out such a thing to stockholders if *they* don't think it means anything.

 

I also didn't say DAI was a failure either.  Don't take my word.  Go back and read my first post on this thread for yourself.  What I AM saying is that DAI also isn't the greatest thing to hit gaming either and frankly looking at the long terms appears (IMO) to be rather mediocre...which by no means makes it a failure.

 

Also consider that EA was coming off a rather bad year, and DAI does make a tremendous first impression and did sell well initially.  That doesn't mean it's a good game though....and neither to GOTY awards given the suspect nature of gaming press and gaming press reviews (and that's putting it very kindly).

[vbibbi]

I don't see many people who liked Inquisition telling people that didn't like it, that they are objectively wrong. 

 

You must not be reading Elhanan's posts.

[Elhanan]

No; a GOTY Award nor reviews prove that any game is good, but it is rather strong evidence. Add a couple of million hrs recorded of game play, and this seems to look even better in the game's favor.

[Elhanan]

You must not be reading Elhanan's posts.

Neither are you it seems. One may have an opinion - myself included - but it does not make it factual. But factual evidence can be presented to indicate that DAI is well received.

[Al Foley]

 

So what makes DA:I special? Because I can't see anything special about DA:I. At least witcher has action then.

 

Don't get me wrong, DA:I is good in some aspects and more or less average in others, overall a good game but with some serious flaws which makes it hard to enjoy sometimes. 

 

 

Good Story: Check.

Characters: Very check.

Developed Character Realtionships: Yes, better imo than in DA:O. 

Really fun sidequests: No. Huge amout of repetitive stuff. 

 

Bugs aside: Combat is...no. Not the mechanic is bad, but is badly done. AI stuck. Characters frozen. Sometimes they don't use skills because their have to "adjust" their position. Lack of variety regarding class and specialisations - just to name a few. Menus are just woah confusing. I bet I am not the only one who had real trouble actually to equip stuff. This is a counterintuitive hence a bad concept.

 

I remember older Bioware games very well regarding the above stated problem and they did some things way better. Keep the good and take the bad out.

 

As did the Witcher.  Honestly the amount of 'repetitive content' in the Witcher 3 and how hard it was to get to made me want to gouge my eyes out and it almost made me stop playing the game actually rage quit it.  I do not think I have *ever* wanted to rage quite a game...trying to think.  I mean permenently...no I suppose there was Skyrim but not sure if it was rage or boredom that made me quite that one...anyways.  This is one of the things that shocks me the most about people who defend the Witcher ad naseum and say its 'so much better of a game then DA I'.  Sure it had its fun side quests, sure it had its cut scene quests which were appreciated over DA I...BUT THEN IT HAD A MILLION OTHER SMALL LITTLE THINGS ACROSS THE MAP THAT WERE JUST STUPID AND ASSASNINE AND IF YOU ACTUALY DID THEM IT MADE DOING SOME OF THE OTHER QUESTS WORTHLESS!!!  *ahem* Both games have way too much filler but at least in DA Is case you could actually get to your frakin destination.  

 

Point: Missing it.  What the picture shows is a game shop has to reserve an entire shelf for games that got "GOTY" all in the same year.  That indicates how many different game gets this award in one fashion or another, making it essentially worthless as an objective tool to evaluate the quality of the game.

If that was the point then that was vague as ****. 

[IanPolaris]

No; a GOTY Award nor reviews prove that any game is good, but it is rather strong evidence. Add a couple of million hrs recorded of game play, and this seems to look even better in the game's favor.

 

Is it?  At one time, perhaps ten years ago, I'd agree but of late it's rare to see ANY game put out by ANY major publisher get anything less than an 8.5 out of 10 regardless of merit.

[Il Divo]

^To me, that says we need to scale up what we consider a good game based on a review score.

 

There's also an argument to be made that it's also a function of fan want/demand. AAA games tend to be extremely popular, generating a large number of sales. I'm not gonna say that I think reviewers do it to appease their readers, but that could be an extra factor to throw in there causing them to give inflated review scores.

[Al Foley]

Honestly the whole exploration of Witcher nearly ruined the game for me.  It took me pretty much running through the ending twice to let me make my peace with it and declare Witcher 3 a pretty awesome game. 

[vbibbi]

 

If that was the point then that was vague as ****. 

No, it was a case of show, don't tell. I will refrain from making the comparison to fans of the DAI style of storytelling

[Al Foley]

No, it was a case of show, don't tell. I will refrain from making the comparison to fans of the DAI style of storytelling

Well played.   But no...not really.  There is nothing on there to indicate that all those Games are from any one year or another.  There is nothing to indicate they are ven GOTY rather then the huge numbers on top. 

[Ariella]

I also didn't say DAI was a failure either.  Don't take my word.  Go back and read my first post on this thread for yourself.  What I AM saying is that DAI also isn't the greatest thing to hit gaming either and frankly looking at the long terms appears (IMO) to be rather mediocre...which by no means makes it a failure.
 
Also consider that EA was coming off a rather bad year, and DAI does make a tremendous first impression and did sell well initially.  That doesn't mean it's a good game though....and neither to GOTY awards given the suspect nature of gaming press and gaming press reviews (and that's putting it very kindly).

It amazes me how many hoops people are willing to go through to prove empirically that DAI is a bad game rather than just admitting the fact that they didn't like it.

If gaming journalism is "suspect" the why point it out to shareholders? And I'm not talking about the guy who has 10 or so shares. I'm talking about the big investors, who are going to have a good idea, probably better than you in fact, about the worth of a GotY nod.

As for a "bad year", so what? Even if it was a bad year, the fact of the matter is DA doesn't have the same name recognition as Mass Effect, and rpgs are a niche market. Even if it was a "bad year" for EA, they probably had a lot more mainstream games come out during that period. The fact that DAI did well enough to get a mention beside EA's big titles in the call is a major deal. RPGs don't do that well usually.

Is it so hard to admit this is your opinion that the game is mediocre, rather than it being fact? And yes, your wording is implication that it is FACT not your opinion.

[BabyPuncher]

This forum has thoroughly crushed any semblance of faith I had in the idea that the majority of players are concerned with any sort of journey of growth and revelation of truth for the protagonist.

 

I obviously always knew players' wanting a 'mature' story was at largely a joke, but I'm pretty much convinced it's a complete, total joke at this point.

 

Nope. What players want is to be a super-awesome badass who has the world bow down to them and effortlessly defeats anyone who raises a word or hand against them. Because they're the player it and they deserve it because they're just that super-duper awesome.

 

I struggle to see how such a staggeringly poorly written story as Inquisition could receive praise for any other reason.

[Elhanan]

This forum has thoroughly crushed any semblance of faith I had in the idea that the majority of players are concerned with any sort of journey of growth and revelation of truth for the protagonist.
 
I obviously always knew players' wanting a 'mature' story was at largely a joke, but I'm pretty much convinced it's a complete, total joke at this point.
 
Nope. What players want is to be a super-awesome badass who has the world bow down to them and effortlessly defeats anyone who raises a word or hand against them. Because they're the player it and they deserve it because they're just that super-duper awesome.
 
I struggle to see how such a staggeringly poorly written story as Inquisition could receive praise for any other reason.

Perhaps bias is like cataracts; clouds the vision of what is actually there.

[correctamundo]

Point: Missing it.  What the picture shows is a game shop has to reserve an entire shelf for games that got "GOTY" all in the same year.  That indicates how many different game gets this award in one fashion or another, making it essentially worthless as an objective tool to evaluate the quality of the game.

 

Tell me, how many of those games were awarded more than 130 GOTYs 2014? You cannot? For apart from DAI that game does not exist. In fact only 3 or 4 games have ever been awarded more than that in gaming history. Sure there may be many awards out there and many games get awarded at least one but only ONE get the DICE award and only one gets a multitude. TLoU has the most ever with 200 or something closely followed by Skyrim.

[straykat]

It's mostly a failure to me for failing to deliver much on the human conflicts. I don't care as much for the overall mythos of the Elves that they were going for here (or their DLC about Avvar or dwarves). Nor do I care for any fantasy setting that has to talk about it's deepest roots and Monomyths. I like politics and personal conflicts. Just like I do in the real world. I don't care about anyone going on and on about Earth's creation stories either. Who does that? lol. Life is about everything else. This is something many fantasy writers don't get....they end up so enamored with their world building that they were forget to build plots that truly live and breath. I'm selective about the whole genre in general because of this. They can't get away from Tolkien and his obsession with myths. But I thought DA2, Asunder, and Masked Empire was going in a better direction. They had something going there with the Chantry and all the various nation states' stances in this.... it came across more like Historical Fiction than pure High Fantasy.....and then they ruined it in the very beginning of the game. That whole plot explodes on the title screen. lol.. Just to introduce a story about an elven artifact.

 

Anyways...It's also a failure for being too mmo-like.. or at best, a poor implementation of the open world genre. But I can get past this. I'm pretty forgiving with mechanics.. but it's bad nonetheless. Even DA2 had a better tactical feel.

[Elhanan]

Human conflicts would seem to include the Templars vs Mages, Venatori, Red Templars, Orlesian politics, murdering victims of the Blight, slavery, murder via Red Lyrium, demon possession of the Grey Wardens, Freemen vs Orlesian troops, etc.

But I guess one could mistake all that for Elven lore....

[IanPolaris]

Tell me, how many of those games were awarded more than 130 GOTYs 2014? You cannot? For apart from DAI that game does not exist. In fact only 3 or 4 games have ever been awarded more than that in gaming history. Sure there may be many awards out there and many games get awarded at least one but only ONE get the DICE award and only one gets a multitude. TLoU has the most ever with 200 or something closely followed by Skyrim.

 

2014 was also an exceptionally weak year in computer gaming.  Even so, I think that DAI being awarded 2014 GOTY when being released near the end of the year is a bit of a travesty.  The game wasn't fully vetted by the public until well into 2015 and when that happened (esp in light of Witcher 3), DAI lost a lot of luster.  Does that make it a failure?  No.  It does mean that it was overhyped at best.  I regard DAI as a mediocre game.  It gives a great first impression, but as I said in my original post here, it's a mile wide and an inch deep.

[Elhanan]

2014 was also an exceptionally weak year in computer gaming.  Even so, I think that DAI being awarded 2014 GOTY when being released near the end of the year is a bit of a travesty.  The game wasn't fully vetted by the public until well into 2015 and when that happened (esp in light of Witcher 3), DAI lost a lot of luster.  Does that make it a failure?  No.  It does mean that it was overhyped at best.  I regard DAI as a mediocre game.  It gives a great first impression, but as I said in my original post here, it's a mile wide and an inch deep.

And again, opinions do not equate to facts. Simply because it failed to impress you, it still impressed 130+ others enough to grant GOTY awards including the DICE award from the industry voters themselves. The public did not gift all these awards, so any such hypothesis seems to fade in the daylight. Or perhaps in this case, it is less then an inch deep in logic....

[IanPolaris]

And again, opinions do not equate to facts. Simply because it failed to impress you, it still impressed 130+ others enough to grant GOTY awards including the DICE award from the industry voters themselves. The public did not gift all these awards, so any such hypothesis seems to fade in the daylight. Or perhaps in this case, it is less then an inch deep in logic....

 

Um, I'd be really careful before I'd criticize other people's logic were I you.  I say that because your basic argument seems to boil down to:

 

1.  DAI got 140+ GOTY which means it's good.

2.  DAI is good because it got 140+ GOTY awards.

 

That seems a bit....circular.

[correctamundo]

2014 was also an exceptionally weak year in computer gaming.  Even so, I think that DAI being awarded 2014 GOTY when being released near the end of the year is a bit of a travesty.  The game wasn't fully vetted by the public until well into 2015 and when that happened (esp in light of Witcher 3), DAI lost a lot of luster.  Does that make it a failure?  No.  It does mean that it was overhyped at best.  I regard DAI as a mediocre game.  It gives a great first impression, but as I said in my original post here, it's a mile wide and an inch deep.

 

Once again, your idea of the game being "overhyped" is your opinion. You are welcome to it. My opinion differs quite a lot from yours. Still it is opinions. But if you look on PSN, xboxlive (or whatever it is called) as well as metacritic you will see that the game was overall very well received. And still is.

[Elhanan]

Eisegesis; reading into the text is not good for comprehension. Bias clouds the message, and obscures communication.

DAI received 130+ GOTY awards, which means that those groups believe DAI is that good. Only some of those awards were from outside the industry, which would appear to mean that public opinion could not influence all of them. Losing or gaining 'luster' would not affect Industry awards, but yet, both them and public awards were still awarded.

If someone believes DAI is mediocre, that is their opinion. But the facts appear to indicate that this same opinion is not held by those granting the Awards. It does not invalidate their opinion, but does make that opinion more difficult to defend. Placing a meme about it may not appear to be a firm defense.