145 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

Well, you know BSN. We like irony.

[Gwydden]

Let us conveniently ignore that it also won the most Reader's Choice-type awards as well. Wouldn't want to derail the narrative with actual facts would we.

I do think that pretending DAI wasn't well received by gamers in general is a bit off the mark. It won GotY fair and square. On the other hand, I also think that the competition was rather feeble, and it certainly wouldn't have been the one I'd have chosen (that would probably have been Hearthstone, shockingly enough).

 

But what's done it's done, and awards aren't that important anyway. What's important is that DAI had flaws, like any other game. A significant group of people, myself included, found them crippling. And frankly, I don't think even those that liked the game would disagree about some of the big ones. How many people are there in this thread who think the open world implementation wasn't lackluster and the side-content rather lifeless?

[Fortlowe]

DAI is ME1 with more resources for the developers to work with. So if you liked ME1 you should like DAI at least as much. Try a parallel playthrough to see what I mean. Play an hour of ME1 then and hour of DAI.

The hate DAI gets is almost entirely unwarranted, if you are fond of ME1.

[Gwydden]

DAI is ME1 with more resources for the developers to work with. So if you liked ME1 you should like DAI at least as much. Try a parallel playthrough to see what I mean. Play an hour of ME1 then and hour of DAI.

The hate DAI gets is almost entirely unwarranted, if you are fond of ME1.

ME1 is second last on my personal list of Bioware games, so you might have a point 

 

I still enjoyed it, though. DAI took the worst things about ME1 and multiplied them by a hundred, while cutting the best parts by half. Not to mention that you could just skip the filler in ME1, where there was less of it to begin with. DAI forces you to slog through a good portion of it in order to advance in the main questline.

[Sanunes]

ME1 is second last on my personal list of Bioware games, so you might have a point 

 

I still enjoyed it, though. DAI took the worst things about ME1 and multiplied them by a hundred, while cutting the best parts by half. Not to mention that you could just skip the filler in ME1, where there was less of it to begin with. DAI forces you to slog through a good portion of it in order to advance in the main questline.

 

I agree and disagree. They didn't really make them worse then what was in Mass Effect 1, but added a couple of additional features that made the grind feeling parts unavoidable with the Ping and Power systems.  If those systems weren't there you could probably skip the aspects you didn't like.

 

Another thing with comparing Mass Effect 1 and Dragon Age: Inquisition is people were upset that you could beat Inquisition in 20 hours for that is too short, but I am able to beat Mass Effect 1 in about 3 and that was fine.

[Calders]

Do you mean main or side quest? All major points of the main quest had cut scenes throughout, as did all "primary" companion quests. 

 

 

Yes I mean the side quests... which were a large chunk of the game (and other Bioware games haven't done this)

 

This isn't really a valid criticism against DA:I specifically, because the damage was done in DA2. Inquisition simply followed through and ultimately came up with a quick solution to be rid of "dead" Leliana once and for all in Trespasser.

 

At least in DA2 she only had a small role, she was a central character in DAI (could they really not just have come up with another character).  Also it wasn't just Leliana... I'm pretty sure I killed Corypheus.

[malloc]

Hopefully nothing.

[Quarian Princess]

 

There could also be a massive disconnect between people that post on message boards and the player that just wants to play the game for Inquisition won plenty of awards voted on by people and not gaming press.

 

 

What else were they supposed to vote on? Not like they really had much to choose from, you know out of the games they had actually heard of (Divinity: Original Sin was the far better game but I doubt most voters would have even heard of it let alone played it).

[Midnight Bliss]

The good:

The game was beautiful
I liked the crafting but there needs to be a less tedious way of gathering resources

Dragon Battles (or an equivalent)

The Bad:

 

Really bad story telling (I will never understand why people rave about Gaider), specifically:

• Sub-plots that don't connect to the main plot or are incoherent
• Game mechanics that don't connect to the plot (e.g. the ways areas are unlocked)
• Open world zones with hardly any plot in them (very basic kill a gang of mooks, or collect some stuff)
• Weak main plot with a poor antagonist
• Too many companions (once you include the advisers - who should have been squad mates)
• Companions that aren't believable as part of a team (just too antagonistic to each other... some conflict is good but it should be resolved)
• Too much time spent wondering around not really caring what I was doing or knowing why I was doing it

The war table (I don't see the point.. just filler, and to add insult to injury some of the plots here seemed better than the stuff I was doing)

Lack of cinematics to enhance plot points

Female LIs that just aren't that appealing 

Bringing dead characters back (there is really no excuse for this in a game)

[KaiserShep]

At least in DA2 she only had a small role, she was a central character in DAI (could they really not just have come up with another character).  Also it wasn't just Leliana... I'm pretty sure I killed Corypheus.

 

 

Small role, but she's clearly part of a bigger plot by the end of DA2, not to mention that she's part of the plot regarding the Divine checking on Kirkwall to see if the situation warrants an exalted march, provided you have the Exiled Prince DLC and of course a small cameo in Mark of the Assassin. 

 

Corypheus isn't a retcon. It's plainly spelled out how he escaped the encounter with Hawke, not to mention that his ability to survive is one of the driving forces of the main plot (as explained by Solas). Leliana is the sole character to make it this far despite being killed. Oghren basically disappears after Awakening. 

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Not to be like DA:I.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

DA:I is a disaster I don't even know how it made GOTY in 2014! But here are my suggestions that they should improve, learn from and never repeat the same mistakes. Here it is:

-No fetch meaningless quests.
-Don't make the game to be so dry and boring, games are supposed to be fun not a chore.
-Fix and improve combat design by introducing motion capture
-Improve cinematics and animations.
-Create more romance options
-Set up for people want to play solo during gameplay especially combat, instead of setting up for them to have to have companions.
-Have a strong engaging story to motivate players to finish the game.

[Calders]

Corypheus isn't a retcon. It's plainly spelled out how he escaped the encounter with Hawke, not to mention that his ability to survive is one of the driving forces of the main plot (as explained by Solas). 

 

Just because its explained doesn't stop it from being retcon.  To not be a retcon it has to at least be foreshadowed in the earlier story.

[themikefest]

In DAI, the Inquisitor can tell Sera to leave at any time. Having that in Andromeda would be nice. Tell a squadmate to get lost.

[Kiera]

To NOT make ME:A multiplayer like DA:I multiplayer.

Character comment when going to objective to kill all DA:I multiplayer enemies: *raspy-voiced male soldier* "When this killing of darkspawns, over I'm gonna find a lass and start a farm like my pappy told me."

ONLY have male soldier cause couldn't stand it long enough to get a female soldier.

[SNascimento]

DAI is ME1 with more resources for the developers to work with. So if you liked ME1 you should like DAI at least as much. Try a parallel playthrough to see what I mean. Play an hour of ME1 then and hour of DAI.

The hate DAI gets is almost entirely unwarranted, if you are fond of ME1.

Although I'm not 100% with the comparison, it has a lot of meritis, although I'd prefer to compare ME1 with DA2. 

Regardless, both this comparisons show just how the moment and the trend of the game community influence how people judge a game. ME1's story could be finished in three hours, maybe less. Its side quests had maybe three different levels they were repeated dozen of times.  Its planets were basically all the same with a different texture and a different skyline. Technically the game was a mess. We're talking about drops to up to 5 fps and a game that could never keep a steady 30. Textures that took ages to load and game crashing bugs that could corrupt entire saves. All this stuff are fact. I'm not making anything up.

But Mass Effect was extremely well received. It has a metacritic user score almost as high as Mass Effect 2. Why? Becuase the game community is as much successive to 'collective bias' as reviewers to personal ones.

When ME1 was released, there was a common thought that allowed people, at least those that are vocal in the internet, to look past all those flaws and see the amazing qualities ME1 had, it was pre-EA Bioware after all, they guys that made Baldur Gate II and KoTOR. But can anyone honestly imagine the same happening with Andromeda if it has even one or two of those flaws, even if it is a better game? Am I too bold to affirm people will blame EA and say Bioware is falling ever deeper? I don't think I am. 

[X Equestris]

Just because its explained doesn't stop it from being retcon.  To not be a retcon it has to at least be foreshadowed in the earlier story.

It was. Look over Hawke's shoulder just before he or she strikes Cory down(this is easiest with a mage, as the killing scene is a bit longer) and you see whichever Warden you aided stagger. At the same time, Cory's eyes go black. Then, when you talk to them they give off an extremely creepy vibe through their mannerisms and dialogue.

[Vox Draco]

Well, looking at the thread my impulse was first to write: Bioware, learn to doyour thing and don'T listen too much to the ever-complaining fanbase BUT! ... then I remembered ME3 ... ^^ artistic integrity my firm behind ...

 

Now, what Bioware should have learned from DAI is that just having huge maps isn't enough - you need to fill it with activity, story, quests. And that these maps should, as you play and solve problems, "change" to acknowledge what we did. DAI has some very minor things about it (like in Crestwood, some small degree in Exalted Plains etc). But if we establish a conoly on some planet in MEA it should over time grow, change, and things should happen to it.

 

Don't keep it too STATIC is what I mean.

 

The other thing taking as lesson from DAI is: Have a main story/plot, and NEVER let us forget this while we drive around planets, do this, do that...it should always be around us, we need always to be aware of it, and there need to be missions, scripted or not, at certain points emphasizing the danger we are in (like attacks on colonies/the ARK, on allies we made - to give us a constant feel of urgency etc)

 

Overall - I really think the DAI template will fit MUCH better on the premise of Andromeda - because in MEA large areas to explore, to gather stuff etc after all is making much more sense than it did in DAI. I go as far and say: DAI should have scrapped open world attempts alltogether and used a way more linear approach similar to DA2, but done is done.

 

Oh, and DAI maybe wasn't the greatest game of all time, but I will enver understand the hatred some people have against it. Could have been better, sure. But at least it didn't ruin an entire franchise, had likeable chars, and lots of content.

[Gwydden]

Oh, and DAI maybe wasn't the greatest game of all time, but I will enver understand the hatred some people have against it. Could have been better, sure. But at least it didn't ruin an entire franchise, had likeable chars, and lots of content.

I don't think any single game can ruin a franchise, and lots of content means very little when almost none of that content is remotely interesting. I'll grant you the likable characters part, though.

 

I don't know about others, but I don't hate it. I just find it tedious to play, which means it completely fails as a game for me. If I speak strongly against it, is because I don't want future games to imitate it. A reasonable fear, I'd say. The way we hear it, DAI sold very well, not to mention it was GotY. It might go to their heads. I'm not worried that they'll pull, say, another ME3 because they got more than enough backlash for that one.

[Hazegurl]

Bioware's biggest takeaway should be "Don't show any gameplay footage until you are 100% sure it won't change in the final game, because your fanbase can't handle it and will call it false advertising."

 

So far, they seem to have learned that lesson.

Or better yet, don't come onto the forums/ or speak publicly  about said features when you have no idea if those features are going to be added into the final product.

 

I honestly think most people voted for DAI at the time because they were just happy it wasn't DA2.  They got to be an elf or Qunari, they got an open world, they got their set sexualities.  But once the rose colored glasses come off many realized that the game just wasn't that good, and quite honestly, it was very forgetting except to die hard BW fans.  Had DAI gone up against the heavy hitters last year, no way it would have won.

 

Anyway, I'm in the group of "The less like DAI the better."  I've always preferred ME over DA overall so if they keep being different from DA then it's automatically better. 

[Calders]

Regardless, both this comparisons show just how the moment and the trend of the game community influence how people judge a game. ME1's story could be finished in three hours, maybe less. Its side quests had maybe three different levels they were repeated dozen of times.  Its planets were basically all the same with a different texture and a different skyline. Technically the game was a mess. We're talking about drops to up to 5 fps and a game that could never keep a steady 30. Textures that took ages to load and game crashing bugs that could corrupt entire saves. All this stuff are fact. I'm not making anything up.

But Mass Effect was extremely well received. It has a metacritic user score almost as high as Mass Effect 2. Why? Becuase the game community is as much successive to 'collective bias' as reviewers to personal ones.

 

I have to disagree... I think people will forgive all kinds of technical issues if a game is fun to play.  ME1 had a good story and great characters that kept you interested even when doing some of the duller side quests, like driving around searching for resources.  In my opinion this is exactly what DAI failed to do.  A number of people describe it as a chore, or boring because the story lines failed to capture your attention.  ME1 made you care what happened, DAI not so much.  IMHO of course.

[Sanunes]

What else were they supposed to vote on? Not like they really had much to choose from, you know out of the games they had actually heard of (Divinity: Original Sin was the far better game but I doubt most voters would have even heard of it let alone played it).

 

-Alien: Isolation

-Dark Souls II

-Destiny

-Bayonetta II

-Super Smash Bros.

-Grand Theft Auto V

-Shadow of Mordor

-Wolfenstein: The New Order

 

There was plenty of choices for games people might have liked in 2014.

 

Edit: All of these games had reasonable launches without too much negativity so they all could have been contenders.

Modifié par Sanunes, 21 février 2016 - 05:48 .

[Revan Reborn]

What can MEA learn from DAI? Don't copy it?

 

Contrary to popular belief, that game was far from perfect.

 

Exploration sucked. The open world sucked. The war table sucked. Load screens sucked. Upgrading Skyhold sucked. Not having a chest to store gear sucked. The throne segments were over-hyped and too brief. All dragon fights were virtually identical (I killed every single one). Romance options sucked. Blackwall sucked. Requisition missions sucked. Combat sucked. The main story was mediocre. The Inquisitor had the emotional role of a wooden plank. The game was pretty though.

 

Besides being pretty, yeah that's really all I want MEA to take away from DAI. I really don't know why BioWare can't just do a phenomenal job with Dragon Age like they did with Mass Effect.

[Kiera]

Whole lotta sucking going on

[AlanC9]

How many people are there in this thread who think the open world implementation wasn't lackluster and the side-content rather lifeless?

Well, I don't like any open -world implementations much; I tolerate them rather than enjoy them. DAI's struck me as no worse than others. Do I count?