477 réponses à ce sujet

[Serza]

Yes. Especially because the Fetchquester is boring as ****.

 

Get back to me when CDPR make a game where I don't have to play as bloody Geralt of Rivia.

 

Geralt of Rivia? Never heard of her.

[Abyss108]

 

[lynroy]

Whoa, it's like people have different tastes and opinions in games. Mind blown.

[YourFunnyUncle]

Whoa, it's like people have different tastes and opinions in games. Mind blown.

I know. Crazy, right? Sadly also some people have to "win" and prove that they are "right".

[Ravenfeeder]

I seem to recall the Devs saying that without having to cater for older consoles they would have been able to do the fortresses as they'd originally planned, with more dynamic ownership and chances for the Venatori/Red Templars to try and take them from you as in the leaked original Crestwood footage.

 

As for TW3 I'll believe a lot of the graphics were better based on footage I've seen. Lots of people say nice things about plot, characterisation and sidequets. It's all irrelevant to me when the gameplay mechanics are so abysmal, on a purely subjective basis, that it's unplayable.

[Serza]

Wait. Do you want to tell me I didn't win? But my opinion is the only true one!

 

Curses! One day you will see that I was the only one who was right!

[Lezio]

All those things are what make me come back to BioWare games again and again. They are why I love them and find so much replay value. Crucially they require a hell of a lot of development resources which CDPR didn't have to bother with. I really think you're underestimating quite how much. Also you don't just "control up to four people", but choose three from nine to go with you, who all have different interactions with one another.

 

There's a fundamental difference in the way The Witcher and DA games work at their core, so while they may seem comparable, they actually aren't so much. I'm happy for you that you have found a game that you love, but it doesn't appeal to me because I don't want to be Geralt.

 

I really resent that statement

Yesterday i played Inquisition for a couple of hours and went around collecting shards and killing stuff in a completely bare landscape, played Witcher 3 (post-game) for 30 minutes and found out-of-nowhere 2 fully voiced sidequests, a grandpa with two kids talking about the game they were playing, some guys around a bonfire discussing their hunts, some guards training just outside the villages and other watching out for danger et cetera et cetera.

Simply put, CDPR spent their money where they should have, BW spent their money..... making bare areas? They 100% didn't spend it making them feel alive OR in sidequests though

[IllustriousT]

I believe Witcher 3 and DAI to be great games in their own right and I've enjoyed both franchises as a whole. Both games have failings and successes, and I look forward to playing whatever Bioware and CDPR have in store for us.  

 

I have a few consoles, but games like Witcher 3 and DAI deserve the PC capabilities, and I really hope the new generation of consoles don't continue to limit possibilities.

[YourFunnyUncle]

I really resent that statement

Yesterday i played Inquisition for a couple of hours and went around collecting shards and killing stuff in a completely bare landscape, played Witcher 3 (post-game) for 30 minutes and found out-of-nowhere 2 fully voiced sidequests, a grandpa with two kids talking about the game they were playing, some guys around a bonfire discussing their hunts, some guards training just outside the villages and other watching out for danger et cetera et cetera.

Simply put, CDPR spent their money where they should have, BW spent their money..... making bare areas? They 100% didn't spend it making them feel alive OR in sidequests though

I've said before that I'd've been happy with two or three fewer areas in DAI with the remaining ones better populated with more time spent on them. I'm not saying that the game is without fault. Far from it.

 

The fact remains though that The Witcher games are hugely less flexible than DA in terms of protagonist and companions, and those are things I cherish in BioWare games. If you're happy to be Geralt and play mostly alone or with a set companion when CDPR gve you one, great for you, but don't pretend that's not a huge difference in terms of development allocation.

[sniper_arrow]

Geralt of Rivia? Never heard of her.

 

I think they meant Geraldo Rivera.

[Lezio]

I've said before that I'd've been happy with two or three fewer areas in DAI with the remaining ones better populated with more time spent on them. I'm not saying that the game is without fault. Far from it.

 

The fact remains though that The Witcher games are hugely less flexible than DA in terms of protagonist and companions, and those are things I cherish in BioWare games. If you're happy to be Geralt and play mostly alone or with a set companion when CDPR gve you one, great for you, but don't pretend that's not a huge difference in terms of development allocation.

 

I'm not pretending. Like i already mentioned, i am saying that CDPR used their money in a sensible way to actually better their game(and i already provided examples previously). BW's (or EA's) money went into an absurd compatibility with PS3 and 360, huge areas that are basically empty landscapes, having The Inquisitor's VAs recording lines like "My goat has run away and i need someone to help me find it" "So your got has run away and you need someone to help you find it" and making codex entries that, IMHO, feel completely out of place in such a lonely world 

 

I did not say that people who think Inquisition is better than TW3 are horrible, horrible persons (but i do think it [Joking]), i simply said that i disagree with your statement that CDPR had a easier time because they didn't have to bother with different protagonists and romances. They didn't, they simply managed their resources in a much, much better way

[YourFunnyUncle]

I'm not pretending. Like i already mentioned, i am saying that CDPR used their money in a sensible way to actually better their game(and i already provided examples previously). BW's (or EA's) money went into an absurd compatibility with PS3 and 360, huge areas that are basically empty landscapes, having The Inquisitor's VAs recording lines like "My goat has run away and i need someone to help me find it" "So your got has run away and you need someone to help you find it" and making codex entries that, IMHO, feel completely out of place in such a lonely world 

 

I did not say that people who think Inquisition is better than TW3 are horrible, horrible persons (but i do think it [Joking]), i simply said that i disagree with your statement that CDPR had a easier time because they didn't have to bother with different protagonists and romances. They didn't, they simply managed their resources in a much, much better way

I agree that the game was hamstrung by the decision to have PS3 and 360 compatibility. Those versions were stripped of NPCs and the machines could still barely cope, so it's clear that they must've had a big impact on the game's complexity. How much exactly is up for debate but I'm sure the game would've been richer if it were current gen only. I never said otherwise.

 

It's clear also though that CDPR did have an easier time in terms of resource allocation for other things because their games have a fixed protagonist and limited set of companions. It's not the only factor but to deny that it is one at all is quite strange. And for me personally, it's a really important factor., because I don't like or want to be Geralt.

[Lezio]

I agree that the game was hamstrung by the decision to have PS3 and 360 compatibility. Those versions were stripped of NPCs and the machines could still barely cope, so it's clear that they must've had a big impact on the game's complexity. How much exactly is up for debate but I'm sure the game would've been richer if it were current gen only. I never said otherwise.

 

It's clear also though that CDPR did have an easier time in terms of resource allocation for other things because their games have a fixed protagonist and limited set of companions. It's not the only factor but to deny that it is one at all is quite strange.

 

It surely is a factor, but Dragon Age is mostly about companions and the protagonist. Saying that they spent money on those 2 factors is stating the obvious, because of course they did, those are what makes their games different. It's expected, it's their formula and i can't praise them or justify them for sticking to it, especially since Inquisition's messines is much bigger and much more complex than simply that one factor

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

"Beat" TW3 how? 

 

I don't need an answer, the question is rhetorical.

 

Most of DA:I's problems were not caused by being developed for the PS 3. That wouldn't have impacted the story structure, the weak villain, inconsistent characterization or the philosophy of building giant areas and filling them almost entirely with text-based point-to-point fetch quests.

 

I suppose if graphics are the most important thing to someone, and they don't care about gameplay or story very much, then blame could be placed on the PS3. Personally, I thought the game was fine. Either way, its more significant (single player) flaws were not related to console capacity.

[Heimdall]

There were a lot of things holding DAI back. Let's not forget that Bioware was working with a brand new engine in addition to having to develop for last gen consoles.

[YourFunnyUncle]

"Beat" TW3 how? 

 

I don't need an answer, the question is rhetorical.

 

Most of DA:I's problems were not caused by being developed for the PS 3. That wouldn't have impacted the story structure, the weak villain, inconsistent characterization or the philosophy of building giant areas and filling them almost entirely with text-based point-to-point fetch quests.

 

I suppose if graphics are the most important thing to someone, and they don't care about gameplay or story very much, then blame could be placed on the PS3. Personally, I thought the game was fine. Either way, its more significant (single player) flaws were not related to console capacity.

 

It's not just graphics, though, it's the entire complexity of what they could show and do. They had to strip out most of the NPCs just to make it work at all. Don't you think that having to make it work for PS3 etc might have been a factor in them dropping that dynamic structure they showed early on where they had the Red Templars attempt to take Crestwood and you had to choose between saving the village and holding the keep?

[Rascoth]

*sigh* I don't care which side starts it - DAI side or TW3 side. This whole thing is getting tiring.

 

As for OP, speculating now is pointless and might lead to arguments like this one. We got DAI as we got it. Looking for "what if's" won't change anything. It only makes you look for faults in a game you apparently love. 

[Addictress]

Hear me out.

First of all I think it's awkward to rant like this on a Bioware forum and I don't want to rile up mods.

Secondly the point of my thread is that a lot of the issues could've been due to PS3 compatibility.

Third, I don't really disagree with most of your points, except you are wrong about the romances. I don't want to argue about it further.

[Addictress]

*sigh* I don't care which side starts it - DAI side or TW3 side. This whole thing is getting tiring.

As for OP, speculating now is pointless and might lead to arguments like this one. We got DAI as we got it. Looking for "what if's" won't change anything. It only makes you look for faults in a game you apparently love.

Yeah I knew it was bound to unleash something awkward.

Ugh

Anyways

It was more or less to be amusing but also to be like
Hey
DAI pulled off a lot in spite of the technical limitations and ALSO the technical limitations are apparently quite severe when you have to develop for ps3

[Addictress]

"Beat" TW3 how?

I don't need an answer, the question is rhetorical.

Most of DA:I's problems were not caused by being developed for the PS 3. That wouldn't have impacted the story structure, the weak villain, inconsistent characterization or the philosophy of building giant areas and filling them almost entirely with text-based point-to-point fetch quests.

I suppose if graphics are the most important thing to someone, and they don't care about gameplay or story very much, then blame could be placed on the PS3. Personally, I thought the game was fine. Either way, its more significant (single player) flaws were not related to console capacity.

You're right about the weak villain and you might have seen me bash the main game elsewhere....

But that Trespasser tho.(ddaayyuumm, )

[Secret Rare]

 

DAI would never have beaten TW3, consoles or no consoles. TW3 is better than DAI in almost every single way.

I don't particularly like TW3 series but there is nothing that i can really say against the argument.

I'm feeling like Peter Parker in the Gif right now

[Addictress]

I seem to recall the Devs saying that without having to cater for older consoles they would have been able to do the fortresses as they'd originally planned, with more dynamic ownership and chances for the Venatori/Red Templars to try and take them from you as in the leaked original Crestwood footage.

As for TW3 I'll believe a lot of the graphics were better based on footage I've seen. Lots of people say nice things about plot, characterisation and sidequets. It's all irrelevant to me when the gameplay mechanics are so abysmal, on a purely subjective basis, that it's unplayable.

A lot of the reason Corypheus was SO WEAK was because they wrote him to be developed through what his forces did on the field. We would witness his Templars or Venatori exercising his strength by proxy, vying for fortresses and whatnot.

Cutting those things out stripped him of effectively all substance. There were probably going to be even more Corypheus cut scenes, triggered by the activities related to these fortresses, too.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

 

TW3 NPCs are far more realistic than the DAI NPCs.

 

 

 

TW3 did strong female characters far better than DAI. Ciri and Yennefer > any DAI female character.

 

 

-DAI NPC are most of the time fetch quest givers who stand there like blocks of static wall there is no element of realism in them

 

-You wound DAI at least save Flemeth.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

A lot of the reason Corypheus was SO WEAK was because they wrote him to be developed through what his forces did on the field. We would witness his Templars or Venatori exercising his strength by proxy, vying for fortresses and whatnot.

Cutting those things out stripped him of effectively all substance. There were probably going to be even more Corypheus cut scenes, triggered by the activities related to these fortresses, too.

Corypheus was a character in DA2 after that he became just a plot device.

[maia0407]

You couldn't even pay me to play the Witcher, whilst Inquisition is my favourite game in existence.

Agreed. The Witcher is not a game I want to touch. I've been told that I should give it a go but it's not for me. I don't want to spend hours and hours forced to play as a man. I'm also really turned off by the prior games skeevy card collection of women the character has been with. I know that aspect was given the boot but I'm just not confident that the developers won't offend me in other ways. I dunno, the entire game just screams "written with a male perspective in mind". My money is better spent with developers that I trust to take my perspective into account.