Something SquareEnix talks about but will never get back with Final Fantasy XV
Or with the now-confirmed FF VII remake. I have disagreed with your point of view in the thread (nothing personal, I just don't agree) but this? Oh this I can agree with. I started with Dragon Warrior/Dragon Quest back in 1988 and Final Fantasy in 1990. How the mighty have fallen.
All I have to say about Final Fantasy XV is that so far, it looks like Zoolander and his friends before they blow themselves up.
Like Kabraxal? I pointed out both advantages and disadvantages Bioware has and yet so many people here, in every thread, whenever we point out the advantages of tw3 - some of which are quite serious - immediately jump down throats and refuse to admit they exist. It's that impulsive defensive attitude that unnerves us. It's sycophancy masquerading as free opinion.
Here is the exchange in question;
Of course there's debate on this, and duly so.
The side-quests are repetitive as hell from a design standpoint, and the central plot can be summarized by a screenshot from Super Mario Bros.
Anyone care to clarify what "bars", exactly, that The Witcher 3 set? Hell, it didn't even meet the "bars" that the previous game set for it.
You didn't even play it or even 40% considering how wrong this is.
Adding in one more dialogue option or tweaking a bit of banter is hardly massive levels of lore integration. I can't use the Anchor besides closing rifts in ambient gameplay, despite it being able to rip holes in the fade, that'd make for a cool ability but nah... Other bits would be like how mage protagonists are immune to attempted possession, templar characters don't have to drink lyrium in combat, and so on.
I won't deny that the world of the Witcher is much less original than Thedas, however that is not an inherent flaw against it because it does so much more with its setting than Thedas does. I can only think of a few examples of this in DA where you can change the landscape to reflect your choices, and mostly they revolve around fixed changes such as the rain to sun in Crestwood or the frost in the Frostback Mountains. And my ability to enjoy an RPG setting is not dependent on how large a footprint of myself I can put on it.
I will say that TW3 is a better game than DA:I based on things like lore integration, characters, plotline, and so on. You are free to disagree and there will certainly be no consensus on which one is "objectively" better, (it would depend on how we measured objective quality, awards won would be an objective meter but I doubt anyone here would agree to it and there are so many to count)
I've given you reasons why I think TW3 is better than DA:I, you don't like them and thus ignore them, its clear you are not interested in actually debating the various merits of one game vs the other, and I don't really have the patience to deal with such a rabid fanboy as yourself. You only further show how stubborn you are by this.
And there is the same tired tactic of the confronted witcher zealot. You passed your opinion off as fact and when confronted, are playing the same card others have retreated to. Ignoring your points is simply not tackling them. Considering I have offered examples and reasons, it is clear you want to hand wave my pists away to claim a false stance of superiority in hopes no one calls you out on the tactic. So if you can't post without the same tired BS dismissal tactic, then go to ganefaqs or reddit where there are echo chambers for you to feel safe in. But keep believing your little delusions if it helps. I'm not the one continually raising another dev's game in these forums.
I made my points and decide it wasn't worth it to pursue anymore. I like both DA:I and TW3, but I think that the TW3 did a good deal of things better, all of a sudden I'm a zealot. I answered your complaints and provided my own answers, but it is clear you have no intention of engaging in any sort of dialogue that isn't "The Witcher is garbage, all hail DA".
I'm not continuously bringing it up either, I've not made one thread about TW3 on these forums. And despite you and others best efforts to poison these beyond hope there is still some hope of worthwhile conversation, just not with you it seems.
I made my points and decide it wasn't worth it to pursue anymore. I like both DA:I and TW3, but I think that the TW3 did a good deal of things better, all of a sudden I'm a zealot. I answered your complaints and provided my own answers, but it is clear you have no intention of engaging in any sort of dialogue that isn't "The Witcher is garbage, all hail DA".
I'm not continuously bringing it up either, I've not made one thread about TW3 on these forums. And despite you and others best efforts to poison these beyond hope there is still some hope of worthwhile conversation, just not with you it seems.
It's called debate.... You just can't handle having something other than an echo chamber to reinforce your opinion. You act shocked that people don't agree and start out with a condescending "I'll teach you the error with your ways" post and then play the victim card when you are called out.
But not suprised... Outside of two posters that simply like TW3 and provided actual nuetral criticism, every other TW3 poster has posted the same crap as Dutch's Ghost and have done so since TW3 released. Guess what... This is a bioware forum in a sub specifically about Inquisition. Enough with Witcher.
I'm not the one who seems the need to validate their own opinions, I'll happily talk about aspects that TW3 fell short in. I'm not shocked people didn't agree, and I'd like to see if you can find one of my posts that would imply that. I'm not playing a victim card, you are just being extremely aggressive since I don't agree with you.
And this is a section for ME:A last I checked...
And there is the same tired tactic of the confronted witcher zealot. You passed your opinion off as fact and when confronted, are playing the same card others have retreated to. Ignoring your points is simply not tackling them. Considering I have offered examples and reasons, it is clear you want to hand wave my pists away to claim a false stance of superiority in hopes no one calls you out on the tactic. So if you can't post without the same tired BS dismissal tactic, then go to ganefaqs or reddit where there are echo chambers for you to feel safe in. But keep believing your little delusions if it helps. I'm not the one continually raising another dev's game in these forums.
How about instead of being in denial, face facts that overwhelmingly, The Witcher 3 is looked at as a far better game than Dragon Age Inquisition.
Its the Bioware Defense force getting all defensive again.
It's no different than the Skyrim versus DA threads from a couple of years ago. Don't worry, the new "best game ever" is going to come out and then the cycle begins again. What's the newest overly-anticipated RPG coming that isn't related to BW? Keep an eye out for that.Starting to feel like it's a rule that at least 50% of ME:A threads have to mention The Witcher III.
Besides, why is this a huge deal anyhow? Isn't it more important that the RPG genre is healthy with variety as opposed to the near decade of cookie-cutter shooters? Constant Battlefield/COD clones with light brown, dirt brown, camo green and grey pallets? Bleech. Nothing wrong with FPS games, but the market was insanely flooded with them for awhile.
This is why
A. Overwatch is amazing, and
B. I'm going to keep mentioning Overwatch every time I see a chance to do so =P
Starting to feel like it's a rule that at least 50% of ME:A threads have to mention The Witcher III.
It's the biggest and most recent AAA Action RPG on the market. I'd be surprised if it wasn't. The core mechanics and design goals may be somewhat different, but these games do vie for basically the same audience.
BioWare practically pioneered the cinematic Action RPG, and they've gone fairly uncontested in that niche for a while. I honestly can't think of a game that more directly competes with that genre than TW3, so comparison is bound to be had.
It's the biggest and most recent AAA Action RPG on the market. I'd be surprised if it wasn't. The core mechanics and design goals may be somewhat different, but these games do vie for basically the same audience.
BioWare practically pioneered the cinematic Action RPG, and they've gone fairly uncontested in that niche for a while. I honestly can't think of a game that more directly competes with that genre than TW3, so comparison is bound to be had.
That would actually be Fallout 4, however, The Witcher 3 is far more praised than it.
And unlike The Witcher, Fallout implementing a Mass Effect style dialogue system was a disaster.
That would actually be Fallout 4, however, The Witcher 3 is far more praised than it.
And unlike The Witcher, Fallout implementing a Mass Effect style dialogue system was a disaster.
Fallout 4 is like DA:I but in reverse, Bethesda trying their hand at more BioWare aspects and not fully succeeding
Fallout 4 is like DA:I but in reverse, Bethesda trying their hand at more BioWare aspects and not fully succeeding
Not succeeding at all, there is no partial success. What they have done wrecks the series if they do not roll it back.
Fallout never should of have this kind of dialogue system.
I can't remember.... is trying new stuff supposed to be a good thing, or a bad thing?
Not when you do it like Bethesda did and copy a system from a company without the experience and the evolution to make it work.
Fallout 4 may be the worst implementation of the "Mass Effect" style dialogue I have ever seen.
Not when you do it like Bethesda did and copy a system from a company without the experience and the evolution to make it work.
I can't remember.... is trying new stuff supposed to be a good thing, or a bad thing?
We're supposed to try new things.
but we're also supposed to get it perfect on the first try.
Then how can a company ever try new things? By definition, you can't have experience in stuff you haven't done before.
They didn't try new things, they rehashed and old idea and did even worse than when the idea was pioneered. They did it because it was popular, instead of trying new things that are in the spirit of the franchise, like what Obsidian did with New Vegas.
And really, what I wanted Bioware to do is go back to the type of storytelling that they did with DA2 and ME3, that TW3 really did well with, and expand and bring new ideas to that.
We're supposed to try new things.
but we're also supposed to get it perfect on the first try.
But what Fallout 4 did wasn't even average.
Not being perfect is one thing, abysmal is another.
But what Fallout 4 did wasn't even average.
Not being perfect is one thing, abysmal is another.
A lot of what Bethesda does is kind of average at best, other than actually creating the game world.
Modders pretty much make everything else great.
Because right now the bar is set with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Hearts of Stone, and Blood and Wine.
After playing Blood and Wine, its crazy to think about how Bioware got so soundly thrashed in most facets of game direction, with CD Projeckt RED also giving Bethesda a whipping as well. It is also probably the first game to not settle and have their cake and eat it too with open world design and strong RPG storytelling.
And writing too. Its quest design, its characterization, and how it implements both quest and character completely and utterly destroy Bioware's use of "talking codex entries", and how Bioware handles character quests. CD Projeckt RED's writing also takes risks, and routinely surprise the player in a way that is organic and well done, and grounds its writing in the human condition, foregoing most of the hero of destiny RPG writing. Even hilarious quests sometimes have dark or sad tones, for example "Big Game Hunter" in Blood and Wine. And the Witcher 3 organically weaves secondary and even side quests to the main plot, both weaving out and back in (although ME3 and really DA2 does this as well). In most Bioware games, the main plot and its side quests are packaged separately.
What caused CDPR to take the crown? Because they were willing to work outside of formula and take risks, and they were allowed to as well. This is the problem with Bioware (and Bethesda). They are stuck with doing the same things over and over, and when they break out and do something different, the fanbase is divided, causing them to go back to basics and do the same thing over again.
It wasn't ME3 or even DA2 that caused them to lose the crown, but DAI. DAI played it safe, because Bioware was too scared to keep evolving in fear of its fanbase. In fact DAI is a step back in story and quest implementation, of originality, of characters taking part of the plot, and the return of those god awful talking codex entries. With that and its clear main plot and exploration segregation, its no wonder CD Projeckt RED dethroned them.
Look at Telltale. They released The Walking Dead to many awards and acclaim as well as sales. In reality, it was a deeply flawed game with weak mechanics and dumbed down gameplay, as well as with glaring technical issues. Instead of the gaming press pointing these flaws out and telling them that they need improvement, they were showered with GOTY awards. So Telltale kept doing the same thing, making the same game, using the same engine. Result: Their sales decline. Enter DONTNOD Entertainment. A near bankrupt company expanded on Telltales formula while adding elements from other successful games, and made a very risky story that dealt with real world issues. Result: This original IP, Life is Strange, outsold Telltales games for Borderlands, Game of Thrones, and Minecraft COMBINED, while being awarded (they even a somewhat of a Peabody Award). The king was dethroned by DONTNOD. How? By evolving the genre and tackling issues games rarely tackle while the "king" did the same thing over and over.
This is what CDPR has done to Bioware. DAO and ME2 were overpraised. The case though is that Bioware did not ignore the flaws, the fans did for the most part. DA2 may have fixed some of DAO's problems but it being rushed out caused new ones. ME3 from top to bottom fixed ME2's problems, but an underdeveloped ending and its risky storytelling caused a backlash (backlash for the former needed to be addressed and was, while the latter, Bioware should have ignored). The reaction to these two games lead Bioware to make DAI, which shared DAO and ME2's problems. And guess what? They are less forgiven now, and will be even less forgiven after The Witcher 3.
What Bioware needs to do is improve side quest integration with the main quest, have characters work organically and not separate from the story, have more info about them come from action and even environmental storytelling instead of the 20 question talking codex entry, have storytelling that takes risks and not try to please everybody. Bioware will regain the throne by going outside its formula because now, the formula is outdated. Its so 2003.
TW3 is one of the best gaming experiences I've had since.. well, the Mass Effect trilogy. However, I just have to address a few things:
1. BioWare change their formula in just about every single game, so the claim that they "don't change" and that's where they're (supposedly) failing, doesn't really work. True, the written characters and romance mechanics remain traditional aspects of BioWare in every single game, but they're all different. In fact, I believe this is one of their greater qualities (though many people disagree). It means with each game there is something a little different and one never gets bored.
2. TW3 has amazing storytelling. It's also very impressive with the amount of content that CDPR has given us. I am on my second playthrough (I've yet to play the expansions due to having issues with my console that wiped my saves) and I don't know whether I'm just impatient and eager to play the new content, but it's getting a bit too overwhelming. I'm also noticing a lot of filler that really doesn't need to be there. The upside to that is, actual effort was put into said filler, as opposed to DAI's simple side quests. All I'm saying is, there is an aspect of grinding. For instance, if you want the best equipment, you have to do those treasure hunts. They are irritating as [CENSORED] when you just wanna get on with the game.
3. I'll also parrot what others have said elsewhere on this thread. The combat is very repetitive too. True, blue, green and red witchers differ but at the end of the day, it is still repetitive.
And lastly, your thread is merely an opinion. Don't pass it off as fact, please. A lot of people preferred DAI and the ME trilogy to TW3. BW gives players the options of being creative and customizing their character, which is something the Witcher lacks due to being based on a set protagonist. All of the Witcher lore was taken from the book series, where as BW created the world of Dragon Age and Mass Effect on their own. Based on that fact alone many people here won't play the Witcher series. It was very easy for CDPR to put the extra effort into the quest and world around them because (aside from interactions with other NPCs) they only had to focus on Geralt.
Retour en haut
