261 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

As Dr. Phil says, how's that working for you?

Wouldn't increased aggressiveness just convince everyone who was being dismissive that being dismissive was the correct response all along?

If they were a$$hats, sure.

[AlanC9]

My point was that the strategy can't possibly advance any rational goal, so why adopt it?

Honestly, I'm not sure when an aggressive tone works in this milieu. The people who like it agreed with you already, and you look bad to everyone else.

[AlanC9]

AlanC9 your comments are sexually stimulating.

Umm..... thanks, I guess.

[dreamgazer]

Umm..... thanks, I guess.

I'm reading your posts in the tune of Barry White from hereon out.

[Giantdeathrobot]

I honestly didn't see a big difference between the two games. Well, maybe The Witcher had a few more gory moments, like when the Crones show their true colors later in the game. But little beyond that. It had more pairs of bewbs, maybe, but Inquisition also had nudity, and if boob quota = maturity, then pornography is the most mature thing around.

 

In terms of themes, the difference was just not there IMO. TW3 was just as much of a save the world story as Inquisition was, Geralt can never be played as a bad guy, and while loaded quests like the Baron's existed in TW3, so did they in DA:I (Blackwall's companion quest being the most obvious example).

[blahblahblah]

You didn't read them.

A quote from a deluded a DA2 fanboy who try to prove that metacritic users scores are legit.

[Seraphim24]

I'm reading your posts in the tune of Barry White from hereon out.

 

Barry White voice even

[In Exile]

TW3 is just less optimistic overall. That's a big one. Ultimately, Geralt is the all powerful ubermensch who decided the fates of countries and so on but he can't decide it in a way that materially improved the lives of the people (not really). This is what people usually mean by dark or mature - faceless nobodies who are so divorced from the ubermensch protagonist they might as well be ants suffer without a real reprieve vs. how in DAI things generally end well. Ironically, when Bioware tried that road out in Trespasser - and committed the great sin of not allowing the ubermensch protagonist to solve a problem with murder, or have favourable consequences fall into their lap - many were unhappy. To be fair part of that is that the political set up really had no major foreshadowing despite being totally natural and logical.

[Seraphim24]

TW3 is just less optimistic overall. That's a big one. Ultimately, Geralt is the all powerful ubermensch who decided the fates of countries and so on but he can't decide it in a way that materially improved the lives of the people (not really). This is what people usually mean by dark or mature - faceless nobodies who are so divorced from the ubermensch protagonist they might as well be ants suffer without a real reprieve vs. how in DAI things generally end well. Ironically, when Bioware tried that road out in Trespasser - and committed the great sin of not allowing the ubermensch protagonist to solve a problem with murder, or have favourable consequences fall into their lap - many were unhappy. To be fair part of that is that the political set up really had no major foreshadowing despite being totally natural and logical.

 

Exile is also fairly sexually potent.

 

All that said though, TW3 had some things that were just better.

[SmilesJA]

A quote from a deluded a DA2 fanboy who try to prove that metacritic users scores are legit.

 

Way to insult people.

[SmilesJA]

 

 

I am willing to concede that DAI is a good game that does a lot of things right, but that there is a list of issues that I think can be improved upon. I'm not unilaterally stating that the game is awful. But the tendency a lot of "defenders" on these boards has is to dismiss any and all criticism and talk down to the critics. Maybe they're tired of defending the game or of feeling attacked by critics, in which case I'm sorry that it's gotten to that point. But don't maintain the double standard that criticisms are just someone's opinion and those who liked the game are objectively correct in all of their opinions.

 

And I suggest the critics do the same thing. It cuts both ways.

[Kabraxal]

I don't brag that my opinions on these flaws are objective fact, but I do try to give examples on why I think they are flaws, and explain the flaws with words. And I adopt an increasingly aggressive tone the more I feel drowned out by dismissive defenders who dismiss these all as preferences.

Then stop acting like it is an objective fact when people don't agree. That is what this thread devolved to.

[Addictress]

As Dr. Phil says, how's that working for you?

Wouldn't increased aggressiveness just convince everyone who was being dismissive that being dismissive was the correct response all along?

don't

[Addictress]

Then stop acting like it is an objective fact when people don't agree. That is what this thread devolved to.

On the contrary, I listed flaws. I explained those flaws. I pointed to other people who agree those flaws exist. It's called criticism.

[Addictress]

A quote from a deluded a DA2 fanboy who try to prove that metacritic users scores are legit.

The individual reviews that are well-written are legit. But you are probably right that the scores don't mean anything.

[Addictress]

You don't like the thread, you can go. Let me eat my DA:I criticism cupcakes in peace.

stop.

Don't reply.

If you reply I will reply for sure.

Only way to end this thread is to let me have he last post.

[Spirit Vanguard]

...

[TK514]

There are plenty of flaws in DA:I. The fact that some people are able to overlook those flaws and enjoy it anyway in no way makes the criticism of them less valid. Each person will have their own level of tolerance for what they can accept before they say "enough", and it is the space in between those individual levels where we come into conflict.

Frankly, that's ok.

I found the not-really-open world to be visually impressive, but lacking in purpose. I found the Inquisitor the be flat and uninteresting. I thought the Mage/Templar conflict, the Orledian Civil War, and Corypheus as the villain were all poorly presented and examples of truly wasted potential. I thought the main story itself, taken without any of the optional padding, was far too brief to really explore the characters and their motives, most glaringly with the antagonists.

My personal tolerance level was such that these flaws, in aggregate, were more than I was willing to overlook in spite of several positive things about the game, such as the companions. Many other players obviously had more tolerance than I did, or simply felt the positives met their needs and thus outweighed the negatives, which is fine. But, again, their ability to overlook or disregard what I consider flaws makes my criticism no less relevant or important.

[correctamundo]

Historically, if you fought with swords or magic, it was an RPG.

 

Then that historical period was really short since Traveller was released in 1977.

[correctamundo]

Actually (had refresh a little with wiki help) Boot Hill came out in 1975 and Bunnies and Burrows in 1976 so I guess the "sword and magic" era of rpgs was confined to 1974.

[Majestic Jazz]

If you were actually around when KotOR came out you'd know about the observe level of hate for having abandoned the PC gamers and having simplified the combat, abandoned race selection, and so on.

Actually I was was around when months before KOTOR came out and after it released. Back with Chris Priestly was just a QA Tester and always dropping by to answer questions.

My point was that KOTOR put Bioware on the mainstream map the same way TW3 has put CDPR on the mainstream map, despite the successes of TW1 and TW2. It will be Cyberpunk 2077 that really allows CDPR to launch just as ME1 did the same for Bioware. It is what CDPR does after Cyberpunk 2077 which will really define who they are. After ME1, Bioware sold themselves to EA and we all know how the rest of that story goes....

[Majestic Jazz]

I honestly didn't see a big difference between the two games. Well, maybe The Witcher had a few more gory moments, like when the Crones show their true colors later in the game. But little beyond that. It had more pairs of bewbs, maybe, but Inquisition also had nudity, and if boob quota = maturity, then pornography is the most mature thing around.

In terms of themes, the difference was just not there IMO. TW3 was just as much of a save the world story as Inquisition was, Geralt can never be played as a bad guy, and while loaded quests like the Baron's existed in TW3, so did they in DA:I (Blackwall's companion quest being the most obvious example).

I never said that nudity in TW3 made it more mature, you did. Go back and try to quote me where I implied that more nudity makes a more mature game. You comment is just another generic comment that TW3 bashers like to throw out in order to dismiss the game the same way people who bash DAI like to throw out the term SJW to dismiss DAI. Try harder next time.

[dreamgazer]

Actually I was was around when months before KOTOR came out and after it released. Back with Chris Priestly was just a QA Tester and always dropping by to answer questions.

My point was that KOTOR put Bioware on the mainstream map the same way TW3 has put CDPR on the mainstream map, despite the successes of TW1 and TW2. It will be Cyberpunk 2077 that really allows CDPR to launch just as ME1 did the same for Bioware. It is what CDPR does after Cyberpunk 2077 which will really define who they are. After ME1, Bioware sold themselves to EA and we all know how the rest of that story goes....

The Witcher 3 also already started the kind of fan petulance that can be routinely found on this forum, with (deserved) complaints about the shift in story intentions, out-of-character developments, and technical/glitch issues.

And they haven't even attempted a custom character yet!

[Majestic Jazz]

The Witcher 3 also already started the kind of fan petulance that can be routinely found on this forum, with (deserved) complaints about the shift in story intentions, out-of-character developments, and technical/glitch issues.

And they haven't even attempted a custom character yet!

That is besides the point. No game is perfect, including TW3. It is only natural that there will ALWAYS be a group of people who dislike certain aspects of a game. There will be CDPR fans who dislike Cyberpunk 2077 for various reasons.

You are missing my point however. My point is less about the games and more about the personality of the developer. When ME1 launched in 2007, Bioware still was running off of the momentum of KOTOR and even NWN to an extent. Then when EA entered into the picture....things changed and now look at where we are almost 10 years later.

When Cyberpunk 2077 comes out, it will be no doubt more popular than TW3 and will further the "legend" of CDPR. It is what they do in the umbrella of this success that will define them. Bioware under the same umbrella sold themselves to EA and they have never been the same. What will CDPR do? Will they remain the little independent Polish studio putting their fans first and taking all the time it needs to put out quality games and taking the time to give us large and meaningful DLC that rivals that of $60 games? Or will they decide to be bought out by a larger publisher to become just another "studio" on the schedule to pop out games every 2-3 years and releasing small DLCs full of microtransations (like Spoils of the Qunari) and story DLC that last no longer than 2-5 hours? Like the Arrival DLC and Leviathan DLC.

[dreamgazer]

Unless, of course, they screw up the shift toward a custom PC, deliver more bugs and graphical complaints, and can't figure out what to do with a world that isn't The Continent. We've seen what CDPR can do while feeding directly off other source material. Cyberpunk 2077 will be something else altogether, and there are plenty of cracks in The Witcher 3 that could indicate a "mediocre" game.

In terms of discussing developer "personality", that's nothing but speculation and, frankly, the realm of fanboy trumpeting. The Witcher 3 can very easily be seen as their Mass Effect 2, though: more popular with a mass audience, but also an attempt at a mainstream gaming experience where they abandoned the superior elements of the game that came before it.