935 réponses à ce sujet

[pdusen]

Then along came Dragon Age Inquisition, which was originally supposed to be an MMO(source: Gamespot),

 

Do we really have to go through this again?

 

It wasn't, and your so-called "source" says nothing of the kind.

 

Stop bringing it back up.

[The Hierophant]

Dragon's Dogma. Now that was a great game. It felt good being able to climb on top of enemies. 

Indeed. The golem fights were epic. 

[Laughing_Man]

Do we really have to go through this again?
 
It wasn't, and your so-called "source" says nothing of the kind.
 
Stop bringing it back up.

"It was a Dragon Age game, multiplayer only, that was in development before Dragon Age II came out. That became the core of what became Dragon Age Inquisition..."

 

It certainly explain why DA:I gameplay felt the way it did.

[Kabraxal]

Dragon's Dogma. Now that was a great game. It felt good being able to climb on top of enemies. 

 

Always wanted a game to take Shadow of the Colossus and add to that kind of idea.  Thank god for PS+ or I would have missed out on DD.

[tehturian]

Lol @ the first ME's combat, but i respect this. 

 

So what do you think of Dragon's Dogma's combat?

So good. 

 

Leaping on giants. Flying on dragons. So great. 

[The Hierophant]

So good. 

 

Leaping on giants. Flying on dragons. So great. 

There's nothing quite like throwing liver busting body blows to a goblin caught in a full nelson. 

 

More companies should take notes on DD's combat system.

[Laughing_Man]

...

As for appreciating the capability to deliver amazing stories... that is purely subjective.  I found the Bloody Baron quest to be one of the high marks of TW3, but nothing truly amazing.  

...

And good gameplay?  TW3's gameplay is a poor knock off of the Batman/Assassin's Creed style with far less versatility.

 

That thing was a mess at launch

 

Gameplay:  hmmm, I can use swords... or swords.. or o yeah, swords.  Signs are of limited use and o, you want to try and stealth anything? Yeaahhhh no.  AC might not be the most versatile combat out there, but it makes a mockery of what you just posted.  I mean seriously, that one isn't opinion it is just fact.  TW3 is severely limited in how you actually play.

 

So I was curious, went to check Steam reviews for TW3 and for its "season pass":

The game itself has 96% / 97% positive reviews, and the season pass has 99% positive reviews.

 

There are VERY few games on Steam with these stats. Must be one terrible game.

 

I'm still waiting for EA to publish their DA:I sales numbers.

[Dobbysaurus]

There's nothing quite like throwing liver busting body blows to a goblin caught in a full nelson. 

 

More companies should take notes on DD's combat system.

 

I just hope they never implement their romance system.... Lol it did lead to some hilarious moments though. 

[Laughing_Man]

I bought DD on PC, wasn't impressed, expected more I guess.

 

Lost interest and abandoned it after the first large monster. (hydra I think)

[fdrty]

? DA:I had beautiful areas. Empty with awful quests, but they were IMO quite pretty to look at. 

 

I just restarted DAI (last played through the game when Trespasser came out) and the open world stuff really isn't as bad as people make it out to be. I think cos it was such a radical change to the DA formula (which hasn't really been established) and other open world games have conditioned us to play a certain way, that maybe players (myself included) think it's worse than it is.

 

 

I'd like to weigh in to say that Witcher 3's combat feels like complete ass. I was originally critical of DAI's combat but that actually holds up after playing something like Bloodborne because it's trying something different(not an Arkham Asylum rip off in other words). Witcher on the other hand is floaty garbage, Geralt's attacks and movement have no weight.

 

I'd take even the first Mass effect's gameplay over the gameplay of the Witcher games. 

 

 

Every RPG has sucky combat at the start. But what gets me about the Witcher's combat isn't that it's just a worse version of Arkham Asylum (even though it is) or how uninteresting the limited selection of spells are - it's how there is no sense of progression to it. You don't gain new abilities, all that happens is you get better stats. After a few hours I just get bored of the same combat and there aren't any ways to change it up.

[Kabraxal]

So I was curious, went to check Steam reviews for TW3 and for its "season pass":

The game itself has 96% / 97% positive reviews, and the season pass has 99% positive reviews.

 

There are VERY few games on Steam with these stats. Must be one terrible game.

 

I'm still waiting for EA to publish their DA:I sales numbers.

 

And? You are throwing opinions at me as proof of something again...

 

I actually don't care if you or anyone likes it.  I don't care about people not liking Inquisition, though it is highly exaggerated how "hated" it is.  What bothers me, is the incessant childish need for TW3 fans to belittle Inquisition constantly while proclaiming their subjective taste as fact ON A DEVELOPER BOARD THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WITCHER.  Or just Bioware haters in general that can't let it go... Christ, it's been years, get the hell over it and move on if Bioware isn't your thing anymore.

 

Personally, I find The Witcher franchise to be the typical boring dark fantasy clichés with poor characterization, poor combat, poor storytelling and pacing, and, in the case of TW3, a repetitive quest system within a mundane generic world that is only vaguely hidden by cutscene delivery.  So naturally, I find it a lesser game in every respect in comparison to one I find with the best characterization on the market, a decent enough story that handles complex themes deftly, an amazingly detailed world that sets itself apart from a generic medieval setting, and has combat that is at least fun to play with multiple classes and customization that lets me tweak each run to my liking. 

 

Is that going to be the same for everyone?  No.  And you won't find me on CDPRs forums ripping their games apart to raise Inquisition higher.  I let them enjoy what they enjoy.  I just wish people would stop acting like it is fact Inquisition is poor and the Witcher is the godsend of gaming.  It isn't.

[pdusen]

"It was a Dragon Age game, multiplayer only, that was in development before Dragon Age II came out. That became the core of what became Dragon Age Inquisition..."

 

So multiplayer-only means MMO now? Somebody tell the Overwatch team that they released Titan after all.

[Shechinah]

I'm still waiting for EA to publish their DA:I sales numbers.

 
Why would they? What purpose would it serve?
 
Also, I think In Exile had a speculative post about this a long while ago in regards to why this is not something EA does. I'll see if I can dig it up;
 

If it's so great though, I expect more bragging or pride.. or..something. That's all.

I don't know what fans would think. Plenty of developers are transparent, both on cost and sales.. I don't see any big deal made about it.

EA doesn't do this because the fans though. They used to release numbers, but they hide everything behind "division" numbers now. Like they won't say what individual games do... just what their divisions do. It's easier to save face when FIFA kicks ass, but NBA Live tanks.

They do it to protect developers from investors. If FIFA rocks and NBA Live tanks, investors will start to push for EA to cut the dead weight. In fact, you'll see a push for a company to strand profitable but relatively underpeforming divisions. And for Bioware - who've shown their model wasn't good enough to keep them afloat at their height - that just means being shuttered.

[The Hierophant]

I just hope they never implement their romance system.... Lol it did lead to some hilarious moments though. 

I heard stories about people getting that old lady merchant at Cassardis, Fournival's daughter, and Asalam. Me, somehow I romanced Quina even though i locked in Mercedes. 

[In Exile]

 

 
Why would they? What purpose would it serve?
 
Also, I think In Exile had a post about this a long while ago in regards to why this is not something EA does. I'll see if I can dig it up;
 

 

 

I'll just add that this is speculation based on general market practices - it's not a statement perse on why EA does it, but why there are perfectly good rationales to avoid publishing results on such a detailed basis, even if you value that aspect of your business. But presumably you could just dig this stuff all out of the securities filings for EA, since it's publicly traded. 

[Gwydden]

With as much fantasy as I've read, it's nice to see a franchise that is a mix of high and dark fantasy that isn't afraid to actually tackle religion, faith, and politics and not ham-fistedly kick and scream about how horrible it all is. As I've said before, the only other franchise in gaming or books for fantasy that I've come across that offers the similar kind of depth of themes is Kushiel's legacy.  It gets dark, but it isn't afraid to have fun or let concepts have a more optimistic tinge than a lot of dark fantasy.  Maybe Inquisition has some clichés, but they are a mix of dark and high fantasy so the interplay gives it a better flavour than high fantasy's airy, bright world of little consequence and dark fantasy's grimy "everything sucks!" cynicism (to outright nihilism). 
 
And I just find the staggering amount of content within Inquisition to contradict the claims that it is "one note" or drab.  I just think it is the style of delivery many have issue with.  Because with other games, where some argue better content, I was bored out of my mind at the insane repetitive nature of that content but I noticed particular method of delivery that seems to be why some prefer that content.  That, and I detest moving in an open world and always running into some game mechanic meant to "fill the world" to keep it from "getting boring".  It is one of the few criticisms I have of Fallout 4 and its radiant quest system.  Let the world breath a little!

 I get why you think it's original, I just don't agree that makes it original. Even if I was willing to concede that being a collage of whatever's popular at the moment makes something innovative, the same thing has been done before DA and arguably much better. But I suspect we just see things differently, and this discussion is not very relevant to the topic at hand.

 

What is relevant is DAI's merits or lack thereof, since it seems we're stuck with the open world thing no matter what. Instead of going on a rant of everything I didn't like about the game, I am going to keep it simple. Yes, the game was nice to look at, but if I wanted a strict "look but don't touch" policy I'd go to a museum or a strip club. Forget all of the stuff there is to look at and read in DAI. What is there to do that is even remotely interesting? Talking to companions doesn't count; that is a tiny percentage of a ginormous game.

 

I don't have the energy for this debate, and IMO TW3 was a knockout GOTY and one of the best games I've played, bar none, but CDPR is quite limited in the respect department. They patronize gamers - much of their schtick is about covering up similar business practices to e.g., EA with glossier marketing language. Their "Free DLC" turned into minor quests (ala the Cerberus News Network) with paid DLC. CD Projeckt has GOG, and that offers phenomenal service (especially with currency). Their games are really good, and some of their quests are brilliant. But this idea that they "respect" customers is absurd. It's largely marketing fluff. Just look at the way they handled the downgrade. 

Capitalists will capitalist. It's the nature of the beast. However, I think there's something to be said for CDPR's good rep and the extreme hate EA gets everywhere. EA is clearly doing something wrong, even if it's just their PR. 

[Laughing_Man]

Why would they? What purpose would it serve?

 

If you have a very successful product, obviously there are benefits in showing it to your investors.

 

As for EA protecting developers, am I the only one seeing the irony here?...

 

So multiplayer-only means MMO now? Somebody tell the Overwatch team that they released Titan after all.

 

It's certainly not a SP RPG. And I doubt Bioware was about to release an Overwatch.

 

The closest thing to Bioware's expertise is another MMO. (makes sense on some level, they have the SW MMO, and with this they could have covered the straight fantasy no Sci-fi MMO type)

 

And? You are throwing opinions at me as proof of something again...

 

Why are *you* throwing your opinions about TW3 here? I provided a simple proof that your analysis of TW3 is shared by very few.

 

The fact is that TW3 is widely liked for what it is and how it was executed, and DA:I is much less so.

[Asdrubael Vect]

If they have option to play as nonhuman and non alliance non N7 hero this could be a good game

 

 

for now it is another "Shepard" ME just in another galaxy and without any our decidions for 3 games, cos Bioware cant fix all crap what they done with Me universe with their Shepard and humanity are special so we need to end reapers in most stupid way like we done in ME3

 

 

it is the same ME1 just in new colors and new names with the same stuff

 

with just a different names it would be the same human hero

 

with the same human faction and fighting hor humans

 

with the same "normandy" and some alliance humans and some pro humans alien guys in team

 

and damn mako who now even without guns

 

and we have another "reapers" and "protheans ruins" what only humans can understand and beat ancient enemy as leaders of everyone as the ones who decide the whole galaxy races future

[Kabraxal]

 I get why you think it's original, I just don't agree that makes it original. Even if I was willing to concede that being a collage of whatever's popular at the moment makes something innovative, the same thing has been done before DA and arguably much better. But I suspect we just see things differently, and this discussion is not very relevant to the topic at hand.

 

What is relevant is DAI's merits or lack thereof, since it seems we're stuck with the open world thing no matter what. Instead of going on a rant of everything I didn't like about the game, I am going to keep it simple. Yes, the game was nice to look at, but if I wanted a strict "look but don't touch" policy I'd go to a museum or a strip club. Forget all of the stuff there is to look at and read in DAI. What is there to do that is even remotely interesting? Talking to companions doesn't count; that is a tiny percentage of a ginormous game.

 

Capitalists will capitalist. It's the nature of the beast. However, I think there's something to be said for CDPR's good rep and the extreme hate EA gets everywhere. EA is clearly doing something wrong, even if it's just their PR. 

 

 

I can ask the same question of games like The Witcher or Oblivion or Fallout... what are you doing in the world that is interesting?  Oblivion has the combat, and it has some interesting encounters and quests but what makes it worthwhile is the world design that gives it meaning and context.  For me, The Witcher has "things to do" but the world design was lacking to where the villages were clearly cut and paste, the encounters and cutscenes were simply "hey, here's this", and the points of interest were just randomly put someplace with on real thought or context as to why.  So not only was the world bland to look at, but it was quite boring since most of what was being done had very little thought towards an overall world design incorporated into them.

 

Inquisition takes an intricate world design, and yes gives us something "pretty", then proceeds to add things to do that fit within the context of that design.  From the heavy emphasis on companions and banter to the war table that actually made it feel like you are the head of a massive organization, to the judgements, to finding mosaic pieces and astrariums, to finding hidden ruins and easter eggs, to fighting dragons, to customizing Skyhold and your character.... I can list of a lot of things I do everytime I play.  And it is all brought together and given context with a world design that matches the top tier of open world RPGs, if not outright blowing past them. 

 

 So this "look don't touch" criticism absolutely falls flat to me.  I am putting nearly 100 hours in every run I have.  So obviously I am finding things to do. 

[TheRevanchist]

If they have option to play as nonhuman and non alliance non N7 hero this could be a good game

 

 

for now it is another "Shepard" ME just in another galaxy and without any our decidions for 3 games, cos Bioware cant fix all crap what they done with Me universe with their Shepard and humanity are special so we need to end reapers in most stupid way like we done in ME3

 

 

it is the same ME1 just in new colors

 

I believe this can actually possibly be a good thing, if handled correctly. If this new team sticks to the original themes and style of ME1 and stop trying to force ME to be some Hollywood Action Movie I think this "soft reboot" can be very successful. I know I would be happy with it.

[Kabraxal]

If you have a very successful product, obviously there are benefits in showing it to your investors.

 

As for EA protecting developers, am I the only one seeing the irony here?...

 

 

It's certainly not a SP RPG. And I doubt Bioware was about to release an Overwatch.

 

The closest thing to Bioware's expertise is another MMO. (makes sense on some level, they have the SW MMO, and with this they could have covered the straight fantasy no Sci-fi MMO type)

 

 

Why are *you* throwing your opinions about TW3 here? I provided a simple proof that your analysis of TW3 is shared by very few.

 

The fact is that TW3 is widely liked for what it is and how it was executed, and DA:I is much less so.

 

And I stated I don't care.  You are simply throwing opinions at me and going "HAH SEE!".  Those opinions are not creating any fact in regards to game quality, hate to break that simple reality to you.
 

[Asdrubael Vect]

I believe this can actually possibly be a good thing, if handled correctly. If this new team sticks to the original themes and style of ME1 and stop trying to force ME to be some Hollywood Action Movie I think this "soft reboot" can be very successful. I know I would be happy with it.

nope this is like Star wars 7 thing for star wars or new Ghostbusters

 

Bio destroy original Me to create another what would have the same mistakes as Shepard thing, and they was promise that it would be a really new non-shepard hero....they simply lie

 

damn, so many years of waiting to play as other part in ME universe and now it would be the same Shepard type hero

 

 

this is became a Halo clone with more alien friendships

[TheRevanchist]

nope this is like Star wars 7 thing for star wars or new Ghostbusters

 

Bio destroy original Me to create another what would have the same mistakes as Shepard thing, and they was promise that it would be a really new non-shepard hero....they simply lie

 

damn, so many years of waiting to play as other part in ME universe and now it would be the same Shepard type hero

 

 

this is became a Halo clone with more alien friendships

 

So...1 game = new Shepard? Please, get over yourself. There is nothing to prove either way that this game will be anything like the previous ones. 

[Laughing_Man]

Those opinions are not creating any fact in regards to game quality

 

Yes they do, in the end those opinions are what differentiates a successful game from a bad one.

 

Your individual taste and preferences are irrelevant to the bigger picture.

 

Some games get to go to Valhalla, all shiny and chrome, while other games languish in their mediocrity...

[Gwydden]

I actually don't care if you or anyone likes it.  I don't care about people not liking Inquisition, though it is highly exaggerated how "hated" it is.  What bothers me, is the incessant childish need for TW3 fans to belittle Inquisition constantly while proclaiming their subjective taste as fact ON A DEVELOPER BOARD THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WITCHER.  Or just Bioware haters in general that can't let it go... Christ, it's been years, get the hell over it and move on if Bioware isn't your thing anymore.

I would like to point out that:

1. People can like Bioware and still think they're not that great.
2. People can like some older Bioware games, dislike some more recent Bioware games, and hope their future games will be more to their taste.
3. People can bring up TW as part of constructive criticism. That some just want to troll doesn't remove merit from others.
4. People will ****** about stuff they dislike and praise stuff they like, more often than not. Malicious intent is not required.
5. Everything should be open to criticism: The Witcher, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, anything. Even in their own boards; especially in their own boards.

 

Inquisition takes an intricate world design, and yes gives us something "pretty", then proceeds to add things to do that fit within the context of that design.  From the heavy emphasis on companions and banter to the war table that actually made it feel like you are the head of a massive organization, to the judgements, to finding mosaic pieces and astrariums, to finding hidden ruins and easter eggs, to fighting dragons, to customizing Skyhold and your character.... I can list of a lot of things I do everytime I play.  And it is all brought together and given context with a world design that matches the top tier of open world RPGs, if not outright blowing past them. 

I'd rather not stray, so I'll stick with Inquisition.

• The heavy emphasis on companions and banter: I haven't drawn up the numbers, but if this is not the Bioware game where the proportion of the time you spend interacting with companions respective to the entire game is the smallest, it certainly feels like it.
• The war table: if the war table made you feel like a leader, having to do menial labor emphatically did not. In that context, all the war table did was send your advisers to do all the actual leadership work while you were picking flowers and finding druffalos in the countryside, like leaders are known to do.
• The judgments: minuscule part of the game.
• Finding mosaic pieces and astrariums: this is fun or interesting how? It's basically "there's that, go fetch!" at its most basic.
• Hidden ruins and easter eggs: that's not doing anything; that's looking at stuff, or if you prefer, looking for stuff. I expect something slightly more exciting from my RPGs than wandering about for pretty things to look at. Where is the choice and consequence? Where is the roleplaying? Where is the character interaction? Where is the decent plot and the thematic subtext? They seem to have gone the way of the griffin in this game.
• Fighting dragons: don't even get me started on the combat in this game.
• Customizing Skyhold: and we're back to "I expect more exciting and interesting things from my RPGs than feng shui." Not to mention Skyhold irritates me to no end, between the weird design, the green flowering trees in the middle of a mountain range, the lack of anything particularly interesting to do beyond talking to companions and those... godawful... pajamas.

Obviously we have wildly different notions of what is enjoyable. I'm not trying to convince you DAI isn't, because it's clear you got a kick out of it and nothing I say it's going to change that. I'm glad someone liked it, at least. But I'm trying to illustrate why some of us consider DAI to be a horrendous taint upon this earth and would see a repeat of it with slightly less horror than the awakening of the great Cthulhu. Ia, ia!