Dragon Age: Inquisition

[Guest Slinky]

 

Wasn't DA2 a product of "data mining" DAO? Or am I thinking of the ME series?

Likewise, David has noted that when the metrics came in, they were surprised by the large percentage of people who opted for a same-sex romance. I don’t think they made all the LIs bi because of that, but it probably informed their decision to do so.

 

What? Really? Have they visited even once their forums ever since ME1 came out? If hey would have, that sure wouldn't been a surpise.

 

Though I understand quite well how someone wouldn't want to go to that forum.

[Halaster]

I thought that combat in DA2 was much superior to that of DA:O in pace, and the tactical element was still very much there at Hard difficulty--in fact I thought the combat was tactically superior, thanks to combinations, to that of DA:O, which was often agonizingly slow and lacked variation.

 

Hmm, did you play Origins a few times too? Because if you did, I cannot for the life of me understand how you could feel that DA2 was tactically superior. The whole DNA of the combat was less 'think like a general' and more 'fight like a spartan'. Gone was the tactical camera. Friendly fire was off by default, and generally off by choice (the enemy animations were too fast to place the target marker without frustration). The enemies used special attacks a lot less frequently. Terrain did not matter. There were no traps, or bombs. There were no ballistas, barricades, pits, mabari cages, ice patches, oil patches or other great props. That's before we get to enemies spawning in your face and behind your mage who previously was in a 'safe' spot in the back near a dead-end.

 

DA2 did on the other hand introduce reflex based dodging of killer attacks (Rock Wraith) and looooong slug-fest boss fights (I think with only a couple of reloads I literally spent 2 hours on the Arishok - during which I would ordinarily have uninstalled, but instead took the difficulty down to normal because I believed the story would save it).

[Tale]

Likewise, David has noted that when the metrics came in, they were surprised by the large percentage of people who opted for a same-sex romance.

They gave me an achievement, how can I not?

[Malekith]

:lol:

Edited August 3, 2013 by Malekith

[alanschu]

 

 

The same argument could be made for giving players the option to play female character and I'm sure those voice-overs cost a lot as well.
Those decisions are more about maintaining standards and fulfilling expectations.
It's just that expectations of old-school RPG players are no longer very important.

 

They do cost.  It's about picking our battles for the type of game that we want to make.  There's also degrees of how well work can be parallelized during development.  DAO, for instance, established that races aren't just indifferent choices with minimal impact on the game (like Baldur's Gate).  In other words, allowing Hawke to be a different race is more than having the character and tech artists make animations and art for different player races, it also adds more work to the writers as well, on top of the programming support to allow the player to choose a race, to allow the writers/level designers to acknowledge that choice.  Female does add some of these same things, but not as much, and voice over work creates work for programmers creating a VO pipeline (which already existed from DAO) and the VO/Localization team (which gets extra work added upon it in all cases as well).

 

Ultima is an old school RPG too, without much in the way of race selection for the main protagonist either.  Ultima 7 is considered by many (including myself) to be one of the most engaging RPGs ever.  Ultima 6 was excellent as well.

 

If you want to be extra scrutinizing, when I was young there also wasn't a distinction between "JRPG" and "CRPG."  We just called them "RPGs" and while I spent a good chunk of time playing Ultima, I also spent a good chunk of time playing Final Fantasy games.

[Oerwinde]

Race selection was an issue in DA2 because it was a sequel to a game that had it. Where Ultima didn't. Same with Witcher. No one had an issue not playing an elf or dwarf, because it was established that you couldn't.

[GhostofAnakin]

I'll be honest, whenever there's the option to choose race, I almost always play as a human.  In DAO, I think I attempted a couple of elf play throughs, but only finished the game one of those times.  I've yet to play as a dwarf.  Even with ME, with the "outcry" from some on the Bioboards about being able to play as a different race, should BioWare implement that, I'd stick to a human.

 

Then again, if given the choice, I always choose to play as a male.  For me, taking on the "role" of the character also seems more natural if that character is the same gender as I am, and thus would react to things -- especially when Bio pushes romances on you -- the way I would.

 

The only "stereotype" I don't seem to fit with is the soldier class thing.  Class selection is the one area where I'm all over the map.  I'll try all classes, and I won't necessarily stick to the same class as my "main" character.

[alanschu]

Race selection was an issue in DA2 because it was a sequel to a game that had it. Where Ultima didn't. Same with Witcher. No one had an issue not playing an elf or dwarf, because it was established that you couldn't.

 

I have heard this position dozens of times.  I understand this perspective, and I never said anything of the contrary.  I merely brought up examples to point out that the "old school" RPGer argument is irrelevant.

 

 

"BioWare doesn't care about old school RPGers as evidenced by their lack of race selection in DA2" and "DA2's lack or race option is bothersome because DAO had it" are two different arguments.

Edited August 4, 2013 by alanschu

[Zoraptor]

Personally, I've always found the 'human fighter' archetype most games are saddled with utterly boring as they're usually the RPG equivalent of playing Doom marine. If there's an option to avoid it I almost always take it.

 

The race and starting vignettes from DAO were one of the things I liked most about it. But even though the levels were mostly recycled into the main plot at some point they were still pretty obviously prone to be cut if cutting were to be done as it's still a lot of work for something many will not see.

[Humanoid]

I've felt for a long time that the Origins in, er, Origins, were a nice idea that ultimately harmed the game. Instead of a smooth curve in which the writers could ease you into the game and provide better justification for what followed, they instead let you play a few independent ideas for a while before abruptly grabbing you by the collar and throwing you into the plot, communicating beyond doubt that "yep, you're on the rails now."

 

I've complained a lot about being forced to become a warden in DAO, but ultimately it's not so much the fact itself as opposed to how it was handled - and that itself is down to the hamhanded compromises they had to make in reconciling six different stories into a common one-size-fits-all set of circumstances.

 

So yes, I am in effect arguing for more linearity in the game. Or at least, making an argument that while divergent non-linearity is good, convergent non-linearity is a far more finicky affair.

[lobotomy42]

I've felt for a long time that the Origins in, er, Origins, were a nice idea that ultimately harmed the game. Instead of a smooth curve in which the writers could ease you into the game and provide better justification for what followed, they instead let you play a few independent ideas for a while before abruptly grabbing you by the collar and throwing you into the plot, communicating beyond doubt that "yep, you're on the rails now."

 

I've complained a lot about being forced to become a warden in DAO, but ultimately it's not so much the fact itself as opposed to how it was handled - and that itself is down to the hamhanded compromises they had to make in reconciling six different stories into a common one-size-fits-all set of circumstances.

 

So yes, I am in effect arguing for more linearity in the game. Or at least, making an argument that while divergent non-linearity is good, convergent non-linearity is a far more finicky affair.

 

I'm deeply ambivalent about this.  On the one hand, the origin stories were one of the things I liked about DA.  On the other hand, the part *immediately after* the origin stories is one of the worst parts.  It never occurred to me that there might be a casual connection between those two things.  But you're right, it is partially an effect of being yanked out of the context you've just started establishing yourself in and then being dumped in a new context which has very little to do with the former.  Combine that with the Wardens literally telling you "This is how we do things around here," the net effect is drawing attention to the linearity of the most linear part of the game.

 

I'd like to think, though, that there are some better ways to hide this and keep the Origin stories.

[Orogun01]

I call that kind of writing the Bioware effect, an all time high followed by a disheartening low, it continues on until a disappointing ending. Luckily a lot of times the highs are good enough to carry the story and keep people coming back for more. Though lately that hasn't been true for myself, the direction BW definitively took after ME2 is a little off-putting to me.
 

[GhostofAnakin]

The problem I had with DAO's beginning is it felt like you were forced to play through two introductory sections, instead of the usual one that most games throw at you.  First you had the origins, which was about an hour or so to slog through.  Then you played through *another* intro in the Warden/Ostagar stages.  The game doesn't give you any freedom until after that part, when you're on your way to Lothering with Morrigan and Alistair.

 

IMO, the double intro (even though that's not what it was meant to be) is the single biggest hurdle I have preventing me from starting new play throughs.  Every single time I attempt a play through, my goal is to "just get past Ostagar" before the fun begins.

[Humanoid]

Lothering is the third intro. Or indeed fourth, if you count the wilds and the tower as separate intros. Yeah, it's a long slog, of which only one part varies.

[Monte Carlo]

DA:O almost had too much story. The story and game levels collided into a sort of spaghetti. There was no sense of serendipity, or a freaking break from the plot.

 

And remember, I liked DA:O. And the dwarf origin stories were, for me, easily the best.

 

Look, I know Alan is in an invidious position as an employee, but BiowEAre now make lowest common denominator RPGs for the hideously needy, fan-service voracious fanbase they've created in the fetid petri dish of snarky Buffy-esque dialogue, poorly animated diaper-sex and emo-Twilight-esque romance.

 

[Maria Caliban]

I love you too, Monte.

[Monte Carlo]

Aw *feels warm and fuzzy*

[BruceVC]

DA:O almost had too much story. The story and game levels collided into a sort of spaghetti. There was no sense of serendipity, or a freaking break from the plot.

 

And remember, I liked DA:O. And the dwarf origin stories were, for me, easily the best.

 

Look, I know Alan is in an invidious position as an employee, but BiowEAre now make lowest common denominator RPGs for the hideously needy, fan-service voracious fan base they've created in the fetid petri dish of snarky Buffy-esque dialogue, poorly animated diaper-sex and emo-Twilight-esque romance.

 

 

 

Look, I know Alan is in an invidious position as an employee, but BiowEAre now make lowest common denominator RPGs for the hideously needy, fan-service voracious fanbase they've created in the fetid petri dish of snarky Buffy-esque dialogue, poorly animated diaper-sex and emo-Twilight-esque romance.

 

 

You funny Monte

 

But on a serious note Alan doesn't have to defend anything. I really enjoy his perspective around some of the decisions and reasons for why Bioware does certain things. But Bioware has million of committed fans, like me, who will continue to purchase there products and support them. They just need to release a game with the word "Bioware" on it and in the first week they will get more sales than most indie developers pray they get over a few months

 

And the reason for this is simple. Bioware has a loyal fan base, they have a prestigious history and there games offer entertainment. In other words the good far outweighs the bad. I sometimes worry about the ubiquitous "Bioware Bashing" that we see on these forums as surly those people should realize there negative view of  the company doesn't reflect what the majority of people think so personally I would question my opinion of something if I am in the minority?

 

I don't believe being vociferous about a topic makes your opinion correct. The facts about a companies success and products can't be changed this way. Only a reality where the fan base of Bioware is reduced and the company suffers poor sales would mean its not doing well or its not a respected development house anymore

Edited August 4, 2013 by BruceVC

[Nonek]

 

Look, I know Alan is in an invidious position as an employee, but BiowEAre now make lowest common denominator RPGs for the hideously needy, fan-service voracious fanbase they've created in the fetid petri dish of snarky Buffy-esque dialogue, poorly animated diaper-sex and emo-Twilight-esque romance.

 

 

I think that this is fairly much uncontestable, partially due to the fact that their standard defense for any decision they're challenged on is to lionise themselves as white knights and demonise their accusers as homophobes and misogynists, no matter the logic or justness of their accusations. In courting the kind of "people" who frequent the Bioware Social Network they've forged their own mandate, which they will have to keep to, despite the insulting depiction of women in their games from the half dressed idiot Isabella to the incompetent guardswoman whose name escapes me and all of the other unmotivated slaves to the protagonist.

 

However I would add that the games they make are fun and entertaining, with solid gameplay and easy to understand mechanics. A few years ago I would have added with rigorous bugtesting, but the state in which the Awakening expansion for the original Dragon Age is left so many years after release is positively shameful. 

[Oerwinde]

Am I the only one who liked Aveline?

[GhostofAnakin]

Am I the only one who liked Aveline?

 

Her banter with Isabela if they were both in your party were arguably the best in the game.

[Serrano]

Am I the only one who liked Aveline?

 

Nope, I liked her too. She was actually one of my favourite companions.  

[Orogun01]

Am I the only one who liked Aveline?

Seeing as she was one of the most level headed companion and one of the only two who weren't on a path of self destruction, yeah I love her.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

DA:O almost had too much story. The story and game levels collided into a sort of spaghetti. There was no sense of serendipity, or a freaking break from the plot.

 

And remember, I liked DA:O. And the dwarf origin stories were, for me, easily the best.

 

Look, I know Alan is in an invidious position as an employee, but BiowEAre now make lowest common denominator RPGs for the hideously needy, fan-service voracious fanbase they've created in the fetid petri dish of snarky Buffy-esque dialogue, poorly animated diaper-sex and emo-Twilight-esque romance.

 

I can't wait until the game is released and one of the companions is "Monte Carlo", an inquisitor with a golden codpiece who owns a sex club.

[Spider]

Am I the only one who liked Aveline?

 

She was one of the few things I really liked about DA2.