Dragon Age 3: Inquisition announced

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

drebo

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2006
7,034
1
81
I think what everyone is saying (generality aside) is that "In this case" the prevailing player opinion trumps Metacritic. And that, if you actually play it, you may find that is true.

The problem with Craig is that he's a die-hard progressive. One of the things that entails is that he trusts "expert analysis" (in this case paid critics, objective or not) over imperical evidence. What his cronies (or the people paid to have the same opinion) think is far more important to him than what the actual consumers are experiencing.

It's not just in gaming, but in everything. Basically, ignore him when it comes to practical experiences about any topic what so ever.
 

darkewaffle

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2005
8,152
1
81
The first image of the plains I do like, though I've never felt like you could really glean much of anything from a game simply off concept art.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Yeah, i read the GS article. I have to say "Again" with the only being able to play human? It doesn't give me a whole lot of hope regarding customization. And it puts me in a mind of DAII much more than DA:O.

Also, they indicate that "One of the levels is bigger than the whole of DAII" (or words to that effect). Well, that wouldn't be to difficult. Bigger than a four (five??)zone single city? Wow.... Stop the presses.

They are going to have to go a LONG way to get rid of the sour taste in my mouth over DAII before I have any interest in this game. Fool me once EA, shame on you. You aren't going to get another shot.
 

arredondo

Senior member
Sep 17, 2004
841
37
91
Fortunately for me, despite being a huge fan of DA:O I was able to hold off on a day one purchase for the sequel. That allowed me to be influenced by the negative user reviews which made me decide to skip DA2 rather than ruin the series for me. I'm hyped for #3, and am confident they will get it right this time.

On a related note, I avoided Mass Effect 3, despite loving ME2 for the same reasons, as well as Diablo 3 despite being a huge D2 fan. Ever since the abominations that were Matrix Realoaded and Revolutions, I've been pretty good at avoiding bad sequels to great releases, whether they be games, movies, books or whatever.
 
Last edited:

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Fortunately for me, despite being a huge fan of DA:O I was able to hold off on a day one purchase for the sequel. That allowed me to be influenced by the negative user reviews which made me decide to skip DA2 rather than ruin the series for me. I'm hyped for #3, and am confident they will get it right this time.

On a related note, I avoided Mass Effect 3, despite loving ME2 for the same reasons, as well as Diablo 3 despite being a huge D2 fan. Ever since the abominations that were Matrix Realoaded and Revolutions, I've been pretty good at avoiding bad sequels to great releases, whether they be games, movies, books or whatever.

Not all sequels suck. GalCiv2 was awesome. So was Moo2. And BG2 of course. There are other examples as well (Empire Strikes Back for example. And Aliens). But yeah, DAII really bit the big one. In so many ways.

I have heard good things about ME3 and heard that, sans the ending, it was actually better and closer to ME1 than even ME2. So I have hopes that it will be good. But like you, I haven't taken the plunge. Yet.
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Not all sequels suck. GalCiv2 was awesome. So was Moo2. And BG2 of course. There are other examples as well (Empire Strikes Back for example. And Aliens). But yeah, DAII really bit the big one. In so many ways.

I have heard good things about ME3 and heard that, sans the ending, it was actually better and closer to ME1 than even ME2. So I have hopes that it will be good. But like you, I haven't taken the plunge. Yet.

I can't forgive them for EDI.
 

Kalmah

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2003
3,692
1
76
DA:O was still a bit shallow in the skill department in my opinion. Only an RPG with the complexities of the D&D ruleset will satisfy me. NWN 1 & 2 with all their expansions were excellent when it comes to character builds. I'm always open to a different system with the same amount of complexity though.

Come to think of it, the 'polish' that EA likes to put to their games is detrimental in my opinion. I'd rather something gritty.

At this point I don't give a shit about AAA titles anymore anyways. D3 was my final first-day purchase. It's sales and budget bin gaming from here on out unless reviews change my mind.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
DA:O was still a bit shallow in the skill department in my opinion. Only an RPG with the complexities of the D&D ruleset will satisfy me. NWN 1 & 2 with all their expansions were excellent when it comes to character builds. I'm always open to a different system with the same amount of complexity though.

Come to think of it, the 'polish' that EA likes to put to their games is detrimental in my opinion. I'd rather something gritty.

At this point I don't give a shit about AAA titles anymore anyways. D3 was my final first-day purchase. It's sales and budget bin gaming from here on out unless reviews change my mind.

Kickstarter has really breathed new life into my gaming world. The two games I am most looking forward to?

Project Eternity
Star Citizen

Neither of which are possible in EA's world (or any other big publisher).
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
DA:O was still a bit shallow in the skill department in my opinion. Only an RPG with the complexities of the D&D ruleset will satisfy me. NWN 1 & 2 with all their expansions were excellent when it comes to character builds. I'm always open to a different system with the same amount of complexity though.

Come to think of it, the 'polish' that EA likes to put to their games is detrimental in my opinion. I'd rather something gritty.

At this point I don't give a shit about AAA titles anymore anyways. D3 was my final first-day purchase. It's sales and budget bin gaming from here on out unless reviews change my mind.

I don't know if there is an established system out there with the complexity of D&D. And it took decades for that to be developed.

And EA's "polish" is specifically intended to make the games approachable to all ages and even the most casual gamer. That is their intent. So I doubt that you will ever see anything 'Gritty' come out of them or any of the other 'Big' houses. They'd much rather have lots of copies sold than actually make a good product. And they are too busy telling players how to play rather than listen to what they want.

What I would really love to see is someone come up with a CRPG based on Paranoia. That was an AWESOME game and would be just loads of fun to play. You play as one of a family of clones in a world where hierarchy is sacrosanct and the computer overloard is Insane. Get sent on a mission to paint a hall from red to orange. Only if you get caught in an orange corridor, you get killed. Loads of fun could be had I think.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Shes a love interest for Joker

Ok, maybe I did hear about that before. Must have blocked it from my mind. I mean, I can see
Joker loving the machine. But not actually LOVING it.

Anyway...
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Me 3 was actually a great game. The ending was weak. Otherwise it WAS better than ME2 and longer. Felt a touch more polished, was all-around a great play.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
Me 3 was actually a great game. The ending was weak. Otherwise it WAS better than ME2 and longer. Felt a touch more polished, was all-around a great play.

The ending was so atrociously bad, it pretty much ruined the entire trilogy.


I'm still a big fan of Dragon Age, and I'll be watching DA3's development. Too early to make any final judgments, but some of the early news makes me wary. Dialog wheel? Yuck. Only a human player character? Bah!
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
Have I posted in this thread? No? Ok.

I'm a Dragon Age fan and a fan of BioWare in general, though my faith in them has been challenged a bit with their past couple releases. So I'm looking forward to Dragon Age III, in the "cautious optimism" sort of way. Dragon Age: Origins was great, and Dragon Age II was good -- certainly not great, certainly not bad, just good. Maybe a bit disappointing, coming from such a storied developer as BioWare and as a sequel to Dragon Age Origins. I don't think the Metacritic score of 82% is inaccurate compared to Origins' score of 91% -- I think that accurately reflects the step down. The user score of 4.2 is just angry fans, and probably even people who never played it, "Metacritic bombing" the game for not being everything they wanted it to be and somehow representing BioWare's decay. It's worth less than the professional critic score, IMO.

I don't really think "consolization" was much of a problem for Dragon Age II. The studio is an experienced PC developer, and kept much of the interface and hotkeys intact. The combat was the same pause and give orders to your 4 party members as Origins, just more fast-paced. Dragon Age Origins' combat wasn't perfect in the first place, and I think both games have the strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, Dragon Age II did have higher resolution textures than the console versions and added some DirectX 11 features, which Dragon Age Origins lacked. I think the changes they made still would have happened even if they had been completely focused on the PC, with perhaps the exception of camera controls. In Dragon Age Origins on PC you could zoom out to isometric tactical view with a free moving camera; Dragon Age II allows you to zoom out but the camera remains fixed on whatever character you are controlling. That should not have been changed.

Now you're free to dislike Dragon Age II's game design changes, just be aware that it really can't be blamed on consolization. I wouldn't blame it on EA executive meddling either -- why would they, anyways? That's just a psychological scapegoat so disgruntled fans can fling more mud at EA. There is something you can blame on EA though, which I'm about to get to...

The real problem that brought Dragon Age II down, IMHO, was the development time, or lack thereof. Contemporary great RPGs, like The Witcher II, Skyrim, the Mass Effect series, and even Dragon Age Origins, had multiple years each for development. There were less than two years between the release of DAO and DAII. This inevitably led to cut corners, numerous glitches, unpolished game design, and time saving measures like recycling environments over. And over. And over. And over. Had Dragon Age II been given even 6 months more development time, I believe we would have gotten a much better game which could have legitimately rivalled its predecessor. The rushed game development, I think, can definitely be laid at EA's feet. They wanted to rush their fantasy RPG franchise out the door so it could sell, and the game suffered for it. Well I hope they've learned their lesson, and will look to Zenimax's example with Bethesda and Skyrim: Bethesda worked on Skyrim for years, it got rave reviews, and sold by the truckload.

Anyways, yeah. Cautious optimism. If EA learns to give the development time to breath, we'll get a great game.
 
Last edited:

drebo

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2006
7,034
1
81
Have I posted in this thread? No? Ok.

I'm a Dragon Age fan and a fan of BioWare in general, though my faith in them has been challenged a bit with their past couple releases. So I'm looking forward to Dragon Age III, in the "cautious optimism" sort of way. Dragon Age: Origins was great, and Dragon Age II was good -- certainly not great, certainly not bad, just good. Maybe a bit disappointing, coming from such a storied developer as BioWare and as a sequel to Dragon Age Origins. I don't think the Metacritic score of 82% is inaccurate compared to Origins' score of 91% -- I think that accurately reflects the step down. The user score of 4.2 is just angry fans, and probably even people who never played it, "Metacritic bombing" the game for not being everything they wanted it to be and somehow representing BioWare's decay. It's worth less than the professional critic score, IMO.

I don't really think "consolization" was much of a problem for Dragon Age II. The studio is an experienced PC developer, and kept much of the interface and hotkeys intact. The combat was the same pause and give orders to your 4 party members as Origins, just more fast-paced. Dragon Age Origins' combat wasn't perfect in the first place, and I think both games have the strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, Dragon Age II did have higher resolution textures than the console versions and added some DirectX 11 features, which Dragon Age Origins lacked. I think the changes they made still would have happened even if they had been completely focused on the PC, with perhaps the exception of camera controls. In Dragon Age Origins on PC you could zoom out to isometric tactical view with a free moving camera; Dragon Age II allows you to zoom out but the camera remains fixed on whatever character you are controlling. That should not have been changed.

Now you're free to dislike Dragon Age II's game design changes, just be aware that it really can't be blamed on consolization. I wouldn't blame it on EA executive meddling either -- why would they, anyways? That's just a psychological scapegoat so disgruntled fans can fling more mud at EA. There is something you can blame on EA though, which I'm about to get to...

The real problem that brought Dragon Age II down, IMHO, was the development time, or lack thereof. Contemporary great RPGs, like The Witcher II, Skyrim, the Mass Effect series, and even Dragon Age Origins, had multiple years each for development. There were less than two years between the release of DAO and DAII. This inevitably led to cut corners, numerous glitches, unpolished game design, and time saving measures like recycling environments over. And over. And over. And over. Had Dragon Age II been given even 6 months more development time, I believe we would have gotten a much better game which could have legitimately rivalled its predecessor. The rushed game development, I think, can definitely be laid at EA's feet. They wanted to rush their fantasy RPG franchise out the door so it could sell, and the game suffered for it. Well I hope they've learned their lesson, and will look to Zenimax's example with Bethesda and Skyrim: Bethesda worked on Skyrim for years, it got rave reviews, and sold by the truckload.

Anyways, yeah. Cautious optimism. If EA learns to give the development time to breath, we'll get a great game.

The problem with your rose-tinted glasses is that every problem with DA2 was a design decision, and 6 more months or even 6 more years wouldn't have fixed that.

Engine upgrade, fine. I liked DA:O's engine and graphics well enough, but I guess more updated or higher resolution graphics wouldn't have been a bad thing.

But that's where it stops. Everything else that lead to players absolutely hating the game was a design decision that represented a step backward:

1) Only one playable race,
2) Dialog wheel,
3) "fully voiced" main character (this one completely breaks immersion for me,)
4) lack of multiple back-story options,
5) stupidly simple item system, particularly for squad-mates,
6) extremely small "world,"
7) extremely limited number of "zones,"
8) tenuous ties, at best, to existing mythos,
9) respawns in town,
10) interface/menu design was aweful,
11) combat animations were comical,
12) view perspective,
13) .... etc, etc.

It wasn't the fact that the game was rushed that was the problem with DA2. It's the fact that they turned it, more or less, an interactive movie. It's extremely linear (whereas the first one had the same start and end point, but the middle was a bit more linear and actually felt like it had some variation) and because it's "fully voiced" there is no feeling that you are the hero making your own decisions. The dialog wheel choices have nothing to do with what your character says and your character's sayings and options aren't necessarily your real feelings in the situation.

To me, the only thing that DA2 got right was the banter between squadmates. DA:O had that, but DA2 expanded on it, and it was the only redeeming quality about the game.

If DA3 went back to DA:O's gameplay and depth (which was admittedly not perfect,) and simply told a different story, I would be a happy camper.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
The problem with your rose-tinted glasses is that every problem with DA2 was a design decision, and 6 more months or even 6 more years wouldn't have fixed that.

Engine upgrade, fine. I liked DA:O's engine and graphics well enough, but I guess more updated or higher resolution graphics wouldn't have been a bad thing.

But that's where it stops. Everything else that lead to players absolutely hating the game was a design decision that represented a step backward:

1) Only one playable race,
2) Dialog wheel,
3) "fully voiced" main character (this one completely breaks immersion for me,)
4) lack of multiple back-story options,
5) stupidly simple item system, particularly for squad-mates,
6) extremely small "world,"
7) extremely limited number of "zones,"
8) tenuous ties, at best, to existing mythos,
9) respawns in town,
10) interface/menu design was aweful,
11) combat animations were comical,
12) view perspective,
13) .... etc, etc.

Well said. DA2 was a mediocre game, at best, and its 4.2 Metacritic user score is probably a little inflated. Try play the game a second time . . but you can't make it out of act 2 before you get bored. All poor design decisions that would still be there if they'd spent another 2 years on development.

What generated the rage was that DAO was Bioware's return to epic RPG greatness, great story telling, awesome characters, multiple backstories and endings, etc. DA2 undid every single one of those things, everything that made DAO great DA2 undid. This rage is 100% justified and Bioware/EA should be ashamed.
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
The problem with your rose-tinted glasses is that every problem with DA2 was a design decision, and 6 more months or even 6 more years wouldn't have fixed that.

Engine upgrade, fine. I liked DA:O's engine and graphics well enough, but I guess more updated or higher resolution graphics wouldn't have been a bad thing.

But that's where it stops. Everything else that lead to players absolutely hating the game was a design decision that represented a step backward:

1) Only one playable race,
2) Dialog wheel,
3) "fully voiced" main character (this one completely breaks immersion for me,)
4) lack of multiple back-story options,
5) stupidly simple item system, particularly for squad-mates,
6) extremely small "world,"
7) extremely limited number of "zones,"
8) tenuous ties, at best, to existing mythos,
9) respawns in town,
10) interface/menu design was aweful,
11) combat animations were comical,
12) view perspective,
13) .... etc, etc.

It wasn't the fact that the game was rushed that was the problem with DA2. It's the fact that they turned it, more or less, an interactive movie. It's extremely linear (whereas the first one had the same start and end point, but the middle was a bit more linear and actually felt like it had some variation) and because it's "fully voiced" there is no feeling that you are the hero making your own decisions. The dialog wheel choices have nothing to do with what your character says and your character's sayings and options aren't necessarily your real feelings in the situation.

Uh, "rose-tinted glasses"? Please don't patronize me. I have my own criticisms of the game that I've made clear. Anyways, since you made a list, I'll go ahead and answer it:

1. Lamentable, but necessary with Hawke's family being more involved in the storyline. Can you imagine playing DAII with the same story, but as a dwarf? I can't; it falls apart. Also, multiple playable races would have required multiple different voice actors, unless you think a dwarf warrior should sound the same as an elf rogue.
2. And? BioWare's other huge success, Mass Effect, was praised for introducing the dialogue wheel. I even think Dragon Age II improved on the dialogue wheel system, using it even better than Mass Effect 3. Stuff like different tones you could give your responses, other voiceover dialogue adapting to your Hawke's personality without you directly controlling it, and the ability to interact directly with your squadmates during conversations gave it more depth than Mass Effect's dialgoue wheel.
3. Ok, that's a matter of taste. Plenty of games have voiced main characters; this is not an objectively bad aspect of the game.
4. Again, necessary for the more personal family aspect of the game.
5. The item system was the same as DAO, except for removing armor customization for squadmates (and if "immersion" matters to you so much, doesn't it bother you that squadmates let you play dress-up with them?)
6. Fair enough, though this is something I would attribute to rushed development time.
7. Same as 6.
8. I'm not sure what you mean by this. Stuff like the Darkspawn, templars, mages, the Chantry, Qunari, the Fade, the Deep Roads, demons, etc., are all from the first game.
9. Not sure what you mean by this either; do you mean that more enemies often spawn during combat? Yes, that's annoying, I will admit.
10. It really wasn't different than Dragon Age Origins...
11. They were a little over the top, and two-handed weapons were comical as well, but is this really so much of an issue?
12. I already said this was a change I did not like.

While I will admit that Dragon Age II is more linear than Dragon Age Origins, I would argue it's not incredibly so. There are still plenty of side quests you can go on, some relating to the main quest but unnecessary and some just completely unrelated. I found a few on another playthrough of the game, which was surprising because I am quite the completionist. You have the same interaction with squadmates, only in locations specific to the characters so animations can be a bit more organic (like Mass Effect 2 and 3 did). It's certainly nowhere near being an "interactive movie".

I'm not sure why you are bashing the voiceover and dialogue wheel so much. You say it doesn't "feel like you are the hero"? Well, I hate to break it to you, but you are not literally the hero in any game. Dragon Age Origins let you take control of six different predefined characters with histories that you had no control over. If it just feels like you're not making decisions in the decisions in the game, then that's a ridiculous complaint, because you are making decisions. I'm curious about what you think of the Mass Effect series (or other RPGs with conversation control but also voiced over characters, like the Deus Ex series, The Witcher series, or Alpha Protocol) since you seem to dislike main character voiceovers in RPGs.

Well said. DA2 was a mediocre game, at best, and its 4.2 Metacritic user score is probably a little inflated. Try play the game a second time . . but you can't make it out of act 2 before you get bored. All poor design decisions that would still be there if they'd spent another 2 years on development.

What generated the rage was that DAO was Bioware's return to epic RPG greatness, great story telling, awesome characters, multiple backstories and endings, etc. DA2 undid every single one of those things, everything that made DAO great DA2 undid. This rage is 100% justified and Bioware/EA should be ashamed.

Couldn't disagree more.
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
Luckily, your view is the distinct minority.

What, a distinct minority that Dragon Age II wasn't a disaster? That it didn't deserve a user rating of 4.2? Last I checked, professional critics rated it at a solid 82 average. And before you start rambling about critics being bought out by EA or whatever, there is no evidence of this. Just look at Medal of Honor Warfighter -- if EA was going around coercing critics into giving them better scores, Warfighter wouldn't have received an abysmal 56 average on Metacritic.

The user reviews, on the other hand, are ridiculous. In no way does the game merit scores of 1 or 0, but plenty of users gave it that score. Probably out of spite than any actual problem with the game. I'd call that a vocal minority myself.

So yes, I put more stock in professional reviews -- reviews by people who play lots of games, both good and actually bad, not just the ones they think for sure are going to be good. I also put more stock in the opinions of people I know in real life and discussion boards. The impression I've gathered from that is that most people agree that Dragon Age II is a decent game, with significant flaws, and not great like Origins.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,320
4,590
136
1. Lamentable, but necessary with Hawke's family being more involved in the storyline. Can you imagine playing DAII with the same story, but as a dwarf? I can't; it falls apart. Also, multiple playable races would have required multiple different voice actors, unless you think a dwarf warrior should sound the same as an elf rogue.

This was the primary problem with the game. The story they wanted to tell didn't fit the type of game they were making. As a result they had to remove a lot of what made the game fun in order to tell the story.

If they wanted to tell that story they should have made a completely different type of game set in the same universe, perhaps an action RPG instead of a turn based on. Make it clear to everyone that it is a Dragon Age universe game, but NOT a (gameplay) squeal to DAO.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |