|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Dragon Age: Inquisition - Redeeming the Series

Default Dragon Age: Inquisition - Redeeming the Series

May 7th, 2014, 10:20
Hardcore Gamer has posted a new article for Dragon Age: Inquisition where they wonder if the new game will redeem the whole series. Here is a sample of it below.

The most disappointing thing about Dragon Age II was that almost all of its many problems could be traced directly back to the ridiculously short development cycle. Dragon Age Origins was released on November 3, 2009 and Dragon Age II was released on March 8, 2011. That puts the development time for Dragon Age II at a mere 16 months, far less than what most grand and expansive role playing games take in development. This is a lesson that certainly seems to have been learned, with Dragon Age Inquisition set for a October 2014 release date which puts the development time at three and a half years. With a clear stance from the development team that they are taking all the Dragon Age IIfeedback to heart and enough time in development to give the game the care it deserves, I find myself very optimistic about Dragon Age Inquisition.I am trying to remain cautious after Dragon Age II, but everything that has been shown so far makes me think this game will in fact redeem the series.
More information.
Couchpotato is offline

Couchpotato

Couchpotato's Avatar
LazyGamer
RPGWatch Team

#1

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Potato Land
Posts: 8,704

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 10:20
The article gets alot of the problems right, and Bioware does say alot of right things now.
I'm not convinced they can pull it off though, the Bioware working on DA1 was a vastly different one than the one now.
Alot of the problem is IMO the EA involvement and the thereby forced audience "broadening".
DA1 had the bonus of the game being close to finished before the EA take over.
But if you think about it, DA's problems didn't really start with DA2, they started when EA was fully involved.
I mean even the DA1 Dlcs were beyond bad for the most part.
Last edited by Thorwyn99; May 7th, 2014 at 11:10.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#2

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 10:32
Assembling proper cut scenes sucks time. The cut scenes in the first were vastly superior to the second as they came with stricter directing and deeper attention to details.

It cant be cut down.

The short developpment did not explain the other various decisions and their consequences.

They built the first from scratch so it took longer.

The burden to be shouldered was the management of all the endings from DA1.

DA2 was transitioning toward a new model, knowing that the previous model could not be sustained.

In configurations like that one, it is quite useless to spend a lot of resources on the transitional product since changes are not supposed to be made to be capitalized later on.

In this regard, DA 4 might come quick fast after 3 as 3 will provide a more profitable basis to capitalize on.

DA1 did not provide that base, it provided a base that would have made each new iteration even more expensive to developp, outside the necessary increase in expenses due to technological higher demand.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#3

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,007

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 10:40
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
Assembling proper cut scenes sucks time. The cut scenes in the first were vastly superior to the second as they came with stricter directing and deeper attention to details.

It cant be cut down.

The short developpment did not explain the other various decisions and their consequences.

They built the first from scratch so it took longer.

The burden to be shouldered was the management of all the endings from DA1.

DA2 was transitioning toward a new model, knowing that the previous model could not be sustained.

In configurations like that one, it is quite useless to spend a lot of resources on the transitional product since changes are not supposed to be made to be capitalized later on.

In this regard, DA 4 might come quick fast after 3 as 3 will provide a more profitable basis to capitalize on.

DA1 did not provide that base, it provided a base that would have made each new iteration even more expensive to developp, outside the necessary increase in expenses due to technological higher demand.
Actually i think that explains it quite well.
The attitude went from how can we make a good game and make profit to
how can we maximize profit.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#4

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 10:43
The attitude hasn't changed.

What's changed is the perception of how to maximise profit.

We're talking about EA here. Expecting them to change their priorities would be like expecting Hitler to invite a jew over for dinner.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#5

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 10:47
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
The attitude hasn't changed.

What's changed is the perception of how to maximise profit.

We're talking about EA here. Expecting them to change their priorities would be like expecting Hitler to invite a jew over for dinner.
Well i don't expect them to, hence one of the reason why i don't believe DA3 will be any good.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#6

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 11:03
Well, it could potentially be a good game.

It depends on what kind of relationship EA has with the current Bioware developers. I mean, obviously - after or around the time of the EA acquisition, things changed for Bioware, and I'm having a hard time believing that was a Bioware decision.

I'm not saying EA are responsible as such, as they're just in this for the profit. That much is as certain as anything can be. But it's feasible the doctors lost their passion for making great games - which their leaving seems to support. So, it's probably a combination of switching priorities and having new suits call the shots.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out what kind of motivation drove the development of SWtOR.

In any case, I've yet to see anything I would call good from Bioware since Mass Effect and Dragon Age - and those titles were both less than what I would have expected from the old Bioware. Dragon Age was reasonably close, but I think that's because development started way back.

Absolutely everything since ME2 has pointed towards suit-driven design, with the perception of how to maximise profit being the ultimate motivator. The actual developers might not see it that way, but that's what I consider to be the denial part.

But even with money as the ultimate motivator - you can end up with good games. That's largely about how smart you are and how much you listen to the people with passion and insight. No matter how you call the shots, there will always be SOME people with passion in a big company - though they're less likely to have any power, because the company line probably won't be in tune with their song.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#7

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 11:13
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
The actual developers might not see it that way, but that's what I consider to be the denial part.
I dunno didn't Bioware lose quite a few devs since the take over ?
Like the guys from banner saga.
Another reason why i think Bioware now is vastly different.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#8

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 11:15
Originally Posted by Thorwyn99 View Post
I dunno didn't Bioware lose quite a few devs since the take over ?
Like the guys from banner saga.
Yeah, but that's not uncommon - and it doesn't mean all the talent is gone. Also, they could have hired new people.

Lots of people are dying to get into the industry - and especially if you're young and driven, you won't have the experience to understand that a company like Bioware under EA is not the place for cultivating genuine passion and talent.

Also, as I understand American culture (though it's Canada?) - it seems more important to have a job and make money - than doing what you really want to do, or creating something that's actually good.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#9

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:23
Hmm, I am part of the minority who think DA2 was actually a better game than DA1.
Mind you, I have to choose between "mediocre" and "acceptable", as I have never considered DA a good game overall.

Methinks the problem is…
1. Over-ambition (I I remember correctly, Bioware planned to make a pen&paper system based on DA1l, they wanted to embrace the NWN mod community, they wanted to create a world as rich as Faerun - talk about kitchen and sink).

2. Lack of focus in plot/setting (I guess they wanted to create a gritty, semi-realistic GoT-like medieval fantasy setting, losing all the *fantasy* imaginative aspect of their previous games). Oh, and special mention goes to David Gaider. He was never a good writer, he never will be.

3. Lack of focus in audience (confusion on the console port for example — I have started playing DA on my xbox, and was hmmm… surprised to say the least. I had to buy the game AGAIN for pc to truly appreciate what it wanted to be. Yes, I am genuinely pissed.)

So, DA2 was clearly aimed at the console crowd and offered a fast, simple gameplay that was actually good for what it was. It was a very cynical game and the protagonist nailed that attitude down perfectly.

I do not believe EA/Bioware will take any risks with DA3 (especially after the catastrophe of SWTOR), so I expect an even simpler gameplay with high production values (shades of Mass Effect 3…)

Should DA3 be a pc exclusive, we might have a chance to get something of a blast from the past - but honestly, EA will never allow that experimentation (all hail to Ubi for a brief moment)
duerer is offline

duerer

Watcher

#10

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 79

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:26
So, DA2 was clearly aimed at the console crowd and offered a fast, simple gameplay that was actually good for what it was. It was a very cynical game and the protagonist nailed that attitude down perfectly.
So, you actually think the way enemies spawned out of nothing and popped down from the heavens made for compelling combat?

As for DA not being complete, I can't agree at all. Obviously, no game is ever "complete" apart from Minesweeper, perhaps - but it sure felt very complete to me.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#11

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:35
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
So, you actually think the way enemies spawned out of nothing and popped down from the heavens made for compelling combat?
Absolutely — for a console action-RPG, this is pretty much expected anyway.
Mind you, the same happened with ME2- it was the dumbed down version of ME1 — and yet, it was hailed the bestest game evar.
duerer is offline

duerer

Watcher

#12

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 79

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:41
Originally Posted by duerer View Post
Absolutely for a console action-RPG, this is pretty much expected anyway.
Mind you, the same happened with ME2- it was the dumbed down version of ME1 and yet, it was hailed the bestest game evar.
I don't think you'll find many around here hailing ME2 as the best game ever.

I don't think spawning enemies out of thin air helped it be a better console game, but then again, I'm still missing the point you're trying to make.

It seems you're trying to say it should have been a bigger hit with people who don't really like RPGs - but it's a known fact that Dragon Age was a much bigger hit overall.

DA2 felt like less than half a game to me, and I don't agree at ALL with DA feeling incomplete. Certainly not more so than DA2 - which had an absurd amount of recycled content.

If your point is that DA2 had better moment-to-moment combat - then I'd agree, but that doesn't make it better "for what it was" - unless we agree that it was pretty much shit and managed to be good at being shit.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#13

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:53
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I don't think you'll find many around here hailing ME2 as the best game ever.
Whew, good to hear that! Please note, I'm not here to make a flame war if DA2 is better or not — I just want to point out that such a big budget game HAS to cover the console audience. Reportedly, this is the segment where the Big Profit is.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
If your point is that DA2 had better moment-to-moment combat - then I'd agree, but that doesn't make it better "for what it was" - unless we agree that it was pretty much shit and managed to be good at being shit.
Well said, Hawke!
As a simple console game, DA2 gets the job done. It is no Dragon's Dogma/Dark Souls though (see, console aRPGs do have their own well-respected superstars)
duerer is offline

duerer

Watcher

#14

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 79

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 12:57
Originally Posted by duerer View Post
Whew, good to hear that! Please note, I'm not here to make a flame war if DA2 is better or not I just want to point out that such a big budget game HAS to cover the console audience. Reportedly, this is the segment where the Big Profit is.
Unfortunately, the end result was lost sales.

Well said, Hawke!
As a simple console game, DA2 gets the job done. It is no Dragon's Dogma/Dark Souls though (see, console aRPGs do have their own well-respected superstars)
Gets the job done poorly, sure
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#15

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 14:05
Originally Posted by Thorwyn99 View Post
I dunno didn't Bioware lose quite a few devs since the take over ?
Like the guys from banner saga.
Another reason why i think Bioware now is vastly different.
No company keep their entire workforce intact in 15 years, especially not the gaming industry where most dev are contractors or where you have to exile yourself to work somewhere (Edmonton is not exactly a paradise). It also have a high rate of "burn out".

BioWare have grown a lot too, they have 3 studios (Edmonton, Austin and Montreal) with 4-5 full dev teams.
azarhal is offline

azarhal

SasqWatch
RPGWatch Donor

#16

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,412

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 14:39
Originally Posted by azarhal View Post
No company keep their entire workforce intact in 15 years, especially not the gaming industry where most dev are contractors or where you have to exile yourself to work somewhere (Edmonton is not exactly a paradise). It also have a high rate of "burn out".

BioWare have grown a lot too, they have 3 studios (Edmonton, Austin and Montreal) with 4-5 full dev teams.
Yeah i understand that turnover is natural, but it seemed alot of quitting happened after the takeover.

Nonetheless though the point is much has changed at Bioware.
It has little to do anymore with the Bioware that made Dragon age 1 much less the games that came before it.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#17

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 14:46
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Also, as I understand American culture (though it's Canada?) - it seems more important to have a job and make money - than doing what you really want to do, or creating something that's actually good.
Lol oddly enough this is how DA2 mostly felt.

Like a job, basically a descent work performance you do for money(I mean imo it wasn't completely horribad, just extremely mediocre).

With little to no passion involved.
Thorwyn99 is offline

Thorwyn99

Watcher

#18

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 96

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 14:49
Originally Posted by Thorwyn99 View Post
Lol oddly enough this is how DA2 mostly felt.

Like a job, basically a descent work performance you do for money(I mean imo it wasn't completely horribad, just extremely mediocre).

With little to no passion involved.
That's how everything since Dragon Age has felt like, to me.

Not bad, and partially well executed - but without passion or vision.

SWtOR is like the epitome of that, frankly.

Bioware games of today feel like they've been bought - rather than created.
DArtagnan is online now

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#19

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,842

Default 

May 7th, 2014, 15:06
I bought Dragon Age 2 on sale and have now played through about 5 hours of it. Granted I had little expectations and already know about what people dislike (such as the lack of inventory and the extremely linear levels), but have found myself enjoying it. It's really not a bad game, but it all depends on what you are expecting. On the other hand, I feel Bioware games rarely feel fresh anymore. They use elements that have worked well in the past (and still do), but the games just don't make an impression like they used to. Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect at least were the first in their series, and so seemed at least a little fresh, because they were in different universes with different visions.
forgottenlor is offline

forgottenlor

forgottenlor's Avatar
SasqWatch

#20

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 160
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Dragon Age: Inquisition - Redeeming the Series
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:23.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch