Dragon Age: Inquistion - Can Bioware Survive Another Misstep?

[CloudAtlas]

The possibility of a Mass Effect 4 pretty much cemented my perspective of Bioware. As grey, corporation spawn. ( DAMMIT EA )

I'm pretty sure countless of fans are longing for a chance to return to the Mass Effect universe. Why shouldn't BioWare heed them? Yes, the ME1-3 story is over, but the universe still exist, doesn't it?

Does it focus on something that is in no way related to Shephard other than maybe a cameo and some background lore? Shephard has trudged through THREE lengthy rpgs. I say we let his character fade off, like how ( though i loathe to invoke DA2 ) DA2 did with Hawke. Let shephard/warden fade into the background lore and get a fresh new character. If Bioware does that, I MAY change my perspective ( Although the chances of that is enormously slim. Like Hollywood, Bioware knows that franchises/sequels are essentially free buyers regardless of how crappy the end product is )

According to BioWare, a new Mass Effect game is in the works, and it will definitely not feature Shepard.

Also, why are you saying turn based tactical combat is based off mmorpg's? Its not. mmorpgs aped it for hell if i know. Turn based tactical combat is THE combat system for multiple party based RPGs.NWN2, Baldur's gate. KOTOR. Jade Empire. DA;O. Mass effect is an FPS so im not counting that.

MMO's were not the first who did it this way, but they're the most notorious for doing it now. It's not THE system, it's A system, some like it, others, like me, don't.

Also, please please please don't compare RPG combat to FPS combat. Two completely different genres.

No, they're not. The transition is pretty smooth. If I'm shooting with guns in a game I compare it to other games where I'm doing the same. Being an RPG doesn't excuse a game for bad gunplay mechanics. There's no reason why combat in games like Mass Effect shouldn't feel as crisp, intense, and polished as in, say, Battlefield. BioWare obviously tried that, but still wasn't quite there yet in ME3.

 

[Lictor Face]

Also, why are you saying turn based tactical combat is based off mmorpg's? Its not. mmorpgs aped it for hell if i know. Turn based tactical combat is THE combat system for multiple party based RPGs.NWN2, Baldur's gate. KOTOR. Jade Empire. DA;O. Mass effect is an FPS so im not counting that.

MMO's were not the first who did it this way, but they're the most notorious for doing it now. It's not THE system, it's A system, some like it, others, like me, don't.

Also, please please please don't compare RPG combat to FPS combat. Two completely different genres.

No, they're not. The transition is pretty smooth. If I'm shooting with guns in a game I compare it to other games where I'm doing the same. Being an RPG doesn't excuse a game for bad gunplay mechanics. There's no reason why combat in games like Mass Effect shouldn't feel as crisp, intense, and polished as in, say, Battlefield. BioWare obviously tried that, but still wasn't quite there yet in ME3.

Name a multiple companion party system game that has combat which does not use THE system, and was not crap, and I might concede that point. Please no shooters or true turn based combat.

What? You do know how damage and whatnot is calculated in games like NWN2 and DA:O right? Mass effect managed to pull it off simply because they had limited armor/weapon options and three types of shielding and various % ammunition. You don't have things like saving throws and player statistic modifiers.

In fact. This is primarily why nearly no fantasy rpg game that includes statistics and saving throws of a sort can have TRUELY smooth gameplay. I'm not a genius at computing or coding, but I believe the computer requires time to factor in the variables and calculate the results. Look a the system of NWN2, and you'll see why having FPS smooth gameplay would mean cutting away a LOT of the core features of fantasy rpgs.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Can they survive? Just.

There are several worrying things for me with DA:I -

1) BW have already announced they plan to stick by various decisions which failed in DA:2 (only one selectable race, voiced protagonist, dialogue wheel etc.). What people's opinion of those aspects are themselves is irrelevant - the concern is that BW are pigheaded enough to continue walking down a path which they see as "right", and not admit glaring issues displayed in DA:2. Sorry, but any Western RPG based on the D&D world which doesn't allow selectable races is missing a massive point of the game/genre - even if people play as humans the choice is what matters to give a feel of a true fantasy/D&D based RPG where you carve out your own destiny from scratch.

I'm pretty sure the folks at BioWare know very well what went wrong in DA2. But all points you're citing here were not objectively wrong - that's just your personal preference.
A predetermined race allows for a more focused story, better interwoven with the protagonist - a different kind of story. Telling a story through cut scenes but with a silent protagonist, and from a first-person perspective, is nothing but awkward, and a good voice actor can give the protagonist more personality. Dialogue wheel, what does it matter whether dialogue options are organized by a circle or by a list. All those decisions have upsides too.

What you're basically saying here is that doing anything but a very conventional fantasy party RPG is objectively the wrong decision. But that's not an opinion that everyone shares.

 

[Mikeyfell]

They're already dead.

DA2's massive disrespect for Origins,
ME3's massive disrespect for ... everything
SW:TOR not giving KOTOR a proper conclusion
ME3 Citadel making everyone regret they were ever born in the first place...

at this point Bioware exists for masochistic wish fulfillment

 

[dementis]

I don't think I can trust Bioware anymore, I might check some LPs of the game to see what it's like but after Dragon age 2 and Mass Effect 3 I'm just dubious about handing my money over nowadays.

Its nice to know that well over a year after release we can all find creative ways to spark the exact same discussion about how much we hated the ending of Mass Effect 3.

Anyhow, 90% of the time when gamers talk about not buying product X, Y or Z because of reason A, B or C its bull. Sure, a lot of people might stop buying Bioware games (and I'm sure some people already have) but I don't think Bioware is going anywhere. What I do know is that most of the backlash they have been getting has been way overblown, to the point in where its a genuinely disturbing to me. I mean were all entitled to our opinions but the amount of entitlement/anger that some people have in the gaming community (not saying any names or calling out any groups or individuals) is truly sad sometimes. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, just with using it as justification for killing CEOs and assaulting peoples mothers.

At the end of the day, if DA:I is a great game I think people will finally start to get over the whole Bioware hatred bug that has been going around and if it sucks a lot of people are going to say they wont be buying the next Bioware product and will buy it anyways.

I can't say I hate Bioware, I just disappointed in them. I feel like a parent who's kid was getting straight As his entire education then starts coming home with Ds for every subject. I don't hate them for it, I just want them to do better.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Name a multiple companion party system game that has combat which does not use THE system, and was not crap, and I might concede that point. Please no shooters or true turn based combat.

On the top of the head I can't even name a single game that belongs to that category and is not from BioWare. But it's not hard to imagine: Take Mass Effect and replace guns with swords.

What? You do know how damage and whatnot is calculated in games like NWN2 and DA:O right? Mass effect managed to pull it off simply because they had limited armor/weapon options and three types of shielding and various % ammunition. You don't have things like saving throws and player statistic modifiers.

In fact. This is primarily why nearly no fantasy rpg game that includes statistics and saving throws of a sort can have TRUELY smooth gameplay. I'm not a genius at computing or coding, but I believe the computer requires time to factor in the variables and calculate the results. Look a the system of NWN2, and you'll see why having FPS smooth gameplay would mean cutting away a LOT of the core features of fantasy rpgs.

All that is fine, but not every likes combat results being determined by statistics and probabilities based on all kinds of stats. They want to feel in control. They want combat to feel direct, immediate. They want to hit the enemy because they aimed well, not because of some virtual dice throws determined that they did. Obviously you need to tailor a different set of mechanics if you're going for direct combat, but the result is not inherently less of an RPG (whatever "RPG" is supposed to mean in practice...).

 

[Orc Town Grot]

There is a infectious tradition of attributing qualities to Bioware games that simply don't exist. Baldur's Gate 2 was great on the basis of the Dungeons and Dragons rule-set developed by other people, and a PERFECT UI (and awesome portrait art)

That game system UI is so enjoyable to use that we tend to ignore the poverty of the level design, or any other weaknesses in the game. We are having so much fun checking our stats, tweaking our saved spells, and re-organizing inventory, that we don't notice that the game itself is a bit dull, or tedious. Wandering one hundred maps chasing up 100 silly plot points.

All the other big Bioware titles have a large number of imperfections: in world design, in game mechanics, in inventory, level design and so on. Also of course UI, which never retained the BG2 standard of perfection. Neverwinter Nights 1 must be the most boring bloody western RPG ever made. I dare anyone to re-install it and try to play through act 1 without going insane at the glacial pace at which you can onlock the city, and the sheer number of boring-as-hell encounters. It takes a serious waste of real time to level up your character or find any good gear, and its a pain in the arse lugging, selling and organizing loot. NOT FUN! Besides NWN1 DA2 was a MASTERPIECE! Of course it isn't really which is the point. All the Bioware games are imperfect and most of them are surprisingly mediocre when you realize that finally none of them are BG2. And most of their games are so damned similar to each other, that I invite anyone to try a 'Bioware marathon' and not scream bloody murder as you watch the same damned plot-twists and psychological cliches roll out every single time. I think the reason DA2 failed so bad, is that Bioware has been creatively pretty sterile for more than a decade. They are just drifting along, coasting on the laurels of past success and their excessive reliance on strong NPC writing (at which they REALLY ARE GOOD).

But Bioware isn't finished! Of course not! Rather, they have barely even started. The whole industry is still young! The present console generation has imposed a technical limit on game design that hopefully will be raised next year. All the hard criticism of DA2 should have a sufficiently sobering effect on Edmonton pride and professionalism. We have abundant talent, huge numbers of capable technicians, and a growing pool of gaming wisdom, as the whole community gradually ages. Plus hordes of young-guns keen to prove themselves.

I would say failed games are just fertilizing the field. And there is a pretty high chance Dragon Age Inquisition will be the first TRULY good game Bioware makes. In the sense that it may be REPLAYABLE. That it may have a long shelf life. That it will have gameplay strength, exploration, and reasons to return beyond your standard (one shot is enough) Bioware 'storytelling'.

However I certainly won't be buying it on release day. I'll wait a month and see what the consensus is first. The main reason I would be reluctant to buy it is cos it will be an Origin exclusive, and frankly I don't want Origin anywhere near my machine. It would take a bloody good game to change my mind on that one.

 

[CloudAtlas]

But in a RPG humans are the most bland and boring race,that's why people play as orcs,goblins,elves,demons,giants,dwarves and so on.I hate playing as a predetermined race if the previous games had race selection,can you imagine if the Elder Scrolls 6 decided to cut out races and make you play as a nord?People would be livid and rightly so,I'm glad DA:I is allowing players to pick races again because choice is important in RPGs.

No, it is not important for all RPGs, and in fact, even entirely predetermined protagonists are not that uncommon in RPGs either. It's simply a trade-off. And if you're free to choose a race in a game, what you usually end up is that your race doesn't really matter to the story. Skyrim and DA:O were no different in this regard. In Skyrim it didn't matter at all, and in DA:O me being a city elf pretty much stopped mattering as soon as the origin story was over. Not very impressive after all the fuzz about the "origins" in its name.
Sure, if you have to save the world from some demon or whatever, perhaps it really doesn't matter, but if you want to tell a story about racism, for example, it's just easier if you don't have to tell a different version of each story for each playable race. And there are some players out there who'd rather hear such a kind of story than having to save yet another fantasy world yet again from yet another prime evil.

 

[CloudAtlas]

And most of their games are so damned similar to each other, that I invite anyone to try a 'Bioware marathon' and not scream bloody murder as you watch the same damned plot-twists and psychological cliches roll out every single time.

Not very tempting.

I would say failed games are just fertilizing the field. And there is a pretty high chance Dragon Age Inquisition will be the first TRULY good game Bioware makes. In the sense that it may be REPLAYABLE. That it may have a long shelf life. That it will have gameplay strength, exploration, and reasons to return beyond your standard (one shot is enough) Bioware 'storytelling'.

Now I'm really not a naysayer, but I'm veeery skeptical about the last part, innovative storytelling.

 

[rodeolifant]

This again. It was one game. One game that wasn't entirely up to *their own* standards. People need to lighten up a little.

I for one, am very much looking forward to DA:I. Yes, I wasn't exactly thrilled about DA2, and I too had envisioned a different ending to ME3.

Fact of the matter is, Bioware is the studio that pretty much sets the standard in this genre. There are only two big names out there that publish titles that compete with theirs, one of which started doing exactly what they were doing because they loved their Bioware games so much, that they wanted to do the same thing.

They have released nothing but really good products, with something to like and dislike for everyone. In franchises, usually what you expect from a sequal is the same game with added stuff. With DA2, that's not what you got. They tried a lot of new things, some for the better. The attitude changing protagonist? Brilliant. Let's not go prologue > four worlds > endgame but stay in a single region? Smart and daring.

The waves of enemies and repeated scenery didn't strike my fancy, but it suits the narrative, by way of Varric's delivery. I imagine, that if I were to tell the story about Commander Shepard, there's going to be a lot of 'and then they were in another metal room fighting hordes of Krogan'.

I didn't want to go o/t defending a game, and I apologize for doing so. The point I wanted to make is - take stuff as they come. If you can't live with a game because it has feature X instead of Y, by all means don't play it. But here's a studio that really knows what it's doing, and cannot be blamed for trying something new within a franchise. It cannot be blamed for *having to* do a product in far less time than needed.

I'm fairly confident that allocated time/budget thing was not the BW's dev team's choice, and that a lot of the creatives there were not entirely satisfied with the end result. This is probably a result of them having to work on two more titles at the same time. In my nightmares too, some EA manager calls up Laidlaw and says 'What do you mean, you need three years? We can get a Fifa something title out in two months with half the staff. You get six. Don't forget to tell 'em to buy DLC.'

But that has already happened. Players, creatives at BW, and EA themselves have felt the resulting outcome on DA2. And they, as much as you - expect a better result. I'm positive they would not have started a project like this again without learning anything from the previous installment. Just, have a little faith.

 

[redmoretrout]

I have no doubt DA:I will be financially successful, but personally I have lost all interest in Bioware games.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

DA:I is definitely not a pre-order for me...yet I'll be watching it closely.

Been bitten one too many times by Bioware. I thought we were friends, but...but they just keep hurting me.

 

[MacChris1991]

Why all the Bioware hate? All three of the games mentioned in the op were good games. Mass Effect 3 was great until the very end (literally). Mechanically it was probably the best of the three mass effect games which is an accomplishment in and of itself. Dragon Age two had some problems but again the game was mechanically sound (some might be upset by the changes they made to the game so that it would be more console friendly, but from what I understand, pc gamers could just plug in a controller and enjoy the experience the same way console players could), and honestly the game had Varric so you can't hate it too much. SW:TOR may have gone free to play but it still has a size able player base and is making EA money, the wouldn't continue running the servers if they weren't. Honestly Bioware must be doing something right because we are all still buying and playing their games. I have yet to play a bad Bioware game, and to be honest I don't think we will be seeing one from the anytime soon.

 

[Ishal]

Short answer: NO.

Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Bioware isn't the company it used to be. They also seemed to have caught that unfortunate foot-in-mouth bug that EA's had for so long. The hate for Bioware isn't just because of their games its because of their PR and worsening relationship with their consumers and fans. The info in the recent DA:I articles have shown Bioware is taking steps in the right direction, but this is pretty much their last chance for a lot of fans.

I love Dragon Age, still play it. Heck, even my forum name is from Dragon Age. But DAII was a disaster, and the two games following it were each worse. That is three strikes as far as I'm concerned. I'm no longer a Bioware fan and I won't buy this game. I'll rent it or buy it a year later when more is known about it.

The thing that will be most telling is how Bioware reacts to criticism of the game, both good and bad.

 

[Raikas]

But in a RPG humans are the most bland and boring race,that's why people play as orcs,goblins,elves,demons,giants,dwarves and so on.I hate playing as a predetermined race if the previous games had race selection,can you imagine if the Elder Scrolls 6 decided to cut out races and make you play as a nord?People would be livid and rightly so,I'm glad DA:I is allowing players to pick races again because choice is important in RPGs.

You may hate it, but in the case of DA:O, apparently less than 5% of players played the Dwarf origins and only just over 10% used the Elf ones. Obviously the vast majority of players selected human even when given the choice (there's a nice graphic they put out that shows the numbers which I can't find, but David Gaider talks about them in this BSN thread [http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/5821847/]).

Personally, I like having more choices as well, but if the majority of people don't use them I don't think you can make blanket statements about that choice making the genre, or that humans are bland/boring in any absolute way.

 

[babinro]

I get the impression that they are still very successful despite the backlash from fans.
DA 3 wouldn't have come out at all if DA 2 was half as bad as threads would have you believe.

How was ME 3 a failure?
That game shipped huge numbers and was well received.
People got angry about the ending, sure, but that's just 20 minutes of a 40 hour game that people otherwise praised.

DA 3 will have to severely fail for the franchise to come to an end.
By fail, I mean critically and financially speaking.

 

[Something Amyss]

As much as people complain, Mass Effect 3 was a huge success despite its ending and even Dragon Age 2 did alright sales wise. Maybe not the surprise hit that origins was, but it did well enough to warrant continuing the series.

So even if Dragon Age Inquisition were the worst game since Superman 64 Bioware would probably be just fine.

Mostly just on name recognition alone, no less.

I doubt even most of the people who have "given up have stopped buying from them, because talk and action are very different things. But they'll continue to be popular even if this game is a massive failure, yes.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

You may hate it, but in the case of DA:O, apparently less than 5% of players played the Dwarf origins and only just over 10% used the Elf ones. Obviously the vast majority of players selected human even when given the choice (there's a nice graphic they put out that shows the numbers which I can't find, but David Gaider talks about them in this BSN thread [http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/5821847/]).

That's hardly surprising, being something of an endemic problem within fantasy RPG's all around. Players either want familiarity, a player-character with which they can empathize more strongly, or are simply lazy or unimaginative. That means human.

Look at World of Warcraft [http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php], for example. The only race that approaches human in popularity is blood elf, attributable to that humans cannot play Horde, blood elves are the most human-like race in the Horde, and they were the first Horde race (and currently, one of two) able to be paladins (the second-most popular class). That's despite humans' lackluster racial traits, starting zones, and plot lines.

I can see the interest in cutting overwhelmingly unpopular content in the name of focusing resources on polishing the most-popular content, but on the other hand Dragon Age is still dark fantasy and the expectation of playing non-human races was still well-established (and was a major selling point) in the first game.

 

[Raikas]

I can see the interest in cutting overwhelmingly unpopular content in the name of focusing resources on polishing the most-popular content, but on the other hand Dragon Age is still dark fantasy and the expectation of playing non-human races was still well-established (and was a major selling point) in the first game.

I don't disagree that it's a well-established feature, but I'd still argue that a feature that very few people use can hardly be a strong selling point.

I'm pretty sure that's because most first time players don't even bother customizing their character and go with the default,that's why the stats are skewed in favor of the human origin.

That may be, but that also only validates the idea that it can't be part of the genre appeal of the genre if the vast majority of people don't care about it (although I don't know if the actually stats show that those human-players were genuinely playing the default male/human noble/warrior as opposed to a female or mage or alternate appearance one).

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

I don't disagree that it's a well-established feature, but I'd still argue that a feature that very few people use can hardly be a strong selling point.

The game was titled after the first hour of each playthrough (the origin story). The origin stories were a huge chunk of the pre-release publicity and advertising, that your perspectives of the game's conflicts and questions will be directly shaped by your character's origin story, and that origin stories continue influencing game content (in admittedly oft-small ways) well beyond the prelude. BioWare did come through with that, too.

DA2, on the other hand, reduced that to "you're either an apostate, or your sister is one. Which do you like better, Swording Things for She-Jesus, or Spelling Things for FREEDUMBS?". Don't even get me started on the damn ending, which asked you "if you had to side with mass-murdering lunatics, would you prefer them to have swords or magic?" without even the potential for a third solution in the form of concluding both sides are fuckin' morons who no longer deserved the privilege of continued breathing, or simply doing the smart thing and getting the hell out of dodge. Overselling a "both sides are bad" narrative I can at least understand, but doing it without alternatives to doing the stupid thing and choosing a side I can't.