• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mike Laidlaw talks Dragon Age Inquisition: possible SP DLC, last gen limitations

S

Some Nobody

Junior Member
Close if old, but I don't think I've seen this. It's a pretty good interview on Eurogamer.

He talks about the collect-a-thon issues:
Laidlaw says he has seen the complaints from fans about the number of collectable side-quests and "doesn't disagree".

"One of things that I think was a miscalibration is a lot of players wanting to do all of it - even to the point where they say 'I'm bored of collecting shards'. But they want them all because they're there. It's almost like a compulsive need. It's almost like 'Doctor, it hurts when I do this'. So don't do this!"
Click to expand...

All the stuff that got pulled from that PAX build:
Sections of the game were adjusted as a result, as it became clear that some ideas were not going to work as originally planned. A version of the game demoed at PAX Prime in 2013, around a year before the game's final release, showed hints of a war simulation system, where players would have to focus on building up and maintaining military strength around their captured keeps.

"We had to do some changes," Laidlaw admits. "That was something where we had a good working prototype but we hit a snag due to the technical limitations on it. Having multiple forces fighting works fine on PC but you end up in a situation where having realistic-feeling war on the older consoles is exceedingly challenging."
Click to expand...

There's potential DLC talk:
"The two big pulls are - 'I want more of this game' and 'I've reached the ending and I want to know more about the characters, or one specific character'," Laidlaw says. "I don't want to go into too much detail but I'm well aware of both of those camps and I'd like to see both of those groups satisfied before we're done."
Click to expand...

Even talk of a sequel.

But, regardless of cuts, Inquisition was a success. So what does this mean for the franchise? "It certainly doesn't put it at risk," Laidlaw replies. "But I never count my chickens before they're hatched. I'll never say 'oh we're definitely doing something else'. I'd say it's possible there will be more Dragon Age - there's certainly no impediments to it.
Click to expand...

There's a lot more at the actual link, so be sure to give it a read.


Much as I liked Inquisition, it sounds like last-gen really held this game back from being a lot more awesome. That's disappointing, and I hope we can get at least one more Dragon Age game that's PC/current-gen only. There seem to be a lot of ideas that undoubtedly had to be cut in order to make it work on PS360, and I'd like to see them in a different title, even if they have to be re-worked.
 
T

toddhunter

Member
That sounds good in theory, but inevitably I would expect the only result in moving away from last gen will be better graphics and even more limited features.

There are a lot more other forces at play and having more power isn't going to stop them.
 
S

Sou Da

Member
war simulation system, where players would have to focus on building up and maintaining military strength around their captured keeps.

"We had to do some changes," Laidlaw admits. "That was something where we had a good working prototype but we hit a snag due to the technical limitations on it. Having multiple forces fighting works fine on PC but you end up in a situation where having realistic-feeling war on the older consoles is exceedingly challenging."
Click to expand...

Sounds like one hell of a cut to make to accommodate last gen consoles.
 
S

Some Nobody

Junior Member
toddhunter said:
That sounds good in theory, but inevitably I would expect the only result in moving away from last gen will be better graphics and even more limited features.

There are a lot more other forces at play and having more power isn't going to stop them.
Click to expand...

Would you care to lay out your theories, or is this tinfoil hat day?
 
N

Nabbis

Member
I don't buy the "having to cut the content solely due to last gen". There was that tweet about the team being exhausted from polishing the game for the deadline. The cut stuff is not as simple to make as those basic side-quests. I think it's more likely that EA made them push the game out "unfinshed".
 
Nameless

Nameless

Member
What he says is true. I skipped 80% of the fetch quest atleast ,and enjoyed my playthrough very much. It was only really an issue for Trophy Whores, and those with gaming OCD who can't leave open quests unfinished.
 
C

Clarkus Darkus

Member
Gave up playing DAI after about 55 hours, Got bored doing the same thing over and over and still barely got what the story was to be honest, Think i will play it again when DLC does hit sometime as i may have had my fill of Bloodborne by then.
 
S

Some Nobody

Junior Member
Nabbis said:
I don't buy the "having to cut the content solely due to last gen". There was that tweet about the team being exhausted from polishing the game for the deadline. The cut stuff is not as simple to make as those basic side-quests. I think it's more likely that EA made them push the game out "unfinshed".
Click to expand...

Yeah but see, that stuff was already in an earlier build. While I don't doubt they could've used more time, it's not that much of a stretch to believe PS360 held back some of the more complex features. That PAX demo had so many elements that seemed to be completely removed from what we actually got.
 
S

Squire

Banned
The bit about collectables is far too reasonable for the likes of the Internet at large.

I mean, yeah; If you don't want to collect shit, then don't. That's been the thing from day one onward. But people feel like devs need to work around their compulsions. Like BioWare, Ubi, etc are obligated to give a shit about your OCD.
 
L

LurkerPrime

Member
Inorigo said:
The bit about collectables is far too reasonable for the likes of the Internet at large.

I mean, yeah; Of you don't want to collect shit, then don't. But people feel like devs need to work around their compulsions. Like BioWare, Ubi, etc are obligated to give a shit about your OCD.
Click to expand...

They padded out DAI with meaingless collectibles to avoid any possible complaints that there wasn't enough content in the game. It's the dungeon designer from DA2 having his ultimate revenge on the fanbase.
blackjaw said:
A sexual sequel of course. Fucking auto correct.
Click to expand...
Autocorrect is the best! :D
 
C

Coffee Dog

Banned
"One of things that I think was a miscalibration is a lot of players wanting to do all of it - even to the point where they say 'I'm bored of collecting shards'. But they want them all because they're there. It's almost like a compulsive need. It's almost like 'Doctor, it hurts when I do this'. So don't do this!"
Click to expand...

You could always put content that's worth playing in your game, Mike. Radical suggestion, I know.

Like, how can you honestly develop a game and then suggest that people skip parts of it due to quality issues. Seriously.
 
D

Dick Justice

Banned
LurkerPrime said:
They padded out DAI with meaingless collectibles to avoid any possible complaints that there wasn't enough content in the game. It's the dungeon designer from DA2 having his ultimate revenge on the fanbase.
Click to expand...

It's pretty funny to think that DA2 of all games utterly shat all over DA:I in terms of side quests.

And the guy talking about "well just don't do it!", how about "just don't put this shitty, useless content in your game for the sake of padding?".
 
N

Nabbis

Member
Sage Shinigami said:
Yeah but see, that stuff was already in an earlier build. While I don't doubt they could've used more time, it's not that much of a stretch to believe PS360 held back some of the more complex features. That PAX demo had so many elements that seemed to be completely removed from what we actually got.
Click to expand...

Im sure PS360 did make them reconsider many features, but given what we actually did get, id still put the blaim on the development time. There was simply too much half-assed content.
 
B

BrassDragon

Member
I find his response to sidequest overload a little disingenious: yes, the players are ultimately responsible for doing them but come on, the critical path of the main campaign pulls you across a huge area that's littered with them so the (subconcious) assumption of gamers is that they're part of the experience (perhaps to ensure you have to right power level / itemisation to tackle later parts of the critical path.)

It's only when you realise that the rewards (both in terms of power and narrative payoff) are slight that not doing a lot of them seems like a viable option. Newer players might be accustomed to 'grind for loot', older players have come to expect interesting story tidbits from BioWare sidequests, but both types have expectations that the game seems to encourage deliberately.

Hell, we had to tell people right here GAF to stop messing about in the Hinterlands before fatigue set in.

Seriously, BioWare - that's as much a design issue as it is a 'player compulsion' issue, give me a break.
 
M

m_dorian

Member
I am deeply dissatisfied by the way they port this game for the PC, but yet, i wanted a better tactical battle system, at least something equal to DA:O. I played it with a DS3 controller and all went well and fine but i never got the sense i was playing a party based RPG. It was more like an action-RPG button mushing experience, that left me wanting more. Also the UI is terrible, i ve rested my hopes to modders.
There were too many fetch quests and i did almost all of them in my first run -because they were there. I might not do them while in my second playthrough though but i could not miss them in my first one.
I wanted more from sidequests too, not the inner circle ones, very few of them were good, they were almost always end up like this: pick up a book or a note and read what happens. Not interesting at all.
Bioware is patching the game and fixing a problem here and there but i do not think they can fix the tactical battle system.
 
T

toddhunter

Member
Sage Shinigami said:
Would you care to lay out your theories, or is this tinfoil hat day?
Click to expand...

Tinfoil hat day?

What game industry are you thinking of where sequels from EA have resulted in extra power being used for gameplay depth over graphics/cinematics?

Dragon Age selling well and getting goty awards is only going to make it worse. This means bigger budgets which means they are going to want bigger sales. You can hopefully fill out the rest.

This is not based on a theory, it is based on the observed reality.
 
S

Squire

Banned
Echoenigma said:
You could always put content that's worth playing in your game, Mike. Radical suggestion, I know.

Like, how can you honestly develop a game and then suggest that people skip parts of it due to quality issues. Seriously.
Click to expand...

There's plenty in the game that's worth playing. But you know, tastes and opinions vary. So rather than expecting everything to cater to you, why not just play the stuff that interests you? And if there isn't enough of it, you can just move on.
 
L

LurkerPrime

Member
m_dorian said:
I am deeply dissatisfied by the way they port this game for the PC, but yet, i wanted a better tactical battle system, at least something equal to DA:O. I played it with a DS3 controller and all went well and fine but i never got the sense i was playing a party based RPG. It was more like an action-RPG button mushing experience, that left me wanting more. Also the UI is terrible, i ve rested my hopes to modders.
There were too many fetch quests and i did almost all of them in my first run -because they were there. I might not do them while in my second playthrough though but i could not miss them in my first one.
I wanted more from sidequests too, not the inner circle ones, very few of them were good, they were almost always end up like this: pick up a book or a note and read what happens. Not interesting at all.
Bioware is patching the game and fixing a problem here and there but i do not think they can fix the tactical battle system.
Click to expand...
Yeah... Bioware seems a game or two away from turning Dragon Age into a character action game, a la Metal Gear Rising or Devil May Cry. Their days of making party-based CRPGs has been gone for quite a while.
 
S

Some Nobody

Junior Member
LurkerPrime said:
Yeah... Bioware seems a game or two away from turning Dragon Age into a character action game, a la Metal Gear Rising or Devil May Cry. Their days of making party-based CRPGs has been gone for quite a while.
Click to expand...

....If they can keep the party-based system and make each character play differently, I'd be down for a more action-focused version of this. What they're doing now isn't satisfying anyone completely, so either go more tactic based or develop a legit action system like KOA or DD.

toddhunter said:
Tinfoil hat day?

What game industry are you thinking of where sequels from EA have resulted in extra power being used for gameplay depth over graphics/cinematics?

Dragon Age selling well and getting goty awards is only going to make it worse. This means bigger budgets which means they are going to want bigger sales. You can hopefully fill out the rest.

This is not based on a theory, it is based on the observed reality.
Click to expand...

You're still mostly making assumptions, though. Dragon Age 3 doesn't have to be garbage. I would think they learned their lesson when they forced out Dragon Age 2.
 
L

LiquidSolid

Member
Inorigo said:
The bit about collectables is far too reasonable for the likes of the Internet at large.

I mean, yeah; If you don't want to collect shit, then don't. That's been the thing from day one onward. But people feel like devs need to work around their compulsions. Like BioWare, Ubi, etc are obligated to give a shit about your OCD.
Click to expand...

Not really. It'd be one thing if the collectables were pointless but the shards in particular open up a dungeon in the game, so are we just meant to ignore that dungeon? He comes across like he's making excuses for poor design.
 
L

LurkerPrime

Member
LiquidSolid said:
Not really. It'd be one thing if the collectables were pointless but the shards in particular open up a dungeon in the game, so are we just meant to ignore that dungeon? He comes across like he's making excuses for poor design.
Click to expand...

That "dungeon" is really more of a big treasure chest with an unnecessarily complicated lock. Like every piece of side content in DAI, it's not really worth it.

Sage Shinigami said:
....If they can keep the party-based system and make each character play differently, I'd be down for a more action-focused version of this. What they're doing now isn't satisfying anyone completely, so either go more tactic based or develop a legit action system like KOA or DD.
Click to expand...

Action and spectacle are definitely what they're moving towards. It seems like the logical next step.
 
S

Squire

Banned
LiquidSolid said:
Not really. It'd be one thing if the collectables were pointless but the shards in particular open up a dungeon in the game, so are we just meant to ignore that dungeon? He comes across like he's making excuses for poor design.
Click to expand...

Yes? This is honest to God the first I've hesrd of the dungeon you're talking about here. I spent 65 hours going through the game playing the main story and plenty of quests I wanted to complete at my own discretion. There's plenty of content, certainly enough to be choosy. As stated, if you don't like what's on offer, play something else! I don't need to tell anyone here the series is not for everyone, I'm sure.

So, yes. Just ignore it. It's no crazier a suggestion than "OMG Mike just make it better gosh!!!"
 
S

Stone Ocean

Member
I get the complaints about stupid fetch quests - go grab your own ram meat, asshole - but overall I don't mind the optional stuff. I do think the game is wayyyy too stuffed, but for the most part the side stuff, collectibles included is pretty fun.

The shards per se, I didn't give a shit about them when I first found about them, but once I figured they opened a thing it wasn't much of a bother, specially since they're marked on your map and I enjoy strolling around big, open areas.
 
D

Dick Justice

Banned
Inorigo said:
Yes? This is honest to God the first I've hesrd of the dungeon you're talking about here. I spent 65 hours going through the game playing the main story and plenty of quests I wanted to complete at my own discretion. There's plenty of content, certainly enough to be choosy. As stated, if you don't like what's on offer, play something else! I don't need to tell anyone here the series is not for everyone, I'm sure.

So, yes. Just ignore it. It's no crazier a suggestion than "OMG Mike just make it better gosh!!!"
Click to expand...

What a shit argument. "If you don't like it, play something else, gosh!!111". If people want to critique the game's shortcomings, so what? Let them, and hopefully Bioware will try to address those criticisms in some way and make a better game in the future.
 
semiconscious

semiconscious

Member
Clarkus Darkus said:
Gave up playing DAI after about 55 hours, Got bored doing the same thing over and over and still barely got what the story was to be honest, Think i will play it again when DLC does hit sometime as i may have had my fill of Bloodborne by then.
Click to expand...

to be honest, i never thought there really was all that much of a story to be gotten :) ...
 
W

Wulfram

Member
The collection stuff isn't really the problem, the problem is that the side-quests generally aren't good.

LurkerPrime said:
Yeah... Bioware seems a game or two away from turning Dragon Age into a character action game, a la Metal Gear Rising or Devil May Cry. Their days of making party-based CRPGs has been gone for quite a while.
Click to expand...

I really don't get this. DAI to me seems like Bioware's most tactical game since BG2. Which admittedly isn't saying all that much, but it's still not part of any trend.
 
L

LiquidSolid

Member
Inorigo said:
Yes? This is honest to God the first I've hesrd of the dungeon you're talking about here. I spent 65 hours going through the game playing the main story and plenty of quests I wanted to complete at my own discretion. There's plenty of content, certainly enough to be choosy. As stated, if you don't like what's on offer, play something else! I don't need to tell anyone here the series is not for everyone, I'm sure.

So, yes. Just ignore it. It's no crazier a suggestion than "OMG Mike just make it better gosh!!!"
Click to expand...

lol, no videogame criticism allowed!!!!
 
S

shinobi602

Member
Echoenigma said:
You could always put content that's worth playing in your game, Mike. Radical suggestion, I know.

Like, how can you honestly develop a game and then suggest that people skip parts of it due to quality issues. Seriously.
Click to expand...

He acknowledges that though:

"There's more XP and money in the game than you need to win. But it's a good insight for us, and something as a team we've been discussing. Myself, while those areas thematically tie into the Inquisition, what people were hoping for is they had more meaty story content built into them.

"So while the [starting area] Hinterlands had fetch quests it also had other things to do to enhance that zone, but in other lighter places people have said they weren't really feeling them as much. That becomes another data point, and a huge opportunity for the game to grow, presuming we move into something in the future."
Click to expand...
 
S

Squire

Banned
Dick Justice said:
What a shit argument. "If you don't like it, play something else, gosh!!111". If people want to critique the game's shortcomings, so what? Let them, and hopefully Bioware will try to address those criticisms in some way and make a better game in the future.
Click to expand...

You're ignoring the part where I never said they couldn't criticize the game. They can and have and Mike has given - as stated - a perfectly reasonable response. The base game is done. So if there are quests in that base game that you dislike: Don't do them. What else is there to say?
 
L

LurkerPrime

Member
It is interesting that they'd like to make another multiplayer DLC, instead of actually confirming it. Suggests to me that DAI MP is struggling compared to ME3's.

I'm still baffled at how half-baked the MP mode is, considering DAI started as a multiplayer spinoff or whatever.
Wulfram said:
I really don't get this. DAI to me seems like Bioware's most tactical game since BG2. Which admittedly isn't saying all that much, but it's still not part of any trend.
Click to expand...

The removal of a true tactical view renders this impossible. DAI's party AI is fundamentally broken in how it reacts to enemies, meaning that long-term, intricate plans like "keep archer over here for the entire fight" is impossible unless you're standing right beside said archer the entire time. Being unable to easily give and queue commands further exasperates the problem.
 
A

antitrop

Member
I feel like they overcompensated for the relatively small size of Dragon Age II, with Inquisition ending up feeling "way too big".

There is not enough side-quest variety to make the ridiculous amount of open space compelling to wander through. The graphics aren't great enough to make it fun as a walking simulator and the combat isn't complex enough to make it fun as an action game.

I figure, like most BioWare games, people were just in it for the characters and dialogue, which is cool, but I didn't like this cast as much as Origins.

So for me, it wasn't nearly as much of a disappointment as II was, but I honestly don't believe BioWare is even capable of once again achieving the heights of DA: Origins.
 
W

Wulfram

Member
LurkerPrime said:
The removal of a true tactical view renders this impossible. DAI's party AI is fundamentally broken in how it reacts to enemies, meaning that long-term, intricate plans like "keep archer over here for the entire fight" is impossible unless you're standing right beside said archer the entire time. Being unable to easily give and queue commands further exasperates the problem.
Click to expand...

The available camera angles don't really change how tactical a game is - and anyway DA:O is the only Bioware game other than DAI to have a tactical camera since BG2. The Dragon Age companion AI has always been stupid about movement, and you haven't been able to queue commands in previous DA games either.

DA:Os far too liberal healing made tactics pretty unnecessary. In DA:I on nightmare at least I feel like I actually have to have good control over the fight, because non-tanks get chewed up quickly without a barrier, and it's no longer trivial to fix them up again.
 
N

NoirVisage

Banned
antitrop said:
I feel like they overcompensated for the relatively small size of Dragon Age II, with Inquisition ending up feeling "way too big".

There is not enough side-quest variety to make the ridiculous amount of open space compelling to wander through. The graphics aren't great enough to make it fun as a walking simulator and the combat isn't complex enough to make it fun as an action game.

I figure, like most BioWare games, people were just in it for the characters and dialogue, which is cool, but I didn't like this cast as much as Origins.

So for me, it wasn't nearly as much of a disappointment as II was, but I honestly don't believe BioWare is even capable of once again achieving the heights of DA: Origins.
Click to expand...
You put it the best way that it could be put. I wonder if ANYONE who worked on the first Dragon Age had any actual input in the sequels.
 
K

kcp12304

Banned
"There's more XP and money in the game than you need to win. But it's a good insight for us, and something as a team we've been discussing. Myself, while those areas thematically tie into the Inquisition, what people were hoping for is they had more meaty story content built into them.
Click to expand...

Glad they acknowledge the problem. My biggest issue was that there weren't enough story heavy side quests. You can spend so many hours in the environments and never talk to an NPC or at least one with any bit of character or story content. Most of the story telling in those areas realied on diary entries you found.

It's a Bioware game. Where is the talking? Where are the dialoue choices? I don't want to read notes on how much of a jackass the Templar commander in the area is. I want to see cutscenes and dialogue about it.

It made a lot of the world feel hallow. It makes me miss the side content in KOTOR and DA:O. Even DA 2 had some decent side quests.
 
J

JerkShep

Member
The real issue is that most of the areas lacked good sidequests with story content. Actually, the were some potentially good sidequests, but they completely missed the mark in terms of presentation, choices and party interactivity. For example, the snowy area in Orlais has you
fightining Ishmael and meeting Michel
, which all things considered are kind of important characters, but the interactions are so limited that it doesn't feel much better than a "Save 6 farmers" fetch quest. Similar examples can be made for most of the other areas as well. They all needed at least one good sidequest with good story content, choices and better presentation (like, actual cutscenes).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Half-Life Writer Marc Laidlaw Explains Why Series Shares Same Universe With Portal And Reveals Why He Regrets Leaking Game's Story
Opinion Game Dev
7
1K
Kev Kev replied
Final Fantasy XVI: The Possibility Of More DLC 'Is Not Zero,' But You Really Shouldn't Expect More
News
4
803
Loomy replied
[VGC] The Like a Dragon series must continue using its bespoke Dragon Engine, but staff must also learn about alternate options
Game Dev
3
503
The Cockatrice replied
Larian Studios Won't Make Baldur's Gate 3 DLC, Expansions, or Baldur's Gate 4
News 2 3
109
6K
Hudo replied
Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines 2 will have a voiced main character
News Game Dev
23
1K
ungalo replied
Top Bottom