General Gaming EA allows BioWare to remove all "live service" components from next Dragon Age title due to Anthem's failure/Jedi Fallen Order's success

[skillzdadirecta]

6 hours ago, Brick said:

 

I'm sure it was, maybe "ruined" was too harsh, but I know a lot of people were pretty down on the microtransactions because they really hampered the experience. 

But they DIDN'T hamper the experience at all. I never bought a single thing and got the full ending. Again, the microtransaction thing was WAAAAY overblown.

 

Just now, Mercury33 said:

Nah not really. What seemed to happen was early reviewers rushed through the game and then when they got to Siege mode at the end they were way under leveled. If you played that game like a normal person would, you never had to grind a single thing. 

THIS.

[SaysWho?]

4 hours ago, Mercury33 said:

Nah not really. What seemed to happen was early reviewers rushed through the game and then when they got to Siege mode at the end they were way under leveled. If you played that game like a normal person would, you never had to grind a single thing. 

 

4 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

But they DIDN'T hamper the experience at all. I never bought a single thing and got the full ending. Again, the microtransaction thing was WAAAAY overblown.

 

THIS.

 

I was seriously shocked at how overblown it was. Basically, siege mode seemed really fun, so I thought, "Okay, I'll get the game, and if the grinding is too much at the end, then I'll just stop when I'm not having fun/ready to move to another game." So I started that endgame portion and I'm thinking, "Okay, Siege Mode is still fun [and I'm a Dynasty Warriors fan, so having better gameplay with that kind of manic army vs army gameplay + castle defenses was REALLY cool], so just go til you don't feel like playing." Before I knew it, the game ended. I checked to see if the ending I got wasn't the real ending, but it was.

 

I think there were 10 stages in the end game, and at the time, I thought probably you could have completed 7 or 8 and felt as if that was enough story-wise, but that is such a far cry from what people were saying -- total grindfest and forced to buy microtransactions to win. It wasn't even "grinding" if we're defining it as killing enemies over and over so you can level and beat something; it was just an endgame where the story said you were defending against massive attacks, so you entered Siege Mode. I guess if you consider defending castles a lot to be "grinding," but I don't see much of a difference between fights in a castle and fights outside a castle in terms of repetition.

 

Maybe they changed something with the microtransactions, but I never saw any indication that you had to buy something to complete the story.

[Brian]

The end game was boring af. I bailed and YT the ending. 
 

[CitizenVectron]

3 hours ago, ManUtdRedDevils said:

The end game was boring af. I bailed and YT the ending. 
 

 

Has there ever been a game with a good early-mid (leveling) game, and also a good end game? If so, I haven't played it. You either get boring grind and then more fun raids/bosses (WoW, etc), or really fun leveling and then boring end game (GW2). Personally I prefer the latter since I don't have 400 hours to dedicate to most games, but it would be nice for someone to figure out the magic formula.

[skillzdadirecta]

7 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

 

 

I was seriously shocked at how overblown it was. Basically, siege mode seemed really fun, so I thought, "Okay, I'll get the game, and if the grinding is too much at the end, then I'll just stop when I'm not having fun/ready to move to another game." So I started that endgame portion and I'm thinking, "Okay, Siege Mode is still fun [and I'm a Dynasty Warriors fan, so having better gameplay with that kind of manic army vs army gameplay + castle defenses was REALLY cool], so just go til you don't feel like playing." Before I knew it, the game ended. I checked to see if the ending I got wasn't the real ending, but it was.

 

I think there were 10 stages in the end game, and at the time, I thought probably you could have completed 7 or 8 and felt as if that was enough story-wise, but that is such a far cry from what people were saying -- total grindfest and forced to buy microtransactions to win. It wasn't even "grinding" if we're defining it as killing enemies over and over so you can level and beat something; it was just an endgame where the story said you were defending against massive attacks, so you entered Siege Mode. I guess if you consider defending castles a lot to be "grinding," but I don't see much of a difference between fights in a castle and fights outside a castle in terms of repetition.

 

Maybe they changed something with the microtransactions, but I never saw any indication that you had to buy something to complete the story.

It's like @Mercury33 said, if you rush through the game and don't recruit more powerful Orcs as you go, or level up the ones that you have, your army is going to be REALLY underleveled by the time you get to the end game and have to protect all of the keeps you've acquired and more powerful Orcs start showing up. They will absolutely SLAUGHTER your army. The microtransactions allowed you to skip leveling up the Orcs you have if you didn't want to do that and get more powerful Orcs right then. However if you played the game the way it was intended to be played YOU NEVER NEEDED TO BUY A SINGLE THING. I had a pretty powerful Orc Army by the end of the game but that was because I was actively doing all of the activities the game had to offer and leveling up my army as I was going. I only lost ONE stronghold in the end game that I had to recapture but the combat was so awesome and those massive battles were so well done, it was a shame this game got trashed the way it did before it came out. A LOT of gamers bought into the whole microtransaction bullshit and unfairly labled the game without even trying it but it really boils down to what @Mercury33 said and that reviewers rushed through a game that would 100 plus hours to beat and then being surprised that they were underleveled for endgame shit... endgame shit that was entirely OPTIONAL by the way 

 

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Has there ever been a game with a good early-mid (leveling) game, and also a good end game? If so, I haven't played it. You either get boring grind and then more fun raids/bosses (WoW, etc), or really fun leveling and then boring end game (GW2). Personally I prefer the latter since I don't have 400 hours to dedicate to most games, but it would be nice for someone to figure out the magic formula.

Yeah... This one.

[Brick]

Well it's not like I'll be able to play that version of the game anymore anyway, so it's a moot point. I'm sure I'll enjoy it when I get around to playing it since it was on PS+, and I've had the first game in my backlog for a few years now. Changing Shelog into a beautiful woman instead of a spider is still stupid though 

 

My girlfriend is a huge Lord of the Rings nerd, so I wonder if she'd want to watch me play the games. 

[Mercury33]

5 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Has there ever been a game with a good early-mid (leveling) game, and also a good end game? If so, I haven't played it. You either get boring grind and then more fun raids/bosses (WoW, etc), or really fun leveling and then boring end game (GW2). Personally I prefer the latter since I don't have 400 hours to dedicate to most games, but it would be nice for someone to figure out the magic formula.

Diablo 3 says what’s up

[BloodyHell]

3 hours ago, Mercury33 said:

Diablo 3 says what’s up

And D2. And D1.

I really want a starcraft 3 too. Its been far too long. (Totally off topic).