138905 réponses à ce sujet

[Sifr]

 

I've just realized when R2 said this, actually the Flaming Weapons pack from Deluxe edition contains the Flaming Sword, which is templar's insignia no? Is this coincidence or do I get it wrong somehow??

 

Anyway, review's a review. Each reviewer has their own "what do we want from this game" list and they'll give score based on this checklist. As a player, I know surely that I don't have any checklist of what to wait and so I'm happy with most games I get. And actually I even LOVE DA2 while the reviewers are saying that it's not really great. Let them do their review and let's play it on our own 

 

The Flaming Sword which the Templars use as their symbol is derived from the Inquisition's original logo, so we're just taking it back?

 

As for the reviewers, what's bothered me a lot so far is the amount that seem to put Origins on a pedestal and compare Inquisition negatively to it. With DA2, this was somewhat justified as the story was not as epic, but with Inquisition, that can hardly be said to be the case.

 

Heck, one review I saw had the argument that the fetch quests in Haven weren't as good as Origins, because Inquisition makes you run around looking for animal skins, gather potions and kill a few enemies... all of which are identical to quests in Lothering? That the plot isn't as good because it meanders often... compared to Origins where you spent more time doing fetch-quests to get people to do your treaties, than actually fighting Darkspawn? And that the Big Bad is forgettable... which granted, I've yet to see, but at least the Elder One has a voice, personality and a plan, whereas the Archdemon and Darkspawn were silent monsters who's motives were just that they're born to be always chaotic evil?

 

Origins was a great game, but I think people's fond memories of it colours their memory of some of the bugs, some of the technical limitations, some of the minor plot holes and some parts of the game that were just a slog to get through?

[Cerulione]

Actually it would be interesting to get a templar spec on rogue too no? Templars should not limit themselves only as warriors, they might have needs of rogues too...

[Cerulione]

The Flaming Sword which the Templars use as their symbol is derived from the Inquisition's original logo, so we're just taking it back?

 

As for the reviewers, what's bothered me a lot so far is the amount that seem to put Origins on a pedestal and compare Inquisition negatively to it. With DA2, this was somewhat justified as the story was not as epic, but with Inquisition, that can hardly be said to be the case.

 

Heck, one review I saw had the argument that the fetch quests in Haven weren't as good as Origins, because Inquisition makes you run around looking for animal skins, gather potions and kill a few enemies... all of which are identical to quests in Lothering? That the plot isn't as good because it meanders often... compared to Origins where you spent more time doing fetch-quests to get people to do your treaties, than actually fighting Darkspawn? And that the Big Bad is forgettable... which granted, I've yet to see, but at least the Elder One has a voice, personality and a plan, whereas the Archdemon and Darkspawn were silent monsters who's motives were just that they're born to be always chaotic evil?

 

Origins was a great game, but I think people's fond memories of it colours their memory of some of the bugs, some of the technical limitations, some of the minor plot holes and some parts of the game that were just a slog to get through?

 

Completely agree. In any case there are also several "fetch" quests in Origin. I don't hate "fetch" quest actually. From what gameplays I saw in DA:I, the fetch quest can even be interpreted more interestingly: we need to find ressources for craft, so why not?

 

In addition, we start an organization from zero, having no one's support. So we need to win people's heart so that they will support us. I can picture helping an old healer's looking for herbs or things like that. One grateful person can help convince others much better since there are proofs of actual deeds.

[herkles]

The Flaming Sword which the Templars use as their symbol is derived from the Inquisition's original logo, so we're just taking it back?

 

Actually that is not correct. The templar sword is Hessarian's sword, below is what the wiki says on the templar heraldry.

 

The Templar heraldry is a stylized representation of a flaming sword. The flames represent purification, just as Andraste was purified by flame upon her martyrdom at the height of the first Exalted March. The sword is an emblem of mercy in Chantry symbolism because Hessarian ran Andraste through with his sword to save her from a slow and painful death.

[Tishina]

The Flaming Sword which the Templars use as their symbol is derived from the Inquisition's original logo, so we're just taking it back?

 

As for the reviewers, what's bothered me a lot so far is the amount that seem to put Origins on a pedestal and compare Inquisition negatively to it. With DA2, this was somewhat justified as the story was not as epic, but with Inquisition, that can hardly be said to be the case.

 

Heck, one review I saw had the argument that the fetch quests in Haven weren't as good as Origins, because Inquisition makes you run around looking for animal skins, gather potions and kill a few enemies... all of which are identical to quests in Lothering? That the plot isn't as good because it meanders often... compared to Origins where you spent more time doing fetch-quests to get people to do your treaties, than actually fighting Darkspawn? And that the Big Bad is forgettable... which granted, I've yet to see, but at least the Elder One has a voice, personality and a plan, whereas the Archdemon and Darkspawn were silent monsters who's motives were just that they're born to be always chaotic evil?

 

Origins was a great game, but I think people's fond memories of it colours their memory of some of the bugs, some of the technical limitations, some of the minor plot holes and some parts of the game that were just a slog to get through?

Oh, agreed, there were some definite flaws with the game, and Inquisition seems to have even more character development and story, etc. But there were some very good things in DAO that they've moved away from that I find deeply depressing as well because instead of broadening the possible experiences, they've severely limited the RP for some people. DAI shouldn't be compared point-to-point, i.e. compared on the percentage of certain types of quests or something rather than the quality of the quests themselves and the overall experience.

[R2s Muse]

True....but I'm going to RP the Herald with Andrastes sword

Spoiler

especially because of how it is given to the PC.

Hmm I guess that really is a spoiler since I don't know what you're talking about! LOL Flaming swords come from the pre-order, but you can also craft them. So I guess I expect them to be plentiful.

But that still sounds like a fun way to RP it.

[riverbanks]

Actually it would be interesting to get a templar spec on rogue too no? Templars should not limit themselves only as warriors, they might have needs of rogues too...

Lore-wise, there are archers, rogues, spies and assassins in the Templar ranks too, not just warriors. Gameplay-wise, the specs have to be gated, or every class starts to feel the same. Specially in a game like DA, where everyone just wants to play mages because they're so broken overpowered, they have to give warriors and rogues unique flavors and abilities to make them distinguishable and appealing too. That's why we can't play Assassin warriors, or Templar rogues, even though they do exist in the world.

[R2s Muse]

Lore-wise, there are archers, rogues, spies and assassins in the Templar ranks too, not just warriors. Gameplay-wise, the specs have to be gated, or every class starts to feel the same. Specially in a game like DA, where everyone just wants to play mages because they're so broken overpowered, they have to give warriors and rogues unique flavors and abilities to make them distinguishable and appealing too. That's why we can't play Assassin warriors, or Templar rogues, even though they do exist in the world.

gameplay-wise they also exist, and we fought some (e.g., Templar Hunter). Just not available for player characters, like you say.

[john-in-france]

Hmm I guess that really is a spoiler since I don't know what you're talking about! LOL Flaming swords come from the pre-order, but you can also craft them. So I guess I expect them to be plentiful.

But that still sounds like a fun way to RP it.

 

The pre-order PC flaming weapon is

Spoiler

introduced in game in a dramatic manner (it is in one of the trailers). Mine will happen to be the sword...

[BioFan (Official)]

Andraste was DEFINITELY a rogue.

Definitely.

 

 

in Last Court it's said she uses a bow

[Sifr]

 

Actually that is not correct. The templar sword is Hessarian's sword, below is what the wiki says on the templar heraldry.

 

The Templar heraldry is a stylized representation of a flaming sword. The flames represent purification, just as Andraste was purified by flame upon her martyrdom at the height of the first Exalted March. The sword is an emblem of mercy in Chantry symbolism because Hessarian ran Andraste through with his sword to save her from a slow and painful death.

 

 

I know that's it's a representation of Hessarian's blade, I meant that the use of it by the Templar Order was because both they and the Seekers derived their insignias from the First Inquisition's logo, which both the Templars and Seekers were originally a part of.

[VampOrchid]

I've started watching once upon a time to pass the time. Omg I'm in love with it lol
so at least until DAI is here I have a hot pirate to look at lol

[john-in-france]

So for fun:

Tevinter Chantry: Andraste is a  mage

White Chantry: Andraste is a sword and board warrior.

Orlesian masked Andraste cult: Andraste is an archer.

 

So who do we think has Andraste as a dual wield rogue? What do the elves say she was...I can't find a reference...

[Lady Artifice]

So for fun:
Tevinter Chantry: Andraste is a  mage
White Chantry: Andraste is a sword and board warrior.
Orlesian masked Andraste cult: Andraste is an archer.
 
So who do we think has Andraste as a dual wield rogue? What do the elves say she was...I can't find a reference...

The Elves don't care, they just wish she had signed a contract.

[Sifr]

Oh, agreed, there were some definite flaws with the game, and Inquisition seems to have even more character development and story, etc. But there were some very good things in DAO that they've moved away from that I find deeply depressing as well because instead of broadening the possible experiences, they've severely limited the RP for some people. DAI shouldn't be compared point-to-point, i.e. compared on the percentage of certain types of quests or something rather than the quality of the quests themselves and the overall experience.

 

Oh yeah, no doubt the RP has become severely limited now they've switched over to Mass Effect's dialogue wheel, although I do like that they've given it a tone indicator to avoid some of the problems we had in DA2. Then again, judging by ME3, the use of auto-dialogue seems to be increasing and while it's fine if it's just fluff for accepting and ending quests, sometimes the dialogue does go on for a while without any imput from us?

 

I suppose it all comes down to story they're trying to tell and the the budget they're allowed on Voice Acting, which would be severely strained if you used it all up on the characters voicing the half-dozen dialogue options we used to get in Origins?

 

Still, I do think some of the RPG elements, such as skills like Persuasion and such, need to return? It seems to be diminishing in modern RPGs and I think Origins was at least a balance between the old and new elements. We don't need the insane amount of character building you were forced to do in old-school games (remember to eat, remember to buy arrows, perma-death TPK's), but we don't also need to be inundated with a ton of combat with limited roleplaying in-between, common to modern games?

[Cerulione]

From what I see, the dialogue wheel is much larger now than DA2's mostly 3 personality choice. It's around 5+ with "OK, Not OK, I'm confused, I'm sad, whatever/sarcastic etc choices. That surely help with RPing.

[alwayshungry]

http://aynapistoleth...now-inquisition

[Ryriena]

While, I do agree that having set voice actor limts you in playing the charcter you want to play I could at least make it sound like I was taking less of a inimidting respone, when I clicked on a diglog option that sounded intimidating. However, the new diolog systems limts that with tones and response, now it will have to be a inimindting response. I like the dialog trees in DA:O better than the mass effect wheel as it gave more room too role play options. It also gave me the ability to give the charcter the voice I wanted her or him to have. It gave a chance to allow my charcters to be mine and not a set permitter.

However, mostly the modern version of RPG's have more combat and less role playing aspect, because the education system is limiting crucial aspect that use the thinking and creativity skills in schools, so in sense dumbing down the population to a point, and techongly has also this affect to a degree.

[Sifr]

From what I see, the dialogue wheel is much larger now than DA2's mostly 3 personality choice. It's around 5+ with "OK, Not OK, I'm confused, I'm sad, whatever/sarcastic etc choices

 

The tonal indicator I'm really glad for. While I liked the personalities and Sarcastic Hawke was often witty and hilarious, sometimes they ended saying completely inappropriate things at times or were forced to via autodialogue.

 

I cringe every time I have to speak to Thrask after finding the bag of bones in Act I, because Hawke's callous "Recognise your missing mage?" seems more like something that the Aggressive Hawke would say. Snarky Hawke's witty and irreverent, but they're not that meanspirited or as much of a jerk on purpose, that's Aggressive Hawke's domain.

[SpiritMuse]

In addition, we start an organization from zero, having no one's support. So we need to win people's heart so that they will support us. I can picture helping an old healer's looking for herbs or things like that. One grateful person can help convince others much better since there are proofs of actual deeds.

Wasn't this the case in DAO too, though? After Ostagar, the Wardens had basically a 0% approval rating among the people and you could do all kinds of stuff to win them over. Of course, you didn't have to, as the treaties would ensure support anyway, but it was a similar starting from zero situation.

[Tishina]

Oh yeah, no doubt the RP has become severely limited now they've switched over to Mass Effect's dialogue wheel, although I do like that they've given it a tone indicator to avoid some of the problems we had in DA2. Then again, judging by ME3, the use of auto-dialogue seems to be increasing and while it's fine if it's just fluff for accepting and ending quests, sometimes the dialogue does go on for a while without any imput from us?

I was actually talking less about that, since I can headcannon that, than about the extreme restriction of the kind of woman acceptable in game by the visually unavoidable single non-athletic body type and walk-run animation. It's great that the option is there for people who want to run a very feminine Inquisitor. It locks out believability for anyone else, to the extent that I've concluded the only way I can run the female inquisitors I want is to never actually control them directly while running around Thedas (it's a good thing I think I'll like Blackwall because apparently I'll be playing him most of the time). There are several relatively simple solutions that could be implemented (a set of armor could give female warriors an appearance of added muscle outside of cutscenes, special armor could conceal the butt wiggle) that wouldn't interfere with cutscenes wtih physical contact/clipping issues, but the lack of any dev comment on eventual fixes makes me think they just don't see it as important. It bothers me so much that if the romances weren't gated, I'd simply create my female inquisitors in the male CC, giving them a feminine appearance and ignore references to "he" ingame, but they've pretty effectively locked out any escape from their decision.

[Ryriena]

Wasn't this the case in DAO too, though? After Ostagar, the Wardens had basically a 0% approval rating among the people and you could do all kinds of stuff to win them over. Of course, you didn't have to, as the treaties would ensure support anyway, but it was a similar starting from zero situation.

Yeah, not everyone is going to like you right off the bat, and anyway we had gather support anyway with the treaties to get what we needed like Ozazamar and the cricle even the Dalish needed something in return.

[SpiritMuse]

While, I do agree that having set voice actor limts you in playing the charcter you want to play I could at least make it sound like I was taking less of a inimidting respone, when I clicked on a diglog option that sounded intimidating. However, the new diolog systems limts that with tones and response, now it will have to be a inimindting response. I like the dialog trees in DA:O better than the mass effect wheel as it gave more room too role play options. It also gave me the ability to give the charcter the voice I wanted her or him to have. It gave a chance to allow my charcters to be mine and not a set permitter.
However, mostly the modern version of RPG's have more combat and less role playing aspect, because the education system is limiting crucial aspect that use the thinking and creativity skills in schools, so in sense dumbing down the population to a point, and techongly has also this affect to a degree.

The thing is though, even the written-only dialogue was always intended to have a specific tone by the writers. And this is what the other characters are responding to, no matter what you headcanon it to sound like. I can't tell you how many times I thought to make a deeply sarcastic comment, only to have the other character react like I'd just done them a completely serious insult. ~_~

[Ryriena]

The thing is though, even the written-only dialogue was always intended to have a specific tone by the writers. And this is what the other characters are responding to, no matter what you headcanon it to sound like. I can't tell you how many times I thought to make a deeply sarcastic comment, only to have the other character react like I'd just done them a completely serious insult. ~_~

The thing is even a sarcastic comment can sound insulting, since its just a matter the words you use.

[Sifr]

I was actually talking less about that, since I can headcannon that, than about the extreme restriction of the kind of woman acceptable in game by the visually unavoidable single non-athletic body type and walk-run animation. It's great that the option is there for people who want to run a very feminine Inquisitor. It locks out believability for anyone else, to the extent that I've concluded the only way I can run the female inquisitors I want is to never actually control them directly while running around Thedas (it's a good thing I think I'll like Blackwall because apparently I'll be playing him most of the time). There are several relatively simple solutions that could be implemented (a set of armor could give female warriors an appearance of added muscle outside of cutscenes, special armor could conceal the butt wiggle) that wouldn't interfere with cutscenes wtih physical contact/clipping issues, but the lack of any dev comment on eventual fixes makes me think they just don't see it as important. It bothers me so much that if the romances weren't gated, I'd simply create my female inquisitors in the male CC, giving them a feminine appearance and ignore references to "he" ingame, but they've pretty effectively locked out any escape from their decision.

 

I completely agree, Aveline and Cass are some of my favourite characters because they've got muscles and aren't feminised, so why does the player protagonist never get to be like that? Why was FemHawke super-slim, when male Hawke was a beefy guy, considering the two had the exact same backstory save for their gender?

 

The examples in Dragon Age where the women looked like they could easily go toe-to-toe in an arm-wrestling contest with their male counterparts, were the female dwarves in Origins, but they too have been lipoed along with the men to remove any stockiness and muscle they may once have had?