For all the hate Dragon Age 2 gets, I'd rather play it since the combat in it is actually fun and tactical, with varied builds and actual character progression.
I've lost interest in playing Inquisition. Combat is an unbalanced, repetitive, tedious mess that requires little thought, effort or tactics.
I enjoy these games primary for the tactical rpg squad based combat with pause, and Inquisition has not just failed to match it's predecessors, it regressed mechanics wise.
I'd like to offer an opinion of DA:I... I'd like to, but for me the controls on the PC are so horrendously bad that I have not yet managed to play for more than a few minutes before shutting the game down in disgust. I am glad most people were able to adjust and from what I have read, it appears that they have found the game fun.
But any game that makes me fight for control of my character, that gets me killed on CASUAL because I am battling the controls, rather than the enemies just to move my character around, is not fun. Since I have logged in thousands of hours in DA:O and hundreds in DA:2 (which was just "meh" in my opinion), the fact that I cannot spend more than twenty minutes in DA:I says something. What changed?
They took the simple, point and click interface that they used in previous games and went for a console type control scheme. Apparently, most people who enjoy the game either play it on consoles, or use a console controller. The rest seem comfortable with MMO's and the like.
Bioware apparently does not value traditional PC players any more. That's OK. It is their right to make the kind of games they want, for the kind of audience they want.
And I have the right as a consumer, never to buy another Bioware product again. And unless they fix the PC controls, I am done with them.
DA:2 was disappointing, but I still bought all the DLC..
ME3's ending ruined the entire franchise; I refused to buy any DLC
DA:I's poorly thought out PC controls was the last straw. Never again.
Loved DAO to death. DAII had a...charm to it that made it enjoyable. DAI is the best Dragon Age to date.
Characters are robust. Strong personality's mixed with good voice acting. I ended up with Sera in my group a lot and I fell in love with the character during the Circle/Templar story arc.
Dorian is a total bag of awesome. Witty but also breaks things down plainly. His arrogance is a self defense mechanism.
Cassandra acts all tough and brutish, but she really cares. Her gruff side is shed off with some of her dialog.
I could easily go on (and risk spoilers) about just how awesome the characters are. Not to mention the open world, the faster paced combat that feels more real then DAO and the quests that get you really involved with not just the world but the lives of the people you interact with.
Ignoring the bugs with the game, or other technical issues, this is one of the best games to be released in years, and one of the best (if not the best) RPG in the last 10 years. Its hard, but not too hard. It provides a challenge that makes winning not a droll "as expected" result, but a "Thank The Maker!" (specially when playing on Nightmare, winning fights is so rewarding)
Loved DAO to death. DAII had a...charm to it that made it enjoyable. DAI is the best Dragon Age to date.
Characters are robust. Strong personality's mixed with good voice acting. I ended up with Sera in my group a lot and I fell in love with the character during the Circle/Templar story arc.
Dorian is a total bag of awesome. Witty but also breaks things down plainly. His arrogance is a self defense mechanism.
Cassandra acts all tough and brutish, but she really cares. Her gruff side is shed off with some of her dialog.I could easily go on (and risk spoilers) about just how awesome the characters are. Not to mention the open world, the faster paced combat that feels more real then DAO and the quests that get you really involved with not just the world but the lives of the people you interact with.
Ignoring the bugs with the game, or other technical issues, this is one of the best games to be released in years, and one of the best (if not the best) RPG in the last 10 years. Its hard, but not too hard. It provides a challenge that makes winning not a droll "as expected" result, but a "Thank The Maker!" (specially when playing on Nightmare, winning fights is so rewarding)
You seem to be concentrating on the story and the characters, and this is probably the best way to enjoy this game. The game's approach to storytelling is, in my view, quite solid and, again in my view, much better than in, say, Skyrim or other Elder Scrolls titles. So in this way Inquisition maybe really is the best Dragon Age so far.
The problem with Inquisition is a different one, though. It's Bioware's broken promise to produce a game 'by PC gamers for PC gamers'. Inquisition is very obviously a 100% console title, and every single feature of its interface, controls and gameplay demonstrate this. I do not know enough to make this statement with confidence, but I suspect that the buggy, badly optimised state in which the game was released is likewise evidence of a poor port from consoles. Bioware are one of the leading developers of PC games, and their poor treatment of PC gamers sets a bad example. PC gaming has its own history and culture, and we deserve something better than just another shoddy port of an AAA console title.
"All you guys saying you could do better have no idea what it's really like."
But yo do, don't you? In fact you know so well that everyone else saying it's not like that is completely in the wrong and should take their bones somewhere else.
This game is so disappointing that i actually rebought DA2 just so i can feel better
You seem to be concentrating on the story and the characters, and this is probably the best way to enjoy this game. The game's approach to storytelling is, in my view, quite solid and, again in my view, much better than in, say, Skyrim or other Elder Scrolls titles. So in this way Inquisition maybe really is the best Dragon Age so far.
The problem with Inquisition is a different one, though. It's Bioware's broken promise to produce a game 'by PC gamers for PC gamers'. Inquisition is very obviously a 100% console title, and every single feature of its interface, controls and gameplay demonstrate this. I do not know enough to make this statement with confidence, but I suspect that the buggy, badly optimised state in which the game was released is likewise evidence of a poor port from consoles. Bioware are one of the leading developers of PC games, and their poor treatment of PC gamers sets a bad example. PC gaming has its own history and culture, and we deserve something better than just another shoddy port of an AAA console title.
No, this isn't at all what is being talked about here. Read the OP before you comment. What is being talked about here is exactly the things I talked about. Gameplay, story, combat, etc are exactly what the OP is talking about.
What you bring up is a completely separate thing from this topic, and should be saved for those topics.
You seem to be concentrating on the story and the characters, and this is probably the best way to enjoy this game. The game's approach to storytelling is, in my view, quite solid and, again in my view, much better than in, say, Skyrim or other Elder Scrolls titles. So in this way Inquisition maybe really is the best Dragon Age so far.
The problem with Inquisition is a different one, though. It's Bioware's broken promise to produce a game 'by PC gamers for PC gamers'. Inquisition is very obviously a 100% console title, and every single feature of its interface, controls and gameplay demonstrate this. I do not know enough to make this statement with confidence, but I suspect that the buggy, badly optimised state in which the game was released is likewise evidence of a poor port from consoles. Bioware are one of the leading developers of PC games, and their poor treatment of PC gamers sets a bad example. PC gaming has its own history and culture, and we deserve something better than just another shoddy port of an AAA console title.
I'm a PC player, they haven't treated me poorly.
DA:2 was disappointing, but I still bought all the DLC..
ME3's ending ruined the entire franchise; I refused to buy any DLC
DA:I's poorly thought out PC controls was the last straw. Never again.
No, this isn't at all what is being talked about here. Read the OP before you comment. What is being talked about here is exactly the things I talked about. Gameplay, story, combat, etc are exactly what the OP is talking about.
What you bring up is a completely separate thing from this topic, and should be saved for those topics.
Actually, no. Some testers have posted on these boards and said that in their view, and during their playthroughs, they thought the tactical camera was great and didn't experience any problems. They also felt the PC controls were great and userfriendly.
So the testers don't get what we are complaining about.
If you played the game with a controller, the experience is actually excellent. The quick combat, pull right trigger to attack style just works perfectly with the controller.
I prefer to not turn a blind eye on the forums and see the truth that a lot of pc gamers do not share their opinions.
I also think that's a step back of what we had in DAO in terms of controls.
We never asked Bioware to change this.
Let's not lower our standard because people want to love blindlessly this game.
It won't help the game to get better if we overlook its flaws.
Bioware did a good job n the past on many features and fans are just asking them back.
To all the comparisons to Baldur's Gate and NWN, do you realize that DAO is NOT like those games any more than Inquisition? They were based off of D&D which is incredibly complex and detailed with a ridiculously large number of feats/skills/spells (granted, I do like the complexity), so let's not pretend that it was all original a brand new game like DAO was. Heck, they were even turned based with only the illusion of real time (I do also like that style). DAO had a combat system that was distinctly not D&D (cooldowns, mana/stamina, realtime with pause, all classes with approx the same # of abilities). DAO had pretty much zero depth as far as skill trees, though the spell combos were pretty cool (also new to this game). If you don't look at the abysmal control scheme, DAI is very much a faster DAO combat with just different abilities.
People here seem to be pretty dang obsessed with DAO being the pinnacle of gaming. I played it, and I liked it a lot. I found the combat to be rather dull as aoe slaughtered everything (I'm looking at you, scattershot)and warriors were sooooo slow. The story wasn't even that interesting to me. The very well designed lore and sidequests drew me in though. DAi has been the opposite; I enjoy the combat (in tactical, not action mode) and the main story quests were incredibly good while the sidequests were lackluster. DAI still has the great lore, great characters, and a better plot than DAO (read note below). It's not DAO, but it's still definitely a worthy sequel and in some ways superior.
Comparison of DAO and DAI plots: DAO's main plot was to stop the Blight...which was a mindless horde that other than destroying Lothering, really didn't seem to be attacking anyone until the end. There was no villian to have interactions with the PC, no surprises (I guess the dark ritual?), and other than the final battle, there was no direct conflct with the horde or archdemon, only blithering about trying to get allies. DAI's plot is to find out who made the breach, stop them, and help restore order to the mage/templar conflict and the *very minor spoiler* leaderless chantry. Every main quest so far (I'm probably a little over halfway) has had some direct conflict with the villain (or a lackey of the vilain), an actual dialogue with the villain who has motivations and goals other than "I will destroy the world because I contracted a disease," and there is definitely the feeling that the threat is out there doing things rather than waiting for you to finish the game. That being said, the DAI sidequests are rather lame and pale in comparison to DAO's. Main plot quests though? Better by miles. Better "cutscenes" too; the stuff right before Skyhold was more epic and far more moving than ANYTHING in the previous 2 games.
Also, I realize I sound like I didn't like DAO's story; I did. It was fine and it was fun, but it wasn't the main story that sold the game. Even the main storyline used the Blight as an excuse to go help the various factions with their problems.
To all the comparisons to Baldur's Gate and NWN, do you realize that DAO is NOT like those games any more than Inquisition? They were based off of D&D which is incredibly complex and detailed with a ridiculously large number of feats/skills/spells (granted, I do like the complexity), so let's not pretend that it was all original a brand new game like DAO was. Heck, they were even turned based with only the illusion of real time (I do also like that style). DAO had a combat system that was distinctly not D&D (cooldowns, mana/stamina, realtime with pause, all classes with approx the same # of abilities). DAO had pretty much zero depth as far as skill trees, though the spell combos were pretty cool (also new to this game). If you don't look at the abysmal control scheme, DAI is very much a faster DAO combat with just different abilities.
People here seem to be pretty dang obsessed with DAO being the pinnacle of gaming. I played it, and I liked it a lot. I found the combat to be rather dull as aoe slaughtered everything (I'm looking at you, scattershot)and warriors were sooooo slow. The story wasn't even that interesting to me. The very well designed lore and sidequests drew me in though. DAi has been the opposite; I enjoy the combat (in tactical, not action mode) and the main story quests were incredibly good while the sidequests were lackluster. DAI still has the great lore, great characters, and a better plot than DAO (read note below). It's not DAO, but it's still definitely a worthy sequel and in some ways superior.
Comparison of DAO and DAI plots: DAO's main plot was to stop the Blight...which was a mindless horde that other than destroying Lothering, really didn't seem to be attacking anyone until the end. There was no villian to have interactions with the PC, no surprises (I guess the dark ritual?), and other than the final battle, there was no direct conflct with the horde or archdemon, only blithering about trying to get allies. DAI's plot is to find out who made the breach, stop them, and help restore order to the mage/templar conflict and the *very minor spoiler* leaderless chantry. Every main quest so far (I'm probably a little over halfway) has had some direct conflict with the villain (or a lackey of the vilain), an actual dialogue with the villain who has motivations and goals other than "I will destroy the world because I contracted a disease," and there is definitely the feeling that the threat is out there doing things rather than waiting for you to finish the game. That being said, the DAI sidequests are rather lame and pale in comparison to DAO's. Main plot quests though? Better by miles. Better "cutscenes" too; the stuff right before Skyhold was more epic and far more moving than ANYTHING in the previous 2 games.
Also, I realize I sound like I didn't like DAO's story; I did. It was fine and it was fun, but it wasn't the main story that sold the game. Even the main storyline used the Blight as an excuse to go help the various factions with their problems.
you seem to forget loghain, he could be considered a villain that you interact with a lot in DAO
I prefer to not turn a blind eye on the forums and see the truth that a lot of pc gamers do not share their opinions.
I also think that's a step back of what we had in DAO in terms of controls.
We never asked Bioware to change this.
Let's not lower our standard because people won't to love blindlessly this game.
It won't help the game to get better if we overlook its flaws.
Bioware did a good job n the past on many features and fans are just asking them back.
I for one don't mind any of the controls at all. KB+M isn't bad. Is it optimal? No, but not bad. The vast majority of people who are playing this game on PC are fine with it.
That said, just because most are ok, its not an excuse to not do something to address those who are having an issue with it.
The forums are loaded with Forum Trolls, and Trolls do not think about anything but tearing down the good things. Stating that "On the forums...", "All these posts on the forums..." etc, isn't proof of fact that the Trolls are right. People who have no issues are not posting because they have nothing to 'feed the trolls' with.
One last thing. I enjoy the game, not blindly, not because I'm a fanboy, or any other thing you want to interject. Nor are the millions who are absolutely in love with DAI. Insulting people because they disagree with you is quite low.
you seem to forget loghain, he could be considered a villain that you interact with a lot in DAO
I didn't forget Loghain; I felt like I was rambling so I didn't bring him up. Loghain's "villainy" revolves around him allowing Ostagar to fall and then harassing the PC while they try to do the actual plot of saving the world. If you removed Loghain's attacks on you and just had Anora not wanting to join the Warden against the Blight until you convince her with the nobles, the story wouldn't really change that much. Remove the archdemon? The story is pretty much gone. Loghain was the villain of a sidequest, nothing more.
Actually, that sounded like an EA/Bioware employee in disguise or someone related (e.g. family and/or friend) to an employee of EA/Bioware.
I actually agree with the person and I don't work with EA/Bioware. Now the fanboys that say there are no flaws in the game I have question who they work for. You don't seem to understand how these things work.
This "backlash" that you say exists - where is it? I haven't seen anything that is even remotely typical of a backlash. And for the love of God, cut down on using platitudes.
There is plenty and I have seen it. Open your eyes fanboy is it really that hard?
1. There are are always going to be repetive, boring side quests. This game is not close to as bad as other are in that regard, not as good as DA:O, but I think you are exaggerating how bad they are.
2. This is by far the game's biggest flaw. In DA:O you had to be dextrous enough or strong enough to use an ability. Here instead you choose an ability and then gain strength and dexterity based on the ability instead. That is backwards, the atrbitues should define what abilities you can or cannot use, the abilities should not define what attrbitues you have. There is no real logic for it, it seems dumbed down and most importantly convoluted. Who could ever think that such a system would even make sense?
3. This can be combined with number 2, as it basically the same system.
4. Everyone knows the PC interface is broken. It should be more like DA:O than anything else, easy to use, had icons, you can drag things onto your character. There was no reason to change it at at all. Basically thery were just too lazy to come up with proper PC controls and we all know it.
5. Tactical view is useless. All it is is a pause and play option with the camera angle elevated. And yes there are problems like not being to see rifts and not seeing properly indoors. A bigger is problem the lack of tactic like in DA:O where you can tell your tank to taunt an enemy if he is attacking you, or so many other custom behaviours you have.
You make some very good points OP, especially about the chracter creation and attribute points which I think is a very confusing system indeed. But I think you exagerated somewhat.
I agree. This game isn't an RPG in the slightest. It's as much an RPG as World of Warcraft is. In fact, this game is literally single player mode of World of Warcraft.
Ha, I'm glad someone else thinks this. That was actually the first comparison I thought of when I got a quest to kill ten rams and all I could think was, "Really? We're doing this now?"
Comparison of DAO and DAI plots: DAO's main plot was to stop the Blight...which was a mindless horde that other than destroying Lothering, really didn't seem to be attacking anyone until the end. There was no villian to have interactions with the PC, no surprises (I guess the dark ritual?), and other than the final battle, there was no direct conflct with the horde or archdemon, only blithering about trying to get allies. DAI's plot is to find out who made the breach, stop them, and help restore order to the mage/templar conflict and the *very minor spoiler* leaderless chantry. Every main quest so far (I'm probably a little over halfway) has had some direct conflict with the villain (or a lackey of the vilain), an actual dialogue with the villain who has motivations and goals other than "I will destroy the world because I contracted a disease," and there is definitely the feeling that the threat is out there doing things rather than waiting for you to finish the game. That being said, the DAI sidequests are rather lame and pale in comparison to DAO's. Main plot quests though? Better by miles. Better "cutscenes" too; the stuff right before Skyhold was more epic and far more moving than ANYTHING in the previous 2 games.
Also, I realize I sound like I didn't like DAO's story; I did. It was fine and it was fun, but it wasn't the main story that sold the game. Even the main storyline used the Blight as an excuse to go help the various factions with their problems.
This is so wrong it's not even funny.
DA:I gives you no motivation or reason to be the Inquisitor. You're just a random dude with a green hand.
It has some weak explanations why you're even taken with Cassandra in the first place.
As for DA:O's story... Apparently it just went over your head.
The real antagonists are Loghain and Howe etc. The real story is the personal and political intrigue around the Ferelden kingdom.
The Origins setup was entirely different.
Example, Human Noble. You got to know your parents, your brother, his wife, your nephew, your freaking librarian and tutor, your dog. You got to know Arl Howe and Duncan, before anything else happened.
After Ostagar you had enough going to feel remorse for the people your lost, enough personal involvement to want revenge on Howe and Loghain, and enough motivation for you character to be believable and function in the world.
The reasons were primarily personal and political, the Archdemon was never a villain, just a plot device to steer the main story line.
The "you gotta save the world" reason was there just as a bonus, when it's the one and only reason in DA:I.
My character has no idea who Cass or Leliana or Cullen are (this is what I'm saying, MY CHARACTER, not me, personally), and they want to imprison/torture/execute him.
He has to be given better reasons and motivations to do what he does, IMO.
That's what I'm saying, it's badly presented.
My character felt absolutely no connection with their cause or their reasonings behind it, while my Warden was all up in the political and Warden business in Origins.
..
As for "moving" scenes...
The DA:O cut scene before Ostagar was amazing. Anyone can connect to that, and there were characters there that you got to know in the game BEFORE anything of importance happened.
The DA:I cut scene before Skyhold with the hymn singing just came off to me as religious zealotry (I'm an atheist, so yeah, it just seemed forced to me and ridiculous to my character).
Yeah I think you missed the whole point of origins if youd consider loghain a sidequest villain, I would consider the blight itself just a plot device to give you reason to go around solving all the problems of the world and getting involved in all the interesting politics.I didn't forget Loghain; I felt like I was rambling so I didn't bring him up. Loghain's "villainy" revolves around him allowing Ostagar to fall and then harassing the PC while they try to do the actual plot of saving the world. If you removed Loghain's attacks on you and just had Anora not wanting to join the Warden against the Blight until you convince her with the nobles, the story wouldn't really change that much. Remove the archdemon? The story is pretty much gone. Loghain was the villain of a sidequest, nothing more.
I don't understand why there is an attribute screen in this game
I'm getting the impression that hating the ME3 ending and hating the DAI PC controls are strongly correlated. Can someone check me on this?
Anecdotal counterexample: Me.
I loved the ME3 (esp. the extended) ending and thought it was a logical and artistically valid conclusion to the series (reminded me a bit of how Frodo deals with his epic quest, non-verbatim quote: 'Sometimes you can save the world for others, but for yourself, it will still be lost.') It was a bit of a bummer, emotionally, but it didn't make it any less awesome.
I absolutely hate the KB+M controls in DA:I and won't stop pouring salt into that wound until it's fixed. 
Retour en haut