934 réponses à ce sujet

[Vader20]

It's a total mess of a series which lacks any sort of coherant direction.

 

They have massacred the series since Origns.

 

Pretty much this.... Mass Effect blows away Dragon Age in every aspect. Dragon Age has no continuity or any direction. Some things don't even make sense to me like the mage-templar war. How on earth could they handle such an important part of story so baldy ? Yo end it just like that by doing some boring mission by picking a faction and after that it's over, just like that ? Yes just like that.. exactly how the game ends as well: Just like that.

 

While the ending of the third ME was questionable, the series was much better written an thought out. I had no problem caring for some characters, getting involved in their personal quests.

 

Also, Bioware played it totally safe in DAi.. There is no loss, no drama, no decisions that ends up "badly".There is no wrong choice or worst choice here. I always have the feeling that it doesn't really matter what I do because there is no noticeable consequence of my actions even I am alwayhs bombarded with lines  like: " You are the Inquisitor, what kind of a Here you'll be, what kind of Inquisition will you lead". Really ? Do I even have a choice ? No I don't, but the game likes to give me the impression that I do have a choice.After ME3 they wanted to please everybody now and that's why the story seem so bland and the game suffers because of this.

[k177sh0t]

It's not much of a disappointment. I really enjoyed the game, It just feels there are stuff in the game that feels lacking.

[Charlie of House Bucket]

It was a weird game for me.  I liked a lot about it, loved the graphics, loved Skyholm, the varied environments and sheer size of the game, facial expressions, most of the art direction, but being an Origins fanatic, so much fell so short, and with so many important things.  It was good enough for me to finish it, which is saying something, but definitely didn't approach the excellence and cleverness of DA:O.

 

The two most glaring issues I had:

 

Combat:  Origins was excellent.  Challenging, clever, and the combat style made me concentrate on all of my characters in any given skirmish.  I liked the different spells and abilities - spells were much more interesting and fun in DA:O - the long customizable quickbar, the pause-based combat, and the greater feeling of choice in leveling... 

 

Combat in DA:I was basically me controlling the mage with my finger on the R key in real time, waiting for this or that (usually elemental) spell of the eight I could use to cool down while the 3 other people in my party did their thing without my input.  Because the quickbar spell choice was so limited I spent most mage level ups picking as many passive abilities as possible. How people in this thread can call this improved or DA:O "outdated combat" is beyond me. I see people criticising the MMO feel for its fetch quests, and agree, but it was the combat that really felt MMO to me the most.  I understand that on nightmare difficulty you are more forced to use the pause option, but I disliked its view enough that I probably won't bother.  Difficulty in this game for me was running into things that were 5 levels tougher than I was, and that's about it.  Nothing like trying to make sure everyone survives the Redcliffe battle in DA:O.

 

Modern Earth in High Fantasy:  The game definitely suffers from trying to shoehorn 20th and 21st century modern Earth identity politics and especially people into a quasi-Medieval/Renaissance setting.  It clashes.  I don't like the modern world so pronounced in my high fantasy.  No problem whatsoever with this stuff in Mass Effect or any modern or other sci-fi setting, but I tend to prefer fantasy to be as Tolkienesque - European - Preraphaelite as possible.  If you're going to have me running around in John Waterhouse paintings, don't make me think of the ugly concrete and plastic world I do live in.  They nail this stuff with locations and then knock it down with the characters. The whole LGBT/SJW thing that people seem to criticise is the merest extension of this issue for me.

 

I walked around with Varrick and Solas in my party for a fair part of the early game, and finally decided Varrick had to go.  I never liked Varrick, but only played DAII once, so sort of forgot about him.  He's like having a NYC cabbie in my party with his accent and characterization, and after the 20th time hearing him call Solas "Chuckles" with his wry modern American voice I'd about had it. The actual last straw was when he made a "dwarf tossing" joke. Out! Now! Bad enough Peter Jackson did it in TTT, but here it just took me right out of the game.  I still find it bizarre that fans seem to like this character the most.  And unfortunately, because I like having archers in my party, this meant I had to use Sera, whose character is 100% puerile modern chick even with her slightly more appropriate Derby accent.  Other than the brief bit in the Deep Roads where you're forced to use Oghren in DA:O, I always left him out of my party for the same reason.  The obvious argument against what I'm saying is "It's fantasy, not the actual Middle Ages; they can do anything they want," but if you're going to go with that line, then it opens the door to hypothetically adding anything from the modern world.  Why not add fast food and cars? It's a matter of style.  Some stylistic things in this game work against others, IMO.

 

----

I also felt it lacked a certain cleverness in puzzles, story choices, and gameplay.  The astraria and the silly dwarven "put the sentences together" bits didn't really do it for me.  There was one fairly interesting if very easy puzzle in the WWI battlefield area, but that's the only one that felt memorable to me.

[Marshal Moriarty]

This is a reply to the 'Mass Effect was more consistent' talk that's been bandied about on this thread. I'm aware that this is basically unrelated to the topic at hand, and I have no intention of going round and round on this. So I'm just to say my piece and leave it at that. Because whilst I have no love for Inquisition, I do take issue with this idea that the Dragon Age series is inherently flawed or not as good as Mass Effect and that this game (awful as it IMO is), somehow proves that.

 

So yes, I just want to say I cannot disagree more with the sentiment that Mass Effect was a consistent series. The latter 2 games maybe, but the change from Hard Sci-fi to more pulpy sci-fi between ME1 and its sequels was jarring beyond belief. ME1 felt believable, and it focused on the realities and awkward compromises that come with entry into new political systems and communities. The focus on how tense the situation between Humanity and everyone else was absorbing and the game did a great game of showing how normally quite reasonable people like Charles Pressly and most of the Turians in the game, lost their cool when the other race was mentioned. Because it was so soon after the war, and Humanity's belligerence and impatient style is so jarring to the Status Quo 'You have to wait your turn like everyone else'.

 

I felt like all this was abadoned in ME2, despite it only being 2 years (which is the blink of an eye to many aliens). All the nuance and sober realism was thrown out in favour of a pulpy ripping yarn mixed with Film Noir. Which was great on its own terms, but the fact that it was so different in tone, and there was now so much Magic Science in evidence (Shepard coming back from the dead as a bionic superhero commando, EDI in general but particularly her hokey acquiring a fembot body, and her cyberwarfare abilities which seem far more advanced than anything the Geth and Reapers ever use). Along with the Lex Luthor inspired character of TIM, it felt like the series had taken a hard shift into much more overly anime, comic book, superhero style territory.

 

The lack of consistency between ME1 and ME's 2 and 3 is the very reason I lost interest in the series. I still think its a good series, but the first game was the only one that truly *mattered* to me, When they changed what the series was and how it was being presented, the kinds of stories it was telling and of course the whole 'Cult of The Absolutely Awesome and Amazingly Amazing Commander Shepard' thing that became so unbearable in and out of game, it turned ME from a series that I truly cared about, to one that I could only accept if I seperated the games mentally as being basically standalones, carrying my characater over but very much taking each game for its own individual merits and not dwelling too much on the idea that it was supposed to be one big, continuous story.

 

And frankly, given how they completely and utterly (IMO anyway) mishandled the Reaper invasion to the point that I just didn't care about it at all, that is much easiet to do than you would think. So I don't accept for one second that the series has been consistent in any way, ME1 is by far the strongest in terms of narrative, ME 2 is probably the most well made and polished of the 3, delivering an experience that whilst it bears no realtion at all to the world of ME1, is on its own merits a fantastic experience. As for ME3, it tried to move back into more serious territory but was now set in a world that was completely unsuitable for that kind of tone. They had allowed individual characters and factions (like EDI, TIM, Shepard, Cerberus etc) to be so ludicrously overpowered and proficient at anything and everything, that the situation never felt as dire as they were saying. Because you were expecting some wave of the magic wand plan, and for these people to always be able to do basically anything they wanted and achieve any outcome just because they were so incredible.

 

The Hard Sci-fi, Cold war realpolitik of ME1 seemed very, very far away by the end of ME3. Nothing felt like it mattered anymore, because it could all be solved quickly and easily in exceedingly and increasingly unlikely and silly ways.

 

 

There, all done. As you were...

[keesio74]

I just finished Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts and it was a blast. Very different part of the game... i admit I first was annoyed by it but once I figured out the mechanics of that part, it was pretty interesting.

 

110+ hours and I am digging this game a lot. Still only about 60% done too.

[SwobyJ]

I just finished Wicked Eyes, Wicked Hearts and it was a blast. Very different part of the game... i admit I first was annoyed by it but once I figured out the mechanics of that part, it was pretty interesting.

 

110+ hours and I am digging this game a lot. Still only about 60% done too.

 

For main story (approx):

The Wrath of Heaven+The Threat Remains --> 10% (Hinterlands, Storm Coast)

In Hushed Whispers/Champions of the Just --> 30% (Fallow Mire, Forbidden Oasis)

In Your Heart Shall Burn+From The Ashes --> 40%

Here Lies the Abyss OR Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts --> 60% (Crestwood, Western Approach)

Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts OR Here Lies the Abyss --> 80% (Exalted Plains, Emerald Graves)

What Pride Had Wrought+The Final Piece --> nearly 100% (Emprise Du Lion, Hissing Wastes)

Doom Upon All The World --> 100%

 

I think. So yeah, you're about 2/3 through.

 

Add in side content through and ugh... you could be anywhere from 1/3-3/4 through... depending on how much you've cleared already.

 

Its too bad that Doom Upon All The World has such a bad reputation. If it was fantastic, I think perceptions of DAI would have been much better. As it is, it just feels like (NO SPOILERS ITS OK) a 'subtle' lead in to DLC.

 

 

EDIT: added in the possibly relevant zones for each story section. I'm still kinda clearing up the first 4 zones tbh , but almost there, and mostly done Crestwood too.

[Shahadem]

Agreed. Linearity helps for building a strong plot/story. I play cRPGs more for exploration so I am much more forgiving to games that have a more open world concept at expense of story. I tend to play FPS games for story. But DA:O did have a near perfect mix of delivering a strong story and and a little bit of freedom. It wasn't so locked as say Bioshock Infinite or Half-life 2 (both FPS games), which had a facinsating story but was a very linear game.

 

Without linearity there can be no sense of urgency. That was one of the stupidest parts of the older Final Fantasy games. The story said that the world was about to end unless you went to the next area RIGHT THIS VERY SECOND, but you could just wander around the map for an entire week or year or more with zero consequences.

 

That's why I think FF13's linear paths were perfectly fine.

[AustinTheFiend]

      I was a diehard fan of the Origins.  I thought Dragon Age 2 was better than the reception it got, but still not nearly as good as the first one.  Dragon Age Inquisition, on the other hand, was incredibly disappointing to me.  What really bothered me was the quality of the writing, and the generally more tolerant and inclusive world state.  A lot of the political and social drama, what I believe really grounds good fantasy, and made the first game interesting, was neutered when things like the alienation and segregation of elves, or the subtle homophobia, and somewhat less subtle misogyny, of the world either took a backseat, or were completely removed.  The power of these issues lies in their existence in reality, making the story more relatable, and potentially more meaningful.  Also the lack of distinct geographic ethnic groups, the inclusion of African looking peoples in a world in which none, or else very few African looking people were present previously, and the liberalization of the Qunari, all came together to make the game feel unnervingly politically correct, and atypically (by my experience of the series) diverse.  I'm fine with the inclusion of any type of person, so long as it doesn't feel  completely out of place or pandering (which in this story, I often feel that it does).

      The gameplay and PC port, which were promised to be more than adequate, were disappointing and couldn't carry me through my disappointment with everything else.  I imagine I'll be much less excited about any future release of Bioware's, as their last two were very disappointing to me all around.  I might try Andromeda. Might. 

[Almostfaceman]

I know some people love the game, but the general attitude on here has been very mixed. If I'm being honest I've see a lot more who are disappointed than people who are pleased. It seems as if Bioware was aiming very high with this game, but fell completely short to a lot of you. So many people on here have been voicing their displeasure, and those who bother to give their own personal score of the game have been giving 6 and 7s. Seemingly low for a game of this budget and scale.

For those reasons, despite my personal feelings on the game, I feel like I have to acknowledge that it's critical and commercial success aside, Dragon Age: Inquisition seems to have been another disappointment to the fans. Some thought that this would end up being Bioware's big comeback. The game that would be measured up against the quality of games like DA:O or ME2, and most would agree it's as good as those titles. But as of right now it doesn't seem so.

 

So many questions have flooded my mind from this, I have to get them out there:

 

1. 6-12 months down the line will DA:I be viewed in a more positive or negative light? Will those who were harsh on the game gain more of an appreciation for it, or vise versa?

 

2. For those who don't like the game or were really disappointed, what's your attitude towards Bioware and the Dragon Age series at this point in time? Are you no longer a fan? Are you giving up on it? Do you have low expectations for it's future?

 

3. Are a lot of fans really disappointed with the game, or is this the voices of a few being really loud? When the dust settles, will there be a lot more positivity towards this game a few weeks from now?

 

Just take a poll. Go to several sites on the internet that make polls available for gamers and make several. Much better at giving you a general feel towards the game - Unless you get some extreme board action, like the reaction to ME3's ending. 

[thats1evildude]

Anyone who saw "subtle homophobia" or "subtle misogyny" in the previous games is kidding themselves. Racism based on species and classism is big in Thedas, but the rest? Eh. And the black people were always there.

Now, enough with the thread necromancy. The thread was already brought back once before; let it rest in its grave.

[Andraste_Reborn]

And the black people were always there.

 

Indeed. Darker skintones look SO much better in Frostbite, so I guess they may be more obvious now.

[Derrame]

DA:I is a great game i really like it, my only little complaints, are the boring chores and fetch quests, few romance options for straight male inquisitor, and the sad slideshow ending, and the non cinematic dialog camera, everything else is very well done, this game surpassed my expectations, 

i have no doubt the next game will be very good as well or even better, a game like inquisition is the right way to do it,,i look forward to the next adventure

[ShadowLordXII]

Essentially this game was trying to do everything at once while making everyone happy at once in an attempt to overcompensate for the critical backlash from DA2.

 

As a result, most can agree that the game is good, but is still lacking.

 

I'd say that half of the problem comes from trying to build off of the good, but inferior DA2 while marginalizing and distancing itself from Origins and the aspects that made it such a classic when it would make more since to either do vice versa or find a reasonable compromise.

[straykat]

My opinion is negative more or less, but I can't tell what the general consensus is. lol I'd like if other people shared my opinion, but I really can't tell. Seems pretty split.

[Ieldra]

I have agreed to and liked a few posts above pointing out DAI's main flaws - too much filler (beautiful as it was) and not enough main storyline, too santitized in its social reality, choices but few consequences, and noticeably incomplete - but the whole package was still good enough for several completionist playthroughs.

 

Also, some people said DAI has subpar writing. I disagree strongly with that. I think DAI's characters are the best-written ones Bioware has ever made, and its dialogues lack DA2's over-the-topness and ME's general oversimplification of everything, though some of the latter is still there. In my account of my first playthrough I wrote about a year ago, I said the DA team had acquired, at last, a mature storytelling voice where the story and the characters speak for themselves, rather than writers using verbal sledgehammers for the benefit of the lowest common denominator.

[straykat]

I have agreed to and liked a few posts above pointing out DAI's flaws - too much filler (beautiful as it was) and not enough main storyline, too santitized in its social reality, choices but no consequences, and noticeably incomplete - but the whole package was still good enough for several completionist playthroughs.

 

Also, some people said DAI has subpar writing. I disagree strongly with that. I think DAI's characters are the best-written ones Bioware has ever made, and its dialogues lack DA2's over-the-topness and ME's general oversimplification of everything, though some of the latter is still there. In my account of my first playthrough I wrote about a year ago, I said the DA team had acquired, at last, a mature storytelling voice where the story and the characters speak for themselves, rather than writers using verbal sledgehammers for the benefit of the lowest common denominator.

 

I'd only say that with the characters (which I guess is what you're saying too). But they've always done that well, for the most part. It doesn't carry the game for me though. I don't know what you mean by mature though. They were mature in all the setup with DA2, Asunder, and Masked Empire. Then got childish here, with a TES like storyline and protagonist. If I knew the world was going to be changed so simplistically like this (and by a random hero), then I would have never gotten invested in the first place. When I heard the new title was going to be "Inquisition", I expected exactly this. Not more high fantasy bullshit.

[Ieldra]

I'd only say that with the characters (which I guess is what you're saying too). But they've always done that well, for the most part. It doesn't carry the game for me though. I don't know what you mean by mature though. They were mature in all the setup with DA2, Asunder, and Masked Empire. Then got childish here, with a TES like storyline and protagonist. If I knew the world was going to be changed so simplistically like this (and by a random hero), then I would have never gotten invested in the first place. When I heard the new title was going to be "Inquisition", I expected exactly this. Not more high fantasy bullshit.

"A mature storytelling voice" I've called it, by which I mean that the writers let the characters and the story speak for themselves, rather than using verbal sledgehammers for the supposed benefit of the player, and putting everything so bluntly that it's insulting to my intelligence. Not that they managed to do that everywhere (Corpyheus in particular is at fault), but it's a noticeably tendency.

 

The thing you criticize has to do something with scope, rather than maturity. If you want a world-changing plot, you'll have to put in elements that facilitate that. Many people have criticized DA2 for its local scope, and while I haven't, I don't think a larger scope is a bad thing.

[Qun00]

I am correcting you and you are wrong.

People seem to be getting over the initial "waaah the newest game sucks, why can't it be like the old ones?" phase. They're gradually warming up to it.

It took a while for people to understand DA2 wasn't an abomination. Likewise, they've come to realize that while it's not perfect, Inquisition has done plenty of things right and is very enjoyable.

I'd expect DA4 to go through the same process.

[lynroy]

Oh gosh. The necromancers have been busy.

[Qis]

Bioware should learned from From Software....they made Dark Souls and fans love it, then comes Ds2 where fans raged and not really like it, they made DS3 is like DS1 with having better graphic and gameplay...

 

[Donk]

 

DS3 isn't even out yet.

 

Is this the new "thing"? Make comparisons to games that aren't even released yet?

[Tidus]

The only thing I have against DA:I is that fine print. Sheesh! At my age I would need my glasses plus a 12x magnifying glass just to read it from a comfortable distance! 

 

Maybe they forgot the gamers from the 80s are now old gamers that still have money to spend on new games and consoles? 

[Qis]

 

DS3 isn't even out yet.

 

Is this the new "thing"? Make comparisons to games that aren't even released yet?

 

i believe the game is not much different when it being released, we all can see From Software work are all the same and similar to each other...DS3 is a mix of DS1 and Bloodborne...and both games are not much different anyway. That's the key of success, their identity, they maintain their identity.

 

So fans might love or hate some few changes, but fans still can play them because it is the same as original...not like Dragon Age series where all three games are different

[greenbrownblue]

I know some people love the game, but the general attitude on here has been very mixed. If I'm being honest I've see a lot more who are disappointed than people who are pleased. It seems as if Bioware was aiming very high with this game, but fell completely short to a lot of you. So many people on here have been voicing their displeasure, and those who bother to give their own personal score of the game have been giving 6 and 7s. Seemingly low for a game of this budget and scale.
For those reasons, despite my personal feelings on the game, I feel like I have to acknowledge that it's critical and commercial success aside, Dragon Age: Inquisition seems to have been another disappointment to the fans. Some thought that this would end up being Bioware's big comeback. The game that would be measured up against the quality of games like DA:O or ME2, and most would agree it's as good as those titles. But as of right now it doesn't seem so.
 
So many questions have flooded my mind from this, I have to get them out there:
 
1. 6-12 months down the line will DA:I be viewed in a more positive or negative light? Will those who were harsh on the game gain more of an appreciation for it, or vise versa?
 
2. For those who don't like the game or were really disappointed, what's your attitude towards Bioware and the Dragon Age series at this point in time? Are you no longer a fan? Are you giving up on it? Do you have low expectations for it's future?
 
3. Are a lot of fans really disappointed with the game, or is this the voices of a few being really loud? When the dust settles, will there be a lot more positivity towards this game a few weeks from now?

Me, my bf and best fri3nd all started DA with DA:I and later tried DAO and DA Ii. And we all agree on one thing- Dragon Age Inquisition is the best Dragon Age game. Personally, I did like Hawke as a protagonist, but did not really like the wayworld around her was executed. And I dont just mean graphics. And DAO was nothing like DAI, so I really just rushed through it. I guess that if DAO and DAI are so different then maybe ppl who loved DAO were dissapointed with the latest DAI, because its like a whole new game? Just guessing.
imo, DAI is the the best game made by Bioware and I honestly hope that Inqusitor will be the next DA's protagonist.

[vbibbi]

I know some people love the game, but the general attitude on here has been very mixed. If I'm being honest I've see a lot more who are disappointed than people who are pleased. It seems as if Bioware was aiming very high with this game, but fell completely short to a lot of you. So many people on here have been voicing their displeasure, and those who bother to give their own personal score of the game have been giving 6 and 7s. Seemingly low for a game of this budget and scale.

For those reasons, despite my personal feelings on the game, I feel like I have to acknowledge that it's critical and commercial success aside, Dragon Age: Inquisition seems to have been another disappointment to the fans. Some thought that this would end up being Bioware's big comeback. The game that would be measured up against the quality of games like DA:O or ME2, and most would agree it's as good as those titles. But as of right now it doesn't seem so.

 

So many questions have flooded my mind from this, I have to get them out there:

 

1. 6-12 months down the line will DA:I be viewed in a more positive or negative light? Will those who were harsh on the game gain more of an appreciation for it, or vise versa?

 

2. For those who don't like the game or were really disappointed, what's your attitude towards Bioware and the Dragon Age series at this point in time? Are you no longer a fan? Are you giving up on it? Do you have low expectations for it's future?

 

3. Are a lot of fans really disappointed with the game, or is this the voices of a few being really loud? When the dust settles, will there be a lot more positivity towards this game a few weeks from now?

Not sure why the thread necromancy, but since it's active I'll bite.

 

1. I think after initial impressions, and with all DLCs released, the overall impression of DAI is that it was a good game but in no way groundbreaking. It's not going to stand out in gaming memory as a significant entry. I think the drop off in communication from Bioware after the game released and through the DLC cycle upset people, as has been their treatment of the fanbase overall. People seem to fall into two major camps: those who enjoyed the game despite its flaws and those who didn't enjoy the game because of the flaws. There are extremes in each camp, of course, but I think DAI will end up being more polarizing than DA2, which most people did not enjoy overall in spite of its good aspects.

 

2. I am not a huge fan of DAI, but I am even less a fan of Bioware at this point. They have not generated much goodwill from me since DAI's release: dropping last gen midcycle, lack of communication with fans (including abandoning this board in favor of twitter), focus more on multiplayer patches than fixing single player issues (the egregious bug of party members not attacking in combat will never be fixed, and the banter issue), the cosmetic DLC packs that should have been included in the actual story DLCs (plus the graphic glitches in Spoils of the Qunari which they could have fixed after it was released early). This certainly has not renewed my faith in the company. I am not going to preorder any more of their games, and if I get MEA, it's going to be after waiting for user scores and reviews, and probably a few months so they can sort out the numerous bugs which will inevitably be in the first release.

 

For DA4, I honestly am not putting a lot of faith in it. Bioware seems to be moving toward open world games with multiplayer elements, whether of their own volition or not, and I'm only expecting this to continue. If they can improve upon the strengths of DAI and mitigate its weaknesses, maybe DA4 will be a great game. But like MEA, I will wait for reviews and bug fixes before even considering buying it.

 

3. I think the fact that this thread has been resurrected shows how the fans' reactions are still mixed, and there remains an undercurrent of negativity toward the game.

 

      I was a diehard fan of the Origins.  I thought Dragon Age 2 was better than the reception it got, but still not nearly as good as the first one.  Dragon Age Inquisition, on the other hand, was incredibly disappointing to me.  What really bothered me was the quality of the writing, and the generally more tolerant and inclusive world state.  A lot of the political and social drama, what I believe really grounds good fantasy, and made the first game interesting, was neutered when things like the alienation and segregation of elves, or the subtle homophobia, and somewhat less subtle misogyny, of the world either took a backseat, or were completely removed.  The power of these issues lies in their existence in reality, making the story more relatable, and potentially more meaningful.  Also the lack of distinct geographic ethnic groups, the inclusion of African looking peoples in a world in which none, or else very few African looking people were present previously, and the liberalization of the Qunari, all came together to make the game feel unnervingly politically correct, and atypically (by my experience of the series) diverse.  I'm fine with the inclusion of any type of person, so long as it doesn't feel  completely out of place or pandering (which in this story, I often feel that it does).

      The gameplay and PC port, which were promised to be more than adequate, were disappointing and couldn't carry me through my disappointment with everything else.  I imagine I'll be much less excited about any future release of Bioware's, as their last two were very disappointing to me all around.  I might try Andromeda. Might. 

I've thought about the change in social issues from DAO to DAI and what I wish would have happened is that the level of modern values present in DAI would have been in from the start. I do think it's important that games can reflect current social issues, but it shouldn't feel shoehorned in. My impression is that once Bio realized they had a series on their hands rather than a one-off, they decided to retroactively add in social values which is a bit jarring. I would rather have had DAO include people of African descent in every nation, and say that there was an historical diaspora of Rivaini after the first Qunari invasion, or something like that. It does feel a bit off now to see a mostly white Fereldan in DAO and a more diverse populace in DAI without explanation.

 

It is odd that they have so drastically changed the Qun, though, and their defense of the change doesn't really make sense. It's not that we're learning more about the culture that we didn't have access to before, it's that they wanted to make it less alien and more easy to relate to, so here comes Iron Bull!

 

I am correcting you and you are wrong.

People seem to be getting over the initial "waaah the newest game sucks, why can't it be like the old ones?" phase. They're gradually warming up to it.

It took a while for people to understand DA2 wasn't an abomination. Likewise, they've come to realize that while it's not perfect, Inquisition has done plenty of things right and is very enjoyable.

I'd expect DA4 to go through the same process.

Who are you responding to?! Yes, the initial pushback from the game has passed, but I do still see many topics and posts on the boards about what DAI could have improved. I'm not certain that the initial phase has receded to fans loving the game.