934 réponses à ce sujet

[cindercatz]

Um... no. They get stuck in the pinning shot animation same as anybody else.

Which doesn't really matter. Plenty of attacks will interrupt spellcasting. Why waste it on a mage? They don't want to move around much anyway. That's kind of gaming the mechanics. Pinning shot shouldn't prevent spellcasting any more than any other ability. See, we found something I agree should've been improved on. I had other tactics prioritizing mages, and certain party members default prioritizing them as well, more about removing them from the equation quickly in my set up. Everybody had a job whatever situation they were in.

edit: typo

[VorexRyder]

Wait a second... you're giving me a lecture about RPG mechanics? Thanks, but... been there, played that, starting with AD&D in 1979.

I prefer to separate the abstractions from the stats, which I like to be real facts in the game world. A character with Strength 20 can lift X kilograms, and a character with Strength 21 can lift X * 1.05 kilograms, etc. I've never seen any value in using stats at all if they're just abstractions anyway.

Getting better attributes by buying abilities, or the automatic MMO stuff both suck. They take away from character customization.

 

So people can't get stronger/smarter without "major magical intervention"? They don't become better at things as they go through their lives and are unaffected by their experiences?

 

Stats are abstractions, that's what "STR 20 = X kg" means. That's what stats as abstractions represents, like the stats about a player on the back of a baseball card! Stats are abstractions of a characters attributes, skills, and talents.

[AlanC9]

Oh, please. The skill points handle the becoming better at things part, obviously. All abandoning increasing stats is doing is trading an abstraction you like for an abstraction you don't like.

And I guess I didn't get the point about STR 20 = X kg across. In any system with more than, say, D&D 3.0 levels of stat increases -- you know that system, right? -- actually relating the stat number to anything real is unworkable.

[Addictress]

I'm playing Inquisition for the fifth or sixth time now. I hated it, until Trespasser happened and I was like ....wow.

- The horse dropped from the sky, clearly more lazy than how Roach enters the scene in Witcher 3.
- When talking to companions or NPCs, and not in a cut scene, they either stand rigidly, or awkwardly cycle through extremely obvious repeating gesture animations, like they ran out of time or didn't have the resources to code conversation animations or even three casual-standing animations.
- The ending battle with Corypheus, again, a joke, as you only have the 4 party members and no indication of any of the other companions or factions you allied with previously. Not to mention the battle itself is short and extremely simple. Like they ran out of time.
- irrelevant fetch and collection quests, no attention to detail in any of them. Awful side quests honestly, consisting of running around, bending and picking things up, for characters and situations that could've been copied and pasted from any other fantasy RPG.


But at the same time, Trespasser and Descent, and Feynite's Looking Glass, escalated the lore to unreal levels. The books and notes found in Inquisition are the best thing about the game. I've been playing it so much because I'm obsessing over the lore and I'm only interested in reading the codex entries. and then also I read Asunder and saw how rich Thedas really is.

It causes a great deal of anguish because the actual lore and narrative world of Thedas is turning out to be so freaking amazing, that I'm literally writhing in agony watching the stiff conversations and awkward, poor pacing in the game - like a rich story I'm dying to experience, imprisoned and tortured....mutilated through an insufficient medium.

Maker help me

[abisha]

you assume correctly.

 

i not sure what to make of this game. i like it and hate it.

 

for instance the hair man it's ancient why can't a company like BW not create psychics hair like other company's can?.

it's just a hugh laugh coming to think of it.

 

second, zero mod support they really do not make friends with that.

 

third,

to expensive DLC it feels like a vampire draining any last drop of blood for it's customer.

 

for this is likely the last product i bought from BW on preorder, they just making to much cr@p to trust them and paying prime money.

[ModernAcademic]

But at the same time, Trespasser and Descent, and Feynite's Looking Glass, escalated the lore to unreal levels. The books and notes found in Inquisition are the best thing about the game. I've been playing it so much because I'm obsessing over the lore and I'm only interested in reading the codex entries. and then also I read Asunder and saw how rich Thedas really is.

It causes a great deal of anguish because the actual lore and narrative world of Thedas is turning out to be so freaking amazing, that I'm literally writhing in agony watching the stiff conversations and awkward, poor pacing in the game - like a rich story I'm dying to experience, imprisoned and tortured....mutilated through an insufficient medium.

Maker help me

 

THIS

 

A lot of wasted potential in this game.

[Addictress]

THIS

A lot of wasted potential in this game.

Thisss

It's seriously painful. It could be so much more with the content they're squatting on.

EA is stabbing me slowly ;___;

[Setitimer]

DA:O is one of my favorite games ever, it's not a perfect RPG but it managed to combine the feel of Baldur's Gate era isometric RPGs with modern game mechanics, and had memorable characters and a reasonably good if not original story.  The world was a blatant ripoff of A Song of Ice and Fire but it didn't treat it too badly so I didn't mind. 

 

DA2 was basically KOTOR in a fantasy setting, and is one of the best character-driven stories ever in a RPG.  It's nothing at all like DA:O, which put off a lot of people, but taken for what it is it's just as good.  It was also consistent with the tone of DA:O, keeping the universe dark and the morals ambiguous.  Gameplay was streamlined but still a lot of fun, and while it lacked the tactical depth of DA:O it gave the player a real sense that their character was evolving and growing.  Hawke's evolution was brilliantly illustrated both in story and in gameplay: when you arrive in Kirkwall you're worrying about getting a roof over your family's head, and by the third act you're one of the most influential citizens in Kirkwall; likewise at the beginning of the game a handful of Darkspawn or a group of bandits was a worrisome challenge, but by the end of the game you're sweeping them off the map by the dozen and the real threats are twenty feet tall and breathing fire.

 

Compared to those games, DA:I is candy coated mass-market nonsense.  There's no grit or grime in the world whatsoever.  The game mechanics are awful at every level.  Combat is just repetitive whaling away at the same reskinned damage sponges all the way from level 1 to level 30.  The acting and writing are beyond bad; voice actors sound like they're reading the script aloud for the first time and the accents are unbearable.  And the vast majority of the content is just pure padding; there's no narrative reason to do any of the exploration or repetitive fetch-quests other than to unlock the next completely unrelated plot point. 

 

The worst is the pacing and the obvious throwaway nature of 90% of the game content.  I was level 18 after finishing the tiresome mess that was Wicked Hearts, and when the next War Table interaction told me that Corypheus' armies were on the run and the time to strike was now, despite never having visited Emerald Graves, Emprise du Lion, or the Hissing Wastes, resolved any of the major political conflicts, or completed anyone's character arcs, it became real obvious none of that stuff mattered so I decided to get it over with. 

 

Inquisition makes me angry because it's such a glaring waste of obvious talent on the game designers' part, it neutered everything that made the world dark and engaging out of a paranoid fear that someone somewhere might take offense at something, and frankly it's just a money grab that disrespects the players who have become invested in the franchise.

[voteDC]

The world was a blatant ripoff of A Song of Ice and Fire but it didn't treat it too badly so I didn't mind. 

I remember when Origins came out and people were saying the world was obviously a blatant rip-off of Middle-Earth. Times change I suppose.

[Setitimer]

I remember when Origins came out and people were saying the world was obviously a blatant rip-off of Middle-Earth. Times change I suppose.

 

To the extent that nearly all Western fantasy RPGs are descended from The Lord of the Rings via D&D, sure, I guess.

 

But really, the entire setting of Ferelden, its history, its nobility, heck even the fact that the Fereldans are "dog people" is based on ASOIAF.  When I first played it I thought the similarities were obvious -- just compare the Cousland origin with John Snow for example.  To say nothing of the Night's Watch Grey Wardens, the Bannermen Bannorn, and of course the White Walkers Darkspawn.  And then when I read The Stolen Throne it became eminently clear just how much the whole backstory is a ripoff of A Game of Thrones, with the Theirins being exactly like the Starks and the Orlesian usurper being a mix of Joffrey Baratheon and Mad King Aerys Targaryen.

 

But I'm not saying this is bad -- I recall there was an interview around the time DA:O was released where they said up front a lot of the backstory was based on ASOIAF.  DA:O is a great game and uses those inspirations to good effect.

[Silversmurf]

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?

Game of the Year

[AFA]

To the extent that nearly all Western fantasy RPGs are descended from The Lord of the Rings via D&D, sure, I guess.

 

But really, the entire setting of Ferelden, its history, its nobility, heck even the fact that the Fereldans are "dog people" is based on ASOIAF.  When I first played it I thought the similarities were obvious -- just compare the Cousland origin with John Snow for example.  To say nothing of the Night's Watch Grey Wardens, the Bannermen Bannorn, and of course the White Walkers Darkspawn.  And then when I read The Stolen Throne it became eminently clear just how much the whole backstory is a ripoff of A Game of Thrones, with the Theirins being exactly like the Starks and the Orlesian usurper being a mix of Joffrey Baratheon and Mad King Aerys Targaryen.

 

But I'm not saying this is bad -- I recall there was an interview around the time DA:O was released where they said up front a lot of the backstory was based on ASOIAF.  DA:O is a great game and uses those inspirations to good effect.

 

When DAO came out, ASOIAF was just a book series, so they could borrow from it with impunity. After GoT made it mainstream, they backed off in Inquisition, to avoid being labeled a rip-off maybe. 

 

The Ferelden backstory is obviously based on the Scottish War of Independence rather than the War of the Roses like ASOIAF. Loghain is the Black Douglas, while Merric is Robert the Bruce. 

[Addictress]

DA:O is one of my favorite games ever, it's not a perfect RPG but it managed to combine the feel of Baldur's Gate era isometric RPGs with modern game mechanics, and had memorable characters and a reasonably good if not original story. The world was a blatant ripoff of A Song of Ice and Fire but it didn't treat it too badly so I didn't mind.

DA2 was basically KOTOR in a fantasy setting, and is one of the best character-driven stories ever in a RPG. It's nothing at all like DA:O, which put off a lot of people, but taken for what it is it's just as good. It was also consistent with the tone of DA:O, keeping the universe dark and the morals ambiguous. Gameplay was streamlined but still a lot of fun, and while it lacked the tactical depth of DA:O it gave the player a real sense that their character was evolving and growing. Hawke's evolution was brilliantly illustrated both in story and in gameplay: when you arrive in Kirkwall you're worrying about getting a roof over your family's head, and by the third act you're one of the most influential citizens in Kirkwall; likewise at the beginning of the game a handful of Darkspawn or a group of bandits was a worrisome challenge, but by the end of the game you're sweeping them off the map by the dozen and the real threats are twenty feet tall and breathing fire.

Compared to those games, DA:I is candy coated mass-market nonsense. There's no grit or grime in the world whatsoever. The game mechanics are awful at every level. Combat is just repetitive whaling away at the same reskinned damage sponges all the way from level 1 to level 30. The acting and writing are beyond bad; voice actors sound like they're reading the script aloud for the first time and the accents are unbearable. And the vast majority of the content is just pure padding; there's no narrative reason to do any of the exploration or repetitive fetch-quests other than to unlock the next completely unrelated plot point.

The worst is the pacing and the obvious throwaway nature of 90% of the game content. I was level 18 after finishing the tiresome mess that was Wicked Hearts, and when the next War Table interaction told me that Corypheus' armies were on the run and the time to strike was now, despite never having visited Emerald Graves, Emprise du Lion, or the Hissing Wastes, resolved any of the major political conflicts, or completed anyone's character arcs, it became real obvious none of that stuff mattered so I decided to get it over with.

Inquisition makes me angry because it's such a glaring waste of obvious talent on the game designers' part, it neutered everything that made the world dark and engaging out of a paranoid fear that someone somewhere might take offense at something, and frankly it's just a money grab that disrespects the players who have become invested in the franchise.

[Shechinah]

When I first played it I thought the similarities were obvious -- just compare the Cousland origin with John Snow for example.  To say nothing of the Night's Watch Grey Wardens, the Bannermen Bannorn, and of course the White Walkers Darkspawn.  And then when I read The Stolen Throne it became eminently clear just how much the whole backstory is a ripoff of A Game of Thrones, with the Theirins being exactly like the Starks and the Orlesian usurper being a mix of Joffrey Baratheon and Mad King Aerys Targaryen.

 

Could you, if you would, list the similarities, please? I ask because I did a post a long while ago where I listed how the Night's Watch functioned compared to the Grey Wardens and the White Walkers to the Darkspawn and I found that below the surface they were both very different.

[Lebanese Dude]

I love how people praise DAO despite its monumentally staggering amount of flaws but are quick to criticize DAI for the most basic things.

 

[ESTAQ99]

DA:O is one of my favorite games ever, it's not a perfect RPG but it managed to combine the feel of Baldur's Gate era isometric RPGs with modern game mechanics, and had memorable characters and a reasonably good if not original story.  The world was a blatant ripoff of A Song of Ice and Fire but it didn't treat it too badly so I didn't mind. 

 

DA2 was basically KOTOR in a fantasy setting, and is one of the best character-driven stories ever in a RPG.  It's nothing at all like DA:O, which put off a lot of people, but taken for what it is it's just as good.  It was also consistent with the tone of DA:O, keeping the universe dark and the morals ambiguous.  Gameplay was streamlined but still a lot of fun, and while it lacked the tactical depth of DA:O it gave the player a real sense that their character was evolving and growing.  Hawke's evolution was brilliantly illustrated both in story and in gameplay: when you arrive in Kirkwall you're worrying about getting a roof over your family's head, and by the third act you're one of the most influential citizens in Kirkwall; likewise at the beginning of the game a handful of Darkspawn or a group of bandits was a worrisome challenge, but by the end of the game you're sweeping them off the map by the dozen and the real threats are twenty feet tall and breathing fire.

 

Compared to those games, DA:I is candy coated mass-market nonsense.  There's no grit or grime in the world whatsoever.  The game mechanics are awful at every level.  Combat is just repetitive whaling away at the same reskinned damage sponges all the way from level 1 to level 30.  The acting and writing are beyond bad; voice actors sound like they're reading the script aloud for the first time and the accents are unbearable.  And the vast majority of the content is just pure padding; there's no narrative reason to do any of the exploration or repetitive fetch-quests other than to unlock the next completely unrelated plot point. 

 

The worst is the pacing and the obvious throwaway nature of 90% of the game content.  I was level 18 after finishing the tiresome mess that was Wicked Hearts, and when the next War Table interaction told me that Corypheus' armies were on the run and the time to strike was now, despite never having visited Emerald Graves, Emprise du Lion, or the Hissing Wastes, resolved any of the major political conflicts, or completed anyone's character arcs, it became real obvious none of that stuff mattered so I decided to get it over with. 

 

Inquisition makes me angry because it's such a glaring waste of obvious talent on the game designers' part, it neutered everything that made the world dark and engaging out of a paranoid fear that someone somewhere might take offense at something, and frankly it's just a money grab that disrespects the players who have become invested in the franchise.

[Lebanese Dude]

*snip*

 

Not in the mood to address every single point here, but the mere fact that you are praising DAO's combat while calling DAI's a mess just goes to show how ridiculously biased you are in your mode of thinking.

 

Without mods, DAO's combat was an excruciatingly slow spam fest. At least DAI's abilities have some semblance of impact. Also, without mods, DAO's difficulty tapered off on NIGHTMARE at level 9 or so, with most of the difficulty being aggro and health management. DAI's difficulty is reduced on NIGHTMARE at around level 14, with most of the difficulty pertaining to positioning (fun stuff) and attrition management. The difficulty is consistently high if the trials are enabled. 

 

I never played DAO for the combat. I played it for the story, and DAI shits on it and every aspect given that the former is a self-contained story about a band of noobs waddling in superficial contact with the cultures you meet while DAI's is a religious and political story that spans civilizations with actual involvement.

 

People. Love DAO as much as you want. Put DAI down as much as you want. Just don't praise the former while putting down the latter in the same sentence as if DAO did ANYTHING (other than a functional hold button I'll give you that) better than DAI.

 

The utter delusion.

 

Whatever. I've posted enough here. Wallow in your own bias all you want. I'm sure DA4 will be great.

[Setitimer]

Could you, if you would, list the similarities, please? I ask because I did a post a long while ago where I listed how the Night's Watch functioned compared to the Grey Wardens and the White Walkers to the Darkspawn and I found that below the surface they were both very different.

 

Off top of my head: both exist to contain a single threat; a large part of their recruits are criminals who were given the option to join as an alternative to judicial punishment; they remain staunchly politically neutral; they once had huge resources (fortresses etc) but all of that is now in decay; both ASOIAF and DA:O featured prominent members of those groups who traveled to noble families begging for recruits.  Obviously, the Grey Wardens are scattered rather than concentrated on one Wall because the Blight can come from anywhere, but otherwise the similarities are obvious.  The biggest difference is the Joining ritual which can kill you, which really resembles the Trials that Witcher recruits undergo.

[abisha]

I love how people praise DAO despite its monumentally staggering amount of flaws but are quick to criticize DAI for the most basic things.

 

 

give me examples in which area you think DA:O failed in?.

i think it deserves to have legendary status amounts other legendary games.

[Deanna Troy]

I love how people praise DAO despite its monumentally staggering amount of flaws but are quick to criticize DAI for the most basic things.

 

Define flaw.

My definition: Every thing or action have/is given a goal/purpose, if it fits its purpose it is flawless if it doesn't it have flaws. Flaws would then be the things in the way of reaching a goal or fulfilling a purpose.

The purpose of a game ~for me~ is to provide entertainment, thus "flaw" is as subjetive as is entertainment. So one person can safely say DAO is flawless because for this one person there is nothing in DAO that get's in the way of its given purpose.

"But there are technical flaws" - Of course, if for you the purpose of the game is not to have anything wrong in its code, graphics, system and others, then ok, you can call it a flaw, it doesn't mean the it is a flaw for others. A bug can be a flaw or the opposite, perfection, depending only on if it makes the game become better or worse according to its intended purpose for a given person.

Hypocrisy would be to rate a game using, for instance, your feelings and the other games using IGN reviews. But as long as one sticks to their subjectivity there is nothing hypocritical.  For a regular definition of hypocrisy to be applied to this kind of discussion about games the way you proposed in your post we would need an absolute reference to for comparison so that you could compare flaws. If we were able to define without discussion or doubt what is flaw and what is not we could say what is or what is not hypocritical to point at other games regarding a specific game.

In fact, for me, it is hilariously hypocritical to talk about hypocrisy when it comes to subjectivities like "games flaws" because it is all about using your preferences and logic to judge others, or, in other words, to say your subjectivity is valid and the others are not. Even if someone go as far as saying DAO graphics are better than DAI's (happened, in a topic of a mod in dao nexus mods) if, as I said, the purpose of the graphics to this person is to provide aesthetical pleasure and DAO does it better, then, yes, DAO graphics are better. It doesn't matter if DAI graphics have insanely more advanced shaders, textures with 10x the resolution, models with 10x the polygons or whatever, the purpose of the graphics for the designers, for the game reviewers, for most players... none of this matters, it only matters if it fits its purpose for the person talking about it. And if the person sticks to their subjectivity there is no hypocrisy in it, on the contrary, the person is being highly coherent.

[pdusen]

I love how people praise DAO despite its monumentally staggering amount of flaws but are quick to criticize DAI for the most basic things.

 

I think stuff like that is just common to the vocal "hardcore" segments of any fandom. See what a vocal "hardcore" Star Wars fans think of The Force Awakens for comparison. (I just read a blog post referring to "those of us who were hurt by Force Awakens". There are some real crazies out there.)

[Qis]

Not in the mood to address every single point here, but the mere fact that you are praising DAO's combat while calling DAI's a mess just goes to show how ridiculously biased you are in your mode of thinking.

 

Without mods, DAO's combat was an excruciatingly slow spam fest. At least DAI's abilities have some semblance of impact. Also, without mods, DAO's difficulty tapered off on NIGHTMARE at level 9 or so, with most of the difficulty being aggro and health management. DAI's difficulty is reduced on NIGHTMARE at around level 14, with most of the difficulty pertaining to positioning (fun stuff) and attrition management. The difficulty is consistently high if the trials are enabled. 

 

I never use combat Mod for DA:O, the slow spam fest is what i like about DA:O combat. I dislike DA2 cmbat because it is fast and anime-like, but still tolerable at that time....and i totally dislike DA:I combat become it become ridiculously cartoony

 

If i want to play single character bashing everyone with a big sword or axe, i better play Dark Souls or Skyrim, in the end my character is a god-like because i love power gamming in those games...

 

I play DA:O because i want to play a team combat, i want to set up my team progressions, skills, and AI...i don't want my character become Goku or Naruto, but i want my team become The A Team, working with and rely on each other, that is what a team supposed to be

[Andrew Lucas]

I loved the heck out of this game. 11/10.

[Heimerdinger]

Without mods, DAO's combat was an excruciatingly slow spam fest. At least DAI's abilities have some semblance of impact. Also, without mods, DAO's difficulty tapered off on NIGHTMARE at level 9 or so, with most of the difficulty being aggro and health management. DAI's difficulty is reduced on NIGHTMARE at around level 14, with most of the difficulty pertaining to positioning (fun stuff) and attrition management. The difficulty is consistently high if the trials are enabled. 

 

DAO was slow because it's a tactical game more close to TBS games, it's not a console action game. Speed is irrelevant, knowledge of gameplay mechanics, spell and talents is what's important there. (because mobs have access to same spells/talents as the player).

 

DAO difficulty was fine. Mobs were not walls of hit points, good balance, required understanding of all spells/talents. What does DAI have? Artificial difficulty. Assassins that can also tank..brilliant Bioware. Tankers that are also damagers..brilliant. 120.000 hit point elites, one-shots that are near impossible to dodge because of clunky controls, retarded ranged companions that go in melee range for no reason at all. Not difficulty just frustration, 12 patches and they still didn't fix characters freezing during combat.

 

I never played DAO for the combat. I played it for the story, and DAI shits on it and every aspect given that the former is a self-contained story about a band of noobs waddling in superficial contact with the cultures you meet while DAI's is a religious and political story that spans civilizations with actual involvement.

 

DAO Superficial contact? where you actually met cultures? Where you actually went to Orzammar?

 

DAI spans civilizations with actual involvement? LMFAO,  war table missions, kings and leaders and diplomats you never meet because you are too busy gathering shards and closing rift #87 which is identical to rift #56 and rift #73. Except Winter Palace the rest is war table nonsense that does not matter anyway, you get Denerim burned down by Venatori...oops let's not mention that again.

 

People. Love DAO as much as you want. Put DAI down as much as you want. Just don't praise the former while putting down the latter in the same sentence as if DAO did ANYTHING (other than a functional hold button I'll give you that) better than DAI.

 

Lets see (other than a functional hold button I mean):

- tactics

- companion AI that works

- proper UI

- proper PC version

- villains you can actually give a damn about

- proper side-questing

- control over attributes

- most dialogue is cinematic, camera zoomed on the person talking.

The list can go on.

 

What DAI did well is the companions, they are on par with DAO if not even better.

[Seraphim24]

DA:O is one of my favorite games ever, it's not a perfect RPG but it managed to combine the feel of Baldur's Gate era isometric RPGs with modern game mechanics, and had memorable characters and a reasonably good if not original story.  The world was a blatant ripoff of A Song of Ice and Fire but it didn't treat it too badly so I didn't mind. 

 

DA2 was basically KOTOR in a fantasy setting, and is one of the best character-driven stories ever in a RPG.  It's nothing at all like DA:O, which put off a lot of people, but taken for what it is it's just as good.  It was also consistent with the tone of DA:O, keeping the universe dark and the morals ambiguous.  Gameplay was streamlined but still a lot of fun, and while it lacked the tactical depth of DA:O it gave the player a real sense that their character was evolving and growing.  Hawke's evolution was brilliantly illustrated both in story and in gameplay: when you arrive in Kirkwall you're worrying about getting a roof over your family's head, and by the third act you're one of the most influential citizens in Kirkwall; likewise at the beginning of the game a handful of Darkspawn or a group of bandits was a worrisome challenge, but by the end of the game you're sweeping them off the map by the dozen and the real threats are twenty feet tall and breathing fire.

 

Compared to those games, DA:I is candy coated mass-market nonsense.  There's no grit or grime in the world whatsoever.  The game mechanics are awful at every level.  Combat is just repetitive whaling away at the same reskinned damage sponges all the way from level 1 to level 30.  The acting and writing are beyond bad; voice actors sound like they're reading the script aloud for the first time and the accents are unbearable.  And the vast majority of the content is just pure padding; there's no narrative reason to do any of the exploration or repetitive fetch-quests other than to unlock the next completely unrelated plot point. 

 

The worst is the pacing and the obvious throwaway nature of 90% of the game content.  I was level 18 after finishing the tiresome mess that was Wicked Hearts, and when the next War Table interaction told me that Corypheus' armies were on the run and the time to strike was now, despite never having visited Emerald Graves, Emprise du Lion, or the Hissing Wastes, resolved any of the major political conflicts, or completed anyone's character arcs, it became real obvious none of that stuff mattered so I decided to get it over with. 

 

Inquisition makes me angry because it's such a glaring waste of obvious talent on the game designers' part, it neutered everything that made the world dark and engaging out of a paranoid fear that someone somewhere might take offense at something, and frankly it's just a money grab that disrespects the players who have become invested in the franchise.

 

Everything looks pretty good, except for the Dragon Age 2 is one of the best RPGs ever or something like that.

 

It's fine, best of all RPGs is a tough competition. ..