934 réponses à ce sujet

[Arshei]

Is it bad to complain about a REALLY EXPENSIVE game that let you play with that?

[Lebanese Dude]

Is it bad to complain about a REALLY EXPENSIVE game that let you play with that?

 

 

 

[vbibbi]

Of course, this brings up the usual question. After a few runs, you can't actually be bad enough at the game to need either the XP from sidequests you don't like or the crafted gear from picking up rocks. So why are you doing those things? I csn understand not liking the stuff you have to do in a game, but the stuff you don't?

 

I know this isn't directed at me, but my response is: of all of the other Bioware games I have ever played, I can do what I consider a completionist run and not felt like it was a chore to do so, multiple playthroughs in. DAI is a much larger game than any other Bioware game I've ever played, so in fairness, it's not realistic to expect such an increase in size to be filled with the same amount of detail as a game half its size. But though I recognize this, it doesn't make it any more fun when I want to be as complete as possible in more than one playthrough.

 

To me, it feels like the game is meeting quotas: we have 100+ quests in the game, check. (Even if 90% of these quests are fetch quests). It features ten huge zones to explore with a variety of landscapes and enemies to fight. (But we only need to visit three of them to complete the game, and several of the zones don't even have a plot attached to them. And the zones only have one to five NPCs to interact with, Hinterlands excepted.) We can influence the politics of two countries and the major religion of Southern Thedas. (We only meet Fereldan's ruler in a five minute cameo if we choose one of two branching quests, we interact with the three candidates for Orlais' throne for five minutes and then decide who should rule based on our knowledge of a book tie-in. We visit one tiny region of the largest city in the world, neglecting the home of the Chantry, the templars, the largest mages' circle, the largest and worst alienage in the world, the actual throne of the empire, the largest university in the world, etc. etc.)

 

I think I would have had more enjoyment completing additional completionist playthroughs if some of these issues were fixed, rather than going through each zone reading all of the letters over and over and having no one to talk to.

[pdusen]

I know this isn't directed at me, but my response is: of all of the other Bioware games I have ever played, I can do what I consider a completionist run and not felt like it was a chore to do so, multiple playthroughs in. DAI is a much larger game than any other Bioware game I've ever played, so in fairness, it's not realistic to expect such an increase in size to be filled with the same amount of detail as a game half its size. But though I recognize this, it doesn't make it any more fun when I want to be as complete as possible in more than one playthrough.

 

Except it's not an apples-to-apples comparison because you're not playing them the same way. Yes, you're doing completionist runs of both games, but a completionist DA:I run has a drastically higher sidequest-to-story ratio. Try playing the same ratio you did in DA:O and see if it's more fun for you.

[Addictress]

The irony being that the Warden was the vegetable that you're forced to watch.

 

I'm not telling you how to feel about it, but there is a lot of value to having your character actually be emotive and expressive (they are, despite what you're saying), just as there is value to having a completely blank character.

 

You used your imagination to create a voice for your Warden. Use your imagination to justify your Inquisitor's dialogue. It honestly isn't that hard to do.

Well that's like saying, use your imagination to make crap good. Use your imagination to pretend the horrible acting on the stage is actually good acting. =/

 

This is what I found playing the whole trilogy: the method of expression works best two of three ways. 1. no voice, I project the voice. 2. voice, with writer's voice and solid expression. 3. Voice that is bland, forcing blandness into the slot where imagination would normally be.

[giveamanafish...]

I don't agree the Inquisitor is bland, but his or her opinion being a bit irrelevant is I think very interesting. It's why I think DA: I subtly subverts the Chosen One archetype. It's played up so much about how you're the Herald, but whenever you talk to one of the power players in the Inquisition, they basically saw it doesn't really matter if you are chosen or not, because they'll tell people you are to manipulate them. The Dawn Will Come scene is, I think, actually a bit cynical because of that; to most of the Inquisition that's a scene of desperate hope, but to someone like Giselle it's a power play to brainwash the followers. I liked afterwards that you can have the Inquisitor tell Giselle as much, asking her "were you the one who made me Inquisitor?" basically acknowledging that Giselle preyed on the perception that the Inquisitor was divine.

Forgive me as I have only a limited knowledge of the Bible, but isn't this how the story of Chistianity's chosen one works out? The holy intervention, the appearance of the son of god, was actually intended to be  more of a demonstration of human frailty? Just a thought.

[vbibbi]

Except it's not an apples-to-apples comparison because you're not playing them the same way. Yes, you're doing completionist runs of both games, but a completionist DA:I run has a drastically higher sidequest-to-story ratio. Try playing the same ratio you did in DA:O and see if it's more fun for you.

How would I be able to play DAO with the same ratio of side quests if there's only a limited number? Or do you mean do all side quests and only a few of the main quests? I think I would still enjoy it more, as the depth and variety of side quests are better in DAO

[thats1evildude]

How would I be able to play DAO with the same ratio of side quests if there's only a limited number? Or do you mean do all side quests and only a few of the main quests? I think I would still enjoy it more, as the depth and variety of side quests are better in DAO

No, he means if there were more side quests to main quests in DAO, you'd enjoy it less.

[In Exile]

How would I be able to play DAO with the same ratio of side quests if there's only a limited number? Or do you mean do all side quests and only a few of the main quests? I think I would still enjoy it more, as the depth and variety of side quests are better in DAO

 

They really aren't. A lot of the 'side' quests in DA:O are actually disguised crit. path quests. Whereas in DAI, this is e.g. the companion quests (and the advisor quests - which we have more of), plus the more developed and detailed companion cutscenes. A lot of resources were poured into those. 

 

Let's use an example. The "proving" in DA:O isn't something people usually say is a "main" quest. But it is - it's created for the crit path. The DA:I equivalent side quests are the chanter's etc. board, the filler quests. DA:O has very few true side quests, i.e., killing all the spiders in the mage origin, or cleaning out all the guards. 

 

That's not to say that DA:O's quests aren't better implemented in the world, but that's more setting (cities vs. pure wilderness). The other thing is that DA:O's quests, while badly designed, have cutscenes and more dialogue interaction, so they feel more dynamic than DAI, which has no dialogue to hide the awful quest design. 

[AlanC9]

How would I be able to play DAO with the same ratio of side quests if there's only a limited number? Or do you mean do all side quests and only a few of the main quests? I think I would still enjoy it more, as the depth and variety of side quests are better in DAO

I'm pretty sure he meant the exact reverse of that: match your DAI completion ratio while playing DAI.

[AlanC9]

I know this isn't directed at me, but my response is: of all of the other Bioware games I have ever played, I can do what I consider a completionist run and not felt like it was a chore to do so, multiple playthroughs in. DAI is a much larger game than any other Bioware game I've ever played, so in fairness, it's not realistic to expect such an increase in size to be filled with the same amount of detail as a game half its size. But though I recognize this, it doesn't make it any more fun when I want to be as complete as possible in more than one playthrough.

This doesn't actually answer the question you're responding to: if completionism isn't working as an approach for you, why use that approach? The point of a playstyle is to make the game more enjoyable, not less enjoyable, right?

[OMTING52601]

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.

*snip*

 

14 months out, a GOTY for the effort... And I do think DA:I is a letdown. The biggest reasons for that were covered in the first three months after release: too much filler, poor combat design/implemetation, a disjointed main quest where the final battle was less challenging (and less needed) than taking out the most difficult dragon in-game (at least I scored some sweet swag off that dragon ;D).

 

I didn't even pick up DA:I until after the last of the patches, the last of the DLC, the last of all SP-related interest was given on the part of BW to the game. And then, I only snagged it because it was hella cheap - less than twenty bucks. So bang for my buck (at 13.99, thank you GS for PowerUp Rewards, lol) yeah, I got that. The scenery is fabulous, no doubt, the music - OMG, I cannot be the only person who got choked up after escaping Haven - phenomenal, the game - ugh, slog, so freakin' boring...

 

I've played five, four, wait, I think six (but I deleted two of the saves because I needed space) PT. That's start to finish, all areas unlocked, all quests completed that I could (I keep forgetting not to talk to that Orlesian Professor dude in the Western Approach *facepalm*). My last playthrough, Qunari IQ, I tallied like 199 hours, I s**t you not. Finished every collection, shard, bottle, astrarium, mosaic, song (did I miss a listing?). Read every single codex card (still irks me I can't get all of those in one playthrough, seems I'm always missing like one or two parts of some tale or history or something, lolol). Literally left no stone unturned, no hill unconquered, even button mashed/screamed the physics engine into letting me plant all the flags on mountaintops.

 

Two hundred hours... And still can't believe how boring and utterly lacking in immersive qualities this game is - not to mention the hold over of what I considered the worst part of DA 2 - lack of player agency (wow, in like a massive and even less opaque fashion than we got in DA 2). I know, you're thinking, "huh, wait, that doesn't make any sense - how can you say it was boring and you felt no immersion if you played for TWO HUNDRED HOURS?!?"

 

Super simply. I can say it because I did play for two hundred hours (actually, ummm, a hella lot more than that - six PT). There is no connection whatsoever between the sidequestery and the main story. Like, nada. Go meet Dorian's pops, doesn't tie me into what Coryphyspit is doing or why or how or when. Help out the refugees in the Hinterlands - doesn't get me any more meat on when the Venatori showed up, how they managed to kick Arl Teagan (man, 'bout time, and thank god NO Isolde!!!) out of his own castle, considering the dude fought off the undead to hold the villiage with me, held the place together through the rest of the Blight, dealt with the fallout of Connor... I digress.

 

Find all the place markers get a bunch of lore and codex entries, but nothing that deepens the plot, immerses the player in the game, in being the Inquisitor. "Fight X megalomaniac baddie who wants all teh POWER/rule teh WORLD..." Really? Come on, all the players should expect better from BW. Loghain was a pr**k, he screwed the pooch (and Fereldan) but he had real, sympathetic REASONS for his betrayal. Were they ridiculous reasons, looked at from an unpoisoned perspective (like Cailan's or the Warden's) yeah, they were, but to him they were REAL. It made his character so much deeper, so much more real, so much harder to simply axe and move on without blinking or even taking a moment to lament how the mighty fell.

 

Cory didn't really have this in DA 2 - but the potential was there. He was an interesting character with the potential to be a gold mine of even more interesting historical information. For all the lore splashed throughout Inquisition, there really ain't much of value - like really getting to dig into Cory's mind and find out what he saw when he assaulted the so called 'Golden City'. How about instead of one-dimensional 'ultimate evil-dude' the story actually revealed those original magister's not to be (or not all to be) power hungry monsters, but super devout (maybe zealotous) worshippers who were really looking to be closer to their gods (like saints or something). How about instead of Ira Gardner's notes on poisons, our Inquisitor and crew discovered the Golden City was Black because once the Veil showed up, it locked ALL the gods away - not just the Enavuris. Now that would have been a hella plot twist I could have gotten behind.

 

If BW is gonna keep heading this way - and man, I don't think there a snowball's chance it won't - I don't know if I can play another game. I love the DA world, I mean holy moly, I've played a ridiculous amount of start-to-finishes in all three games. But I don't want to play an MMO, period. More than that, though, I don't want to play BW's version of Skywitcher of Dutycraft. I want to play Dragon Age. My shortest playthrough was about five hours - wasn't trying a speed record, just wanted to play only the main story and companion quests. No crap, could have done it in three hours, if not for the built-in slow down (which was absolutely intended to do exactly this) of accumulating the power to progress the main path (I watched the speed run, on like super FF, and that's basically what i did, plus companions).

 

Playing that, I can tell you, none of the main quest parts had any connection to the others. To clarify, in Origins the Brecelian(sp) Forest section wasn't intrinsically tied to any of the other parts - nor were the Deep Roads (not really), but they did so much for world building and for immersion AND had the added benefit of offering some interesting secondary content (DR is like a game in and of itself, back-door political intrigue, shady men in power, a power crazed wanna be demi-god (Branka, not Caridin, lolol)) that played into the overall purpose - which was to build a fracking army to kill a god-dragon. The mage tower and the fade were my least favorite sections, but in doing them, I had the opportunity to save a child, which tied those two pieces into one another (Redcliffe and Circle) and Denerim was just the capstone, the part that brought us to the climax and the big showdown. 

 

In this game, I gotta resolve a war that's been brewing for a millenia - and which is over off-screen, with no further altercations and with no visible impact on the world. As in none. I've played both sides out - one or two word changes in dialogue does not an effect make. Hmm, oh, yeah, then I gotta drain a lake and pick up a Warden to go reveal the Wardens are corrupted (uh, duh, the second Cory showed up, I went - hmm, well, the Wardens are effed). KK, saved em/ejected em, again no changes. So what's next? Oh, hell yeah, lets get to politicking and backstabbing, it's Halamshiral!! Oh, wait, well, sort of, not really, kind of (if I take out the most openly offensive character I have ever encountered in a video game, aka Sera) but making everyone work together leaves the world in a crap state, so... Still, no effect. Alright, what's next, wait, what? I'm at the end? But, I don't feel like I've done anything. Yeah, I see the markers ticked off, the quests completed, but... Oh, wait, okay, right, Cory lost the Anchor, so he tried to get the Wardens. That didn't work, so next up Orlais. That didn't work out either, so some long lost Elvhen temple FTW, but... nope, again, TWHARTED MWAHAHAHAHAHA.... And... so...

 

Super lame final battle with a lot of villainous monologuing but no real battle, over and done and totally anti-climactic in less than five minutes (including cut scenes). Damn, that last dragon in EdL took me like twenty!

 

Look, this isn't a 'small minority talking really loud'. Read the reviews from AFTER the publicity blitz of the first month, they all say pretty much the same thing - too much filler, not enough meat, crappy interfaces and combat implementation, devs fixing stuff that doesn't really need to be fixed (FoF/TC exploit instead of the freaking banter glitch? Really? In a SP game, what the heck does it matter if the SP can 'cheat'? The exploit didn't work in the MP to begin with, so...) And more than a year out, go take a look at overall rated scores, they're like five to seven on a ten scale cause folks aren't getting paid (in one way or another) for their reviews.

 

In the end, though, (TL;DR) I think maybe the better question(s) to ask is not if one will continue to support BW/DA games or what expectations moving forward might be. I think the better question to ask is whether or not BW is interested in building their own game, in their own world, and probably filling a niche that won't sell tens of millions of copies, but rather a modest few million, but which honestly showcases what DA:O did so well: (and even DA 2, despite how awful the game played out - admit it, if there had actually been any player agency in the second game and if the companion characters were as easily engaged and as deftly written as the companions in Origins - the game play changes and the never-ending wave battles would have been minor irritations) Immerse players in a world and surround them with NPC's they give two bits about.

 

Yeah, we love the lore, we love the world, we love the fighty-fighty and the kissy-kissy... But what we really love is not playing BW's version of Skyrim or the Witcher (seriously, spam the search -- DUDES, Witcher Two) or WoW or whatever fracking game sold big and made tons of money. We came back for DA 2 because we wanted that closeness, that total immersive quality and the actual player agency (even if it was limited, and linear, and the only changes were mostly cosmetic, but we SAW those choices, man, we saw them when we called up our allies as we tried to save the world from the Blight). We wanted to lose ourselves in Thedas, that ambient atmosphere so well done, as we met interesting people and build friendships and a family all of our own. And that didn't work out so great in the second game, no, but the party banter? FTW and it made the lack of interaction almost bearable; it made those NPC's and even Hawke more REAL.

 

Inquisition, though? I could give two figs about Vivienne - heck, I don't even know what the point of her character IS - other than just an alternative Divine choice? It's not like she's the one that gets us in to Halamshiral, you know, with all her damn court connections?! :/ At least she'd have had a point besides 'first African-Marcher' character if she *had* been needed to get an invite to the ball. If the mechanics just needed a third mage, you know cause Solas, then well... FIONA would have been hella more interesting, added hella more depth, and like, I don't know, been freaking amazing! And she coulda done it either way - it wasn't really her in Val Royeux so that not-her coulda been in Redcliffe, and we could have rescued her or something... Okay, not digressing more down that road...

 

What's the point of Sera, for that matter? Need two rogues for depth mechanics, okay, don't make Cole optional - Sera is as well, FWIW - but he's got legs in the story, he's an established character of canon from the books/comics that some players might not have known about due to this - but stick him in, add some leading codex entries, next thing BW knows its a twofer!! Players are now super curious about this Cole guy so they go BUY OTHER MERCHANDISE and there are two alternate rogues for the PC to opt for while battling/exploring. I adore the Iron Bull, but he too is completely unnecessary and doesn't even really have much depth until Trespasser where he will turn on the Inquisitor if said Inquisitor decided to burn the Chargers, you know, alive. I'm sure it's another depth mechanic, but tbt considering all the returning faces pulled into this game, Fenris would have made a more interesting two-handed warrior and his freaking backstory actually could have been used to get hella more depth and information, considering Venatori/Coryphyllus/Ancient Elven magic/gods... Seriously, I cannot be the only person who thinks that might have been a better choice than the one-eyed Jam-er sorry Ben...Hassrath spy dude who has the least interactive dialogue and one of the shortest personal quest in the game (especially when taking into account how much crap has to be done beforehand, so that I (at least) have always been WAY OP by the time I get his quest).

 

So, if BW wants to go MMO for future DA - more power to them! Label appropriately and folks who aren't interested can move on, those who are opt in. Easy peasy. If BW wants to make ARPG's (cause really, Origins is an early ARPG) that focus on meaty plots, and meaty secondary plots, and side quests that overwhelmingly either build on those plots or build up the immersion and NPC characters - more power to them! Label appropriately etc, etc, etc. If it's the latter, I am all TAKE MY MONEY. If it's the former, well, it's been a great-to-middlin' run, but I got fantastic memories and DAO still plays like a champ (on PC and XBox, cause I got both lol).

[OMTING52601]

They really aren't. A lot of the 'side' quests in DA:O are actually disguised crit. path quests. Whereas in DAI, this is e.g. the companion quests (and the advisor quests - which we have more of), plus the more developed and detailed companion cutscenes. A lot of resources were poured into those. 

 

Let's use an example. The "proving" in DA:O isn't something people usually say is a "main" quest. But it is - it's created for the crit path. The DA:I equivalent side quests are the chanter's etc. board, the filler quests. DA:O has very few true side quests, i.e., killing all the spiders in the mage origin, or cleaning out all the guards. 

 

That's not to say that DA:O's quests aren't better implemented in the world, but that's more setting (cities vs. pure wilderness). The other thing is that DA:O's quests, while badly designed, have cutscenes and more dialogue interaction, so they feel more dynamic than DAI, which has no dialogue to hide the awful quest design. 

 

Yes, please. I'll gladly take side quests which are cp quests over filler any and all days of the week. That dynamism is exactly what hooked me and had me buying BW products. Just guessing, but I don't think I'm in the minority. That kind of design detail builds on immersion and can really make an SP game RPG feel more like a big group, tabletop RPG, fwiw.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

DAI certainly has plenty of upsides, and the graphics in particular are beautiful, but Origins is still better in many ways.

[GoldenGail3]

DAI certainly has plenty of upsides, and the graphics in particular are beautiful, but Origins is still better in many ways.

No mention of DA2. Lol. And I agree; I like Inquiston, it's a fun game without all the filler quest In the way though, lol.

[Iakus]

Of course, this brings up the usual question. After a few runs, you can't actually be bad enough at the game to need either the XP from sidequests you don't like or the crafted gear from picking up rocks. So why are you doing those things? I csn understand not liking the stuff you have to do in a game, but the stuff you don't?

Well, from an RP perspective, it feels odd to not close every rift on the map.  I mean, that's what the green glowy hand is for, and what the Inquisitor is uniquely qualified for, amirite?

 

As for the rest, I can resist doing the exceptionally boring or out of the way quests, but seeing quests just hanging in the journal can get my fingers itching to clear them off, even if I know it would serve no purpose.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I'm surprised to say this, but Angry Joe's review sums up a lot of my complaints about DAI. Not all of them, but many of them.

[OMTING52601]

No mention of DA2. Lol. And I agree; I like Inquiston, it's a fun game without all the filler quest In the way though, lol.

 

Come on, DA2 isn't *that* bad, LOL Okay, no, it is, but honestly, when I want to just smash some buttons and hack off some limbs, with witty banter as background, I toss it in and fire it up. Seriously.

 

Inquisition has its moments, but without the filler it is so barren... Really, it's hard to ignore how unconnected the parts are (a line of dialogue saying 'The Elder One said so,' just doesn't do it for me, whatever that's worth) without the padding. Still, I honestly have put the game on in like, EdL or Val Royeaux and just left the IQ stand there. The I listened to the ambient chatter while I did homework or housework or whatever, cause the atmosphere is spectacular.

[OMTING52601]

Well, from an RP perspective, it feels odd to not close every rift on the map.  I mean, that's what the green glowy hand is for, and what the Inquisitor is uniquely qualified for, amirite?

 

As for the rest, I can resist doing the exceptionally boring or out of the way quests, but seeing quests just hanging in the journal can get my fingers itching to clear them off, even if I know it would serve no purpose.

 

Agreed, on both counts. Plus... If one doesn't do that stuff, the game is really, really short... for the genre it is supposed to be in, at least.

[GoldenGail3]

Come on, DA2 isn't *that* bad, LOL Okay, no, it is, but honestly, when I want to just smash some buttons and hack off some limbs, with witty banter as background, I toss it in and fire it up. Seriously.
 
Inquisition has its moments, but without the filler it is so barren... Really, it's hard to ignore how unconnected the parts are (a line of dialogue saying 'The Elder One said so,' just doesn't do it for me, whatever that's worth) without the padding. Still, I honestly have put the game on in like, EdL or Val Royeaux and just left the IQ stand there. The I listened to the ambient chatter while I did homework or housework or whatever, cause the atmosphere is spectacular.

Lol! I like you! We should get together to go hunt DA2 lovers. I'm sure they'll block us in no time!

(Sarcasm)

I know; Inquiston is a blank slate (so is all the Progies of the Elder Scrolls; but I still play them. Their background doesn't matter to me, it be honest). But I still like it; even with its all its faults. It's an okay game in my eyes.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

Something I didn't notice in the beginning, but it soon began to wear on me: The inquisitor doesn't seem to have much of a personality. I was trying to play a rowdy, boisterous, fight-loving, stereotypical dwarf, but that's impossible. The Hero of Ferelden obviously had more choice due to the lack of voiceover, but even Hawke had aggressive dialog options. The inquisitor is far too calm and calculated to me.

[GoldenGail3]

Something I didn't notice in the beginning, but it soon began to wear on me: The inquisitor doesn't seem to have much of a personality. I was trying to play a rowdy, boisterous, fight-loving, stereotypical dwarf, but that's impossible. The Hero of Ferelden obviously had more choice due to the lack of voiceover, but even Hawke had aggressive dialog options. The inquisitor is far too calm and calculated to me.

I image my Male Lavellan's always been caculated and so him being calm isn't a surprise to me. And yeah; it took me two game thoughts to even like the Inquistor to be honest.

[AlanC9]

I've played five, four, wait, I think six (but I deleted two of the saves because I needed space) PT. That's start to finish, all areas unlocked, all quests completed that I could (I keep forgetting not to talk to that Orlesian Professor dude in the Western Approach *facepalm*). My last playthrough, Qunari IQ, I tallied like 199 hours, I s**t you not.

(snip)

not to mention the hold over of what I considered the worst part of DA 2 - lack of player agency (wow, in like a massive and even less opaque fashion than we got in DA 2). I know, you're thinking, "huh, wait, that doesn't make any sense - how can you say it was boring and you felt no immersion if you played for TWO HUNDRED HOURS?!?"

Er....actually, I was going to ask how you can keep playing something for ONE THOUSAND HOURS if you found it boring. Six playthroughs, right.? (Figuring the last run ran a little longer than the others.. otherwise it's 1200 hours.)
 

Super simply. I can say it because I did play for two hundred hours (actually, ummm, a hella lot more than that - six PT).

Yep. I believe you. But the question isn't if you did that. The question is, why did you? I doubt I'm going to put 300 hours into DAI, and I like the game.
 

[GoldenGail3]

Er....actually, I was going to ask how you can keep playing something for ONE THOUSAND HOURS if you found it boring. Six playthroughs, right.? (Figuring the last run ran a little longer than the others.. otherwise it's 1200 hours.)
.

I've played and beaten the game twice... I can't do it that long; it'd get tired of DA real quick if I were to play DAI 6 times all the way through.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I've played and beaten the game twice... I can't do it that long; it'd get tired of DA real quick if I were to play DAI 6 times all the way through.

I had a similar problem with DA2. Every playthrough felt the same, with the only difference being Bethany or Carver. I needed to wait some time between playthroughs.