357 réponses à ce sujet

[Wompoo]

DA:I's open world feels far far more like BG series open world then any Beth game. Story is however no where near as strong or as engrossing as BG series games or DA:O. Graphically it is on par (ignoring technology differences) with Skyrim. Companion AI is also much much much better then Skyrim's idiot factor with pathing from hell. Combat in both games is weak, lacking substance and  borderline  bland at times with whack a mole enemies every where... this impacts on the long term re playability (DA:O was King of this franchise; as was Morrowind for Beth). BW's world story is also far stronger then Skyrim's blink and its gone, where your character means absolutely nothing in the greater game world... DA:I is a good story but I just feel lacks drama and a wow factor, my character feels like a caretaker not hero... however it does have some very good tongue in check humour. Mods however, Beth rules unchallenged (adding re playability and additional sales), why on earth BW could not provide even a small mod system for textures and models I have no idea. BW's armour is also very limited (same base designs recycled to many times) boring and with some incredibly fugly choices made (the long rigid rear flaps on robes and some Heavy armour, are just plain terrible, head gear lacking some type of hair is plain B grade and thank god for hide head gear).  DA:I is a good game, but no where near a great one (the GoTY is a good indicator of just how poor 2014 has been for games... with a few notable exceptions, for me at least).... Skyrim is, Nordic feudal systems meets the sims... no soul at all. Character customisation? in DA:I it is just adequate... lacking hair styles across the board, with male and female characters sharing the same limited selection. 8/10 same score I gave Skyrim. Will need to wait for W3 and hope it fills the huge hollow in present rpg games.

[DariusDrannen]

Bethesda excels in world building.  Adventuring in their sandbox is truly magnificent, as it seems each little cave, town, or tower has its own rich story.  DA:I's open world is a decent start, but it's nowhere near as rich in detail and things to stumble across as Skyrim's.

 

BioWare excels in interesting characters and does well in story driven quests.  This is where DA:I is superior to Skyrim; the characters are more memorable and the story is more central to the game.

 

If I had to pick between the two, I'd pick DA:I because I'm more of a story/character guy.

 

As for DA:I trying to be Bio's Skyrim, it's a decent start.  But, IMO, the world needed a lot more fleshing out.  Too many simplified fetch quests and not enough backstory/lore behind those quests.  Plus, I actually think Bio attempting a more open world actually hurt the one aspect they're usually superior at.  That is, the main quest, IMO, was lacking in Inquisition.  It seemed shorter than the previous two games' main quests, as well as less fleshed out.

 

What I would have liked to have seen happen is if they eliminated 2 or 3 of the maps that didn't really deal with the main quest (ie. one or two of the "sidequest maps") and used that extra time and resources to flesh out the main quest and give more depth to Corypheus' character, the game would have been much improved, IMO.

[TheWinstitute]

In a perfect world, the remnants of pre-Zenimax Bethesda and pre-EA BioWare would align together to make the greatest RPG studio of all time.

 

Just think what that would be like, the greatest minds of the last 20 years all working under a roof that isn't being run by lawyers and investment brokers.

 

I'd probably never need to buy another game.

 

Hell I'd scrub toilets at that studio on a free internship just to be near that kind of epic greatness.

[scootshoot]

Skyrim + Mods > DAI

 

Skyrim Vanilla < DAI

 

There are just some epic mods out there.  Vilja, Frostfall, realistic needs, Convenient horses.  Complete new land masses with quest lines which could easily be another DLC, Falskaar.  

 

Long as the Nexus modders are active, Skyrim will never come off my hard drive.

[Tsunami Chef]

I liked DA:I more. I could never finish a playthrough of Skyrim despite enjoying many different aspects of it (Dark Brotherhood, Thieves guild, Companions, Daedric lord quests, crafting, exploring, etc.) I just never felt the motivation to finish the game because the main storyline was so lackluster to me. I think Skyrim is just as good of a game as DA:I in a sense, but it wasn't necessarily as good of an experience. Simply because I was never constantly thinking about the SKyrim world while at school or work, it was just something that was enjoyable in the mean time when I was free. Almost all Bioware games have given me this feeling of thinking about the game even when doing everyday stuff.

 

This is modded skyrim though. I never played unmodded skyrim since I didn't pick the game up till a few years after it came out. I imagine my opinion might be less praiseworthy if i didn't have mods since I used ENB's, + RP mods (immersion mods), + gear mods, + basically everything mods.

[scootshoot]

lol.  I have easily close to 300 hours invested into Skyrim and have never finished the main quest.  The farthest I got was meeting Delphine at the inn.  There is just so much crap to do and the mods always add so much content I get distracted.

[Obvious_Shining]

[Zorlagius]

It`s kind of amusing how many people don`t finish the main quest in Skyrim. I`m pretty sure it`s not just because they got "distracted" but because of the unconscious feeling that if they do it, the game ends. But it really doesn`t... The main quest is not as bad as it is portrayed to be, only the final boss is rather lame. Other stuff that happens during that quest is actually more appealing than DA:I:s finale. I highly suggest that people finish that quest at least once.

 

In reality, Skyrim sort of assumes that you might have done it before you go and do the last DLC (listen to the main bad guys dialogue there, its kind of amusing).

[Melca36]

They really should NOT be compared. You had marriage amulets and the characters had very little depth to them.

[Starkrei]

You can easily mod Skyrim, thus comparing them is unfair to DA:I.

 

One thing I will say however, vanilla Skyrim combat is pretty horrible, but it's still better than DA:I's.

[berrieh]

One thing I will say however, vanilla Skyrim combat is pretty horrible, but it's still better than DA:I's.

 

Combat in Skyrim is very bland to me compared to DA:I where I can consider things like status effects and combos. I actually don't get any criticism of DA:I combat - it's not perfect, as nothing is perfect, but I think it's the best blend of action-and-tactical combat I've seen. No other RPG has given me such choice in combat, where I can choose to play it different ways for different situations. I would like more abilities (not to map - the 8 slots works for me, but to change out), but I'd always like more abilities. But I don't really see a flaw with DA:I combat except the tactical camera being imperfect, but it's not horrible - just poor in a few specific situations. 

[Han Shot First]

DA:I > Skyrim

 

Elder Scrolls games tend to bore me. The game world is beautiful, but it is populated by completely forgettable characters including the PC.

[Starkrei]

Combat in Skyrim is very bland to me compared to DA:I where I can consider things like status effects and combos. I actually don't get any criticism of DA:I combat - it's not perfect, as nothing is perfect, but I think it's the best blend of action-and-tactical combat I've seen. No other RPG has given me such choice in combat, where I can choose to play it different ways for different situations. I would like more abilities (not to map - the 8 slots works for me, but to change out), but I'd always like more abilities. But I don't really see a flaw with DA:I combat except the tactical camera being imperfect, but it's not horrible - just poor in a few specific situations. 

Combat in Skyrim is bland. But at least it has some satisfying aspects, like sneak archer (much more satisfying if you install a mod that fixes sneak to not be op and enemies to not be blind though). The combat in DA:I was wholly unsatisfying for me, 8 Ability slots was annoying, but not liking most of the abilities were the bigger issue for me. It also felt pretty slow, especially with the capped Mana/Stamina.

 

I actually enjoyed the combat more when I got the Knight-Enchanter specialization and could get through anything with nothing but spam of that sword. 

 

The major thing though is probably that I have no interest in the "best blend of action-and-tactical combat". I don't want action in my tactical combat, go away action, you have better places to be. One thing that kind of befuddles me however is how the game is action-y. It feels like it is, it leaves the sour taste of being that in a game I wish it didn't have a place, but apart from the ridiculous "hold button to auto-attack" thing I don't see it.

[berrieh]

Combat in Skyrim is bland. But at least it has some satisfying aspects, like sneak archer (much more satisfying if you install a mod that fixes sneak to not be op and enemies to not be blind though). 

 

If you need to install a mod, I don't count that as part of the game, personally. Mods are a whole different thing. I do like sneaking in Skyrim - stealth combat is the best combat in the game, but it's far less interesting than a proper stealth game. My big problem with Skyrim combat is you can do everything and almost everything feels very similar. The archery, a few support spells, and the stealth are slightly different, but the spells are too similar to each other and attacking feels almost the same no matter what weapon I use. The perks help sometimes, but not enough. I don't mind it because combat isn't the thing in Skyrim, but I get very little satisfaction from combat. 

 

The combat in DA:I was wholly unsatisfying for me, 8 Ability slots was annoying, but not liking most of the abilities were the bigger issue for me. It also felt pretty slow, especially with the capped Mana/Stamina.

 

I actually enjoyed the combat more when I got the Knight-Enchanter specialization and could get through anything with nothing but spam of that sword. 

 

The major thing though is probably that I have no interest in the "best blend of action-and-tactical combat". I don't want action in my tactical combat, go away action, you have better places to be. One thing that kind of befuddles me however is how the game is action-y. It feels like it is, it leaves the sour taste of being that in a game I wish it didn't have a place, but apart from the ridiculous "hold button to auto-attack" thing I don't see it.

 

I feel like the combat in DA:I is tactical, deliberate, and interesting. The slowness helps that for me (though it isn't nearly as slow as DA:Origins, thankfully). Now, I get people have preferences, but I don't think you can say those things are uniformly bad. 

 

Personally, I guess I prefer action combat (unless we're going full turn-based; I love me some turn-based, but every other kind of tactical combat is fairly dull to me and feels too RTS), but I still want to think about it. So I guess DA:I was made for people like me. It's probably my favorite RPG combat of all time. I wouldn't mind a toggle auto-attack (I'd probably turn it off now that I've tried it this way) just because I know some people have disabilities, etc, and I do like games to be accessible. But I do think the combat itself feels more cohesive if you push to attack or hold for auto-attack, rather than simply just having the character do it. 

 

I definitely think it is objectively a deeper combat system than Skyrim. Which one is preferred is obviously up to the user, but DA:I has more depth because it has classes, specific abilities, meaningful status effects that impact combos, full party play, the ability to play top-down tactical or action, etc. 

[lyleoffmyspace]

They're completely different kind of games with different things associated with them. I think I'd give the edge to Skyrim overall though, because the open world was fun to explore, whereas in DA:I it was a bit of a bore. I've got far more hours in Skyrim, it's that game you can always jump back into and have fun with without making a big committment.

 

I think for combat, companions, overall story, and personal lore preference, I prefer Dragon Age Inquisition.

 

But for exploration, world design, open world content, loot and general fun, Skyrim is preferable.

[Starkrei]

 

If you need to install a mod, I don't count that as part of the game, personally. Mods are a whole different thing. I do like sneaking in Skyrim - stealth combat is the best combat in the game, but it's far less interesting than a proper stealth game. My big problem with Skyrim combat is you can do everything and almost everything feels very similar. The archery, a few support spells, and the stealth are slightly different, but the spells are too similar to each other and attacking feels almost the same no matter what weapon I use. The perks help sometimes, but not enough. I don't mind it because combat isn't the thing in Skyrim, but I get very little satisfaction from combat. 

 

 

I feel like the combat in DA:I is tactical, deliberate, and interesting. The slowness helps that for me (though it isn't nearly as slow as DA:Origins, thankfully). Now, I get people have preferences, but I don't think you can say those things are uniformly bad. 

I didn't say that I need to mod the combat for the stealth/archer part to become satisfying, only that it is satisfying and becomes even more so after mods. I honestly view all of Bethesda's latest games as a barebones base to be built upon, similar to how the base games of "The Sims" function without expansion packs or CC. But vanilla archer and sneak is fine, melee and mage are pretty horrendous however.

 

I think we're not at the same page when it comes to the slowness. What makes up the major part of the "slowness" in DA:I for me is that most enemies have tons of health, and you have little damage and mana to kill it with. Especially in the start. Even when I started using the "op" Knight-Enchanter spec combat was still pretty slow, since the enemies had tonnes of health.

 

And no, DA:I isn't nearly as slow as Origins, it's muuuuuuuch slower. Nightmare mode Origins is pretty quick actually, if you don't watch out your whole party will be dead in seconds. But at the same time most of the bosses and enemies are rarely beefcakes, you can dispose of them quickly and cleanly, but they can do so to you as well.

 

Another annoying thing that breaks up the exploration part of DA:I is the no healing thing. If you have no healing spells, why in the name of the gods' grandmother isn't there any out of combat hp regeneration? I thought the removal of healing spells was supposed to make it more tactical or whatever, but as it stands now you have to spam barrier every fight from the start or your party members will suddenly have 10 hp left and no potions.

 

And I'm off-topic now, I suppose. Sorry 'bout that.

 

Glad that you enjoy the combat though, even if I don't enjoy it I'm glad that at least it causes someone else to love it.

[sangy]

This subject comes up too often.  They're completely different animals.  Both are good games, but they are only similar in the fact they're old age fantasy games. 

 

Someone mentioned the cutscenes in DA.  It's funny, but it's true.  I feels a lot more personal in a cutscene than just hearing the dialog being spoken.  The companions are a lot more focused too.  They're not just names, they're special and very interesting.  Skyrim has some great stories and people, but it just feels so distant compared to DAs approach.  The only other game I know of that goes as deep into characters as DA is Bioware's Mass Effect.  Go figure.  Though, Final Fantasy does pretty well too.

[Nefla]

The main story and companion/advisor quests in DA:I are top notch and visually the world is stunning and well designed, however it feels dead and empty. The main story and followers of Skyrim can't compare at all but I feel that it fills the world much better

 

-In Skyrim there was a beautiful soundtrack playing, in DA:I there are occasional 10 second blurbs but mostly I'm alone with my footsteps and maybe a chirping bird

 

-Most NPCs in Skyrim are able to be interacted with and many have long and informative conversations that either give quests or teach you lore. Most NPCs in Inquisition are window dressing and just stand stiffly in one place and if you're lucky a pre-recorded conversation might play over a few of them. Skyrim NPCs have daily lives that they go about and will stop and interact with each other as well as reacting to things you do and fighting enemies or running. NPCs in Inquisition don't react to enemies for the most part.

 

-There are fetch quest or simple task quests in Skyrim but there are also long, involved, and very fun questlines like the faction questlines as well as shorter ones like "a daedra's best friend" (the one with the talking dog)

 

-Skyrim has multiple towns which all have shops, quests, and people to talk to. Inquisition only has your base of operations and Val Royeaux (which has no one to talk to after your first time there)

 

BioWare made a beautiful world with a great story and companions, I just wish they had filled it with something more than 100,000 of "find my mother's ring" or "take this letter to this tree."

[scootshoot]

Combat in Skyrim is bland. But at least it has some satisfying aspects, like sneak archer (much more satisfying if you install a mod that fixes sneak to not be op and enemies to not be blind though). The combat in DA:I was wholly unsatisfying for me, 8 Ability slots was annoying, but not liking most of the abilities were the bigger issue for me. It also felt pretty slow, especially with the capped Mana/Stamina.

 

I actually enjoyed the combat more when I got the Knight-Enchanter specialization and could get through anything with nothing but spam of that sword. 

 

The major thing though is probably that I have no interest in the "best blend of action-and-tactical combat". I don't want action in my tactical combat, go away action, you have better places to be. One thing that kind of befuddles me however is how the game is action-y. It feels like it is, it leaves the sour taste of being that in a game I wish it didn't have a place, but apart from the ridiculous "hold button to auto-attack" thing I don't see it.

 

Stealth archery is pretty fun with mods.  Also pickpocketing npc's, putting a poisoned food item etc. back in their pockets and watch him/her squirm?  Never gets old.

 

The Bethesda engine is pretty great in terms of there is nothing like being able to open up every single container and looting most any object in the game stead of some static mesh.  I've seen some wicked house player decorations because of this which is another game to itself. 

[berrieh]

I didn't say that I need to mod the combat for the stealth/archer part to become satisfying, only that it is satisfying and becomes even more so after mods. I honestly view all of Bethesda's latest games as a barebones base to be built upon, similar to how the base games of "The Sims" function without expansion packs or CC. But vanilla archer and sneak is fine, melee and mage are pretty horrendous however.

 

I don't think you can say similar to the Sims because those packs are officially released packs. I don't think "ability to mod" is necessarily a plus for a game, though, even if mods make it more fun because they also make games more exhausting (to me) and it limits me to playing on PC (which I can do and have a gaming PC for games that are heavily modded or only on PC but don't really prefer). So I guess I'm not the audience for modding arguments. Even when modding is awesome, though, I think the modders deserve the credit, and it really bugs me when devs leave things unfixed because mods will fix it, ignoring the portion of their audience that A) doesn't want to mod or B] plays on other platforms. 

 

I actually think vanilla archery is fine, too (not great, not as fun as an archer in DA:I, but fine) and that the OP sneak in Skyrim can be fun, but your sentence only stated they were fun with mods, so I was just addressing that.

 

I think we're not at the same page when it comes to the slowness. What makes up the major part of the "slowness" in DA:I for me is that most enemies have tons of health, and you have little damage and mana to kill it with. Especially in the start. Even when I started using the "op" Knight-Enchanter spec combat was still pretty slow, since the enemies had tonnes of health.

 

 

As long as I was fighting enemies near my level, I never noticed this. Granted, I've not yet played on Hard/Nightmare, but I'd expect it to be slower, grindier, and so forth on those difficulties. Now I did notice some enemies far out-leveled me in the starting area, and I fled from them except when on Casual until I was closer to them in level. I liked that mechanic. Minor battles lasted far less time than a single encounter in DA:O would for me (unless cheesing it with mage traps ahead of time in DA:O) and similar to DA2. I didn't notice them being particularly long. Even the first real encounter, the Pride Demon, was far less than 5 minutes on Normal, and that was a boss fight. If the combat were any less grindy, it'd barely be there. Which, frankly, Skyrim combat kind of is barely there to me - there are no fights I really remember, and I always turn the difficulty pretty far up - or did the last few times I played a couple of years ago - (which is not my normal mode of playing) because it always seemed really easy to me and to be just button-mashy, except for the stealth bits. DA:I doesn't have real stealth, I'll say that, but that's okay - RPGs usually make terrible stealth games. Fallout/Skyrim do okay, but not the best. 

 

I can't speak to Nightmare mode in DA:I, as I never play that until way later, and I don't tend to like Nightmare or even Hard anyway. I will likely someday attempt it for the trophy at some point. 

[Sriep]

I prefer DAI, which is at lest partly due to 3 years advancement in graphics technology.

 

I do think Skyrim has more replay-ability. In DAI you are copy of one of your companions and you can control any of your companions during combat. So you can get most of what’s available in DAI in one playthrough, while you can endlessly try different builds and play styles in Skyrim.

 

Still the DAI world makes more sense, and gives better immersion, however that is largely due to the extent you are restricted in what you can do. DAI is not an open world like Skyrim.

 

I have not tried the elder scrolls online, kind of put off by the multiplayer thing. For solo play, is it an improvement on Skyrim?

[LilyasAvalon]

I don't think you can compare an apple to an orange.

[scootshoot]

I don't think you can compare an apple to an orange.

regardless of stance.  There is nothing wrong with being compared to one of the highest grossing games of all time.  It's more a compliment than anything. 

 

http://www.statistic...s-v-statistics/

 

Skyrim : The Elder Scrolls V Statistics

Statistic Verification Source: Bethesda Game Studios, Steam, Zenimax Research Date: 12.19.2013 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is an action role-playing open world video game developed by Bethesda Game Studios and published by Bethesda Softworks. It is the fifth installment in The Elder Scrolls action role-playing video game series, following The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Skyrim was released on November 11, 2011 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.

 

Skyrim Sales Statistics Data

Skyrim units sold in the first 48 hours 3.5 million

Skyrim units sold in the first week release 7 million

Skyrim sales in the first week of release $450 million

Total Skyrim units sold 20,270,000

Total Skyrim sales revenue $1,290,000,000

Average user review rating 92 / 100

Highest number of concurrent players on Steam 320,000

Skryim Sales By Platform   XBox 360 59 % Playstation 3 27 % PC 14 %

Skyrim Load Times   Average XBox load time 48 seconds Average Playstation 3 load time 34 seconds

Skyrim Development Statistics  

Number of years it took to develop Skyrim 3.5 years

Skryim development and marketing budget $85 Million

Number of game developers employed 90

Number of actors employed for character voice overs 83
 

[SpookyDjinn]

I loved Skyrim. In fact, I loved it so much that I bought the legendary edition for both my Xbox and PC. However, it pales in comparison to DA:I.

 

For starters, Yes Skyrim has an open World, but it's a World which is highly restricted. Your forced to join factions if you wish to explore all areas.....which I hate.
Companions are merely cannon fodder and are -in most cases- completely broken in that the don't level with you.

The leveing system its self is also rubbish, Since anywhere past 40 (depending on difficulty) your pretty much unstoppable. My PC and Cicero destroyed everything -including the legendary Dragons which come along at level 78- in a matter of seconds due in part to this, and the Absorb Health Blades we had.

 

These two games really can't be compared at all.

EDIT to add: Also non of your choices matter in Skyrim. Example: You become Harbinger of the Companions, you STILL get sent on fetch quests.
You restore the Thiefs Guild and: Vex still speaks to like crap, despite you being Master.
You solve the Civil War quest line: No one notices.
Alduin in Killed: Who notices? Only Odahviing, Durnehviir, Paarthunax and the Grey Beards.

[AlanC9]

It`s kind of amusing how many people don`t finish the main quest in Skyrim..

Par for the course in TES games, isn't it? IIRC most Morrowind players were said to have never even met Caius Cosades, although I've always suspected that was a bit overstated.