272 réponses à ce sujet

[theluc76]

I never thought I had to write something as simple to get to my point Leldra, yes they did that in NWN, was greatly diluted in DAO but was still acceptable. BioWare had lost the contract with WotC for D&D games because WotC is under Hasbro now, so they had to resort to an other system, Poof DAO was born as well as the gift system, personal quest and the story telling part you like so much.

When creating YOUR Inquisitor it should be fully integrated in the game, meaning that the way its created affect all aspects from combat, dialogue to romance and in the case of DAI the war table should reflect the culture of the character. The present system is so simple that it doesn't allow  that, its so MMO style that the RPG dimension is just not there.

[Kendaric Varkellen]

It was said they can leave if they their approval rating becomes too low. I wonder: did that happen in anyone's game or is this another instance of "we set the thresholds so low that they're meaningless" (another, because ME3 did this with the war assets and their unlocking of different endings - basically you had to try really hard to be locked out of anything except the scene they wanted nobody to see, and that, of course, defeats the point)

 

From what I've seen they don't leave easily or at least Solas doesn't, but then again he's special anyway and probably tied too much into the plot for that to happen. He does react rather negatively to the inquisitor on low approval ratings, however.

Not sure about the others, but despite from what I hear should happen, even Varric remains with me despite leaving Hawke in the Fade (and yes, they are set to be friends in the keep). My assumtion is that they have varying thresholds, depending on how important they are for the overall plot. That would make Cassandra, Solas and possibly Vivienne very difficult to get rid off, while Bull, Cole and Blackwall might find leaving you far easier.

[AddeKKola]

 

Again Leldra, nothing to do with your character, just like those YOU ARE THE HERO books, no skill, no feature no racial traits, or contact did help, influence, determine the course of action or result. Yes you had a choice to do but in no way the creation of your character did minimise or expand the choices in the situation. All is generic as the armor selection, what ever the kind of character you did.

 

I remember in NWN had a character so min max for combat that dialogue was almost impossible, had to rely on companions to get info, was very funny.

 

I see now that we've been speaking about pretty much the same thing, but from different angles.

 

I'll leave the discussion here, unless someone addresses me directly.

 

Edit:

 

To summarise my thoughts. Game play is very important to me in an RPG. If the game play ties into the story in a meaningful way and the way I choose to fight and build my character affects the outcome then that's great. If it doesn't tie in to the story, but is working really well I can still enjoy a game and suffer a story that's not as good. If we reverse the roles so that we have a great story but horrible game play then I'll most likely never get through the game. I see games as games first and foremost and if I were only in it for the story I'd read a book.

[Ieldra]

I never thought I had to write something as simple to get to my point Leldra, yes they did that in NWN, was greatly diluted in DAO but was still acceptable. BioWare had lost the contract with WotC for D&D games because WotC is under Hasbro now, so they had to resort to an other system, Poof DAO was born as well as the gift system, personal quest and the story telling part you like so much.

When creating YOUR Inquisitor it should be fully integrated in the game, meaning that the way its created affect all asprect from combat, dialogue to romance and in the case of DAI the war table should reflect the culture of the character. The present system is so simple that it doesnt allow  that, its so MMO style that the RPG dimension is just not there.

Well, obviously I disagree with the conclusion that the roleplaying dimension is not there, but seeing that this is indeed a serious lack, I wonder if there's some middle ground. Because you see, I recall when a FO:NV DLC attempted to resolve an important plot-related situation using the character's (non-combat) skills, they had to present ten different options to ensure that almost all characters had a way to resolve it. Doing this in a game where the protagonist is voiced might just not be feasible.

 

DAI gives us the Inquisition knowledge perks. Those appear to have very significant impact. Were they part of your character, would that satisfy you or do you need the freedom to fail? I'm just asking, btw.. As I said, the presence of choices is sometimes important even if nobody makes them. It's just that this is a huge YMMV area.

[theluc76]

Leldra as perfection will never be, since perfection will be for one not the other, its matter of perception. I understand your points but for me a RPG is a package not just a part. The organization of the Inquisition is not yours you are part of it, your character even if you dress it up its BioWares inquisitor, not yours, the fact that the protagonist has a voice is limiting options greatly. Can you imagine the tons of lines for the voice actors, that is why the hardcore fans was in opposition of a voiced protagonist for DA2. Already in DAI its insane the amount of lines.

Play NWN gold edition, yes graphics by today sandards is like a atari game but the control, consequences and impact from character creation to even late game choices shows big time.

I still play NWN and DAO, both has something that draws me back again and again, DAI with all the videos I seen. Sorry not worth the money.

[Ieldra]

Too bad then, theluc. I guess the difference is that I feel during the story the Inquisition becomes more and more mine as I make decisions that shape its identity, and that while I have the knowledge from the perks more or less by proxy, it's still implicit in the decision that my character learned all that stuff. It's a sort of around-the-corner identification that takes some extra mental work, and it is inferior to the more direct identification I have in games like DAO or FO:NV, but I can make it work for me.

 

As for NWN, I couldn't get into it. I don't recall why exactly, probably having no control over the companion(s) was the critical issue. Looked bad even by the standards of the time, too.  

[ZipZap2000]

Well, DAI *is* somewhat in-depth in its character-expression. More than its predecessors and *way* more than ME. What is lacks is the freedom to play as wide a range of characters as Skyrim because your "career" is predetermined, but that's what you need for a strong story. I don't think it's fair to criticize DAI for something it never wanted to be. In comparison, "my decisions feel meaningless", that's a strong criticisim because it aims at the heart of what DAI wants to be.

 

I agree actually and wasn't criticising the game itself just making the comparison between the two, I think it is a good RP game now doubt, just could be better but that can wait for the next instalment. They improved on the traditional Bioware experience by miles but it still remains a bioware product at it's core and RPG'ers shouldn't lose sight of that or they will be disappointed at what they see as less of an RPG and more of an action adventure. 

 

I think it's actually on par with ME2 character depth only they're slightly more believable because comments and interactions are much more inline with their personalities. Great thread btw it's making for good reading.

[Bladenite1481]

[Sorry for the awkward reading, but this is the no spoiler forum so I've put the spoilers in spoiler tags]

 

@Bladenite1481:

If I understand you correctly, you aren't satisfied with DAI because the decisions you make do not feel meaningful to you. I fully agree that if decisions do not feel meaningful to you then the game's roleplaying dimension fails for you.

 

I'm curious, though, why it would be that way for you in DAI, because for me it's exactly the other way. The decisions feel meaningful, and in part they do that exactly because there is no golden path in most decisions (there is in some, I'll get to that). If there is a golden path, then any deviation from it makes you either stupid or wilfully evil. I felt that way about the Broken Circle, the Sacred Ashes, the Werewolf plot and - to a lesser degree - Connor at Redcliffe. Thus, my choice there feels meaningless. In fact, specifically in the Werewolf quest I felt I didn't really have one if I didn't want to play a stupid or wilfully evil Warden.

 

Compare that with, say, the decision at the Orlesian court. I think we can say that...

Spoiler

...letting the assassination happen is the "more evil" choice. Unlike DAO, however, DAI  provides you with a convincing reason why you might want to do it - having Gaspard on the throne and supporting you will give you a stronger army, at least that's what the situation suggestes.

You *can* still do it because you're simply evil, but "evil for evil's sake" is not a very convincing character trait. The temptation of evil lies in that it pays off in tangible benefits, most of the time. Anything more is petty or stupid. Thus for me, the choice whether I want to be evil for evil's sake is not meaningful. The choice, however, if I want to let something bad happen in order to gain a specific benefit, that is meaningful.

 

The decisions in a game with a roleplaying dimension are designed so that you can express who your character is, and I contend that DAI allows for far more subtlety than DAO in that regard. That "evil for evil's sake" and "good outcome with no downsides" are largely absent allows for more variation within the range of reasonable decisions that don't make you stupid or villainous.

 

As for coming out of things smelling like roses, your Inquisition can have that at the end of the game, but may I ask how believable that is? When has that ever been true of any power? There are also several war table operations that can have rather satisfying outcomes and no downsides, depending on who you choose for the operation, and everyone's happy if you...

Spoiler

"exile" the Avvar tribe to Tevinter.

I completely skipped this yesterday, my apologies. 

 

I felt disconnected to the decisions in Orlais and I was completely uncaring of who ruled. I do think that much of this has to do with the fact that these characters and their strife comes from Cannon ie a novel written completely outside the game.

 

Furthermore, The game had done little to this point to assure me that I was under threat from anything so I didn't see why I needed assistance from Orlais. I didn't do The Winter Palance until I had traipsed through The Exalted Plains and The Emerald Graves. In doing so I had already fiixed all the problems that the bungling Nobles had caused in the first place by being so divided and letting Cory and his men fool them. So by the time I got to the palace I was more like "Why do I need any of you idiots?" rather than "Ooh, let me gain support for the Inquisition" so all of the role playing and decision making was coming from a version of me that was very much out of touch with what I had done in the game.

 

This left me completely "meh" about who was leader, I didn't need to pick the right one, I just needed another person like me. I needed another symbol that the people of Orlais would blindly follow. So in effect, the entire exercise felt void and barren for me, because it didnt matter which was selected, every one of them did something bad to the country and or themselves no matter what decision you made and none of the game play took into account that I had already gone through and saved their garrisons, freed their ramparts, exiled their traitors, ended the black market mining operation and liberated their lesser nobles. So yeah..how am I supposed to feel connected to this event when I have already fixed most of these issues they are talking about and they don't even know? 

 

People talk about DAO that its the same and nothing is better, well if you went to the Tower of Mages first..Redcliffe knew about it and it changed what you could do. When you go through and repair Orlais, the nobles have no clue what you have done, it changes absolutely nothing. 

 

As for the assassination, honestly for me it didn't matter. I don't see how that is evil or good, its either self defense, protection or embarrassing her by beating her at the game. Beating her at the game gets you some cool style points, but you lose the great unique dagger that she drops when she dies. None of this affected how my character feels, it just seems like a hoop I have to jump through because the game doesnt realize I have already fixed these problems. I guess for me these choices weren't about feelings, they were about economics. 

 

As for realism vs all good, all bad, grey etc. My take is this, I don't need staunch realism in my fantasy. All I need is for my fantasy to retain its own rules once it has created them. I prefer to have the choice to come out all good, or all bad if its feasible and in many instances in this game..it certainly looks feasible. It just seems like I am being blocked by an invisible wall of narration that says "This is a game about big decisions and the consequences. There must always be a balance, you have to sacrifice something because I say so"

[herkles]

People talk about DAO that its the same and nothing is better, well if you went to the Tower of Mages first..Redcliffe knew about it and it changed what you could do. When you go through and repair Orlais, the nobles have no clue what you have done, it changes absolutely nothing. .

are you not introduced to the ball based on what you do?

[Bladenite1481]

are you not introduced to the ball based on what you do?

You are introduced to the ball automatically after From the Ashes, its part of the streamlined Inquisitor's path. If you move ahead and free the area around it, they have no clue that you have done anything. It's a little immersion breaking for me to save their entire country side and yet they all seem to have no awareness of it. 

[Medhia_Nox]

Please...

 

Hinterlands:

 

Kill the demon turning the wolves into minions... no more wolves in Hinterlands.

 

Destroy mage camp - no more mages - but templars patrol.

 

Destroy templar camp - no more templars - but mages patrol.

 

Destroy both - really peaceful Hinterlands with peasants moving out in camps into previously hostile zones.

 

****** off Corypheus - Venatori in Hinterlands.

 

Bring peace to region - soldiers present you with chests of loot they've found.

 

===

Storm Coast:

 

Make nice with Blades of Hessarion... friendly blades of Hessarion patrolling the area.

 

 

And this is just a touch of the things that are alterable in the environment as I go through my second nice and slow playthrough. But it's clearly not enough - clearly we need several cinematics celebrating the PC and his many super important accomplishments.

 

@Ieldra:  You missed a masterpiece in NWN.  Not that single player.. not at all.  But the persistant world community with the DM Client, Player Client and Toolset was the closest to PnP the computer has EVER gotten.  Funny that the persistent world I played in was a magocracy not unlike Tevinter.

[Bladenite1481]

Please...

 

Hinterlands:

 

Kill the demon turning the wolves into minions... no more wolves in Hinterlands.

 

Destroy mage camp - no more mages - but templars patrol.

 

Destroy templar camp - no more templars - but mages patrol.

 

Destroy both - really peaceful Hinterlands with peasants moving out in camps into previously hostile zones.

 

****** off Corypheus - Venatori in Hinterlands.

 

Bring peace to region - soldiers present you with chests of loot they've found.

 

===

Storm Coast:

 

Make nice with Blades of Hessarion... friendly blades of Hessarion patrolling the area.

 

 

And this is just a touch of the things that are alterable in the environment as I go through my second nice and slow playthrough. But it's clearly not enough - clearly we need several cinematics celebrating the PC and his many super important accomplishments.

 

@Ieldra:  You missed a masterpiece in NWN.  Not that single player.. not at all.  But the persistant world community with the DM Client, Player Client and Toolset was the closest to PnP the computer has EVER gotten.  Funny that the persistent world I played in was a magocracy not unlike Tevinter.

You are quite smug, which is interesting because you are answering a question that was never asked. 

 

I never commented that the game lacked Regional quest awareness, nor did I say that there were not interesting mechanics available to find agents. What I said was the main Quest and the NPC's within it from Orlais had no idea I had already fixed everything they were discussing at their peace talks and that impacted my immersion in the game. So if you are commenting to my post and you aren't talking about Wicked Hearts and the Winter Palace, then what you are talking about is completely irrelevant. I didn't address anything else. It's as if I have said "the sky is blue" and your counter argument was "But the grass is green!"

 

Within each of those regions, they are quite aware of what you have done. The mechanic for claiming surrounding areas and your scouts leaving you a box is present in any place, it has to do with you claiming the territory and putting it under Inquisition control. But none of that has anything to do with how the Winter Palace decisions impacted me, which was the question I had been asked. 

[stevemill]

What I said was the main Quest and the NPC's within it from Orlais had no idea I had already fixed everything they were discussing at their peace talks and that impacted my immersion in the game. 

Maybe this discussion should be taking place elsewhere. I don't want to know any details of what for me, is still to come. That's why I'm in this part of the forum and not the 'spoilers' one.

[AlanC9]

I never thought I had to write something as simple to get to my point Leldra, yes they did that in NWN, was greatly diluted in DAO but was still acceptable. BioWare had lost the contract with WotC for D&D games because WotC is under Hasbro now, so they had to resort to an other system, Poof DAO was born as well as the gift system, personal quest and the story telling part you like so much.

You make it sound like Bio actually wanted to keep using D&D. You sure about that? I could never understand why they'd want to stick with the lowest common denominator of RPGs.

Also, I think you're really overrating the effect of the dialogue skills in NWN -- at least, in the official campaigns. I suppose we can put this to the test with a walkthrough.

[AlanC9]

People talk about DAO that its the same and nothing is better, well if you went to the Tower of Mages first..Redcliffe knew about it and it changed what you could do.

If you side with the Templars before Redcliffe you lose an option, yep. But if you're going to side with the mages, you can do that before or after Redcliffe; the kid will wait patiently for you to get back.

[Natashina]

If you side with the Templars before Redcliffe you lose an option, yep. But if you're going to side with the mages, you can do that before or after Redcliffe; the kid will wait patiently for you to get back.

Yep.  Once you clear the village of undead and chase Connor up to his room, he'll just hang out while you go do the Tower.  Heh, you'd think he was taken over by a demon of Sloth, not Desire.  

[Bladenite1481]

Yep.  Once you clear the village of undead and chase Connor up to his room, he'll just hang out while you go do the Tower.  Heh, you'd think he was taken over by a demon of Sloth, not Desire.  

Yeah..would be cool if there was a timing mechanic on it or something. But its already a pretty great quest line..minus the fade. Even I as much as I love DAO..always had skip the fade on mod list after my first playthrough

[robmokron]

Good thread again.

 

Everyone seems to havbe a different definitin of what they deem an rpg but the industry has deemed DA:I a RPG

It wont RPG of the Year and Game of the Year.

 

The industry and general public approve of the game.

 

Mike Laidlaw also said one of theyre next goals for another game is that they want the world to feel more alive (NPCs that arent staic) he also mentioned atleast 2 more games. so we will see..

[Ieldra]

You know, robmokron, this definition problem is why I stopped using the term somewhere down this thread, but rather spoke of the different aspects of a game's roleplaying dimension, which may be summarized by "who you are" - the sum of your decisions - "what you are" - the sum of your abilities - and "what you have" - the sum of your possessions. DAI has all of those, and I think they're mostly very well done (the ability system is a YMMV area but I think it needn't be more complex that in DAI) but the former and the latter two don't interact as much as desirable.

If I have one major point of criticism in DAI's roleplaying, it's that the ability system doesn't include non-combat skills, which means there is never a trade-off between those areas. That makes characters less distinctive in the "what you are" aspect. Of course you'd need to use that distinctiveness somewhere if it existed, to be meaningful, and since complex patterns of responsiveness may just be the most complicated aspect of rpg design the DA team may have decided early that they didn't have the resources to implement that on top of everything else. They still acknowledge it's desirable, in form of the knowledge perks and the special exploration abilities, but since tradeoff from the former is very much the lesser option and everyone automatically has the latter that doesn't make characters any more distinctive.

[robmokron]

You know, robmokron, this definition problem is why I stopped using the term somewhere down this thread, but rather spoke of the different aspects of a game's roleplaying dimension, which may be summarized by "who you are" - the sum of your decisions - "what you are" - the sum of your abilities - and "what you have" - the sum of your possessions. DAI has all of those, and I think they're mostly very well done (the ability system is a YMMV area but I think it needn't be more complex that in DAI) but the former and the latter two don't interact as much as desirable.

If I have one major point of criticism in DAI's roleplaying, it's that the ability system doesn't include non-combat skills, which means there is never a trade-off between those areas. That makes characters less distinctive in the "what you are" aspect. Of course you'd need to use that distinctiveness somewhere if it existed, to be meaningful, and since complex patterns of responsiveness may just be the most complicated aspect of rpg design the DA team may have decided early that they didn't have the resources to implement that on top of everything else. They still acknowledge it's desirable, in form of the knowledge perks and the special exploration abilities, but since tradeoff from the former is very much the lesser option and everyone automatically has the latter that doesn't make characters any more distinctive.

 I can agree to that, The only thing i believe DAO did better was that, as well as more diversity and strange builds. Arcane Warrior, Dual Weilding Warrior, etc

 

But thats just classes.

 

In this game i feel like my character has a belief system that people react too,

 

leldra, when you said that Lelainna can respond differently even with the same dialogue choice based on previous actions blew my mind. Serious. It is affected by the keep or the game? who knows? Cassandra brings up that i dont believe in the maker ocasionally, its nice.

 

Also, you get more dialogue options via perks, you claim that they arent part of your character (with good reason) but i disagree. I opened up the mage options and i think at one of my judgments, i had a perk option, mage option, and regular other options.

My second character when i decide to pursue that, im gonna pick the noble dialogue perk. I feel like i'll be able to play this game 5-6 times and feel like the experience is different based on different imports and choices

[AlanC9]

Play NWN gold edition, yes graphics by today sandards is like a atari game but the control, consequences and impact from character creation to even late game choices shows big time.

Could you provide some examples? NWN never struck me as being particularly good in this aspect, although a few mods were better than Bioware's work.

[Ieldra]

 Also, you get more dialogue options via perks, you claim that they arent part of your character (with good reason) but i disagree. I opened up the mage options and i think at one of my judgments, i had a perk option, mage option, and regular other options.

My second character when i decide to pursue that, im gonna pick the noble dialogue perk. I feel like i'll be able to play this game 5-6 times and feel like the experience is different based on different imports and choices

No, the dialogue options very much are a part of your character, but when you take the perk, you aren't making a decision about your character's skills. You're making a style decision in the "who you are" area and it's assumed that your character actually reads those books. A more appropriate mechanic would have the perk as a prerequisite for taking a non-combat knowledge skill at the next level-up. It works as it is, but it feels a little disconnected.