150 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Yeah, the thing is..none of that matters. It doesn't really contribute to any game play advances. It only changes that area and that's it. Everything else in the game will play the same, so it cheapens the effort and promotes skippage. Where as if it were made to be a main quest and then brought with it some changes..like maybe Fairbanks can help you with the nobles or solving the Civil war gets you an in with Gaspard..then it would have been more fun. As it is, its bloated, ineffectual and uninteresting.

I don't know what to tell you dude. The side quests here aren't any more or less pertinent than the side quests any where else. By definition, they're not supposed to be, hence side quest. If not getting some lore added to your codex is the most outstanding thing you can think of, or not gaining some loot to sell or use, then by all means, roll a character, get in game, then delete it, because it doesn't matter, right?

[Stelae]

It actually does have an impact, it makes the fight easier. I'm not sure how much easier, but it does make it easier.

 

Nope.  I've done it both ways.  His attacks and specials are exactly the same, his HP are exactly the same, and he doesn't alter his fighting style any more than he alters his dialogue.

 

ETA:  This "sidequest" sounds like it should have an effect on what you do later in the game -- it's not like "feed the refugees and pick 10 elfroot" sidequests.  It's "There's this guy you are going to confront -- take steps to whittle him down."  Only the whittling?  Doesn't actually happen.

[theluc76]

The game is not about the ending, its about the grinding till there.

[robertthebard]

Nope.  I've done it both ways.  His attacks and specials are exactly the same, his HP are exactly the same, and he doesn't alter his fighting style any more than he alters his dialogue.

How about the stats that would actually be affected by affecting his armor? I mean, if my armor has a hole in it, I'm not going to hit like a wet noodle, but I am going to take more damage if someone hits the hole. The idea was to weaken his armor, I don't expect that to change his dialog, or attack moves.

The other question, that's really pertinent, is, if the item is equippable, did you equip it? I found out on the Storm Coast that just because I made the item doesn't mean it's going to work, and cost myself an agent.

[DarkSpiral]

Yeah, the thing is..none of that matters. It doesn't really contribute to any game play advances. It only changes that area and that's it. Everything else in the game will play the same, so it cheapens the effort and promotes skippage. Where as if it were made to be a main quest and then brought with it some changes..like maybe Fairbanks can help you with the nobles or solving the Civil war gets you an in with Gaspard..then it would have been more fun. As it is, its bloated, ineffectual and uninteresting. 

I get that you don't like it, and you have every right to that opinion, so the only thing I can say is "You're right, as far as that goes."

Bioware stated outright this game was going to have more exploration.  All the people that scream "Skyrim envy!" are idiots.  This is what Bioware bulti themselves on in the first place.

 

The Baldur's Gate series made this company what it is.  It isn't the only thing they'd done prior to their smash hit with DA:O, but it was what they were known for.  It doesn't matter to me that these completely optional areas don't tie into the main plot.  Half of the landmass in BG and BG2 didn't tie directly into the main game, unless you made it do so by walking in your character's shoes.  It didn't matter to the 

 

This is not a blatant attempt to copy the success of The Elder Scrolls formula.  Its a return to their roots, and thank god for it.

 

You young whippersnappers just lack the perspective my years allow me 

 

PS: If you're years do indeed allow the same perspective, and you hate the optional areas anyway, that's on you.  Not Bioware.  I'm not overly fond of nihilistic FPS games, but that isn't 2k Games problem, its mine, and it doesn't stop their game from being a fine piece of work.  Just not one that's to my taste.

[Bladenite1481]

I don't know what to tell you dude. The side quests here aren't any more or less pertinent than the side quests any where else. By definition, they're not supposed to be, hence side quest. If not getting some lore added to your codex is the most outstanding thing you can think of, or not gaining some loot to sell or use, then by all means, roll a character, get in game, then delete it, because it doesn't matter, right?

Maybe that is the point? It would be nice if they felt more like part of the story and added something new, do they have to be useless? Is this a written rule or law that I am not privy to that you know of?. As human beings we are incentivized individuals and hardwired to think about things in terms of opportunity cost, what is the issue that you have with people wanting to better the game? Do you like bland quests that tell you go to hunt letters? If you like to role play a golden retriever or a blood hound then that's understandable, but some of us would not hate Bioware if they bucked the trend and made the side quests interesting. 

[Bladenite1481]

I get that you don't like it, and you have every right to that opinion, so the only thing I can say is "You're right, as far as that goes."

Bioware stated outright this game was going to have more exploration.  All the people that scream "Skyrim envy!" are idiots.  This is what Bioware bulti themselves on in the first place.

 

The Baldur's Gate series made this company what it is.  It isn't the only thing they'd done prior to their smash hit with DA:O, but it was what they were known for.  It doesn't matter to me that these completely optional areas don't tie into the main plot.  Half of the landmass in BG and BG2 didn't tie directly into the main game, unless you made it do so by walking in your character's shoes.  It didn't matter to the 

 

This is not a blatant attempt to copy the success of The Elder Scrolls formula.  Its a return to their roots, and thank god for it.

 

You young whippersnappers just lack the perspective my years allow me 

 

PS: If you're years do indeed allow the same perspective, and you hate the optional areas anyway, that's on you.  Not Bioware.  I'm not overly fond of nihilistic FPS games, but that isn't 2k Games problem, its mine, and it doesn't stop their game from being a fine piece of work.  Just not one that's to my taste.

I remember BG and BG2 quite fondly and if I remember correctly side quests were a way to build up your character a bit more with items, xp and the advancements that came with that kind of thing without mindlessly looking for random encounters. Some of them were just story, freeing the nymphs or whatnot, but some were things like getting a new character. Issue is that level and gear is a much easier to come by resource in DA with crafting especially so it would be nice if side quests offered a bit more. 

 

I get it too though, I do think the games I like have passed me by for the most part. I bought into the hype on this one, I won't do that again. If I wanted an action RP, I'll play DS or DD, at least there I get to pvp and climb monsters. 

[JusticarStef]

The ending of DA:I was the same as DA:O

 

Killing the big bad, everyone is happy, talk with companions afterward, side show with ambitious rumors. At least DA:I had a movie like after credits bit.

The journey is also no different, you still get the support you need to forward the plot no matter what you do.

 

Honestly the only reason why anyone should be disappointed is that it's the same plot as DA:O with mostly different characters, factions and slightly different McGuiffin threat.

 

That being said, I found the ending satisfactory and interesting because of the meat and lore, it's never really about the ending either way for these kinds of games.

This. A million times this.

[robertthebard]

I remember BG and BG2 quite fondly and if I remember correctly side quests were a way to build up your character a bit more with items, xp and the advancements that came with that kind of thing without mindlessly looking for random encounters. Some of them were just story, freeing the nymphs or whatnot, but some were things like getting a new character. Issue is that level and gear is a much easier to come by resource in DA with crafting especially so it would be nice if side quests offered a bit more. 
 
I get it too though, I do think the games I like have passed me by for the most part. I bought into the hype on this one, I won't do that again. If I wanted an action RP, I'll play DS or DD, at least there I get to pvp and climb monsters.

Says he understands what side quests are; and then says he wants the side quests to be part of the main story...

[DarkSpiral]

I remember BG and BG2 quite fondly and if I remember correctly side quests were a way to build up your character a bit more with items, xp and the advancements that came with that kind of thing without mindlessly looking for random encounters. Some of them were just story, freeing the nymphs or whatnot, but some were things like getting a new character. Issue is that level and gear is a much easier to come by resource in DA with crafting especially so it would be nice if side quests offered a bit more. 

 

I get it too though, I do think the games I like have passed me by for the most part. I bought into the hype on this one, I won't do that again. If I wanted an action RP, I'll play DS or DD, at least there I get to pvp and climb monsters. 

Ah, now there is genuine flaw in DAI.  The main plot adjusted to you level to much.  You can't do that in any previous game I can think of by Bioware, in fact you could take the endgame on underleveled and geared if you tried to push the main story along to quickly.

[Bladenite1481]

Says he understands what side quests are; and then says he wants the side quests to be part of the main story...

Yeah, If I had my preference they would still be optional and yet add something meaningful to the rest of your quest. Think outside the box, man. 

 

They are still side quests in that they are not needed to further the main plot, however they would still have the added reward of affecting it if you so choose to take part in them. 

[robertthebard]

Yeah, If I had my preference they would still be optional and yet add something meaningful to the rest of your quest. Think outside the box, man. 
 
They are still side quests in that they are not needed to further the main plot, however they would still have the added reward of affecting it if you so choose to take part in them.

They affect what they are intended to affect, your character/party/Inquisition. That is why they are there, and that is why they are there in every game ever written that has them. They are not supposed to advance the plot, they are supposed to advance you. I can see your going to be "but the story doesn't change". But you do. You come in stronger, due to increased character level and gear, making it even easier. I don't have to think outside the box, I understand what the quests are intended to do perfectly well. The "something meaningful" is that you are stronger when you arrive at the destination, and that you learned a bit more about the world you're interacting with. Now, unless you're here to play CoD in DA, which seems to be the design intent, more action, then the story should be somewhat of a motivator, in and of itself. Since it seems that it's not, since the little things that happen along side the main plot are, what, beneath your notice, then you're getting your reward when you get to the end. For me? The rewards are the interesting little tidbits I turn up along the way.

At the end of the day, Cory is a Blight infected mage. Nothing more, nothing less, just a really old one. The end of the game would have been really boring if he'd been omnipotent, wouldn't it? You show up, he kills you, game over. I'm waiting for the BioWare game where that happens; no matter what you do, you can't win. You think there's rage now? Get your popcorn ready.

[Bladenite1481]

They affect what they are intended to affect, your character/party/Inquisition. That is why they are there, and that is why they are there in every game ever written that has them. They are not supposed to advance the plot, they are supposed to advance you. I can see your going to be "but the story doesn't change". But you do. You come in stronger, due to increased character level and gear, making it even easier. I don't have to think outside the box, I understand what the quests are intended to do perfectly well. The "something meaningful" is that you are stronger when you arrive at the destination, and that you learned a bit more about the world you're interacting with. Now, unless you're here to play CoD in DA, which seems to be the design intent, more action, then the story should be somewhat of a motivator, in and of itself. Since it seems that it's not, since the little things that happen along side the main plot are, what, beneath your notice, then you're getting your reward when you get to the end. For me? The rewards are the interesting little tidbits I turn up along the way.

At the end of the day, Cory is a Blight infected mage. Nothing more, nothing less, just a really old one. The end of the game would have been really boring if he'd been omnipotent, wouldn't it? You show up, he kills you, game over. I'm waiting for the BioWare game where that happens; no matter what you do, you can't win. You think there's rage now? Get your popcorn ready.

All right, we just disagree on the assessment of side quests. They check off the boxes for the absolute minimum requirements of an optional quest, hooray for mediocrity. 

 

The story would be a motivator, if it at all interested me. I never felt any urgency in the story past Haven. It felt like a slow unyielding funeral procession uphill through molasses in the snow just to watch Cory die in a blaze of "meh". 

 

The story is beneath my notice, because its written badly and paced horribly. Too many plot holes, gaping moronic moments and choices based on forced narrative. Most of what happened to make Orlais the way it was had nothing to do with the game, it has to do with a novel. So it feels despondent, but I still have to deal with it. Now the Wicked Hearts mission was actually somewhat entertaining, but honestly I didnt think I needed Orlais to kill Cory and I never feared what he was. 

[robertthebard]

All right, we just disagree on the assessment of side quests. They check off the boxes for the absolute minimum requirements of an optional quest, hooray for mediocrity. 
 
The story would be a motivator, if it at all interested me. I never felt any urgency in the story past Haven. It felt like a slow unyielding funeral procession uphill through molasses in the snow just to watch Cory die in a blaze of "meh". 
 
The story is beneath my notice, because its written badly and paced horribly. Too many plot holes, gaping moronic moments and choices based on forced narrative. Most of what happened to make Orlais the way it was had nothing to do with the game, it has to do with a novel. So it feels despondent, but I still have to deal with it. Now the Wicked Hearts mission was actually somewhat entertaining, but honestly I didnt think I needed Orlais to kill Cory and I never feared what he was.

Goody? I rather enjoyed the ride. Of course, I didn't come in expecting Origins 2.0. This is, of course, what I pointed out in my very first post in this thread, the article linked is one big "I miss my Warden", and this whole thread is a direct link to "Warden Envy". There is no other explanation for expecting every side quest to be a riveting, edge of your seat moment. I can't recall a game where every side quest was. In fact, I can't recall a game where the majority of the side quests were, including Origins. Hell, people cried about how involved some of the main quests were, but ah, for those rose colored glasses, eh? Before you start trying to come off with "Nuh uh, Origins rocked from beginning to end", go to the legacy forums, in the Origins category, and search The Fade, and Orzammar.

[DarkSpiral]

robert, for crying out loud he already conceded the point.

[KaiserShep]

I actually really enjoyed the ending, albeit brief. The feast bit was pretty decent, though I was disappointed that the conversations were not cutscenes.

 

Anyway, the post-story bit is less than meh. It does have some little things that I like that were worth bothering with for a few minutes, like some of the post-story dialogue, especially with Cassandra if she becomes the next Divine (which she does in my playthrough) and at the war table, Cullen comments that if you squint, Lake Callenhad looks like a bunny XD

 

I suppose it makes sense that Vivienne leaves once the story is over, but that does leave you with just one mage if you want to fight stuff, namely the remaining dragons.

[Giantdeathrobot]

I get that you don't like it, and you have every right to that opinion, so the only thing I can say is "You're right, as far as that goes."

Bioware stated outright this game was going to have more exploration.  All the people that scream "Skyrim envy!" are idiots.  This is what Bioware bulti themselves on in the first place.

 

The Baldur's Gate series made this company what it is.  It isn't the only thing they'd done prior to their smash hit with DA:O, but it was what they were known for.  It doesn't matter to me that these completely optional areas don't tie into the main plot.  Half of the landmass in BG and BG2 didn't tie directly into the main game, unless you made it do so by walking in your character's shoes.  It didn't matter to the 

 

This is not a blatant attempt to copy the success of The Elder Scrolls formula.  Its a return to their roots, and thank god for it.

 

You young whippersnappers just lack the perspective my years allow me 

 

PS: If you're years do indeed allow the same perspective, and you hate the optional areas anyway, that's on you.  Not Bioware.  I'm not overly fond of nihilistic FPS games, but that isn't 2k Games problem, its mine, and it doesn't stop their game from being a fine piece of work.  Just not one that's to my taste.

 

Agree.

 

90% of BG2 was completely irrelevant to the main quest. Starting dungeon. Market where you start. Graveyard to get to Bhodi's lair. Docks to get Shadow Thief side-quests. Slums. Spellhold. 10% of the Underdark. Final elven city. That's all you need to enter to beat the game. All the other quarters were optional, every single area outside of the main city was optional, the Sahuegin (or whatever) city was optional and had 0 plot relevance, you could basically just walk out of the Underdark straight away, Watcher's Keep was optional and irrelevant.

 

That's how Infinity Engine games rolled. Fallout could be beaten by going straight to Mariposa and the Cathedral. Fallout 2 by going straight to San Francisco. Planescape was more linear but has tons of optional content that was irrevelant to your quest, even if a lot of it was. Don't get me started on Icewind Dale 1 and 2.

 

I'm not sure how having lots of optional content is now a sin, when in bygone days it was a standard. I do admit Assassin's Creed style busywork like the shards are bad, but areas like the Hissing Wastes aren't anything new. It's optional content that gives extra loot and lore. Like the optional content in every RPG ever.

[robertthebard]

Agree.
 
90% of BG2 was completely irrelevant to the main quest. Starting dungeon. Market where you start. Graveyard to get to Bhodi's lair. Docks to get Shadow Thief side-quests. Slums. Spellhold. 10% of the Underdark. Final elven city. That's all you need to enter to beat the game. All the other quarters were optional, every single area outside of the main city was optional, the Sahuegin (or whatever) city was optional and had 0 plot relevance, you could basically just walk out of the Underdark straight away, Watcher's Keep was optional and irrelevant.
 
That's how Infinity Engine games rolled. Fallout could be beaten by going straight to Mariposa and the Cathedral. Fallout 2 by going straight to San Francisco. Planescape was more linear but has tons of optional content that was irrevelant to your quest, even if a lot of it was. Don't get me started on Icewind Dale 1 and 2.
 
I'm not sure how having lots of optional content is now a sin, when in bygone days it was a standard. I do admit Assassin's Creed style busywork like the shards are bad, but areas like the Hissing Wastes aren't anything new. It's optional content that gives extra loot and lore. Like the optional content in every RPG ever.

The feathers in AC really got to me, because, in the end, it didn't matter if you did them or not, the next installment assumed you did.

[DarkSpiral]

How in the world did I fail to mention Fallout?  Good on you, Giantdeathrobot.

[Sidney]

The final battle was anti-climatic but I suspect for a lot of us that will be because we are overleveled. It said the fight was for 17-19 and I was 22 when I went it. Shockingly it wasn't a horribly hard fight.

 

The author of the first article also rather tends to have the magic DAO fog so many live in. Little things didn't matter. Choosing Bhelen or Harrowmont didn't matter. You got dwarves. I don't think the difference in cannon fodder werewolves or elves is really all that important, same with mages and templars. No matter what you do the Arl lives.

[Bladenite1481]

The final battle was anti-climatic but I suspect for a lot of us that will be because we are overleveled. It said the fight was for 17-19 and I was 22 when I went it. Shockingly it wasn't a horribly hard fight.

 

The author of the first article also rather tends to have the magic DAO fog so many live in. Little things didn't matter. Choosing Bhelen or Harrowmont didn't matter. You got dwarves. I don't think the difference in cannon fodder werewolves or elves is really all that important, same with mages and templars. No matter what you do the Arl lives.

I fought it at 16 just to see if I could, didn't make much of a difference. Its just an easy fight with really simple mechanics to it. 

 

Whether I had played DAO or not, DAI was disappointing to me. I could remove any and all features or memories of DAO and DAI would still be a meh, forgettable and average game. I was at first taken in by the sheer volume of it, consumed and enveloped by its pretty colors and proposed plot. And then after Haven it fell apart and I stopped caring. I went to every area and hoped that it would become more interesting and it didn't. I was kind of hoping I could just speed up a war table operation to end the game, because frankly I had to force myself to finish it because the combat and travelling through the world became that dull. I never felt that way about DAO. If you did, then hey I get it. But I don't dislike this game because I liked DAO, I dislike this game because it failed to make me feel anything for it. 

[Wavinglighter]

Great article. Everything rang so true to me.

[DxWill103]

Didn't read the article, I've read his stuff before I know he's good and doesn't just spout nonsense or statements without merit. I was impressed after the Mass Effect3 article.

 

But... did I see him say.. the Fear demon.. was tougher than Cory?  lolwut?

 

This is going to sound ridiculous but.. after playing that mission 3 times now on hard/nightmare, and encountering countless fear demon enemies in multiplayer... I honestly still have no idea what they actually do except become annoying due to them becoming un-targetable. A lack of observation on my part no doubt but..

 

Do people actually think the fear demon is harder than Cory on hard/nightmare difficulties?  If so please enlighten me on as to how/why, because, as I said, I have literally failed to notice this thing's attacks, if that's any indication of how 'dangerous' its attacks are (at least from my experience).  Again, the 'hardest' part of this enemy is the annoying factor of sitting there just waiting (or focusing on adds) when they enter the un-targetable phase.  Or maybe he meant the demon commander during Templar quest?  If so, still not harder than Cory imo, but certainly more difficult than a Fear demon with some adds?  Or am I alone here?  I was hoping to fight that giant demon crab/spider thing! (RIP Stroud)

 

Anyway From what I've skimmed so far in this thread he undoubtedly brings up valid points.  For me at least though, coming off the disappointment of ME3's ending, the fact that I actually had a boss fight with a cool environment and some varied fighting involved in it was already a step up in my book.  Agree with author and many others that ultimately, however, it was a missed opportunity for the most part.

 

The epilogue was, meh I don't know, I mean I wasn't just..completely and utterly devastated like a lot of people here were, but I agree it left me underwhelmed.  The cut scene after the credits though was an unexpected treat for me, and the omgwtfwaitwhat feeling I had afterward helped to assuage some of that disappointment at least.

 

All in all, yeah agree with a lot of the points I've seen, but can't really shake the feeling of some rose tinted glasses action going on here.

[Stelae]

The cut scene after the credits though was an unexpected treat for me, and the omgwtfwaitwhat feeling I had afterward helped to assuage some of that disappointment at least.

 

All in all, yeah agree with a lot of the points I've seen, but can't really shake the feeling of some rose tinted glasses action going on here.

 

I loved the after credits scene for a couple of reasons. 

 

The first is the fun it added to my second playthrough.  Solas isn't the expository excuse I thought he was, after all.  His dialogue and banter become really interesting, as does his attitude to Sera.  He's trying to fix the consequences of Yet Another Bad Decision (tricking the Elven Gods into banishment being the original Bad Decision, which he was trying to undo when he had his second brilliant idea, giving his orb to Corypheus) ... bloody trickster gods ... the fact that his intentions are good (?) doesn't change the chaos he unleashes every time he bloody moves.

 

And second, that Huge Big Bad Corypheus you were fighting?  No supervillain after all, it turns out the poor sap was as much of a pawn as you were, and was in waaay over his head, messing with things he had no chance of controlling.  The victory you thought you won really hasn't solved the bigger problem, because as Inquisitor, you didn't even know there WAS a bigger problem.  And as player, even when you know about it, there's sod all you can do to head it off.

 

And speaking of bigger problems, now just in time for DLC, there's a being who is two parts Elven God and one part Old God wandering about, desperate to undo the ancient banishment of the Elven pantheon, for reasons.  And either the Inquisitor or one of her most powerful advisors is bound to them.  I'm sure no world-shakingly chaotic and unforeseen consequences could possibly come of that.

[Johnsen1972]

I nearly agreed with everything this guy said about how the game was great, but the ending very disappointing. Not disappointing in an ME3 way...more in the way that the ending seemed like a total rush job. I can't do the article justice though. If you have 5 minutes, it's worth a read.

http://johnswritersb...ge-inquisition/

 

ME3 Ending was a rush job too