154 réponses à ce sujet

[TheJiveDJ]

This is a good way of putting it.

 

I actually like the conversation mechanic for certain things like talking to the scouts and merchants, getting the really minor side-quests. It allows the player to not be "stuck" in a dry cinematic used for an exposition-dump. They can easily pop out and continue exploring.

 

But, I think some of the big side-quests could have benefited from them. The Old Crestwood and Choice Spirit quests were pretty interesting, but they weren't very emotionally engaging. It was so weird to read Masked Empire, and then get re-introduced to Michel, who seemed "blank."

 

Though, I do understand that cinematics are an expensive bottleneck on the production of video games.

They can't be that expensive considering pretty much all NPC interactions for 90% (rough estimate) of BW's games since the early 2000's have cinematic interactions. It sounds more like BW's choice of engine may have made things difficult for this kind of stuff. It's really unfortunate if this is the case.

[In Exile]

They can't be that expensive considering pretty much all NPC interactions for 90% (rough estimate) of BW's games since the early 2000's have cinematic interactions. It sounds more like BW's choice of engine may have made things difficult for this kind of stuff. It's really unfortunate if this is the case.

 

KoTOR started the trend, and it had a human only PC. ME1-3 had human only PCs. DA:O had multiple races, but cinematics somewhat screwed with character model sizes (depending on whether it was just the KoTOR style zoom-in). DA2, again, had a human only PC. 

 

DA:I is the first Bioware SP game with both (1) multiple races, i.e., multiple character models and (2) modern cinematics. 

 

FB3 I'm sure is a source of trouble, but not in that it was hard to use after it was ready, but that I'm sure they had to spend like 2 years getting it in a workable state to design an RPG on it. 

[tybert7]

I don't think we need every conversation to be cinematic of course, but I think the OP put his finger on something that misses some of the spark of other bioware games.

 

 

The in game cinematics really give a sense that you are part of a story.  A similar thing happened when I was playing swtor, much of that game was just some random rodian speaking in an alien dialect with some text underneath, or some boring fetch type quest.  But I distinctly remember a quest on a desert planet where a member of the empire called in a strike from space to bombard a nearby position, the camera cut to some ships in space firing, and the aftermath.

 

That extra bit of effort fleshed out the world and story more than the sort of sterile interactions that were normally had there.

[Nightmusic]

I think it would work if you left it this new way but allowed us to zoom in to watch faces if we want to.  To be stuck in this far off third person talking to someone whose face I can't really see and we both seem focused on each other's left foot... doesn't work for me.  I need a first person zoom.  I want to zoom in and look at the face of the person talking to me.

[stevemill]

It took me an extremely enjoyable 70 hours to get around to closing the Rift.  My reward was a couple of hours of perhaps the most intense and emotionally rewarding game-play and story-telling I've experienced.  The 'Hymn Scene' bought a lump to my throat.  I don't think the story is too short because for me the story involves all the work I do exploring the map and gathering support for the Inquisition by helping people out.  Scenes such as the 'Hymn' work just great. 

[hwlrmnky]

I've taken to manipulating the camera during the non-cinematic dialogue. It's fun; I get to see the scene the way I want to.

[M Hedonist]

Feeling short compared to what? Obviously, the main plot thread is shorter than Dragon Age Origins' - but Origins' main plot was so large, epic and ultimately dull for the most part that its pacing was terrible.

DAI's main plot thread is definitely not shorter than, say, Mass Effect 2, and many people agree that game to be the best of the Mass Effect trilogy. Mass Effect 2 was about the characters, and Dragon Age Inquisition is, too.

Will people please stop writing their "reviews" after they've reached the halfway mark of the game? All the meaningful character content comes in the later parts of the game.

[In Exile]

I think it would work if you left it this new way but allowed us to zoom in to watch faces if we want to. To be stuck in this far off third person talking to someone whose face I can't really see and we both seem focused on each other's left foot... doesn't work for me. I need a first person zoom. I want to zoom in and look at the face of the person talking to me.

The inability to zoom was something that I found to be very perplexing.

[Lebanese Dude]

The inability to zoom was something that I found to be very perplexing.

Same. I heard they were addressing this.

[Itkovian]

I don't feel a disconnect at ALL from the lack of cinematics in side content (let's not consider companion quests and dialogue as side content, those are pretty much a core part of the Bioware experience). I can "feel" the dialogue just as well with the "world" dialogue.

 

But then again, I felt that connection in RPGs with far worse convos anyway (BG2, for example).

 

That said, I certainly would LOVE more cinematics, and I do miss them from time to time. Hopefully this is something Bioware can pay more attention to in future DA games, now that they've nailed down a superb gaming style for Dragon Age.

[AlexisR]

Honestly, I'm starting to agree. There are longer sidequests that should feel important and part of the story. Like the whole subplot about saving your soldiers in the Fallow Mire. It's a situation comparable to defending Redcliffe from undead or take any of the more important DA2 sidequests. This should by all rights be considered part of the story-- yes, a side quest, but an actual subplot. It spans a whole area!

 

It doesn't feel that way though.

Spoiler

You get there, you don't even get any dialogue - not even a two second long one - you kill the mini boss, open the door, again no dialogue except an ambient comment and you're done.

(Spoiler for the quest. There's not actually anything to spoil, though.)

 

So I'm starting to think that yes, the lack of cinematics is a reason why only the main plot itself feels like plot instead of all the important subplots being part of the story like they should be. It's like they cut out all the tiny little cinematic dialogue scenes from all sidequests, which relegates them from "interesting subplot" to "fetch quest". :/

[johnny.temper]

So you want quantity over quality?

 

It's not a question of quantity over quality...a conversation is a conversation, regardless of how many flashy camera angles are used in presenting it and I don't know whether this thread is criticising the writing as such.  I don't want to see the cinematic conversations ditched completely, but am happy to deal with this compromise in minor conversations and even minor quest-giving ones or general, non-plot related conversations with party members if it means that a. this means we get more interaction in general and b. we get more and/or better quality when the cinematic conversations do come along.

[Brockololly]

I absolutely hate the "casual dialog" camera view in this game for anything other than merchants.

 

It's almost like the camera itself is as disinterested in these "scenes" as I am and is just phoning it in.

 

Its terrible and off putting.

 

Half of the time you actually run into someone to talk to out in the world and you're subjected to getting some awkward camera angle that conveniently shows your brain dead companions running around like idiots in the background. Or yesterday when I went to talk to Sera, the camera conveniently positioned itself behind a wall.

 

I totally understand why they did it but its this sort of thing combined with the inordinate amount of banal fetch quests / Ubisoft collectable quests that really sucks the life out of the game for me.

[Maverick827]

Its terrible and off putting.
 
Half of the time you actually run into someone to talk to out in the world and you're subjected to getting some awkward camera angle that conveniently shows your brain dead companions running around like idiots in the background. Or yesterday when I went to talk to Sera, the camera conveniently positioned itself behind a wall.
 
I totally understand why they did it but its this sort of thing combined with the inordinate amount of banal fetch quests / Ubisoft collectable quests that really sucks the life out of the game for me.

I agree. The game still appeals to me, but now it's 100% about the combat/character build/party build aspect. The game's story has really ceased to matter to me. I'm not sure how close I am to just muting the sound and playing some music while I blow through all of the side quests, like I'd do when grinding quests in an MMO.

[AshesEleven]

 

 

But, I think some of the big side-quests could have benefited from them. The Old Crestwood and Choice Spirit quests were pretty interesting, but they weren't very emotionally engaging. It was so weird to read Masked Empire, and then get re-introduced to Michel, who seemed "blank."

 

 

 

Yeah I just did the quest line in Emprise du Lion and kept thinking "Wow this definitely needs some more substantial cutscenes."

 

Though personally I found the game didn't do a good job of introducing us to any of the Masked Empire characters.  But that's a discussion for a more spoilery time.  

[Lucky Thirteen]

It's not just decreased cinematics. Though I do feel like that plays a role in it.

 

The majority of companions have one tiny side mission that lasts like 10 minutes and they hardly develop or change or do anything. They all feel stagnate. A couple of them were so abrupt and random, it literally felt like they were only put in the game to have this over the top, dramatic moment and then do nothing else. I don't even know why I bothered keeping half of them around, their absence would do nothing to my game. There wasn't a moment like when I first played DA2 where I screwed up with Isabela and she just outright abandoned me during an extremely crucial moment in the story.

 

There was a personal mission where I thought to myself, I don't even know why I'm bothering talking to you, nothing is going to change after this. I was just brought along to watch you be dramatically angry and cut a persons throat. Again. Cause that's edgy. Oh maybe I should play along and try to stop you, Sarcasm: " no, don't do that....' Okay blood everywhere. Are you done yet? Okay I'm going back to collecting useless crap, you can go back to your spot where you will probably have nothing new to say. Maybe one new line, but the whole time your back will be turned to me and because your doing your repetitive walking cycle, you'll probably walk out of range ending the conversation. Again.

 

Another one, I watched a characters lover die and laughed so hard. That was literally the only reason I was brought there, to awkwardly watch someone I hardly knew, lose another person that I really, really did not know. And I was expected to feel something for these strangers other than, well **** that sucks for you. 

 

They all had wonderful personalities, but none of them are really explored.  I kept going around to talk to all of them every chance I got and there was nothing. There was no reason to care for them. They were just there shouting two or three random lines in the field whenever my game wasn't glitched and they were permitted to actually speak. I even went on youtube after playing to hear all the ambient conversations that I didn't get to hear. I still feel this lack of care for these characters.

 

The bulk of their personalities and stories shouldn't be in background noise while I'm fighting demons or in their romances since I can't bang them all in one playthrough. This is like what happened in ME2 all over again, only it feels so much worse because you can play this game for hundreds of hours thanks to the none story related collection quests, and get very little out of these people let alone a very strong story. At least in ME2 a lot of the characters felt like they developed and changed.

 

The story overall is weakened by the fact they attempted this semi-open world thing. A more focused story does create more of a linear path, but it's stronger and more interesting for it. Games like Elder Scrolls: Skyrim's and Fallout 3 had a story that was in the background, very weak, so as to not interfere too much with player free roaming. That type of player enjoys that and throws a fit if there is just some story directing them down one path.  The beginning of Fallout: New Vegas made these people angry. Many hated the fact there are a bunch of story quests leading them in one direction and there are powerful enemies several levels above them blocking alternate paths in the beginning.  

 

Players like me, and I imagine many who play Bioware games, find it too boring to have a game with so much free roaming because the story isn't really engaging and encouraging you follow it. But even then, comparatively, the side/collection quests in Skyrim and the Fallout games had a lot more interesting stuff going on. Dragon Age Inquisition has more of a grind feel to it. Like an MMO and I've read they had almost made an MMO like game. 

 

Probably could finish the game in 40hrs minus all the silly collection & side quests, and I would probably still have the exact same story experience.

[pinkjellybeans]

I think it would work if you left it this new way but allowed us to zoom in to watch faces if we want to.  To be stuck in this far off third person talking to someone whose face I can't really see and we both seem focused on each other's left foot... doesn't work for me.  I need a first person zoom.  I want to zoom in and look at the face of the person talking to me.

 

The problem with this 3rd person view is that the characters aren't specifically animated for each conversation, so most of the times they aren't showing the proper emotions. Their faces and their posture is the same for all conversations, so if you mute the sound they could be talking to you about their dead husband or they could be talking about the weather. Cut scenes give you unique reactions that make you care for the characters.

 

I know cut scenes can't be cheap, but giving us 10 worlds where almost all of them don't have a single cinematic (not counting the opening conversation with Harding of course) makes them feel empty and disconnected from the main story, like we're playing two different games. I think the problem is that all the sidequests are boring fetch quests so cinematics for those would be weird. But if they would cut most of those quests and added a proper main story with cinematics for each world, it would make a huge difference. Like with Origins, each region is important to the main story and has an important main quest that you need to complete in order to further the story. In Inquisition that doesn't happen. You can complete the game without visiting most of the worlds. Only a few are relevant to the main story and even then, it's not enough to make you feel attached to that particular place. In Origins when I went to the Deep Roads, man, it felt like I was there for weeks and was glad when it was over, but I will always remember that place no matter what. The same cannot be said of any of the DAI worlds unfortunately, because none of them was memorable, they were just there.

[Lebanese Dude]

But if they would cut most of those quests and added a proper main story with cinematics for each world, it would make a huge difference. 

I read this a lot and its a sad misconception that prevails on these forums.

 

First of all the equivalent of the "cutscene-heavy" side-quests are the zone quests you have per zone. You know..the one that starts with the war table "discussion" and the actual cutscene with Harding talking to you etc...

Those are the zone quests that accompany the core quest.  They serve to animate the game world, much like the cutscene'd quests (Valena, Danyla,  Burkel etc..) in the much smaller Origins.

The fetch quests (which are in plentiful amounts) are more equivalent to the relatively basic Chanters Board/Irregulars Post/Collective Satchel quests. 
Their purpose is also slightly different, as the quests in DAO were more like a checklist to complete throughout the game. The ones in DAI are more zone-centered and serve as exploration incentives. They exist in bigger quantities because the world is so vast. One is not expected to complete them all in one playthrough unless one is so inclined, much like the DAO ones.

 

Second, you cannot just "add more to the main story". There's a cascade effect with the work that needs to be done to actually implement the writing, not to mention the potential re-writing that may occur halfway into development. Things even have to get cut! 

If they could write more they would have, but you have story branching/continuity, asset design, quest-zone design, dialogue recording, animations, cutscenes, etc... that follows the writing which is a crucial first step in RPG story-based game design.

You can't even create the zones without writing. How would you design a village if you didn't know it was going to be attacked? 

 

Then there's the fact that resources spent on zone populating/sidequests are incomparable/insignificant compared to those spent on actual heavy-duty content.

The side-quests you see are essentially created after all the main story / companion / zone quests are done. 
They are pretty simple to do really.

 

Kill Quest:

1) Create an NPC

2) Write/Record one line

3) Add item to a mook inventory

 

Voila. No cutscenes. No dialogue. Little testing required.

 

If you hypothetically do not implement any the side quests in the game and try to make something out of the spare resources, you'd gain very little in exchange for sacrificing the entire premise of an exploration-based game. It's a little short-sighted to ask BioWare to cut it all out when many players enjoy it. What makes others people's fun less important than yours?

 

Prudence would tell you to just do as much as you need to per playthrough (unless you are honestly having fun) and just check out what's left on consequent playthroughs, but you can also force-feed yourself all the extra content and get burned out too.

 

Frankly, you are only sabotaging your own game experience by trying to complete all the sidequests per zone in one playthrough.

I know I'm not. I'm not a fan of doing all these side quests and I skipped A LOT just exploring.

[KillTheLastRomantic]

I definitely felt a disconnect during those conversations, I think you may be right. I assume not having to spend time directing all those scenes lent time for other features, but it did have an impact on the narrative. A good compromise in future content could, perhaps, be having ALL companion interaction be cinematic, along with any major locational sidequest dialogue (such as your interactions with the mayor of Crestwood).

[pinkjellybeans]

 

I read this a lot and its a sad misconception that prevails on these forums.

 

First of all the equivalent of the "cutscene-heavy" side-quests are the zone quests you have per zone. You know..the one that starts with the war table "discussion" and the actual cutscene with Harding talking to you etc...

Those are the zone quests that accompany the core quest.  They serve to animate the game world, much like the cutscene'd quests (Valena, Danyla,  Burkel etc..) in the much smaller Origins.

The fetch quests (which are in plentiful amounts) are more equivalent to the relatively basic Chanters Board/Irregulars Post/Collective Satchel quests. 
Their purpose is also slightly different, as the quests in DAO were more like a checklist to complete throughout the game. The ones in DAI are more zone-centered and serve as exploration incentives. They exist in bigger quantities because the world is so vast. One is not expected to complete them all in one playthrough unless one is so inclined, much like the DAO ones.

 

Second, you cannot just "add more to the main story". There's a cascade effect with the work that needs to be done to actually implement the writing, not to mention the potential re-writing that may occur halfway into development. Things even have to get cut! 

If they could write more they would have, but you have story branching/continuity, asset design, quest-zone design, dialogue recording, animations, cutscenes, etc... that follows the writing which is a crucial first step in RPG story-based game design.

You can't even create the zones without writing. How would you design a village if you didn't know it was going to be attacked? 

 

Then there's the fact that resources spent on zone populating/sidequests are incomparable/insignificant compared to those spent on actual heavy-duty content.

The side-quests you see are essentially created after all the main story / companion / zone quests are done. 
They are pretty simple to do really.

 

Kill Quest:

1) Create an NPC

2) Write/Record one line

3) Add item to a mook inventory

 

Voila. No cutscenes. No dialogue. Little testing required.

 

If you hypothetically do not implement any the side quests in the game and try to make something out of the spare resources, you'd gain very little in exchange for sacrificing the entire premise of an exploration-based game. It's a little short-sighted to ask BioWare to cut it all out when many players enjoy it. What makes others people's fun less important than yours?

 

Prudence would tell you to just do as much as you need to per playthrough (unless you are honestly having fun) and just check out what's left on consequent playthroughs, but you can also force-feed yourself all the extra content and get burned out too.

 

Frankly, you are only sabotaging your own game experience by trying to complete all the sidequests per zone in one playthrough.

I know I'm not. I'm not a fan of doing all these side quests and I skipped A LOT just exploring.

 

Ok first of all, I was giving my opinion, I wasn't asking Bioware to do anything. Second of all, I think that's exactly the problem: the worlds are too big so it's nearly impossible to add meaningful stories to all of them so they felt the need to add all these fetch quests so people have something to do. The fact that you can complete the game without visiting half of the worlds shows that they are useless to the main story. Yes, there's a reason those worlds are introduced but they aren't important enough, they are just thrown at you "oh go here and do this", "ok, done, now what?", "now you have a huge world to explore, have fun". I can see how some people like that aspect of the game, but I don't. If I wanted to explore a world endlessly I would play Skyrim. I play the Dragon Age games for the story, and the sad truth is that 80% of this game is exploring the worlds and doing content that has little to do with the main story. 

 

In Origins you visit Redcliffle and have to save the city and the arl in order to complete the main story, so all those little fetch quests (convince the blacksmith, etc.) actually have a point! You visit Orzammar and have to solve all these side quests and go to the Deep Roads in order to choose a king in the end. Again, purpose! So every single place you visit is important, you need to visit them and explore them and do most of the side quests that lead to the big mission: gather the army. And in the end you get to see that army fighting at your side. In Inquisition none of that happens. You have no reason to visit these worlds other than to gain power to unlock the main story. In the end you don't even feel like what you did mattered at all. 

 

They didn't give us more story and cut scenes to go with it because they were probably too busy focusing on the exploration part of the game by creating 10 huge worlds and completely neglected the story part, which is the core of the DA games. The fact that in the Alpha build you had a mission to save the village of Crestwood from red templars or protect a keep shows that they had plans to add an important story to at least some of the worlds. Why did that get cut? Who knows! But it could've well be because they spent their time and resources on these huge worlds and in the end run out of time. But well, that's just MY opinion. 

[TheLastArchivist]

It would be nice to have a proportional number of cutscenes in relation the the amount of field exploration we have to do.

I must've completed 80 hours of gameplay and feel like only 1 hour correspond to all the custcenes I've watched.

There's a good amount of cinematics in the game. The problem is that, for every 10 hours of gameplay, there are only 10 minutes of cutscene. Or something like that.

[TheLastArchivist]

After Haven, the gameplay comes to a point where you don't feel like exploring all the available areas. Because nothing interesting will happen after you complete all those mini quests. Only if you go on with the plot-related ones. Then you MIGHT get a cutscene if someone's approval went up -for whatever reason- or a line of dialog. And that's it.

So exploring the Emerald Greaves, the Exalted Plains, the Storm Coast, the Fallow Mire, parts of Emprise du Lion and of the Western Approach just feel like a huge waste of time.

[Spooky81]

/agree with OP.  Feel 80% dead on the inside with the new angled, 3rd person interaction.  It's gone from being a BioWare RPG to another cookie cutting, industry standard design.

 

I completed only 1 playthrough of DA2 and that was just to see it through to the end no matter how I felt about it.  Can't believe i'm feeling the same lack of motivation and drive from a 2nd sequel who's series is suppose to be the spiritual successor to BG.

 

A well delivered and presented story can move people forward by leaps and bounds, even if the the system/foundation it's built on isn't perfect.

[Jadebaby]

Even with the kind of mass effect 3 conversation technique used in DAI. you can still get some good camera angles yourself if you're near an object that will close the camera in on the people talking.... I know conversations and cutscenes is what drag.... All bioware games are about. But with the length of DAI. I don't find this an issue. I'm 80 hours in and I will be surprised if I finish before 100.

[In Exile]

/agree with OP. Feel 80% dead on the inside with the new angled, 3rd person interaction. It's gone from being a BioWare RPG to another cookie cutting, industry standard design.

I completed only 1 playthrough of DA2 and that was just to see it through to the end no matter how I felt about it. Can't believe i'm feeling the same lack of motivation and drive from a 2nd sequel who's series is suppose to be the spiritual successor to BG.

A well delivered and presented story can move people forward by leaps and bounds, even if the the system/foundation it's built on isn't perfect.

But barely any story content to lots of exploration is exactly what BG1 did. That's as spiritual successor as you can get.