129 réponses à ce sujet

[NoRmAnDy-SR2]

DA:O: 9.5/10

DA:2: 8/10

DA:I: 7/10

 

yep I'm a story and characters first kind of guy

and DA:I lacked in that department (way too many generic fetch quests, barely any story missions, huge lifeless areas etc.) maybe DLC will fix it still a solid game though

 

DA2 apart from the reused enviroments was awesome I never got the hate for it

Its still not as good as DA:O though

 

DA:O is the first DA game and still the best

its Bioware at its best (linear story and character games) great story with many choices along the way, great companions

great soundtrack, interesting side quests etc.

still like to replay it

Same for me.

 

I think the perfect game for me will be DAO with Inquisition graphics and battle system (DAO battle animations feel a bit slow and clunky).

[ElementalFury106]

I'll rate each individually by story, combat, and game design

 

Dragon Age: Origins

Story - 9/10

Gameplay - 7/10

Design - 9/10

 

Overall: 9/10

 

Dragon Age 2

Story - 6/10

Gameplay - 7/10

Design - 5/10

 

Overall - 7/10

 

Dragon Age Inquisition

Story - 7/10

Gameplay - 8/10

Design - 8/10

 

Overall - 8/10

 

***my personal rating criteria***

10 - perfect

9 - excellent

8 - great

7 - decent

6 - mediocre

5 - weak

anything lower is abysmal. 

[Precursor Meta]

This was my first entry in the Dragon age series and I liked it. So between the Earths molten core and the surface of the moon, I'd rate this game a tree in Massachusetts.

[Fireheart]

DA:O 9/10 (after mods to fix the broken melee combat)

DA:2 7-8/10 (my biggest gripe are the recycled maps and the heavy handed story that falls apart before act 2 is over by requiring every character to act like an idiot but the characters are great and the combat is great, and sarcastic female Hawke is a hoot).

BUT, if I was rating DA:2 when it came out and before I installed mods to fix mages, I'd rate it a 6/10, maybe lower. It was a huge disappointment at the time.

DA:I 5/10 (It's pretty, but looks aren't enough).

What was wrong with mages?

[BraveVesperia]

DAO - 9/10. I loved the game, though I couldn't rate it a 10. There were some things that bothered me, even just shallow stuff. Like the fact that you had a choice of about 5 armours for the whole game. Or the clunky combat and broken spells/talents. I also noticed after playing a bit of the PC version that some dialogue was dropped in the console version (for some reason).

 

DA2 - 7.5/10. I enjoyed it a great deal, but the lack of development time and bits of wasted potential drag down its rating. The repeating dungeons got a little unbearable after a few playthroughs. The main plus was Hawke and companions (and the dlc). I liked the concept, it's a shame it wasn't given more time!

 

DAI - 9/10. I would've liked more story missions and race impact, but the major story quests we did get were amazing and the locations spectacular. Best music out of all three games. It suffers from the same lack of armour variety as DAO, though at least we can swap pieces and materials.

[Tel]

Inquisition isn't half the game Origins was.

[Lebanese Dude]

Inquisition isn't half the game Origins was.

 

Yeah it's twice the game it was.

#Opinions

[Shahadem]

What was wrong with mages?

 

They were incredibly weak as their spells did not scale well, their single target damage was pathetic, and mp did not regenerate fast enough. Their spell radius was also too small to deal with situations where enemies spawned out of thin air on every corner of the map at once. Another problem was the complete lack of even a single spell combo like we had in DA:O.

 

Luckily those problems were all easily fixable by mods but Bioware really should have never created those problems in the first place. According to DA lore mages are supposed to be incredibly powerful, but the gameplay as implemented was completely inapposite with this assertion.

 

This probably wouldn't have been as much of a problem in DA:O, but in DA2 you really had to play as a mage in order to be invested in the game's story, especially Act 3.

[Fireheart]

They were incredibly weak as their spells did not scale well, their single target damage was pathetic, and mp did not regenerate fast enough. Their spell radius was also too small to deal with situations where enemies spawned out of thin air on every corner of the map at once. Another problem was the complete lack of even a single spell combo like we had in DA:O.

 

Luckily those problems were all easily fixable by mods but Bioware really should have never created those problems in the first place. According to DA lore mages are supposed to be incredibly powerful, but the gameplay as implemented was completely inapposite with this assertion.

 

This probably wouldn't have been as much of a problem in DA:O, but in DA2 you really had to play as a mage in order to be invested in the game's story, especially Act 3.

Wow, really? Everything you said could be applied to DAI, in fact I thought you were talking about DAI until I re-read your previous post. All these reasons you stated is why I hate mages, even a KE, in DAI. I LOVED playing a mage in DA2. I felt my Hawke was powerful enough as a mage, she could also handle being attacked by melee for a while before having to move. In DAI, my IQ was always generating aggro and always having enemies come after her, she was so vulnerable to physical attacks... And barely did any damage with regular attacks or spells. It was a nightmare, and I was playing on Normal, lol.

[Traejun]

DA:I Rating

 

Story: 9/10

Graphics: 9/10

Gameplay: 8/10

Difficulty: 8/10

 

Overall: 8.5/10

 

I thought it was an excellent game with tons of replay value.  The characters were generally deep with few exceptions and the story felt compelling thoughout most of the game.  My only real gripe is that going through the zones felt grindy and often not related to the overall story.  In essence, most of the zones were only loosely related to the Inquisition's purpose.

 

That said, I'm not entering my second playthought after faffing about in multiplayer for a while and taking a little break after the first playthrough. 

 

I would and do recommend this game to anyone that even remotely likes RPGs.

[PillarBiter]

For now, I give DAI a 7.5/10.

 

When it's all patched up and fully works, I'll play it again and revise. I have no doubt it'll be able to get a 9.5/10.

 

For reference:

DA:O 8.5/10

DAII 8/10

 

And I'm usually a pretty harsh critic.

[Greypaul]

Bioware have made some great games , my love for them began with Jade empire , kotor and kotor 2 The sith lords then came DAO it could'nt get any better one my all time favorites 10/10 . They seem to have lost their way a bit since then DA2 7/10 DAI 8.5/10 . I enjoyed DAI but I don't know some of the magics gone hope they get it back .

 

Crap forgot to mention ME1 10/10

[Falcon084]

DA:O - 9.5/10

DA2 - 9/10

DA:I - 10/10

[Neoideo]

DAO: 9.6/10

(when a story is so good at both coarse and fine grain levels, you can forgive small scenarios, bad combat animations or basic graphics)

 

DA2: 6/10

(The idea of a low-scale story had so much potential (and still has, for a DA4), bad it was badly implemented. The game needed more development time, 1.5 years not enough.)

 

DAI: 8/10

(medium quality story, too predictable at a coarse level and no fine grained story elements. Little connection with the main character. Graphics (global illumination) amazing, combat animations amazing, level design not so good in some regions, in others it was outstanding. I feel the devs made a high amount of non-forced mistakes, like in tennis. Bioware has the skill to make a much better game, and I am not asking for an even larger world, neither more development hours, it is just how to move the pieces correctly. Just as an Idea, It would have been great that depending on the race you chose, your story developed on a different set of regions than for other races, with a much better guided story line.)

[Ryriena]

Dragon age Origins and Awaking 9/10 Awesome story and one of my favorite stories after patches and mods to help with hairs and combat

Da2: I would say that it was good in some aspects but I do agree that the storyline and design aspects went in the wrong direction for this game. In fact, a lot of it seem to have been desgined by those whom disliked espects of a video game Helper for one thing drastic change of an established character made me dislike this story a lot more. Since to me it never made sense to have Anders a mage not even in the circle at Kirkwall be the one too do the bombing or making his separation from Justice pointless was a bad game design. So around 6/10 for me

DAI: I would say around 6.5 for since a lot of the things I look for in a dragon age weren't there, in fact, I would say most of the rp elements were ripped out of the story for the goody two shoes character, which for a game like the witcher is pretty good but not for a game were you define your characters personality.

[mrmike_1949]

For personal enjoyment I'd rate it 6/10. Enjoyed the story and several of the characters but actually "playing" the game was a frustrating experience for me.

Combat mechanics is a problem: laggy controls, lack of tactical control over your npcs, less abilities available. This is biggest problem by far

Story not as deep as DA:O - which had large sections on Dwarf and Elf culture - DAI had Orlesian instead.

Lots of things to do, game takes a LOT of hours to complete.

Not too many bugs (I just got the game, came with patch #4), pretty stable

Crafting is improved, War Table an interesting idea, Power also interesting.

Looks better than Skyrim, not necessarily in detail level, but overall appeal (Skyrim was dull color pallette!)

Very demanding of cpu/gpu -  I've got an average system, and do see lags/stutter quite often

 

Bottom Line 8/10       combat mechanics knocked 1.0 off the score

[DarthSideus2]

Can't remember if I responded to this thread  yet all so.....

 

DAO + all DLCs: 9.5 (excellent game, good story, good cast of companions, tons of dlc, so so combat, limited tactics options)

 

DA2 + all DLCs: 8.75 (good personal story, liked the combat change, loved Sarcastic Hawke and Isabela, improved tactics, limited game world size and repetitive dungeons)

 

DAI: 9 (best graphics and game world of the series, excellent companions, good combat, no dlc yet, somewhat buggy, meh main villain and final boss fight)

 

Overall, I love this series and DAI in particular. Will probably score DAI higher once dlc comes out.

[ShadowLordXII]

Origins

 

Story: 8/10

Characters: 9/10

Gameplay: 9/10

Replayabilty: 9/10

Design: 8/10

 

Final Verdict: 9/10

 

DAII

 

Story: 6/10

Characters: 9/10

Gameplay: 7/10

Replayabilty: 6/10 (7 with mods)

Design: 6/10

 

Final Verdict: 7/10

 

Inquisition

 

Story: 7 or 8/10

Characters: 9/10

Gameplay: 8/10

Replayabilty: 8/10

Design: 9/10

 

Final Verdict: 8.5/10

 

Inquisition's a great game, no doubt. However, it falls short of being as good or even better than Origins in terms of story and gameplay. I find this very odd because the game could have easily surpassed Origins if the developers were willing to do.

 

The story is good for what it is, but there's plenty of missed opportunities to make things better. An attack on Skyfall? Divine Justinia's Conclave? Inquisitor for Divine? An ending where the Inquisitor dies? Having a bad choice result in a companion/advisor's death? Directly confronting the mage-templar conflict and actively supporting/antagonizing one or both sides? Being an outright evil/power-hungry Inquisitor?

 

Gameplay was better than Origins in some ways like crafting and the War Table; but also fundamentally suffers from the continued class restrictions on weapon choice from Dragon Age 2 for no real reason than either A) The developers just didn't want warriors with duel-wielding or rogues with great axes or It was easier, so they stuck to it. This means less options for customizing your character, it means that your rogue and warrior are stuck in their pre-established roles without any way to meaningfully alter this. Couple this with the removal of character attribute allocation and weaker party control dynamics and you have even less control and input over the role of your character in a ROLE-PLAYING GAME. 

 

There's also a clear abandonment of the "illusion of choice" dynamic as there are multiple times when the game outright tells you that the choices and alterations that you made in past games (especially Origins) didn't matter. Noteworthy because this is a clear backtrack from the fact that key choices were meant to have consequence beyond the initial situation. This also has the impact of weakening the all-import aspect of Choice and Consequence which acts as an invisible draw to replaying the game with different characters, different personalities, and different choices.

 

Most prominent cases in point: Leliana being alive regardless of if she died in Origins (hand-waved twice); Sten always being Arishok even if he didn't get back Asala or died; Hawke always hating blood magic even if he was a blood mage himself; Negligible impact concerning who was chosen to be Ferelden's monarch in Origins; and Dark Ritual plot-line getting resolved with frustrating ease because BW didn't want to put a lot of effort into a decision that doesn't fit their official canon.

 

Some could argue that some of these decisions were done to inject more aspects of "realism" into the game, but it retroactively robs those connected choices of their punch and importance. Now I know that the Dark Ritual truly was a "No Dies" Button instead of an unclear and morally ambiguous choice with consequences that would be worst than letting the Warden or Alistair die. I'm even less invested in the Landsmeet because not only is it impossible to fail, but whoever becomes monarch will be childless which likely means another civil war or succession crisis is on the horizon. Who cares about how I treat Leliana and Sten? They'll become whatever the plot's decided for them to become regardless of my input or even putting a sword through their faces.

 

There's choices that will end up with the same result with some/several variations and then there's choices where you're outright told that they'll matter only to be later told/shown that they never mattered. I'd rather have the former because it at least it was interesting and fun while the latter is just obnoxious and annoying.

 

Ranted for longer than I wanted and it probably gives the indication that I hated Inquisition's story. But with the above fubar aside, I really enjoyed the game's story and it's themes concerning Faith and Restoring Order to Chaos. Can I also just say that the Winter Ball was a much better thought-out and fun politics level than the Landsmeet?

[phil11113]

DA:O - 9/10

DA2 - 8/10

DA:I - 9/10.

[Valvadir]

DA:O 10/10

DA2- 9/10

DA:I 9.5/10

 

I thought the whole series so far, has been delicious. Please give me more. XD

[Jaquio]

I think a combo of DA2's story and DAI's environment building would have made a truly stellar game.

 

All in all:

 

DAO - 9.5 out of 10

(The Deep Roads do drag on, and we could have used one or two different character models)

 

DA2 - 6.5 out of 10

(The story was stellar, but the recycled environments were lazy, and the parachuting enemies ganking my mages in the back filled me with undeniable rage)

 

DAI - 8.5 out of 10

(Environment effects were awesome, the breadth felt great, but the companion quests were very short and uninspiring, especially after DA2.  Resolving Cole's questline through a war table mission was undefendably lazy)

[mindw0rk]

DA:O - 9/10

DA2 - 7/10

DAI - 4/10

 

DAI is the only game in series I couldnt force myself to finish and felt like I never had any fun playing. Having experience with over 100 MMORPG titles, I saw striking similarities. DAI is offline MMO, very mediocre, tedious and made without any passion. 

[Melca36]

Origins: 9.0

DA2: 7.0

Inquisition 8.0

 

Loved Inquisition. Had fun and still have fun. I'm looking forward to the DLC too.   From what I see from the complaints are people who just want a virtual novel with little gameplay.  I got my moneys worth.

[The Antagonist]

me3 9/10
me1 8/10
me2 8/10
da2 5/10
dai 4/10
dao. 2/10

[Shahadem]

Wow, really? Everything you said could be applied to DAI, in fact I thought you were talking about DAI until I re-read your previous post. All these reasons you stated is why I hate mages, even a KE, in DAI. I LOVED playing a mage in DA2. I felt my Hawke was powerful enough as a mage, she could also handle being attacked by melee for a while before having to move. In DAI, my IQ was always generating aggro and always having enemies come after her, she was so vulnerable to physical attacks... And barely did any damage with regular attacks or spells. It was a nightmare, and I was playing on Normal, lol.

 

I don't think you are playing KE right. So long as was I spamming Spirit Blade I was basically immune to all damage. I wasn't really doing any damage, but I wasn't really taking any damage either. So combat just boiled down to holding down "1" until everything was dead. Especially since the lack of any functional companion AI or tactics system kept me from being able to do anything else.

 

But I do agree that DA:I mages are also extremely underpowered compared to what they should be. In fact DA:I mages have it way worse since the spells all suck, they all use WAY too much mp, mp regenerates WAY too slowly, and nearly every spell has a ridiculously long cooldown time forcing you to spam a whimpy and lame autoattack (something which also bothered me in DA2). Mages should never be using autoattacks, they should always be casting big powerful spells.

 

The lack of any actual healing spell was also really stupid when Bioware demonstrated that magical healing was still in the game as they allowed players to use potions to magically heal their characters in a way that only actual mages could heal. So that was also extremely stupid. You can't remove magical healing from the only source that can provide magical healing and then make a bottle provide magical healing that can only come from a mage and can't come from a bottle.

 

New Bioware just hates mages. That's all that can be said about the issues. I mean just look at how stupid Bioware made the mages act in DA:I.