Aye, I'm also hoping for future changes (personally though tactics/build/controls should have been in there to begin with! heh), like maybe a DLC to add in an origins-style introduction to your Inquisitor? Or something to flesh out the final battle. Either of those I would buy. The game is complete as it is and I'm satisfied with the story, but it could become epic!
Better yet, if this DLC then allows you to play the original game as it should be played!
Big Snip
-----------
Basically, what I care about in a game, be it rpg or anything else, is wether the game is fun
--------
Snip.
And fun, is tied to expectations. Expectations are generated by the PR dudes from Bio. Then there is the actual game you were expecting to have fun with. 
And fun, is tied to expectations. Expectations are generated by the PR dudes from Bio. Then there is the actual game you were expecting to have fun with.
Yeah, well, that's true. 
One more reason to never listen to PR stuff. It's PR! What do people expect? It's a safe bet that Bioware will never return to those idolized roots of rpg gaming. Why? Because even though they might please some rpg fans, they aren't exactly legion. The player base has mightily expanded in those past 15 years, the industry has changed accordingly and, importantly, has much more money at its disposal. And even in the years since the DA:O release. Nowadays, video games are pretty much mainstream stuff. Back in the day, it was a thing for unwashed nerds in dark, dusty dungeon-like basements.
I just have a hard time seeing how certain oldschool crpg features like attribute points can make or break a game for some people to the point where even though there are obviously other and more meaningful ways to customize your character, they claim DA:I is not a crpg at all anymore. It's just so... minor. At least, it is to me, clearly not to others. Maybe that's because I don't adhere to the holy principles of gaming as it always was and always has to be.
I so sad cuz da hataz gunna hate on me for trying to be positive on a Positive review when the negative reviews for the people like you know who you/they are and they are everywhere just like the spam in my junk mail box.
Not wasting time going back and forth with you lame haters because you didn't get THE Game You Wanted...... You wanted DA:O well go play it.
Thanks for the time*not really*,
Have a great Christmas and a "Happy" New Years(if you can even manage to that in your angered lives)
The op im sure has seen me post around and knows im not in love with the game..lol
That said I respect your opinion. You liked the game and im happy for you.
But.....lol
How can you say this with a straight face??
"In my opinion, Dragon Age: Inquisition is the best of the Dragon Age games."
Isnt DA a rpg game series?
If so how can you say a game that had alot of its rpg elements ripped away, or widdled down to next to nothing, be the best of the series?
Sure it looks great and got some things right, and as a stand alone title would be an amazing game. But its not its own title, its a Dragon Age game.
The amount of customization to your character is next to none.
Your armor and weapons have been minimized to the most basic level.
Almost everything in the game besides the main story is a fetch quest. You cant even do your specializations without having to run around fetching things.
etc etc.
Thing with me is and the thing that pisses me of alot about gamers today is they will take whatever turd is handed to them by their favorite developers and eat it up and say thank you can i have another.
You cant look at DAI and see all its flaws and all that was taken away and act like you dont see it, or be ok with it. By being ok with it all your doing is saying to Bioware and EA is to keep half a@@ing things and giving me less and less, and im not only ok with it, but ill praise you for it.
Just because these companies tell ya how great these detractions are by using buzz words like "Streamlined", doesnt mean we have to buy into it. At some point we have to call them out on it.
Heck when was the last time you played an epic rpg and couldnt even divide out your stats?? Even ME with all that was taken out of that franchise didnt even go that far.
/rant off
I'll explain, then, since you asked. To start off with: I don't like the same kind of game that you do. It's that simple. Your opinion of what makes a good RPG and my opinion differ greatly. For me, DA:O was essentially Microsoft Excel in a fantasy setting. It reminded me of doing statistical matrices. I didn't find that aspect of the game fun in the slightest - on the contrary, I found it to be tedious. I would rather spend the game walking around and defining my character by the choices he makes interacting with the world than by putting one point in herbalism, four in coercion, and two in lockpicking. That's one of the reasons I was able to play Skyrim until my eyes bled, but I couldn't get through the Witcher games: too many menu options. In Skyrim - and, to a lesser extent, DA:I - you define by doing. In games like DA:O, you define by putting skillpoint seventy-five into slot forty-three.
I didn't feel like the RPG elements of DA:I were stripped down, personally - I felt like they were, yes, streamlined. Instead of having eight boxes of coercion, now I get Inquisition perks that I can put into slots that allow for more conversation options and, therefore, for choice in dialogue trees. That happens. It's a thing. I didn't put points into all of those options on my first playthrough, but when I did on my second, bam. New conversation options, new options for making choices. You're able to sway people with your accumulated knowledge, which is exactly what a skill tree like coercion allowed you to do. I just find it to be more fun this way.
As for armor and weapon customization, I absolutely have to disagree with you. There is more customization in DA:I than there is in DA:O, unless you're talking about being able to put pink boots on otherwise blue armor. If that's your big beef, then...sorry. Can't help you there. Agree to disagree, yeah? So yes, I actually can look at DA:I and be okay with it. It's the Dragon Age I've always wanted to play. You cannot say that DA:O is objectively better than DA:I - you just can't, same as I can't say it the other way around. It's player preference that defines whether a game is good. Example: everybody loves Far Cry 3. I thought it was okay. Never finished it. That doesn't make it objectively "okay." It just means that I, personally, didn't lose my **** over it.
Hey, OP! Can you edit your post and mention that there are spoilers - though minor - in your post? I was curious what you had to say so I read it and learned some things I hadn't learned through playin the game. Good review. But a warning would be nice, please.
Whoops. Sorry! Done and done.
When you start a review with what amounts to "only positive reviews matter because haters gonna hate," you sort of prove an inability to be objective.
That is absolutely not what I started my review with. I said that there was a lot of undeserved hate going around - I didn't say that all negative reviews are stupid and don't matter. I've offered constructive criticism on what I liked and didn't like about the game. I didn't just write that it was ZOMG SO AWSUM and leave it at that. You are misinterpreting what I've written. I'm sorry that you read it that way though, let's be honest, I'm thinking you came here for a fight.
Look at it from the players that experienced freezes and crashes. Don't forget those that have high and systems or those that bought new gear just to play the game (I'm one of them) only to experience video stuttering... video stuttering! Or trying to read super small fonts! The latter group, btw, paid more than the $60 to play this game.
I'm sure you remember those painfull chalkboard screeches in the classroom. Those reactions are objective, yes? Do you blame them for that reaction? Same with the reactions when experiencing freezing and crashing... ad nauseam..
I have, and I'm sure the guy you were talking to has. He isn't saying those should be discounted out of hand because they're obviously not objective. He was responding to something you said which, if you remember, was exactly what you're accusing him of saying. You came on here and acted like I was trying to promote my subjectivity as objectivity. I'm sorry that you're having problems with the game, but let's be real here, friend: you started this, you drew first blood, and he was only responding to you in the same vein that your original response was written. Chill out. Nobody's saying you're not having problems.
The extended cut DLC and the Citadel DLC made ME3 so much better, an amazing game
I hope a future patch/DLC/expansion pack will 'fix' Inquisition, it's also an amazing game in a lot of ways, but at the same time it's lacking severely in certain areas (tactics, character build, PC controls, etc.).
At the moment I do not share the same opinion as the OP (prob. never will since the review mentions a controller and a 2-handed sword, which is def. more fun than what I experience with a mouse/keyboard crying over the lack of options as a mage), but with future changes to Inquisition? Yeah, I might agree more with the OP
I agree. There was actually some stuff that I forgot to add in my review, or that I left out because (as mentioned) it's already being talked about elsewhere, but the M&K controls blow. I couldn't get past them and switched over to a controller after the first hour. I...can't really comment on the mage, because...I have to be honest...I've never enjoyed playing mage classes. >< I always prefer to play almost the "underdog," at least ability-wise, and I also get pretty bored standing in one place until something necessitates my repositioning. That being said, I did start a mage, and I have to tell you - it's way better with a controller. I highly recommend getting one. It's a cheap investement.
And as for Mass Effect...RIGHT? The Citadel DLC was absolutely (for me) the best DLC I've played for any game, ever. I actually really enjoyed all of ME3's DLC, and I was a little confused as to why Leviathan wasn't in the original cut. Oh well. Still awesome.
I agree with the original post, for the most part. It's a great game. It's a HUGE game. I've put in nearly 190 hours now on three different characters, and I still feel like I've only scratched the surface. I'm still loving the game.
The game is a lot more like Skyrim than earlier DA games, which infuriates some people. But I think they're made a much better game than Skyrim (which some people talk of in legendary terms for some reason) because the story lines and characters DAI are clearly superior.
Most of the complaints about the combat systems confuse me. I think some people were put off because combat isn't more like DA2 or DAO. Thing is, with a little practice and patience, even features like the tactical camera are quite useable. I have trouble understanding why some people don't give new muscle memories a chance to kick in before they start objecting. It IS a new game, after all.
I've run into a few little bugs, nothing a restart couldn't fix. But nothing close to game-breaking. I suspect some people are having trouble finding the right graphics settings to play at? Playing on an old PC without a graphics card, I was amazed I could play it at all. I had massive "bugs" at first, but after setting all the graphics to low, it plays fine now.
All in all, I'm very thankful to Bioware for putting in all the work to make a great game!
Most of the complaints about the combat systems confuse me. I think some people were put off because combat isn't more like DA2 or DAO. Thing is, with a little practice and patience, even features like the tactical camera are quite useable. I have trouble understanding why some people don't give new muscle memories a chance to kick in before they start objecting. It IS a new game, after all.
I think the big issues with the Tac-Cam are that 1.) it doesn't zoom out as far as DA:O's and 2.) you can't zoom through ceilings in dungeons like you could in DA:O. It works fine out in the open, but not so well indoors. I'll admit, I too would rather have one that functions as it did in DA:O. That being said, it certainly wasn't game breaking for me.
Completely agree OP. Bugs aside, the writing was brilliant, the quests imo always had a purpose for the most part, and the characters were just so real. The customization system I thought was one of the greatest parts. You could pick the color of your armor, and what attachments you wanted to add to it. And with masterwork crafting the options become exponential. Walking bomb on hit, armor bypassing class specifications etc.
Even the bugs I encountered weren't game breaking, luckily enough.
I'll explain, then, since you asked. To start off with: I don't like the same kind of game that you do. It's that simple. Your opinion of what makes a good RPG and my opinion differ greatly. For me, DA:O was essentially Microsoft Excel in a fantasy setting. It reminded me of doing statistical matrices. I didn't find that aspect of the game fun in the slightest - on the contrary, I found it to be tedious. I would rather spend the game walking around and defining my character by the choices he makes interacting with the world than by putting one point in herbalism, four in coercion, and two in lockpicking. That's one of the reasons I was able to play Skyrim until my eyes bled, but I couldn't get through the Witcher games: too many menu options. In Skyrim - and, to a lesser extent, DA:I - you define by doing. In games like DA:O, you define by putting skillpoint seventy-five into slot forty-three.
I didn't feel like the RPG elements of DA:I were stripped down, personally - I felt like they were, yes, streamlined. Instead of having eight boxes of coercion, now I get Inquisition perks that I can put into slots that allow for more conversation options and, therefore, for choice in dialogue trees. That happens. It's a thing. I didn't put points into all of those options on my first playthrough, but when I did on my second, bam. New conversation options, new options for making choices. You're able to sway people with your accumulated knowledge, which is exactly what a skill tree like coercion allowed you to do. I just find it to be more fun this way.
As for armor and weapon customization, I absolutely have to disagree with you. There is more customization in DA:I than there is in DA:O, unless you're talking about being able to put pink boots on otherwise blue armor. If that's your big beef, then...sorry. Can't help you there. Agree to disagree, yeah? So yes, I actually can look at DA:I and be okay with it. It's the Dragon Age I've always wanted to play. You cannot say that DA:O is objectively better than DA:I - you just can't, same as I can't say it the other way around. It's player preference that defines whether a game is good. Example: everybody loves Far Cry 3. I thought it was okay. Never finished it. That doesn't make it objectively "okay." It just means that I, personally, didn't lose my **** over it.
Maybe its an attentions span issue. I dont know. Maybe its a whole mentality issue with todays gamers. I dont know. But it seems the less they have to think the better.
Im an older guy, almost 37 now. (Jan) And I grew up with games like Eye of the Beholder, where every point in every skill mattered. Where we would study and debate between friends the best way to set up our character, our party, etc. Now, no offense, its like the vieo game industry big wigs are right. Gamers today are stupid. Dont make them think, just put some pretty graphics and explosions and call it a day. Having to think about points and play with menus, bah, i want to kill stuff!!
Now i know thats an exageration and im not attacking you personally but this is what gaming is becoming nowadays. I mean just take a look. Everything is getting dumbed down in favor for less depth and customization, and more action and drama. And to me thats not what makes an RPG.
As far as your points. Opening a different line of dialogue is not exactly what i meant when i talked about character customization. lol How about something simple. Im a mage (i like mages) and I need more skill or intelligence to get some new ability. But, when i take a few hits im dead in a heartbeat. So i choose to place some points in cinstitution for a level or two to increase my health and keep me from dying as easy, and put my skills on hold. Or maybe im a rogue and instead of people even more points in cunning or agility, maybe i feel I dont do enough damage, so I put more points in Strength instead. Thats options. I personally dont want to give up that kind of flexibility and customization in order to get into the game a minute faster.
As far as armor, how is it more. You can add a helmet and an outfit. Thats all. If you come across some boots you can wear and are for your race and lvl, why shouldnt you be able to wear them? Instead you have to make sure it "goes" with your outfit. Like some glorified barbie doll. Sorry but those gloves are so last week. They just dont go with my newest outfit. Lol. Thats not customization. Thats a limitation.
It aggravates me, and i apologize if i sometimes get, bitchy...lol. But It does aggravate me because growing up and playing games, I always thought, imagine what kind of stuff we'll be able to do in the future when technology really takes off. I mean if we can do all this stuff now, just imagine.
I never thought that when the technology did get to that point, that i would have to look back at those old games and say, wow what happened to those great games?
Yes we got nice new graphics and fancy resolutions, but the depth, and all that you could do in these older games has all but dwindled away. And its, disheartening.
I'll explain, then, since you asked. To start off with: I don't like the same kind of game that you do. It's that simple. Your opinion of what makes a good RPG and my opinion differ greatly. For me, DA:O was essentially Microsoft Excel in a fantasy setting. It reminded me of doing statistical matrices. I didn't find that aspect of the game fun in the slightest - on the contrary, I found it to be tedious. I would rather spend the game walking around and defining my character by the choices he makes interacting with the world than by putting one point in herbalism, four in coercion, and two in lockpicking. That's one of the reasons I was able to play Skyrim until my eyes bled, but I couldn't get through the Witcher games: too many menu options. In Skyrim - and, to a lesser extent, DA:I - you define by doing. In games like DA:O, you define by putting skillpoint seventy-five into slot forty-three.
I didn't feel like the RPG elements of DA:I were stripped down, personally - I felt like they were, yes, streamlined. Instead of having eight boxes of coercion, now I get Inquisition perks that I can put into slots that allow for more conversation options and, therefore, for choice in dialogue trees. That happens. It's a thing. I didn't put points into all of those options on my first playthrough, but when I did on my second, bam. New conversation options, new options for making choices. You're able to sway people with your accumulated knowledge, which is exactly what a skill tree like coercion allowed you to do. I just find it to be more fun this way.
As for armor and weapon customization, I absolutely have to disagree with you. There is more customization in DA:I than there is in DA:O, unless you're talking about being able to put pink boots on otherwise blue armor. If that's your big beef, then...sorry. Can't help you there. Agree to disagree, yeah? So yes, I actually can look at DA:I and be okay with it. It's the Dragon Age I've always wanted to play. You cannot say that DA:O is objectively better than DA:I - you just can't, same as I can't say it the other way around. It's player preference that defines whether a game is good. Example: everybody loves Far Cry 3. I thought it was okay. Never finished it. That doesn't make it objectively "okay." It just means that I, personally, didn't lose my **** over it.
This is the same way I feel. It is the reason I was never able to finish Oblivion. Do I sympathize with people who had an element taken out like for example the advance tactics when they liked it...yes. Yet their game play experience is no more important than mine and everything in a game costs time and money so devs have to decide what they should focus on.
I never used the advanced tactics screen. I picked from the Bioware presets and went with it. If I wanted to do something special with my companions like a cross class combo I would pause and set it up. Most of my friends who played were the same way. Many of the people who liked this feature are mad about it being taken out and I get that but here's the thing. Its not like Bioware decided to gut a gameplay feature for the lulz. They likely...gasp...did market research and discovered that a majority of the players didn't really used the advanced tactics so they made an executive decision. To spend their time on features that more people actually used.
This isn't an insult to you or anyone that liked and used it but a practical decision. Time=money. They have to make decisions on what they are going to spend their time on and if the choice was a mechanic that the majority doesn't use or an area that most if not all will use than the smart business decision is to go with the majority.
You can call this dumbing down...consilization or anything else you want. But the reality is they as a business need to sell as many games as possible to stay in the black.
Sorry about typos, my keyboard is absolute junk...lol
Now we could have a good in between system. Something that automatically adjust points or skills based on how you play. Just like in Everquest. Where when you wanted to work on a certain type of magic, you practiced and used that type of magic. If you wanted to get better at swords, then you equip a sword and use it and get better with it.
Even though it was happening automatically and you weren't putting points in these things, it was still in depth because you had input into it by what you did in the game.
Maybe something more along those lines would work in the future. Idk. But it still wouldnt be a Dragon Age game. It would be its own beast.
Maybe its an attentions span issue. I dont know. Maybe its a whole mentality issue with todays gamers. I dont know. But it seems the less they have to think the better.
Im an older guy, almost 37 now. (Jan) And I grew up with games like Eye of the Beholder, where every point in every skill mattered. Where we would study and debate between friends the best way to set up our character, our party, etc. Now, no offense, its like the vieo game industry big wigs are right. Gamers today are stupid. Dont make them think, just put some pretty graphics and explosions and call it a day. Having to think about points and play with menus, bah, i want to kill stuff!!
Now i know thats an exageration and im not attacking you personally but this is what gaming is becoming nowadays. I mean just take a look. Everything is getting dumbed down in favor for less depth and customization, and more action and drama. And to me thats not what makes an RPG.
As far as your points. Opening a different line of dialogue is not exactly what i meant when i talked about character customization. lol How about something simple. Im a mage (i like mages) and I need more skill or intelligence to get some new ability. But, when i take a few hits im dead in a heartbeat. So i choose to place some points in cinstitution for a level or two to increase my health and keep me from dying as easy, and put my skills on hold. Or maybe im a rogue and instead of people even more points in cunning or agility, maybe i feel I dont do enough damage, so I put more points in Strength instead. Thats options. I personally dont want to give up that kind of flexibility and customization in order to get into the game a minute faster.
As far as armor, how is it more. You can add a helmet and an outfit. Thats all. If you come across some boots you can wear and are for your race and lvl, why shouldnt you be able to wear them? Instead you have to make sure it "goes" with your outfit. Like some glorified barbie doll. Sorry but those gloves are so last week. They just dont go with my newest outfit. Lol. Thats not customization. Thats a limitation.
It aggravates me, and i apologize if i sometimes get, bitchy...lol. But It does aggravate me because growing up and playing games, I always thought, imagine what kind of stuff we'll be able to do in the future when technology really takes off. I mean if we can do all this stuff now, just imagine.
I never thought that when the technology did get to that point, that i would have to look back at those old games and say, wow what happened to those great games?
Yes we got nice new graphics and fancy resolutions, but the depth, and all that you could do in these older games has all but dwindled away. And its, disheartening.
So first off, if you're going to insult me, just do it. Trust me, I won't get mad. But don't make a half-assed comment about me (and "today's gamers," which we'll get to in a moment) being ADHD morons and then act like you weren't really talking about me a second later. It's silly. I know what you meant. Everyone here knows what you meant. Again, you're going to have to try a lot harder to make me angry. I promise. Commit, man.
Now since you brought it up, I'd like to discuss "today's gamers." Let's define "today's gamers," because I think you might be missing something vital: you're part of today's gamers. If you're a gamer today, you are a member of the club. When you were first starting out in that club, there were far fewer members. It was very cliquish. The Old Guard had a very particular set of interests, and those interests were catered to because the Old Guard made the games they played. But things change. Evolution is real. And humans like to change quickly. Video gaming is now the number one form of entertainment, above even film. It brings in a tremendous amount of revenue every year because veritable hordes of people play video games now. They've become integrated into things as small as our smart phones. Gamers today include your Old Guard - your voice is just smaller, because there are more of the New Guard now. Most people your age who played games in the past still play games, so it's not like you've disappeared and the only people left are CoD kids.
You're not that much older than me, just so you know. I grew up with most of the same games, because as a child my family was poor and we couldn't afford the newer, fancier, flashier ones. When that changed and I got to experience the "dumbed down" versions of the older games you're referring to, you know what? I liked them better. I don't want games to take away options so that I can jump into the action and start smacking stuff, I want them to streamline their features so that I can do what I came here to do: experience an epic story without having to spend thirty minutes on a spread sheet. There are pen-and-paper RPGs that I can do that with if I want to. You say that video games have gone backwards in relation to technology - what? Do you really think that if BioWare'd had access to these kinds of flashy graphics and fun gameplay systems twenty years ago they wouldn't have used them? They're keeping up with the times, and they're keeping up with their growing fan base. Getting somewhere first doesn't give you everlasting rights to dictate how every subsequent product that thing churns out is going to be, and while I understand your frustration (no, really, I promise I do) you have to realize that nothing stays the same, ever. Such is the nature of humanity. You can either grow with it or be left in the dust, but no amount of screaming at BioWare is going to make them alienate their now-larger audience.
Let's segue into the next point - streamlining. Toh-may-toh, toh-mah-toh, you might say, but what you're calling "dumbed down" isn't that at all - not in this game, at least, or maybe just not quite to the level that you're preaching. You brought up the example of the mage. Okay, fair point - you can't hop into a skill menu and put a few points into constitution. You know what you can do? Put a point from your Inquisition perks into giving your party better defenses. Craft armor and/or weapons that have constitution or maximum health in their specs. It really is, if not the same thing, very, very similar. And this:
As far as armor, how is it more. You can add a helmet and an outfit. Thats all. If you come across some boots you can wear and are for your race and lvl, why shouldnt you be able to wear them? Instead you have to make sure it "goes" with your outfit. Like some glorified barbie doll. Sorry but those gloves are so last week. They just dont go with my newest outfit. Lol. Thats not customization. Thats a limitation.
I don't understand. My apologies, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where you're coming from here. You can add a helmet, an outfit, and arm and leg attachments. You can change the colors and the patterns as well. If you come across some boots for your race and level...do you mean why can't you wear heavy armor if you're a mage? Is that what you're talking about? Because the answer to that is simply: gameplay mechanics. This is a game where you choose a class and stick with it for the duration. I understand your frustration, considering that you were able to wear epic tank armor as a wimpy mage in DA:O, but I've always seen that as a power-gaming attitude. I know not everybody shares my opinion, but can you give me a valid reason as to why, in a game with three rigidly defined classes, it should be an imperative that you are allowed to turn your squishy DPSer into an unholy, unkillable rape machine?
That's the only thing I can come up with to respond to that comment, because frankly the rest I don't understand. Where did you encounter an armor piece that you couldn't use with another armor piece, barring - again - class separation? If that's what you're talking about, then I'll direct you to my previous paragraph because my question is the same. That being said, yes, you're right - it is a limitation. But it's limited for a reason, not just because BioWare decided that they didn't like you all of a sudden.
We can go back and forth on this all day. I don't expect you to share my opinions. Nor should you expect me to share yours. But what I urge you to understand is that, again, nothing stays the same forever. Just because a 2014 FJ Cruiser isn't exactly the same as a 1972 FJ-40 doesn't automatically make it worse. Different, sure. But worse just because some of the older, outdated features are missing?
I've noticed in this and other forums, that many are subject to negative reactions when reading "a spoiler". They complain. Rather than avoiding the forums (ie: not reading), these individuals keep reading and complaining (on reading "spoilers").
As I have no such negative reactions, I find complaints humourus. The allegory, here, is someone that touches a hot stove, complains it's hot, then goes back to this wonderfull looking stove and touches it again.
To be fair, this is not a section that states spoilers are allowed, therefore no one should be expecting spoilers. So, a nice gesture by a thread starter would be to mention that there might be spoilers - which the OP gladly went back and edited in.
Were I to go into the Scuttlebutt spoilers section and complain about spoilers, I'd agree with you 100%. That's why I don't go into that section.
So first off, if you're going to insult me, just do it. Trust me, I won't get mad. But don't make a half-assed comment about me (and "today's gamers," which we'll get to in a moment) being ADHD morons and then act like you weren't really talking about me a second later. It's silly. I know what you meant. Everyone here knows what you meant. Again, you're going to have to try a lot harder to make me angry. I promise. Commit, man.
Now since you brought it up, I'd like to discuss "today's gamers." Let's define "today's gamers," because I think you might be missing something vital: you're part of today's gamers. If you're a gamer today, you are a member of the club. When you were first starting out in that club, there were far fewer members. It was very cliquish. The Old Guard had a very particular set of interests, and those interests were catered to because the Old Guard made the games they played. But things change. Evolution is real. And humans like to change quickly. Video gaming is now the number one form of entertainment, above even film. It brings in a tremendous amount of revenue every year because veritable hordes of people play video games now. They've become integrated into things as small as our smart phones. Gamers today include your Old Guard - your voice is just smaller, because there are more of the New Guard now. Most people your age who played games in the past still play games, so it's not like you've disappeared and the only people left are CoD kids.
You're not that much older than me, just so you know. I grew up with most of the same games, because as a child my family was poor and we couldn't afford the newer, fancier, flashier ones. When that changed and I got to experience the "dumbed down" versions of the older games you're referring to, you know what? I liked them better. I don't want games to take away options so that I can jump into the action and start smacking stuff, I want them to streamline their features so that I can do what I came here to do: experience an epic story without having to spend thirty minutes on a spread sheet. There are pen-and-paper RPGs that I can do that with if I want to. You say that video games have gone backwards in relation to technology - what? Do you really think that if BioWare'd had access to these kinds of flashy graphics and fun gameplay systems twenty years ago they wouldn't have used them? They're keeping up with the times, and they're keeping up with their growing fan base. Getting somewhere first doesn't give you everlasting rights to dictate how every subsequent product that thing churns out is going to be, and while I understand your frustration (no, really, I promise I do) you have to realize that nothing stays the same, ever. Such is the nature of humanity. You can either grow with it or be left in the dust, but no amount of screaming at BioWare is going to make them alienate their now-larger audience.
Let's segue into the next point - streamlining. Toh-may-toh, toh-mah-toh, you might say, but what you're calling "dumbed down" isn't that at all - not in this game, at least, or maybe just not quite to the level that you're preaching. You brought up the example of the mage. Okay, fair point - you can't hop into a skill menu and put a few points into constitution. You know what you can do? Put a point from your Inquisition perks into giving your party better defenses. Craft armor and/or weapons that have constitution or maximum health in their specs. It really is, if not the same thing, very, very similar. And this:
I don't understand. My apologies, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where you're coming from here. You can add a helmet, an outfit, and arm and leg attachments. You can change the colors and the patterns as well. If you come across some boots for your race and level...do you mean why can't you wear heavy armor if you're a mage? Is that what you're talking about? Because the answer to that is simply: gameplay mechanics. This is a game where you choose a class and stick with it for the duration. I understand your frustration, considering that you were able to wear epic tank armor as a wimpy mage in DA:O, but I've always seen that as a power-gaming attitude. I know not everybody shares my opinion, but can you give me a valid reason as to why, in a game with three rigidly defined classes, it should be an imperative that you are allowed to turn your squishy DPSer into an unholy, unkillable rape machine?
That's the only thing I can come up with to respond to that comment, because frankly the rest I don't understand. Where did you encounter an armor piece that you couldn't use with another armor piece, barring - again - class separation? If that's what you're talking about, then I'll direct you to my previous paragraph because my question is the same. That being said, yes, you're right - it is a limitation. But it's limited for a reason, not just because BioWare decided that they didn't like you all of a sudden.
We can go back and forth on this all day. I don't expect you to share my opinions. Nor should you expect me to share yours. But what I urge you to understand is that, again, nothing stays the same forever. Just because a 2014 FJ Cruiser isn't exactly the same as a 1972 FJ-40 doesn't automatically make it worse. Different, sure. But worse just because some of the older, outdated features are missing?
Ok....phew...lol....
First i wasnt trying to insult you or anyone else. Believe me i havent been quiet about my opinions in this forum at all yet, why would i now. I was generalizing todays gamers as a whole. If you felt I was attacking you, i think you may be being a bit defensive.
Now lets move on...
You say you dont want to spend an hour distributing points. But yet its ok to spend an hour or more on getting your nose just right, or the cheek bones to point out just a bit more. Etc. Besides it doesnt take 30 mins just to say...hmmm...i think ill put 2 points in Constitution and one in styrength. When you level up. I dont see that as all this work you are making it out to be. It takes all of 2 seconds. Just as much time if not less that choosing a skill or ability. I dont see a difference.
I never said games have gone backwards in regard to technology. I said that when i was younger I thought we would be able to do alot more and have alot more options available to us with all this new technology. But instead people like yourself say things like, "There are pen-and-paper RPGs that I can do that with if I want to." or "Well go play those games then." etc. I dont want the old games. I want to see all this technology put to good use besides just better graphics. Thats what I liked about Shadows of Mordor. They at least tried something new by creating a whole society system with this new tech. Thats progress to me. Thats something that gets me excited to be a gamer. Or Everquest Next with its new AI system "StoryBricks" that does away with rpeatable quests done by everyone and mobs that are always in the same place. Now we'll have mobs that have likes and dislikes, quest givers that respond to whats happening at the time. Thats progression I can get behind. Etc. Just saying that taking away aspects of a game to make it more streamlined is progression and i should basically get with the time, well, i dont buy that. To me its just limitations. No matter how developers spin it.
As far as the armor, what I mean is, and mind you this is as far as IM aware of. If you are wearing a certain outfit, in order to add boots or gloves, you can just add any that you happen to be open to as far as level range or race. You have to add the boots and gloves that happen to go with that exact outfit. So you cant add say, chain mail boots, to a scout outfit for example. Even if your class race and level requirement are met. Because it doesnt belong to that outfit. Thats a limitation. Now again im not talking putting steel plate on a rogue or something like that, but as far as I am aware In DAI you have outfits, coats/gloves/boots that all match and can only be put together with themselves. If that makes sense.
Now as far as thinking that stat points and complete armor selections and what have you are outdated aspects, and dont need to be in game, why is it that what, 5-6 years after release people still play, debate, and talk about how great DAO was, where with DAI you have alot of people, who were fans of the franchise, who either cant make it thru a single play thru, or have made it thru one or two and have put the game down already? In a matter of weeks.
Is it a decent game? Yes. Do i think that more people are liking it because its the new thing? Yes Do i think it will have the lasting effect and plays of DAO? Not a chance. Theres a reason DAO is looked upon as so great because not only of its great story and choices that made you second guess a hell of alot of them, but also your freedom to customize your character the way you wanted. Not how was dictated to you. And having the occasional point here and there to put in one aspect like dialogue or inventory slots, is not the same thing.
Gamers now a days don't want to spend hours debating the "best" possible setup and skill points. They don't want to take days to make a decision, only to realize it wasn't the optimal way to go and have to restart. Players now a days want to play. The problem with the "old guard" is that you're a cliche. You refuse to look at the majority of other gamers and can only think about how awesome the games were when you played. The games that were extremely hard and punishing, the games that were like pnp games and had no mercy. The games that weren't all the popular, because nobody likes losing or being forced to restart. Gamer's want to play a game when they have time to play it, not be forced to dedicate time to play it. It might suck, but the majority of gamers are like that now.
I don't understand. My apologies, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where you're coming from here. You can add a helmet, an outfit, and arm and leg attachments. You can change the colors and the patterns as well. If you come across some boots for your race and level...do you mean why can't you wear heavy armor if you're a mage? Is that what you're talking about? Because the answer to that is simply: gameplay mechanics. This is a game where you choose a class and stick with it for the duration. I understand your frustration, considering that you were able to wear epic tank armor as a wimpy mage in DA:O, but I've always seen that as a power-gaming attitude. I know not everybody shares my opinion, but can you give me a valid reason as to why, in a game with three rigidly defined classes, it should be an imperative that you are allowed to turn your squishy DPSer into an unholy, unkillable rape machine?
Actually... you can make any armor usable by any class. Use silverite as your masterwork ingredient. It gets ride of the class requirement. But you need to remember that warrior armor has warrior ingredients. It would be defense heavy and you wouldn't be able to get a cloth utility bonus out of it like magic+ or willpower+
And every set of armor has armor attachments. You can use any light armor attachment on any light piece of armor that has upgrade slots. Same for medium and heavy.
And mind you its not like im alone in thinking this game is limited and doesnt have a lasting appeal. I posted a thread about how I just had a hard time getting into the game and how I was disappointed with the mage class.
You can see the people commenting that they are having a hard time making it thru the game and have gotten frustrated with its limitations.
Heres that thread:
http://forum.bioware...his-im-so-torn/
Gamers now a days don't want to spend hours debating the "best" possible setup and skill points. They don't want to take days to make a decision, only to realize it wasn't the optimal way to go and have to restart. Players now a days want to play. The problem with the "old guard" is that you're a cliche. You refuse to look at the majority of other gamers and can only think about how awesome the games were when you played. The games that were extremely hard and punishing, the games that were like pnp games and had no mercy. The games that weren't all the popular, because nobody likes losing or being forced to restart. Gamer's want to play a game when they have time to play it, not be forced to dedicate time to play it. It might suck, but the majority of gamers are like that now.
Actually... you can make any armor usable by any class. Use silverite as your masterwork ingredient. It gets ride of the class requirement. But you need to remember that warrior armor has warrior ingredients. It would be defense heavy and you wouldn't be able to get a cloth utility bonus out of it like magic+ or willpower+
Thing is its not like im talking about some ancient or pen and paper type games. Were talking about games in the same franchise here. This IS a Dragon Age game. People expected a Dragon Age game. With all its complexity and choices. Especially after Bioware got reemed for what happened with DA2, they even said that DAI would be a return to form and EXPAND on what DAO was. This is not that game.
Some people love the game, some hate it. Some are somewhere in the middle.
Reviews are always at least party subjective. You enjoy the game? I'm happy for you. My experience with it is rather negative.
What everyone here needs to remember is that there is no single truth. Emotions colour our experiences far more than we are aware. A gamer playing DA:I on a new console probably has no technical difficulties and doesn't have to deal with weird controls while a PC gamer needs half an hour just to get the settings configured correctly. That alone can make the difference between "I love this game!" and "I want my money back!".
I will never attempt to convince someone who had fun playing DA:I that they shouldn't have enjoyed the game. If it works for you, perfect. In return I expect that people do not try to belittle my issues with a game that frustrates me.
Yes, I miss many elements of old games in newer games. In return, new games do a lot of things better than the old ones. We can discuss this civilly and figure out how to improve DA:I so everyone can enjoy it.
Arguments like "I had fun, you must be doing it wrong." or "This game drives me up the wall, why do you accept this?!" lead nowhere and are unproductive.
One thing about the attribute system though, if you look closely, instead of getting 3 points to put in here or there each levelup, the attribute gains are now tied to your skills/talents. Have a look at the tree - +3 dex, +str, etc etc all in the tree. Hence I guess that's why I never had a problem with the change - there's still customisation, heck already on the combat/strategy board people are making and comparing builds. The RPG elements are still in there in my opinion, and I love the crafting system! There's alot of different armors/looks in the game as well, you just have to find them.
My main gripe either than the PC controls is the tactics system however. For me in DAO and DA2 (especially in DAO) alot of the fun was fine-tuning my party's tactics without any micromanagement and seeing how my preparation pays off battle after battle. In DAI now however I'm playing the game within the limitations of the AI instead of fine-tuning the AI to suit my strategy. This is my main problem with DAI's gameplay - I even wrote a big thread on it.
My main gripe either than the PC controls is the tactics system however. For me in DAO and DA2 (especially in DAO) alot of the fun was fine-tuning my party's tactics without any micromanagement and seeing how my preparation pays off battle after battle. In DAI now however I'm playing the game within the limitations of the AI instead of fine-tuning the AI to suit my strategy. This is my main problem with DAI's gameplay - I even wrote a big thread on it.
Tactics weren't all that great because you had to unlock the slots for them first. If you didn't have enough, then the character wouldn't be able to use a certain skill.
Personally I have zero problems with the AI in DA:I. I am not using the tactical view, I just play my Inquisitor and let my party do their thing. Solas is better with placing the barrier than I am, Cassandra goes after the correct threats first, Varric keeps his distance... it's all good. Outside of moving them to a better position during dragon fights I don't micro manage them.
It feels like the AI does most things automatically we had to define in DA:O. The end result is nearly the same in my eyes.
That was easily fixed - immediately modders added more tactics slots and then finally advanced tactics mod
Already DAI took the ideas from the Winter Forge crafting mod from DAO and implemented it into DAI, and I fell in love after reaching Skyhold. Bethesda also learned alot from modders in the days of Oblivion. Why can't Bioware do the same with the advanced tactics mod?
In DAI I can't prioritise targets, in DAO aside from fine-tuning specific abilities I had tactics set up like this, e.g.:
- PC: Enemy attacking Morrigan - > Attack
- Enemy using ranged attack -> Attack
- Nearest enemy -> Attack
Translates in battle as: PC will attack any enemies that attack my mage, but if she's safe, he will attack the ranged mobs first, then finally he will attack the nearest target.
Then we have the combos:
- Morrigan: Enemy health > 90 -> Winter's Grasp
- PC: Enemy frozen -> Mighty Blow
You can't do that in DAI, combos have to be done manually. So no, not nearly the same from my experience. Also another one:
- Leliana: Enemy attacking Leliana -> Attack
- Target using melee -> Dirty Fighting (Stun)
Translation: Leliana will target mobs that are attacking her, and if they are using melee, she will stun them using her melee skill.
Now in DAI, I have Vivi with spirit blades but I don't want her charging into melee just to use it! But I can't change that.
Solas, Varric, Cassandra and I do combos all the time, without the need to do it manually. I even have the achievement and I sure as hell never did anything for it myself. ^^
Of course they do, but it's random when left to the AI, and many times I want to set up a combo but they fire off their ability too soon and then I have to wait for cooldown 
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the tactics are fine for some folks, but for folks like me who want to fine-tune our tactics, the current tactics system is poor compared to previous DAs.
Retour en haut
