848 réponses à ce sujet

[Giantdeathrobot]

It is true, with the warriors and rogues, I give you that much. I´ve always played with a mage so I can´t comment much about the other specs. However I don´t see how making warriors and rogues semi-mages with their ridiculous talens improves the gameplay (IMO). I had no problem having my support team whacking away "only" with weapons (thought most of them were magical). Warriors and rogues are "just" human/race. They only function through the skills grinded through basic weapon training, not by a magical talent.

For me the warrior/2hwarrior/rogue/mage basic party turns into mage/mage/mage/mage party because of the ridiculous talents and skills DAI has.

 

BG1 had a large variety of spells and spell slots at your disposal and BG2 had even more so the 10 limit (which I am not still sure about it, have to check) applies only to BG1. As for the vancian casting, maybe, though at the time I had no problem with it. Now, I don´t now, depends on the game. 

 

The very reason why you don't play rogues or warrior types is why you think them being boring as hell to play is fine, I'd wager. I like playing warriors, and on that front Dragon Age is way, way better than any D&D based game. I can feel that my character has a presence on the field, rather than just the guy who mops up after the mage is done AoEing and dispelling protections.

 

And really, you think fighters in D&D were less ridiculous? What with being able to kill a dragon in 4-5 hits (while having more HP than them!) late game and attack who knows how many times per round? Magic items that procced a wide variety of effects? Or bards (and associated kits) using magical music? Thieves dissapearing in thin air? 

[Uccio]

I'm not quite sure why your opinions on rogue and warrior gameplay deserve to be taken seriously, since you never play them and don't seem to be particularly interested in what they do.

 

 

The very reason why you don't play rogues or warrior types is why you think them being boring as hell to play is fine, I'd wager. I like playing warriors, and on that front Dragon Age is way, way better than any D&D based game. I can feel that my character has a presence on the field, rather than just the guy who mops up after the mage is done AoEing and dispelling protections.

 

And really, you think fighters in D&D were less ridiculous? What with being able to kill a dragon in 4-5 hits (while having more HP than them!) late game and attack who knows how many times per round? Magic items that procced a wide variety of effects? Or bards (and associated kits) using magical music? Thieves dissapearing in thin air? 

 

 

 

I worded it wrong, my canon play is always a mage. Like in Origins I played all the different beginnings, human noble - 2h sword, dwarven noble - sword/shield, dwarven castless- rogue sword/axe, alienage elven rogue two swords/daggers. I never took those talents which caused magical effects or actual disappearances. 

 

Warriors and rogues can have spectacular moves without unrealistic talents and firework effects. I love parry and dodge, how you can block enemy hits in Origins.

 

Mages get pass because their talent, magic, is part of the physical laws of that universe. Magical weapons fit in that category.

[Giantdeathrobot]

 

 

 

 

 

I worded it wrong, my canon play is always a mage. Like in Origins I played all the different beginnings, human noble - 2h sword, dwarven noble - sword/shield, dwarven castless- rogue sword/axe, alienage elven rogue two swords/daggers. I never took those talents which caused magical effects or actual disappearances. 

 

Warriors and rogues can have spectacular moves without unrealistic talents and firework effects. I love parry and dodge, how you can block enemy hits in Origins.

 

Mages get pass because their talent, magic, is part of the physical laws of that universe. Magical weapons fit in that category.

 

 

You not taking them doesn't mean it wasn't there. By that same logic you could conceivably just not level up talents on your warriors/rogues in Dragon Age, or just take those you seem realistic enough (surely Block and Slash or stuff like Shield Wall isn't too over the top?). I don't see why you would, but it's your game after all.

[Uccio]

well for that same reason I love Witcher combat, as much as I remember Witcher does not perform any over the top nor ghastly unrealistic moves while fighting (some magic yes but it fits the lore). 

[Vox Draco]

And really, you think fighters in D&D were less ridiculous? What with being able to kill a dragon in 4-5 hits (while having more HP than them!) late game and attack who knows how many times per round? Magic items that procced a wide variety of effects? Or bards (and associated kits) using magical music? Thieves dissapearing in thin air? 

 

What? That was possible? I always "fingered them to death" after massively reducing the Dragon's resistance with...the increase magic resistance-spells ^^...

 

Wait...fingered to death doesn't sound all that good..

[Giantdeathrobot]

well for that same reason I love Witcher combat, as much as I remember Witcher does not perform any over the top nor ghastly unrealistic moves while fighting (some magic yes but it fits the lore). 

 

You mean, apart from hacking at 10 men at a time faster than the naked eye can see (TW1)? Or the execution moves in TW2 that kills 3-4 enemies with the press of a button?

 

It's more realistic than Dragon Age, but not by much. You still, for example, manage to hurt a being made of stone with a sword and solo a dragon.

[Uccio]

You mean, apart from hacking at 10 men at a time faster than the naked eye can see (TW1)? Or the execution moves in TW2 that kills 3-4 enemies with the press of a button?

 

It's more realistic than Dragon Age, but not by much. You still, for example, manage to hurt a being made of stone with a sword and solo a dragon.

 

Well there was no actually insane movements included in those fights, and witcher is a mutated creation which explains his faster reflexes. Also the fight with the dragon was more like fighting from the safety of the tower and making a daring charge against it compared to DA whacking it to death. 

[In Exile]

Well there was no actually insane movements included in those fights, and witcher is a mutated creation which explains his faster reflexes. Also the fight with the dragon was more like fighting from the safety of the tower and making a daring charge against it compared to DA whacking it to death.

That still makes it unrealistic superhuman combat.

[ORTesc]

Bioware will never make another Origins. DA2 & DAI are facts that their fandom for action is immense. This is of course my opinion but 2 games that have similar actioney combat if that does not tells you anything

 

I honestly believe that Bioware honestly believes that there's no room for anyhting in this industry that doesn't involve hack n slash 'shoot em up' combat. It's such a shame considering their origins, but once the doctors left we all knew what EA was going to do to this developer. Is it really so much to ask for a real RPG in 2015? EA is such a cancer, they literally ruin everything they touch.

[SofaJockey]

Is it really so much to ask for a real RPG in 2015? EA is such a cancer, they literally ruin everything they touch.

 

Huh?

DAI - string of GOTY and RPG of the year.

I've found it a bundle of fun, haven't touched another game since November.

What sites have you been reading? BSN? 

[AlanC9]

Yeah, this thread really needed a necro. Thanks, ORTesc.

[outlaw1109]

Yeah, this thread really needed a necro. Thanks, ORTesc.

Fitting.  He/she is the OP.
 

Huh?

DAI - string of GOTY and RPG of the year.

I've found it a bundle of fun, haven't touched another game since November.

What sites have you been reading? BSN? 

I found it fun, and prefer it over Origins at this time, but RPG of the year I think is a stretch.

Personally, nothing against Dragon Age, but I've found myself searching for...a different RPG experience (after 3 playthroughs).

Maybe I'll try TW2 again...smh...

[gay_wardens]

the south park video reference was hilarious. well done OP!

[SofaJockey]

Fitting.  He/she is the OP.
 

I found it fun, and prefer it over Origins at this time, but RPG of the year I think is a stretch.

Personally, nothing against Dragon Age, but I've found myself searching for...a different RPG experience (after 3 playthroughs).

Maybe I'll try TW2 again...smh...

 

It's certainly true there is only so much you can do at one sitting.

After three single player play throughs I went to multiplayer and do not expect to be back to SP until DLC takes me there.

That's not a criticism of the game at all.

[sim-ran]

Oh my God OP they will never make Origins 2 - why is that so hard to grasp?!

You actually make a sensible point, but it changes nothing, they're going to continue to try new things, and not just repeat themselves, like they always have.

I've always regretted the direction the ME writing took after the first one but my not going to spam Bioware with requests to go back to it. Because its futile.

Also the way its looking, the new format is working out pretty well for them. You're just looking at how DAO fans responded. They will look at how the market as a whole responded. Can you honestly blame them?

[theluc76]

IF EAWare do a Origins2, they will butcher it anyways.

[Reever]

I haven't played DA:I yet, so it's not like I can judge the game. But I liked DA:O and would like to see the next DA game be in the same vein.

[sim-ran]

IF EAWare do a Origins2, they will butcher it anyways.

You know I'm not entirely sure what Origins 2 means anyway. The plotline and characters of DAI could constitute as DAO2 anyway so I guess it's just combat and levelling mechanics? I assume they don't mean gear, as DAI is debately better (some bits aren't as good, but others are much better).

I'm assuming the OP is a PC gamer and therefore sees more of a difference in combat. As a console gamer I'd say combat has never been good in any iteration, so feel free to keep experimenting.

Maybe they mean DAO style side quests? They certainly are better. Weapon swapping?

It seems more sensible to point out what needs improving rather than saying "give me DAO2". The game was great but not perfect after all, so we'd still want some new innovations beyond better graphics.

[kaidanluv]

I don't know that we necessarily need a DAO 2 more than we need Bioware to stick to what they do best, and not do this out-of-character "open world" thing. DAI without the filler content and a longer story would have kicked ass, as the only thing I dislike about starting another playthrough is doing all the pointless side quests. Some of them should have at least made some sort of impact on the larger world in order for them to have been compelling and worth completing.

[ORTesc]

The issue is and always has been the lack of quality content. Cut and paste "mmo-style" quests is what kills this game. There simply isn't enough quality content to justify that 2nd or 3rd playthrough, mostly because not much is going to change. In Origins, a lot of what you did had an impact on the game. Did you give Bella money to escape to Denerim or put her in charge of the bar? Did you take the sword or pay for it? Was Connor 'cured' or did you leave his possession unchecked? Talking tree or mad hermit? Side with wolves or elves or manage to side with both? Who became King of Orzimar? I mean almost everything you did FELT like it had an impact as big or small as it may have been. In Inquisiton that's simply not there. Fetching 8x this or 10x that is horrible game design. Why not just put a yellow exclamation point over their heads and call it what it is? An offline mmo.

 

This game being in the top 5 of 2014 really shows how far gone this industry is. It doesn't deserve it, but then again, what does? EVERY big AAA release is either tied to microtransactions or failed miserably. GTA 5 ruined many aspects of it's singleplayer to ensure that people would purchase their stupid online money points. Far Cry and ACU? Ubisoft. Need I say more? And Bioware comes out with a semi competent RPG, of course it's going to win. But it's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.

 

I'm sorry, yes I necrod my own thread. But I haven't been around in a few weeks. I was simply catching up on what I missed. The fact is, Bioware made a decent game. But it doesn't deserve the praise it's getting, especially from the sell out game media (including Angry Joe).

[Natureguy85]

The issue is and always has been the lack of quality content. Cut and paste "mmo-style" quests is what kills this game. There simply isn't enough quality content to justify that 2nd or 3rd playthrough, mostly because not much is going to change. In Origins, a lot of what you did had an impact on the game. Did you give Bella money to escape to Denerim or put her in charge of the bar? Did you take the sword or pay for it? Was Connor 'cured' or did you leave his possession unchecked? Talking tree or mad hermit? Side with wolves or elves or manage to side with both? Who became King of Orzimar? I mean almost everything you did FELT like it had an impact as big or small as it may have been. In Inquisiton that's simply not there. Fetching 8x this or 10x that is horrible game design. Why not just put a yellow exclamation point over their heads and call it what it is? An offline mmo.

 

This game being in the top 5 of 2014 really shows how far gone this industry is. It doesn't deserve it, but then again, what does? EVERY big AAA release is either tied to microtransactions or failed miserably. GTA 5 ruined many aspects of it's singleplayer to ensure that people would purchase their stupid online money points. Far Cry and ACU? Ubisoft. Need I say more? And Bioware comes out with a semi competent RPG, of course it's going to win. But it's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.

 

I'm sorry, yes I necrod my own thread. But I haven't been around in a few weeks. I was simply catching up on what I missed. The fact is, Bioware made a decent game. But it doesn't deserve the praise it's getting, especially from the sell out game media (including Angry Joe).

 

I am a big Origins fan, but don't misrepresent what the game was. Those examples you gave actually had little to no effect on the game. Bella and the sword aren't important to anything, Eamon gives you his support no matter what happens to Connor, tree or hermit just changes whom you fight: ditto for Behlen or Harrowmont. Now some of these do affect the world going forward, but not the story or game. The farthest the biggest choices in the game go is to change which troops you get in Denerim.

 

Edit: This is not to say that I didn't enjoy these RP choices and I do want them in these games. They felt like real people and were well done.

[Elfyoth]

Let me change your title before I read it.... "Dear Bioware just make Inquisition 2" 

[outlaw1109]

I am a big Origins fan, but don't misrepresent what the game was. Those examples you gave actually had little to no effect on the game. Bella and the sword aren't important to anything, Eamon gives you his support no matter what happens to Connor, tree or hermit just changes whom you fight: ditto for Behlen or Harrowmont. Now some of these do affect the world going forward, but not the story or game. The farthest the biggest choices in the game go is to change which troops you get in Denerim.

I agree.  That would be one of the areas I think should have theoretically been improved upon (instead, even the illusion of choice was removed).

Keep game mechanics, (the shuffling was irritating, but acceptable).  Improve crafting, graphics, AI and storyline impact throughout the game.

New protag., story, and companions.  DA:O 2.

If I could make it myself, I would.

 

[Cyonan]

The issue is and always has been the lack of quality content. Cut and paste "mmo-style" quests is what kills this game. There simply isn't enough quality content to justify that 2nd or 3rd playthrough, mostly because not much is going to change. In Origins, a lot of what you did had an impact on the game. Did you give Bella money to escape to Denerim or put her in charge of the bar? Did you take the sword or pay for it? Was Connor 'cured' or did you leave his possession unchecked? Talking tree or mad hermit? Side with wolves or elves or manage to side with both? Who became King of Orzimar? I mean almost everything you did FELT like it had an impact as big or small as it may have been. In Inquisiton that's simply not there. Fetching 8x this or 10x that is horrible game design. Why not just put a yellow exclamation point over their heads and call it what it is? An offline mmo.

 

This game being in the top 5 of 2014 really shows how far gone this industry is. It doesn't deserve it, but then again, what does? EVERY big AAA release is either tied to microtransactions or failed miserably. GTA 5 ruined many aspects of it's singleplayer to ensure that people would purchase their stupid online money points. Far Cry and ACU? Ubisoft. Need I say more? And Bioware comes out with a semi competent RPG, of course it's going to win. But it's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.

 

I'm sorry, yes I necrod my own thread. But I haven't been around in a few weeks. I was simply catching up on what I missed. The fact is, Bioware made a decent game. But it doesn't deserve the praise it's getting, especially from the sell out game media (including Angry Joe).

 

So tell me about this great impact on the game that leaving Connor possessed has. I keep bringing it up whenever people talk about choice in Origins mattering, but nobody has been able to give me an answer beyond "Alistair disapproves -10".

 

If we're going to praise Origins we should at least be honest: It was great at giving you the choice in how you handled matters, but it was terrible at making that choice actually mean something within the game.

[In Exile]

So tell me about this great impact on the game that leaving Connor possessed has. I keep bringing it up whenever people talk about choice in Origins mattering, but nobody has been able to give me an answer beyond "Alistair disapproves -10".

If we're going to praise Origins we should at least be honest: It was great at giving you the choice in how you handled matters, but it was terrible at making that choice actually mean something within the game.

And DA2 faced an incredible amount of rage over the fact that there were choices without measurable in-game consequence. Clearly Bioware had a resource issue with the side quests but I don't blame them for cutting flavour choices seeing the way DA2 went.