371 réponses à ce sujet

[saladinbob]

I understand why Bioware made each area level specific. It prevents the player from opening up the map too quickly. On the other hand it removes any reason to ever go back once you're over level for that area. So you can't really call Inquisition an Open world. It's just a collection of rather large maps.

[StrayChild83]

I understand why Bioware made each area level specific. It prevents the player from opening up the map too quickly. On the other hand it removes any reason to ever go back once you're over level for that area. So you can't really call Inquisition an Open world. It's just a collection of rather large maps.

 

I don't have problem of area getting low level, it makes it better to plan what area to use for leveling up first, so you don't have to waste its exp, how ever even that is pointless now that everything respawn and exp isn't needed for anything because everything stays at your level anyway. To make game much more enjoyable they would need to remove respawns, so then you could plan carefully all areas you use if you want to get most exp out of it.

[Owlbear]

 

Call me a completist if you want, but I don't think that is a bad thing.

 

If it is preventing you from enjoying the game, then I don't see how it's not a bad thing.

 

I don't think DA:I is one of Bioware's greatest achievements, but I think it's pretty good. One of the realities–and strong points–of Bioware's character and choice-driven games is that you can't experience everything in on go: you have to choose one path out of many possible paths. This also means that there is an incentive to play the game more than once. This, in turn, means that you can skip many of the quests during any given playthrough and yet ultimately experience them all.

 

If you feel compelled to complete every playable part of the game on your first playthrough, you will be fighting against the game design to try to cram everything in to one journey that was designed to be revealed over a course of many journeys. Any time you fight against the game design, you are going to end up frustrated and unhappy. Worse, if you end up succeeding, you will be faced with the prospect of having to do the exact same quests again if you want to try the game with a different class, race, romance, or character concept, rather than getting to experience some new content along with your new character.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a completionist by nature, but branching story RPGs are probably the worst possible game type for that sort of person to play. Better to stick with strictly linear games that are, by nature, designed to show you all they have on a single run. If you've already paid for DA:I, you might as well try to play it the way it was designed to be played in order to squeeze as much enjoyment out of it as you can.

 

I think I explored less than half the world in my first game, and that is what will make it replayable at least one or two more times.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I've been building them for over 30 years and you are right that they are indeed meant to compute but just like the tungsten element of an incandescent lightbulb it is repetitive expansion and contraction of the metal that causes failure.  I monitor 8 different points in my box on another screen while I play and have never seen temps rollercoaster as they do in this game even using military spec'd parts wherever I can.

 

Yeah, I really don't know what's up with this game. Everything's fine, the GPU is running at 45% usage and suddendly there are 99% spikes. In menus. Oo

I also wonder what the heck DA:I is doing with my CPU. My Core i7 is never that busy, not even during the installation of Sharepoint, Exchange and SQL on several virtual machines at the same time.

[taglag]

I do appreaciate the Response Owlbear, but that was very much taken out of contex, I having played Kotor1, Kotor sithlords, and ME1, Me2, as well are Origins, and DA2  at least 4 time each fully understand how one must play Bioware Games many time's. NOTE:: I left out ME3 because one play through was all I could take

 

  My point was that In each play through I verymuch try to complete all parts of the Game in what every way my choices give me. I like this game, the side quests are for me actually fun, even the fetch and carry ones.

 

  I find some trouble with having to go back to the main area (Skyhold ) sometimes troubling or confusing ( To open another area ), but doing the quests is not actually a pain for me, it is a pleasure. as I said

 

{

 2.  The Op has a point in that Many of the side quests do seem to be dis-jointed from the main quest, and I guess don't have to be done.

 

But I feel obligated to try and finish them all.

 

Call me a completist if you want, but I don't think that is a bad thing.}

 

  I enjoy RPG's for there content, and I like having many things to do, I will admit that some are far more fun that other's, but I always like the full experience, and don't like to just do what I have to so I can tell every one I finished the game. I like being a completist, for me this is a fun way to play, and enjoy the game.

 

And I am enjoying this one.

 

I don't like when I explain something that troubles me, and get this answer.

 

{1. You don't have to do the whole story, and all the quests just do enough to finish the game, you can skip all the requisition stuff, and sell everything, except the Monster study items, all you need is enough power for the main quest.}

 

  That for me is not fun. NOTE:: I said for me! What is fun for you is your own personal choice, I just enjoy being a completist in my RPG games.

[StrayChild83]

If it is preventing you from enjoying the game, then I don't see how it's not a bad thing.

 

I don't think DA:I is one of Bioware's greatest achievements, but I think it's pretty good. One of the realities–and strong points–of Bioware's character and choice-driven games is that you can't experience everything in on go: you have to choose one path out of many possible paths. This also means that there is an incentive to play the game more than once. This, in turn, means that you can skip many of the quests during any given playthrough and yet ultimately experience them all.

 

If you feel compelled to complete every playable part of the game on your first playthrough, you will be fighting against the game design to try to cram everything in to one journey that was designed to be revealed over a course of many journeys. Any time you fight against the game design, you are going to end up frustrated and unhappy. Worse, if you end up succeeding, you will be faced with the prospect of having to do the exact same quests again if you want to try the game with a different class, race, romance, or character concept, rather than getting to experience some new content along with your new character.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a completionist by nature, but branching story RPGs are probably the worst possible game type for that sort of person to play. Better to stick with strictly linear games that are, by nature, designed to show you all they have on a single run. If you've already paid for DA:I, you might as well try to play it the way it was designed to be played in order to squeeze as much enjoyment out of it as you can.

 

I think I explored less than half the world in my first game, and that is what will make it replayable at least one or two more times.

 

If you think re-play value was considered in this, why didn't they add anything else for like mage class. I mean the story is 99% the same no matter what class you play, that takes off lot of this "re-play value". I wanted to try mage after rogue just to find out what more there is in story for mage class and all I got was like few options in dialogue to say "hey I am a mage" and everyone replies like "what ever" and thats it, other than that it was just the same as playing any other class. Would been nice to have least something different in fade for playing mage.

[DaemionMoadrin]

If it is preventing you from enjoying the game, then I don't see how it's not a bad thing.

 

I don't think DA:I is one of Bioware's greatest achievements, but I think it's pretty good. One of the realities–and strong points–of Bioware's character and choice-driven games is that you can't experience everything in on go: you have to choose one path out of many possible paths. This also means that there is an incentive to play the game more than once. This, in turn, means that you can skip many of the quests during any given playthrough and yet ultimately experience them all.

 

If you feel compelled to complete every playable part of the game on your first playthrough, you will be fighting against the game design to try to cram everything in to one journey that was designed to be revealed over a course of many journeys. Any time you fight against the game design, you are going to end up frustrated and unhappy. Worse, if you end up succeeding, you will be faced with the prospect of having to do the exact same quests again if you want to try the game with a different class, race, romance, or character concept, rather than getting to experience some new content along with your new character.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a completionist by nature, but branching story RPGs are probably the worst possible game type for that sort of person to play. Better to stick with strictly linear games that are, by nature, designed to show you all they have on a single run. If you've already paid for DA:I, you might as well try to play it the way it was designed to be played in order to squeeze as much enjoyment out of it as you can.

 

I think I explored less than half the world in my first game, and that is what will make it replayable at least one or two more times.

 

I believe you are wrong. It makes no sense to offer a player all those areas and then assume they will only play some of them. This is a design flaw and not intentional.

Replay value comes from different experiences. If playing the game again is mostly the same, then there's no point. A different class might make the difference but most of the time I play games again to take the story to another ending or play it another way. In DA:O that could mean siding with the templars instead of the mages or supporting the Dalish vs. the werewolves. KotOR feels very different as Sith compared to a earlier Jedi playthrough.

 

The number of playthroughs is a good indicator of replay value. Mass Effect: 8, ME2: 8, ME3: 2. KotOR: 6, KotOR2: 6, BG1+BG2+Throne of Bhaal: 20+, Dragon Age: 10, DAII: 6, DA:I... 1. That being said, I completed The Witcher and Skyrim only once too and probably won't play those games again anytime soon.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I also don't care if I finish, but to me that's a sign of a good game. There's so much to do, the main quest almost doesn't matter.

I continue to say that Baldur's Gate is one of the best CRPGs ever made, but to this day, some 15 years after I first player it, I've never finished it.

I've played over a dozen characters in DAO. I've slain the archdemon once.

I may never actually get to the end of DAI, but that's a good sign, not a bad one.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I believe you are wrong. It makes no sense to offer a player all those areas and then assume they will only play some of them. This is a design flaw and not intentional.

I completely disagree. If a player is expected to see all the content in the game, then you're missing an opportunity to offer a choice.

Choosing between A and B is nice, but having the option of Neither available is even better.

[Ashen Nedra]

To Taglag:

 

Nobody should try to make you play in a certain way in a single-player RPG. That's bad game design, plain and simple.

 

In Dai, it sometimes feel like somebody was so impressed with his own 'art' -or marketing bs- as you prefer, that they inserted mechanisms just to force players to see the  different parts of the game:

 

'Oh they absolutely (to be pronounced with a veeerry cultured accent) need to see the pretty landscapes, let's insert the shards!'

 

'Oh , sorry, people, don't know a thing about French culture, they're not civilized enough, my dear... Let's create a ridicule version of France where everybody  talks like a living cliché and get rid of the French actresses (or pick people from Quebec,idk, isn't bioware from Canada, for Christ's sake). They were too expensive anyway'

 

'young people like colors, my daaaaarling, let's put them everywhere, and make the male characters all dress like hipsters, yeeah'

 

'They like action, fast-paced, no pause, yeeeeeeeeah. Don't let them issue tactics no, no. Bad player. Bad player. respect my authoritaaaaayyyyh"

 

You get my meaning....

 

I'm glad you're still enjoying the game and, being a completionist at heart, I really feel for your plight.

Modifié par Ashen nedra, 15 décembre 2014 - 02:09 .

[DaemionMoadrin]

I also don't care if I finish, but to me that's a sign of a good game. There's so much to do, the main quest almost doesn't matter.

I continue to say that Baldur's Gate is one of the best CRPGs ever made, but to this day, some 15 years after I first player it, I've never finished it.

I've played over a dozen characters in DAO. I've slain the archdemon once.

I may never actually get to the end of DAI, but that's a good sign, not a bad one.

 

Forgive me for saying that, but that's rather weird. Good that you're having fun, but not finishing a game is pretty unusual.

 

I completely disagree. If a player is expected to see all the content in the game, then you're missing an opportunity to offer a choice.

Choosing between A and B is nice, but having the option of Neither available is even better.

 

I don't really understand what you're saying here.

[Ryzaki]

Forgive me for saying that, but that's rather weird. Good that you're having fun, but not finishing a game is pretty unusual.

 

Uh...it's actually what most people do.

 

According to most gaming stats most people don't finish the game. Now it may not  be intentionally but that's what the stats show.

 

http://www.ign.com/a...at-finish-games

[Ashen Nedra]

kids these days....can't concentrate

[Sylvius the Mad]

Forgive me for saying that, but that's rather weird. Good that you're having fun, but not finishing a game is pretty unusual.

It's not always a good sign.  It's a good sign in game I want to start again and again (like DAO), or a game I want to explore indefinitely (like Skyrim), and DAI manages to be both of those things at once.

 

But a game that is merely frustrating to play, such that I want neither to continue nor to restart (like DA2, or The Witcher) is a bad game.

I don't really understand what you're saying here.

Offering a player a choice in a game as you describe it would involve letting him choose to experience specific content in different ways.

 

And that's better than not offering that choice.  But even better, I would argue, is giving him not only the option to experience that content in different ways (say, defend the city, or conquer the city), but also give the player the option not to experience the content at all (abandon the city to its fate).

[abearzi]

Offering a player a choice in a game as you describe it would involve letting him choose to experience specific content in different ways.

 

And that's better than not offering that choice.  But even better, I would argue, is giving him not only the option to experience that content in different ways (say, defend the city, or conquer the city), but also give the player the option not to experience the content at all (abandon the city to its fate).

The problem though, is that in DAI most of the choices consist of either: Do a thing or do not do a thing. If you choose to do a thing, there is little actual variation in the manner which the thing can be done in.

 

I do agree that having the option to opt out of doing a thing is good. But there is do or do not, rather than do in a selection of ways or do not.

 

Stab the shifty merchant? Barter with the shifty merchant? Run off the Shifty merchant? Get bribed by the shifty merchant? Ignore the whole mess, its not your problem? That was choice. There are only a very, very small handful of quests in DAI which offer anything like that in terms of options. That was the rule in DAO rather than the exception.

[Dakota Strider]

I can sympathize with the OP.  I try to go through every possible nick and cranny of a game world, and leave no stone unturned.... (etc, more clichés).  I managed to complete the game yesterday, and now I have no desire to go back in.  After DAO, BG2, and NWN1, I jumped right back in almost immediately, eager to try new builds, try different tactics and make different Role Play choices.  While there are a few things in DAI that I didn't get to try the first time through, for the most part, I feel like I have seen it all.  Every type of rogue, warrior or mage was basically at my disposal in my party.  Combat in DAI seemed to be a repetition of hitting the same 3-5 hot keys in every combat, almost in the same order every time.  No need for tactics, and even when I tried to have my party fight in an orderly fashion, they totally ignored them.  So, not much thrill of achievement in button-mashing through combat. 

 

Now I would like to make constructive criticism, even though I won't hold my breath waiting for a Bioware employee reading this, let alone even considering it.  But, there are things that they could have done, perhaps still do in future patches that would make this game more riveting. 

 

Side Quests:  Even if the quests have nothing to do with the main story...please give us some type of feedback when we complete them.  If I fulfill the dying wish of some nameless peasant, obviously without any type of reward, the least you could do is give me a Slight Approval from Sera (for helping the little people) or a Disapproval from that snotty biatch Vivienne (for wasting time on nobodies).  Also, just a tiny little note in the Completed Quest, that either gives a backstory regarding the quest, or perhaps a synopsis of how completing it helped/hurt somebody, whether or not my character personally gains from it.  It would be a huge project to do now, but it is something that could still be added retroactively if they really wanted. 

 

Start of Game:  It would almost take an expansion to do, but even the tiniest bit of an Origin for our characters would help us connect and perhaps give us "ownership".  At the very least, let us spend some time at the Enclave at the Temple of Sacred Ashes, and give us a chance to meet and interact with people...perhaps develop friendships.  And then...when we start to like these people...blow them all up.  Now...we are hooked...we actually have a personal reason to want to destroy whoever killed our friends.  In DAO, the desire for my Warden to revenge his fallen friends at Ostagar, and was real.  In DAI, it feels contrived, and it is harder to feel connected with a story about loss, that you never really experienced.  If they were pressed for time, in creating this game, they could have removed one of the "non-essential" adventure areas, to add this "Origin" content.

 

Build a Better Villain:  If they would have made us more connected with the lost friends in the destruction of the Temple of Sacred Ashes, this would already be mostly accomplished.  I kept waiting for an attack on my allies, especially my LI, as a way to take revenge on the things my Herald had done.  Granted it may be cliché...but it works.  So Carrifeshit (thanks Sera) was a (SPOILER) Magister AND a Darkspawn.  Oooooooh.  We have been taught those are two of the worst things in all of Thedas.  But, they really did very little, besides some codex entries to make us understand why.  Its been quite a bit of time, in both game, and in our world since DAO, and while they did a great job of making us revile darkspawn then, they needed to do more about it in DAI, if that was part of the reason we are supposed to hate the main villain.  And even DA2 did a decent job of showing why the Tevinter Magistars are evil, but it just did not carry over into this game.  This villain was powerful, monstrous and definitely evil....but it was really hard to get worked up about him, as in past games.

 

So those are a couple of things they could have done, using the same tools they used to build the rest of the game, that would have helped game immersion. 

 

However, there are choices they made that cannot be fixed with a patch, or an expansion, or a rewrite.  They chose to make characters cookie cutter clones for the most part.  If we cannot build our own characters, to suit the way we want to play them, I don't care how perfect I can design the avatar.  In NWN or BG we had next to zero customization of avatars, yet because we could build them, by class and ability scores...and I for one, felt far more connected with my character than I did with either Hawke or the Inquisitor. 

 

This post is already too long, I go on and on about choices the devs made in creating this game that took away choices, which then reduced the opportunities for player immersion.  Obviously, not every game player enjoys the same type of games.  So there are plenty of people that are happy with the change of direction Bioware has made with their franchise.  There were good games before Bioware started...there will be companies that pick up the mantle of creating quality CRPGs now. 

[Shardik1]

Very well said. Dakota.  You hit a lot of nails on their collective heads. 

 

You gave a lot of great suggestions but as you know, the format of the game was set and built to the point where the corrections that really need to be made would just about entail a complete restructuring of the game.

 

I doubt that there will be anything dome with the PC UI or the health potions or quest structures or goals and only expect the obvious mechanical bugs such as quest items not dropping and having NPCs spawn halfway in walls.

[Spectre Impersonator]

I haven't finished my first playthrough yet either.  Can't really get into it. It started to feel more like work than experiencing a story. The same happened with Dragon Age: Origins but that was due to poor combat IMO and I ultimately found that worth completing multiple times.

 

Inquisition is just too many grind-tastic quests and not enough heart. I can overlook mechanical flaws, animation glitches, and even the dreaded conversation bug if it weren't for the very poor grind to engaging quest ratio. 

 

To be honest, the amount of fetching and boring gathering we have to do in Inquisition makes the planet-scanning in ME2 look like a joy.

[StrayChild83]

I haven't finished my first playthrough yet either.  Can't really get into it. It started to feel more like work than experiencing a story. The same happened with Dragon Age: Origins but that was due to poor combat IMO and I ultimately found that worth completing multiple times.

 

Inquisition is just too many grind-tastic quests and not enough heart. I can overlook mechanical flaws, animation glitches, and even the dreaded conversation bug if it weren't for the very poor grind to engaging quest ratio. 

 

To be honest, the amount of fetching and boring gathering we have to do in Inquisition makes the planet-scanning in ME2 look like a joy.

 

Amount of those shards to find is just ridiculous. Also the side quests keep repeating same quests over and over again, you can end up with endless power and for main quests you need just like 100 , I actually ended up to have over 200 power with my first play, when I was just completing everything for fun.

[Darkly Tranquil]

But a game that is merely frustrating to play, such that I want neither to continue nor to restart (like DA2, or The Witcher) is a bad game.

You just described my experience of DAI, and I finished DA2 multiple times and Witcher once.

[Spectre Impersonator]

Amount of those shards to find is just ridiculous. Also the side quests keep repeating same quests over and over again, you can end up with endless power and for main quests you need just like 100 , I actually ended up to have over 200 power with my first play, when I was just completing everything for fun.

If only it WAS actually fun. 

[abearzi]

You just described my experience of DAI, and I finished DA2 multiple times and Witcher once.

Same. I did multiple DA2 plays before the endless map-repetition just got to be too much. I was bored of DAI before I even finished it.

[Bladenite1481]

I actually played a ton of hours, however most of that was restarting again and again trying to get the right look, feel and motivation for my Inquisitor. Finally I realized that I just didn't like the game, so I cut through the BS, made a bee-line for the boss and beat the game so it would be off my list of things to do. 

[luism]

I'm feeling the same may have to shelve the game till some decent content gets added.