535 réponses à ce sujet

[barenas]

no to day/night cycles please.

 

why? If they are going toward a more open world style, I think a day/night cycle is pretty important for immersion. For linear, corridor games not so much.

[Fantazm1978]

why? If they are going toward a more open world style, I think a day/night cycle is pretty important for immersion. For linear, corridor games not so much.

 

it's usually either so slow that you end up spending half the game in the dark (or "waiting" for daylight and making the whole thing pointless) or it's too quick and it takes you an entire day to have a conversation with an NPC.

[Olddog56]

I hope Bioware makes the next Dragon Age twice as big as DAI!

 

It is so freakin cool to have a huge gameworld to explore! I love this game and its big sandbox I can play in.

 

Moar plz Bioware?  kthx

[tmp7704]

it's usually either so slow that you end up spending half the game in the dark (or "waiting" for daylight and making the whole thing pointless) or it's too quick and it takes you an entire day to have a conversation with an NPC.

Maybe this mechanics could work if the day/night thing wasn't automatic but more like 'permanent' day/night/whatever that you'd switch between. Not unlike what they tried in DA2, now that I think about it, though imo it was marred there with parachuting night time spawns.

[In Exile]

why? If they are going toward a more open world style, I think a day/night cycle is pretty important for immersion. For linear, corridor games not so much.

It's anti-immersion. Time doesn't flow at the rate that the game shows. Days dont take hours/minutes. It's an abstraction. So you end up getting yo-yo weather and when you add in specific times for events, you basically have to use the wait function over and over to get the time to fit.

It's one of the worst open world feature ever. By far worse than the worker ant AI Morrowind popularised as somehow being realistic or alive.

[Vox Draco]

I don't mind the day/night cycle, as long as I can just wait the night out and just play during daytime, I hate stumbling around in the dark .. ^^

[SilentK]

I have loved these big maps. There are so many places that I have not seen yet, just waiting to be discovered with my next Quizzy. I cannot replay Origins yet again because I still know the maps by heart. This game works so much better for me.

[Wolven_Soul]

That's nonsense. BG1 quests were garbage with almost 0 dialogue and no reactivity.

The dialogue wasn't great, that's true, but calling the quests garbage is a serious case of a bad memory.  I remember quite a bit of interesting side content.  Such as finding Minsc and going with him to find his witch.  Running into Drizzt while out and about.  And there was a ton of cool stuff to do once actually making it to Baldur's Gate.  Such as dealing with that priestess of Umberlee.  What you call garbage quests, I call a whole lot of good stuff to distract me from the main quest.

 

Something that Inquisition has absolutely none of.

[Wolven_Soul]

Skyrim is an empty walking simulator. Just because it had a lot of caves to go spelunking in and AI that simulates the behaviour of humans if they were lobotomised worker ants does not make it a living world.

Wow....did you even play the game?  Or maybe have you gotten knocked on the head while you were playing the game?  I will admit that the main story of Skyrim was rather lackluster, but the side content had a of interesting stuff.  Most particularly, the Dark Brotherhood story line was really good.  I liked the Companions missions as well.  The Mage Guild's stuff was decent, and a few of the city's quest lines were pretty neat.  Again, interesting side content to distract one from the main mission.  Something Inquisition simply does not have.

[In Exile]

The dialogue wasn't great, that's true, but calling the quests garbage is a serious case of a bad memory. I remember quite a bit of interesting side content. Such as finding Minsc and going with him to find his witch. Running into Drizzt while out and about. And there was a ton of cool stuff to do once actually making it to Baldur's Gate. Such as dealing with that priestess of Umberlee. What you call garbage quests, I call a whole lot of good stuff to distract me from the main quest.

Something that Inquisition has absolutely none of.

Finding Jahaeira is a random kill quest. Minsc shows up and asks you to massacre some gnolls. You then go through 4 maps of encounters, exterminate everything alive, and at the end of it Jaheira thanks you and asks to join. And that's basically your last conversation with her or Minsc ever. How is this a better quest than finding an agent after a random kill quest?

And how is Drizt even a quest? You just murder some gnolls together, he gives you some advice, and you run off. That's barely a cameo.

To me that's the same trash style of quest you find in DAI.

The Umberlee quest is totally different. It had multiple stages, the reward vary depending on who you side with, it ties in with a whole other wuestline in Baldur's Gate. It's a side quest in the sense that it's not related to the main plot but it has more content than the Neshkel Mines and the Bandit camp combined.

[In Exile]

Wow....did you even play the game? Or maybe have you gotten knocked on the head while you were playing the game? I will admit that the main story of Skyrim was rather lackluster, but the side content had a of interesting stuff. Most particularly, the Dark Brotherhood story line was really good. I liked the Companions missions as well. The Mage Guild's stuff was decent, and a few of the city's quest lines were pretty neat. Again, interesting side content to distract one from the main mission. Something Inquisition simply does not have.

It's very wrong, IMO, to consider faction quests in Skyrim the side quests. They're like a mix between the MQ in DAI and the companion quest. In fact I would say these quests are - in terms of resources invested - the actual "main" quest of Skyrim that we need to compare with the main quest in DAI, and then with the Dragonborn main quest being more the equivalent of the DAI companion quests.

Still this is Skyrim's A-game. They're the highlight and Bestheda knows it. While they're technically side quests in terms of the terminology we use I think its a misleading comparison to equate them to the zone quests.

[NedPepper]

The big sign is a cutscene that talks about the plot. It seems that for some people this is very important. I understand that feeling. I prefer more cutscenes. I just don't mind their lack when the combat isnt pure garbage like Skyrim or FO3, which I play in spite of the actual gameplay.

 

 

I would certainly say that seeing an actual reaction with a cutscene after doing a fetch quest is in infinitely more interesting.  Mainly because the NPC becomes an actual character instead of just a quest giver.  

You said, "But we learned that people like fetch quests that are covered up in imaginative ways. Perhaps it helped that the DAO UI didn't flash a "Collect Acorn 0/1 bar"? To point out they are on a fetch quest? "

And you are right.  There was at least an emotional connection to talking to the Rhyming Tree after retrieving his acorn.  It didn't feel like a bland quest giver.  It was as you said, imaginative.  It's that little touch.  Also, you could kill the tree if you wanted.  There were options there.  

Now let's look at the Emprise Du Lion.  Miners are being kidnapped.  It's templars.  Solution.  Randomly walk around, wipe out the hordes and then you get an anti-climatic "QUEST COMPLETED".  No big boss?  No dialogue whatsover?  Just kill the bad guys, you win?  It just rings hollow.

Hell, in Dragon Age 2, there's the mission where you help out Thrask.  In this mission, you learn about Thrask, the Starkhaven mages fear and division, and can resolve the quest by killing the templars or turning the mages in.  And, as another option, you can have Varric use his charisma to outsmart the angry templars.  Maybe it's just me, and even if it's the illusion of choice, the cutscenes wher you actually see characters with different opinions REACTING to the story is so much more satisfying than kill hordes, quest completed. 

[In Exile]

I would certainly say that seeing an actual reaction with a cutscene after doing a fetch quest is in infinitely more interesting. Mainly because the NPC becomes an actual character instead of just a quest giver.

You said, "But we learned that people like fetch quests that are covered up in imaginative ways. Perhaps it helped that the DAO UI didn't flash a "Collect Acorn 0/1 bar"? To point out they are on a fetch quest? "

And you are right. There was at least an emotional connection to talking to the Rhyming Tree after retrieving his acorn. It didn't feel like a bland quest giver. It was as you said, imaginative. It's that little touch. Also, you could kill the tree if you wanted. There were options there.

Now let's look at the Emprise Du Lion. Miners are being kidnapped. It's templars. Solution. Randomly walk around, wipe out the hordes and then you get an anti-climatic "QUEST COMPLETED". No big boss? No dialogue whatsover? Just kill the bad guys, you win? It just rings hollow.

Hell, in Dragon Age 2, there's the mission where you help out Thrask. In this mission, you learn about Thrask, the Starkhaven mages fear and division, and can resolve the quest by killing the templars or turning the mages in. And, as another option, you can have Varric use his charisma to outsmart the angry templars. Maybe it's just me, and even if it's the illusion of choice, the cutscenes wher you actually see characters with different opinions REACTING to the story is so much more satisfying than kill hordes, quest completed.

I don't disagree with you at all. More cutscenes would make the quests way better. I just don't see the older quests as having a different design. Bioware always had crap quests. They just covered it up better.

[finc.loki]

and what are the benefits of moving characters? did you ever followed only one to see what he is doing the whole day (unless its quest necessary)? thats only a thing you can advertise but nothing that advance the game.

guild quests in skyrim are mainquests, because, well, there is nearly no mainquest (content wise, walking is a LOT for main quest)

and a side quest is deep because of one shiny drop? a drop which is mostly outnumbered by the crafting possibilities? in a dungeon that is build exactly from the same tiles as every generic dungeon? did you visit the dwarfen thing in hinterlands or the temple with the frozen time in da:i?

the only thing that skyrim did better was the presentation of the masses of fetch quests it had. but to hear a story about a girl hijacked by orks and a questmarker showing the girl in the middle of an orc camp is gameplaywise exact the same thing.

 

skyrim had a few really good "not main quests" and da:i has a great mainquest but often really generic sidequests (but far from nothing with meaning). its funny people always bring the ram meat and the flower/grave mission on the table, two of the first quests in hinterland, and after this nearly none examples about it. maybe because the quest design gets better or they just repeat what they heard of skyrim got tons of dungeons and 90% were generic, da:i have only a view real "locations" but each one is unique.

 

and sorry to talk about difficulty in skyrim is a joke in itself. the combat system and balancing were and are one of the biggest issues in tes titles. jump on a rock and range everything to dead because of the more than stupid ai. 

 

skyrim is in no way superior to da:i, only the mods make a difference (and for skyrim 90% of the mods were graphical enhancements to make the hated "walking clueless through the envirement and enjoy it" from da:i more satisfying)

 

I believe that's what In Exile refers to as "worker ants" thing. Yes, Skyrim NPCs move around a place on a fixed loop. And that's pretty much all they ever do, it's completely pointless, empty activity which doesn't recognize the state of the game world at large. BW went a different route with their NPCs, by sprinkling the generic spawns with groups that hold some actual conversations which can take into account events in the world.

 

 

So you guys would have me believe that DAI NPC's that literally stand still like frozen statues are better and more realistic than the Skyrim NPC's. Yes I know they follow a set path, it is a game, there are limitations. BUT they at least TRY to make it a more livable world "illusion wise". No one in their right mind would fault Skyrim and Bethesda for that over Bioware and their STATIC NPC. That is just silly.

[zeypher]

I hate day night cycles. It just messes with my immersion since time flows at a bizzare rate.

This is also true, IE skyrim time felt completely wonky. I guess that is a reason BIO never do it. Now that i think about it i rather not have a day nigh cycle if it is going to cause weird time issues, which is always does in games. 

[Wolven_Soul]

Finding Jahaeira is a random kill quest. Minsc shows up and asks you to massacre some gnolls. You then go through 4 maps of encounters, exterminate everything alive, and at the end of it Jaheira thanks you and asks to join. And that's basically your last conversation with her or Minsc ever. How is this a better quest than finding an agent after a random kill quest?

And how is Drizt even a quest? You just murder some gnolls together, he gives you some advice, and you run off. That's barely a cameo.

To me that's the same trash style of quest you find in DAI.

The Umberlee quest is totally different. It had multiple stages, the reward vary depending on who you side with, it ties in with a whole other wuestline in Baldur's Gate. It's a side quest in the sense that it's not related to the main plot but it has more content than the Neshkel Mines and the Bandit camp combined.

You sure do like to simplify things don't you?  And not very well either.  First of all, why does their have to be fantastic conversations for it to be a good quest?  There were not very many games back then that did have a great deal of great conversations, at least not that I played.  Those four maps of encounters were fun to go through, and though I do not remember the rewards, I have no doubt there was a few good ones.  

 

I never said Drizzt was a quest, but he was side content, interesting side content.  Him showing up is like if....well I can't think of anyone to compare him to in Dragon Age, as the histories don't really talk about interesting characters that are still alive.  Forgotten Realms had a plethora of characters that could show up, and several did.  In any case, again, he was interesting side content.

 

You really think that getting an agent after a random blah quest is such a great thing?  An agent that what....makes one of your advisors do their job faster?  Whoopty freaking do!  At least when you get Minsc and his witch you get two interesting party members.  Especially Minsc.  Ahhh I can't even begin to imagine how much more awesome a character he would be in a Dragon Age style game where you get to have those conversations with him.  At least that is one area Inquisition does not disappoint in.  In any case, yeah, that is a hell of a lot better than getting an agent after a random, stupid, boring ass quest.  

[Wolven_Soul]

It's very wrong, IMO, to consider faction quests in Skyrim the side quests. They're like a mix between the MQ in DAI and the companion quest. In fact I would say these quests are - in terms of resources invested - the actual "main" quest of Skyrim that we need to compare with the main quest in DAI, and then with the Dragonborn main quest being more the equivalent of the DAI companion quests.

Still this is Skyrim's A-game. They're the highlight and Bestheda knows it. While they're technically side quests in terms of the terminology we use I think its a misleading comparison to equate them to the zone quests.

LMAO...what?  Seriousy?  No, just no.  They are side quests.  Plain and simple.  There is really no getting around that.  The definition of a side quest is a quest that you do that has nothing to do with the main game.  When you can go through an entire game without doing a quest, it's not part of the main quest line.  Changing definitions to shore up a weak arguement just sounds desperate.

[pasmith31]

oh i agree and they gave us £10 this time round in my book.

Ummm It felt like I gave them $90.

 

On topic I prefer a smaller world focused on the story being told, I've little interest in exploring a world if that world has nothing special to find and I didn't find anything special while exploring DA:I. I have spent 100s of hours in both  DA:O and DA2 and less than 10 hours in Skyrim.

 

I still enjoyed alot of what DA:I had to offer on my first PC but I can't get motivated to play it again at this point in time.

[keyip]

The dialogue wasn't great, that's true, but calling the quests garbage is a serious case of a bad memory.  I remember quite a bit of interesting side content.  Such as finding Minsc and going with him to find his witch.  Running into Drizzt while out and about.  And there was a ton of cool stuff to do once actually making it to Baldur's Gate.  Such as dealing with that priestess of Umberlee.  What you call garbage quests, I call a whole lot of good stuff to distract me from the main quest.

 

Something that Inquisition has absolutely none of.

 

You're mixing up BG1 and BG2. Drizzt was in BG2, heh and the first time I met him he called me an imposter and attacked... cause my character's name was Drizzt.

 

BG1 sidequests WERE actually garbage. Minsc's quest was a character quest, sidequests generally consisted of going off to some part of the map, fighting an evil wizard/bears/spiders, then wandering back and collecting the reward.

[Wolven_Soul]

You're mixing up BG1 and BG2. Drizzt was in BG2, heh and the first time I met him he called me an imposter and attacked... cause my character's name was Drizzt.

 

BG1 sidequests WERE actually garbage. Minsc's quest was a character quest, sidequests generally consisted of going off to some part of the map, fighting an evil wizard/bears/spiders, then wandering back and collecting the reward.

No, I am not, Drizzt was in both games.  In BG1 you run into him while he is fighting a bunch of gnolls.

 

And I disagree, I don't think they were garbage at all.  Minsc's quest was a character quest yes, but character quests pretty much are sidequests unless they are tied into the main game and thus integral to the main plot.  If you can go through a game without ever doing the quest, then it's a side quest.

 

From what I rememeber, there were a lot of interesting quests.  Remembering a couple more...there was that person that got turned into a statue that you could save, making them a potential party member.  Also, there was a sculptor or a painter that you had to defend at one point to, memory is a little hazy there.  I enjoyed that to.  It's been a long time since I have played that game, but I bet if I looked through a list of the side missions in that game, I would find a good deal more that I enjoyed.

[keyip]

And I disagree, I don't think they were garbage at all.  Minsc's quest was a character quest yes, but character quests pretty much are sidequests unless they are tied into the main game and thus integral to the main plot.  If you can go through a game without ever doing the quest, then it's a side quest.

 

From what I rememeber, there were a lot of interesting quests.  Remembering a couple more...there was that person that got turned into a statue that you could save, making them a potential party member.  Also, there was a sculptor or a painter that you had to defend at one point to, memory is a little hazy there.  I enjoyed that to.  It's been a long time since I have played that game, but I bet if I looked through a list of the side missions in that game, I would find a good deal more that I enjoyed.

 

Ah, my mistake concerning Drizzt. That being said a cameo appearance by a character not of Bioware's own creation is hardly impressive. Here's a question, if you kill him can you still meet him in BG2?

 

Minsc's character quest may have been deep but so are the character quests in Inquisition. It's the multitude of fetch quests which draw criticism, and rightly so. That being said BG1 was littered with them also.

 

Whether you ENJOY sidequests is a subjective issue which has nothing to do with their fetch nature. Missable party characters are hardly impressive. And I found the painter's quest to be awfully tedious.

[Nastrod]

I do not mind the open world but if it is going to be open world make it more meaningful. Most side quests were nothing more then fetch quests and the other ones  were  completely forgettable anyways. There is a ton of side stuff to do but very little felt worthwhile. It was all filler with little substance.

[DragonAgeLegend]

It was all filler with little substance.

 

Yes it really felt that way to me. 

[DragonAgeLegend]

It was all filler with little substance.

 

Yes it really felt that way to me.