129 réponses à ce sujet

[pinkjellybeans]

I really like DAO and I really like DAI. Let's face it the Scared ashes quest  is one long fetch quest.

 

If you do DAO without doing the side quests you find that the game is relatively short. Which is interesting because it is one of the complaints leveled at DAI.

 

Also the fetch quests in DAI make sense especially at the beginning of the game where the ram meat quest that everyone likes to point at is given.

The quest makes sense because the hunter who gives is not equipped to fight templars, mages or demons. The refugees need meat. One way to gain influence and get the populace behind the Inquisition is to help them. It may seem like a small act but it does type into the point of gaining influence and power. It helps the Inquisition's reputation. 

 

You can hear this in the dialogue between the NPCs and the hunter even states that he was skeptical about the Inquisition until now.

 

Every quest does not have to be an earth shaking moment, but it can have impact. IMHO

 

But, YMMV.

 

Like I said, it's not that particular quest most people are complaining about. I for one don't mind it that much, yes it makes sense, but the problem is that all quests are like that, they are fetch quests where the only purpose is to give you power. Return a wedding ring, have some power, go fetch some medicine, have some power. Give me the name of one quest in DAI that has the same level of emotion/thought/creativity as the side quests in Origins. Like the examples I gave, it was hard for me to decide if I should tell Ruck's mother the truth or tell her that he died like he asked me to. That doesn't happen in Inquisition, we don't even have proper dialogue in side quests, let alone make hard choices. 

 

The reason people keep saying the main story is short is because it is, specially if you compare it to the amount of exploration this game has. There isn't a balance, you spend 80% of the game exploring and you can go days without having a single cutscene or witness actual story, unless you read infinite pages of codex. Even if DAO's story was short, which I don't think it is, it didn't feel like it because everything happens smoothly. While you're on a particular place working on the main story, you can do these side quests so there's a really nice balance of side quests and main quests on each place. Like the brecilian forest, you have to go there to solve the problem with the werewolves so why not do these little side quests while you're there? 

 

I never played Origins without doing the side quests (except some of the chanter boards and mages collectives) but I'm genuinely confused when people say that DAO main story is shorter than DAI when it actually has more and longer main quests. The fact that the last two quests of Inquisition can be completed in about half an hour shows how short it is compared to Origins. The Deep Roads quest alone is bigger than two main Inquisition quests put together.

 

Oh and about the Sacred Ashes quest. I don't consider it to be a fetch quest at all, because 1) it's part of the main quest, 2) yes, while you go there to literally fetch the urn, there's a lot of story and lore involved and you go through a lot of stuff to get to the urn. Can you really compare that quest to fetch ram meat, or a wedding ring, or medicine? 

[AlanC9]

The reason people keep saying the main story is short is because it is, specially if you compare it to the amount of exploration this game has. There isn't a balance, you spend 80% of the game exploring and you can go days without having a single cutscene or witness actual story, unless you read infinite pages of codex.

Same thing happens in Skyrim. It's what open-world games do. It's what they have to do. You trade off length in the critical path for more space.

I never played Origins without doing the side quests (except some of the chanter boards and mages collectives) but I'm genuinely confused when people say that DAO main story is shorter than DAI when it actually has more and longer main quests.

I believe the argument is that the DAO main quests are only that long because Bio integrated lots of filler combat into the quests. How much of what you do in "Nature of the Beast" has anything at all to do with Witherfang, for instance?

[wrdnshprd]

talk about hyperbole

 

i actually enjoy my games. Especially bioware games. With that in mind i dont think they are perfect. Many gamers like to complain about everything as if they do  ot like gaming at all.

 

i like your selective memory. I for once have not done these quests apart from a couple. Game has lots of variety in m quests fortunately.

 

Me2 : i ve played that game 10 or 12 times. I think it is the most beloved of the series. Characters were great. ofcourse there is no choice like kayden/ashley where is the point in that? Me2 introduced you cerberus, it built more on genophage-geth-reapers and pretty much everything.

Me3: the original ending was nightmarish BUT the extended cut was pretty good.  playing me3 with all the DLC is fantastic, it is propably the best in the series.

as for pc controlls ijn DaI i wouold not know but yes sadly the game seems consoley.

 

regarding kayden/ashley.. i would argue the Arl of Redcliff in DA:O had that kind of choice within the questline.. even the deeproads quest in DA2 had that kind of impact.. i didnt get that feeling once in ME2.

 

as for ME2 being the most beloved.. i would actually agree with that overall though i cant understand why.  most of the RPG gameplay elements were removed vs improved.. there was no real impactful moments storywise (though i admit shadow broker DLC was pretty good) and the last boss fight was the worst of any bioware game.  a giant T800??? really?  and though the game was liked by many.. im not the only one that had these criticisms.

 

as for the extended cut in ME3.. i would agree that was decent.. but i would still argue your choices throughout the series had little if no effect on the ending of the game.. it still basically came down to a red/green/blue decision.

[BlacJAC74]

I have no idea why people still act surprised by the very mentality you're are questioning.

 

Gamers in general always allow their nostalgia to cloud their judgement. Almost every title out there has a following and when any game evolves or moves on, it almost always leaves a selection of players behind and if we're being honest, they would denounce anything that proceeded it no matter how deep they had to delve as to acquire that opinion.

It's happened with the Civilisation series, Fallout, TES, Diablo etc etc. It's nothing new and will happen with the next instalment too.

 

Hell, there's even people out there that are now claiming DA2 was better than it actually was and think it's a far superior game to DA:I in almost every dept.  ME2 is considered the best, yet these forums were carnage when it was first released, because it wasn't ME1, had no real inventory system and so on.  It was just a dumbed down Gear of War clone.

 

Aye, a vocal minority are never happy with change regardless.

[Ultim Asari]

As a huge Baldur's Gate fan who has played the game many times I have to say:

 

You're wrong. Very wrong. DA:I and BG1 are completely different.

 

Thank God too, I'm done with BG

[MagisterMaximus]

I definitely prefer this design, over both DA:O and DA2. It's not perfect but heading in the right direction.

[Ultim Asari]

I definitely prefer this design, over both DA:O and DA2. It's not perfect but heading in the right direction.

 

Exactly, it's a step in the right direction, though it still has work to do.

[pinkjellybeans]

Same thing happens in Skyrim. It's what open-world games do. It's what they have to do. You trade off length in the critical path for more space.


I believe the argument is that the DAO main quests are only that long because Bio integrated lots of filler combat into the quests. How much of what you do in "Nature of the Beast" has anything at all to do with Witherfang, for instance?

 

Well but Dragon Age isn't Skyrim, is it? And that's why some people are complaining. They completely neglected the story because they decided to create 10 huge worlds just for the sake of it, because it's trendy.

 

I don't consider it to be filler at all. It's part of the main story, you need to solve those problem so that in the end you have your army.  In Nature of the Beast you can actually choose if you want the werewolves or the Dalish to fight at your side in the end. So again, you're gathering your army, it's not filler to me. It wouldn't be a good story if you would just arrive to places, have a talk with the people and you're done, you have your army.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the open world idea, BUT if that means they will create a crapload of worlds and sacrifice the story every time, I would much rather go back to Origins style because I play Dragon Age for the story not for the open worlds and mindless exploration.

[wrdnshprd]

one thing i will say about DA:I though.. the filler quests are, for the most part, not required.. i only filled maybe 3 of the requisitions in my first playthrough and i think every one of them were the simple ones in hinterlands..  otherwise, i was able to do the side quests (which for the most part were pretty good) to get my power needed to open the main quests.

[finc.loki]

I'd describe that as ME3 ripping off DA:O's "gathering armies to fight the Blight," myself.

Funny thing is they are still doing the same story machinations. DAO, ME2, DAI, ME3 all have more or less the same story plot design.

All about "gathering forces".

[Frenrihr]

Me neither, but I'm still enjoying the game despite that. Does that made me a fanboy?
People other than you who are enjoying the game are fanboys? and they should feel bad for that?

Will you also call people who are enjoying the game have a bad taste because the game doesn't justify your preferences?
What are we gaming for?

 

You sound so insecure, probably yes you are  fanboy.

[Lewie]

one thing i will say about DA:I though.. the filler quests are, for the most part, not required.. i only filled maybe 3 of the requisitions in my first playthrough and i think every one of them were the simple ones in hinterlands..  otherwise, i was able to do the side quests (which for the most part were pretty good) to get my power needed to open the main quests.

At the beginning I thought you had to do them but I didn't know at the time how much power would be needed. Now I do one each area and hand it in before I leave so it's fine. I am a completionist so the levelling is an issue, saying that if enemies are I think 3 levels below you, you will not get xp so I can do the areas but the combat is going to be pretty boring. They could increase the level cap and have everything scale to your level I am not sure why they didn't do that, some enemies are too difficult which is good and that shouldn't be changed. The balance isn't right but I would hope it is fixable. I didn't like 8 slots at first either but now I don't think I want to go back to 15 slots I can spam either, it has been a bit of a learning curve but it's fine. The astrarium cave loot needs fixed, someone made a good point why not change them to schematics, that is a great idea. So yes the game has issues but overall I like it regardless, I was honestly expecting it to be far worse than it is.

[AlanC9]

Well but Dragon Age isn't Skyrim, is it? And that's why some people are complaining. They completely neglected the story because they decided to create 10 huge worlds just for the sake of it, because it's trendy.

Sure. I'm just pointing out that you're opposed in practice to the open-world approach. Even if you like open world in principle, this is the cost that gets paid when you go that route.
 

I don't consider it to be filler at all. It's part of the main story, you need to solve those problem so that in the end you have your army.  
 

All those undead in the ruins and the whole slog through the forest were necessary to the story? How so?

[AlanC9]

Funny thing is they are still doing the same story machinations. DAO, ME2, DAI, ME3 all have more or less the same story plot design.
All about "gathering forces".

They got away from it in DA2. They won't make that mistake again.

[DEUGH Man]

A different combination of elements will cause a different combination of problems. Da2s lack of different locations was a problem because it was a downgrade from the first game. The big world here is a problem because it isn't filled with interesting things, which was an issue with the original Mass Effect. Players want a variety of locations with a variety of stuff to do. Having an enjoyable combat system with the freedom to do what you want in the least complicated way possible goes a LONG way too. Just because they have listened to fans and made changes doesnt mean that the changes were done in the best way possible. Bioware has the problem of making their changes to, I don't know, literal. The mako wasn't well received? Better take it out rather than risk putting a fixed one in the next game and getting lampooned for it being there. Too many useless abilities/trees? Better put in the most popular ones instead of trying to make the "useless" ones more viable and getting lampooned for not listening. They are in a difficult position with each sequel, and they are not perfect. Here's hoping they can someday find the balance that will make most people reasonably content.

[pinkjellybeans]

Sure. I'm just pointing out that you're opposed in practice to the open-world approach. Even if you like open world in principle, this is the cost that gets paid when you go that route.

 

Not necessarily. They could cut half of the worlds and include more story in the ones left. Did we really need worlds like The Hissing Wastes and Forbidden Oasis? Couldn't the temple and ruins be included in the The Western Approach for instances? 

 

 

All those undead in the ruins and the whole slog through the forest were necessary to the story? How so? 

 

Erm, to give you some challenge maybe? You wanted to go through the forest and reach the werewolves without any work? I honestly don't understand what you're getting at. You get there, you face the werewolves, you find a way to go through the magical barrier, you reach their lair, fight your way through more werewolves and reach their leader. I'm not sure what slog you're talking about, but this "slog" is necessary to the story. But if you want to go down that road, in Inquisition you have to fight mobs of bandits, mages, templars, venatori, darkspawn (and I'm not even mentioning the animals) and there's all these temples and ruins with all sorts of demons and undead. How is that necessary to the story? You could say we were "cleaning" the worlds but they just respawn minutes later, so what's the point in that?

[Abraham_uk]

"You so asked for this game all these years." Quoting title of thread.

 

Umm. By "you" do you mean a diverse section of the general public from multiple backgrounds, attitudes and experiences who all wanted different things from Dragon Age Inquisition?

 

Dragon Age Inquisition is the game that some people asked for and some people did not.

Also as an addendum, Dragon Age Origins 2 is the game that some people want and some people don't.

 

1. Some people want a fast pace hack and slasher.
2. Some people want a slow paced tactical game.
3. Some people want a Tale Tales style adventure game with Dragon Age combat thrown into the mix.
4. Some people want a return to Baldur's Gate, whilst others don't.
5. Some people want lots of mini games
6. Some people want a survival mode that takes into account, hunger, thirst, sleep, diseases and injuries.
7. Some people want a really complicated game with lots of meaningful options
8. Some people want a streamlined game with few but meaningful options
9. Some people don't even know what they want
10. I'm fine whatever Bioware does. So I guess I'm in a minority category of my own.

I have probably only covered about 0.5% of all video gamers world wide in the above list. Not even 1%. That is how diverse and unique we are as people.

 

My problem with this thread is that it assumes we all wanted the same thing.

No we didn't ask for the same thing. A lot of what we gamers want is contradictory and impossible to fully satisfy.

I'm sorry but you can't please us all. Not even remotely possible.

[SomberXIII]

I LOVE YOU, OP!

[AlanC9]

Not necessarily. They could cut half of the worlds and include more story in the ones left. Did we really need worlds like The Hissing Wastes and Forbidden Oasis? Couldn't the temple and ruins be included in the The Western Approach for instances?

The question is how many zones you can take out before the game fails as an open-world experience. Since I'm not a fan of open-world myself, I don't know how many you could cut. We've got another thread for discussing whether open-world was a bad idea in the first place, so this topic might work better over there.
 
 

Erm, to give you some challenge maybe? You wanted to go through the forest and reach the werewolves without any work? I honestly don't understand what you're getting at. You get there, you face the werewolves, you find a way to go through the magical barrier, you reach their lair, fight your way through more werewolves and reach their leader. I'm not sure what slog you're talking about, but this "slog" is necessary to the story.

You don't remember that whole level full of undead that have nothing to do with the werewolves except that they live in the same building? The darkspawn and whatnot in the forest that also have nothing to do with the werewolves? It's OK to like having a lot of filler content in the quest, but don't pretend it isn't in there.

And calling the minor fights along the way a "challenge" is an act of violence against the English language. Those fights are not challenging, nor are they meant to be.

I guess the question is what counts as "filler." We seem to be reading the same content differently.

But if you want to go down that road, in Inquisition you have to fight mobs of bandits, mages, templars, venatori, darkspawn (and I'm not even mentioning the animals) and there's all these temples and ruins with all sorts of demons and undead. How is that necessary to the story? You could say we were "cleaning" the worlds but they just respawn minutes later, so what's the point in that?

Sure. I didn't mean to say DAI didn't have filler combat too; it's just distributed a bit differently. All CRPGs have filler combat. Always have, always will. It's one of the congenital defects of the genre, and necessary since if the amount of combat was cut back to, say , PnP levels the vast majority of your game time would be out of combat, and I don't think that would be marketable. (In theory you could go full turn-based with slow combat and get the ratio up a lot, but I've never seen that implemented. ToEE might have done that if it had actually had a plot.)

If you want to drill down into the specifics, we can go there. Is there a decent DAI walkthrough up yet? It's easy enough to start counting the number of mandatory trash fights on the critical paths.

[frankf43]

I truly enjoy Bioware Games....But I think they kinda blew it here with the forced pathing in the game...makes the world feel constrained,claustrophobic and small.....how come developers cant get this aspect of a game right....anyone else feel like the areas are to narrow and smallish?? Come on give us BIG OPEN EXPLORABLE FREEDOM  

 

This is taken from the DA:O forum I could get hundreds more that say the same thing. 

[frankf43]

"You so asked for this game all these years." Quoting title of thread.

 

Umm. By "you" do you mean a diverse section of the general public from multiple backgrounds, attitudes and experiences who all wanted different things from Dragon Age Inquisition?

 

Dragon Age Inquisition is the game that some people asked for and some people did not.

Also as an addendum, Dragon Age Origins 2 is the game that some people want and some people don't.

 

1. Some people want a fast pace hack and slasher.
2. Some people want a slow paced tactical game.
3. Some people want a Tale Tales style adventure game with Dragon Age combat thrown into the mix.
4. Some people want a return to Baldur's Gate, whilst others don't.
5. Some people want lots of mini games
6. Some people want a survival mode that takes into account, hunger, thirst, sleep, diseases and injuries.
7. Some people want a really complicated game with lots of meaningful options
8. Some people want a streamlined game with few but meaningful options
9. Some people don't even know what they want
10. I'm fine whatever Bioware does. So I guess I'm in a minority category of my own.

I have probably only covered about 0.5% of all video gamers world wide in the above list. Not even 1%. That is how diverse and unique we are as people.

 

My problem with this thread is that it assumes we all wanted the same thing.

No we didn't ask for the same thing. A lot of what we gamers want is contradictory and impossible to fully satisfy.

I'm sorry but you can't please us all. Not even remotely possible.

 

I've played for 109 hours and haven't finished my first playthrough, I love this game the way it is.. I have been happy with all 3 DA games and the BG and NWN games before that. Maybe I'm easy to please but there have been a hell of a lot of other games that have been found wanting so I don't think that's the case.

[pinkjellybeans]

The question is how many zones you can take out before the game fails as an open-world experience. Since I'm not a fan of open-world myself, I don't know how many you could cut. We've got another thread for discussing whether open-world was a bad idea in the first place, so this topic might work better over there.
 
 
You don't remember that whole level full of undead that have nothing to do with the werewolves except that they live in the same building? The darkspawn and whatnot in the forest that also have nothing to do with the werewolves? It's OK to like having a lot of filler content in the quest, but don't pretend it isn't in there.

And calling the minor fights along the way a "challenge" is an act of violence against the English language. Those fights are not challenging, nor are they meant to be.

I guess the question is what counts as "filler." We seem to be reading the same content differently.


Sure. I didn't mean to say DAI didn't have filler combat too; it's just distributed a bit differently. All CRPGs have filler combat. Always have, always will. It's one of the congenital defects of the genre, and necessary since if the amount of combat was cut back to, say , PnP levels the vast majority of your game time would be out of combat, and I don't think that would be marketable. (In theory you could go full turn-based with slow combat and get the ratio up a lot, but I've never seen that implemented. ToEE might have done that if it had actually had a plot.)

If you want to drill down into the specifics, we can go there. Is there a decent DAI walkthrough up yet? It's easy enough to start counting the number of mandatory trash fights on the critical paths.

 

We keep saying "open world" but Inquisition isn't even an open world because you can't travel from one region to another on foot. They are more like a bunch of different places open to some extent so cutting a few wouldn't change a thing, just the number of places you could go, Thedas would still be a semi open world.

 

You can't honestly compare a few undead in a old ruin (which makes sense) or a mob of darkspawn in a forest in the middle of a blight (also makes sense) to the never ending mobs of DAI. It's like you're killing flies, it's pathetic the number of people you've killed by the end of the game, it's like half of Thedas. "it's just distributed a bit differently" well that's because the worlds are huge so it feels that way but the truth is they are filled with it along with the fetch quests. Sigh, but I'm tired of arguing this, we clearly have different opinions so let's just leave it at that.

[Coyote X Starrk]

I am 100% satisfied with DAI 

 

Easily GOTY for me. 

[AlanC9]

You can't honestly compare a few undead in a old ruin (which makes sense) or a mob of darkspawn in a forest in the middle of a blight (also makes sense) to the never ending mobs of DAI. It's like you're killing flies, it's pathetic the number of people you've killed by the end of the game, it's like half of Thedas. "it's just distributed a bit differently" well that's because the worlds are huge so it feels that way but the truth is they are filled with it along with the fetch quests. Sigh, but I'm tired of arguing this, we clearly have different opinions so let's just leave it at that.

You're right -- I should have said "it's distributed a bit differently and DAI is a bigger game."

[StingingVelvet]

People like different things. What a shocker.

 

There will always be complaints because there are always people who like something else more. I loved Origins and ME1, complained a little about ME2 and DA2. Now I'm complaining a lot, because this game is not the kind of game I like. That's how it works.