329 réponses à ce sujet

[berrieh]

Probably should of clarified but my 73ish hour in play through I completed like 98% of the games total content. The only things I did not complete are those star puzzles & I can't find the last 4 shards. I did everything else in the game. My power upon completion was 220 something.

 

I wanted to experience everything this game had to offer so I wouldn't be talking out of my ass when discussing it. So my Criticism was kinda unfair, seeing as it only applies to completion's runs.  

 

I will say that I can see how someone who wants linear story strength yet wants to do a completionist run of DAI might get frustrated; the two are hard to reconcile. I have done a mostly completionist run (there are some things you literally can't complete due to bugs) too. It was ~140 hours. I had to create a specific type of character to roleplay to make it make sense (deep desire for discovery/knowledge) and I can see where you can't easily do a completionist run with every type of character. That's part of the freedom though. And it does a better job than something like Skyrim where competing it totally takes you out of character no matter what type of character you are and feels false if you think about it much. It does the best job I've ever seen at reconciling the two, but it's two different ways of playing. 

 

Your post made it seem as though the 45 hours of power-grinding were mandatory, but if that's not what you intended to say, I understand. I also understand some people feel it mandatory to see everything. I have a completionist nature in me. I didn't do a completionist run as my first run. I hadn't even seen 5 of the areas (the Oasis, Hissing Wastes, Emprise du Leon, Exalted Plains, and Emerald Graves) in my first run. It was about 50 hours still. Some of that was just running about, of course, in awe of the game - first playthrough. I was eager to re-start immediately. Now that I've done a completionist run, I was worried I'd not want to keep going, but I still do. Now I just know how to craft the best stories out of what there is in the game. Really enjoying the flexibility still. My first story was a good story, but I did have that nagging ("stuff I didn't see!") feeling. 

 

 

Personally I just found the majority of the content in this game to be underwhelming, the plot wasn't bad but I just found it too boring with it's lame underdeveloped villains & it's predictability (For the most part). And the exploration wasn't engaging enough (Plat forming was too basic/wonky sometimes, Horse riding was too slow/stiff + you had to constantly dismount to loot stuff as well as making sure you didn't miss any banter. Also the Looting animation was too long) All we did was kill strangers in the forest & pick flowers  

 

And when it was about to get interesting with the Coronation of divine Victoria & the revelation about Solas, the game cuts to the Credits. I know that game development resource allocation does not work like this but I would trade all my time exploring DA:I's open world hubs for more Main plot missions in a heart beat.  

 

 

 

For me, the side stuff is fun. Though a completionist run is not my favorite per se (honestly, the need to be completionist in one run just isn't fun in general to me, despite my desire to do so, and often disrupts my enjoyment of RPGs and has for years, though). The replayability has me overjoyed at this game. It's the most replayable story game I've ever played. On my 5th playthrough now (holidays, had lots of time off, also the SO has been away for work, so lots of time to game, and I've only played this and about 2 hours of Far Cry 4 despite having several games in-line to play). 

 

I liked the plot well enough and the characters more than any other DA game, personally. I thought each individual plot mission was strong and none were tedious (a DA first for me) to my tastes. I would not trade any of the exploration for more main plot missions, personally. Though I wouldn't mind if they added a few cut scenes to each of the major side stories so people could see their heft (I don't need it, but I think it would help). 

 

I liked the exploration, though I see ways it could be improved. It is a heads-and-shoulders above improvement from any DA or ME game, though. I think it will be even more impressive in a next-gen game (I may be able to play this game on next-gen systems or equivalent or even better PCs, but that is not the lowest common denominator it's designed for on console or PC at the moment - until our lower denominator truly jumps, like with "next gen" games, we cannot see the true benefit of the technological leap - and this is true for PC too because they have to design it for minimum specs in terms of everything but "the pretty"). I agree small improvements with jumping, mounts, and looting could be implemented. I'd also like to be able to swim. But it's much better than the unnatural feel without even the ability to jump! I barely used mounts, though, so I can't say they weren't poorly implemented. That said, I never use mounts in Skyrim either. Or basically any RPG I can think of. I was looking forward to them here and disappointed though, but I knew the banter would be an issue and a reason not to use them. 

 

I understand how for someone who wants a really long, linear story, this might not be their favorite game. Though I think DA2 does way better than Origins on that front, so I don't get why those people don't count DA2 as their favorite. DAO has lots of non-story you have to grind through in each level, with less banter per level, and less interesting side missions. (I think DAO is a better game because of some fundamental flaws with DA2, but I think DA2 is clearly a better linear story game if that's all we're judging by. Practically everything in DA2 is part of Hawke's story.) 

[Chloe Thenab]

 And when it was about to get interesting with the Coronation of divine Victoria & the revelation about Solas, the game cuts to the Credits. I know that game development resource allocation does not work like this but I would trade all my time exploring DA:I's open world hubs for more Main plot missions in a heart beat.

Same here.

[BlacJAC74]

Quite easily. I judge each game i play on it's own merit.  I accepted DA:O wasn't Mass Effect, I accepted DA:I isn't DA:O and so on..  But i knew all that before purchasing those games.  Add to that, I'm glad DA:I isn't a carbon copy of DA:O because that would have been worse than anything we have now.

[Aetheria]

I'll say it again though, no, not all of us who have played DAO consider it to be this Godlike phenomenon among games. In fact, I don't even think it's one of BioWare's best games anymore. And the more it's hyped and glorified, the more jarring its (plenty) flaws become.

 

Seriously, I still remember when this game came out and the BG crowd treated BG the way you are talking about DAO now while calling DAO what you are calling DAI. (And worse, people were royally upset that THAT was supposed to be the "spiritual successor" of BG. I was just as annoyed by them, to be honest)

Yeah, I too remember lots of people being pissed off that Origins wasn't exactly like Baldur's Gate II in every respect. In fact, there were even complaints that Origins' campaign was too linear and walled-in, and didn't let you wander around the world map discovering sidequests and wasting time like Baldur's Gate II, the best RPG in history and the standard to which all others ought to be held...

 

Myself, I loved BG2 to pieces. I loved Neverwinter Nights and Origins as well. But I have to admit that I don't really want a carbon copy of any of those games from Bioware in 2014. The shine has come off the top-down, quasi-turn-based, D&D-ish combat a bit by now, and the writing and art direction certainly haven't dropped in quality in Inquisition. If anything, I feel like NWN and Origins looked less distinctive than BG2's detailed 2D environments, and DA2 and Inquisition were a big step up in visual style. They've come up with a lot of new things for Inquisition, and since the new things are fun, there's no reason for me not to accept it as an enjoyable game. In the end, the only game that's ever going to be fun in the exact same way as Origins is Origins itself.

[RepHope]

Things Origins did better:
-Better antagonists (Loghain and the Architect are leagues above Cory).
-More control over your character's personality
-I preferred Origins companions
-You get more choices that matter or at least are better reflected in the epilogue slides
-Mages were OP but also more fun to play as since they had a wider range of spells
-A much better final boss fight, Cory somehow managed to be worse than Meredith and Orsino

Things DA:I did better:
-Music
-Environments
-Exploration
-The War Table was a welcome addition
-Graphics

DA:O will always be my favorite but Inquisition is still a good 7/10 game that could become better if they'd update the frequency of banter and patch some features back in. A full blown expansion pack is what this game needs.

[rigron]

Because they are completely different games settled in the same universe with almost zero connection between them (other than 1 or 2 optional cameos), as long as you bear that in mind and play them as the different games they are you can enjoy them.

[Vox Draco]

Things Origins did better:
-Better antagonists (Loghain and the Architect are leagues above Cory).

I still really don't understand how Loghain is always considered to be a good villain/antagonist...he barely does anything, he once sends out some assassin-failures after you but...besides this? He is mostly incompetent as ruler, so much for sure. But a good antagonist? I expect a bit more from one...(and Cory isn't the best as well, but that's this damn Bioware-problem for a long time...)

[Grieving Natashina]

I still really don't understand how Loghain is always considered to be a good villain/antagonist...he barely does anything, he once sends out some assassin-failures after you but...besides this? He is mostly incompetent as ruler, so much for sure. But a good antagonist? I expect a bit more from one...(and Cory isn't the best as well, but that's this damn Bioware-problem for a long time...)

I agree with this here.  Unless you read the EU, Loghain comes off just as this Lawful Stupid Evil character who's actions make no sense.   I don't mind having EU to supplement my game play, but it always irks me when I feel I have to read it just to know what's going on.  "You need to go read the EU" is not a sign of great in-game development of a character in my opinion.  

 

YMMV when it comes to Cory (seen better from BW, seen worse,) but at least his story is in one of the other games.   I didn't need to read a comic or a book to learn about him.  His story is within the actual games, which helps connect his villainy to me as a player.  I could play the DLC from DA2 and learn that way, firsthand.   Reading a book or a comic doesn't have the same level of impact for me in cases like this.

 

_{I'm eyeballing you, Kai Leng.}  

[Machina Obscura]

Damnit Sky King, its Dingo from evcochron. Why are you always wrong about everything?

[Aren]

when DAO first came out without patch, dlc,expansion or mod i have not found the game so intreasting, give to the inquisition some times and with other features it will become more and more better then now and of DAO.

[Vader20]

It would have been nice for the game to have some kind of prologue like DAO had, but we have to live with what we've got. DAI has some really annoying flaws, which I won't post here because it's not a *let's complain about DAI thread*, but overall I really love the game.

 

Some people need to move on from the past... Yeah, Baldurs Gate, NWN DAOI were great, but we can't complain all the time that what we are getting now is not like those games.

[berrieh]

I still really don't understand how Loghain is always considered to be a good villain/antagonist...he barely does anything, he once sends out some assassin-failures after you but...besides this? He is mostly incompetent as ruler, so much for sure. But a good antagonist? I expect a bit more from one...(and Cory isn't the best as well, but that's this damn Bioware-problem for a long time...)

 

I think Loghain is considered an interesting antagonist, rather than a good one. Having him join you was a nice twist. And he is an interesting character if you talk to him. I still think he's lying when I talk to him and he talks about needing to retreat to save soldiers lives (in DAI, they almost convince me with what Solas says about Ostagar and Threnn, but then I remember the cut scenes) because they make the mistake of giving him mustache-twirling villain cut scenes. A lot of people feel he's a better villain because of those cut scenes. Personally, I think cut scenes somewhere I'm not in a RPG with a character I'm defining (fine in a JRPG or something) are a bad idea and that was a design flaw in DAO, but others thought it helped the story. 

 

To me, Cory is more interesting as an antagonist, purely due to his nature (a Blight-addled Tevinter magister!), and more of an antagonist, because his support doesn't fall apart like paper cards; I have to actually dismantle it, piece-by-piece (some have a problem with how easy that is but considering he knocks me on my ass and it takes me half the main story to dismantle it, I find it a good "Man in a Hole" style story). But obviously I can talk to Loghain more, and purely talking to someone more seems to make the character more interesting to people. 

 

Personally, if we're going to pick out secondary villains, I think both Alexius and Seeker Lucius are more interesting. Samson is fairly interesting to me too but that's only because I remember him from DA2 (lyrium addiction has always been interesting to me since Alistair first mentioned it). Calpernia seems fairly interesting as well, though just on my first Templar run now. But these people all have less cut scenes than Loghain and thus will be seen as less interesting by many. 

[Persephone]

I think Loghain is considered an interesting antagonist, rather than a good one. Having him join you was a nice twist. And he is an interesting character if you talk to him. I still think he's lying when I talk to him and he talks about needing to retreat to save soldiers lives (in DAI, they almost convince me with what Solas says about Ostagar and Threnn, but then I remember the cut scenes) because they make the mistake of giving him mustache-twirling villain cut scenes. A lot of people feel he's a better villain because of those cut scenes. Personally, I think cut scenes somewhere I'm not in a RPG with a character I'm defining (fine in a JRPG or something) are a bad idea and that was a design flaw in DAO, but others thought it helped the story. 

 

To me, Cory is more interesting as an antagonist, purely due to his nature, and more of an antagonist, because his support doesn't fall apart like paper cards; I have to actually dismantle it. But obviously I can talk to Loghain more, and purely talking to someone more seems to make the character more interesting to people. 

 

Personally, if we're going to pick out secondary villains, I think both Alexius and Seeker Lucius are more interesting. Samson is fairly interesting to me too but that's only because I remember him from DA2 (lyrium addiction has always been interesting to me since Alistair first mentioned it). Calpernia seems fairly interesting as well, though just on my first Templar run now. But these people all have less cut scenes than Loghain and thus will be seen as less interesting by many. 

 

He is definitely not lying about that, as it ties in directly with the battle of West Hill and it was a strategically sound decision. Even in the most "villainous" of his scenes (After having asked Cailan again and again to stay away from the front lines) I simply read as resigned sarcasm, nothing more. I'll never deny he made mistakes. But Ostagar wasn't one of them.

[9TailsFox]

How dare you infidels have an opinion of your own , excuse me while i burn you all.

[zeypher]

Quite easily. I judge each game i play on it's own merit.  I accepted DA:O wasn't Mass Effect, I accepted DA:I isn't DA:O and so on..  But i knew all that before purchasing those games.  Add to that, I'm glad DA:I isn't a carbon copy of DA:O because that would have been worse than anything we have now.

pretty much this. I like this game and it is good.

[LinksOcarina]

I agree with this here.  Unless you read the EU, Loghain comes off just as this Lawful Stupid Evil character who's actions make no sense.   I don't mind having EU to supplement my game play, but it always irks me when I feel I have to read it just to know what's going on.  "You need to go read the EU" is not a sign of great in-game development of a character in my opinion.  

 

YMMV when it comes to Cory (seen better from BW, seen worse,) but at least his story is in one of the other games.   I didn't need to read a comic or a book to learn about him.  His story is within the actual games, which helps connect his villainy to me as a player.  I could play the DLC from DA2 and learn that way, firsthand.   Reading a book or a comic doesn't have the same level of impact for me in cases like this.

 

_{I'm eyeballing you, Kai Leng.}  

 

One thing I will say, I do think Loghain is a better character because his motivations do make sense, but his own pride and ambition are really what kill him. It's a tragic villain sort of arc, but it's done in Origins in the background and really has little to do with the main plot.

 

Corypheus honestly was a more effective villain. Let's face it, he would have basically won if it weren't for sheer dumb luck.

[Savvie]

Well because it is a good game and Bioware at least did revert back to some aspects in the game that were like DAO which I appreciate. However, that doesn't mean that I feel it has that special quality that DAO had. I'd rather see Bioware go back to designing a game similar to DAO and stop trying to be so mainstream, but I doubt that will ever happen.

[luism]

Why is not a PITA to pick weeds in the witcher 2 and skyrim but it's a total chore here in this game. And if I have a master botanist in my garden in sky hold and inquisition agents why do I still have to pick weeds after upgrading sky hold?

[luism]

One thing I will say, I do think Loghain is a better character because his motivations do make sense, but his own pride and ambition are really what kill him. It's a tragic villain sort of arc, but it's done in Origins in the background and really has little to do with the main plot.
 
Corypheus honestly was a more effective villain. Let's face it, he would have basically won if it weren't for sheer dumb luck.

They should have let one of the villains live from 2 either orsino or Meredith depending on choices. I think it would have made for a more interesting ending.

[ShadowLordXII]

I myself am currently tied between the two games.

 

Though there are things that Origins does better that Inquisition needed work with.

[Taura-Tierno]

I would have liked it if bioware didn't lie about it and it wasn't sold and told to be a game with customizing, better than DAO, 

There's an entire crafting system, way better than anything DA:O offered. Your companions' outfits look much more awesome here, since every armor gets a unique appearance on them. The character creator is way, way, way better, enabling you to make an Inquisitor with much more diverse looks than your Warden ever had. 

 

 

 

more indepth consequences for choices you make, etc,  when no choice you make has any impact in DAI

Let's see ... you can have your companions' dislike grow to the extent that they will leave, and it cannot just be bought back with gifts. You get to decide whether the Templars of mages join the Inquisition. You get to decide who will rule Orlais, arguably the most important nation in Thedas. Many of the things you do combined determine who will become the next Divine, arguably the most influential and powerful person in all of Thedas; this determines the future of the entire Chantry, the Templars and the mages. You get to decide whether people live or die. Execute your enemies, lock them up, or do something else? You can choose to sacrifice memorable NPC's for the greater good. You choose whether the Grey  Wardens remain in Orlais or are exiled. You dialogue choices with the companions affect how they interact with you in the future. 

What similar choices did you get to make in DA:O? You chose whether to save the elves or werewolves; who became Orzammar's king; who became Ferelden's regent. Whether a tiny Circle was eradicated or not. Most of the consequences were  if you got golems or dwarves, mages or templars during the final battle (which was much more epic in DA:O). 

I like DA:O more as well. But don't say that DA:I has no important choices that affect the world, because that's just a lie.

[Aimi]

I agree with this here.  Unless you read the EU, Loghain comes off just as this Lawful Stupid Evil character who's actions make no sense.

I don't think that the books make that much a difference for Loghain's characterization. If you want to portray him as an unappreciated military genius who was truly working for the good of the country, the game has plenty of material that allows you to do that. If you want to portray him as a man with a great reputation but little else who was out of his depth against the Blight, the game has plenty of material that allows you to do that. And if you want to portray him as Snidely Whiplash minus the mustache who hid in the patriotism that is the last refuge of the scoundrel, the game has plenty of material that allows you to do that, too.

None of that is contradicted by the books, which offer hints in multiple directions for Loghain's characterization. We see why he would have had a grievance against the Wardens and a hatred of the Orlesians, and we see why he would be suspicious about claims of Blights. But we also see that he has ample motive and opportunity for betrayal, and to explain decisions that the player might think are bad is not to justify them. You can take this and run in whatever direction you choose. The EU, then, does not fundamentally change Loghain's characterization, but it does provide more ammunition for anybody making decisions about it.

However, I wouldn't mistake this for complexity. The uncertainty about what drives Loghain is intentional, and obviously it spawns many arguments about that here, but it's ultimately sterile. Crucial plot points in Origins that are rather critical to making decisions about his character are muddled and confusing, and BioWare's writers and animators lacked the knowledge and/or resources to resolve them properly. The course of the battle of Ostagar, for example, makes no sense unless we are in a world where all of the major actors in it are astoundingly incompetent...and even that doesn't solve all of the problems with the sequence. Given the outsize relevance of that battle to the narrative and to assessments of Loghain's character, it is pointless to try to use it as a springboard for talking about how great or bad a character Loghain was.

Corypheus, as far as I know, is generally written in a way that doesn't allow for the sort of contradictory mess that gets in the way of talking about Loghain. The major issues with him aren't ones of player experience, but of him being an unreliable source on ancient events - an unreliability that is extensively acknowledged within the game, is intentional, and is in fact exactly what we would expect from something that happened a thousand years prior.

[Orihime]

Yup dao good since I've played dao so many times....I really do love both

Da2 wasn't very well done on levels and it was rushed.

Just being a grey warden in dao and choosing to be from 3 races etc had my heart. Plus alistair

Cared less of hawke


Dai is such a amazing improvement in level, graphics, cullen, jumping x).


Well my ramble in thoughts on my opinion x)

[Rekkampum]

You got to admit it was fun though

I also used mana clash in pretty much every battle with mages.

I abused the Arcane Warrior skill tree. It was so OP'd.

EDIT: Not to mention Smite was uberuseful during Darkspawn fights.

[Rawgrim]

DA:I has more good parts than bad. But I am not sure I feel like I am playing dragon age when I play it. Feels like an MMO with a Dragon Age "skin".