123 réponses à ce sujet

[Xralius]

In exile your logic is completely foolish. You are basically saying that DAO quests were unoriginal because they were, in fact, quests, and did in fact involve doing things that you sometimes do in quests. Oh, and there were plenty of puzzles and convincing of people, by the way.

[Realmzmaster]

I do not understand where posters are getting that DAI is an MMO. DAO has more MMO elements than DAI. DAI has regenerating health, total lack of permadeath of party members (unless it is scripted) as oppose to party members getting killed in combat during a random encounter,  an unlimited number of healing potions and spells, mages were way overpowered (AW and many spells like Mana clash made combat a walk even on nightmare) and only four party members instead of six.

 

DAI is far more like Bioware BG1 game in design. Some posters do not seem to remember that BG1 based on D & D did not allow for the manipulation of attributes. Once the character was created at character generation that was it, no adding to attributes except under very unusual circumstances like a wish or ioun stone. The only way to augment the attributes was through equipment like Ring of Strength +2 or Necklace of Dexterity +1 which is what DAI does along with unlocking certain skills that grant increases in attributes.

 

The only point I do not like about DAI is that there is no permadeath.  I like the limited health potions which is a throwback to BG1. I like the proactive approach to damage migitation rather than the reactive approach to healing after combat. It changes how combat is approached. 

 

All crpgs have fetch quests from Ultima to Witcher to DA. I see no more fetch quests in DAI than I see in any other crpgs I have played.  

[Realmzmaster]

Well maybe it takes some getting used to, but I played a melee character through the prologue and said "screw this". Chasing something while clicking on it while also hitting my abilities... Was obviously designed for console and is a slap in the face to PC gamers. I don't want to fight the controls all game.

 

I am not fighting the controls. I simply adapted to using them which is what I do for all crpgs.

[In Exile]

I do not understand where posters are getting that DAI is an MMO. DAO has more MMO elements than DAI. DAI has regenerating health, total lack of permadeath of party members (unless it is scripted) as oppose to party members getting killed in combat during a random encounter, an unlimited number of healing potions and spells, mages were way overpowered (AW and many spells like Mana clash made combat a walk even on nightmare) and only four party members instead of six.

DAI is far more like Bioware BG1 game in design. Some posters do not seem to remember that BG1 based on D & D did not allow for the manipulation of attributes. Once the character was created at character generation that was it, no adding to attributes except under very unusual circumstances like a wish or ioun stone. The only way to augment the attributes was through equipment like Ring of Strength +2 or Necklace of Dexterity +1 which is what DAI does along with unlocking certain skills that grant increases in attributes.

The only point I do not like about DAI is that there is no permadeath. I like the limited health potions which is a throwback to BG1. I like the proactive approach to damage migitation rather than the reactive approach to healing after combat. It changes how combat is approached.

All crpgs have fetch quests from Ultima to Witcher to DA. I see no more fetch quests in DAI than I see in any other crpgs I have played.

The real answer, I am convinced, is that most people have not played BG1 nor really played any of the old cRPGs on forever. Otherwise, it is nostalgia.

To me, DAI is as close to a spiritual successor to BG1 as Bioware will ever get. That both you and I agree on much of the game is really a triumph for Bioware.

[In Exile]

In exile your logic is completely foolish. You are basically saying that DAO quests were unoriginal because they were, in fact, quests, and did in fact involve doing things that you sometimes do in quests. Oh, and there were plenty of puzzles and convincing of people, by the way.

I didn't say the quests in DAO were unoriginal. I said that most of them were fetch quests, and in comparison to DAI some of them had more dialogue.

DAI has plenty of unique and creative quests.

The point I'm making - and you seem to be missing - is that the real criticism here from other people seems to be either the lack of dialogue or the lack of cinematics, not the quest design.

That's my point. That's why I used the main quest in DAO as an example of something people don't even realise is a fetch quest, because it has high quality content in terms of story and dialogue.

[Sylvius the Mad]

DAI's story is significantly more interesting than either DAO's or DA2's. The DA2 story could have been good, if we'd been playing Anders rather than Hawke, but as it is we just watch a bunch of disjoonted events over which we have almost no control.

[Realmzmaster]

In exile your logic is completely foolish. You are basically saying that DAO quests were unoriginal because they were, in fact, quests, and did in fact involve doing things that you sometimes do in quests. Oh, and there were plenty of puzzles and convincing of people, by the way.

 

Plenty of puzzles? DAO had at best two puzzles the bridge puzzle for the  Ashes quest, the Ruins puzzle which is answered for the party if they find the elven tablet and the riddles for the Ashes quest. The riddles were easy. The only puzzle that cause problems was the bridge puzzle. That garnered many protests because it occurred on one of the "main" questslines. Lots of gamers ran to the wikis, forums or strategy guides to find the answer.

 

Once the main character got three or four levels in persuasion there was no possibility of failure. It is basically an I Win button.

 

In fact the whole Ashes quest is a fetch quest just like In Exile stated. The quest basically is get the urn to magically save the arl. In fact all quests can be broken down into certain types: Kill, fetch, gather, escort or a combination of the four.

 

The overall quest in DAO is to defeat the ArchDemon, hence it is a kill quest.

 

The only difference is what the party goes through to solve the quest. A fetch quest can be a main questline or a simple quest to raise experience but still at its heart is is a fetch quest.

 

The choices in DAO are basically inconsequential. Does it really matter to the warden who rules the dwarves? The overall point is to get an army from each faction. There is a nice illusion of choice, but the main point is to get an army together and defeat the ArchDemon. It really does not matter the composition of the army. The main task of the army is to provide cannon fodder to throw at the darkspawn or ArchDemon while the party does the real work. In fact the army is not really needed since the party by that time can take out everything in sight.

 

Posters are upset because healing magic is gone. In fact healing magic should have never been available to all mages. That is according to lore. The healing is basically akin to magical surgery and takes a great deal out of the healer. That would make healing in combat virtually impossible except for a spirit healer.

 

The fact that DAO has the mage healing is because by lore only the mage could use magic. BG1 had priest, cleric and druid classes who worshiped different gods.  They could pray to there gods for their spells. 

 

According to the lore in DA the gods are either locked away (elven gods except for Fen' Harel), turn their back (the Maker) or forefathers are exalted (dwarves). So no cleric type class. So the mage becomes the healer  and that does not actual follow the lore as written.

 

I understand that posters like DAO. I like DAO. I also like DAI.  Even with the flaws I liked DA2. I find DAI refreshing because it is a throwback to BG1.

[keesio74]

I am a big DA:O fan. Very much disliked the changes that started with Awakenings

What did you dislike about Awakenings? It is basically a D:AO expansion - same game mechanics and so forth. I actually liked Awakenings.

[In Exile]

Calling ashes a fetch quest is utterly absurd. Yes, you were fetching ashes but you have some great battles along the way. It's akin to you calling getting paragon support a fetch quest and that was a massive part of the game to go through the deep roads with a whole lot to do. Haven was an interesting stop in the journey. It was only a fetch quest (over simplification much?) if you consider that you are fetching something. But to equate it with one is just ridiculous. A fetch quest as many people mean it here is go get me this thing that doesn't even really you doing anything but getting some thing. Maybe you fight something. Maybe. But it's filler and not very involving or worth giving a damn about. But those ashes, you could poison them which was also something that would change things within that game if you didn't give thought to it. You had a decision there that could cost you Wynne and Leliana but most definitely wynne if you had her at that point. Haven was anything but a fetch quest. Some of the most amusing puzzles in the game too.

Like I said: it had some great cinematics. But it was just a linear dungeon to fetch the ashes. I'm not saying it was a bad quest (although I don't like it for unrelated reasons, namely like the werewolf quest you have a sane choice and a nutter choice instead of a idealistic and pragmatic one). All I'm saying is that its the same design as a fetch quest.

Bioware doesn't know how to do varied quests. They never did. All they did was re-create BG1 with a voiced PC and more epic storyline. Plot and quest wise I mean.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Calling ashes a fetch quest is utterly absurd. Yes, you were fetching ashes but you have some great battles along the way. It's akin to you calling getting paragon support a fetch quest and that was a massive part of the game to go through the deep roads with a whole lot to do. Haven was an interesting stop in the journey. It was only a fetch quest (over simplification much?) if you consider that you are fetching something. But to equate it with one is just ridiculous. A fetch quest as many people mean it here is go get me this thing that doesn't even really you doing anything but getting some thing. Maybe you fight something. Maybe. But it's filler and not very involving or worth giving a damn about. But those ashes, you could poison them which was also something that would change things within that game if you didn't give thought to it. You had a decision there that could cost you Wynne and Leliana but most definitely wynne if you had her at that point. Haven was anything but a fetch quest. Some of the most amusing puzzles in the game too.

They're all basically fetch quests. You're told "go get this thing" and then you do it. There might be a bunch of obstacles in the way, but your overall objective is very simple.

[Realmzmaster]

The real answer, I am convinced, is that most people have not played BG1 nor really played any of the old cRPGs on forever. Otherwise, it is nostalgia.

To me, DAI is as close to a spiritual successor to BG1 as Bioware will ever get. That both you and I agree on much of the game is really a triumph for Bioware.

 

I believe that may be the case. I remember when I was playing Wizardry V, the W key sent the party forward. A key rotated the party 90 degrees left. D key rotated the party 90 degrees right. X key rotated the party 180 degrees and then you pressed W to walk in that direction. K Key was to kick down a door. At least by Wizardry VIII Sir-Tech was using that new fangled device called a mouse!

[Zjarcal]

...and edgy banter such as what was shared between Morrigan and Sten are history and I am wondering what else.

Wat...

(yes I know what banter is being referred, I'm reacting to the notion that "edgy" content has been toned down)

[Mr.House]

I can sum up what was lost with one word:   Choices.

DAI had no choices? What, did you even play the game? Let's ignore the fact that one big choice in fact takes all your big choices into considerations and gives you your outcome, Wicked eyes and wicked hearts is ooozing with choices and multiple outcomes ect. I can really go on. Saying DAI has no choices just shows me you did not play the game or you just wanted to hop on the hate wagon.

[Realmzmaster]

I think some posters are thinking that the epic nature of the quest elevates it from its basic design which is not correct (IMHO). The Ashes quest at its heart is a fetch quest. It may be an elaborate fetch quest but it is still a fetch quest. If the party does not come back with the urn the quest would be a failure.

 

The other problem is that if the party does not come back with the urn the story cannot progress. The problem with DAO is that the warden had to get all the armies. The story simply did not allow the gamer to march with less than four or no army. I would have like to see that option even if it meant getting owned by the enemy.

[Mr.House]

Personally, I was far more impressed by the main quest design in DAI then DAO. Champions of the Just, In your heart Shall burn, Lies in the Abyss and Wicked eyes and wicked hearts where all better then any quest in DAo, Battle of Denerim being the only one that can even come close.

 

DAO defiantly has better gameplay mechanics and such but characters, story, player agency, how to build your character, companion approval C&C are just better then DAO for me.

[AlanC9]

I think some posters are thinking that the epic nature of the quest elevates it from its basic design which is not correct (IMHO). The Ashes quest at its heart is a fetch quest. It may be an elaborate fetch quest but it is still a fetch quest. If the party does not come back with the urn the quest would be a failure.

Right. When someone calls something a "fetch quest" it actually means "quest which isn't sufficiently long," or something along those lines. The mechanics of the quest are beside the point.

How many different quest mechanics are there? Besides fetch quests and Kill Foozle quests, there's... what?

[Maverick827]

Im getting really tired of explaining what the term "fetch quest" means.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Right. When someone calls something a "fetch quest" it actually means "quest which isn't sufficiently long," or something along those lines. The mechanics of the quest are beside the point.

That's an idiotic definition.

How many different quest mechanics are there? Besides fetch quests and Kill Foozle quests, there's... what?

Investigation. Exploration. Freedom to do other stuff.

Straight ahead quests like fetch and kill foozle are only a problem if the objective is handed to us on a silver platter. But if we have to figure out what to do, or decide what we want to do, that turns the simple quest into a denouement on the end of a much more interesting section of plot.

Roleplaying is about making decisions. If we're told what to do, and have no choice but to do it, we have no decisions to make.

[Realmzmaster]

Im getting really tired of explaining what the term "fetch quest" means.

Which definition are you using?

 

http://tvtropes.org/...Main/FetchQuest

or

http://www.urbandict...erm=fetch quest

or

http://en.wiktionary...iki/fetch_quest

or

Do you have your own definition.

[Realmzmaster]

That's an idiotic definition.
Investigation. Exploration. Freedom to do other stuff.

Straight ahead quests like fetch and kill foozle are only a problem if the objective is handed to us on a silver platter. But if we have to figure out what to do, or decide what we want to do, that turns the simple quest into a denouement on the end of a much more interesting section of plot.

Roleplaying is about making decisions. If we're told what to do, and have no choice but to do it, we have no decisions to make.

 

That is the point with DAI the gamer does not have to do all the  quests. The gamer can decide to do certain quests to get the minimum amount of power and influence or do many quests to gather as much power and influence as possible. The gamer has a choice. 

Sometimes that simple quest can lead to a bigger quest or not, but that is up to the developer.

[Dakota Strider]

Choices:

Start at the beginning...The amount of classes available to choose from, Origins by far exceeds DAI or DA2.  And when you build your character in DAO, you do more than just pick a face and a voice, you actually build the statistics for the character based on your own idea of how the character should be played.  Not so in DLI, apparently players are no longer competent enough to make those choices. 

 

As you levelled up in Origins, you were not locked into a few narrow skill trees choices.  You could mix and match skills paths, and had the ability to use all your skills in combat, not be limited to a small amount of skills, based on the limited number of quick slots that a console game can handle.   You even had the freedom to choose to switch weapons within combat, instead of being locked into whatever happened to be in your hand.  No logic to DLI's methods in this, except that it worked better for consoles and multiplayer.  The versatility of Origins wins again, as versatility means more choices.

 

Now if your only objective is finishing the game, it does not matter what choices you make during the game.  For those that enjoy the role play...it does matter if you choose the elves or the werewolves as an ally, the mages or the Templars, if you choose to allow dwarven golems to be made, or if you break the anvil,  whether you support the ethical dwarven councilor to rule, or the ruthless prince.  Yeah, they all are just pawns in the final battle, if you just see it as a means to reaching the end.  But, if you immerse yourself into the game, then the choices you make reaching the end, matter just as much as finishing.  For some, the object is not just to finish the game, but to play your character in such a way, that you are happy with the choices he/she makes, just as much as you are happy with beating the big boss at the end.  And from beginning to start, there are far more role play choices that lead to different outcomes in Origins. 

 

Companions: How many companions do you have forced upon you in DLI, and how many do you actually have a chance to reject?  I am counting your War Table advisors, as apparently your choice in ambassador, general and spymaster really don't matter.  I think the only companion you "have" to have with you in DAO is Alistair.  Most of my playthroughs in DAO, I kill off at least two of my potential companions.  I would say those are choices that make a difference.  And the choices you make while you play in DAO, will determine whether or not your companions stay loyal to you until the end, or bail on you before the big fight.  (And I generally do not use the cheap trick of bribing my companions with gifts, except the one or two "special" gifts that open up roleplay options).  I would say there are definitely more companion choices in DAO. 

 

How many possible choices of endings are there in DLI?  Two, maybe?  You get a dragon to fight for you either way, one happens to be Morrigan, the other is apparently a real dragon.  You chose between Templars and Mages in the beginning, how much does that make a difference?    In DAO there are multiple possible endings, At least 4 major endings, and up to 20 different variant minor endings.  I think the choices in DAO mattered again. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

-snip-

DAO offered greater diversity in available character builds, and I did generally prefer the combat.

But I won't concede your other points.