447 réponses à ce sujet

[TheImmortalBeaver]

Man, I sure am glad that this thread exists. Before it, I thought I disliked all of the annoying side missions in Origins and just general feeling of pointless padding that game had. I thought I liked the open-world exploration and ambient storytelling in Inquisition mixed with a number of harmless and avoidable fetch quests, but boy was I wrong. I must've just been willfully ignoring the facts. Origins is just so much better in every possible respect. I apologize for my ignorance, and sure will try to do better in the future.

[pinkjellybeans]

You continue to perpetuate that ALL DAI side quests are "stupid filler" quests.  Yet, despite whoever says otherwise, you instead insinuate that they're wrong and are attacking you.

 

lol no. Did I ever say anyone is wrong? I'm only saying I can't understand why you think fetch quests are better than quests that give you a story, choices and dialogue. Is that saying you are wrong? Maybe I keep posting in this thread because I actually want to understand why you think that way but the arguments people are giving me aren't helping me see it. We just have to come to the conclusion that some people like fetch quests while others don't. In all my posts I always tried to include "nearly all", "most", "90%". If I said "all" at anytime, then my bad, I didn't do it consciously. I don't think all sidequests in DAI are filler quests (but the majority, yes) just as I don't think all quests in DAO are awesome and well thought quests. Like I said, there's the Chanter board and whatnot. 

[Lianaar]

Maybe I keep posting in this thread because I actually want to understand why you think that way but the arguments people are giving me aren't helping me see it. We just have to come to the conclusion that some people like fetch quests while others don't.

You try to understand why people like filler quests.
But our point is, way less is filler quest then you think. So not "almost all', "90%" etc.
I do not understand why anyone would enjoy a bad quest only dropped there to fill the void. But I don't think so many are 'filler' as you list.

Your paradigma and mine just don't match.

[exboomer]

No. Just absolutely no. After browsing through this forum for quite awhile and reading people defending these MMO fetch quests using such terrible arguments, I just couldnt take it anymore and had to make an account and post my thoughts on it.

 

Im going to go over all the arguments defending this and attempt to refute them. However before I do so, let me just add that I only have 80 hours of gameplay in DA:I so far. Im on Act 2 and have done The Hinterlands, The Exalted Plains, The Western Approach, The Oasis (Havent opened the door yet though, so dont know if I should actually count this), (However I havent done the operation to open up more of the Exalted Plains and Western Approach map, just to throw that in there) and am just now on the Grey Warden area (Dont remember the name). So I already know you guys are going to try to auto disqualify what I say by saying I havent seen all of it yet, but frankly I dont think I need to play the game more to figure out what the jist of this has been. Especially when I hear other posters saying the other areas arent much different.

 

 

 

1. The side quests are optional. - This has got to be the most used argument I have seen. And it completely misses the point. No **** they are optional. We arent complaining about that. What we have a problem with is that these optional side quests are of such low quality. The side quests in DA:O were optional as well, but we wanted to do them all. Why? Because they were of such high quality. Some of these even rivaled the quality of the main quest. This has been completely absent in DA:I for my playthrough so far.

 

And besides, why in the hell would you tell a gamer to not do the content thats within the game? Thats stupid. If I see a fork in the road and the main quest points me left, then I will go right. Why? Because I want to explore everything that has to offer. We should be WANTING to do all the content that is possible within the game. To say "Dont worry! Just ignore it and go do something else!" is basically admitting you know its **** and cant defend it on the meaningfulness of the content itself.

 

Also you are ignoring opportunity cost. If you put resources into A, that means those resources cannot be put into B-Z. If they took half of these bloated zones and reduced them or cut them in order to make meaningful content, this would be less of an issue.

 

 

 

2. Both DA:O and DA:I have MMO fetch quests, therefore you cannot complain about DA:I side quests without also complaining about DA:O side quests

 

- This has to be the most dishonest attempt at defending this games side quests I have seen. First off, yes, origins does have *some* fetch quests. However those quests took place in areas where you were already doing the main quest or were doing a far more interesting side quest. So since you were there, you might as well complete the *fetch* quest. You didnt have anything like a gigantic map area that was specifically dedicated to completing a whole bunch of worthless MMO style fetch quests like Inquisition has.

 

Second. And this is by far the most obvious example of dishonesty when making this argument, is that you are COMPLETELY IGNORING all of the Origins side quests which involved multiple dialogue options and multiple ways to end a quest. In Inquisition however, 99% of all of these side quests involve "Accept or dont accept" and "Turn in or dont turn in" dialogue options. And there arent really multiple ways to end these quests. (There was that one in Exalted Plains about returning that amulet or w/e it was to the Dalish elf sister and having a choice and what to tell her, but that was it, and it still wasnt really good at all)

 

I mean seriously, how can you so blatantly lie and say that because Origins side quests involved you going from point A to point B to either retrieve something or kill something, while ignoring all of the multiple dialogue choices and ways to end the quest, is somehow comparable to Inquisition where there are neither of these things?

 

This is like saying a T bone steak is the same thing as a T bone because when you boil both of them down, they are just T bones. Its like yeah no ****, but you had to first strip all of the meat away from the first one to say they are the same thing.

 

And third. Even if I was to give this claim validity, which I dont. Surely you can see the obvious difference in QUANTITY of these filler quests? In Inquisition the ratio to a worthless MMO filler quest to a somewhat meaningful side quest(which I havent even ****** seen yet) would be like a 100 to 1 ratio, while in Origins its much less, (In fact I think the meaningful content might have been more than the filler, but Im not going to wiki this)

 

3. Having large maps means we have to expect diluted content in order to fill up the map with stuff to do. -

 

Now I agree with this in a sense. I believe there is a correlation between Open World games and meaningless fluff content. Take Kingdom of Amalur for example, it was littered with a bunch of MMO side quests, probably to a worse extent than Inquisition had. It was terrible then and its still terrible now.

 

I have yet to play an RPG that has big maps and wasnt diluting its side content. (If you know of one please tell me, I would love to play it, I mean seriously no joke, please)

 

However this is missing the point. We are saying if the only way you have can have these big map areas is to dilute all the side content, THEN DONT BOTHER MAKING BIG MAP AREAS TO BEGIN WITH!

 

Look believe me, as soon as I finished DA:O I was so sad that the game wasnt longer. You know why? Because I loved the quality content of the game. However if the only way to do that was to dilute the side content (Hell maybe even the main content) then no I would never do that. Quality > Quantity any day of the week. I love exploring every nook and cranny as much as the next guy, however if you arent going to populate these areas with meaningful content, then just dont bother.

 

If they could somehow have taken the big maps of Inquisition and filled all of it up with meaningful content like Origins did, we would have had the greatest rpg ever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sadly these are the only 3 of I can think of at the moment, and Im pretty sure there are more. So to anybody who disagrees with this assessment, please explain why. 

 

Dont get me wrong, I like Inquisition, and its a good game on its own, but by it being a sequel to Dragon Age, and especially since its from Bioware, I expect better

 

I know this is my first post, and it comes off a little aggressive. So sorry about that, I know it make me seem like a douche but I just had to say this. 

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion however I totally disagree with your points.

 

Point 1: The purpose of the side quests is to flesh out the story line as well as enable your Inquisitor to level up so they really are NOT optional. Granted some (not all) of the side quests aren't up to the DA:O quests but there are also A LOT more of them then there were in DA:O so Bioware can be forgiven if they aren't as good IMO.

 

Point 2: I don't understand your apparent obsession with MMO fetch quests. Again these side quests are not worthless, they are necessary to level up your character and to open up more dialogue options with the NPC's. And all of the dialogue I've had with my NPC's have been multiple option with the choice you make affecting how the NPC sees you or the Inquisition so I don't get your point.

 

Point 3: You also seem to be obsessed with "meaningful content" whatever the heck that is. What may not be meaningful to you very well could be very meaningful to someone else. It all depends on how you view the game and the story it is trying to tell.  I've really enjoyed the dialogue options given so far and I am 110 hrs into the game. I think the story line for the NPCs was very well written and I've greatly enjoyed discovering their back stories.  It seems you may lack the patience for this type of game so maybe shooters are more your style but for me I think this is a great game and I have few complaints about it.

 

[AlanC9]

Or maybe you just don't understand the discussion in this thread.
 
DA:I has 80% filler content (fetch quests, etc.) while other RPGs like DA:O have substantially less fetch quests or filler content. That is what we are discussing here.
 

And I'm saying that the premise of the discussion is a bit wonky. DA:O integrates filler into the main quests, and DAI does not do this to the same extent. (I belive In Exile pointed this out upthread.) Not that DAI doesn't have somewhat more filler content -- that's the price you pay for open-world -- but it's not nearly as much more as you keep saying it is.

[In Exile]

And I'm saying that the premise of the discussion is a bit wonky. DA:O integrates filler into the main quests, and DAI does not do this to the same extent. (I belive In Exile pointed this out upthread.) Not that DAI doesn't have somewhat more filler content -- that's the price you pay for open-world -- but it's not nearly as much more as you keep saying it is.

DAO also uses a different UI interface for the filler (so it's not so obviously marked as filler) and includes cosmetic dialogue choices with no in-game consequence. Since DA2 got killed for having meaningless choices, Bioware only included them when they were meaningful. Which of course leads to criticism that there aren't enough flavour choices.

Edit: Although the filler feel of the lack of cinematics I think helps a great deal. I did not expect Mother Giselle to matter at all when I met her. And I thought Krem was just a random quest giver. The lack of cutscenes helps to reduce the problem Bioware games have in making it obvious which NPCs matter.

[Ezkiel]

DAO also uses a different UI interface for the filler (so it's not so obviously marked as filler) and includes cosmetic dialogue choices with no in-game consequence. Since DA2 got killed for having meaningless choices, Bioware only included them when they were meaningful. Which of course leads to criticism that there aren't enough flavour choices.

Edit: Although the filler feel of the lack of cinematics I think helps a great deal. I did not expect Mother Giselle to matter at all when I met her. And I thought Krem was just a random quest giver. The lack of cutscenes helps to reduce the problem Bioware games have in making it obvious which NPCs matter.

Guess its matter of personal taste or what ever but don't see how interface matters. I mean sure you get crap load of random marks of map which is kinda like big flashing sign for filler content. But DAO still had more side crap that expanded game lore and main quests in each area carried more weight then they do in DAI.

 

In DAI after i have finished clearing almost every map and then finished game it was painful obvious that i could have ignored like 80% of that and finish game in 20hours instead of 150h. Only thing that could prevent me from that is probably lack of levels which gets you back to side content which servers as grind wheel filler

[pinkjellybeans]

You try to understand why people like filler quests.
But our point is, way less is filler quest then you think. So not "almost all', "90%" etc.
I do not understand why anyone would enjoy a bad quest only dropped there to fill the void. But I don't think so many are 'filler' as you list.

Your paradigma and mine just don't match.

 

 

Ok, mostly I use the term "fetch quests" and not "filler quests". I think I only said filler quests once in this whole discussion. I don't like to use that term just because some people seem to have different meanings for "filler" but to me, filler quests are just a bunch of fetch, kill and other simple quests combined, which are the majority of the DAI quests. Get the prima guide and look at the list of all the sidequests in the worlds and count how many of them tell you to fetch or kill something and how many allows you to make different choices.

 

But like I already said, I give up trying to understand. Let's just say some people prefer simple fetch quests and some prefer quests that give you different outcomes by allowing you to make choices and even use skills (persuasion and intimidation). Let's leave it at that, shall we.

[outlaw1109]

Guess its matter of personal taste or what ever but don't see how interface matters. I mean sure you get crap load of random marks of map which is kinda like big flashing sign for filler content. But DAO still had more side crap that expanded game lore and main quests in each area carried more weight then they do in DAI.

 

In DAI after i have finished clearing almost every map and then finished game it was painful obvious that i could have ignored like 80% of that and finish game in 20hours instead of 150h. Only thing that could prevent me from that is probably lack of levels which gets you back to side content which servers as grind wheel filler

Or bias.

You say, in the same post, DAO had more "side crap" that expanded the lore and main quests in each area.

But in DAI it's "painfully obvious" that you could have ignored 80% of it.

Well, which is it?  You like the side "crap" to expand the lore, or you want to ignore it?  If you actually pay attention to that "side crap" in DAI, it DOES expand the lore.

On the other hand, your statement about skipping 80% of DAI is also true of Origins.  Since Origins was a smaller game, I imagine it could be chopped down to, what, 10hours instead of 60?  (which was the average playthrough according to stats posted by BW, IIRC).


Also, you say that "side crap" carries more weight in DAO, but you've obviously played a different DAO than I, because many of those side quests had only RP value and 0 direct impact on the events of the game.

Unless you're referring to the gathering of armies (aka, Warden treaties) in which case, those were not side quests at all, but part of the MQ and thus irrelevant to this topic.

[Lianaar]

Ok, mostly I use the term "fetch quests" and not "filler quests". I think I only said filler quests once in this whole discussion. I don't like to use that term just because some people seem to have different meanings for "filler" but to me, filler quests are just a bunch of fetch, kill and other simple quests combined, which are the majority of the DAI quests. Get the prima guide and look at the list of all the sidequests in the worlds and count how many of them tell you to fetch or kill something and how many allows you to make different choices.

 

But like I already said, I give up trying to understand. Let's just say some people prefer simple fetch quests and some prefer quests that give you different outcomes by allowing you to make choices and even use skills (persuasion and intimidation). Let's leave it at that, shall we.

I used the term filler quest, because that was the word you used in the statement just prior to mine. Otherwise I would not have used it either. I admit I have not read back specifically to your posts before making my own statement.

 

And... well. You are not insulting and I put words in your mouth, but you give up understanding people like me, who "prefer simple fetch quests" and if they disagree those are a) simple and any more fetch quests then DA:O side quests, then they are obviously ignorant by choice and ignore facts...

 

From my point of view: you prefer whatever you prefer, it doesn't bother me. I argue, that those quests are any more fetch quests then those of DA:O ones. I say they are story driven, which in my view is a fact (but obviously I am deliberately ignoring they are not, which again is not an insult toward my capabilities of comprehension).

 

No, I am not actually insulted btw. I am by now more amused.

So what we argue is not the enjoyment value, but the question how exactly the DA:I side quests relate to DA:O side quests.

Probably we first need to decide what quests we talk about. Like Poet tree which is a main quest, but is listed here as side quest. Or the advisor quests, which are side quests, but are excluded here from the side quests. See? We can not even agree which quests to talk about? Maybe if we focused on that list, we can have a more valuable conversation.

 

And you are free to dislike DA:I, or its partial content, or its full content, it doesn't make you any lesser gamer or being. Every single person here wants a game they enjoy after all, no?
 

[Peranor]

I like the side quests. Got no problem with them 

[Sasie]

The problem with the Inquisition side content is the codex, most of the lore/story in the zones outside of the main quests are all provided through pure text and it makes the entire thing pointless to begin with. Personally I like interactive storytelling in RPGs. It's why I loved Dragon Age 2 despite all it's flaws and also the Mass effect games. It's simply nice to have a main character we can control who are part of the world and not just a mirror for the player to act through.

It's not so much about fetch quests in my opinion as it is about missing cut scenes and voiced dialog that connects it to the rest of the world and our characters. None of that happens though because all rewards only come with another codex update and they have no interactivity at all.

I don't dislike the Codex entirely because it's nice to flesh out the world at times but when it becomes the entire world there is a huge problem for me. It's the same with Skyrim, I know there are tons of books that explore the lore in that game but I never reached any of it because I always quit in disgust an hour into the game because all the characters are completely bland and my own character is just a nameless prisoner. They just don't give me a reason to go on or care and now Dragon Age copied some of the worst parts of that series.

It's nice to find some hidden clues about the history of the world in long forgotten tombs and caves but it would have been even nicer if we could take that clue, bring it with us out in the light and back to our camp and bring it up in discussion with relevant companions or quest givers in a scene that last more then 15 seconds. As it is I usually stop caring about a zone after I taken most of the camps and at times I even forgotten if I did or didn't do the quest related to the zone when I get there, most of the time it simply had too little dialog and interactivity to make me remember/care.

[nici2412]

As this seems to be some kind of feedback thread to the sidequests in inqusition. The (side)questdesign in this games is horrrible (imo). They reminded me of the 2 hours I played Tera Online or Kingdom of Amalur. Most of them were:

boring( no interesting story behind them; if there is a interesting story than mostly badly presented via letters or one-liners from npcs,

no cutscenes),

simple (without any choices, neither dialogue nor different ways to solve the quest, mostly "kill, find, bring")

and completely forgettable (I remember maybe 4 npcs and only very few of the stories and I did almost all of the side-content)

If a quest has some of the above mentioned flaws it would be fine, but unfortunaly they have all of them.

I would have prefered if they would have cut half of the open world maps and filled the rest with interesting high-class sidequests.

The hight amount of questmarkers also didn't help to motivate me to explore the map. It felt more like I was working off a check-list to clear the area than looking out for interesting things within the world.

 

Edit: I don't care if Origns did it better or not. It might be similar (althought the sheer amount of more sidecontent in Inqusition makes it at least much more visible), but that is not a reason that Bioware doesn't try to improve their questdesign. There are a lot of games with wonderful questlines, which can be a inspiration how to make sidecontent interesting if Origins isn't a good example.

[Goldark]

Wouldn't you guys have enjoyed getting to know some of these side characters prior to killing them, though?  Characters like Sister Costeu, Maliphant, Hand of Korth, Servis, Lucanus, etc.  I would have loved to be able to converse with some of these characters and figure out different ways to either beat them or even help them, depending on the circumstances.

 

I think some people are getting too worked up over this whole DAO vs DAI debate.  I guess I can see why due to the OP and the title of this thread.  However, forget about DAO and lets just focus on DAI and what we can build upon here.  Keep the awesome looking zones, but lets add some more of what Bioware does great:  Character interaction and dialogue. 

 

I don't know, I just see a lot of potential here.  Although, I do have other grievances with the game (combat, UI, terrible loot), I won't get into those here.  I am specifically referring to the zones and how well the art team did.  If we can just add some great characters to these zones it could be amazing.

[Lianaar]

I don't dislike the Codex entirely because it's nice to flesh out the world at times but when it becomes the entire world there is a huge problem for me. It's the same with Skyrim, I know there are tons of books that explore the lore in that game but I never reached any of it because I always quit in disgust an hour into the game because all the characters are completely bland and my own character is just a nameless prisoner. They just don't give me a reason to go on or care and now Dragon Age copied some of the worst parts of that series.

That I can agree with. I think the start of the game is not good. My first impression was: what? Who is this character they chained? What is she doing there? Why does it bother her? Why stay at all? ... it would have been nice to have 5-10 minutes of game play prior to the events where DA:I starts. It would have given way more of a connection, a chance for you to flash out the character you play and actually feel it is -your- character.

[VahnXIII]

In summary:

 

"I'm sick of your opinion. This is my opinion and it's correct."
"Nuh uh! Your opinion is wrong and mine is right."

 

And the world keeps spinning.

[alwaysquestions]

The problem with the Inquisition side content is the codex, most of the lore/story in the zones outside of the main quests are all provided through pure text and it makes the entire thing pointless to begin with. Personally I like interactive storytelling in RPGs. It's why I loved Dragon Age 2 despite all it's flaws and also the Mass effect games. It's simply nice to have a main character we can control who are part of the world and not just a mirror for the player to act through.

It's not so much about fetch quests in my opinion as it is about missing cut scenes and voiced dialog that connects it to the rest of the world and our characters. None of that happens though because all rewards only come with another codex update and they have no interactivity at all.

I don't dislike the Codex entirely because it's nice to flesh out the world at times but when it becomes the entire world there is a huge problem for me. It's the same with Skyrim, I know there are tons of books that explore the lore in that game but I never reached any of it because I always quit in disgust an hour into the game because all the characters are completely bland and my own character is just a nameless prisoner. They just don't give me a reason to go on or care and now Dragon Age copied some of the worst parts of that series.

It's nice to find some hidden clues about the history of the world in long forgotten tombs and caves but it would have been even nicer if we could take that clue, bring it with us out in the light and back to our camp and bring it up in discussion with relevant companions or quest givers in a scene that last more then 15 seconds. As it is I usually stop caring about a zone after I taken most of the camps and at times I even forgotten if I did or didn't do the quest related to the zone when I get there, most of the time it simply had too little dialog and interactivity to make me remember/care.

 

Well said.

 

People focus a lot on the fetch quests but I really have nothing against fetching if it's well packaged. Suppose you come upon the hunter guy in Hinterlands and you get a little cutscene with him where you get to know him a little bit, maybe he tells you about how he's the main guy in charge of providing for the village and he can't do it because of all the fighting. Maybe there's a starving villager somewhere around him you can talk to for effect. Then if you take the quest you promise to bring him back 8 rams but as you're gathering them a ranger approaches you. He tells you that the villagers have been hunting the rams to extinction and that what you're killing are the last ones left and begs you not to do it. Maybe he points out that it will even hurt the village in the long term, even though it would help them now.

 

I'm not a writer so this sounds dumb, but a multilayered, immersive, impactful fetch quest can be a fun quest in my book. It's just that they usually aren't written like that.

[Remmirath]

DAO also uses a different UI interface for the filler (so it's not so obviously marked as filler) and includes cosmetic dialogue choices with no in-game consequence. Since DA2 got killed for having meaningless choices, Bioware only included them when they were meaningful. Which of course leads to criticism that there aren't enough flavour choices.

The more I've thought about it, the more I'm sure that -- as odd and inconsequential as it may seem to some -- those changes actually do make the difference in how I perceive the quests in DA:O versus the quests in DA:I. I hate having quests obviously marked as filler, I hate those bars that count up the quest progress all the time, and cosmetic dialogue choices still offer an opportunity to roleplay the character (which is, of course, important in a roleplaying game). I'm completely cool with flavour choices. I like having them. The only time when I'm ever annoyed if a choice doesn't actually have impact is if it is played up so that it seems very much like it should, but then doesn't, and that's fairly rare. I didn't even mind the lack of choice in DA II near the ending, I minded that it wasn't played as obviously that everything was spiraling out of control as it could've been. I'd always rather be able to express my character's opinion on something, even if that opinion doesn't matter; and indeed, it's odd if your character's opinion will always end up being the last word on things.

So, yeah. It's not so much that the quests are worse, although with the sheer number of them the inherent quality of some is likely to suffer, but rather that they're comparatively poorly packaged. It's also not as if every quest in DA:O was great. It is true that, for most of DA:O's largely meaningless make-work quests, one didn't have to go out of the way to do them -- and that probably led to them feeling less oppressive. If you've got the same quest in each style, say finding 10 elfroots, it feels a lot different if you happen upon 10 elfroots while you're doing something else, realise you've got enough in your inventory, and hand them over instead of searching all around a wide area specifically for elfroots while the quest marker at the side of the screen counts up to 10 (in this particular example, being able to purchase the item you're looking for and then effectively donate it instead of searching around for it is also a plus).
 

Edit: Although the filler feel of the lack of cinematics I think helps a great deal. I did not expect Mother Giselle to matter at all when I met her. And I thought Krem was just a random quest giver. The lack of cutscenes helps to reduce the problem Bioware games have in making it obvious which NPCs matter.

I agree that this is a good thing, although I know several people who are bugged by the lack of cinematics for most conversations. I don't really want it to be obvious which NPCs are important. I mean, yeah, sometimes it's obvious, and that's cool -- but being surprised by that is nice as well.

[In Exile]

Wouldn't you guys have enjoyed getting to know some of these side characters prior to killing them, though? Characters like Sister Costeu, Maliphant, Hand of Korth, Servis, Lucanus, etc. I would have loved to be able to converse with some of these characters and figure out different ways to either beat them or even help them, depending on the circumstances.

I think some people are getting too worked up over this whole DAO vs DAI debate. I guess I can see why due to the OP and the title of this thread. However, forget about DAO and lets just focus on DAI and what we can build upon here. Keep the awesome looking zones, but lets add some more of what Bioware does great: Character interaction and dialogue.

I don't know, I just see a lot of potential here. Although, I do have other grievances with the game (combat, UI, terrible loot), I won't get into those here. I am specifically referring to the zones and how well the art team did. If we can just add some great characters to these zones it could be amazing.

Here's the thing - I think Bioware needs to find a way to let us know these characters without their "Have a chat before fighting" style. Maybe making the conversation optional (like the Blades in the Storm Coast) is a good idea. I also agree that e.g. the Freedmen of the Dales seemed to have a very relatable story and it sucked we just had to kill 'em all. We do get content on these people via codex but I agree that interacting is better.

The solution is for Bioware to make quests less liniear. It's their design again. Instead of making it us vs. the Freedmen by default, let us pick sides. The Elder one scoops up the other side and then we fight it out.

If Bioware made it so that each area had 2-3 factions and we picked one, I'd wager people would like even the simplistic filler quests more.

[outlaw1109]

So, yeah. It's not so much that the quests are worse, although with the sheer number of them the inherent quality of some is likely to suffer, but rather that they're comparatively poorly packaged. It's also not as if every quest in DA:O was great. It is true that, for most of DA:O's largely meaningless make-work quests, one didn't have to go out of the way to do them -- and that probably led to them feeling less oppressive. If you've got the same quest in each style, say finding 10 elfroots, it feels a lot different if you happen upon 10 elfroots while you're doing something else, realise you've got enough in your inventory, and hand them over instead of searching all around a wide area specifically for elfroots while the quest marker at the side of the screen counts up to 10 (in this particular example, being able to purchase the item you're looking for and then effectively donate it instead of searching around for it is also a plus).
 

 

This has been much of my point.  It's not about the quest being inherently bad, in fact the content is vaguely similar, it's about how they're executed.  

I understand how someone might want to have those extra nuianced, cut-scene style convo's with people, I really do, but in retro-spect, the outcry was far greater at the release of Origins to have it removed.

Bioware has a big issue with being able to make a game that suits their strengths because they focus too hard on making it popular.  Bioware has strong stories, great characters, great art, but only okay DESIGN.

Whereas, (just for example purposes) games like skyrim are almost the opposite exactly:  weak stories, weak characters, okay art, and GREAT design.

 

[Travie]

I finally took the plunge over the holiday and bought it, and I totally agree with OP. 

 

The only real sidequests are the companion sidequests, the rest are basically MMO-style fetch quests. 

 

Sure, they fill out the areas, but I can only take so many fetch quests before I'm completely demotivated to continue and have to take a long break to do something else.

[AlanC9]

If you've got the same quest in each style, say finding 10 elfroots, it feels a lot different if you happen upon 10 elfroots while you're doing something else, realise you've got enough in your inventory, and hand them over instead of searching all around a wide area specifically for elfroots while the quest marker at the side of the screen counts up to 10 (in this particular example, being able to purchase the item you're looking for and then effectively donate it instead of searching around for it is also a plus).

 

I'll bet this was deliberate design. In a sense, the point of the collection missions is to get you running around the map. It's somewhat akin to the way Skyrim radiant quests send you running all over the world map, or ME3's item recovery missions.

[LostInReverie19]

I'm out of likes, OP, but I just wanted you to know that one more person completely agrees with your assessment of the "side quests" in this game. 

[Lianaar]

In summary:

 

"I'm sick of your opinion. This is my opinion and it's correct."
"Nuh uh! Your opinion is wrong and mine is right."

 

And the world keeps spinning.

The reason I come back to this thread is that even if our opinions differ, if we can strip the issues down from emotions we might find something that can be built upon. So by disecting the exact cases and pinpointing the explicit issues we might turn out to think the same on those aspects even if we seem to disagree.

 

Eg. I like DA:I more then I liked DA:O, I believe it is more flashed out.
But I can agree to some statements in the complaints, eg the delivery of the quests and the closure as well as the rewards might be worked on even if it means less maps. The schematics of the quests have little options, the ideas behind them are not bad, however if there was more easy to grasp and less abstract rewards, it would probably make the closure feel more real and less electronic and distant. I personally don't need it, for I imagine it for myself even if I read a text, but I easily see why people need it and I also think it would make it better.

 

Then while we disagree wether the side quests are good or bad, we can agree on how to make them better. We can formulate this opinion in a way, that is understandable for game designers and coders and they can allocate resources differently next time. So yes, there is a good point in sharing opinions which differ.

 

Unrelatedly I thought about another quest that I enjoyed, though I wouldn't call it quest in the sense it was not an entry in the quest list: The castle with the people who worshiped the rift. It was an interesting perspective with more then a single thing to do and you could have different outcomes. It altered people and how they thought about things and you could drift them to various directions, if my memory serves.

[Maverick827]

Willful ignorance usually entails completely disregarding established facts, evidence and/or reasonable opinions. Since no facts or evidence is involved in this discussion I can only assume reasonable opinions. If that is the case my opinion is just as reasonable as yours. I could state that you are engaging in willful ignorance also since you choose not to see my reasonable opinion when others in this thread do. Or are those posters also willful ignorant?

 

What if I could prove that DAI had a shockingly high number of "filler" side quests when compared to Origins' side quests?