146 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

I wouldn't consider either of them decent RPGs, though I do think they are excellent isometric combat simulators (similar to Divinity). Sorry if I wasn't clear - that was my point. I appreciate that their combat is phenomenally well done. I just think that adequate combat is a minimum threshold for an RPG, and anything above adequate is largely irrelevant (though excellent combat can be a non-RPG related reason for playing the game, much in the same way that the excellent tactical combat of XCOM:EU is a reason to play it). 

 

By that criteria most early crpgs aren't decent rpgs then.

[In Exile]

By that criteria most early crpgs aren't decent rpgs then.

 

By my criteria, yes. But I think this is incredibly subjective, and generally a gets everyone nowhere. What matters is whether or not you like the game. That's really the only calculus. Thumbs up or down. 

[MadDemiurg]

By my criteria, yes. But I think this is incredibly subjective, and generally a gets everyone nowhere. What matters is whether or not you like the game. That's really the only calculus. Thumbs up or down. 

Have you actually played Dragonfall? IMO it has better story than DA:I too. It doesn't present it quite as well (no voice acting etc,), which can be expected from a lower budget game, but it still was more interesting for me. Companions are quite good as well, although maybe not on BW level. Tbh it doesn't take much to beat Inquisition's main plot line.

[In Exile]

Have you actually played Dragonfall? IMO it has better story than DA:I too. It doesn't present it quite as well (no voice acting etc,), which can be expected from a lower budget game, but it still was more interesting for me. Companions are quite good as well, although maybe not on BW level. Tbh it doesn't take much to beat Inquisition's main plot line.

I haven't played the expansion, just the original. I was underwhelmed but thought it was an OK game. I didn't realise it had an expansion until you pointed it out, so I should qualify any comment regarding it to the original. I may also have confused it with Wasteland 2 originally.

[Andraste_Reborn]

I thought Dragonfall was a considerable improvement on the original campaign's story - one of the best I've played recently, in fact. The companions are pretty interesting, too, and there are some interesting plot decisions to be made. Well worth checking out if you liked the combat in the base game, and it convinced me to back Shadowrun: Hong Kong.

 

However, in my opinion it's not a patch on Inquisition when it comes to character interaction and ability to express your PC's personality. You can headcanon whatever you want about you protagonist, but to me they came across as rather flat in-game.

[MadDemiurg]

I thought Dragonfall was a considerable improvement on the original campaign's story - one of the best I've played recently, in fact. The companions are pretty interesting, too, and there are some interesting plot decisions to be made. Well worth checking out if you liked the combat in the base game, and it convinced me to back Shadowrun: Hong Kong.

 

However, in my opinion it's not a patch on Inquisition when it comes to character interaction and ability to express your PC's personality. You can headcanon whatever you want about you protagonist, but to me they came across as rather flat in-game.

That's true, Inquisition indeed has more RP options in terms of expressing your character, to me personally it doesn't make up for poorly balanced combat and short and cliched main plot line however.

 

Also, moving into entirely subjective area, most of the available RP choices made me despise my character and none of them were quite as cool as renegade ME options or sarcastic options in DA2

[Sylvius the Mad]

"I did sink 40 hours into it, which should theoretically be more than enough to finish any single player game."

This alone disqualifies this reviewer's opinion.

[Giantdeathrobot]

To me it reads like the reviewer just doesn't really like single-player RPGs in general. Which is completely fine, but it's still a bit weird that he makes an article that basically complains X game he didn't like won more awards than Y game he likes.

 

I mean, Hearthstone is fun and I play it from time to time (and no, it's not just luck at all), but as I see it a GOTY is one that marks the year and is memorable, Hearthstone might be a good card game but it's, well, a card game. Wasn't Hearthstone released last year anyway?

[Dreamer]

The only thing more entertaining than reading a Forbes nobody talk about an industry (and franchise) they truly do not understand is watching a select few posters here get red-faced and indignant because not everyone is slobbering with the same love they have for Inquisition.

[Al Foley]

Elder scrolls series (Skyrim) probably is average on CONSOLES, on the PC with all its mods from the developers freely provided CreationKit makes it is an awesome game, which is something extremely unlikely to happen with any EAware game...

DA:I is an average game I wish I didn't buy, but I did so from the nostalgia of Bioware making actual good games.

I find this argument to equate to: My 72 Pinto was a terrible car, until I took out the engine, remade the frame, and turned it into a 2010 Mustang and now it rocks!

[Sanunes]

To me it reads like the reviewer just doesn't really like single-player RPGs in general. Which is completely fine, but it's still a bit weird that he makes an article that basically complains X game he didn't like won more awards than Y game he likes.

 

I mean, Hearthstone is fun and I play it from time to time (and no, it's not just luck at all), but as I see it a GOTY is one that marks the year and is memorable, Hearthstone might be a good card game but it's, well, a card game. Wasn't Hearthstone released last year anyway?

 

If I understand my timeline correctly the game was open for people to play in 2013 for "testing" and had an official launch in 2014.

[MikeJW]

The only thing more entertaining than reading a Forbes nobody talk about an industry (and franchise) they truly do not understand is watching a select few posters here get red-faced and indignant because not everyone is slobbering with the same love they have for Inquisition.

 

I think the red faced and indignant ones are the ones that are still here complaining about a two month old game they hate.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I wouldn't consider either of them decent RPGs

Is it just that they lack reactivity, or is there something else you're looking for?

[Sylvius the Mad]

I find this argument to equate to: My 72 Pinto was a terrible car, until I took out the engine, remade the frame, and turned it into a 2010 Mustang and now it rocks!

It's way better than it would have been if I had been forced to keep it as a 72 Pinto.

[In Exile]

Is it just that they lack reactivity, or is there something else you're looking for?

Reactivity isn't quite the right word for it. I think an RPG is about the interaction between the player avatar - the PC - and the game world. If it's happening in your head, to me that's not RP. I think that - and this is because I value social interaction and expression - that social interaction is more central to RP that things like aesthetic, feature customisation (e.g. stats and skills in the abstract) and combat are secondary.

Essentially an RPG has to be demarcated from daydreaming and writing (to me). Any game that requires a substantial amount of headcanon doesn't work for me.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Reactivity isn't quite the right word for it. I think an RPG is about the interaction between the player avatar - the PC - and the game world. If it's happening in your head, to me that's not RP. I think that - and this is because I value social interaction and expression - that social interaction is more central to RP that things like aesthetic, feature customisation (e.g. stats and skills in the abstract) and combat are secondary.

Essentially an RPG has to be demarcated from daydreaming and writing (to me). Any game that requires a substantial amount of headcanon doesn't work for me.

That makes sense.

As I would dispute the existence of interaction generally, this clearly can't be a requirement of mine.

[Unknown_Warrior]

Yes, because when I want gaming reviews I go to Forbes. Like when I went to Home and Garden to decide what car to buy. Or when I go to MSNBC when I want real news.

 

Or when you want good restaurant advice, you go to a tyre company. ...Wait, I think I'm doing it wrong.

Forbes is entirely fair, and I do feel DAI won mostly because of the competition being **** rather than it being excessively good.

[atlantico]

People still ignore DAI is an awesome game. The point is not to deny DAI awesomeness, AS A GAME, but as something a lot more specific:

 

I will rate it again:

As a game: 9/10

As a RPG: 8/10

As a DA: 7/10

As for PC: 6/10

Considering what was promised by the developers in countless streamings, posts, interviews, etc: 0/10

 

They just should have made a MMORPG or they could have been honest and said what they were doing exactly. Even if you love the game you can't honestly say they delivered what they promise. Even a simple thing like "combat is mix between DAO and DA2" is absurd since it went completely action and is completely different from both, god I would hate this game so much less if AT LEAST this promise they folowed to the end... but no... then other follow as you are all aware of like PC as lead platform and so on... the fable "decisions that matter" (but this one is old as hell, not DAI exclusive for sure)... races/specializations that matter (well some people think it does, I see no difference at all, I'm not a lover of random useless comments about how dangerous dragon blood is or that magic is scary, also great job at killing the whole clan and ignoring it)... anyway, they just shouldn't have lied

 

Good post and actually makes a very important point, that there are very many ways to look at DA:I

 

My take is this:

 

As a game: 6/10 - there's just not much gameplay to it and the UI hinders the player enjoying the little gameplay there is

As an RPG: 5/10 - there's not much roleplaying possible, few options, shallow customization, shallow character development, shallow world interaction

As a DA: 7/10 - it's DA, just PG-13 DA. And a bit preachy.

As for PC: 5/10 - There's a 10 000 post thread on this, five out of ten is generous.

As what was promised: 1/10 - it didn't deliver on what was promised, though it did have large open zones and they are very pretty.

 

Some of the above can be improved with patches and DLCs, so this isn't the final verdict, but the game certainly starts out with a large handicap.

 

edit: pdusen, yes you are indeed correct, I have changed the score to reflect your point. 

[pdusen]

As what was promised: 0/10 - it didn't deliver on what was promised.

Let's not be melodramatic here. It _is_ a game. It _does_ have large open zones. That at least warrants a 1/10 on delivering what they advertised. You can't reaonably give this game a 0/10; it would have to be a book or something for that to make sense.

[uzivatel]

That guy again? Whatever...

[k1rage]

First off Forbes reviewing video games? big lol there, stick to what your good at Forbes

 

Also he states that the game trys to emulate skyrim, I really dont see that as true, yes there are more open world environments than previous dragon age games but thats where the similarities end...

 

As for the comparison to Crash, I have no idea what hes talking about Crash was a preachy racist PoS movie, DA:I on the other hand is decent at worst, I guess you could argue that they both won in weak years for their respective form of media but thats about it...

 

Oh and also Hearthstone as game of the year? OMG what a joke its a pay to win computerized magic the gathering rip off... any pay to win games should be disqualified instantly

[Ashen Nedra]

Reactivity isn't quite the right word for it. I think an RPG is about the interaction between the player avatar - the PC - and the game world. If it's happening in your head, to me that's not RP. I think that - and this is because I value social interaction and expression - that social interaction is more central to RP that things like aesthetic, feature customisation (e.g. stats and skills in the abstract) and combat are secondary.

Essentially an RPG has to be demarcated from daydreaming and writing (to me). Any game that requires a substantial amount of headcanon doesn't work for me.

QFT and like

[LinksOcarina]

funny, everyone was hailing forbes two years ago when mass Effect 3 came out...

[Giantdeathrobot]

funny, everyone was hailing forbes two years ago when mass Effect 3 came out...

 

It was more that one author who decried the ending which got him publicty. Not sure if it is the same one, I don't think so.