DAI is not a proper rpg at all. It is an action hack and slash game with some elements of rpg in it.
I always wonder what the idea of a "proper RPG" would be to all of these "DAI ISN'T AN RPG ERMAGERD!" purists.
I can't fathom a single element that DAI fails to share with other "real" RPGs, but I'm obviously an idiot because they see something I don't. I mean, I've been playing video games by whole life, but it just isn't clear to me.
The reason I said I rated DAI 7 out of 10 part of the reason is because I got it on sale for $45 CAD and then its worth it around that price range. The lower the price, the more worth it is to buy.
If DAI was $70+ CAD, I would never of bought it after reading all the posts, threads and reviews.....not worth the money.
And its buggy, oh so buggy its not even funny.
Patch 1......Patch 2.....Patch 3......mini Patch 4.......Patch 5????
DAI is not a proper rpg at all. It is an action hack and slash game with some elements of rpg in it.
I'm not even sure how anyone can really mistake this game as a hack and slash arpg. You don't fight hundreds of mobs in mere minutes, like say, the Diablo series. in ARPG's it's all about clearing speed and light on story. And the looootz man, don't forget the looootz.
As for bugs: There may be many more problems on the PC version (compared to the current gen consoles), but for the amount of code it takes and the complexity most modern day games have compared to games 20 years ago is off the charts. More room for error, and harder to catch everything. Unfortunately with games as massive as they are now, it's about impossible to not release a game without issues. Not making any excuses here, just using logic.
It's s partially open-world rpg. I though that was obvious 
The irony being that DAI has the most roleplaying elements out of all the DA and ME games.I always wonder what the idea of a "proper RPG" would be to all of these "DAI ISN'T AN RPG ERMAGERD!" purists.
I can't fathom a single element that DAI fails to share with other "real" RPGs, but I'm obviously an idiot because they see something I don't. I mean, I've been playing video games by whole life, but it just isn't clear to me.
I always wonder what the idea of a "proper RPG" would be to all of these "DAI ISN'T AN RPG ERMAGERD!" purists.
I can't fathom a single element that DAI fails to share with other "real" RPGs, but I'm obviously an idiot because they see something I don't. I mean, I've been playing video games by whole life, but it just isn't clear to me.
The irony being that DAI has the most roleplaying elements out of all the DA and ME games.
Because you both like Bioware and many other fans here decided, at some point, that RPG is storytelling...
Or whatever other characteristics you randomly assigned to... most common I see are exploration, choice and character interaction
Now I will be retarded like you pretend to be to defend your point, not you two, you people who try to defend Inquisition: By the raw definition of yours Double Dragon, the arcade game from the 80's is RPG. There is a story. There is exploration. There is choice. There is chharacter interaction. In fact there is a choice way better than Inquisition where you can kill your own brother to get the girlfriend.
So what are really RPG elements?
Story? So Tomb Raider, Resident Evil and GTA are RPGs right?
Exploration? Same as above.
Character interaction? Same here.
Character creation? So Saints Row and The Sims are RPG.
What really defines the genre? I already stated like a million times here in this forum. What makes RPG is the set of rules (game) limiting the fantasy (roleplaying) but not any set of rules. Rules that define character interaction and combat. When you bring this to computer games you have to be a lot more specific since in computer games, given the programming, all genres use rules to control character interaction and combat, so the difference in RPG is that you can have option and choices, ultimately control, the elements of your character that take part in these rules. This is in general, and in combat, there is this and the combat being more about the character you are roleplaying than about action, that is the most basic feature of an eletronic rpg to be different from ation games.
So yeah, I get it that for you things present in most AAA titles today are RPG, from war to sport games there is storytelling, evolution, and so on. But whole of these characteristics I put above define RPG and mark the difference regarding other genres. Sad thing is that Bioware seemed to convince people that good story is somehow related to RPG.
I wonder if in a tabletop game a GM tells to worst story ever, if the game ceases to be RPG. Or if GM excludes exploration. No, because RPG is the set of rules, as long as the GM keeps the set of rules it is going to be RPG. But from the moment GM removes my ability to assign my stat points, removes my non combat skills and starts asking me to jump around and simmulate in live action the combat in a session to define my success on attack rolls, yeah, it is not RPG anymore. Now if the GM told me it would be live action, ok, genre defined, same goes for Bioware, had they told me there would be action I would never buy the game and all would be happy. I still would be pissed off the same as if the GM in a tabletop game suddenly changed the way we played an adventure in the middle of the story, but still, would prevent huge frustration.
Honesty can do amazing things, so sad Bioware does not even know the meaning of this word,
You answered your own question. All of those traits belong to the semi-open world narrative party-based RPG, DAi.Because you both like Bioware and many other fans here decided, at some point, that RPG is storytelling..
So what are really RPG elements?
Story? So Tomb Raider, Resident Evil and GTA are RPGs right?
Exploration? Same as above.
Character interaction? Same here.
Character creation? So Saints Row and The Sims are RPG.
What really defines the genre ?
DAI is an attempt at MMO, but single player game in the end.
- hack and slash
DAI is not a horrible game but its not a great great, true rpg and game of the year either.
I rate DAI 7 our of 10 and only becasue I got it on sale for $45 CAD.
As a former long time Dynasty Warriors player (now retired); I can say that DAI is not even, close, to being a Hack and Slash.
Adventure game based on MMO game play
As a former long time Dynasty Warriors player (now retired); I can say that DAI is not even, close, to being a Hack and Slash.
Dynasty Warriors that brings back memories, I'm surprised I made it through that era without developing a nervous tick.
People seem to forget that MMO enemies run back to their spawn points, and respawn there when killed. In Inquisition, where they spawn will only respawn them if you reload or go far enough away, which I think is just a poor design choice.
The "fetch quests" are very minor and most of the time, promote exploration anyway, which is what those quests should be doing in a game with big maps.
People should remember that MMOs have content that primarily relates to there being other real life people playing. To say Dragon Age: Inquisition's single player is an MMO shows just how short-sighted, and how uninformed about MMOs they are. Not to mention how quick they are to jump the band-wagon.
I get really tired of these fetch quest and MMO complaints, because there's always someone complaining about them.
Well then, as someone who has played lots of MMOs, this game feels like a single-player MMO. Specifically, it feels like SWTOR.
But SWtOR actually has real side quests and the ability to be evil or money grubbing or lazy, etc...
I don't really get the "single player MMO" thing either. Then again I've only really played TOR and a little bit of ESO.
Because you both like Bioware and many other fans here decided, at some point, that RPG is storytelling...
Or whatever other characteristics you randomly assigned to... most common I see are exploration, choice and character interaction
Now I will be retarded like you pretend to be to defend your point, not you two, you people who try to defend Inquisition: By the raw definition of yours Double Dragon, the arcade game from the 80's is RPG. There is a story. There is exploration. There is choice. There is chharacter interaction. In fact there is a choice way better than Inquisition where you can kill your own brother to get the girlfriend.
So what are really RPG elements?
Story? So Tomb Raider, Resident Evil and GTA are RPGs right?
Exploration? Same as above.
Character interaction? Same here.
Character creation? So Saints Row and The Sims are RPG.
What really defines the genre? I already stated like a million times here in this forum. What makes RPG is the set of rules (game) limiting the fantasy (roleplaying) but not any set of rules. Rules that define character interaction and combat. When you bring this to computer games you have to be a lot more specific since in computer games, given the programming, all genres use rules to control character interaction and combat, so the difference in RPG is that you can have option and choices, ultimately control, the elements of your character that take part in these rules. This is in general, and in combat, there is this and the combat being more about the character you are roleplaying than about action, that is the most basic feature of an eletronic rpg to be different from ation games.
So yeah, I get it that for you things present in most AAA titles today are RPG, from war to sport games there is storytelling, evolution, and so on. But whole of these characteristics I put above define RPG and mark the difference regarding other genres. Sad thing is that Bioware seemed to convince people that good story is somehow related to RPG.
I wonder if in a tabletop game a GM tells to worst story ever, if the game ceases to be RPG. Or if GM excludes exploration. No, because RPG is the set of rules, as long as the GM keeps the set of rules it is going to be RPG. But from the moment GM removes my ability to assign my stat points, removes my non combat skills and starts asking me to jump around and simmulate in live action the combat in a session to define my success on attack rolls, yeah, it is not RPG anymore. Now if the GM told me it would be live action, ok, genre defined, same goes for Bioware, had they told me there would be action I would never buy the game and all would be happy. I still would be pissed off the same as if the GM in a tabletop game suddenly changed the way we played an adventure in the middle of the story, but still, would prevent huge frustration.
Honesty can do amazing things, so sad Bioware does not even know the meaning of this word,
As a former long time Dynasty Warriors player (now retired); I can say that DAI is not even, close, to being a Hack and Slash.
Dating simulator...
Am i doing this right?
Rules are the framework for the RPG. The role playing is provided by the participants based on the gameworld and story provided by the DM. The rules in a RPG are not craved in stone.
Steve Perrin and Ray Turney creators of Runequest defined Role playing as: "A role playing game is a game of character development. simulating the process of personal development commonly called "life". The player acts a role in a fantasy environment, just like he/she might act a role as a character in a play. In fact, when played with just pen and paper on the game board of the player's imagination, it has been called improvisational radio theater. If played with metal and plastic figures, it becomes improvisational puppet theater."
Every good DM knows when to fore go the rules so that the group has fun. Fun is the number one rule in rpgs. Close adherence to the rules framework can kill the fun.The story is the primary mover in the adventure. Without the story the rules are just that rules.
Each gamer has their definition of role playing that fits them. There is no universal definition. I also care little for genre definitions. If the game has enough rpgs elements in it by my check list then it is an rpg. IMHO, YMMV
Because you both like Bioware and many other fans here decided, at some point, that RPG is storytelling...
Or whatever other characteristics you randomly assigned to... most common I see are exploration, choice and character interaction
"RPG" is actually "role-playing game", which is inherently narrative focused. It's literally in the name. There is no objective, factual way you are correct on this, so stop insisting you are. Not only do I and plenty of other people here disagree with you, but the name of the f**king genre itself and people who make games within that genre disagree with you.
You saying what something is or isn't doesn't make it true when it contradicts every established tenet of that thing.
Well then, as someone who has played lots of MMOs, this game feels like a single-player MMO. Specifically, it feels like SWTOR.
Coming from someone who has played a lot of MMOs (and SWTOR, but not for too long), this game plays nothing like an MMO.
Unless you're saying that fetch quests and wide open maps are MMO-esque (which appear to be the majority of the complaints in regards to DAI being an MMO), in which case literally every RPG that isn't totally linear is also an MMO.
To me, the rules, setting and story provide the framework for role playing. The player must provide the remainder of the elements if there is to be any role playing.
When you role play in a game, you must make decisions and take actions that fit the character with little to no regard for the result. When the result is not what you had envisioned, the player must deal with the situation as it is. Just because your didn't reach your goal in one try is no excuse for a redo.
The problem with this view of role playing is that it is too much like real life. That's why games try to avoid taking the player down ugly, depressing paths. Who wants that? That was a rhetorical question. I know there are some of you that want exactly that. Get help.
On a less serious note, I just want the most entertainment possible for my entertainment dollar. When I buy a game, that's what I'm looking for. I expect a game to stand on it's own merits, whether it is the first in a franchise or the close of a franchise. Is that too much to ask?
But is it as focused on story as BioWare's more recent games have been? I wouldn't say so myself, and that is exactly what I'm trying to say with the post you quoted - BW dedicated even more importance to story in their games following Baldur's Gate (I can't speak for Jade Empire, though, I have yet to play it) and Inquisition is closer to BG than those titles.
As a former long time Dynasty Warriors player (now retired); I can say that DAI is not even, close, to being a Hack and Slash.
Guest_Lathrim_*
Oh, absolutely. In terms of story JE probably had the best structured story a Bioware game has ever had. I was disappointed with it at the time but in hindsight it was quite good.
Anyway I think it's important to consider Bioware vs. its contemporaries. BG1 had as much story as games around that time had a story. It was really weak on party member interaction and generally their focus on NPC writing. That's what BG2 changed and made Bioware what it is today.
I see. All the more reason to get it!
Sure. My point is that regardless of how standard BioWare's approach to Baldur's Gate may have been at the time, they definitely changed with its sequel and now, with Inquisition, it looks to me like they're looking at the first BG more attentively than before.
I agree with you entirely that DAI is the spiritual successor to BG1 in a way no other game really was since, including BG2. Except maybe for ME1.I see. All the more reason to get it!
Sure. My point is that regardless of how standard BioWare's approach to Baldur's Gate may have been at the time, they definitely changed with its sequel and now, with Inquisition, it looks to me like they're looking at the first BG more attentively than before.
I see. All the more reason to get it!
Sure. My point is that regardless of how standard BioWare's approach to Baldur's Gate may have been at the time, they definitely changed with its sequel and now, with Inquisition, it looks to me like they're looking at the first BG more attentively than before.
Jade Empire is a beautiful game and a great story, be warned it will be dated and the combat controls will be very frustrating. Similar to Kotor but a little more cumbersome. I eventually got used it. But then I played it, when it first came out.
Retour en haut