232 réponses à ce sujet

[LostInReverie19]

Yes please. Being a messiah figure was fun for a little while, but it got old quickly. It's just too cliche. DA2 was confining and had its flaws, but at least we started out as an ordinary person, and being an ordinary person in a video game feels refreshing. If DA2 had been implemented better, it would have been an amazing game. 

[Ravenfeeder]

Yet I will agree that DA4 should please, pretty please, avoid such stuff. I have no problems with a young hero growing into the saviour-role over the course of the story/game. But pelase start it slow, and don't overdo it. And please NO CHOSEN ONE! I hate chosen ones...

 

Just a normal guy/gal thrown into the frying pan, confronted with impossible odds and growing to be strong and capable (though NOT from zero to hero!)

 

I like the way Quizzy could believe they were the Chosen One, even if they weren't though. And that some others believed it too. And then finding out that they weren't always fell a bit flat unfortunately.

[Exalus]

The rise to power in this game was one of the most well done in any rpg ive seen. 

[hellbiter88]

exactly its like Bioware doesn't have their own vision for the DA games I mean its good to listen to fan criticism but to go overboard like this?

very lame and I expected more from Bioware

 

To be fair, after the firestorm that DA: II's environments caused---Bioware did try really, really hard to please fans by correcting that mistake. I'm not saying it was the fan's fault, cuz it's not, but this is a product of exaggeration.

[Nykara]

DAI is nothing but an exaggertion of the DA2 criticisms.

People hated thd closed in urban DA2 world.....so they make many large unique worlds full of mmo style quest.

People hated the smaller more personable story of Hawke and said it wasnt epic enough....so they make you a borderline religious prophet in DAI who saves the world from doom!!!

People hated how everyone was bi sexual in DAI......so they now make romances sex gated and race gated.

Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

And yet all of these things they did in DAI I think are awesome!

[Riven326]

To be fair, after the firestorm that DA: II's environments caused---Bioware did try really, really hard to please fans by correcting that mistake. I'm not saying it was the fan's fault, cuz it's not, but this is a product of exaggeration.

Normally I would agree. But I think in this case it's a product of another game's incredible success.

[Majestic Jazz]

And yet all of these things they did in DAI I think are awesome!

And yet all of these things are not what makes a great Bioware game.

Bioware games since KOTOR are 100% cinematic experiences....only about 20% of DAI was cinematic.

Bioware games focus on smaller yet detailed worlds or enviornments with a lot of stuff to do they are always unique like the Rogue V.I. on the Citadel in ME1....DAI had nothing of this but rather MMO style fetch quest.

[line_genrou]

The problem is that I think the enemy should give us more of a challenge, in this game there wasn't much

[Raoni Luna]

Yeah, give me a game where I'm somebody's ******, where I either have to do as I'm told or the game ends. That sounds awesome. Turns out I live that RPG every day.

 

That is precisely how I feel in Inquisition. See, you need to follow a given path in the main story. The only time in the main story where you can shoose WHAT to do is recruiting either mages or templars all the rest you can just choose how to do. So yeah, I feel like I'm somebody's ******. "Oh but you can choose what to do to the wardens!" - Should I care? "You can choose the ruler of Orlais!" - Great but I'd rather not deal with it. "You put a new divine on the throne!" - Good, and if I want to destroy the Chantry?

So what most people call choices I call no choice at all. For a chosen one I feel completely helpless. I'm always depending on something or someone and I can't choose my path, never.

"Oh but then there are the side quests" - Where I also can't choose.

If I have to break into a keep and take it, I couldn't bother less with other choices, I can't choose whether to take the keep or not! I would like choices, real choices, like taking the keep or making an alliance to the people there. I seriously don't understand how you are happy with the choices presented, they are not even choices... I miss the simple but delicious ability to choose between helping a rhyming oak or a mad hermit. Elves, Werewolves ofr both.

And before you tell me how none of this choices made an impact: I don't care. Choices for me were never about the impact they had later in the game, or in later games, they were about making choices. I could build my character in these choices, actual choices. Interesting choices like killing Merrills clan or transforming dwarves into golems or making pacts with demons to get power... all gone.

I'm not someone's ******, I'm Bioware's ******.

 

 

The rise to power in this game was one of the most well done in any rpg ive seen. 

 

You have already the possible groups to interact. You can choose on how to deal with them yes, but the scripting limits you greatly. "How could they make better than this?" - Giving more options and letting the player free to approach chosen groups. Let's say they give us 9 factions and we can choose 3 to approach, we would not have time to approach all of them and making alliance to some would restrict the alliance to others. I would love to see something like that. It would still not fit my concept of choice but would be a lot less limited than Inquisition. Rise to power... well, I prefer Hawke's both the beginning, the path and the end.

It is very sad to see mage/templat, greywardens, orlais... Inquisition score is huge in the first playthrough but VERY diminishing in the next playthroughs. Also I don't ever feel like my army grow or something like that, all I know is some mission on the war table saying like Wardens are ok or Warden dies... it is deffinetly not fulfilling for me.

[_Aine_]

Jesus led an army because he interrupted something and caught a magical orb that transferred power into his physical hands? Wow, who knew? 

[Phoe77]

The rogue V.I. quest that consisted of running throughout the relatively empty levels of the Citadel so we could click on random nodes.  It did result in a climactic confrontation in which we had to hit buttons in a certain pattern though.  That's a weird choice of example if you're trying to say that DAI had too many fetch quests.

 

All joking aside, I thought that Inquisition was great.  It did things differently from previous Bioware titles, and some of those things could certainly benefit from additional polish and refinement, but the experience was enjoyable for me throughout and I'm looking forward to several more playthroughs.  It was a great Bioware game for me.  Of course all of this is neither here nor there.

 

I thought the "chosen one" angle was done well in Inquisition.  It was never treated like your victory was preordained, and the events in the Fade introduced a level of ambiguity that made things interesting.  I still don't know how I'd answer if I were asked if the Inquisitor was guided by divine will.  

 

That doesn't mean that I'm opposed to a story that's smaller in scope or that revolves around a less larger-than-life character.  I wish that more games would attempt what DA2 did and focus their narrative on the actions of a person or a group of people rather than some epic avert-the-apocalypse storyline.   

[Spankatola]

That is precisely how I feel in Inquisition. See, you need to follow a given path in the main story. The only time in the main story where you can shoose WHAT to do is recruiting either mages or templars all the rest you can just choose how to do. So yeah, I feel like I'm somebody's ******. "Oh but you can choose what to do to the wardens!" - Should I care? "You can choose the ruler of Orlais!" - Great but I'd rather not deal with it. "You put a new divine on the throne!" - Good, and if I want to destroy the Chantry?

So what most people call choices I call no choice at all. For a chosen one I feel completely helpless. I'm always depending on something or someone and I can't choose my path, never.

"Oh but then there are the side quests" - Where I also can't choose.

If I have to break into a keep and take it, I couldn't bother less with other choices, I can't choose whether to take the keep or not! I would like choices, real choices, like taking the keep or making an alliance to the people there. I seriously don't understand how you are happy with the choices presented, they are not even choices... I miss the simple but delicious ability to choose between helping a rhyming oak or a mad hermit. Elves, Werewolves ofr both.

And before you tell me how none of this choices made an impact: I don't care. Choices for me were never about the impact they had later in the game, or in later games, they were about making choices. I could build my character in these choices, actual choices. Interesting choices like killing Merrills clan or transforming dwarves into golems or making pacts with demons to get power... all gone.

I'm not someone's ******, I'm Bioware's ******.

 

 

I think this is silly. You admit you were given choices, just not the ones you wanted. At least be honest in your criticism. I can personally choose the empress of Orlais, whether the Templars exist, whether the Grey Wardens are even allowed to be within a thousand miles of me. I can choose who runs the chantry. You want to make some dwarves into golems? I'm changing the world over here.

 

Yes, you're Bioware's ******, to the extent you're the ****** of every game company whose games you buy. You play the story they give you. Your criticisms just don't resonate with me at all.

[BSpud]

Considering how the writers like to change things up in every installment (even down to the new PC), I don't see why anyone would expect the next one to be DAI Revisited, unless you just want to scrape the barrel for things to worry about.

[Lewie]

I don't see any of my characters as religious so Jesus 2.0 is ambiguous.

 

I don't mind an organization that tries to fix a world gone mad, if I miss the evil I can always play DA2 again. 

 

The games are different though. If they over-reach the series will be lost.

[hellbiter88]

Normally I would agree. But I think in this case it's a product of another game's incredible success.

 

yeah I know about the skyrim inspiration. but skyrim started off in open world and carried that tradition. DA didn't... and the transition wasn't as smooth. Nevertheless, I think both skyrim and fanbase complaint were huge factors.

[Al Foley]

Considering how the writers like to change things up in every installment (even down to the new PC), I don't see why anyone would expect the next one to be DAI Revisited, unless you just want to scrape the barrel for things to worry about.

Or hope for...

[Nefla]

All I want is balance BioWare I don't want to be failing at every turn and completely ineffectual (Hawke, Shepard in ME3) but I also don't want to be an invincible Mary-Sue who encounters no setbacks and wins at everything (Inquisitor). I just want to start small and have to earn a measure of strength but I don't want to be this super elite, strongest in the world, chosen one. I want to succeed mainly through cleverness, circumstance, teamwork, and occasionally sacrifice and NOT because I'm some kind of untouchable demi-god. I want there to be ups and downs, wins and losses, tragedy and triumph.

[Orian Tabris]

I just realised, this thread is very spoilerish for the "NO Spoilers" section. Even as vague to the plot, as it is.

[In Exile]

All I want is balance BioWare I don't want to be failing at every turn and completely ineffectual (Hawke, Shepard in ME3) but I also don't want to be an invincible Mary-Sue who encounters no setbacks and wins at everything (Inquisitor). I just want to start small and have to earn a measure of strength but I don't want to be this super elite, strongest in the world, chosen one. I want to succeed mainly through cleverness, circumstance, teamwork, and occasionally sacrifice and NOT because I'm some kind of untouchable demi-god. I want there to be ups and downs, wins and losses, tragedy and triumph.

But you always win because you're an untouchable demi-god because, at the end of the day, you win through murder. That's the key problem with Bioware games. You're always an amazingly good murderer. The only difference is whether things go your way on random stuff outside of your control.

The Warden is good at one thing: murder. But the murder just leads to awesome results. Murder your way through the deep roads? Find Branka or Caridan, each of whom give you what you want.

Hawke is also amazing at murder. But the murder doesn't work out. You murder your way through the chantry zealots in Act 2 but they skill kill Sameus. The Arishok still hides a bunch of elves you never knew about and starts sacking Kirkwall.

The Inquisitor goes back to having all the circumstances going your way. You're awesome at murder, but Haven still goes against you. Except look! Solas happens to know about Skyhold and Corypheus doesn't have the power to attack again.

In RPGs we are unkillable demi-gods who succeed or fail depending on the whim of the writers.

[Thandal N'Lyman]

<snip>
In RPGs we are unkillable demi-gods who succeed or fail depending on the whim of the writers.

 

I disagree.  In RPGs we are demi-gods who succeed.  Period. 

Otherwise, we wouldn't play.

 

The writers work very hard so that the story makes (some kind of) sense regardless of what attitude/style the player adopts.

[Aimi]

But you always win because you're an untouchable demi-god because, at the end of the day, you win through murder. That's the key problem with Bioware games. You're always an amazingly good murderer. The only difference is whether things go your way on random stuff outside of your control.

Isn't this kind of the problem with games qua competitive activities? Not the "murder" bit, but the fact that you always win unless things don't go your way on random stuff outside of your control, because if you didn't win you wouldn't, y'know, have completed the game.

[In Exile]

Isn't this kind of the problem with games qua competitive activities? Not the "murder" bit, but the fact that you always win unless things don't go your way on random stuff outside of your control, because if you didn't win you wouldn't, y'know, have completed the game.

Not necessarily. We could have an enemy who we can beat by something other than pure murder. Ignore how easy DAI's combat is for a second. The some demon fights have an interesting mechanic. For Wrath of Heaven you need to exploit the rift - it's a simplistic mechanic but the battle doesn't portray you as an incredible badass.

Similarly there's a quest where you meet a trapped spirit that became a demon. You could fight the demon. But you could also destroy the mechanism that summoned it.

I think these mechanics are good and should be expanded on.

[Aimi]

Not necessarily. We could have an enemy who we can beat by something other than pure murder. Ignore how easy DAI's combat is for a second. The some demon fights have an interesting mechanic. For Wrath of Heaven you need to exploit the rift - it's a simplistic mechanic but the battle doesn't portray you as an incredible badass.

Similarly there's a quest where you meet a trapped spirit that became a demon. You could fight the demon. But you could also destroy the mechanism that summoned it.

I think these mechanics are good and should be expanded on.

Oh, the "murder" part wasn't what I was highlighting, I just thought that pointing out untouchable demigodhood is silly because that's what winners are like. Whether you beat enemies through murderkilling or beat them through stealth, etc., you're still vanquishing all comers unless something outside of your control happens.

[Nefla]

Not necessarily. We could have an enemy who we can beat by something other than pure murder. Ignore how easy DAI's combat is for a second. The some demon fights have an interesting mechanic. For Wrath of Heaven you need to exploit the rift - it's a simplistic mechanic but the battle doesn't portray you as an incredible badass.

Similarly there's a quest where you meet a trapped spirit that became a demon. You could fight the demon. But you could also destroy the mechanism that summoned it.

I think these mechanics are good and should be expanded on.

I agree and would also like to see opportunities to win or progress through non combat means, trickery, laying plans/setting a trap ahead of time, etc...even things like having people I saved or befriended earlier coming to my aid in a battle, or battles like with Ser Cauthrien where it was a difficult fight and you could lose and still progress through the game.

[Lanavis]

I think the premise for this game was interesting. I like how it was proved inky EDIT the herald of Andraste. But I agree with your post. This game felt too big to me. More story and less open world. I hope they get the balance of the next game right,

Just a head's up you may want to edit your comment. 

Whether or not Andraste sent the Inquisitor is a spoiler.

Bolded for my edit.