I have a biotic dealing with singularities.
There is another one in my party who loves barriers.
And I'm pretty sure Sera uses biotic charge too.
Varric was an engineer last time I checked.
Do I even need to say who Iron Bull is?
Sadly there is no Kai Leng =(
Oh, wait, did you even check rogue enemies moving... specially the elves from the Arbor Wilds? I'm pretty sure one of them is Kai
=)
1.singularities were there from Bulders gate.
2. Barriers where also there from Bulders gate.
3.It's called chain hook and all rogue have it. And that type of charge was there for Kotor.
4.Engineers are just mage theifs with no magic cloak.
5. He's Krogan....from Bulder's gate 2.
1.singularities were there from Bulders gate.
2. Barriers where also there from Bulders gate.
3.It's called chain hook and all rogue have it. And that type of charge was there for Kotor.
4.Engineers are just mage theifs with no magic cloak.
5. He's Krogan....from Bulder's gate 2.
1. With biotic hand and all? Funny I don't recall it being exactly like in Mass Effect.
2. You mean mage spells not the exact barrier from Mass Effect.
3. I was not talking about chain hook...
4. Nope.
5. Nope.
Everybody defending Inquisition can only do so by simplifying things. Or better, going to the original concept. Is is like saying some movie copied Lord of The Rings, then you say lord of The Rings copied Norse Mythology. yeah, right, but in norse mythology the description of the races, for instance, are VERY different from Lord of the Rings. Also there are a lot of original lore in lord of the rings despite the heavy norse mythology. So saying lord of the Rings copied Norse Mythology is no excuse for copying lord of the rings. And makes no sense as a defense...
So why don't you all, really, there are dozens of you, stop ignoring the specifics to defend Inquisition? Go play Mass Effect than use you biotic. Go to Inquisition play a mage Inquisitor, specially a rift mage. Then go play Baldur's Gate. Then come back and say all these simplifications. Or better, record it all, put on youtube, and see how ridiculous it sounds to compare those from baldur's gate, that are only CONCEPTUALLY simmilar to the comparison i made of Inquisition and Mass Effect where they are not only conceptually simmilar but also mechanic and visually the same.
It is always like this... Ice is water. Yes. If you ignore the lack of energy. If you ignore a lot of things you can even say a cube is no different from a circle. And that's how Inquisition/BG comparison goes. Now take into consideration all the elements and the comparison makes no sense at all.
Guest_Raga_*
Okay, so accepting your premise that Inquisition is just Mass Effect...so what? I *like* Mass Effect. Also, if you are seriously arguing that any high fantasy that copies Lord of the Rings is null and void, you just bankrupted the genre.
1. With biotic hand and all? Funny I don't recall it being exactly like in Mass Effect.
2. You mean mage spells not the exact barrier from Mass Effect.
3. I was not talking about chain hook...
4. Nope.
5. Nope.
Everybody defending Inquisition can only do so by simplifying things. Or better, going to the original concept. Is is like saying some movie copied Lord of The Rings, then you say lord of The Rings copied Norse Mythology. yeah, right, but in norse mythology the description of the races, for instance, are VERY different from Lord of the Rings. Also there are a lot of original lore in lord of the rings despite the heavy norse mythology. So saying lord of the Rings copied Norse Mythology is no excuse for copying lord of the rings. And makes no sense as a defense...
So why don't you all, really, there are dozens of you, stop ignoring the specifics to defend Inquisition? Go play Mass Effect than use you biotic. Go to Inquisition play a mage Inquisitor, specially a rift mage. Then go play Baldur's Gate. Then come back and say all these simplifications. Or better, record it all, put on youtube, and see how ridiculous it sounds to compare those from baldur's gate, that are only CONCEPTUALLY simmilar to the comparison i made of Inquisition and Mass Effect where they are not only conceptually simmilar but also mechanic and visually the same.
It is always like this... Ice is water. Yes. If you ignore the lack of energy. If you ignore a lot of things you can even say a cube is no different from a circle. And that's how Inquisition/BG comparison goes. Now take into consideration all the elements and the comparison makes no sense at all.
1. singularities are all about pinning down groups of enemies. Differance between the games is how. Still the same thing.
2.The barrier system in ME and Bg is all about prevention to damage. They are the same thing but one restores it self. The barrier system in bg is far more simular to the one in dai any ways.
3.Funny, that's the only ability rogues have that does that...Unless your taking about her romance.
4.I'm sorry. A mage theif can summon monsters, shoot fire, shoot ice, shoot lighting, debuff enemies, set traps, pick locks and doors, and disarm trap. An engineer can summon drones, shoot fire, shoot ice, shoot lighting, set traps, decrypt doors ans locks, and disarm traps. How are they not similar?
5. The entire Krogan race is based of this on character...Who's name is Krogan.
And I'm not say the game play is similar. I mean the powers.
Funny, after playing with most classes in ME and now playing DAI with the mage class( the only one left), there's not a single coincidence. In fact, I'm now playing ME3's multiplayer right now after finishing DAI two days ago.
DAI isn't Mass Effect, more like Baldur's Gate.
Thank you. I'm not the only one that sees this.
I don't understand this thread.
Dragon Age is Dragon Age.
Mass Effect is Mass Effect.
Bioware is Bioware.
This thread is like saying, Skyrim is Fallout. Because a vast majority of the features are similar. Yet there are differences, but because there are similarities, they are the same game. Nothing to do with Bethesda making both games, they're just the same game entirely.
No, stahp.
I don't understand this thread.
Dragon Age is Dragon Age.
Mass Effect is Mass Effect.
Bioware is Bioware.
This thread is like saying, Skyrim is Fallout. Because a vast majority of the features are similar. Yet there are differences, but because there are similarities, they are the same game. Nothing to do with Bethesda making both games, they're just the same game entirely.
No, stahp.
Guest_Roly Voly_*
You and I remember Mass Effect very differently...
1. With biotic hand and all? Funny I don't recall it being exactly like in Mass Effect.
2. You mean mage spells not the exact barrier from Mass Effect.
3. I was not talking about chain hook...
4. Nope.
5. Nope.
Everybody defending Inquisition can only do so by simplifying things. Or better, going to the original concept. Is is like saying some movie copied Lord of The Rings, then you say lord of The Rings copied Norse Mythology. yeah, right, but in norse mythology the description of the races, for instance, are VERY different from Lord of the Rings. Also there are a lot of original lore in lord of the rings despite the heavy norse mythology. So saying lord of the Rings copied Norse Mythology is no excuse for copying lord of the rings. And makes no sense as a defense...
So why don't you all, really, there are dozens of you, stop ignoring the specifics to defend Inquisition? Go play Mass Effect than use you biotic. Go to Inquisition play a mage Inquisitor, specially a rift mage. Then go play Baldur's Gate. Then come back and say all these simplifications. Or better, record it all, put on youtube, and see how ridiculous it sounds to compare those from baldur's gate, that are only CONCEPTUALLY simmilar to the comparison i made of Inquisition and Mass Effect where they are not only conceptually simmilar but also mechanic and visually the same.
It is always like this... Ice is water. Yes. If you ignore the lack of energy. If you ignore a lot of things you can even say a cube is no different from a circle. And that's how Inquisition/BG comparison goes. Now take into consideration all the elements and the comparison makes no sense at all.
Seriously, calm down already with your perturbed warbling. The concepts of such powers, since they are not original even in Mass effect, come from other games. You think telekenisis and barriers are unique?
And if you are really going to start comparing animation and effect of such powers from game to game in such a way, I refer back to Peter Griffin.
Nah. ME3 actually had good gameplay.
Oh. Lovely. Done reading this. Bye.
Looks for instances of...
*Character derailing autodialogue
*Canonically stupid protagonist
*Ending that leaves a bad taste in your mouth
*Few roleplaying opportunities
*farcical enemy second-in-command
Not finding any of these, I conclude: DAI is not Mass Effect
Looks for instances of...
*Character derailing autodialogue
*Canonically stupid protagonist
*Ending that leaves a bad taste in your mouth
*Few roleplaying opportunities
*farcical enemy second-in-command
Not finding any of these, I conclude: DAI is not Mass Effect
The ending wasn't bad. A bit underwhelming in the final battle but a lot better than Red, Green, Blue.
Looks for instances of...
*Character derailing autodialogue
*Canonically stupid protagonist
*Ending that leaves a bad taste in your mouth
*Few roleplaying opportunities
*farcical enemy second-in-command
Not finding any of these, I conclude: DAI is not Mass Effect
that's description of ME or DA:I, because i'm confused 
The ending wasn't bad. A bit underwhelming in the final battle but a lot better than Red, Green, Blue.
Unfortunately, the EC didn't manage to remove the taste of the original completely. Also, I have severe storytelling issues with it.
Retour en haut
