280 réponses à ce sujet

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You didn't get to fight in the war in DAO at all. You got a final battle, sure, but that was just a small part of a conflict that apparently overran all of Ferelden. Same with the ME series. Bioware doesn't feature war even in games about war.

I kind of agree about the Dragon Age series, but not with Mass Effect series. In each of those games you were in battles other than the first and final one of the war. In Mass Effect 1 there was Feros where you hold off the Heretics from getting to the refugees and Virmire where you infiltrate Saren's main base. In Mass Effect 2 you were on Horizon while the Collectors were doing their harvest of the planet. And in Mass Effect 3 you experience the war a few times: Tuchanka, Rannoch, and especially Thessia. 

[Saphiron123]

I kind of agree about the Dragon Age series, but not with Mass Effect series. In each of those games you were in battles other than the first and final one of the war. In ME1 there was Feros where you hold off the Heretics from getting to the refugees and Virmire where you infiltrate Saren's main base. In Mass Effect 2 you were on Horizon while the Collectors were doing their harvest of the planet. And in Mass Effect 3 you experience the war a few times: Tuchanka, Rannoch, and especially Thessia. 

Yeah and the reapers were VERY present.

Mass effect gave me the feeling I craved, I felt like I was part of an immense galactic conflict. 

DAO I remember looking down into the chasm in the deep roads and watching the archdemon's army on the move. Inquisition had it's moment too, at haven when the enemy was marching over the hills. It had adamant and Haven, but the rest of the game, the wilderness areas, skyhold, the ending... I felt like my army was absent.

The arbhor wilds were apparently this HUGE battle that all but destroyed Corypheus. I saw like 30 guys from each side.

It was actually pretty disappointing. I wanted to see a major battle, with demons and venetori (or templars). Bioware told us about it, but they never let us participate.

[Shelled]

I'm at a part in the story where my army is supposed to be engaging the enemy army to hit their leader. No army to be seen by either side, so I'm running through this elven jungle and there's like 4 enemies engaging 2-3 of my troops every 40 feet down a tight linear path. There is no army, there is just.... whatever this is?

??  this can't be for real can it ? This is some of the laziest game development I've ever seen, especially when the story is supposed to be heating up at this moment. Dragon age origins blows this game out of this dimension and into something else where really really bad games go, I'm talking about games so bad you don't even mention their names.
 

This game is appalling. I don't like its action orientated combat, its tactical mode is a joke compared to origins and the game isn't even tactic necessary on nightmare difficulty. I find everything about the combat itself and the side-quests to be completely dumbed down and uninteresting. Even the writing for the story itself takes a massive downward spiral when the wardens are introduced and it never recovers. The gameplay in conjunction to the story writing gets progressively worse from this point in the game and onward and becomes completely disconnected from what the story is trying to portray. They couldn't or simply didn't visually portray what the story was telling us at this point. It doesn't do it on these big side-quest maps either. Like the OP said, you never see an army or engage more than 4 or 6 enemies on-screen at a time.

I almost feel like some of the developers are intentionally sabotaging the dragon age name. You couldn't make it this bad unless you intentionally tried to do so. I mean it.

Christ.... and I thought DA2 was bad. My eyes have been opened once again to horrifyingly bad game design. Yes the game is gorgeous and the level designs are quite good, nobody can really deny that. But wtf happened to everything else!? Visuals alone do not make a good game! You have these absolutely massive maps and they've done absolutely nothing with them with regards to our army and the enemy army.

I managed to glitch myself outside the exalted plains border and I ran out to the edges of the map where you aren't supposed to be. http://www.twitch.tv...ade/b/627070325 it literally took me an hour just to explore this "forbidden zone".

My god they probably only used 20% of that entire zone. Do we not have an army? Oh wait, we do. SO what the hell kind of game design is this supposed to be? Please explain it to me. It literally doesn't even make sense with regards to what the story in this game is attempting to portray. WHY USE THIS ENGINE IF YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT!? Or was the problem lazy incompetence instead?
 

Last bioware game I'll ever play. Jesus christ they should just layoff the entire bioware division at this point. I thought the mp was bad which is what I've been playing, I had no idea that the single player progressed to this level of awful though. Why aren't more people talking about this? I don't understand it.

[Mari]

[...]

Maybe you wouldn't change a thing, but I don't feel like I have an army. I hear all about the war with the demons and the war with the mages and Templars and when I'm in the wilderness maps, I seem to be doing pure sidemission stuff that has nothing to do with the story. It's loosely related to the war at best.

It's just empty. My only point is there's this vast conflict out there, and I'm not attacking DAI, I'm just saying bioware can involve us pretty heavily and instead I'm delivering flowers for some guy in redcliff while my soldiers report a massive battle that I wasn't even in.

And in the end, I don't even get to face corypheus' army. They're beaten off screen. Denerim may be old tech, but at least I got to fight the horde.

Dao isn't perfect, but it's closer. And beating those Templars in emprise wasn't all that fun, becuase it didn't lead anywhere. It was better then the fetch quests, but far too shy of the actual story content. It could have been so much more.

.

 

YES! This is one of my biggest issues with DA:I. All the really cool, interesting, story based quests seem to be in the war table, while I'm just stuck collecting shards and closing rifts. I played about 150+ hours of that game and all I can remember from that experience is seriously dreading going to a new place cuz I knew the only thing I really had to look forward to is the monotonous task of collecting shards and closing rifts.  

[AlanC9]

Last bioware game I'll ever play. Jesus christ they should just layoff the entire bioware division at this point. I thought the mp was bad which is what I've been playing, I had no idea that the single player progressed to this level of awful though. Why aren't more people talking about this? I don't understand it.

What I don't understand is why you're playing the MP if it's bad.

[Saphiron123]

I'm at a part in the story where my army is supposed to be engaging the enemy army to hit their leader. No army to be seen by either side, so I'm running through this elven jungle and there's like 4 enemies engaging 2-3 of my troops every 40 feet down a tight linear path. There is no army, there is just.... whatever this is?

??  this can't be for real can it ? This is some of the laziest game development I've ever seen, especially when the story is supposed to be heating up at this moment. Dragon age origins blows this game out of this dimension and into something else where really really bad games go, I'm talking about games so bad you don't even mention their names.
 

This game is appalling. I don't like its action orientated combat, its tactical mode is a joke compared to origins and the game isn't even tactic necessary on nightmare difficulty. I find everything about the combat itself and the side-quests to be completely dumbed down and uninteresting. Even the writing for the story itself takes a massive downward spiral when the wardens are introduced and it never recovers. The gameplay in conjunction to the story writing gets progressively worse from this point in the game and onward.

I almost feel like some of the developers are intentionally sabotaging the dragon age name. You couldn't make it this bad unless you intentionally tried to do so. I mean it.

Christ.... and I thought DA2 was bad. My eyes have been opened once again to horrifyingly bad game design. Yes the game is gorgeous and the level designs are awesome but WTF happened to everything else!? You have these absolutely massive maps and you've done NOTHING WITH THEM!

I managed to glitch myself outside the exalted plains border and I ran out the edges of the map where you aren't supposed to be. http://www.twitch.tv...ade/b/627070325 it literally took me an hour just to explore this "forbidden zone".

My god they probably only used 20% of that entire zone. Do we not have an army? Oh wait, we do. SO what the hell kind of game design is this supposed to be? Please explain it to me. It literally doesn't even make sense with regards to what the story in this game is attempting to portray itself as. WHY USE THIS ENGINE IF YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT!?
 

Last bioware game I'll ever play. Jesus christ they should just layoff the entire bioware division at this point. I thought the mp was bad which is what I've been playing, I had no idea that the single player progressed to this level of awful though. Why aren't more people talking about this? I don't understand it.

This is what I'm saying. This huge battle is apparently going on... who can't I see it? Hell, make it a cinematic that pops up if you have to, but don't just mention it offhandedly in a conversation later.

"By the way sir, we crushed the enemy and crippled Corypheus' forces. Wish you could be there."

[Il Divo]

Last bioware game I'll ever play. Jesus christ they should just layoff the entire bioware division at this point. I thought the mp was bad which is what I've been playing, I had no idea that the single player progressed to this level of awful though. Why aren't more people talking about this? I don't understand it.

 

 

I suspect it's because more people might not necessarily feel the same way. Kinda like your statement that the only way to make a game this bad is by intentionally doing so. It's also usually when I ask for the poster's best effort at an RPG so the forums here can rip it apart, which wouldn't take very long. 

[Shelled]

What I don't understand is why you're playing the MP if it's bad.

because I paid for the game and have had nothing else to play. The game may be terrible but I'm going to get my money's worth out of it.

I played the damp because I had hoped they would be adding content to it on a regular basis, little did I know however what would really happen for the last 3 months would be a battle with patches that didn't really fix anything and broke the damp even more. It's playable now, but at this point its practically dead on pc.

I waited patiently for them to fix the horrendous tactical mode while I played the mp, but that isn't even going to happen with patch 5 because nothing about it was changed at all in the beta. So I said screw it and started playing the single player instead, because I've permanently quit the mp at this point because something like a dragon fight in mp or an entire zone with quests dedicated to mp isn't going to happen and I realize that now.

So I started playing the single player off and on, I bought the game with origins combat in mind, but its just this mindless action crap where you don't even need to be tactical in nightmare. I had absolutely no idea that the single player was this awful in the later stages of its gameplay though. These big maps are so disconnected with the story so much so that its almost humorous at times. Then when you're actually in a story mission, its also disconnected completely from the writing lmao.

So to answer your question, I had hoped the game would get better, so I grinded the multiplayer for a while, while I waited for a tactical mode improvement patch for the single player. It didn't get better and a tactical mode improvement fix isn't going to happen either, it remains as bad as ever and I had no idea the single player was this terrible until relatively recently. I had hope for this game for a while; that they would improve it, but that's long gone at this point. 
 

 

I suspect it's because more people might not necessarily feel the same way. Kinda like your statement that the only way to make a game this bad is by intentionally doing so. It's also usually when I ask for the poster's best effort at an RPG so the forums here can rip it apart, which wouldn't take very long. 

 

Sure, lets say they gave me a team and resources. First thing I would do is make a remastered dragon age origins with a non-linear style. If they didn't let me do that I would make dragon age origins 2 instead and the plot would be the grey wardens launching an assault against the darkspawn instead of waiting for another blight to occur. 

Instantly two better games than dragon age inquisition.

[TBJack]

Well, while I certainly do agree that the Inquisition army should have had a lot more visibility, and that the war table missions consisted almost exclusively of missed opportunities for excellent full-blown sidequests, I take issue with complaints about the collection and other mini-quests, like finding shards.  Yes, doing it could be tedious, there's really no arguing that.  Those quests were, however, entirely optional.  Power and influence were strewn throughout the game like Fanta at an ICP concert, so it was easily possible to skip the vast majority of the quests.  Failing that, influence and power could literally be bought in Skyhold.

 

As for these theoretical games that would shame DA:I, I don't think there's really any point in speculating about these things.  With enough time and the right resources, yeah, just about anyone could make a better game.  Including Bioware.  The problem is that from here, it isn't really possible to ascertain the technical feasibility of many things, and establishing an accurate timeline is just about impossible.

 

Also, in regards to the multiplayer, the patches have fixed things.  There are still problems, but to claim they haven't accomplished anything is disingenuous.

[catabuca]

"DAI is a game about a war that you never see, and only hear about."

 

ngl, I thought this was going to be a cool riff on how the game is all about the war between the Elvhen gods. ^^

[Gothfather]

The war is seen in DA:I that is a fact full stop.

 

Could it have been done better? I think there is a strong argument for the arbour woods having been done better. But the real issue is the story deals with the danger of cory's army at the very start of the game.

 

You destroy cory's army at haven and you destroy his back up plan when you save the wardens. He doesn't have a huge army after haven. Sure he has a military force but as the inquisition grows Cory's forces shrink. The story actually writes out a big clash of armies post haven and then promptly ignores that for the arbour woods "clash of armies", which makes no sense story wise because you get told by Solas that Cory has no major military force or a way to get one post wardens arc and we all know that Solas would have inside info on Cory based on the ending.

 

Far too much of the story in DA:I peaks at haven and because this "victory" for cory is so costly its not a true victory for him at all and you then go from success to success with dealing with him that his threat never feels significant after haven. That is not a great way to write the story about a great evil out of the past. A far better way (I think) to deal with the main plot elements post haven was for Cory's forces to retreat largely intact to regroup but you lose contact with them. The wardens and the Orleasian civil war should have had NOTHING to do with Cory so that resolving these issues doesn't weaken cory. This requires that these parts of the story have been something completely different. and thus you stop the story making the threat of the enemy become progressively less and less as you approach the climax of the game. Rather you become stronger and stronger so you can actually deal with his military threat.

 

In the last two games bioware has done this, create the framework for the overwhelming force only to do EVERYTHING they can to undermine that theme so when you get to the climax of the story you never feel like you could actually lose. If you are fighting an overwhelming force you should actually feel like you could lose the game especially on the first run through. ME3 suffered from you kicking the reapers ass at every point in the story so you reach priority earth and you feel "I got this!" Not "this is a desperate gamble." In DA:I if you hadn't wiped out Cory's army at haven then you would feel he was more of a military threat but post haven you simply go through a series of actions that cut him off from political and military power in the south.

 

At haven you are at your weakest and Cory is at his strongest after haven you and Cory are both weak but you get more powerful in all the power you gather through quests and you eventually get the orleasian army as allies. Cory loses influence within the orleasian court and loses the chance to create a demon army. he uses desperate tactic of changing villagers into red Templars and throwing venatori into the fray but the venitori are a finite, very limited resource that you keep depleting, Nothing in the story make Cory seem dangerous post Haven because all the mechanics and story mile stones point to you kicking his arse. Bioware i think has lost the art of epic story telling when it comes dealing with a overwhelming threat. They seem to think any setback in the game is bad. hell even haven isn't a setback as you can save MOST people, you defeat most of Cory's army and you go from a largely indefensible position to a significant stronghold that is incredibly defensible because of the terrain which helps in your prestige as you now have a real stronghold not some small village with mud roads. Everything about Haven when you take a step back shows it was a huge tactical and strategic victory for the inquisition. Yet the dynamic changes if you just cut off Cory's army vs. destroying it. That one minor tweak totally changes the strategic situation for the better story wise in my opinion.

 

If you want to create a story about fighting an overwhelming force then make your player victories actually costly. Make some missions at best give a result that is a draw, make some missions an actual failure but you gain some insight or intelligence on the enemy. So while the player's side makes progress they also see that the enemy is making progress. If the overwhelming enemy always loses to the player all the time they quickly stop being the overwhelming enemy and get relegated to non threatening punching bag. This is why Cory seems like such a let down as an enemy post haven. You always beat him what makes him scary post haven?

[TBJack]

*snip*

 

You destroy cory's army at haven and you destroy his back up plan when you save the wardens. He doesn't have a huge army after haven. Sure he has a military force but as the inquisition grows Cory's forces shrink. The story actually writes out a big clash of armies post haven.

 

Far too much of the story in DA:I peaks at haven and because this "victory" for cory is so costly its not a true victory for him and you then go from success to success with dealing with him that his threat never feels significant after haven. That is not a great way to write the story. A far better way (I think) to deal with the main plot elements post haven was for Cory's forces to retreat to regroup and you lose contact. *snip*

 

At haven you are at your weakest and Cory is at his strongest after haven you and Cory are both weak but you get more powerful in all the power you gather through quests and you eventually get the orleasian army as allies. Cory loses influence within the orleasian court and loses the chance to create a demon army. he uses desperate tactic of changing villagers into red Templars and throwing venatori into the fray but the venitori are a finite, very limited resource that you keep depleting, Nothing in the story make Cory seem dangerous post Haven because all the mechanics and story mile stones point to you kicking his arse.

*snip*

 

This is a very interesting take on how the game went, and it's one that hadn't even occurred to me.  It makes perfect sense, but since as far as I can remember we're never given any real estimation of Corypheus' military strength I had no real reason to think his army's strength wasn't as overwhelming as his own personal power.

 

I think that you are absolutely right about needing setbacks and costly victories.  The closest we had here was the Chargers mission, and even that didn't really feel like a price had been paid (except perhaps an emotional one depending on your decision).  Having a short string of victories once your strength is completely realized might be acceptable, but having them from start to finish is rather monotonous.

 

At any rate I think you really hit the bullseye here.  Nicely done.

[Chiramu]

Dragon Age Origins hardly let you fight in the war. You were off recruiting elves and dwarves for your magical fairy army while the Ferelden army was being smashed by the darkspawn.

[AlanC9]

because I paid for the game and have had nothing else to play. The game may be terrible but I'm going to get my money's worth out of it.

You may want to look up the "sunk cost fallacy" sometime. Though this is arguably a case where your behavior is rational. If buying a game and not playing it really would bother you -- if you can't just forget about that money -- then, yeah, you might as well play a game you don't like in order to get rid of that distress. In effect, you'd be playing the game to avoid emotional pain rather than to have fun, but it's still a win.

[durengo]

 

 

You destroy cory's army at haven and you destroy his back up plan when you save the wardens.

 

cory's army isn't complete destroyed after haven but indeed he lost many of his warriors.

what we  should think about is the fact that the rest of his army is spread all over orlais and thedas.everywhere are little troops of them.

parts of his army seek artefacts in the hissing waste ..the forbidden oasis and the western approach...other parts fighting against

the royal army of orlais in the exaltet plains and emprise  de lion also against the rebels of the emerald graves...and so on.the most of this battles are only skirmish.

 

orlais is huge and cory didn't concentrate his army on one spot of the map to make one big battle after another.

after haven he use the rest of his army not really to make one big war ...maybe they are not able and not enough warriors to do so.......they are more seeker and searcher to find something powerful to make cory stronger.other ones of corys creatures are only up to terrorise the citizien of orlais but not able to make a big battle.but to be fair we shouldn't forget some war table missions where parts of cory's army attack villages and nobles and so on.

 

the only big battle after haven is the adamant battle.

 

but who is in his army ? his army is a mix of different creatures and warriors:

the demons and ghosts , the red templar, the undead,the warden , the darkspawn,calpernia and the venatori.

 

cory loose with every skirmish more and more warriors everywhere in orlais.he will be weaker day by day and his man can't find new artifacts to keep him strong or to make him stronger... and if they find something...the inquisitor will be there to prevent that cory get it.the alliance to defeat cory is too big.whole thedas is fighting against him.

 

into the arbor  wilderness fight a reunited troop of the last warden...venatori and red templar against the strong inquisition.

[Bioware-Critic]

So, DAO had a war, but I got to fight in that war. DAI has a war, but aside from some burning houses in the hinterlands and copy and paste mobs, you never encounter it. No large forces (barring the keep int eh main story), no fallout or refugees or drama surrounding the effects of that war. You hear a little, but it seems like it's not a part of the game.

And the demon rifts, they don't affect anything around them. The npcs don't fight them, they don't alter the maps, they only open when you get close and then they close.

So the demon war doesn't seem to affect many people either. Sure, I hear it does, but I never see it. Hell, except for one or two cut scenes and the dudes training outside haven, i've never even seen my army.

Origins had denerim, and it was old tech and a little basic, but I had troops. I had an army, I had waves of darkspawn in front of me. It has ostagar, I saw more troops there then the whole of inquisition.

I miss my wardens, they particpated in the world. The inquisitor seems content to lay flowers on graves and deliver urns of ashes for notes on the ground while a war we hear about but never really encounter rages around him.

 

Kudos!

 

It is one of the biggest downfalls of DA:I !!! And there is absolutely no excuse for that ... on any level!

 

The game feels empty and disconnected from the mainstory throughout and right up until the end! It could not compare itself to Origins if it got 20 patches and 10 big DLC's just because of that fact alone !!! There is no way in hell this will get fixed.

 

It is a beautiful but very empty world and a mere shadow of what Origins was - period!

 

BioWare improved a lot and created really beautiful things in DA:I - but they failed in the end ...

They failed to create something that can rival one of the greats ... like Origins.

 

They took the series three steps backwards instead of forward!

[Bioware-Critic]

Dear moderator ...

 

could you delete my accidental double posting? This very posting here ...?

 

Thank you!

[Bioware-Critic]

So DAI is about something after all!

 

Honestly I had a hard time figuring out about what this game was about. While I played I thought it was beta testing of Bioware trying to make a Frostbite 3 version of Elder Scrolls of Warcraft: Devil Mario Cry.

 

Kudos!

 

The story is good... it's just buried under 100 hours of fluff. Sadly, it's short too, most of their resources went into the fluff.

What's there is good though, it just feels like a dlc in a big empty set of wilderness environments.

 

Kudos!

 

Wow... that was brutal.

 

But it is the truth! ...

[papercut_ninja]

...one of the biggest complaints about the areas in DAI is that they are so vast and empty...kind of like what an area looks like after a war has swept through...

[Bioware-Critic]

I absolutely agree that more instances like Adamant would have made the game more believable, and more importantly more entertaining.  Maybe having keep battles play out that way, or being able to intercept Venatori/Templar forces in large scale battles with Inquisition soldiers visible and actively participating.  Maybe have the rewards increased if you keep your people alive (reducing large rewards isn't as much fun as increasing mediocre ones).  If these battles were unlockable through short series of War Table missions such as rumours --> scouting --> battle, it would also make the War Table feel more worthwhile.

 

Screw the War Table!

 

I want to "act" as an inquisitor that leads an army and who fights these battles! I don't want to read about what I could have particitpated in or what I missed!

 

I want to play this! Not theorize about it in my head, how it must have been ... to fight these fights!
 

[RVallant]

Dragon Age Origins hardly let you fight in the war. You were off recruiting elves and dwarves for your magical fairy army while the Ferelden army was being smashed by the darkspawn.

 

Technically it did. Just depending on the area it wasn't actually the Blight war that you were fighting, it was the Ferelden Civil War and also technically the Warden wasn't meant to be interfering in it, but then Loghain didn't leave them much choice.

 

Just for clarity;

 

Broken Circle - Loghain / Howe's doing (The abomination was acting in agreement with Loghain + co - Wynne confirms)

Arl Eamon / Sacred Ashes - Loghain again (yay!)

 

Orzammar - This is part of the Blight skirmishing/war

Brecellian Forest - Isolated/unique.

 

Denerim (post-recruitment) - we see the slavers and co, the last desperate act of the civil war really.

 

So really Origins is mostly defeating and overturning plots in motion that undermine the war effort - if we follow the suggested route (Orzammar last) then you destroy several plots and just about deal with the Dwarves by the time the Blight gets in full swing - allowing everyone time to mobilise.  

[Bioware-Critic]

Just don't purchase future bioware games. If I had known the director for origins had left I would have never purchased inquisition in the first place.

The only reason why Da2 and Da:I exist is because of what Brent Knowles and the old team had created, the fanbase that surrounded that title and the old BioWare, and the big money from Ea who saw the big potential of that new creation/franchise which had been created with just one game alone - Origins!

What they do now is - at least partially - having a ride on the tail of Brent Knowles success! And then they try to spin around the criticism, the follow-up titles got from the fans for breaking everything down into little pieces and left-overs ... and screwing the whole heritage up, by denying to talk about the facts. Even to this very day!

Just trying to appease everybody ...

Well that's not gonna fly!

[deatharmonic]

The way I see it, is we get a different role for each game.

 

DAO had the Wardens who had to form/command an army and fight in it order to end the Blight, so you would be in the heart of it.

 

DA2 had you trying to make a living and end up caught in a semi-war that forced you into making choices that affected the situations.

 

DAI is about leadership and most of the war is dealt with at the table, minus a few plot related battles.

 

You are not trying to stop a Blight, you are not stuck in the middle of a war that broke out partly due to your crazy companion, you are leading people and ordering them to fight most of your battles, while you partake in the more important ones.

 

I would agree but I see a disparity between the leadership role you highlighted and what we actually experience in game play. There's an awful lot of muck work you do that can and should actually be left to your army. I don't think our role as Inquisitor was as well constructed as it could have been.

[durengo]

Screw the War Table!

 

I want to "act" as an inquisitor that leads an army and who fights these battles! I don't want to read about what I could have particitpated in or what I missed!

 

I want to play this! Not theorize about it in my head, how it must have been ... to fight these fights!
 

 

for example, a king sits mostly on his throne and sends his troops in the world to fight for him.

sometimes he fights himself on the battlefield.... but rarely.

 

you can't be everywhere at the same time...you can't care about everything personally as inquisitor or king.

 

 

to rule  and govern means to send off your soldiers and diplomats with  specific orders.

thats why the war table system exist and i like it.

 

but...

 

i hope that some single player dlcs will continue the story with new wars and battles where the player can fight on the battlefields together with his army and i also hope for more war table missions.