280 réponses à ce sujet

[Saphiron123]

To the guys who say I just want action, that's not it. I mean yes I want to see the army I have that's supposedly so impressive and everyone talks about, and I'd like some high drama major encounters, sure.

What I really want is to feel connected to the conflict.

Like, go to emprise du lion. Did you get any unique dialogue, did what you do there affect the central plot in any way? Did if affect the enemy? Did it even affect your companions in a meaningful way?

No.

You could skip the entire area and it would mean nothing. Meanwhile there's battles in the arbor wilds that were apparently so massive, so game-changing they crippled corypheus' forces... I saw 30 guys in a forest, I didn't get to be a part of that. Nah, my inquisitor spends most of the game delivering flowers and ashes for +2 power and, if I'm lucky, a line of dialogue my companions don't even weigh in on.

The point is that we're told so much about what's going on, then we go and do fetch quests while much of the real story, the wars between the Templars and mages, the war with the demons, occurs mostly off screen.

I don't want hack and slash action. I want story, real engaging story about the conflict I'm supposed to be involved in. I want to see and participate in it, not hear the best parts at the war table.

[Elhanan]

To the guys who say I just want action, that's not it. I mean yes I want to see the army I have that's supposedly so impressive and everyone talks about, and I'd like some high drama major encounters, sure.

What I really want is to feel connected to the conflict.

Like, go to emprise du lion. Did you get any unique dialogue, did what you do there affect the central plot in any way? Did if affect the enemy? Did it even affect your companions in a meaningful way?

No.

You could skip the entire area and it would mean nothing. Meanwhile there's battles in the arbor wilds that were apparently so massive, so game-changing they crippled corypheus' forces... I saw 30 guys in a forest, I didn't get to be a part of that. Nah, my inquisitor spends most of the game delivering flowers and ashes for +2 power and, if I'm lucky, a line of dialogue my companions don't even weigh in on.

The point is that we're told so much about what's going on, then we go and do fetch quests while much of the real story, the wars between the Templars and mages, the war with the demons, occurs mostly off screen.

I don't want hack and slash action. I want story, real engaging story about the conflict I'm supposed to be involved in. I want to see and participate in it, not hear the best parts at the war table.

Cullen's quests are a main factor as to my latest excursion to The Lion; Dagna offered another. While there, gained another Agent and judicial matter, saved slaves, had the city rebuilt, stopped a demon, refused it's bribe, gained a Keep, stopped a major source of Red Lyrium, and gained some useful resources. Etc.

All of this fit well with the Inquisitor I had; may not fit another, and may be skipped. personally, I adore options, and DAI has many.

[durengo]

To the guys who say I just want action, that's not it. I mean yes I want to see the army I have that's supposedly so impressive and everyone talks about, and I'd like some high drama major encounters, sure.

What I really want is to feel connected to the conflict.

Like, go to emprise du lion. Did you get any unique dialogue, did what you do there affect the central plot in any way? Did if affect the enemy? Did it even affect your companions in a meaningful way?

No.

You could skip the entire area and it would mean nothing. Meanwhile there's battles in the arbor wilds that were apparently so massive, so game-changing they crippled corypheus' forces... I saw 30 guys in a forest, I didn't get to be a part of that. Nah, my inquisitor spends most of the game delivering flowers and ashes for +2 power and, if I'm lucky, a line of dialogue my companions don't even weigh in on.

The point is that we're told so much about what's going on, then we go and do fetch quests while much of the real story, the wars between the Templars and mages, the war with the demons, occurs mostly off screen.

I don't want hack and slash action. I want story, real engaging story about the conflict I'm supposed to be involved in. I want to see and participate in it, not hear the best parts at the war table.

did you played the game twice with different choices? depends your decision who will be in a alliance with you ...templar or mage...you will get some different  quests (also different personal quests from different companions) in emprise de lion and elsewhere with maybe different affect.

 

its the same with other decision you make.

[Saphiron123]

did you played the game twice with different choices? depends your decision who will be in a alliance with you ...templar or mage...you will get some different  quests (also different personal quests from different companions) in emprise de lion and elsewhere with maybe different affect.

 

its the same with other decision you make.

I did. Neither one really presents it in a way that makes me feel a part of it... and as for choices, I'm playing my 8th warden (6 of those were a long time ago) and I'm still bringing different party compositions for unique dialogue and finding stuff I never knew existed. Did you know you can actually play as first enchanter irving in the fade at redcliff if you bring in the mages? Had no idea. 

Thing is, one or two major diverging decisions shouldn't be the majority of the game. Most of the changes I saw were due to decisions my warden made two games before, like loghain showing up or alistair. The inquisitor's decisions seem to be few and far between.
 

 

Cullen's quests are a main factor as to my latest excursion to The Lion; Dagna offered another. While there, gained another Agent and judicial matter, saved slaves, had the city rebuilt, stopped a demon, refused it's bribe, gained a Keep, stopped a major source of Red Lyrium, and gained some useful resources. Etc.

All of this fit well with the Inquisitor I had; may not fit another, and may be skipped. personally, I adore options, and DAI has many.

The thing is the companion quests in this, for the most part, kind of suck. Some are great... but break red lyrium for Varrick, no unique dialogue during or when completing. Hunt the white wyvern (who was sadly miles ahead of most bosses because you could actually identify it, but no special scenes announcing it or anything), hunt 5 guys on different maps (Quest complete +2 power), Valamarr (promised the deep roads, just replayed the valammar map and closed a door), a lot of them a seriously lame. Some get the right amount of bioware attention, but a companion quest should NEVER just be "smash 10 crystals for zero dialogue").

In past dragon ages they were ALL heavy on dialogue and cut scenes and they made you feel like you were invovled and the characters are real.

I mean yeah, you liberated a keep. No impact on the story, or on the enemy. Taking a different party means no extra scenes or dialogue. Killing every Templar in Lion has zero impact on anything... that's the problem. In DAO, when you complete a map, it changes things... whose in your army, whose alive or dead, it sets up future decisions.

And once again, if there's a huge templar force that needs to be taken down, and I have like 100,000 men, why do I never see more then like 20 spread out across a map? 

Some of it's okay, but it's just a pale shadow of the stuff we've seen before. It's moved away from story consequences into sandbox stuff and story was always central to dragon age.

And don't get me started on the demon, of course you refused his bribe, I mean in past games the demon offered you things that actually had value, riches, blood magic, kinky demon sex if you're into that... this guy, a supposed desire demon, didn't offer anything worth having. No moral dilemmas. And why the hell is his demon form a bunch of recycled rift forms? Desire demons in the past two games had their own unique look. A male desire demon had tons of potential.

Nope, just a dude. Who turns into a rage demon. It was kind of a let down.

And don't get em wrong, I enjoyed the game, but back to the central point... it's a game that tells you about the amazing stuff you're missing, and then never shows you. While huge battles are raging, I'm delivering flowers for some guy in redlciff. You never see much of the major conflicts, and it's too bad. The past games  had their issues, but you were always right there at the major events... you didn't hear about how corypheus' army was destroyed in the wilds while you were fighting 6 groups of 5 guys. In DAO, you would have seen that conflict for yourself, and with modern tech, it would have been amazing.

[eyezonlyii]

I completely agree. I think it would have been cooler if were we more like Sutherland, trying to gather our own little band within the Inquisition, and then completing quests in a guerrilla tactic against Cory, that way the disconnect between our position (Inquisitor) and our role (quest completer?) wouldn't be so disjointed. I mean none of the advisers go into battle except for Cullen on one Samson mission, but the head of the organization itself is running around the maps setting up camps? What exactly is Harding's job then?

[Elhanan]

Seems that some forget about bridges, towers, tunnels, and other types of construction projects that affect the landscapes. Or some seemed to have missed travels with Cole, Leliana, Dorian, Josephine, Vivienne, amongst others.

Selective memories make for lesser communication and discussion.

[Saphiron123]

Seems that some forget about bridges, towers, tunnels, and other types of construction projects that affect the landscapes. Or some seemed to have missed travels with Cole, Leliana, Dorian, Josephine, Vivienne, amongst others.

Selective memories make for lesser communication and discussion.

A minor landscape change is still pretty minor though. Getting rid of posion gas or compelting a bridge while you move between maps doesn't give you tough decisions or unique party banter, it just changes a tiny element and let's you walk in a little area you couldn't access before.

I remember those things, but they're sort of unavoidable as part of the map, and they won't be done any differently in subsequent playthoughs. I want something new every time, like in origins, a reason to come back and replay.

And I want to be involved in more of the game. Hell, even with the bridges and stuff, it's all done off screen. It's just "there" when you return.

And the party dialogue between characters is nice, but so many events and quests have no unique dialogue attached to them. It's a dragon age first, and it's a step backwards.

[Elhanan]

A minor landscape change is still pretty minor though. Getting rid of posion gas or compelting a bridge while you move between maps doesn't give you tough decisions or unique party banter, it just changes a tiny element and let's you walk in a little area you couldn't access before.

I remember those things, but they're sort of unavoidable as part of the map, and they won't be done any differently in subsequent playthoughs. I want something new every time, like in origins, a reason to come back and replay.

And I want to be involved in more of the game. Hell, even with the bridges and stuff, it's all done off screen. It's just "there" when you return.

And the party dialogue between characters is nice, but so many events and quests have no unique dialogue attached to them. It's a dragon age first, and it's a step backwards.

Some of these changes brings shelter to refugees, increases commerce to the people, and aids in preserving and protecting the locals. And even a minor change is more accurate than statements of Never and None. And there is dialogue, though perhaps not in cut-scenes. But maybe some are too impatient to listen to banter and dialogue to hear it.

[AiCola]

Some of these changes brings shelter to refugees, increases commerce to the people, and aids in preserving and protecting the locals. And even a minor change is more accurate than statements of Never and None. And there is dialogue, though perhaps not in cut-scenes. But maybe some are too impatient to listen to banter and dialogue to hear it.

 

just look at games like origins, mass effect 2, etc., all done by bioware.

this game is nothing like them in terms of decisions, dialogue, story telling, and so on...

[TBJack]

Some of these changes brings shelter to refugees, increases commerce to the people, and aids in preserving and protecting the locals. And even a minor change is more accurate than statements of Never and None. And there is dialogue, though perhaps not in cut-scenes. But maybe some are too impatient to listen to banter and dialogue to hear it.

 

I get what you're saying, but I think the issue is that the vast majority of quests have such minor changes that you are more or less required to fill in the aftermath yourself.  Don't get me wrong, I have no problem doing that and love using the opportunities to flesh out my characters.  However, it seems that there aren't really any optional quests that result in major, concrete changes to the area.

 

Look at building bridges in L'Emprise and the Western Approach.  You open up some to territory, and I believe you get some dialogue in L'Emprise.  Which is okay.  I think what people are saying is along the lines of "it would be better if doing this let us see goods coming in, or soldiers marching, towns rebuilding or keeps being reinforced".  It's not exactly that there is no reward, just that it could be a lot better.  While it's great that people can rely on themselves to fill in the blanks, everyone has a different threshold for how much of that they can do while still finding it satisfying.

[Elhanan]

I get what you're saying, but I think the issue is that the vast majority of quests have such minor changes that you are more or less required to fill in the aftermath yourself.  Don't get me wrong, I have no problem doing that and love using the opportunities to flesh out my characters.  However, it seems that there aren't really any optional quests that result in major, concrete changes to the area.
 
Look at building bridges in L'Emprise and the Western Approach.  You open up some to territory, and I believe you get some dialogue in L'Emprise.  Which is okay.  I think what people are saying is along the lines of "it would be better if doing this let us see goods coming in, or soldiers marching, towns rebuilding or keeps being reinforced".  It's not exactly that there is no reward, just that it could be a lot better.  While it's great that people can rely on themselves to fill in the blanks, everyone has a different threshold for how much of that they can do while still finding it satisfying.

Perhaps it is based on how it is played. In my latest liberation of The Lion, I was offered a war Table assignment to help rebuild. This was not seen during my initial campaign, as I did not choose the options available during the linked trial.

In some areas, one can hear folks chat amongst themselves on what the Inquisition did for them. In the Hinterlands, if enough good is performed, one may gather more Agents from them. This was unseen in my primary campaign; likely linked to a Codex bonus perk.

In both cases, after taking the Keep (also seen in other locations), changes may be seen in both the Keep and surrounding locales. Added merchants, quests, crafting equipment, troops, etc.

But you are correct; I and some others find such changes quite satisfactory. While others may not, the changes are still present, and not reliant on mental imagery.

[TBJack]

Right, my point was more that the changes were quite minor, not nonexistant.  Taking keeps is probably the best example.

 

When you take a keep, as you mentioned you get a smattering of new NPCs including merchants, maybe a couple of minor quests, and some cosmetic changes to the immediate area.

 

It just seems to me that the actual impact for taking a fortified base of operations should be more significant than that.  These are supposed to be hubs for enemy operations in the region.  One would think that taking over enough of them would have a tremendous impact not just on the immediate area, but the war itself.

 

For instance, having a stronghold in L'Emprise should logically enable a large enough Inquisition presence that they could do some serious damage to the local Red Templars, undead and demons.  I believe you may encounter a few of your men plinking away at a demon or new near the fortress itself, but that's it.

 

In terms of gameplay this would be hard to justify, since it would render the zone barren in terms of enemies.  In terms of impact, however, that's what I would expect from such an important victory.

[Elhanan]

Right, my point was more that the changes were quite minor, not nonexistant.  Taking keeps is probably the best example.
 
When you take a keep, as you mentioned you get a smattering of new NPCs including merchants, maybe a couple of minor quests, and some cosmetic changes to the immediate area.
 
It just seems to me that the actual impact for taking a fortified base of operations should be more significant than that.  These are supposed to be hubs for enemy operations in the region.  One would think that taking over enough of them would have a tremendous impact not just on the immediate area, but the war itself.
 
For instance, having a stronghold in L'Emprise should logically enable a large enough Inquisition presence that they could do some serious damage to the local Red Templars, undead and demons.  I believe you may encounter a few of your men plinking away at a demon or new near the fortress itself, but that's it.
 
In terms of gameplay this would be hard to justify, since it would render the zone barren in terms of enemies.  In terms of impact, however, that's what I would expect from such an important victory.

As I recall, the changes shown are about a week's passage of time in length. This much suggested change would seem disproportionate to that degree of time. The bridge at The Lion already pushes this boundary of immersion, but for one am glad to see something besides wood planks at that later stage.

[TBJack]

As I recall, the changes shown are about a week's passage of time in length. This much suggested change would seem disproportionate to that degree of time. The bridge at The Lion already pushes this boundary of immersion, but for one am glad to see something besides wood planks at that later stage.

Wars take place over a long period of time.  Sure, having everything flip like a toggle switch immediately upon keep capture would be silly.  So have it take some time.  24 real world hours, say.  Then have something substantial occur.  It doesn't matter too much to me what happens, so long as it does.  As it is now, the benefit to capturing a keep is greatly out of sync with it's supposed importance.

 

The time factor is tricky, I'll admit.  As I said, however, wars don't take place over a month or two.  Especially when you're limited by Medieval/Renaissance technology.  The travel time to get to and from Skyhold alone would likely add up to weeks, perhaps months.  I also think it's fair to say that the actual zones we play in are meant to be representative, rather than the actual size of the region.  A scale model, almost.  Otherwise you would be dealing with a very small world.

[Saphiron123]

Right, my point was more that the changes were quite minor, not nonexistant.  Taking keeps is probably the best example.
 
When you take a keep, as you mentioned you get a smattering of new NPCs including merchants, maybe a couple of minor quests, and some cosmetic changes to the immediate area.
 
It just seems to me that the actual impact for taking a fortified base of operations should be more significant than that.  These are supposed to be hubs for enemy operations in the region.  One would think that taking over enough of them would have a tremendous impact not just on the immediate area, but the war itself.
 
For instance, having a stronghold in L'Emprise should logically enable a large enough Inquisition presence that they could do some serious damage to the local Red Templars, undead and demons.  I believe you may encounter a few of your men plinking away at a demon or new near the fortress itself, but that's it.
 
In terms of gameplay this would be hard to justify, since it would render the zone barren in terms of enemies.  In terms of impact, however, that's what I would expect from such an important victory.

Agreed, much like the army in the story, taking keeps make no visual changes in the game... And minor alterations like building a bridge on the war table really don't blow my skirt up.

As always, you hear about it, you don't see it.

[Coyote X Starrk]

I loved the story setting and the way it played out. 

 

 

Can't please everyone I guess. 

[Sartoz]

To the OP.

 

You now know all about Merketing Speak vs Truth Speak.

[In Exile]

I think that, if anything, DAI exposed that the "show, don't tell" for a lot of people has to be done on level where the game points finger at stuff and, ironically, screams "see, THIS IS WAR" at the top of its lungs, repeatedly, otherwise it'll go completely overlooked.

Which is rather depressing.

(honestly, when you have a game with multiple zones populated with various groups of refugees and number of quest chains dealing one way or another with problems of these groups... and then you see complaints how there's "no fallout or refugees or drama surrounding the effects of that war"? It really makes you wonder how people play these games, and just what exactly the "show" would need to involve for thing to actually get noticed)

People want things to be shown but they don't want them to be subtle or in the background. Which is where the complaint about the lack of cutscenes - in the sense of fully realised dialogue scenes - comes in. That's what focuses player attention on the issue and what makes people feel as if they're seeing something.

I can relate to the feeling since this has always been my issue with the supposed well developed world of Skyrim.

[Saphiron123]

I want to be a part of the world. And delivering flowers while major events go on kind of makes me feel unconnected.

Yes, I want to see events unfold. Especially the major ones. The destruction of corypheus' entire army is a pretty major even to have a character basically telling me (the leader of the army that crushed them) "oh, by the way, we crushed your enemies for you while you fought 30 guys and drank from a pond".

[Saphiron123]

People want things to be shown but they don't want them to be subtle or in the background. Which is where the complaint about the lack of cutscenes - in the sense of fully realised dialogue scenes - comes in. That's what focuses player attention on the issue and what makes people feel as if they're seeing something.

I can relate to the feeling since this has always been my issue with the supposed well developed world of Skyrim.

I'm okay with subtle, but except for a few story missions there's no evidence of a war at all... I mean there's like 3 burning houses in the hinterlands, but nothing you do in the big maps has any impact at all,

[Cheviot]

I'm okay with subtle, but except for a few story missions there's no evidence of a war at all... I mean there's like 3 burning houses in the hinterlands, but nothing you do in the big maps has any impact at all,

Except the constant battles between the Mages and Templars in the Hinterlands that only stop when you destroy their respective camps.

[Maker Be Damned]

play MP if you want to fight in the war.

[SofaJockey]

play MP if you want to fight in the war.

 

This is true 

 

The Inquisitor is the leader and so the target is the enemy leader not every minion.

This is a familiar device. Much of Shakespeare had the protagonists viewing the battle from 'yonder hill'...

 

There are times, as in DAO, DA2 and Mass Effect series when your party of 4/3 is dealing with waves,

but this is not ESO or an MMO, you're not among a force of thousands (or dozens)...

 

I'm struggling to see the point of the OP's 'feedback'.

[Erstus]

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.

The battle of DenerI'm was the most significant though considering what happened in that battle. And aside from Ostagar there really were not any major battles. The army crushed and the country torn by civil war. The Blight just swept through wi th little to no resistance until Denerim.

[NextGenCowboy]

I like Inquisition a lot, but its largest failing summed up in one sentence is that it fails the "Show don't tell" method of storytelling.

 

It tells an intriguing story, but by that I mean, it tells an intriguing story. Whether it's in the form of notes, or war table missions, we very rarely see the effects of our (the player's) actions. which isn't a cardinal sin even in a BW RPG, but the fact that we fail to see the actions of anyone, up to, and including the antagonist (outside of a handful of cutscenes) is the issue.