1664 réponses à ce sujet

[Rizilliant]

deleted

[Rizilliant]

the arishok vitaar could be useful for the next story expanions or dlc.but aside that .. there are no other useful rewards in the temple? maybe not in your game. i found blue and violett/purple daggers and bows there.. also purple rings and mighty runes also  a lot of money.

 

about that this all comes so late in the game.....like the new storage chests and the black emporium too.

like the option to change the armor color .

well...too late or not too late.....either way it is enjoyable.

 

and useful into the next story expansion.

What story expansion is that?

[Rizilliant]

ok....

 

i found a dagger there.. the dagger looks awesome...i can't craft the same dagger because i didn't have the schematic.i love how the dagger looks like and i wanna use it.i don't know but it could be a unique weapon.

 

not all player like to craft items anyways... why should they do that if they are able to find the items they wanna have into the temple?

not all player like to pick up ressources to be able to craft items...why should they do that if they are able to find the items they wanna have into the temple?

 

what about the gold? can you craft the gold? but you can find a lot of gold into the temple... and with that you can buy whatever you like to have.maybe rare items.

 

can you craft the arishok vitaar ? no ! well ...no problem because you can loot it into the temple.it's a unique item.

 

What in the game is left?????

....all what you skipped before and that could be much...

as example: sidequests... maybe romances...companion missions... dragons....conquer a fortress...and so on.

 

if i compare that to swtor and the holocrons ....

i know many people they skipped the holocron pick up part ..

they just play without increased stats. you wanna know why?

because the holocron pick up part is frustrating and you get nothing what you could use.

it doesn't matter if your stats are increased or not.

 

but it does matter if you get a awesome item that could be used for fights .

 

i love my dagger.

 

it does matter if you get a  item who is awesome only because of the look.

You appear to argue, for the sake of arguing, and stepping allover your words in the process.. You claim you enjoy the game, but resort to exploiting chests to get gear.. You dont want to craft gear, because you dont wanna collet resource, but you seem to have no issue with having to collect 100 shards, spread accross 10 zones, which have level walls, and then you back track on those claims.. 

 

Do you have a point, whatsoever? Or just trying your hardest (not good btw) to be argumentative? 

[Rizilliant]

58 pages... damn, I gotta get in on this lol.

 

I've began thinking that maybe the reason the game's main story is so short is because, you know how they were working on Exalted March for da2? Then they decided to cancel it and focus on the next game in the series, a new main game. Gaider also stated that some elements from the expansion are present in dai. Recently, I've thought that maybe dai IS the expansion? Awakening, for me, I finished iirc somewhere 25-30 hours. The main story in dai is what, 10-20 hours? I have a pt where I started the templar mission at 23 hours (10 of which were spent wandering the Hinterlands) and by the time I got to Corypheus, I was at 40 hours. It took me 17 hours to go from the early-game templar mission to the final story mission. I recently started a new playthrough where I just completed the Templar mission at 8 hours. dao and da2 both took me 60 hours+.

 

I think that dai IS Exalted March, what they did was make a couple changes since Hawke would no longer be the protagonist, and no previous companions besides Varric would be coming back. The length of the game adds evidence to my claims. But in order to make the game seem more like a full, main game in the series, they needed to make it bigger, add some extra hours to the play time, so they made all these fetch quests to give players something to do, and added the Power system to force players to do the extra content so they wouldn't notice how short and small the game really is if they only stuck with the main quests. Also kind of explains the lack of side quests where you can RP your character. Awakening had a few such quests, like did you have the guards defend the farmlands or the city (I think)? But still not as much as Origins. Looking back at dai, it really smacks of expansion pack, just with a couple add-ons and switch-arounds.

 

Also, there is a new interview Mike Laidlaw which STRONGLY implies [re: confirms] that the game being put on last gen systems had something to do with how dai turned out.

Spoiler

One problem the team did have to tackle was maintaining Inquisition's simultaneous development across five platforms, including two console generations.

"We established fairly early on we would maintain gameplay parity. Visually, obviously, we knew there would be differences - if there wasn't then we'd have severely missed our mark. PC is a powerhouse now, PS4 and Xbox One have the benefit of a decade of hardware development." The PS3 and Xbox 360 in comparison have "memory limitations", Laidlaw continues, but sometimes the limitations lead to new ideas.

"Yes we could have had more enemies on screen, but instead we were able to think about how we could have enemies that work together - buffing each other, for example. Was there a potential for us, if we went beyond Gen 3, to go further? Sure, but we have to build a game that we are able to ship in the box."

Sections of the game were adjusted as a result, as it became clear that some ideas were not going to work as originally planned. A version of the game demoed at PAX Prime in 2013, around a year before the game's final release, showed hints of a war simulation system, where players would have to focus on building up and maintaining military strength around their captured keeps. "We had to do some changes," Laidlaw admits. "That was something where we had a good working prototype but we hit a snag due to the technical limitations on it. Having multiple forces fighting works fine on PC but you end up in a situation where having realistic-feeling war on the older consoles is exceedingly challenging."

The game used to feature more environmental destruction, too, and a greater number of options for solving missions. Boats could be burnt and bridges collapsed to affect the strength of enemy forces. These items were cut based "a little bit [on the last-gen] platforms, a little bit about the flow of the gameplay," Laidlaw adds. "We didn't want to build a military campaign simulator and have one zone riddled with that but others that don't have keeps be different - we wanted a consistency across the game.

"So it was about recognising the things from playtests where we realise we can almost do something but it does fall down at a certain point. And we did reuse some of that - for example, when moving the trebuchets in Haven - so we didn't throw 100 per cent of the systems out.

 

http://www.eurogamer...s-of-dragon-age

 

Was also stated that DAI started out as a multiplayer game. http://www.gamespot....y/1100-6423362/

 

I have to put this disclaimer: This is only my OPINION.

This is very intriguing, and i wouldnt put it past this dev/publisher team at all, at this point!

[Rizilliant]

Am expecting exploration in the Mako for ME4. But I do not expect to see this next in the DA series; am guessing it will be contained more in size like in DAO.

We tend to butt heads often Elhanaan, but i thnk you and I, may be one of very few who found ME1 to be the better of the trilogy, from an "rpg" standpoint.. I felt 2, and 3 were more shooter than rpg (still enjoyed them).. And i loved the Mako missions..It wasnt too much, and not too little, nor did it feel a "must do", like some side quests end up feeling..

[Rawgrim]

We tend to butt heads often Elhanaan, but i thnk you and I, may be one of very few who found ME1 to be the better of the trilogy, from an "rpg" standpoint.. I felt 2, and 3 were more shooter than rpg (still enjoyed them).. And i loved the Mako missions..It wasnt too much, and not too little, nor did it feel a "must do", like some side quests end up feeling..

 

Add me to the list too. ME1 was a better rpg.

[ButterBreadBro]

Add me to the list too. ME1 was a better rpg.

 

I want in on this as well.

Though I felt that the shooter-hybrid in ME 2 & 3 also worked quite well for the series; only collecting thermal clips became annoying after a while.

[Geth Supremacy]

to me....its extremely obvious the people who started bioware are not the people who are currently doing their games.  It's not even close.

 

It's a different generation of people at Bioware.

 

If I compare DAO to DAI?  Yeah.

 

ME1 and ME2 to ME3?  Yeah.

 

That not to say I hate ME3....its just not on par with ME2  love the MP though.

[Regan_Cousland]

... i loved the Mako missions..It wasnt too much, and not too little, nor did it feel a "must do", like some side quests end up feeling..

 

I also enjoyed the Mako missions in ME1, and that was because those missions provided a pleasant and genuinely optional diversion from the main quest; they never felt compulsory.

 

If you decided not to do them, you didn't feel as though you were ignoring the bulk of the game's content, and you were still perfectly capable of levelling up your character to your satisfaction, acquiring good gear, and of advancing to the next story mission.

 

Let's briefly apply DA:I's modus operandi to ME1:

 

Most of the game would take place on big, beautiful, but narratively barren planets, and driving the Mako would suddenly become a chore as you disembark every twenty feet to harvest a space rock or collect a fetch-quest from a soulless statue of an NPC, e.g.

Saddo the Salarian: "My friend and I were attacked by Varren. I'm too scared and/or lazy to go back and check on him myself. Please drive twenty virtual miles and do it for me, Commander. I'll reward you with -- Power, which you can use to avoid the drudgery of talking to more people like me and continue on your important quest to save the galaxy."

Shepard's response options: 

 

1. Please tell me what you want me to do in more detail. I didn't find your first statement boring enough, dear friend.

 

2. Farewell.

 

Twenty hours later ...
 

Shepard returns to the Normandy to discover that Urdnot Wrex has murdered the entire crew and himself out of boredom. lol

[Il Divo]

I also enjoyed the Mako missions in ME1, and that was because those missions provided a pleasant and genuinely optional diversion from the main quest; they never felt compulsory.

 

If you decided not to do them, you didn't feel as though you were ignoring the bulk of the game's content, and you were still perfectly capable of levelling up your character to your satisfaction, acquiring good gear, and of advancing to the next story mission.

 

Let's briefly apply DA:I's modus operandi to ME1:

 

Most of the game would take place on big, beautiful, but narratively barren planets, and driving the Mako would suddenly become a chore as you disembark every twenty feet to harvest a space rock or collect a fetch-quest from a soulless statue of an NPC, e.g.

Saddo the Salarian: "My friend and I were attacked by Varren. I'm too scared and/or lazy to go back and check on him myself. Please drive twenty virtual miles and do it for me, Commander. I'll reward you with -- Power, which you can use to avoid the drudgery of talking to more people like me and continue on your important quest to save the galaxy."

Shepard's response options: 

 

1. Please tell me what you want me to do in more detail. I didn't find your first statement boring enough, dear friend.

 

2. Farewell.

 

Twenty hours later ...
 

Shepard returns to the Normandy to discover that Urdnot Wrex has murdered the entire crew and himself out of boredom. lol

 

I did find this funny because you essentially did just describe ME1's modus operandi, with minor variations. 

[wicked cool]

Im not sure that witg skyrim and witcher 3 you cant go back to da1 or da2 linited corridors. As the title of the thread says it just boring.
If the Witcher 3 is a massive success and bethesda gets a new big game next year than dai become just a footnote in gaming history
The questions will be if those studios could do it why couldnt you and if Witcher 3 is game of year in 15 then could have won in 14 as well
It

[Regan_Cousland]

I did find this funny because you essentially did just describe ME1's modus operandi, with minor variations. 

 

Yep, I suppose I did.

 

The thing that makes Inquisition especially painful to play, however, is its incredible size combined with the increased banality of its quests.

In ME1 you have big areas containing moderately interesting, cinematically-presented quests that offer decent roleplaying opportunities ... 

 

In DA:I you have humongous areas containing fullblown chores that offer zero roleplaying opportunities.

It's a step too far.

I'm not claiming that all older BioWare games are perfect. But Inquisition works hard to accentuate the negative instead of the positive (at least when it comes to general questing).

[Il Divo]

Yep, I suppose I did.

 

The thing that makes Inquisition especially painful to play, however, is its incredible size combined with the increased banality of its quests.

In ME1 you have big areas containing moderately interesting, cinematically-presented quests that offer decent roleplaying opportunities ... 

 

In DA:I you have humongous areas containing fullblown chores that offer zero roleplaying opportunities.

It's a step too far.

I'm not claiming that all older BioWare games are perfect. But Inquisition works hard to accentuate the negative instead of the positive (at least when it comes to general questing).

 

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with all of this, it's more that I think ME1 represented a much larger shift than Inquisition did. 

 

As you say, the problem is related to world size. Or content density as someone in another thread put it. ME1 followed on the heels of KotOR and Jade Empire. While not every side quest was absolutely brilliant, what worked in the latter's favor was that side quests were incorporated into the actual game world. 

 

Each ME1 quest occupies its own little symmetrical sandbox. Each cluster has exactly one planet you can land on. Each planet has exactly one base that is clearly identifiable on the map. And each base consists of 2-3 identical rooms which the player is required to clear out before receiving a moral choice. And keep in mind, exploration consisted of locating Salarian Medallions and Minerals. It gets even worse when all the companion quests are given much the same treatment, creating a sense of homogenization. 

 

Where KotOR/Jade Empire might have incorporated these side quests into the general narrative of the world, Mass Effect confined each quest to its own little bubble. 

 

While I agree DA:I suffers problems related to boring side quests quite a bit, all of its companion quests (plus a few others) go to a far greater extent than ME1's side quests ever did in providing cinematic conversations. And not just the talking head treatment. Compare Cole's companion quest to finding Dr. Saleon for Garrus. Characters behave more dynamically in side quests, not just standing in one position talking back and forth. 

 

Personally, I think Bioware should be taking a less is more approach. Fewer side quests, but far more in depth as exemplified by Jade Empire's Imperial Arena, the Sunry Murder Trial, etc. 

[Inalt]

Am expecting exploration in the Mako for ME4. 

 

I'm already worried...

[PhroXenGold]

They shouldn't just take the JE style of quests, they should take everything from it. Screw more DA and ME games, give us Jade Empire 2

[Regan_Cousland]

I'm already worried [about the Mako exploration in ME4] ...

 

Me, too.

I'm a Mako fan, and I was excited to hear that the Mako is returning ... before I played Inquisition.

Now I'm afraid that ME4 will be DA:I in space, and that the Mako will simply take the place of mounts, allowing us to reach our grand buffet of boring fetch-quests that much more efficiently. lol

With luck, however, BioWare will heed some of the feedback on these message boards and populate the open environments in ME with interesting content that's relevant to the story.

And, yes, I'm sure that Mass Effect will have open environments: modern developers seem to adore them, whether they enhance player enjoyment or not.

 

A developer must feel like the strange, unpopular kid at a party if it failed to shoehorn an open world into its game. lol
 

[KennethAFTopp]

Add me to the list too. ME1 was a better rpg.

well there's that and there were no nuances to the dialogue wheel in ME3, along with too much Autodialogue.

So I never even got to the end of ME3 because I felt they ruined it way before I heard about the ending.

[AlanC9]

I'm not too worried about the Mako returning. I tolerated it or blew it off in ME1, and I figure I can do the same in ME4. As long as ME1's inventory doesn't return, I'm good.

[Rawgrim]

I'm not too worried about the Mako returning. I tolerated it or blew it off in ME1, and I figure I can do the same in ME4. As long as ME1's inventory doesn't return, I'm good.

 

I'd rather have the ME1 inventory than no inventory like in ME2 and 3, to be honest. Its an rpg. It should have inventory.

[Gileadan]

I would not only like to have the Mako back, but also a special character skill tree that gives an edge in using it. I would also like to have an inventory again, but I could do without the associated clunky controls or all the clicking that was necessary to transform items into omni-gel. 

[Il Divo]

I'd rather have the ME1 inventory than no inventory like in ME2 and 3, to be honest. Its an rpg. It should have inventory.

 

Meh, I've always been of the opinion that inventories often hold RPG's back. Even in pen and paper, there often isn't an excessive amount of time spent rifling through dead bodies. 

 

I thought it was funny when Mordin made that comment about the Salarian Spec Ops having better funding than the Spectres. 

[PhroXenGold]

I'd rather have the ME1 inventory than no inventory like in ME2 and 3, to be honest. Its an rpg. It should have inventory.

 

ME1's inventory served absolutely no purpose other than to waste the player's time. There was no management in any meaningful way. There were essentially no decisions about it (whether or not you equipped a weapon or stuck it in your backpack was an utter no brainer, and then rendered moot as soon as you get the spectre guns, and whatever was in your inventory got sold when you got back to ship). It was simply a chore. And while a better implemented inventory might've been better than completely removing it, dumping it was better than leaving it in in the form it had in ME1.

 

Roleplaying is about shaping your character, not sticking stuff in a bag,

[Il Divo]

ME1's inventory served absolutely no purpose other than to waste the player's time. There was no management in any meaningful way. There were essentially no decisions about it (whether or not you equipped a weapon or stuck it in your backpack was an utter no brainer, and then rendered moot as soon as you get the spectre guns, and whatever was in your inventory got sold when you got back to ship). It was simply a chore. And while a better implemented inventory might've been better than completely removing it, dumping it was better than leaving it in in the form it had in ME1.

 

Roleplaying is about shaping your character, not sticking stuff in a bag,

 

Yeah, ME1's inventory could largely be decided by inequalities. 50>49. 200>150. Once you decided that, the rest was omnigel. 

[Lee T]

Meh, I've always been of the opinion that inventories often hold RPG's back. Even in pen and paper, there often isn't an excessive amount of time spent rifling through dead bodies. 
 
I thought it was funny when Mordin made that comment about the Salarian Spec Ops having better funding than the Spectres.

Inventories involve choice and choice is good, but cRPG's inventory require a good UI to help implement those choice fast. ME1 inventory was a UI catastrophe ant it had to be corrected, it also had the classic cRPG of having way too much stuff serving basically the same role. Changing that was fine, but they went overboard.

My main issue with ME2 inventory ( less so with ME3 but still), to put it simply : shooter's inventory put these to shame. There is more loadout option in CoD/Battlefield. Being beaten at a mechanic cRPG brought to computers by the very genre they were trying to emulate is a bit sad.

[AlanC9]

My main issue with ME2 inventory ( less so with ME3 but still), to put it simply : shooter's inventory put these to shame. There is more loadout option in CoD/Battlefield. Being beaten at a mechanic cRPG brought to computers by the very genre they were trying to emulate is a bit sad.

This assumes that fuddling with inventory is a good thing, of course. I can go either way; in PnP I've played game systems with zero or minimal loot and inventory. I liked the ME2 system because it suited the situation and lore; it's a pity they didn't go all the way and remove credits too, though.