246 réponses à ce sujet

[hoechlbear]

Also, your use of "cardboard cutouts" in reference to NPCs suggests that you don't think that the same could be said for NPCs in previous games.  Please confirm, so I can begin laughing.

 

No, because in previous games I could interact with most of these NPCs and they would react to me accordingly to what I would tell them so they felt like real people most of the times. In DAI, you can only (barely) interact with NPCs that give you fetch quests.

 

 

 

inb4 you use the "drufallo escort" as a counterpoint. Yes... the occasional irrelevant fetch quest among a hundred is too much to bear.

 

You're talking about DAI, right? A game where more than half of the sidequests are irrelevant fetch quests? Ok, just checking.

[Lebanese Dude]

No, because in previous games I could interact with most of these NPCs and they would react to me accordingly to what I would tell them so they felt like real people most of the times. In DAI, you can only (barely) interact with NPCs that give you fetch quests.

 

When do you interact with the Mage Collective / Irregular / Chantry Board NPCs beyond one or two points in the game? 

 

How about you compare the DAO side quests that allow you to talk to people at a relatively significantly level to the appropriate ones in DAI?

 

These include:

 

1) Major zone quest NPCs 

2) Minor zone NPCs

3) Certain war table NPCs such as Sutherland, Krem, etc...

4) Keep quest NPCs 

5) Potential agent quests

 

etc..

 

Most of your analogies and comparisons have been very off base. Explains your way of thinking I suppose.

[Lebanese Dude]

Spoiler

 

Oh, wait wait. I've found another drinking game. 

 

Drink when Lebanese Dude uses the nostalgia excuse.

 

 

 

Wrong thread dear. Feel free to join us the Drinkquisition thread.

 

 

 

If you read the post of the person I replied to, you would see that I was actually answering to someone saying that DAO's main quests are a complete waste of time and involve a lot of slogging. And I answered in that in mind. 

 

Then how about you defend your point of view by focusing on the merits of DAO?

 

 

 

Exactly. That's why the temple of sacred ashes isn't a slog either. Again, you should read the post of the person I replied too. 

 

I agree. Again, there is no need to put down DAI in an attempt to prove your point, especially when your counterpoints that use DAI are rather hyperbolic.

 

 

 

No? The temple of the sacred ashes? You can learn a great deal about Andraste and her disciples. You can also respect the temple by removing all of your armor and weapons at the end or not give a fig about it. It's pretty similar in my eyes.

 

Fair enough. You do learn a little, but definitely not in the same scale of that in DAI since most of what you see at the temple is already documented in the codex while the revelations in the Temple are very new and undocumented. Ask Dorian.

 

Regarding the "respect" part, there is a major difference between how they play out in the games. DAI actually allows you to disregard it from the get-go. DAO forces you to go through the gauntlet while allowing you to pull the middle finger. The consequences are more significant in DAI as well. You actually miss a lot of these revelations.

[hoechlbear]

When do you interact with the Mage Collective / Irregular / Chantry Board NPCs beyond certain points in the game?

How about you compare the DAO side quests that allow you to talk to people at a relatively significantly level to the appropriate ones in DAI?

These include:

 

1) Major zone quest NPCs 

2) Certain war table NPCs such as Sutherland, Krem, etc...

3) Keep quest NPCs 

4) Potential agent quests

5) Unique reputation-based Elven camp discussions

etc..

Most of your analogies and comparisons have been very off base. Explains your way of thinking I suppose.

 

I'm not even talking about quest givers. I'm talking about random NPCs that you can just talk to! I gave this example a few pages ago. And I guess I'll have to repeat myself. 

 

"You get to Ostagar you can talk to the merchant, an elf servant, several guards (at least 4) and soldiers (like the Ash warriors), the priest, the healer, and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone. Then you get to Lothering you can talk to refugees, a farmer, templars, soldiers, priest, bartender, and you get encounters like the doomsayer and the merchant charging prices too high. In the Dalish camp you can even sit by the fire and talk to the elves and ask them several questions. You get dozens of little encounters/interactions with NPCs in each location. I honestly can't remember a single one in DAI, apart from one line of dialogue with the healer at Skyhold maybe."

 

In DAO you get your information about each location by asking people questions. Not by picking up notes from the ground. That's why I give a crap about NPCs in DAO, because they seem like people, not some statues that you can't interact with.

[hoechlbear]

Then how about you defend your point of view by focusing on the merits of DAO?

 

(...)

 

Again, there is no need to put down DAI in an attempt to prove your point

 

Because we're talking about DAI here. You dismiss people's arguments by accusing them of being nostalgic when they mention DAO, but apparently it's not a problem when people put down DAO in order to prove their point about DAI. "Yes, but what about DAO's chanter board fetch quests?" or "the fade and the deep roads is a complete grinding as well." That's what the person I replied to did. That's why I defended DAO and then continued the discussion about DAI's sidequests being errand boy quests, since, you know, is the point of this thread.

[Lebanese Dude]

Because we're talking about DAI here. You dismiss people's arguments by accusing them of being nostalgic when they mention DAO, but apparently it's not a problem when people dismiss DAO in order to prove their point about DAI. "Yes, but what about DAO's chanter board fetch quests?" or "the fade and the deep roads is a complete grinding as well." That's what the person I replied to did. That's why I defended DAO and then continued the discussion about DAI's sidequests being errand boy quests, since, you know, is the point of this thread.

The funny part being that I never actually called DAO's quests a grind either.

 

I only use them as a counterpoint because YOUR argument is that "DAO did it better".

 

Spot the difference?

[Lebanese Dude]

I'm not even talking about quest givers. I'm talking about random NPCs that you can just talk to! I gave this example a few pages ago. And I guess I'll have to repeat myself. 

 

"You get to Ostagar you can talk to the merchant, an elf servant, several guards (at least 4) and soldiers (like the Ash warriors), the priest, the healer, and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone. Then you get to Lothering you can talk to refugees, a farmer, templars, soldiers, priest, bartender, and you get encounters like the doomsayer and the merchant charging prices too high. In the Dalish camp you can even sit by the fire and talk to the elves and ask them several questions. You get dozens of little encounters/interactions with NPCs in each location. I honestly can't remember a single one in DAI, apart from one line of dialogue with the healer at Skyhold maybe."

 

In DAO you get your information about each location by asking people questions. Not by picking up notes from the ground. That's why I give a crap about NPCs in DAO, because they seem like people, not some statues that you can't interact with.

 

I have a question. Why do you continue to make arguments in a vacuum?

 

Did you ever consider that DAO and DAI approach the process of "talking for information about the world" differently?

Did DAO have a major hub? It's natural that all conversations are spread OUTSIDE your base of operations. In DAO you literally only have one and that's with Bodahn if you ignore the DLC NPC. DAI has Haven and Skyhold. Those contain dozens of NPCs to talk to,

 

Did DAO have adivsors? There is no equivalent in DAO. What do you use to quantify their dialogue?

 

Also what about the fact that DAO heavily relies on a passive method to explain what's going on? DAO has NPCs tell you what's going on because there's literally NO WAY for you to experience it for yourself.

DAO allows you to experience what's going on for yourself so there's very little need to give you a full explanation of what's going on.

 

Admittedly, DAO has more NPCs per square inch because their zones are smaller. They're more concentrated, and that gives the feeling of being more accessible. The Western Approach for example has random soldiers to talk to in some areas, the Keep soldiers and merchants in another, Serrault in the south...etc.. They're simply spread out more.

 

Ignore the NPCs that give you quests. Let's take the Elven camp into consideration. 

 

You have the various Elven elders that explain lore to you. Who fulfills that function to you in DAI? Solas of course. There's also the elves in the camp to talk to. Morrigan as well when you get to that point. What about experiencing it first-hand in the temples as opposed to hearing about it?

 

What else is there? ... I don't think there is anyone else.

[hoechlbear]

*snip*

 

And why do you always change the subject and distort everything I say?

 

When I was talking about the NPCs I was answering to someone that said "Also, your use of "cardboard cutouts" in reference to NPCs suggests that you don't think that the same could be said for NPCs in previous games." I answered, saying that no, I don't think they are cardboard cutouts in DAO because you can interact with them in multiple ways.

 

Of course DAI and DAO are two completely different games, does that mean that DAI couldn't have NPCs in the worlds that you could talk to? They couldn't, let's say, have some refugees on the crossroads that you could talk to and experience first hand how much they were suffering? Therefore making you give a crap about them and give you a reason to care enough to go fetch ram meat and supplies? Or maybe the slaves in the hissing wastes, maybe after you saved them, they could show up at your base camp and you could ask them a bunch of questions. There are tons of ways they could include NPCs interactions in this game.

 

 

 

Admittedly, DAO has more NPCs per square inch because their zones are smaller. They're more concentrated, and that gives the feeling of being more accessible. The Western Approach for example has random soldiers to talk to in some areas, the Keep soldiers and merchants in another, Serrault in the south...etc.. They're simply spread out more.

 

The fact that the zones in DAO are so small and yet you have so many people to talk to, proves my point actually. In each world in DAI you maybe have one or two interactions with an NPC that isn't a quest giver. And when I say talk to, I mean more than one line of dialogue.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Lebanese Dude:  Not saying you shouldn't enjoy NPCs, your game is yours... but I find it absolutely ludicrous that anyone would just talk to me and tell me their life story. 

 

In fact, I'd prefer NPCs to be abrasive with a complete stranger that walks up to them and starts asking questions. 

[hoechlbear]

The funny part being that I never actually called DAO's quests a grind either.

 

I only use them as a counterpoint because YOUR argument is that "DAO did it better".

 

Spot the difference?

 

 

You didn't, but others did. I do think DAO did it better, as do many others. But it's not like I go around saying "DAO did it better because DAO did it better". I already said several of times why I think that, I give valid arguments, if people don't agree with them that's a whole different matter. 

 

Someone was putting down DAO for no reason, so I defended it in the first part of my comment. Then on the second part I continued talking about DAI's sidequests. If you remove the first part where I talk about DAO, the second part still makes sense, so in truth, I wasn't using the argument that "DAO did it better". Go read my comment again, if you wish.  It's like you only read the part where I talk about DAO (when I wasn't even the one to brought it up in the first place) and ignore everything else to suit your argument. It gets tiring trying to have a conversation that way because I have to repeat myself twice.

 

(And by the way, in case you didn't notice, the last part of my comment was supposed to be sarcastic. If that person thinks going through the temple of sacred ashes is a complete slog, then by that logic, reaching and going through the temple of mythal was also a slog.)

[Lebanese Dude]

And why do you always change the subject and distort everything I say?

 

When I was talking about the NPCs I was answering to someone that said "Also, your use of "cardboard cutouts" in reference to NPCs suggests that you don't think that the same could be said for NPCs in previous games." I answered, saying that no, I don't think they are cardboard cutouts in DAO because you can interact with them in multiple ways.

 

Of course DAI and DAO are two completely different games, does that mean that DAI couldn't have NPCs in the worlds that you could talk to? They couldn't, let's say, have some refugees on the crossroads that you could talk to and experience first hand how much they were suffering? Therefore making you give a crap about them and give you a reason to care enough to go fetch ram meat and supplies? Or maybe the slaves in the hissing wastes, maybe after you saved them, they could show up at your base camp and you could ask them a bunch of questions. There are tons of ways they could include NPCs interactions in this game.

 

 

 

 

The fact that the zones in DAO are so small and yet you have so many people to talk to, proves my point actually. In each world in DAI you maybe have one or two interactions with an NPC that isn't a quest giver. And when I say talk to, I mean more than one line of dialogue.

 

Changing the subject? I'm changing the context.

It's rather easy to isolate one characteristic of the game and claim that it's wrong.

In fact your entire argument is based on some quantitative comparison between the two games regarding the number of people you can talk to.

That's entirely fallacious because there are way more variables at play.

 

It's very important to note that DAI focuses on "showing and not telling" to complement its exploratory nature. 

DAO zones are very small and as a result are populated with NPCs that tell you what's going on because there's literally almost no way for you to experience it for youself. Civil War? Dwarven instability? Blight upon the lands? Unless someone told you about it, there's no way for you to know.

In fact in a very very very ironic twist, the only way for you to experience them for yourself is to do the DAO fetch quests from the Chantry board.

 

Another consequence of all those "major NPCs" is that DAO has way less ambient NPCs because of this, rendering most areas feeling artificially populated with significant characters with little actual "cardboard" NPCs that are actually necessary to make the world feel alive. I had to download mods for this.

 

In DAI you can actually SEE the refugees suffering. You can see them homeless and without food. You see the mages and templars clashing outside the refugee camp. You can SEE your soldiers fending them off to protect the refugees. 

 

It's not as if DAI doesn't have NPCs that have a dialogue component.

 

You ask for people to tell you that the refugees are suffering despite the fact that you can actively SEE it with your own eyes? DAI delivers.

 

You have Harding who gives you a rundown of what's going on.

You have Giselle who not only explains to you what's going on, but is later available in Haven for a potentially lengthy dialogue exchange regarding the state of the refugees in the Hinterlands and other areas.

 

Those very NPCs that you so readily dismiss as being trivial are in fact the equivalent of those people who talk to you DAO. 

 

The hunter explains to you why they are hungry. You can see why and you can help.

The soldier tells you that you that the refugees are freezing. You can help.

 

If you choose to help you go to the south. There you discover various people who need your help as well and provide further insight into what's going on in the area.

 

You have various agents who describe the situation directly. You have the zealots in the fort. You have the distraught elven woman who describes how insane the templars are in the area. 

People mock them, when they serve the very purpose you ask.

 

Let's not forget the ambient NPCs themselves. There's the little things that add a major feel to the setting that you are again ignoring. Many ambient NPCs have dialogue among themselves that passively explain the situation to you and that EVOLVE depending on your actions.

A good example are those three refugee children sitting with their grandmother to the south of the refugee camp. Before you complete the food quest, the kids are complaining about the lack of food and the grandmother assures them that they'll figure it out.  After you get the ram meat for the hunter and feed the refugees, the grandmother notes that she was right and that the Inquisition helped them.

 

Is it done in a descriptive manner? Yes, but it relies on visuals JUST as much as dialogue. It relies on both passive AND active cues.

 

DAO completely and utterly fails in the visual (active) part compared to DAI.

That's fine. It was limited because of the technology at the time. It needed to make up for it by inflating the amount of random NPC dialogue. It doesn't make it a superior version.

 

Also you need to stop using the "I don't care" excuse when it comes to approaching the missions because that can apply to anything in any game ever. If you honestly feel more compelled to help an elf hook up with his girl than help refugees in their plight, then that's very much your prerogative and not a consequence of the game making you incapable of caring especially when the visual cues are all there.

[Lebanese Dude]

@Lebansese Dude:  Not saying you shouldn't enjoy NPCs, your game is yours... but I find it absolutely ludicrous that anyone would just talk to me and tell me their life story. 

 

In fact, I'd prefer NPCs to be abrasive with a complete stranger that walks up to them and starts asking questions. 

I agree but I don't get why you're quoting me xD

[Al Foley]

Changing the subject? I'm changing the context.

It's rather easy to isolate one characteristic of the game and claim that it's wrong.

In fact your entire argument is based on some quantitative comparison between the two games regarding the number of people you can talk to.

That's entirely fallacious because there are way more variables at play.

 

It's very important to note that DAI focuses on "showing and not telling" to complement its exploratory nature. 

DAO zones are very small and as a result are populated with NPCs that tell you what's going on because there's literally almost no way for you to experience it for youself. Civil War? Dwarven instability? Blight upon the lands? Unless someone told you about it, there's no way for you to know.

In fact in a very very very ironic twist, the only way for you to experience them for yourself is to do the DAO fetch quests from the Chantry board.

 

Another consequence of all those "major NPCs" is that DAO has way less ambient NPCs because of this, rendering most areas feeling artificially populated with significant characters with little actual "cardboard" NPCs that are actually necessary to make the world feel alive. I had to download mods for this.

 

In DAI you can actually SEE the refugees suffering. You can see them homeless and without food. You see the mages and templars clashing outside the refugee camp. You can SEE your soldiers fending them off to protect the refugees. 

 

It's not as if DAI doesn't have NPCs that have a dialogue component.

 

You ask for people to tell you that the refugees are suffering despite the fact that you can actively SEE it with your own eyes? DAI delivers.

 

You have Harding who gives you a rundown of what's going on.

You have Giselle who not only explains to you what's going on, but is later available in Haven for a potentially lengthy dialogue exchange regarding the state of the refugees in the Hinterlands and other areas.

 

Those very NPCs that you so readily dismiss as being trivial are in fact the equivalent of those people who talk to you DAO. 

 

The hunter explains to you why they are hungry. You can see why and you can help.

The soldier tells you that you that the refugees are freezing. You can help.

 

If you choose to help you go to the south. There you discover various people who need your help as well and provide further insight into what's going on in the area.

 

You have various agents who describe the situation directly. You have the zealots in the fort. You have the distraught elven woman who describes how insane the templars are in the area. 

People mock them, when they serve the very purpose you ask.

 

Let's not forget the ambient NPCs themselves. There's the little things that add a major feel to the setting that you are again ignoring. Many ambient NPCs have dialogue among themselves that passively explain the situation to you and that EVOLVE depending on your actions.

A good example are those three refugee children sitting with their grandmother to the south of the refugee camp. Before you complete the food quest, the kids are complaining about the lack of food and the grandmother assures them that they'll figure it out.  After you get the ram meat for the hunter and feed the refugees, the grandmother notes that she was right and that the Inquisition helped them.

 

Is it done in a very descriptiv manner? Yes, but it relies on visuals JUST as much as dialogue. It relies on both passive AND active cues.

 

DAO completely and utterly fails in the visual (active) part compared to DAI.

That's fine. It was limited because of the technology at the time. It needed to make up for it by inflating the amount of random NPC dialogue. It doesn't make it a superior version.

 

Also you need to stop using the "I don't care" excuse when it comes to approaching the missions because that can apply to anything in any game ever. If you honestly feel more compelled to help an elf hook up with his girl than help refugees in their plight, then that's very much your prerogative and not a consequence of the game making you incapable of caring especially when the visual cues are all there.

Applause, applause, applause.  

[CronoDragoon]

I'll preface this by saying I do believe there needed to be a stronger primary quest for each zone. Basically a Still-Waters level quest that involves multiple areas, NPCs, smaller quests picked up on the way, plot twists, and maybe even a dungeon. Zones like the Storm Coast are sorely missing such involved quests.

 

With that being said, everything else about the zones is very well done. The fetch quests are necessary to get you going around the zone, and they are almost always conveniently bunched so that you can go out and do a section of the map, fulfill some quests, get some markers, etc, then hit another camp and do it again. Rarely are you ever asked to backtrack or travel to inconvenient locations solely for one quest. Additionally, the environmental storytelling is, as LD notes above, top notch. The most memorable part of the Exalted Plains was stumbling across a burned-down hut and going inside to find a female skeleton lying overtop a much smaller skeleton with a sword driven through both. That's the kind of thing that makes the world feel alive (in a manner of speaking) and hits home the message that Inquisition wants to send you about the zone. Letter quests fulfill a similar function. Touches such as these make the zones feel hand-crafted, whereas for Origins the only interesting thing about the zones were the NPCs.

 

I feel that having the character mindset that you are going around doing specific quests is going to lead to dissatisfaction as the quests continue to be small endeavors that don't contain much of an intricate story. If, however, you envision your role as the Inquisitor as someone whose responsibility is to restore order to each area by any means necessary, then the "death by a thousand cuts" makes a lot more sense to roleplay. Virtually everything you do in the zone is some form of quelling chaos and establishing Inquisition footholds, which is important considering the main gameplay conceit (and one of the main story conceits) is building the Inquisition into some form of important force in the world. In order to portray this believably, the game needs to convince you that the Inquisition really does matter not just to the powerful people in the world but to the "small" people as well. Stop at a campfire sometime and listen to what the travelers/refugees have to say. They are talking about everything the Inquisition is doing.

 

So again, I'll reiterate that it's not that something is wrong with the content Inquisition has: virtually everything it does works to establish the premise the game wants. What it is missing is simply a good vignette-size story in every zone to engage you on that BioWare level. Had a quest of this sort existed in each zone, I'd consider the structure of the game an unmitigated success.

[Lebanese Dude]

*snip*

Certain zones could have used more work on their zone quests I fully agree. 

 

In fact Storm Coast is the first place that comes to mind. 

 

However I honestly assume this is intentional. For example, the Wastes are "empty" but that's the point of it.

Not every zone needs an earth-shattering event to be interesting. The Storm Coast is a comparatively "chill" area for the IQ to explore, with a minimal main zone quest meant to build up anticipation regarding the Wardens.
Perhaps that's enough?

[Al Foley]

I'll preface this by saying I do believe there needed to be a stronger primary quest for each zone. Basically a Still-Waters level quest that involves multiple areas, NPCs, smaller quests picked up on the way, plot twists, and maybe even a dungeon. Zones like the Storm Coast are sorely missing such involved quests.

 

With that being said, everything else about the zones is very well done. The fetch quests are necessary to get you going around the zone, and they are almost always conveniently bunched so that you can go out and do a section of the map, fulfill some quests, get some markers, etc, then hit another camp and do it again. Rarely are you ever asked to backtrack or travel to inconvenient locations solely for one quest. Additionally, the environmental storytelling is, as LD notes above, top notch. The most memorable part of the Exalted Plains was stumbling across a burned-down hut and going inside to find a female skeleton lying overtop a much smaller skeleton with a sword driven through both. That's the kind of thing that makes the world feel alive (in a manner of speaking) and hits home the message that Inquisition wants to send you about the zone. Letter quests fulfill a similar function. Touches such as these make the zones feel hand-crafted, whereas for Origins the only interesting thing about the zones were the NPCs.

 

I feel that having the character mindset that you are going around doing specific quests is going to lead to dissatisfaction as the quests continue to be small endeavors that don't contain much of an intricate story. If, however, you envision your role as the Inquisitor as someone whose responsibility is to restore order to each area by any means necessary, then the "death by a thousand cuts" makes a lot more sense to roleplay. Virtually everything you do in the zone is some form of quelling chaos and establishing Inquisition footholds, which is important considering the main gameplay conceit (and one of the main story conceits) is building the Inquisition into some form of important force in the world. In order to portray this believably, the game needs to convince you that the Inquisition really does matter not just to the powerful people in the world but to the "small" people as well. Stop at a campfire sometime and listen to what the travelers/refugees have to say. They are talking about everything the Inquisition is doing.

 

So again, I'll reiterate that it's not that something is wrong with the content Inquisition has: virtually everything it does works to establish the premise the game wants. What it is missing is simply a good vignette-size story in every zone to engage you on that BioWare level. Had a quest of this sort existed in each zone, I'd consider the structure of the game an unmitigated success.

I also feel that the faster you rush through this game, the more you will miss these details.  Like me, sadly I really rushed through my first playthrough and did not stop to 'smell the flowers'.  And even though I had an amazing time its only through reading the forums and the Wiki and convos with friends that I keep on having an appreciatation of how good this game actually is.  Because, of fine details like these, and Corypheus.  I have so much to say about him.

 

Certain zones could have used more work on their zone quests I fully agree. 

 

In fact Storm Coast is the first place that comes to mind. 

 

However I honestly assume this is intentional. For example, the Wastes are "empty" but that's the point of it.

Not every zone needs an earth-shattering event to be interesting. The Storm Coast is a comparatively "chill" area for the IQ to explore. 
Perhaps that's enough?

Fallow Mire, Hinterlands, Emerald Graves, and Storm Coast comes to mind...hmm.  

[CronoDragoon]

Certain zones could have used more work on their zone quests I fully agree. 

 

In fact Storm Coast is the first place that comes to mind. 

 

However I honestly assume this is intentional. For example, the Wastes are "empty" but that's the point of it.

Not every zone needs an earth-shattering event to be interesting. The Storm Coast is a comparatively "chill" area for the IQ to explore. 
Perhaps that's enough?

 

I'd suggest that the general structure of the Wastes (large expanses with very little fetch quests and lots of desert to traverse) works well, but that this atmosphere wouldn't be sacrificed by introducing some story to go along with the Venatori being in the area. Even something like meeting Fade spirits that think they are the former Dwarven family protecting their tombs, but the family members are at odds and jockey for your favor so that you have to protect one tomb over another against the Venatori.

 

For the Storm Coast, I actually think it's because it was almost cut from the game entirely and only added very late in the process (source: BW's Pax panel with Laidlaw). Since it doesn't make sense to develop a story with a large budget of dialogue and lines for a zone that is likely to be cut, I think that's probably the reason why it's pretty empty.

 

You're right that every zone doesn't need an earth-shattering event, but most zones don't compare to Crestwood and Emprise's story quest. Emerald Graves has the Fairbanks quest, but an unfortunate amount of that quest is told through letters, and the Freemen of the Dales are never developed in an interesting fashion.

[Lebanese Dude]

I'd suggest that the general structure of the Wastes (large expanses with very little fetch quests and lots of desert to traverse) works well, but that this atmosphere wouldn't be sacrificed by introducing some story to go along with the Venatori being in the area. Even something like meeting Fade spirits that think they are the former Dwarven family protecting their tombs, but the family members are at odds and jockey for your favor so that you have to protect one tomb over another against the Venatori.

 

For the Storm Coast, I actually think it's because it was almost cut from the game entirely and only added very late in the process (source: BW's Pax panel with Laidlaw). Since it doesn't make sense to develop a story with a large budget of dialogue and lines for a zone that is likely to be cut, I think that's probably the reason why it's pretty empty.

 

You're right that every zone doesn't need an earth-shattering event, but most zones don't compare to Crestwood and Emprise's story quest. Emerald Graves has the Fairbanks quest, but an unfortunate amount of that quest is told through letters, and the Freemen of the Dales are never developed in an interesting fashion.

 

I'm glad they returned the Storm Coast then. The ocean waves make it all worth it.

[Al Foley]

I'm glad they returned the Storm Coast then. The ocean waves make it all worth it.

Some of the best use of the Frostbite engine.  That was just...so awesome.  Amazing graphics.  

[Lebanese Dude]

Some of the best use of the Frostbite engine.  That was just...so awesome.  Amazing graphics.  

 

Right?

On my second playthrough I just sat there for a good 10 minutes or so staring at the water. It made me miss the beach

[CronoDragoon]

I was rather partial to the oddly squared rocks myself. Finding out you can actually climb up them to get to a path was one of those "Wait this isn't one of those invisible barriers?" moments that separate Inquisition's zones from DAO/2. Ditto with climbing dunes in the Wastes/Approach.

[hoechlbear]

DAO zones are very small and as a result are populated with NPCs that tell you what's going on because there's literally almost no way for you to experience it for youself. 

 

DAO completely and utterly fails in the visual (active) part compared to DAI.

 

Not all of the NPC's interactions in DAO consist of them telling you what's going on, it actually shows you what's going on. In Lothering there's about 5 people to whom you can ask questions, but then you have other encounters like the two refugees with their child that got robbed by the highwaymen, or the doomsayer scaring everyone, or the merchant taking advantage of desperate people, or the little boy who lost his mother. All of that shows you the hard times those people are going through. Are you seriously saying that DAO wasn't visual enough? In DAI you see nothing of the sort. 

 

 

A good example are those three refugee children sitting with their grandmother to the south of the refugee camp. Before you complete the food quest, the kids are complaining about the lack of food and the grandmother assures them that they'll figure it out.  After you get the ram meat for the hunter and feed the refugees, the grandmother notes that she was right and that the Inquisition helped them.

 

Are you talking about those random NPCs that spawn in some places (sometimes even in the middle of a river) and are always around a campfire and occasionally say a few lines? Yeah, no, I can totally see their suffering. In no circumstance are these refugees in danger. In DAO you actually go to a certain location to protect a few refugees from darkspawn. If you are not careful they can all die. That literally never happens in DAI. And are you sure they were children? I don't remember seeing a single child in this game apart from Kieran.

 

 

Another consequence of all those "major NPCs" is that DAO has way less ambient NPCs because of this, rendering most areas feeling artificially populated with significant characters with little actual "cardboard" NPCs that are actually necessary to make the world feel alive. 

 

There are more NPCs in Lothering than Val Royeaux, for example. You can click on most of the ambient NPCs in DAO and they will have a line or two of dialogue, unlike DAI. The dialogue even changes as you complete quests and how you complete them. Redcliffle in DAI is the one that looks artificially populated because you have a lot of static NPCs just standing a few inches from each other and only a few of them occasionally have something interesting to say.. The others just keep repeating random words like "of course. thank you. yes." and so on. In DAO they are scattered across the place. In Lothering there are a lot of refugees by a fire and some tents which makes things feel more natural. In Denerim they are close to the market or in groups of 2 or 3. Not to mention that there are elders as well as children running around as opposed to DAI where you only see almost exclusively adults.

 

 

You have Harding who gives you a rundown of what's going on.

You have Giselle who not only explains to you what's going on, but is later available in Haven for a potentially lengthy dialogue exchange regarding the state of the refugees in the Hinterlands and other areas.

 

Those very NPCs that you so readily dismiss as being trivial are in fact the equivalent of those people who talk to you DAO. 

 

Mother Giselle and Scout Harding happen to be regular characters not random NPCs that live in the worlds.

 

 

 

The hunter explains to you why they are hungry. You can see why and you can help.

The soldier tells you that you that the refugees are freezing. You can help.

 

Exactly. The hunter explains, the soldier tells you. You don't see any of that. The fact that you think DAI is a "show, don't tell" kind of game is just laughable because it's literally the other way around. You get told by the hunter that refugees are starving, but you don't see it. You get told by a soldier that the refugees are freezing and need supplies but you don't see it. You get told the templars are going crazy and murdering innocent people but you don't see it. I played this game back in November and haven't touch it ever since so I don't remember all the details but I'm sure there's more. And I'm just giving the example of the refugees.

 

 

 

Also you need to stop using the "I don't care" excuse when it comes to approaching the missions because that can apply to anything in any game ever. If you honestly feel more compelled to help an elf hook up with his girl than help refugees in their plight, then that's very much your prerogative and not a consequence of the game making you incapable of caring especially when the visual cues are all there.

 

I "don't care" because the game doesn't give me a reason to care. I don't see these people suffering or dying. I don't see the sadness and desperation, they all look the same and all have the same neutral expression on their faces. Should I care because the game tells me I should instead of showing me? 

[robertmarilyn]

Right?

On my second playthrough I just sat there for a good 10 minutes or so staring at the water. It made me miss the beach

 

When I go to the Storm Coast, the waves make me feel seasick, just like the waves at the beach do for me in real life. 

[Nefla]

LOL.

 

At least doing the side quests in DAI is justified as you gaining literal and figurative power and influence in order to have the authority to speak to certain people in power so you can advance the cause of the Inquisition.

How does helping Kaitlyn or Cammen remotely relevant? They're all RP options sure, but to claim they are MORE RELEVANT to the story itself is just laughable. 

inb4 you use the "drufallo escort" as a counterpoint. Yes... the occasional irrelevant fetch quest among a hundred is too much to bear.

 

You can gain power to advance the story in SO MANY WAYS that claiming that DAI FORCES you to do every side quest is borderline asinine.

Do I have to list them for you? I ended the game with 300+ power and I didn't even do everything.

 

Anyone who played DAI can refute this statement of yours. Stop it.

 

If you seriously claim to have NEVER done side quests in DAO then you're either playing 20 hour playthroughs or are blatantly lying.

 

 

---

I'm having a meltdown I know.

 

 

This whole back and forth has become very convoluted and confused >.< my relevance problem with the DA:I fetch quests and other boring tasks (requisitions, tents, closing rifts, etc...) is that the game doesn't even try to give you a reason for forcing you to do them. Seriously, why do I have to pitch tents and skin bears before the revered mother will talk to me? Why do I have to collect herbs for the Dalish, follow notes on the ground to some generic enemies, etc...before I can go to the winter palace or storm adamant fortres, etc...it doesn't make any sense and the game shouldn't have had this mechanic. Power doesn't change your ending or have a tangible impact on the world, it just needlessly gates the main plot. You aren't forced to do a single side quest in DA:O so if you don't want to find Bevin or help Camen and Gheyna you can just ignore them and are not forced to do something equivalent. Imagine if you were forced to do all the mages collective quests, find the 10 garnets, do all the quests for the Denerim guard captain, clear out the haunted orphanage and deal with Ser Landry before Arl Eamon would talk to you in his estate in Denerim. Like his door is just locked and when you've done enough tasks it opens. No reason given.

 

I also never claimed you have to do every fetch quest or task, however since I find them all mind numbingly boring doing enough of them to earn 124 power is a chore for me. If you like doing those things then obviously it wont feel that way to you. I don't understand why you're defending the power requirements system. It adds nothing and for many people like me it made the game a chore instead of just short and disappointing.  

 

I really really like side quests with role playing options/lots of dialogue choices/difficult puzzles/multiple ways to resolve and wish there had been side quests like that in DA:I but I would never suggest that the game force players to do them in order to move forward. While I wouldn't personally see doing a ton of quests I consider fun a chore, I know many people don't like the same things that I like.

 

Y u so angry at me?

[Nefla]

I'm not even talking about quest givers. I'm talking about random NPCs that you can just talk to! I gave this example a few pages ago. And I guess I'll have to repeat myself. 

 

"You get to Ostagar you can talk to the merchant, an elf servant, several guards (at least 4) and soldiers (like the Ash warriors), the priest, the healer, and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone. Then you get to Lothering you can talk to refugees, a farmer, templars, soldiers, priest, bartender, and you get encounters like the doomsayer and the merchant charging prices too high. In the Dalish camp you can even sit by the fire and talk to the elves and ask them several questions. You get dozens of little encounters/interactions with NPCs in each location. I honestly can't remember a single one in DAI, apart from one line of dialogue with the healer at Skyhold maybe."

 

In DAO you get your information about each location by asking people questions. Not by picking up notes from the ground. That's why I give a crap about NPCs in DAO, because they seem like people, not some statues that you can't interact with.

That was one of the main things I missed in DA:I there is almost no human element outside your inner circle.