60 réponses à ce sujet

[andtheafterglow]

Yes and no. I have played the game through three times, so that's more than I have replayed a lot of other games. I've enjoyed seeing some of the changes from decisions on the Keep and plot points in the game.

Still, I'm having a hard time thinking of playing it a fourth time. It's a little disheartening to see major gameplay decisions have so little impact on story progression and outcome. Yes, I understand that there are major things that have to happen in order for the story to evolve as the writers intended, but one of the things that historically set BioWare apart from other developers was the fact that they made that happen while still making the player feel like their choices are relevant.

I could just as happily play DAI as almost any other game I enjoy and NOT feel that hint of disappointment if they removed the pretense of choice. I made decisions throughout the game expecting major consequences like players experienced in DAO. Instead, I felt like the selections in the Keep were more powerful than any decision I made while actually playing DAI.

Don't get me wrong: I stand by DAI as a game and I felt like it did a great job of tying together a lot of loose ends in the plots from prior games/books/etc. But I also think that if BioWare had shaved off about 10 hours of fetch quests in some of the more monotonous zones and put those hours into richer choice-based experiences, I would feel as passionately about DAI as I did about DAO.

I shelled out a couple hundred dollars for DAO in its various incarnations and experiences, but I haven't even given a second thought to my decision not to buy Hakkon yet. I can wait to play Hinterlands 2.0 until the price drops or there is some other incentive to pay the full price (like a bundle or patch, etc.).

I have to admit I am making my first forum post with these comments because I hope BioWare is following player feedback on topics like this. I know it's easy for players to sit back and complain -- we didn't spend years creating this product and have no idea how hard it is to pull something like DAI off successfully. I do love the game, and don't regret few hundred hours I invested in it (chronic illness has one up-side), so on those merits alone, it IS a successful effort in my book.

I just would love to see BioWare return to its roots (in some ways, anyway) and provide that feeling we all had that we were seeing the effects of our choices in our games (DAO and ME/ME2 were the most potent, imo). Most of all -- BioWare, I hope you guys are reading -- I have no complaints of limited replayability in the base game if you guys take us somewhere with it in future DLC, updates, etc. I'll happily put my money directly into your wallets if you keep delivering solid gameplay experiences (and not just more fetch quests in pretty maps).

Edit: I also wanted to add that I absolutely loved the diversity of companions and supporting cast in DAI (even though none of them really grabbed me like Alistair did in DAO). I was happy to FINALLY see Cullen as a romance option, and I would have loved to see more of Krem (honestly, if he had just replaced Sera, I would have liked the game a lot more, but even if he was a Josephine-like romance, I would have been thrilled). I think the romances were a lot less "romantic" overall in DAI than previously -- mostly it seems the same whether you are friends or lovers aside from one or two moments, and I think that's a loss. If the only variation you can get is a kiss (etc.) or making them so made they just leave your party, it makes me feel a little less invested in the companions emotionally. But I really enjoyed everyone's personal plots and getting to know each of them, and I think overall it was done pretty darn well.

[badkenbad]

> Does DA:I has enough replayability for you?

 

Absolutely.

 

I played through all the origins in DA:O, but to me, they didn't really seem to have much impact on the overall story. No matter which Origin you choose, you still have to run around and gather allies, and then fight the archdemon. The rest is window dressing, really (but VERY NICE window dressing). I have a feeling a lot of what people are remembering as "decisions having huge impact on the story" is idealized memories of a great game with a powerful story. I need to go back and play it again, because I spent many hours on it, and I enjoyed it a lot.

 

I absolutely loved the characters in DA2, and absolutely hated everything else about it. Horrible art design, horrible graphics, horrible environment design. Kirkwall was nothing more than a series of mazes connected by teleporters, and had absolutely no sense of place. The outdoor environments were a joke. And of course, the infamous mighty morphin' single dungeon/cave complex. I didn't like the combat much either - I just felt disconnected from Hawke somehow. It took me three attempts to get through the game once. Having played it once, though, I may actually suffer through the godawful environments again because I love the characters so much, and I eventually want to try the DLC.

 

DA:I has everything I'm looking for. It's not perfect, but it at least has all the pieces in one place. Spectacular environments and art design. Story that ties into the variety of cultures of Thedas more than previous games. Visceral combat (especially for mages - they really nailed the third person spell caster gameplay). I've even come to enjoy the tactical option, though I play with a controller, because the mouse/keyboard controls just don't feel right to me. And the characters are so well written. Just spend some time reading various message boards and see the level and range of emotions people feel towards these characters - it's amazing.

 

DA:I supports roleplaying quite well, too. I have tried quite different approaches with each of my characters, and while the big picture of the story stays the same, enough details change (in dialogue and relationships to characters) to make it rewarding. DA:I doesn't seem to have as many plot switches as DA:O, but it makes up for it with the relationship building with the characters. Unfortunately while trying to un-game-ify the character interactions, I think Bioware went too far, and sometimes the relationship building can be frustrating because you don't get a clear idea where you stand.

 

I think as a pure action RPG, DA:I does not fare very well. I suspect that is one big reason people have issues with it. You can choose to control only your character, but you can't guide the AI to support you very effectively, and on its own, the AI is only just serviceable. At least enemy AI is pretty good, and there is a good variety of enemies with a good variety of attacks and defenses. DA:I doesn't do a great job of guiding you through the main story. There are points in the story where you are not ready to proceed, and you are given no guidance whatsoever about how to get there. At that point, people sort of lose their way and lose interest, because the easiest ways to increase in power are also the most boring. The side quests are nice when they are optional and you can use them to flesh out your character's story. When you are forced to choose something and have no idea which is a good way to go, it's frustrating.

 

Fortunately, I'm not playing it as a straightforward action RPG. I'm getting into the roleplaying and exploring different areas and different relationships with each character, and I'm trying out different crazy combinations of abilities to keep things interesting. Because of that, I find it very replayable.

[SwobyJ]

I wish DAI facilitated (broadly speaking) Lawful Evil on top of Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral. Or even Neutral ___. (I'm alright with less Chaotic ___ happening this time.)

 

I think it would have encouraged many more playthroughs. As it is, Bioware sets the guidance for us, and we get things done in that 'certain way' no matter what. That's always been the case to some degree, but in DAI it is so tight. Basically I just get swept up in the Inquisition, or it gets swept up in me... I'd at least like to enforce the Inquisitor's will so strictly that it transforms the Inquisition itself more. 

 

I feel like I only got 1/3-1/2 the roleplaying possibilities with this (at least base game) premise. I'm a goody goody no matter what, just maybe a bit more abrasive about it at times.

 

I think that's a problem TBH. With the plot here, I'd have seen no problem with playing an Inquisitor that turns the title into a self-empowering tool to wield power over others, and pushes the Inquisition into taking maximum resources for itself in order to stand strongest at the end of the initial conflict, no matter the moral cost. 

 

The Envy Demon instead of being a warning, could have been a dark mirror of what my Inquisitor already was, deeper down...

 

I see glimmers of this in the DAI we got, but sadly I can really only be Very Good, Kinda Good, and Somewhat Good. God, the British Inquisitor voice would have been perfect for a total villain Inquisitor, weaving his way around Skyhold turning people against each other but ultimately towards him as servants.

 

A whole 1-2 more playthroughs from this alone, if it existed.

 

I'm basically too Paragon. And you're looking at a mostly Paragon (in Mass Effect) player here.

[Nefla]

DA:I has the lowest replay value for me out of any BioWare game I've played. Heck it's even limited to one ending and you don't have the ability to go down an evil/ruthless path.

[Silcron]

I completed one playthrough, didn't like the character so I made another one and soldiered on to try and 100% it. Well, I got in 90s%, finished the main campaign and I genuily think that if I had made my second char first I wouldn't have done a second walktrhough so I guess my answer is no.

Which is odd, I have done 20+ completed walkthroughs of other bioware games and I feel like I will complete them yet again in the future (I've felt the ME urge recently and I've KotOR on my ipad).

Hopefully the next ME won't dissapoint.

[Chardonney]

i see people with many playthroughs... do you peeps spend a lot of time on side quest or just enough to level up for the next main mission ?

 

Well, I personally don't do speedruns at all. I always end up doing all the side quests, as well. I'm no compulsory completionist in any way but everything gets done nevertheless. I like to explore, take my time and discover new things I missed on previous runs.

[Cheviot]

A few minutes after finishing my first playthrough, I started my second, so I'd say yes, it has loads of replay value. Around 200+ hours so far.

[Melyanna]

I hate replaying games, I never do that except for the Baldur's Gate series, some of the Neverwinter Nights ones and Dragon Age (including inquisition).

I guess that means that the game does have enough replayability for me.

 

One thing I really love so far about Inquisition is that at any playthrough (I just finished my third one) I have found things I didn't know about on the previous one.

[turuzzusapatuttu]

Yes. Planning a new PT after The Witcher 3 and when I'll finally be able to play Jaws of Hakkon.

[Xetykins]

Still on my 3rd pt, for about 2 months now:-) It just got a bit boring, so I'm taking my time on this one and try to do a lot more than my previous 2. It is a real chore. Not like in Origins where my family had to bodily extract me from the computer in between my 20something play throughs. Inquisition just have very little of the main story that I liked more in Origins. Having said that I really did enjoy my first 2 pts very much , and wondered why it got old too fast.