Keep your bad game with fetch quests, terrible open world, bland protagonist, cartoon villian
If you really want to give me a clapback, avoid repeating the same hyperbolic statements you've completely failed at defending time and time again.
Don't mind me though. I'll continue to have debates with people who can actually support their criticisms of DAI rather than resort to fallacious reasoning.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
It's more a friendly concern really.
No matter how you attempt to spin it, spending eight months in a message board pertaining to something you clearly dislike can't be good for your health.
Maybe he needs attention? Dunno. I'd give him a hug if I knew him, although I sense he'd complain about that too.
I bought DA:I and DA is (ok was) one of my favourite game franchises, I bought the previous games + all DLC's and any EU material
And you are saying that I can't complain about it because some fans like you can't deal with any sort of criticism regarding their precious game?
I would say your fanboyism isn't good for your health I mean why desperately defend DA:I at every turn
Doesn't it get tiring?
I bought DA:I and DA is (ok was) one of my favourite game franchises, I bought the previous games + all DLC's and any EU material
And you are saying that I can't complain about it because some fans like you can't deal with any sort of criticism regarding their precious game?
I would say your fanboyism isn't good for your health I mean why desperately defend DA:I at every turn
Doesn't it get tiring?
So you buying the games makes your conclusions valid? Did I ever say you can't complain? You're being too defensive here.
You'll also find it pretty normal for people to not get tired from things they enjoy. Considering I've only come here for Twitter feeds and news about DAI for the last few months, I have a hunch that I'm not the obsessive one here.
Are you implying you enjoy eight months of complaining? Does that not get tiring?
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
So you buying the games makes your conclusions valid?
You'll also find it pretty normal for people to not get tired from things they enjoy dear.
Are you implying you enjoy eight months of complaining? I suppose your type does exist.
I don't enjoy it but its needed I want DA4 to be better again and not go DA:I's road so I'm providing feedback and hope Bioware listens
I don't see how my complaining is any worse than you desperately defending DA:I at every turn for 8 months
I also don't see me jumping at you for liking DA:I and declaring your opinion invalid and delusional just because it doesn't match mine
I wasn't on these forums for eight full months either
I was here for TW3 and now I'm staying for ME4, I visit sometimes the DA forums but I guess thats already obsessive for you
When you come to a halt with your party, why do they all turn their backs on you? Do they despise you, or maybe inquisitors involuntary break wind on a regular basis.
I'd bet money that the majority of people who complain about aspects of DAI in these forums do so because the game isn't DAO or some other irrelevant game of the same genre.
If people removed those nostalgia goggles and judge the game based on its own merits they'd think differently.
The main reason I enjoy the game is because I treat every game as its own entity as opposed to a 2.0
Frankly I think mine is the better approach, especially since newer games in this series have never and will never remain static.
Not only do I not feel disappointed, but I end up enjoying the games more. That's the point of the games... to enjoy them.
Enjoy them.
That they can disapprove is not in dispute.- I said as much. But I also pointed out that this counts for *nothing*. It doesn't affect anything! And if you saw someone about to make a choice that you thought was a disastrous mistake, saying you disapprove after the decision is taken, is pretty weak don't you think? Would you be happy knowing that the people in your government would allow the Prime Minister to drive the economy (or whatever) actually over the cliff before they said anything? Your actions and words to others can completely blacken the Inquisition's name and reputation (particularly if you are militantly anti-Chantry), yet they never so much as bat an eyelash.
And the Judgements. Thanks for bringing that up, seeing as how the whole idea of giving someone with no legal training such authority is... unwise.Your advisors should be I don't know... advising in the Judgements. Instead they just leave it up to you! A judgement on people of influence and forgeign nationals would carry a great deal of weight in how it was perceived by others. Even if the people in charge have officially named you as having the right of judgement, the actual decisions you take would be noted by parties far and wide. Your advisors should all be intimately involved in this process, not just dump it on you. This person is guilty of this crimes - what;s your decision? Well? WELL?!!! Wouldn't it be a good idea to at least take some time to mull it over, take the temperature of interested parties, discuss what the potential consequences would be, how it reflects on the Inquisition if you are seen to spare a certain person or execute another? But no, just an on the spot decision made in a manner of minutes!
And you say the characters have words with you, yet the characters never comment on these things. The advisors get the odd comment during Main Quest missions, but they are frequently contradictory. Cassandra and Leliana recomend that you recruit the Mages, yet bemoan the fact that having them on board lowers your reputation afterwards, whilst they counsel against recruiting the Templars, then heap praise on the decision afterwards as if they always knew it was the best course. They argue that you *must* attend the Orlesian ball because you *must* stop the events that are motion, only to then come up to you at the eleventh hour and say the exact opposite! There is no consistency. You can be the worst Chantry hating malcontent to ever stalk the hills of Thedas, yet Mother Giselle will still heap praise on you, you can be tyrannical in your oppression of mages and opinions about them and your party mages will still think be fine with you. An approval loss here and there doesn't alter their conversations, and is almost always made up for with approval gains elsewhere, even when they aren';t present!
Along with their decision to promote a complete amateur (at all the various role you are handed), It gives the Inquisition the feel of a band of utter fools, who couldn't organise the proverbial ****** up in a brewery. Cassandra cares enough to create the Inquisition and push it through all the red tape, then dumps it all on you and goes off to whack dummies all day in the courtyard. She doesn't even bother showing up to the War Room from Act 2 onwards. Pushback from characters would be them saying you couldn't do something, or would be stupid to do so. But no, we can't have that. Because every time characters do take legitmate concern over stupid decisions that Bioware force on you, people blame those characters for daring to challenge you (Ashley/Kaiden in Mass Effect 2 for example). Its all part of the Rule of Cool direction that Bioware have been going in. You get to be the best person ever who is always right about everything, and nobody gets to tell you No, even when you're making utterly ridiculous decisions. Because you're amazing and can do everything.
It didn't use to be like this. Mass Effect 1 for example had stats that governed whether a particular character (including Shepard) was any good with computers, decryptions, electronics etc. If you didn't have it, then you couldn't intereact with certain objects, locks, hack certain computers etc. And yet by the time of Mass Effect 2, those stats have gone. Now in all the missions, Shepard is hacking computers like the world's greatest tech nerd, despite still occasionally professing ignorance of such things in dlalogue. Even when you have people who *are* qualifie to do all this stuff, they don't do it, because you have be the one in the spotlight who saves the day. And in ME3 they occasionally do the exact opposite - where you can be an Engineer, but because fixing a console or some such isn't nearly as dynamic or heroic as fighting off hordes of Geth, you get your team members to do the tech stuff - despite the fact you can be easily the best qualified, and they might be people who know *nothing* about such things. Yet they still get the job done just as quickly as the tech savvy members.
All in service of pampering the player's ego. Which is what Dragon Age Inqusition is doing. I really don't see how this can be argued against. Your character has carte blanche to act in all matters, despite not having earned that right, and not being in any way qualified to do so. And not only that - you succeed. All the time. Because you're just that amazing. Isn't that rather undermining people who practice these things as their profession. Lawyers, judges, dancers, strategists, diplomats etc.
If you took all the various origins and backstories of the available character classes and races and crushed them together in giant transmutotronic genomorphic psychoneuro splicing chamber, and gave it a jolt of lightning on a dark and stormy Geheimnisnacht night, you might be able to create this remarkable specimen that you are, who is proficient at all of these things. Having the military know-how and survival skills of the Quanari merc, the educated courtly nous of the Noble, the arcane smarts of the Circle Mage etc. But without doing that, your character is simply drawing on vast reserves of knowledge and talent that they would have no realistic chance of possessing. Being a Renaissance man is one thing, but even they had their limits! And how would your advisots even know this?
'Oh actually, you pretty good at everything, so we'll leave all the big decisions to you and not gainsay you. If you do anything particularly stupid or immoral, we might glare at you a bit for a few seconds.'
Its like that SNES version of Sim City, where you could build airports all around a guy's house, or have the local park be in the middle of the coal factory district, put the football stadium on a island off the coast, and the main street be enclosed and not lead anywhere. All whllst taxing the people with about 500% tax rates, and supplying no power to the businesses and residental areas. Yet even though public opinion was through the floor, they would never replace you or have another election. They bore their (enitrely justified) rage and bewilderment at your anarchic policies with dignity and stoicisim! Which seems to be what the Inquistion are doing with you.
Especially since their own reputations suffer as a result of your actions - the chances of your various companions winning that election are entirely based on *your* actions and opinions, not theirs! All the modifiers that determine who wins are based on things you say and do. If they only knew, eh? Maybe then they'd actually speak up and try to stop you, instead of scowling behind closed doors and wondering why they let you get away with all this.
And don't blame every game for having unlikely narratives,as some kind of excuse. It doesn't justify bad writing, nor is it as bad even in Bioware's own games, without slapping everyone else's games with a blanket statement like that. This game's narrative does not hold up to scrutiny. Its just an opinion obviously, but I think its fairly clear how strongly I feel about it. Because being a fan of this series and Bioware in general is not the same as being an apologist for bad work and a Yes Man when they are going wrong. And IMO they are going very wrong these days. Pretending otherwise will not help things.
You claim you genuinely feel differently, and we detractors have no choice but to take you at your word. But to once again quote the OP (with slight paraphrasing) 'We just don't get it'. Because this game's narrative is poorly written, badly developed, and terribly inconsistent. The narrative does not support the way the gameplay functions, has no credibility, chronically misuses previous characters (that smile of delighted familiaty in Wicked Hearts... what on earth?!) and has systems make no sense at all. Power is meaningless as supporters of the game have admitted on this thread, and Influence does not do what it purports to do, instead being of relevance only to Perks. They could have fixed all that by simply axing the Influence stat, giving you Power for completing War Table missions and tying Perks into that instead. Then make Power into a spendable stat, which which you could actually purchase upgrades, trade agreements, troops etc for the Inquistion, as well as being something you use to offer Alpha Protocol style mission specific benefits and targeted support from allies etc.
But instead we had a system where none of the stats really mean anything. You have hundreds of Power points that mean nothing, Influence that does nothing, and Perks which give such tiny incremental passive buffs, that feel wholly unworthy of the time and effort expended to get them (not to mention that they feel like the wrong kind of reward to get from the stat in the first place - its like you're skimming benefits for yourself).
If you like this mess of a game, then good for you. But plenty of us don't, and we're no less fans of the series than you, because we say what we think about it. This was a terribly put together game, and it represents a dangerous direction for Bioware to be going in. Narrative and character interaction particularly are what they have going for them usually, but not in this game. Without that, they have nothing in the face of rising stars like From Software and (to play Devil's advocate) CDProjeckt.
you made my day even if your comment is old i know.
When I read topics like this, I really start to feel like I'm one of the only ones to like it.
When I read topics like this, I really start to feel like I'm one of the only ones to like it.
That is often one of the purposes; to try and influence someone to believe that they are in the minority.
Whose purpose was that? The topic starter's? 
Whose purpose was that? The topic starter's?
Or the people who continue to advance the position that DAI was obviously and irredeemably bad, while the previous games weren't.Whose purpose was that? The topic starter's?
Or the people who continue to advance the position that DAI was obviously and irredeemably bad, while the previous games weren't.
Dismissing dissent as fanboyism is quite funny for those of us who like DAI but didn't like DA2. We're clearly willing to criticise a Dragon Age game; we just aren't criticizing this one.
I really think this train of thought is paranoid, although I can imagine such things being done intentionally. Just not by everyone. In most cases I assume when people say "majority", "all", these are merely emotional exaggerations. Hyperboles.
But I see what you mean. From the amount of posts you two have posted, you must be dead tired of all the negativity. If it got even to me recently, then what can be said about you! When I first came here I was happy to criticize DAI. But just a bit later I've seen too much criticism, especially in the Witcher 3 thread, and started to feel like it wasn't fair. I even regretted some things I've said all over the forums, they were too nit-picky and didn't matter in the long run. Although I still stand by my opinion that the tactical mode isn't stellar on PC and side quests could be more interesting, but that's about all. I could name more aspects than these two in which this game shines. And far brighter than many other AAA-games.
I'm not sure I've ever seen such a big amount of negativity in any other game forum. Maybe that's because Bioware's forums are more popular than others, but then it means that the average player is pretty much a negative person. 
I really think this train of thought is paranoid, although I can imagine such things being done intentionally. Just not by everyone. In most cases I assume when people say "majority", "all", these are merely emotional exaggerations. Hyperboles.
But I see what you mean. From the amount of posts you two have posted, you must be dead tired of all the negativity. If it got even to me recently, then what can be said about you! When I first came here I was happy to criticize DAI. But just a bit later I've seen too much criticism, especially in the Witcher 3 thread, and started to feel like it wasn't fair. I even regretted some things I've said all over the forums, they were too nit-picky and didn't matter in the long run. Although I still stand by my opinion that the tactical mode isn't stellar on PC and side quests could be more interesting, but that's about all. I could name more aspects than these two in which this game shines. And far brighter than many other AAA-games.
I'm not sure I've ever seen such a big amount of negativity in any other game forum. Maybe that's because Bioware's forums are more popular than others, but then it means that the average player is pretty much a negative person.
Nah, I play ESO regularly and the amount of negativity on their forum is.... about the same, I'd say. Though I have to admit that some people on BSN seem to be hell-bent to turn every discussion into drama-fest, even if there is little to no drama to begin with. It doesn't matter how calm or civil a discussion or exchange between individual forum members can be, at some point either someone will join the party to try and stir the pot and derail the discussion, or for some reason people will begin getting the idea that the other side is "too aggressive", even if till that point the discourse was just... normal.
Someone who likes them all is indistinguishable from a fanboy from the complainers' perspective.Or the possibility that someone like myself can enjoy them all.
Nah, I play ESO regularly and the amount of negativity on their forum is.... about the same, I'd say. Though I have to admit that some people on BSN seem to be hell-bent to turn every discussion into drama-fest, even if there is little to no drama to begin with. It doesn't matter how calm or civil a discussion or exchange between individual forum members can be, at some point either someone will join the party to try and stir the pot and derail the discussion, or for some reason people will begin getting the idea that the other side is "too aggressive", even if till that point the discourse was just... normal.
Come to think of it, you're right, it has to be a lot more complicated than the game's popularity and amount of forum posters. I know two big forums for one game, one of them has been very civil and peaceful for years, another has been nasty. It's a mystery to me why they're so different, even though the game is the same, maybe early moderating policies mattered or people who initially ran them attracted people who were alike to themselves.
But these days I just feel bad for Bioware's efforts. So much bashing here. Maybe not too much normally, but after Witcher 3 got released there was so much negativity. Like someone opened the flood gates. Oh forget it, I don't want to even think of that ugly thread anymore that housed most of it. 
It must be the first time I even visited here after dropping to read BSN.
Really I'm not sure how to think about it myself and what might have shaped these forums - or why there's a fairly sizable group of people so determined to prove that TW3 is all they ever wanted, while DAI is the equivalent of genital warts.
Kinda reminds me of a time where I lived in a bigger city where I attended my art schools - there were two football teams in this city and pseudo-fans of each of those HATED each other. It went to such extreme that people can be beaten or even killed over it; I even remember one story where a poor, unwitting student wore a scarf that vaguely resembled those worn in support of one teams... he got himself a knife in the back 
Of course, we can never reach such extremes here, fortunately - but the fact that all this "competition" vaguely reminds me of those football pseudo-fans is kinda telling.
I mean, at this point I'm starting to suspect that some of them don't really even care if TW3 is indeed a better game - what matters, it seems, is just to make yet another comparison, no mater how unfair or irrelevant it is or just complain at DA/DAI/Bioware, without even an attempt to pass it as any sort of constructive criticism.
Honestly, I really wonder what's going to happen with those comparisons much later, especially after the hype is over and people will find new and creative ways to nitpick the hell out of TW3 itself (I'm almost mentally preparing myself to TW3/Fallout 4 "competition") or when CDPR does something that.... well... it probably won't turn that many loyal, reasonable fans away, but will ****** of those most vocal or aggressive ones.
And I don't wish CDPR bad by any means - aside from me enjoying their games so far, I even have local colleagues I admire working for them and even wondered if I should apply as concept artist/illustrator myself - but I'm sadly aware of realities of the Web and how quickly some people can turn on their heroes or hero companies...
I don't know if there's really that many rabid TW3 fans spreading negativity on the forums, it feels like mostly the same couple of people talking a lot. I've also seen a fair amount of fans of both games that aren't turning everything into a competition, but they aren't as outspoken. Most people who are satisfied or don't have some axe to grind aren't as likely to bother talking as much.
I don't know if there's really that many rabid TW3 fans spreading negativity on the forums, it feels like mostly the same couple of people talking a lot. I've also seen a fair amount of fans of both games that aren't turning everything into a competition, but they aren't as outspoken. Most people who are satisfied or don't have some axe to grind aren't as likely to bother talking as much.
As usual, moderate/reasonable/easygoing fans of either or both franchises (or anything, really) won't be ever as visible as the vocal minority.
The whole idea of the Inquisition getting more powerful, because you and a couple of guys are rolling about over hill and dale, picking up odds and ends, and doing odd jobs is very silly. Its basically just a President/Prime Minister simulator with you meeting and greeting, helping people bring in their groceries in return for their votes, mixed with some open world roaming on your days off. A friend jokingly suggested my Inquisitor was like Vladimr Putin in those silly 'Vote for me, because I hunt and swim and I'm a real man's man of a leader!' videos.
The game should have been a lot more intimate and intense. Your connections to the your party should have been stronger, Corypheus should have been a much more active menace, and there should have been some visual evidence to show the fruits of your labour. Bioware insist on giving these scenarios where you recuit for a big war, but never make good on it after all the effort we expend. The few levels we see in their games that show anything like a big warzone are always fumbled and feel like uninteresting slogs. Because there's just no spectacle to it, no sight of your allies, no chevaliers riding in a huge host at the enemy, no huge barrages of spells from mages etc etc. Its just you and 3 guys massacring waves of basic guys as a couple of regular soldiers look on. It was the same in the Mass Effect games too.
I know this is an old post but still, 99% agreed, especially the bolded part, but not the Mass Effect part. Because Mass Effect had this:
And it's not just Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins had this:
And this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY3yKw724bA
Now those 2 DAO scenes are better than anything Inquisition had. Siege of Adamant was OK-ish, I suppose, but it barely comes close. And Arbor Wilds was ridiculous. Big battle going on but let's hide it behind trees. Brilliant.
The scene of Ostagar is interesting,but after 5 years it wears its graphical age,too clunky and not fluid
also Marshal post are always a pleasure to read.
That final space battle of Mass Effect is short and soulless. It has no dramatic tension, besides that brief moment just before the fleets engage. The actual battle itself is awful. It just rams home how utterly ineffectual the Reapers were as main enemies. As a big horde of baddie space ships, they were just sort of a nothing presence that it was impossible to care about. And with only the Normandy and perhaps the Destiny Ascension being recognizable good guy ships, the battle is just some red and blue ships firing inconclusively at each other, as some explosions happen. There is no drama and no energy to it at all, and certainly no deeper character interest that you might expect in a more personal one on one ship battle.
Big battles just don't work in these games. Smaller scale encounters like a couple of pirate ships or Cerberus strike ships attacking, and engaging in hit and run whilst trying to board Normandy etc would be much more in keeping with the kind of game we want. Big battles that we can't have any direct influence on like this (unless they take the terrible decision to stick us behind a turret for a while). add nothing to a Bioware game. If a big battle is going to happen, we need identifiable good guys to root for, and small little stories playing out.
Like the Ostagar scene, which I happen to agree with. One of the very rare times when Bioware has in fact got this stuff right. It gave me hope for the main story of Origins, which it then proceeded to squander in almost every scene thereafter. The Landsmeet and Final Battle happen so long after this scene, that it feels like years have passed. They are serviceable sequences, still amongst the better concluding set pieces of Bioware games, but they still feel rushed and undercooked. Both the Archdemon and Loghain were completely underutlised in that game IMO. The Archdemon particularly had no personality and though it was a fairly powerful enemy and the battle against it had a big feel, there was still a big 'Wait... is that all?!' about it. That dragon should just have been one of the Archdemon's minions. The actual fiend itself should have backed off and gone back into hiding ready for the sequel. It would have let the Blight story develop, but still given the heroes and Ferelden a big victory to cheer about.
The actual fiend itself should have backed off and gone back into hiding ready for the sequel. It would have let the Blight story develop, but still given the heroes and Ferelden a big victory to cheer about.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but just on this last point: it was deliberate on the writer's part. I remember reading a post from David Gaider where he described the plot of future games as being "N.A.B" - his acronym for Not Another Blight.
They absolutely didn't want to pursue or develop that particular story in future games, irrespective of cut scenes or gameplay mechanics, so the Archdemon was going to die at the end one way or another.
Retour en haut