949 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

The world doesn't change in any meaningful way. The odd random spawn is not change. Change would be the rifts getting worse over time. Change would be the amount of ruined buildings and corpses getting worse over time. Change would be the people living in the Hinterlands either dying or leaving. Change would be far greater numbers of demons appearing all over the region. None of this happens. And the few changes that do occur are a result of you advancing plots, and not a factor of time. You can leave the rifts unattended for as long as you like and nothing will change.

Change over time: Wraiths vs Pride Demons, the villages and lands are decimated, Demons are used to create Abominations from the Wardens, the future seen in Redcliffe of what will occur, Crestwood under siege, etc. And Demons mostly visit via the rifts.

Meta-gaming vs RP; prefer the latter....

[The Elder King]

Damm I can't believe people are defending the terrible Open world and fetch quests of DA:I
Very low standards clearly

Well, they covered their flaws pretty nicely, since they managed to fool you in believing it was a good/great game for a while.
And to be clear I think Bioware should Improve a lot their open world/side quests in their following games.

[PhroXenGold]

Change over time: Wraiths vs Pride Demons, the villages and lands are decimated, Demons are used to create Abominations from the Wardens, the future seen in Redcliffe of what will occur, Crestwood under siege, etc. And Demons mostly visit via the rifts.

Meta-gaming vs RP; prefer the latter....

 

Eh? Where are these villages and lands getting decimated? There are places that are already decimated when you get there, but that's hardly "change". And what have things like main plot advancement and visions of the future got to do with anything? I'm talking about the fact that nothing in in the Hinterlands ever changes no matter how long you leave it to change.  I'm talking about the fact that there are no consequences to your decisions to prioritise other things over closing rifts (or indeed anything. Decide to go close rifts instead of, say, helping that guy get the medicine for his wife, what happens? Oh, right nothing, he's still waiting there for ever - The only time that chosing to prioritise one thing actually has an impact on others is In Hushed Whipsers vs Champions of the Just.). The same applies across the game. The world is unchanging barring when you chose to advance it through main plot quests, and even that has no real impact on things in the various parts of the world. they're still sitting there exactly as they were when you first found them. Those rifts will continue siting there doing nothing.

 

DA:I gave us a static snapshot of a world. And that is it's greatest flaw.

[The Elder King]

true its just disheartening to see that many fans still try to defend the mistakes
Thankfully most gamers don't think that way otherwise we would have DA4 Fetch quests and bad open world continued

People have different opinions ans values. I don't think they're defending it just because, but because they enjoyed it.

[The Elder King]

good for them I guess at least the forums are more positive now (just when I don't like the game..)

Well, I doubt the ME forum will remain that positive When they'll fully announce the next ME game, regardless of the direction they took.
I'd suggest to prepare a lot of popcorn for E3. There'll be some nice discussions .

[Dieb]

Damm I can't believe people are defending the terrible Open world and fetch quests of DA:I 

Very low standards clearly

 

Nobody is "defending" anything. We're all discussing video games, arguably the vainest form of past time entertainment, in a civilized fashion here.

 

Stop taking yourself so goddamn seriously on the matter.

 

 

edit: I apologize for that sounding overly harsh. I just get frustrated when people seem to force negativity.

[Elhanan]

Eh? Where are these villages and lands getting decimated? There are places that are already decimated when you get there, but that's hardly "change". And what have things like main plot advancement and visions of the future got to do with anything? I'm talking about the fact that nothing in in the Hinterlands ever changes no matter how long you leave it to change.  I'm talking about the fact that there are no consequences to your decisions to prioritise other things over closing rifts (or indeed anything. Decide to go close rifts instead of, say, helping that guy get the medicine for his wife, what happens? Oh, right nothing, he's still waiting there for ever - The only time that chosing to prioritise one thing actually has an impact on others is In Hushed Whipsers vs Champions of the Just.). The same applies across the game. The world is unchanging barring when you chose to advance it through main plot quests, and even that has no real impact on things in the various parts of the world. they're still sitting there exactly as they were when you first found them. Those rifts will continue siting there doing nothing.
 
DA:I gave us a static snapshot of a world. And that is it's greatest flaw.

The Lion seemed to be later in the game than my time spent in the Hinterlands. Perhaps it was because it was later in time.

In the Hinterlands, Towers were built, people were saved, Agents recruited, and a War is brought to near end over time.

But if placing the game on a timer is what would make it a better experience, then make a mod; certainly do not want it for my version. And almost any game with quests is unchanging until the Questee meets the Qusestor; am fine with it myself, but I prefer RP over meta-game philosophy.

And DAI seems to be quite the success at doing this.

[Fast Jimmy]

No, but that's sort of the problem when you're both the leader and the front line of whatever forces you control. If it was reflected more like a real organization, the Herald would only show up in an armed caravan to seal the rift after throwing wave after wave of men at the demons and then move on to the next one. S/he'd never even see a bandit. You'd just have scouts scope them out and eliminate them. Not much fun XD

It's similar to Shepard being both the diplomat and strike team leader to take out some lab or whatever when you could just as well have a group on the ship specifically for that function.

Yes, but Shephard wasn't Admiral of the Alliance. Or even leader of the Spectres, for that matter.

Shephard was a Commander. In charge of the ship's crew and free to choose whatever mission deemed appropriate. That's very different than leading a United military force.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well, I doubt the ME forum will remain that positive When they'll fully announce the next ME game, regardless of the direction they took.
I'd suggest to prepare a lot of popcorn for E3. There'll be some nice discussions .

I agree. The first official reveals of ME4 will open up old ME3 wounds that were thought healed, but have just been festering.



Glorious.

[Al Foley]

Should lack of ability to kindle one's own imagination be the fault of a gaming company?  Should they be responsible for spelling out -everything- for a player?  When we see a battle in a movie, we don't usually really see thousands of soldiers going at one another.  When watching Rome, for example, I certainly never actually saw 9 legions (guessing roughly 40K men) under Pompey get crushed by Caesar's single legion (5K or so men?)  Does that mean the show failed because it didn't show me tens of thousands of men actually engaged in battle?  I say no. 

Game of Thrones would be an even better example of this of all the epic battles we see like ten seconds of...yet it works.  

[Elhanan]

Yes, but Shephard wasn't Admiral of the Alliance. Or even leader of the Spectres, for that matter.

Shephard was a Commander. In charge of the ship's crew and free to choose whatever mission deemed appropriate. That's very different than leading a United military force.

Guess you missed the ME3 return to Earth sequence then....

[PhroXenGold]

I'm perfectly happy to use my imagination to fill in the gaps. To expand on what is presented. I shouldn't have to imagine things are utterly different to what the game is presenting to me in order for the world to be believable.

[Fast Jimmy]

Guess you missed the ME3 return to Earth sequence then....

This is not worth even debating. Shephard was not the leader of the Alliance, Admiral Hackett was. He orders all ships, including the alien allies, in the final battle. Anderson organizes the ground troops in the final push. Shephard is a strong leader, but is never "in charge." The Inquisitor is the head of the Inquisition - a position of authority and responsibility. It is a disconnect to have that character leading hunts for Elfroot.

[dreamgazer]

It is a disconnect to have that character leading hunts for Elfroot.

Well, you can keep sending out war-table expeditions to gather elfroot, and grow your own in Skyhold.

But I don't really see a problem with the Inquisitor picking up some more of the rather crucial herb while they're out and about.

[AresKeith]

Damm I can't believe people are defending the terrible Open world and fetch quests of DA:I
Very low standards clearly

How dare people still fine enjoyment despite acknowledging the flaws

[Al Foley]

How dare people still fine enjoyment despite acknowledging the flaws

how dare people have different opinions.  

[Ieldra]

true its just disheartening to see that many fans still try to defend the mistakes (desperately)

Thankfully most gamers don't think that way otherwise we would have DA4 Fetch quests and bad open world continued

You see, if I say the complete experience of DAI was enjoyable, I do not mean it was perfect and there wasn't significant room for improvement. I dislike the high number of meaningless small collection "quests" of the type "find n of X" greatly, but plainly that flaw wasn't critical for me.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well, you can keep sending out war-table expeditions to gather elfroot, and grow your own in Skyhold.

But I don't really see a problem with the Inquisitor picking up some more of the rather crucial herb while they're out and about.

Fine... does it make sense to the leader of a huge organizaiton to hunt X number of bears? Does it make sense for such a leader to have an assigned quest where they have to go out and play pest control? Despite how stupid OP the game made bears, it is silly to make the general of armies a glorified pest control worker.

[Elhanan]

This is not worth even debating. Shephard was not the leader of the Alliance, Admiral Hackett was. He orders all ships, including the alien allies, in the final battle. Anderson organizes the ground troops in the final push. Shephard is a strong leader, but is never "in charge." The Inquisitor is the head of the Inquisition - a position of authority and responsibility. It is a disconnect to have that character leading hunts for Elfroot.

I agree that it is not worth debating. A great leader can often serve his troops and people through tasks deemed lesser than expected. If such tasks seem beneath them, then they may not be the great leaders they believe themselves to be. Examples abound....

[dreamgazer]

Fine... does it make sense to the leader of a huge organizaiton to hunt X number of bears? Does it make sense for such a leader to have an assigned quest where they have to go out and play pest control? Despite how stupid OP the game made bears, it is silly to make the general of armies a glorified pest control worker.

If they're building up their reputation and getting their skills up to snuff, sure, why not?

By that logic, there's no reason for the Inquisitor to do anything at all but stand at a distance and close rifts.

[JeffZero]

It's been working for my brain a lot more now that I'm rolling a Lavellan. I like to imagine the tangos with bears and clippings of elfroot are all just a part of the day-to-day in the world she left behind.

Also, for some reason I want to lie and claim you can grow bears in Skyhold too but something tells me no one here would believe it.