That order... at the same time?
![]()
You dog.
Although, if there was such a thing in DA...
...
Me?

That order... at the same time?
![]()
You dog.
Although, if there was such a thing in DA...
...
Me?

What DAI did better:
Companions you travel with/can better interact with.
Map variety.
Save import.
Crafting.
Playing as a female protagonist/CC.
What DAI did just as well as TW3:
Lore
Voice acting
Combat
Humor
Romances
What TW3 did better:
Quest design
Quest integration into the open world
Storytelling (incl. evoking emotions/making the story feel very personal)
Character development
Corypheus as a final villain (not saying much), and that you can tint your armour. Can't think of anything else at the moment.
I would say the facial animation, lip syncing, certain cinematic animations (I would say the chess scene is one of the best. You can see the different hand gestures, Cullen moving his legs, leaning towards the table or laying back to the chair etc.) and voice acting of DAI is better. Not saying TW3 did these poorly but they are more natural and realistic to me in DAI.
...really? DA:I's animation felt extremely stiff to me, as is usually the case with BioWare games unfortunately...whereas there were many occasions in TW3 where I was really impressed by how well CDPR nailed the animation, facial animations particularly. Some scenes are made immeasurably better just because of the beautifully subtle emotions you can see flash across Geralt's face...whereas there weren't very many points in DA:I where such a thing happened. TW3 uses mocap, to boot.
TW3 uses mocap, to boot.
Bioware will not be able to use mocap as long as they offer customizable protagonists. CDPR won't be able to either once they start.
Well, face mocap at least. Body mocap would still work fine.
I actually felt the 'villains' of TW3 were far more convincing than Corypheus
More specifically, i'm talking about a comparison between each game's big bad like the King of The Wild Hunt.
More specifically, i'm talking about a comparison between each game's big bad like the King of The Wild Hunt.
Fair enough
In general, the wickedness and just how brutal/severe the criminals in TW3 are what won me over. Now, this is a strength AND a weakness as.. People have pointed out before that the level of detail may just go 'too far' for some persons tastes and that's fine.
More specifically, i'm talking about a comparison between each game's big bad like the King of The Wild Hunt.
Both underwhelmed me a bit for various reasons, but I never felt like Eredin and the Hunt were becoming less and less of a threat as the game went on, like I did Corypheus. I give him the edge for that. Eredin also gets bonus points for being around since the series' conception rather than being built up in a DLC.
I actually felt the 'villains' of TW3 were far more convincing than Corypheus
Admittedly, I do love Inquisition- I've a definite preference of DA:I over Witcher 3 by default (as I haven't played Witcher 3 and I can't make actual judgements on it).
But I personally felt Corypheus could've been worked on more. This article here pretty much sums up why I think he didn't do too well as a villain.
Fair enough
In general, the wickedness and just how brutal/severe the criminals in TW3 are what won me over. Now, this is a strength AND a weakness as.. People have pointed out before that the level of detail may just go 'too far' for some persons tastes and that's fine.
True.
Coming back to this thread, I'd like to take this moment to say that both series have improved since their first iterations.
. . .Witcher One's combat. . . *SHUDDERS VIOLENTLY* The JC Denton level voice acting. *SHUDDERS VIOLENTLY*
Origin's facial expressions *SHUDDERS VIOLENTLY* Origin's slow 'fight through pudding' animations *SHUDDERS VIOLENTLY*
Admittedly, I do love Inquisition- I've a definite preference of DA:I over Witcher 3 by default (as I haven't played Witcher 3 and I can't make actual judgements on it).
But I personally felt Corypheus could've been worked on more. This article here pretty much sums up why I think he didn't do too well as a villain.
Yea Bioware themselves said Cory should've had more development as a villain
Both underwhelmed me a bit for various reasons, but I never felt like Eredin and the Hunt were becoming less and less of a threat as the game went on, like I did Corypheus. I give him the edge for that. Eredin also gets bonus points for being around since the series' conception rather than being built up in a DLC.
Another plus is that Eredin is not insane. He deserved more screentime though.
DAI did a lot of things right, in small doses (FOR ME). It was a success, I cannot deny that as much as it baffles me. It's far more inclusive. But from my experience, I actually felt unfamiliar with the world at large and very disconnected from my character -- at times, from the plot itself. Little moments however kept the experience overall okay. Like Mother Giselle leading the defeated and confused people into a choir. It was uplifting. The battle in the forest near the elvish temple was kind of amazing because I saw my army, my soldiers that were once inexperienced but now hardened warriors from Adamant and what have you, fighting the forces of Corypheous. Maybe if they invested more into Corypheous and his schemes I'd have a better reaction to the game.
...really? DA:I's animation felt extremely stiff to me, as is usually the case with BioWare games unfortunately...whereas there were many occasions in TW3 where I was really impressed by how well CDPR nailed the animation, facial animations particularly. Some scenes are made immeasurably better just because of the beautifully subtle emotions you can see flash across Geralt's face...whereas there weren't very many points in DA:I where such a thing happened. TW3 uses mocap, to boot.
Yes, the animations are stiff from time to time so I said certain cinematic animations. I really think some of the animations are very good, besides the chess scene I mentioned, the scene where the IQ and the advisors entered the hall when the Inquisition just established is pretty well done too. I like the little details like the standing postures and hand gestures at the end of the scene when they are wondering who Varric was talking about. And I am mainly talking about the animations of the NPCs since the IQ is really stiff as hell.
And I do see quite a lot of emotions on NPCs faces during cutscenes. I think the most well done are Cullen, Dorian and Varric. They would smirk, look worry or sad and their heads would sometimes tilt which are pretty well done and natural imo.
Edit: I guess my point is that DAI has some standout animations while TW3 has a overall great animation performance. But I would pick the memorable, impressive few cutscenes over the smooth overall cutscenes. Each to their own, I guess.
DAI did a lot of things right, in small doses (FOR ME). It was a success, I cannot deny that as much as it baffles me. It's far more inclusive. But from my experience, I actually felt unfamiliar with the world at large and very disconnected from my character -- at times, from the plot itself. Little moments however kept the experience overall okay. Like Mother Giselle leading the defeated and confused people into a choir. It was uplifting. The battle in the forest near the elvish temple was kind of amazing because I saw my army, my soldiers that were once inexperienced but now hardened warriors from Adamant and what have you, fighting the forces of Corypheous. Maybe if they invested more into Corypheous and his schemes I'd have a better reaction to the game.
Totally should've been the Divine choice
Totally should've been the Divine choice
Would have made her divine in every playthrough.
True.
Spoiler
I don't even want to know, do I?
Another plus is that Eredin is not insane. He deserved more screentime though.
Yeah...Imrileth and Caranthir too. There wasn't really much to those two other than being Eredin's lackeys.
DA is slightly more cogent (checks off some more kind of autistic things) than TW perhaps, it's just the issue is the TW has always been is much more human than DA.
A little vs a lot is what it comes down to in the end.
I don't even want to know, do I?
oh yeah. the struggle of mages there is real. and shown.
edit: but it's not so much "gore"--in that scene. as in fleshy bits and all that. it's disturbing because of some dialogue..calling to the "kind ppl" for help.
it's sad more than anything. it was very sad.
I don't even want to know, do I?
Party based game play.
an attempt I suppose at tactical combat. Hopefully to be updated and improved upon.
Race selection. Again hopefully to be improved upon where necessary.
War table is an interesting idea but needs to be accessible in the field as well. Even if its just the camps.
Skyhold is a good idea but the upgrades need to give some bonuses.
Please for the love of god don't make DAI's watered down crappy tactical combat a plus. Dragon age had some very cool systems in place, they cut them all. It's not a step forward.
War table was an okay concept but it was usually just waiting out a timer for some minor reward. They have to make it more meaningful, it's basically the same as your timed trade ship minigame in assassins creed 4.