960 réponses à ce sujet

[Akrabra]

The problem with DAI is the world is bland and empty. The wilderness is nearly all we see, and that wilderness has nothing noteworthy in it. A burning house here, a note on the ground there, the side quests are 1/100th of the care in the witcher or even in past bioware games.

It's just bland. Most of the maps don't even tie into the story. Most npcs are a single line and aren't memorable in the slightest.

The witcher is more "dragon age-y" then inquisition could ever be. All it needs is races, which again, are so watered down without origins that they don't inspire you to replay.

This makes zero sense to me. The Witcher is the Witcher and Dragon Age is Dragon Age. And you claiming that the Witcher is more Dragon Age-y isn't that the opposite of what you want? 

[panzerwzh]

The problem with DAI is the world is bland and empty. The wilderness is nearly all we see, and that wilderness has nothing noteworthy in it. A burning house here, a note on the ground there, the side quests are 1/100th of the care in the witcher or even in past bioware games.
It's just bland. Most of the maps don't even tie into the story. Most npcs are a single line and aren't memorable in the slightest.
The witcher is more "dragon age-y" then inquisition could ever be. All it needs is races, which again, are so watered down without origins that they don't inspire you to replay.

QFT

[Blooddrunk1004]

The problem with DAI is the world is bland and empty. The wilderness is nearly all we see, and that wilderness has nothing noteworthy in it. A burning house here, a note on the ground there, the side quests are 1/100th of the care in the witcher or even in past bioware games.

It's just bland. Most of the maps don't even tie into the story. Most npcs are a single line and aren't memorable in the slightest.

The witcher is more "dragon age-y" then inquisition could ever be. All it needs is races, which again, are so watered down without origins that they don't inspire you to replay.

My issue with Inquisition is that it should have stayed like Origins. Have smaller maps and focus more on plot, characters, side quests etc.

I wish devs would stop with Skyrim syndrome, thinking that open world makes everything better. In my opinion Inquisition suffered from that because i was reminded on Kingdoms of Amalur aka MMO single-player after doing so many side activites with no detail or focused plot in them. It also lacks popularity, i mean Vol Royeaux, the capital of Orlais is a joke when you compare it to Novigrad, Oxenfurt or even Flotsam which was just a small village.

 

When i heard TW3 is going to be open world i was really pissed because i expected that everything that made previous two games awesome was going to be sacrificed just so i can roam Northern Kingdoms, thankfully i was proven 100% wrong.

[Elhanan]

DAI appears to have fewer cut-scenes; a bonus for those not requiring such cinematics for minor moments.

DAI does not have a major city, and more outdoor areas. Each area has a purposed storyline or quest.

DAI has four race selections, both genders, and four full VO's for their CC personalized character. And a Pause function.

[wicked cool]

One thing dai does better than w3 is movement within buildings. Even with alternate controls his movements are not smooth

[Xetykins]

Alistair, Morrigan and Dorian . That is all.


I'll try not to let the door hit me on the arse on the way out.

[Akrabra]

Isn't it a more fair comparison to be found in the story,quests and gameplay aspects of both games. Saying one has better characters and naming them seems abit weird, as those characters do not exist in the other universe. One could say that DA:I does better work with companions, but what does that even mean when The Witcher 3 doesn't have companions in the same way. Both games are indeed fantasy rpg's, but they don't have that much in common, and the base game design has a totally different layout. All in all most comparisons fall flat, in my opinion. 

[Wolven_Soul]

Isn't a more fair comparison to be found in the story,quests and gameplay aspects of both games. Saying one has better characters and naming them seems abit weird, as those characters do not exist in the other universe. One could say that DA:I does better work with companions, but what does that even mean when The Witcher 3 doesn't have companions in the same way. Both games are indeed fantasy rpg's, but they don't have that much in common, and the base game design has a totally different layout. All in all most comparisons fall flat, in my opinion. 

 

Yeah, as much as I greatly prefer TW3, there really isn't that much that you can compare about the two games straight across the board.  Story, quests, and gameplay are about it.  Well, I suppose you can compare characters, but that is going to mostly end up being your opinion.  And in any case, I actually think the games are equal character wise.  Maybe...just maybe I would give DA:I a slight edge here, simply because there is more interaction between you and the characters than there is in TW:3.

[Nattfare]

Just poking in the voice acting on The Witcher here. Especially the first game has some really poor acting in it. Assassins of Kings was better, but still bad in many parts.

Playing the games with Polish voices instead gave me a much richer witcher experience in comparison. Polish is the original language too after all.

Also, Jacek Rozenek is much easier to listen to as Geralt than Doug Cockle for me.

[TmTapani]

Just poking in the voice acting on The Witcher here. Especially the first game has some really poor acting in it. Assassins of Kings was better, but still bad in many parts.

Playing the games with Polish voices instead gave me a much richer witcher experience in comparison. Polish is the original language too after all.

Also, Jacek Rozenek is much easier to listen to as Geralt than Doug Cockle for me.

Might be true. IF you're fluent enough in it. Most of the world uses English though and Cockle's voice is the "real one" for them.

[Nattfare]

Nowhere near being fluent in Polish. Sure, I know a fair deal of words but I would never have gotten anywhere without English subtitles too.

 

To me it's no different than having to watch English stuff on TV but with Swedish subtitles as a kid.