Have not done speed runs myself, but seem to recall that ME1 could be done, and have read the same of Skyrim's MQ.
And I do not accept the Strawman assertion; thanks.
With speed run, many games can finish in 1-4 hours, that's not what the developers intended nor should it be taken that way.
You're the one who has been bringing up strawman by bringing up GOTY as if it carries weight, especially when discussing a feature people dislike.
With speed run, many games can finish in 1-4 hours, that's not what the developers intended nor should it be taken that way.
You're the one who has been bringing up strawman by bringing up GOTY as if it carries weight, especially when discussing a feature people dislike.
.......while key info is withheld from players about supposedly important characters like Cory, Selene and Briala is from outside sources.
No downtime? In my experience that's not for everyone... in concept that's something like Star Fox but I think many Bio fans might find that exhausting.
Withheld, or simply not in the game because the PC wouldn't know it?
Hmm? This is true. Combine this with their short screen time, and they seem like weak characters to anyone who didn't read TME. Not as bad as Eredin but still.
I bring it up when some folks appear to believe the game is not well received, and DAI has both industry and player awards to indicate such an view is false.
Beggars can't be chooser, it's basically because the year was so mediocre, it won due to having weak competition but when you pair it up against other GOTY, it would fall short, and you could easily see that with discussions and polls throughout various sites. It's hard to take pride in being number 1 if you're the only one in the competition.
I bring it up when some folks appear to believe the game is not well received, and DAI has both industry and player awards to indicate such an view is false.
In my experience it would be more accurate to say the game got more of a mixed response from players. There's a lot of people who loved it, but there's also a lot more hate for it that I see online than other games like The Witcher 3.
However the fact that it won some GOTY is entirely 100% meaningless in my eyes because those awards tend to focus primarily on the biggest over hyped AAA releases, of which 2014 was weak for that specific category. Shadow of Mordor was really the only competition the game had for it. Hearthstone would probably have gotten more attention if it actually had a big launch event, but it was in open beta for so long people didn't even really notice.
but at the end of the day people should just like what they like. Why does everybody's opinion about what is or isn't a good game need to be validated by talking about what "the industry" thinks?
Shadow of Mordor was really the only competition the game had for it.
And even Shadows of Mordor was closer to a Batman game than a direct competitor.
Is there a fetch quest that isn't stupid?
Is there a fetch quest that isn't stupid?
Well that's the difference between a side-quest and a fetch quest... 
And even Shadows of Mordor was closer to a Batman game than a direct competitor.
It has the nemesis system which was kind of interesting. Personally I'd probably give GOTY to Wolfenstein TNO myself, but it didn't have a huge amount of hype surrounding it so it wasn't really in the running most of the time.
Great throwback to old school FPS games though.
Is there a fetch quest that isn't stupid?
Legends tell of a quest where one is send to fetch a pan for an old lady.
Beggars can't be chooser, it's basically because the year was so mediocre, it won due to having weak competition but when you pair it up against other GOTY, it would fall short, and you could easily see that with discussions and polls throughout various sites. It's hard to take pride in being number 1 if you're the only one in the competition.
In my experience it would be more accurate to say the game got more of a mixed response from players. There's a lot of people who loved it, but there's also a lot more hate for it that I see online than other games like The Witcher 3.
However the fact that it won some GOTY is entirely 100% meaningless in my eyes because those awards tend to focus primarily on the biggest over hyped AAA releases, of which 2014 was weak for that specific category. Shadow of Mordor was really the only competition the game had for it. Hearthstone would probably have gotten more attention if it actually had a big launch event, but it was in open beta for so long people didn't even really notice.
but at the end of the day people should just like what they like. Why does everybody's opinion about what is or isn't a good game need to be validated by talking about what "the industry" thinks?
DAI won all these awards, and while we may not care at all, those at Bioware and the other gaming companies seen to place some importance upon them. So when the industry itself gifts the top honor on DAI, it does mean something to them.
Opinions may vary, but facts remain.
So what?
Is all the GOTY awards supposed to mean something to me and make me change my opinion of the game?
If DA:I is such a great game, why hide behind this argument? Should such an amazing game not be capable of standing on its own merits?
Hiding behind other people's opinions(which is all that those awards are) makes for a poor argument.
Is there a fetch quest that isn't stupid?
My dog thinks they're cool.
This argument again? All I've ever wanted to know is what user awards they won. Publications can be OK.. I'm not the biggest hater of them.. but a very small number decides that.
So what?
Is all the GOTY awards supposed to mean something to me and make me change my opinion of the game?
If DA:I is such a great game, why hide behind this argument? Should such an amazing game not be capable of standing on its own merits?
Hiding behind other people's opinions(which is all that those awards are) makes for a poor argument.
Elhanan, I've heard that someone said that TW3 has better fetch quests than DAI over at the Bethesda forums. I think you should seriously investigate that.
*crosses fingers*
DAI does stand on it's own merits which includes all of those Awards. Whether it means anything to you or myself does not matter, as it means something to the Devs and their peers.
And I am not hiding behind other opinions; already recorded my own on Amazon long ago. Still does not alter the fact that DAI is a financial and critical success.
Awards are nothing more than other people's opinions about the game. They are not the game's actual merits, which only include things the game actually features in the game itself.
You're hiding behind them on these forums when people bring up criticisms of the game, because that appears to be your go to response to any and all criticisms of the game.
Elhanan, I've heard that someone said that TW3 has better fetch quests than DAI over at the Bethesda forums. I think you should seriously investigate that.
*crosses fingers*
I had the more personal quests in the companion content. I had the contextual present quests in judgements and places like Suledin Keep. I then also got puzzles to solve in the Astrariums, historical revelations, contextual information on how the world is faring in the face of these conflicts through realistic methods of discovery, and then the management of a massive organization through the war table.
What were these methods of discovery? In the vast majority of these quests, the quest giver is either a note left behind or just a quick "I need something" from an NPC. There's little personal appeal to be found. Ambient encounters like the dragons offer even less to work with.
I'd be more inclined to believe that you're managing a missive organization if, like you said, the War Table missions had more connections to events you physically participate in. I'd actually be happier with it if the War Table missions connected with each other more. Precious few of them had overarching narratives to latch onto. Most were small, isolated incursions that amounted to little more than flavor text and a slightly amusing anecdote. Pillars, again, managed to create a more palpable sense of ruling by actively engaging the player in the politics of their lordship.
I might agree with you about the Astrariums if the quest wasn't repeated 12 or 13 (maybe even more) times. It's a nice gimmick that oustays its welcome, and honestly seems more "gamey" than other gameplay. More importantly though, what are the context of these puzzles? Why are we connecting lines together to solve them? The connection to Tevinter is intriguing, but I would have liked to participated in a more complex arc that was more than puzzle (3x) -> reward.
The judgements were one of the few things that DA:I did quite well, but they were in the tiny minority of DA:I's quests, and mostly acted as epilogues to other (usually quite straightforward) quests. What I would want is the essence of these judgement quests to be diffused through every mission, no just added on top of a few. I really enjoyed the personal narratives presented to us as well choices we were given at the end. Ideally, this kind of design could be stretched over a more complex plot that unfolds over the course of a quest rather than be sequestered to a single conversation.
And this is before taking in to account I create the character. I decide what to wear, how to act, how the interior and even some exterior portions of my headquarters will look, and what my characters feelings are. I'm not told this. I'm not locked into just being one character that is the same thing in every run that you can ever play.
We're not reviewing these games here. I don't care how much roleplaying freedom you have in DA:I, that's not what we're talking about. We are talking about quest design, and unless you think that DA:I's extra roleplaying freedom precludes more complex side narratives. Of course, that's demonstrably false given Pillars of Eternity.
The more personal, intimate, and contextual content is in Inquisition. The variety is there in Inquisition. And the breadth of roleplaying is there in Inquisition. But then, reading how you can just drag and drop these quests into another game and they magically work is sort of telling me all I need to know about your viewpoint... if you only mean the STYLE of all these quests, then obviously. Same thing for the witcher. You can drag and drop any Witcher sidequest into any RPG and it works (because it has been done before). If you mean straight drag and drop, then you clearly just didn't pay attention to how these quests actually did integrate specifically into the world. Especially considering there is more than one type of side quest in Inquisition.
No, you can take the situation of "a woman lost her ring to some ruffians" and place it in nearly any world without any extra justification. Hell, DA:I had the quest twice. The situations in Pillars, however, (I'll refrain from talking about the Witcher because there's apparently no way to have a level-headed discussion about only a few of its mechanics) not only involve characters with deep histories and unique problems, they also just have interesting narrative arcs. For example: a woman in a village asks you to get her a potion to save her child from a soulless birth (a problem the whole region seems to be facing). A plain and simple fetch quest, but from the outset we're dealing with a problem that is unique to the world of Pillars, and one that is fairly unique by itself (you don't often deal with issues of miscarriages). What does a woman losing her ring or a man needing some meat say about the world of Dragon Age? It says the Templars are jerks and war sucks, but those, like I said, are just base archetypal traits. They have nothing specific to say, nor anything particularly interesting about any party involved.
But Pillars' quest doesn't stop there. Once you get to the herbalist and do a favor for her to get the potion for free (the favor itself is related to the politics of native tribes), she tells you that the potion isn't magic and may not actually save the quest-giver's child. The plot thickens. Indeed, the plot actually gets more more complex as the quest progresses; it doesn't just end after the item in question has been found. This is what DA:I or any other game with poor questing is missing: an intriguing narrative. It doesn't need to be big, but there should hopefully be some sort of evolving story arc to keep the task at hand from seeming like just a task. If I'm told to find a ring, but discover some deeper relationship between the quest-giver and the Templars (or whatever else), I'm not going to think much about how boring it is to ferry around this macguffin.
To top this tiny quest off, we're given a choice: tell the quest-giver the truth about the potion or lie. If you want to talk about roleplaying freedom, this is roleplaying freedom. I can't think of more than a few of DA:I's quests that actually give you choices at the end. The extra roleplaying freedom starts and stops at: "I want to help/I don't want to help," and that's just kind of boring. Those choices aren't even that nuanced. What fun is it roleplaying a character when I'm rarely given choices that I need to chew over?
Your opinion on the Witcher v Inquisition quests are not fact by any stretch, no matter how many people keep screaming it. You like it. Good for you. The Witcher bored me in almost everyway possible, including those repetitive quests. The only redeeming moments from that game (and mostly franchise as a whole) was the drinking scene in Kaer Morhen, the attempt at actual complexity in the Baron questline (not really a sidequest by the way), and Gwent. But do you find me on CDPR forums continually screaming that they need to be more like Bioware and feature puzzles, and companions in a party, and a character creation screen with a better combat system that allows for a variety of playstyles? No... CDPR and its fans can have that franchise and enjoy it for what it is. I will just avoid it and hope to whatever gaming gods there are that Bioware does not bow to the pressure and put out a game like The Witcher....... that would be a disaster.
No, you're ignoring the substance of my argument. You seem incapable of engaging with only an isolated aspect of Witcher's design. This isn't an opinion thing. This is a "most of the quests in Pillars (and yes, The Witcher) have things that most of DA:I's quests don't " thing. You can like or not like a game in spite of this, but I don't see how the addition of unique premises, deeper characters, evolving narratives, and extra choices could be a bad thing.
Awards are nothing more than other people's opinions about the game. They are not the game's actual merits, which only include things the game actually features in the game itself.
You're hiding behind them on these forums when people bring up criticisms of the game, because that appears to be your go to response to any and all criticisms of the game.
I use them to support my arguments; not hide behind them. And it also indicates that at least some other folks share my opinion:
Spoiler
I use them to support my arguments; not hide behind them. And it also indicates that at least some other folks share my opinion:
As I recall the last time we had that debate it was the majority of your argument.
The funny thing is that I wasn't even trying to claim Inquisition was a bad game. I straight up said I didn't think it was a bad game. I was just pointing out some areas I thought it could do better, primarily in side content in zones. The only other thing you really mentioned was the idea of "They're there if people want to do them", but I also wasn't advocating that the stuff I found boring be removed either but rather supplemented with quests that had more meat to them.
All that those awards you keep touting say is that people thought "This was the overall best game in 2014". It doesn't mean they agree with your opinion on specific parts of the game that get criticized.
Retour en haut