1016 réponses à ce sujet

[TheN7Penguin]

Dragon Age feels to me like walking from one end of the Skyrim map to the other - and I MEAN walking, not running, not fast travelling, not sprinting, WALKING - just to find a stone of barenziah.

[Han Shot First]

Considering that ME1 was a 2007 game with a lower budget compared to a 2014 game with a much higher budget and resources, I would say that it would be copying Inquisition. I mean, I could literally play ME1 through without ever touching foot on an uncharted world. Noveria, Citadel, and Feros had their own side quest that were good and tied into the story in some way, the UC worlds weren't needed for that. Unlike in DAI where one had to traverse the locations in order to gain enough power to move forward in the story. Yes, one could "buy" power, assuming that he or she had enough gold to do so and guess what? How do you get more gold? Well, you have to go out and do fetch quest to get gold or items to sell for gold.

 

So in the end, DAI was more dependent on exploration while ME1 wasn't. 

 

Another issue with DA:I was that it tried to force players into side content by often placing your main or companion quest markers clear on the other side of the map from the starting point, with rifts, shards, camps, and other meaningless side content in the way. That more than anything has discouraged replays for me.

[TheN7Penguin]

It discouraged PLAYS with me, let alone REPLAYS.

[Majestic Jazz]

Another issue with DA:I was that it tried to force players into side content by often placing your main or companion quest markers clear on the other side of the map from the starting point, with rifts, shards, camps, and other meaningless side content in the way. That more than anything has discouraged replays for me.

 

Hm, good point, I never thought of that angle before. 

[themikefest]

Another issue with DA:I was that it tried to force players into side content by often placing your main or companion quest markers clear on the other side of the map from the starting point, with rifts, shards, camps, and other meaningless side content in the way. That more than anything has discouraged replays for me.

I will add to that. When I looked through the skeleton head for shards, I realized I had to go back to that same area I was at a moment ago.

[TheN7Penguin]

I think Dragon Age Inquisition would have been better if they basically did what I think would improve GTA V. Cut down on the needless crap and do what's relevant/good better.

[TheN7Penguin]

Shards are to DA:I what Yoga is to GTA V, although GTA V doesn't really force you to do Yoga.

[dreamgazer]

Considering that ME1 was a 2007 game with a lower budget compared to a 2014 game with a much higher budget and resources, I would say that it would be copying Inquisition. I mean, I could literally play ME1 through without ever touching foot on an uncharted world. Noveria, Citadel, and Feros had their own side quest that were good and tied into the story in some way, the UC worlds weren't needed for that. Unlike in DAI where one had to traverse the locations in order to gain enough power to move forward in the story. Yes, one could "buy" power, assuming that he or she had enough gold to do so and guess what? How do you get more gold? Well, you have to go out and do fetch quest to get gold or items to sell for gold.

Budget and resources are still budget and resources, though, and a lot of those zots were expended while making huge planets to explore in ME1 ... and placing all sorts of trinkets everywhere to collect (and keepers to scan on the Citadel, for that matter). Think about how focused the narrative could've been without them, or without running errands or fetching armor!

Also, you're admitting that the vast majority of ME1 is entirely optional content? Fantastic.

Playing through Inquisition's main story nets you enough power to finish the game, in any number of ways you can obtain it. Everything else is gravy.

[dreamgazer]

Shards are to DA:I what Yoga is to GTA V, although GTA V doesn't really force you to do Yoga.

DAI didn't force you to collect shards, either, but at least they're far more useful than picking up dogtags and insignias.

[dreamgazer]

Another issue with DA:I was that it tried to force players into side content by often placing your main or companion quest markers clear on the other side of the map from the starting point, with rifts, shards, camps, and other meaningless side content in the way. That more than anything has discouraged replays for me.

Why is giving the player things to do between markers a bad thing, though? It is a game you're playing.

Can't the same thing be said about the space between markers in Witcher 3? Abandoned camps, guarded chests, imprisoned people, etc.

[Majestic Jazz]

DAI didn't force you to collect shards, either, but at least they're far more useful than picking up dogtags and insignias.

 

Lol, you still hating on the ME1 UC worlds even though I just proved that you cannot compare the two?

 

Again, I can complete the main story in ME1 without ever having to land on a UC world or do a UNC mission. The same cannot be said about DAI because you need power and influence to progress the story and you get that by doing those fetch quest. Or you can simply buy power and influence but riddle me this.....where do you get enough gold to be able to afford it? Well.....you have to do fetch quest in order to make money as wartable missions doesn't yield much. OR you can just sell unwanted equipment and supplies to vendors for a nice yield and gold but again......where do you get that unwanted equipment and supplies? You have to go out and explore which leads you back to doing fetch quest.

 

Just get over it, ME1 had fetch quest on UC worlds but one could 100% ignore them and still complete the main story. The same CANNOT be said about DAI. 

[TheN7Penguin]

*has not ever played Witcher 3* *would probably hate on that too* *basically hates on everything apart from Batman: Arkham City and Mass Effect, occasionally Skyrim too*

[Majestic Jazz]

Why is giving the player things to do between markers a bad thing, though? It is a game you're playing.

Can't the same thing be said about the space between markers in Witcher 3? Abandoned camps, guarded chests, imprisoned people, etc.

 

Nope, the same cannot be said.

 

Reference me to a sidequest (non-companion related) in DAI that is to the same length and level of quality in terms of emotion, choice, and atmosphere as this sidequest:

 

[dreamgazer]

Lol, you still hating on the ME1 UC worlds even though I just proved that you cannot compare the two?

You proved something?
 

Again, I can complete the main story in ME1 without ever having to land on a UC world or do a UNC mission. The same cannot be said about DAI because you need power and influence to progress the story and you get that by doing those fetch quest Or you can simply buy power and influence but riddle me this.....where do you get enough gold to be able to afford it? Well.....you have to do fetch quest in order to make money as wartable missions doesn't yield much. OR you can just sell unwanted equipment and supplies to vendors for a nice yield and gold but again......where do you get that unwanted equipment and supplies? You have to go out and explore which leads you back to doing fetch quest.

And again, you do not need any more power than what the game gives you along the core narrative.
 

Just get over it, ME1 had fetch quest on UC worlds but one could 100% ignore them and still complete the main story. The same CANNOT be said about DAI.

Sure, it can. You need power; you do not need to do the fetch quests or farm to obtain power. Following the critical path gives you everything you need.

[Han Shot First]

Why is giving the player things to do between markers a bad thing, though? It is a game you're playing.

Can't the same thing be said about the space between markers in Witcher 3? Abandoned camps, guarded chests, imprisoned people, etc.

 

I'm fine with stuff to do between the markers, just not when it is placed directly in your path and can't be avoided. I thought the Witcher 3 was better at that sort of thing in that while mounted on Roach Geralt could nearly always gallop along the roads to an objective without getting side tracked or having to fight anything, if you chose. The optional content felt a lot more optional than it did in DA:I, and more like something you could go back and do at your leisure. In DA:I I often ended up fighting to close rifts or clear a camp site on the way to a quest objective because the game didn't give me much choice. A couple were tough fights as well that required either multiple tries or backtracking and levelling up first, which also ended up as a time sink delaying the completion of the quest I was actually on.

 

A lot of TW3's side content is also much more interesting than DA:I, so that I wouldn't have minded the distraction from an active quest.

[themikefest]

Sure, it can. You need power; you do not need to do the fetch quests or farm to obtain power. Following the critical path gives you everything you need.

What is the critical path?

[pdusen]

And it is in this regard, this is what I hope ME:A does not carry over.

 

 

Lol and what is that supposed to mean? My point was that despite the success of DAI, there remains many criticisms. Those websites gave the game great praises, but they also point out some of the faults of the game. THAT is what I was referring to, you just turned it into something that you wanted it to be in order for you to come back with a failed wity response.  You try to make it seem just because an outlet gave the game a great score and a thumbs up, that the game is free from flaws and free from criticism and free from things that weren't entirely top quality. I can get a positive evaulation at work, but that does not mean that my supervisor (as well as peers) may not also understand that I have some faults that needs to be addressed moving forward.

 

Point was, DAI despite the financial and review score success has many problems (such as pacing, fetch quest, and open worlds) that needs to be addressed in DA4 and needs to be refined in games like ME:A. In that, that is why I hope ME:A is nothing like DAI.

 

Nice try though. 

 

There is so much fail in this post I don't even know what to do.

 

Jazz, despite your attempt to play it off as though dreamgazer was saying that DAI is universally loved, that isn't what they were doing in the slightest and you look really silly for trying to spin it like it was.

[dreamgazer]

Nope, the same cannot be said.
 
Reference me to a sidequest (non-companion related) in DAI that is to the same length and level of quality in terms of emotion, choice, and atmosphere as this sidequest:
 

Great quest.

With that out of the way: Why can't I reference the entirely optional companion-related or advisor-related quests? There are far more of those in Inquisition than Witcher 3, and they'd rival that quest.

Cherry-picking one quest wasn't the point of that comment, though. Both games involve small side obstacles that complicate the travel time between Point A and Point B.

[AlanC9]

Budget and resources are still budget and resources, though, and a lot of those zots were expended while making huge planets to explore in ME1 ... and placing all sorts of trinkets everywhere to collect (and keepers to scan on the Citadel, for that matter). Think about how focused the narrative could've been without them, or without running errands or fetching armor!

Though OTOH those planets were procedurally-generated trash with prefabs dumped on them, and therefore relatively cheap.

It's interesting how Bio got away from the ME1 features that had low zot-to-game-hours ratios.

[dreamgazer]

I'm fine with stuff to do between the markers, just not when it is placed directly in your path and can't be avoided. I thought the Witcher 3 was better at that sort of thing in that while mounted on Roach Geralt could nearly always gallop along the roads to an objective without getting side tracked or having to fight anything, if you chose. The optional content felt a lot more optional than it did in DA:I, and more like something you could go back and do at your leisure. In DA:I I often ended up fighting to close rifts or clear a camp site on the way to a quest objective because the game didn't give me much choice. A couple were tough fights as well that required either multiple tries or backtracking and levelling up first, which also ended up as a time sink delaying the completion of the quest I was actually on.

It becomes a similar issue when you start progressing toward objectives with higher levels of recommended difficulty.

And you do have to earn a specific, sizable amount of coin to get to Skellige.
 

A lot of TW3's side content is also much more interesting than DA:I, so that I wouldn't have minded the distraction from an active quest.

I mostly agree there.

[Majestic Jazz]

Great quest.

With that out of the way: Why can't I reference companion-related or advisor-related quests? They're are far more of those in Inquisition than Witcher 3, and they'd rival that quest.

Cherry-picking one quest wasn't the point of that comment, though. Both games involve small side obstacles that complicate the travel time between Point A and Point B.

 

But Witcher 3's use of side quest to allow the player to better explore and understand the world was better done compared to DAI's which is the point and what I hope ME:A does better at.

 

Again, here is another TW3 sidequest that is more in line with a companion quest in DAI which is in my opinion better executed.

 

 

 

I repeat, ME:A would be better off the less it is like DAI.

[AlanC9]

Sure, it can. You need power; you do not need to do the fetch quests or farm to obtain power. Following the critical path gives you everything you need.

MJ, at some point you're really going to have to respond to this point. Your whole argument seems to rest on needing power from SQs to beat DAI, and it looks like that premise is false.

[Elhanan]

Another issue with DA:I was that it tried to force players into side content by often placing your main or companion quest markers clear on the other side of the map from the starting point, with rifts, shards, camps, and other meaningless side content in the way. That more than anything has discouraged replays for me.

Perhaps it was my solo days upon SWTOR that allowed me the experience to skirt encounters, but one is not forced into the side content. Most rifts are clearly marked, and well illuminated if close in order to avoid them. Shards must be actively sought; easily skipped if one chooses to do so. Camps could be missed, though I do not wish to do so personally. And other side content besides the Bottles are generally avoided with ease.

If one simply wants to play the MQ, many posters here have stated it can be done. If one wishes to explore, that is another option. Personally, prefer the latter method, though I do not choose everything; only most of it.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Sure, it can. You need power; you do not need to do the fetch quests or farm to obtain power. Following the critical path gives you everything you need.

I did a 100% run through of DAI and still have like over 200 power after doing all the main quests and unlocking all regions. You really need to do the bare minimum in terms of sidequests to finish the game.

[DragonBears]

No it was just plain stupid. It made me want to smash guitars.

Ah, then you need to get a job as a baggage handler with United Airlines