645 réponses à ce sujet

[Suledin]

Who cares anyway? TW3 is their last game. Because what...? They can't pull the story from the books (Kappa). Yet DA universe still exists and expands with each game. 

[Queen Skadi]

Some of them, then again DA isn't totally lacking in that regard, remember the werewolves in the Brecillian? I also found that the sentient Disciples in Awakening posed an interesting dilemma. There's also an argument to be made for some abominations in that regard. Actually some spirits have potential for this, depending on how you feel about their desire to experience the real world.

 

Perhaps not totally lacking in this regard but not particularly strong in it either, taking your word on this aspect as I did not feel anything for any of them. The werewolves were humans who raped an elf girl and were then cursed by a vengeful elf? Ehhhhhh not incredibly deep nor can I really say they inspire much sympathy, the sentient Disciples? can't really recall as I found Awakening to be incredibly dull, in fact I would even say Awakening was worse than Dragon age 2.

 

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by depth anymore. Do you have to feel sympathy for something for it to have depth? If so, that's not what I mean. I mean that all of those ties to the greater cosmology of the setting add to it, beg the question of "what is the Blight?" How does it twist and mutate the living? Why? Why was it in the Black City? Was it really the Old Gods that drew the Magisters there? What is the Calling and why does it drive them to seek out the Dragon-Gods? And the darkspawn don't know the answers to these questions themselves, as Awakening showed, and when that compulsion is taken away they're not unlike naive (Contagious and highly dangerous) children no more inherently malicious in their intent than anyone. So that's why I find the darkspawn interesting. They're a mystery, a puzzle wrapped up in the very fabric of Thedas itself.

 

So what you are saying is the depth of the Darkspawn comes from the lack of detail and coherent reason for their actions? Pretty sure the Darkspawn do what they do for little reason other than to provide an opposing force to be combated in the name of creating a video game, not sure the writers really thought all that hard about it. That to me is what I define as the absence of depth.

 

The center? The darkspawn haven't been a central enemy since the first game and Bioware has been expanding their bestiary since.

 

They are a defining aspect in much of the Thedas lore from the Chantry to the formation of the groups meant to combat them and the fall of the Tevinter empire, I would argue that they play a central role in defining much of the Thedas lore despite their lack of depth. 

[The Night Haunter]

Honestly DA and Witcher can't be compared at all. They are completely different games. It's like comparing Arkham Asylum with CoD4.

 

DA focuses on Party based combat and story telling, with a custom avatar.

Witcher focuses on Geralt's story and his interactions with his friends/enemies. It is also an action rpg, based on reaction times.

 

Combat is very different.

Story Telling is very different.

Main Character is very different.

Dialogue & Interactions are very different.

 

The only thing they have in common is a fantasy setting, apart from that it is apples vs. oranges.

[Jawzzus]

People like one, people like the other, some people even completely enjoy and like both of them.  That's all completely ok too

[Heimdall]

Perhaps not totally lacking in this regard but not particularly strong in it either, taking your word on this aspect as I did not feel anything for any of them. The werewolves were humans who raped an elf girl and were then cursed by a vengeful elf? Ehhhhhh not incredibly deep nor can I really say they inspire much sympathy, the sentient Disciples? can't really recall as I found Awakening to be incredibly dull, in fact I would even say Awakening was worse than Dragon age 2.

I was under the impression that those werewolves were the descendants of those humans, entirely innocent. I had my issues with Awakening too, many in fact, but I enjoyed the Disciples.

So what you are saying is the depth of the Darkspawn comes from the lack of detail and coherent reason for their actions? Pretty sure the Darkspawn do what they do for little reason other than to provide an opposing force to be combated in the name of creating a video game, not sure the writers really thought all that hard about it. That to me is what I define as the absence of depth.

No this would be the absence of depth "The darkspawn are vicious evil monsters that follow a dragon around and kill stuff just because. They exist to be killed, the end". But that's not the sum total of darkspawn. You seem happy to ignore their ties to the cosmology of the setting and the Blight's effects. It's the implications of those ties that I find intriguing, at least far more intriguing than any monster I've met in a Witcher game.
 

They are a defining aspect in much of the Thedas lore from the Chantry to the formation of the groups meant to combat them and the fall of the Tevinter empire, I would argue that they play a central role in defining much of the Thedas lore despite their lack of depth.

Well certainly, they play a role, repeated mass darkspawn invasions can't help but make an impression. The First Blight crippled the Imperium, setting the stage for Andraste to dismantle the south, thus the Chantry. Obviously the darkspawn have played a crucial role in the lore.

But that's not what I said.

[Queen Skadi]

No this would be the absence of depth "The darkspawn are vicious evil monsters that follow a dragon around and kill stuff just because. They exist to be killed, the end". But that's not the sum total of darkspawn. You seem happy to ignore their ties to the cosmology of the setting and the Blight's effects.

 

Well truth be told I did not mention those details because I found them fairly inconsequential in the discussion of depth, but ok, I acknowledge that interacting with the fade and the black city turned the magisters into Darkspawn (because again, reasons?) and that they poison stuff they interact with, this gives them oh so much more depth how?

[Realmzmaster]

I get it, we all get it, personally I much rather being able to create my own character than being forced to play a pre-defined one, but this does not stop me from playing games that have a pre-defined protagonist, sometimes a story requires a pre-defined character and this does not make the game any less brilliant, I mean look at Planescape: Torment, despite forcing the player into the role of the Nameless One it is still considered one of the greatest story driven games of all time.

 

You are correct about Planescape Torment. It is also known as the game that barely broke even and made the developers very little profit. Unfortunately critically acclaimed does not mean financially successful.

[Queen Skadi]

You are correct about Planescape Torment. It is also known as the game that barely broke even and made the developers very little profit. Unfortunately critically acclaimed does not mean financially successful.

 

Well then its a good thing I don't judge the quality of something based on how much money it makes

[Heyokah]

Nice bit of troll bait here so I'll bite....

 

TW3 beats out DA:I with trolls and sex on unicorns.

 

DA:I beats out TW3 with Iron Bull and shaved privates with Sera.

 

Otherwise, I permit myself the luxury to enjoy playing both.  I would highly suggest that you allow yourself the same freedom.

[Realmzmaster]

Well then its a good thing I don't judge the quality of something based on how much money it makes

 

Which is why there has not been a sequel to Planescape Torment until Torment:Tides of Numenera (which is still waiting to see the light of day). I mean it only took 16 years plus. So while you may not care about financial success, developers and publishers do.

 

I also get the distinct feeling that no matter what someone says in this thread you will disagree with it in regards to TW3 and DAI unless it agrees with your preconceived opinions. 

 

So i will state this unequivocally, in my personal opinion DAI is the better game for me because I do not like the character of Geralt. I do not care for the world or the lore. Have no interest in the Witcher combat. I played Witcher 1 and I have two copies of Witcher 2 sitting in a box somewhere that were given to me. Those copies remain unopened.

[Queen Skadi]

Which is why there has not been a sequel to Planescape Torment until Torment:Tides of Numenera (which is still waiting to see the light of day). I mean it only took 16 years plus. So while you may not care about financial success, developers and publishers do.

 

The reason there has not been a sequel to Planescape Torment is because I don't base my tastes on which game makes the most money? That does not make any sense. It would seem there is a point you are trying to make but you are doing an extremely poor job of making it, why don't you just come out and tell us what it is and how it relates to the thread at hand?

 

I also get the distinct feeling that no matter what someone says in this thread you will disagree with it in regards to TW3 and DAI unless it agrees with your preconceived opinions. 

 

Preconceived opinions? I can respect other peoples opinions and I am pretty sure I already explained this on the previous page to somebody who said pretty much the exact same thing so if you are looking for a response to that just read my earlier response as I can assure you that any response I have for you in regards to this will be exactly the same, but preconceived opinions? My views on both of the games being discussed in this thread are not preconceived, they were conceived by actually playing the games and my experiences with both games and series.

 

Now you have openly acknowledged that you are of the opinion that Inquisition is the better game despite not having played let alone even opened either the Witcher 2 or 3. Now I don't care if you never play these games as quite frankly it is your loss, I am merely pointing out the irony behind your statement as declaring one game to be the better game despite never having played or experienced the other is the very definition of a preconceived opinion.

 

Now I can respect if you had played both games and prefer Inquisition, I really can, you would have every right to your opinion, but without having even played the other game in question how can you possibly know which is better?

 

 

 

Now that being said this thread isnt about which game is better, it is about finding the things that Dragon Age Inquisition does better than other games in it's field and while it is admittedly a tough question surely there has to be something right?

[United Servo Academy Choir]

I've never played a FIFA game. I'm not at all interested in sports games. Maybe that means I can't speak to their quality, but I can certainly pronounce them not worth my time.

One thing is for sure - Dragon Age and TW are very different kinds of games. Frankly, if Realmzmaster would rather play a RTwP party RPG, then I don't know why he'd go out of his way to play it at all. He probably doesn't like action games, which at the end of the day, is what the gameplay in TW adds up to. Both can exist harmoniously, because while there is overlap, they have different goals, and they're aimed at different audiences.

Reading through the whole thing, this is a really pointless thread, and I'm certain you're just trolling everyone. If you're not trolling, then the existence of Dragon Age, and the fact that other people like it a lot, apparently threatens your enjoyment of the witcher. Maybe step away from the forum and go do something you actually enjoy rather then antagonize DA fans and then get all butthurt when every opinion isn't in line with your own.

[Heyokah]

 

 

 

Now I can respect if you had played both games and prefer Inquisition, I really can, you would have every right to your opinion, but without having even played the other game in question how can you possibly know which is better?

 

 

 

Now that being said this thread isnt about which game is better, it is about finding the things that Dragon Age Inquisition does better than other games in it's field and while it is admittedly a tough question surely there has to be something right?

 

Party banter....har har.

[London]

I wish people who felt the need to start these mean-spirited threads to praise Witcher 3 would pack their bags and head on over to CDPRs forums where threads like this are consistently locked or deleted.

I'll take DAIs soundtrack over Witchers generic fantasy faire - just because of the tavern songs. I just played Witcher 3 and can't remember a single song.

I'll also take having a party of companions with me to develop relationships with over recurring NpCs that accompany you maybe 5% of the game. Who cares if there is a funny drinking scene when you only see these people 10 minutes in the game.

Relationship building is better - Witcher doesn't have many relationships to build.

I like DAIs world and setting more; it doesn't need to advertise racism as a selling point as did Witcher 3 in a trailer.

I like more flexibility in picking my class.

I Really miss DAOs RPG perks that were not combat bases, like Coercion, and hope DA4 brings back some non-combat skills. This is better than Geralts Axii, which begs the question as to why he never uses it when it would be useful. I guess the game would be cut significantly if he didn't have to run errands and just Axiid his way to the info about Ciri.

[Heyokah]

"I'll take DAIs soundtrack over Witchers generic fantasy faire - just because of the tavern songs. I just played Witcher 3 and can't remember a single song."

 

To be fair - every single time I engaged combat there was that one song.....erm....how did it go.....?

 

Oh yeah I remember....."oooooh ahhhh ohoho oh ahhhh....yayaya YAAAAAAA OOOOH AHHH YAAAAA....lalalalala...." awesome track.  I actually liked that one  

[Queen Skadi]

I wish people who felt the need to start these mean-spirited threads to praise Witcher 3

 

I thought I already clarified that this thread isnt about praising the Witcher? It is about finding the things Inquisition does better, I am sorry if I wont settle for lies and misinformation about what Inquisition does better but I would much rather find the things that Inquisition truthfully does better than to settle for lying to ourselves.

[London]

Go read the title of your thread and think for a second how your messaging is coming across. You essentially wrote: "DAI does nothing better than Witcher 3."

Edit: if it's so bewildering to you that DAI does anything better, why stay? Let us simpletons continue to lie to ourselves and enjoy the game. There is no need for you to be on this crusade to dispel "lies" about anyone's opinion of a video game, let alone on the games own turf.

[DebatableBubble]

Successful troll, Skadi. 10/10. 

[Jaron Oberyn]

Well DAI doesn't randomly cause computer freezes for starters.

[Heyokah]

I thought I already clarified that this thread isnt about praising the Witcher? It is about finding the things Inquisition does better, I am sorry if I wont settle for lies and misinformation about what Inquisition does better but I would much rather find the things that Inquisition truthfully does better than to settle for lying to ourselves.

 

Fair question and I'll attempt to answer in the utmost unbiased fashion.  First off, I love both games for what they are.  They are in the same genre but they truly are not the same type of game in my view.  That aside I'll give you a quick answer, and one whicher ((: ) I believe is the most important from a purely economical point of view - replayability.

 

Now for the answer most will skip:  (TL/DR and all that)

 

TW3 gives you a great protagonist in Geralt - if you enjoy a scarred, grey haired, yellow cat-eyed mutant with zero emotion who loves shagging chicks on unicorns then TW3 wins hands down.  Certainly you can specialize in various witcher skills - those being swordplay, alchemy, and/or spells but in the end the min/maxers will fixate on and cherry pick certain abilities.  Yes, you can make a pure alchemist type Geralt or even purely use signs or swords but it seems (to me at least) a rather weak form of character specialization.  I have tried them all and while the gameplay varies the overall mechanics do not.  Not to mention the fact that alchemy is rather clunky and you only need to use the crossbow while underwater.  YES - Geralt can 1-2 shot almost anything at any level while underwater with a crossbow.  On land the crossbow does nothing more than make flying creatures crash to the ground or tickles everything else.

 

DA:I gives you the ability to truly customize a character that you become invested in. 3 classes, 3 specializations per class, and 4 races - while that doesn't seem like much (and it really isn't) you do have far more freedom when creating YOUR character.  Geralt is Geralt - love him or hate him.  Beyond character creation you have a party that you can craft equipment for and choose who you wish to join you.  Now here is the rub in the replayability department - if you care nothing for the party banter then this means nothing in regards to replayability.  As for me, it does.  Your mileage may vary.

 

But in my opinion DA:I wins.  Sure TW3 has 36 supposed end states but who really cares?  Did I get it on with Yennifer or Triss is the most pertinent question.  My first playthrough I was a **** and tried to persue them both.  Didn't turn out so well for poor Geralt but hey...2 more playthroughs and I am done.  With DA:I I still retain much greater character flexibility AND more romance options.

 

I am not going to venture into the gameplay so much as both systems are great yet flawed.  Those arguments have been languished over and argued ad infinitum.

 

TW3 has far better side quests as some feel like a minor AAA game unto themselves but I am not arguing quests here as you seem to be asking for an honest appraisal of what DA:I does better.  I hope I have given you an answer that suits your needs.

 

You asked an honest question and I have given you my personal opinion.

 

Both are great games and should not be compared so harshly - each should be enjoyed for their own merits.

 

 

edit - Just thinking about game mechanics and tactics but DA:I wins there as well.  In TW3 you simply counter human enemies and dodge/evade monsters and THAT IS IT.  I have played both on the hardest setting and while TW3 is very unforgiving it is unforgiving much like Dark Souls.  If you are hit you are going to be severely hurt.  Once you get the timing down nothing hits you.  DA:I is the reverse of this - yes you can absorb damage but the mobs you fight have more ways to CC you and thus negate your attempts to not be hit.  Rarely was I CC'd in TW3 and then attacked without the ability to dodge.  In DA:I if an archer is pelting you while you are CC'd you had better run asap.  DA:I's AI is lacking due to the obviously inherent aggro range. 

[London]

That was more than this thread deserves.

[Heyokah]

That was more than this thread deserves.

Gave me something to do while I smoked a cigarette. 

 

I am so gratified that my post deserved a response from such an august member of these forums such as yourself.

[London]

Your welcome. Flattery will get you everywhere.

Anyway my point is that I disagreed with the premise that Op was merely asking an honest question, being so unable to think for herself after playing DAI that she needed the forums help to find something to like about it, as on her own she could think of nothing at all.

Also wasn't saying that what you wrote wasn't well thought out - I just wouldn't be surprised if she comes back to dismiss most of it like she had others.

[Heyokah]

No - I get it.

 

And I also needed something to do while I had a smoke.

 

Sorry for being a tad snarky.

 

Now that you put it that way...yeah I should have snuffed out the cigarette much sooner.  hehe

[London]

It's ok. I can see how it came off rude. I just felt you put a lot of thought into it and hope she really does value your insight. It was a good and balanced read.