855 réponses à ce sujet

[thats1evildude]

150 hours of picking flowers. 10 hours of story. Almost zero control over the player characters personality. And almost no choices when leveling up. Its mediocre at best.

On the contrary. I feel like I had a lot of control over the Inquisitor's personality. Admittedly, there's not a lot of options to play an evil dickhole, but I could determine the Inquisitor's beliefs, his views on mages and templars, his feelings about his family, his attitude towards blood magic, his leadership style, and so forth.

And the openness of the areas didn't mean there weren't interesting stories connected to them.

[Ashaantha]

On the contrary. I feel like I had a lot of control over the Inquisitor's personality. Admittedly, there's not a lot of options ro play an evil dickhole, but I could determine the Inquisitor's beliefs, his views on mages and templars, his feelings about his family, his attitude towards blood magic, his leadership style, and so forth.

And the openness of the areas didn't mean there weren't interesting stories connected to them.

 

I love this post..

 

I loved how my Inquisitor wasn't a set in stone one kind of personality only the entire game like Hawke was. I could choose the types of reactions to many things in the game that fitted my Inquisitor better then auto-aggressive or auto-snark dialogue ever could. Made my Inquisitors feel more natural, more like people.

I also enjoyed each zone's quest chain specific to it

[KaiserShep]

150 hours of picking flowers. 10 hours of story. Almost zero control over the player characters personality. And almost no choices when leveling up. Its mediocre at best.

 

Heh, replace flowers with minerals and you'd be describing ME1. Anyway, I found that I had more control over the Inquisitor than I did with some other protagonists I've played. The only one that I can recall that offered more control was the Warden, and that's because deranged murder fiend is on the list of possible character traits for that one. 

[thats1evildude]

I can understand why the Warden was a deranged murder fiend. He was a loner, a freak, an outcast in a world filled with people who communicated verbally. His ability to convey opinions and commands by blinking and arm-crossing was an inspiration.

[Majestic Jazz]

*sigh* To me Loghain was an uninteresting melodramatic blank slate who was trying too hard to be the Illusive Man. I did not connect to the villain at all. Only thing that really made it the least bit satisfying in any way was watching Ali take his revenge ust like I was able to do against Arl Rendon Howe. I preffered greatly Corypheus.

Except that Loghain came before TIM. So I guess you can say that TIM was trying to be Loghain.

[Al Foley]

Except that Loghain came before TIM. So I guess you can say that TIM was trying to be Loghain.

True but I played TIM first and TIM was so much better at it.  

[Black Jimmy]

Not sure where you're coming from friend. The ending of Trespasser has me more hyped then ever.

It even caused me to start a new playthrough as an Female Elf who romances Solas, making it the first time I've played both an Elf, and a male romance.

[Cobra's_back]

DAI is an extremely good RPG ... the only flaw is that it is closer to Skyrim than its own predecessors. 

 

Only 3 maps actually contribute to the Main plot ... Hinterlands, Crestwood and Western Approach, beyond that all the Main Story takes place in its own unique maps. For me this affected my view of the game most. It felt as if the maps were developed as standalone areas disconnected from the central story, Skyrim style. This was a major departure from previous Bioware games.

 

A few examples

-----------

Exalted Plain, Freemen, Emerald Graves could have connected to main plot. We have to move a significant force through the the Dales to reach the Arbor Wilds. So we should solve Freemen plot and control Exalted Plan & Emerald Graves (establish all camps and remove the rifts) before we can move Orlesian & Inquisition forces through the area. Combining this with a few Board missions and suddenly you have a much more integrated game

-----------

Hissing Wastes is a complete waste and does not contribute anything beyond some high level gear. The gear could have been accumulated inside Emprise de Lion 

-----------

Oasis Map could have been a part of Western Approach with Oasis area accessible before Haven battle and some operations to open up remaining Western Approach once Crestwood is done. The expanded area would have the Keep 

-----------

 

Perhaps they were limited by prev gen console support as Tresspasser gives us a glimpse at what an only curr gen console game could have been. I hope there is a major improvement in DA4. 

The great part of this game is that you can skip some areas. Hissing Waste is more about collecting stories and codex's.

 

"You must find five maps which will each lead you to a tomb that holds a key fragment. The key fragments, once all are collected, will give you access to your ultimate destination, the Tomb of Fairel. " Along with the treasure hunt you get the story of Fairel's two sons.

 

Oasis Map is about hunting shards. 

 

You don't have to do them if you don't want to. The game was designed for flexibility. Not everyone wants to find all the shards so they can skip the whole area. 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I find it odd that if you give the player more control of where they go next, they complain about it. The more options the better.

[Cobra's_back]

I love this post..

 

I loved how my Inquisitor wasn't a set in stone one kind of personality only the entire game like Hawke was. I could choose the types of reactions to many things in the game that fitted my Inquisitor better then auto-aggressive or auto-snark dialogue ever could. Made my Inquisitors feel more natural, more like people.

I also enjoyed each zone's quest chain specific to it

Same here. Hawk had no control over his/her environment. 

[vbibbi]

The great part of this game is that you can skip some areas. Hissing Waste is more about collecting stories and codex's.

 

"You must find five maps which will each lead you to a tomb that holds a key fragment. The key fragments, once all are collected, will give you access to your ultimate destination, the Tomb of Fairel. " Along with the treasure hunt you get the story of Fairel's two sons.

 

Oasis Map is about hunting shards. 

 

You don't have to do them if you don't want to. The game was designed for flexibility. Not everyone wants to find all the shards so they can skip the whole area. 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I find it odd that if you give the player more control of where they go next, they complain about it. The more options the better.

 

For me, it's such a jarring change from the previous two games in the series, and the change isn't a welcome one. I didn't play DAO and DA2 and say, "wow I enjoyed playing those games but you know what? I'd rather have more of a Skyrim experience. Instead of actually playing Skyrim, I'd rather have the next game in a series I enjoy deviate substantially from why I enjoy the series and try to emulate Skyrim."

 

It's not a bad thing to have completely optional maps, even some hidden areas which are a reward for exploration and don't have relevance to the main plot. But as people have pointed out, when only three out of the ten full maps are necessary to the story, the rest of the playable world seems extraneous. And people have pointed out how it would have been very easy to connect the zones to the main game, with the EP and Graves being necessary prior to WEWH or Arbor Wilds. The intention of the devs seems to be focused more on exploration than the actual story here.

 

 

ETA: I am hopeful that the devs see this. All three DLCs have taken feedback into consideration, in one way or another. JOH integrated a stronger central zone storyline to the new map. Descent still had beautiful scenery but tightened the focus, even though the story was weak. Trespasser had small, controlled zones but more companion reactivity and interaction. These are the kinds of things much of the base game is missing.

[Al Foley]

For me, it's such a jarring change from the previous two games in the series, and the change isn't a welcome one. I didn't play DAO and DA2 and say, "wow I enjoyed playing those games but you know what? I'd rather have more of a Skyrim experience. Instead of actually playing Skyrim, I'd rather have the next game in a series I enjoy deviate substantially from why I enjoy the series and try to emulate Skyrim."

 

It's not a bad thing to have completely optional maps, even some hidden areas which are a reward for exploration and don't have relevance to the main plot. But as people have pointed out, when only three out of the ten full maps are necessary to the story, the rest of the playable world seems extraneous. And people have pointed out how it would have been very easy to connect the zones to the main game, with the EP and Graves being necessary prior to WEWH or Arbor Wilds. The intention of the devs seems to be focused more on exploration than the actual story here.

Plus all the stuff you could do in the WA to connect it to the siege of Adamant...

[vbibbi]

Plus all the stuff you could do in the WA to connect it to the siege of Adamant...

Right. We can meet Hawke and the Warden by skirting the vast majority of the zone, so there's no actual need to explore most of the map. Same in Crestwood, I'm surprised that they didn't have the Warden in a location blocked off by the underground rift, so we actually HAD to clear the fortress and travel in the tunnels before advancing the main plot.

 

I understand that the viewpoint from Bioware is that they didn't want to force players to explore every single large zone and complete a significant portion of the content if they just wanted to focus on the main story. But more focus on the main story would have been welcome for me.

[Al Foley]

Right. We can meet Hawke and the Warden by skirting the vast majority of the zone, so there's no actual need to explore most of the map. Same in Crestwood, I'm surprised that they didn't have the Warden in a location blocked off by the underground rift, so we actually HAD to clear the fortress and travel in the tunnels before advancing the main plot.

 

I understand that the viewpoint from Bioware is that they didn't want to force players to explore every single large zone and complete a significant portion of the content if they just wanted to focus on the main story. But more focus on the main story would have been welcome for me.

Althugh the basic framework is good.  BioWare did a good job even with a lot of the side quests in Inquisition.  All it would have taken in MOST of the cases of the changes I think would have been appreciated, IE connecting it to the main story, would have required a couple lines of dialog here and there. Or a line in a codex entry or war table.  

[Elhanan]

For me, it's such a jarring change from the previous two games in the series, and the change isn't a welcome one. I didn't play DAO and DA2 and say, "wow I enjoyed playing those games but you know what? I'd rather have more of a Skyrim experience. Instead of actually playing Skyrim, I'd rather have the next game in a series I enjoy deviate substantially from why I enjoy the series and try to emulate Skyrim."
 
It's not a bad thing to have completely optional maps, even some hidden areas which are a reward for exploration and don't have relevance to the main plot. But as people have pointed out, when only three out of the ten full maps are necessary to the story, the rest of the playable world seems extraneous. And people have pointed out how it would have been very easy to connect the zones to the main game, with the EP and Graves being necessary prior to WEWH or Arbor Wilds. The intention of the devs seems to be focused more on exploration than the actual story here.
 
 
ETA: I am hopeful that the devs see this. All three DLCs have taken feedback into consideration, in one way or another. JOH integrated a stronger central zone storyline to the new map. Descent still had beautiful scenery but tightened the focus, even though the story was weak. Trespasser had small, controlled zones but more companion reactivity and interaction. These are the kinds of things much of the base game is missing.

And am guessing that DAO and DA2 were not purchased blindly. DAI was inspired by Skyrim, and this was clearly stated beforehand. And while the Main Story may only connect a few areas, all are connected by a story. And for one, am rather glad that the Player was left to choose whether or not they were of importance enough to explore; not some mandatory trek.

And am glad the Devs are listening to feedback, as they have always done. But am hoping that they adhere to placing importance on Player choice, characters, and story; not things like cut-scenes for secondary quests.

[Al Foley]

And am guessing that DAO and DA2 were not purchased blindly. DAI was inspired by Skyrim, and this was clearly stated beforehand. And while the Main Story may only connect a few areas, all are connected by a story. And for one, am rather glad that the Player was left to choose whether or not they were of importance enough to explore; not some mandatory trek.

And am glad the Devs are listening to feedback, as they have always done. But am hoping that they adhere to placing importance on Player choice, characters, and story; not things like cut-scenes for secondary quests.

Cut scenes for all the quests please.

[Cobra's_back]

For me, it's such a jarring change from the previous two games in the series, and the change isn't a welcome one. I didn't play DAO and DA2 and say, "wow I enjoyed playing those games but you know what? I'd rather have more of a Skyrim experience. Instead of actually playing Skyrim, I'd rather have the next game in a series I enjoy deviate substantially from why I enjoy the series and try to emulate Skyrim."

 

It's not a bad thing to have completely optional maps, even some hidden areas which are a reward for exploration and don't have relevance to the main plot. But as people have pointed out, when only three out of the ten full maps are necessary to the story, the rest of the playable world seems extraneous. And people have pointed out how it would have been very easy to connect the zones to the main game, with the EP and Graves being necessary prior to WEWH or Arbor Wilds. The intention of the devs seems to be focused more on exploration than the actual story here.

 

 

ETA: I am hopeful that the devs see this. All three DLCs have taken feedback into consideration, in one way or another. JOH integrated a stronger central zone storyline to the new map. Descent still had beautiful scenery but tightened the focus, even though the story was weak. Trespasser had small, controlled zones but more companion reactivity and interaction. These are the kinds of things much of the base game is missing.

 

 

Skyrim is nothing like Dragon age inquisition. You can get married in Skyrim, and your spouse doesn't know you after the wedding. There is no companion interaction, and you don't control a team. Skyrim is just one big huge map that players easily get lost going through it. 

 

Dragon age has separate zones because people would complain the areas are too big.  Lumping Hissing Waste and Oasis  could make the other maps too large. With larger maps the player can easily get lost making that map boring. These smaller zones make it easier to get where you want to go and still keeps the area interesting.

 

It is illogical to complain they gave two separate zones for puzzle solving treasure hunting when there is no one needs to go everywhere. The game is huge and cutting off variety doesn't make sense when it was optional. Plenty of players finished the main game at level 18-19. Why spend points going to Hissing waste or Oasis if you were not wanting to pick up Shards or hunt Tomb of Fairel's treasure? The game also provides multi-player. I don't play multiplayer, and I'm not insisting they remove it. Variety is the spice of life.

[vbibbi]

Skyrim is nothing like Dragon age inquisition. You can get married in Skyrim, and your spouse doesn't know you after the wedding. There is no companion interaction, and you don't control a team. Skyrim is just one big huge map that players easily get lost going through it. 

 

Dragon age has separate zones because people would complain the areas are too big.  Lumping Hissing Waste and Oasis  could make the other maps too large. With larger maps the player can easily get lost making that map boring. These smaller zones make it easier to get where you want to go and still keeps the area interesting.

 

It is illogical to complain they gave two separate zones for puzzle solving treasure hunting when there is no one needs to go everywhere. The game is huge and cutting off variety doesn't make sense when it was optional. Plenty of players finished the main game at level 18-19. Why spend points going to Hissing waste or Oasis if you were not wanting to pick up Shards or hunt Tomb of Fairel's treasure? The game also provides multi-player. I don't play multiplayer, and I'm not insisting they remove it. Variety is the spice of life.

 

You misunderstood my post. I am in no way saying the zones should all be connected into one giant, open world like Skyrim. I'm saying people are asking that there be a tighter connection in having to visit zones in order to advance the main plot. Right now, issues of power-gating aside, we only need to visit three zones in the game. If more of the zones were required to advance the plot, and in a reasonable manner (such as having to clean up the Exalted Plains before Halamshiral can reasonably call for peace talks, or eliminating the Freemen before we can move our troops to the Arbor Wilds), that would better integrate the exploration of the large maps with the narrative focus Bioware is known for.

 

Also, I think you are cherry picking when you say Skyrim is nothing like DAI. The devs have stated that they took inspiration from Skyrim when developing DAI. I'm not saying DAI is a Skyrim clone, of course it's not. But I can see where many of the features of Skyrim were converted to the DA setting, such as the large zones which focus more on exploration than on a narrative. There is nothing wrong with having maps which don't relate to the plot if done well (arguably Hissing Wastes, I would not advocate for the Oasis though). It's a problem when MOST of the maps don't have a strong enough connection. Yes, EdL involves the red templars, but if we skip the zone, nothing changes in the main plot, there aren't behemoths in the final battle, or additional blockades in the Arbor Wilds. Gameplay segregates the zones from any impact in the main questline.

[EmperorSahlertz]

DA:I was a failure for MANY reasons. But no hope for the Elves, is not one of them. Rather the complete lack of captivating cutscenes, mediocre story, semi-interesting characters, failure to facilitate plot (see lack of cutscenes), incoherent action, and a complete and absolute failure of an End Boss, those are the reasons DA:I was a failure. Though the DLC packages were actually quite nice. Too little too late though.

[Cobra's_back]

You misunderstood my post. I am in no way saying the zones should all be connected into one giant, open world like Skyrim. I'm saying people are asking that there be a tighter connection in having to visit zones in order to advance the main plot. Right now, issues of power-gating aside, we only need to visit three zones in the game. If more of the zones were required to advance the plot, and in a reasonable manner (such as having to clean up the Exalted Plains before Halamshiral can reasonably call for peace talks, or eliminating the Freemen before we can move our troops to the Arbor Wilds), that would better integrate the exploration of the large maps with the narrative focus Bioware is known for.

 

Also, I think you are cherry picking when you say Skyrim is nothing like DAI. The devs have stated that they took inspiration from Skyrim when developing DAI. I'm not saying DAI is a Skyrim clone, of course it's not. But I can see where many of the features of Skyrim were converted to the DA setting, such as the large zones which focus more on exploration than on a narrative. There is nothing wrong with having maps which don't relate to the plot if done well (arguably Hissing Wastes, I would not advocate for the Oasis though). It's a problem when MOST of the maps don't have a strong enough connection. Yes, EdL involves the red templars, but if we skip the zone, nothing changes in the main plot, there aren't behemoths in the final battle, or additional blockades in the Arbor Wilds. Gameplay segregates the zones from any impact in the main questline.

Okay, I see your point. However, if you do that then those areas are somewhat mandatory. I believe the reason they took this approach was because people complained so much that DA2 was too linear. 

 

I seriously do not mean to cherry pick. I played both games and enjoyed modding Skyrim. Having said that many DA fans would not like Skyrim. DA fans like companions and a Skyrim companion is a luggage rack.

 

Zones which focuses on exploration and allow the player to go wherever they wanted was one of the things players wanted. There were plenty of critics claiming DA2 was just a very small world that didn't allow the player to roam. Adding in more open areas is the only thing in common with DAI and Skyrim. I would include crafting but they are not even close in design. 

[Nefla]

You and I played very different games.  I would almost say you accidentally put your copy of Skyrim in instead of DA I...but that'd be rude. 

Skyrim was actually fun though...

[Al Foley]

Skyrim was actually fun though...

I disagree.  I guess bits of it were fun but I would never describe it as 'stupid amounts of fun that left me grinning like an idiot' like I would with bits with DA I. 

[Cobra's_back]

Skyrim was actually fun though...

It is fun BUT it was never to be taken seriously. Remember you can save the world from the world eater go into Whiterun and the Companions think you are a Nobody. They don't know you saved the world and they don't know you are Thane. I also loved the game.

[Al Foley]

Honestly Skyrim is the worse game that I have played that I actually still enjoy.  Probably.  There were probably a couple during the PS2 era that would qualify but this game is certainly down there. 

[Cobra's_back]

Honestly Skyrim is the worse game that I have played that I actually still enjoy.  Probably.  There were probably a couple during the PS2 era that would qualify but this game is certainly down there. 

It was a comedy and NOT to be taken seriously. The writers of Skyrim have a warp sense of humor. The problem is too many people expected it would be similar to the DA series. Elder Scrolls was always warp. 

[Elhanan]

DA:I was a failure for MANY reasons. But no hope for the Elves, is not one of them. Rather the complete lack of captivating cutscenes, mediocre story, semi-interesting characters, failure to facilitate plot (see lack of cutscenes), incoherent action, and a complete and absolute failure of an End Boss, those are the reasons DA:I was a failure. Though the DLC packages were actually quite nice. Too little too late though.

Hope DA4 fails much in these same ways then.

Am personally opposed to having more cut-scenes for minor quests and events, and that Bioware continues to keep them for Main Quests and characters. I do not want to purchase a film with Player based interruptions; prefer to keep the game as a CRPG.

And since this mediocre story and semi-interesting characters, as well as other supposed failures garnished a record launch, 130+ GOTY Awards, and other accolades from a sizable number of folks in and outside the industry, there is hope that Bioware will listen to this kind of support when making the next game. Perhaps it will be able to see a GOTY edition, too.