855 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

...

Prove it. 

No seriously prove this EXACT statement. 

No, don't pull out the unethical practices of other companies. I'm talking about exact proof that proves that most game awards that Inquisition earned was due to EA bribery. 

Yes, I have read all how the industry courts journalists/reporters. 

However, I can just as easily generalize that companies like Valve and CDPR do the same based on those reports. 

Second, he obviously is talking about the game winning multiple GOTY year awards from numerous publications. 

Do we really have to explain the latter one?

It also does not explain the Awards granted by those outside the industry.

[Savber100]

Also am I the only one that thinks this thread is near-insulting in how it presumes that Inquisition is a failure when there's clearly a group of people (I would even say a majority) that generally liked it? 

No one has said the game is perfect. 


This entire thread is pretty laughable in where anyone who dislikes the game assume: 

1) The game clearly sucks. 

2) Any awards it got was from bribery. 

3) Something Something Witcher 3. 

And then act as if it's a fact. 

Hint: It really isn't. You go like your games. I go like my games. 

It's not hard. Go play games you like. 

[Nefla]

**Disclaimer: These are all my personal opinions based on my own priorities, likes and dislikes in a game**

 

I believe DA:I sold very well so I assume it was a financial success and it clearly has a lot of fans as well. Personally I think it was much weaker than what I would have expected from BioWare and that has nothing to do with the elven storyline. With a few exceptions (hair, beards, most eyebrows, elf bodies) I thought the game was visually stunning. The level design was gorgeous and I loved the amount of care and detail put into everything. Even the fabric textures were spot-on realistic. The voice acting was also superb as usual and I really enjoyed getting to play a non-human again. That being said, in my book the game was weak in many ways:

 

-The intro: players are not introduced to the world and the story in a way that makes them care or attaches them to what's happening around them. They are simply thrust into action and explosions after two minutes of people simply telling you what happened. Who was Divine Justinia and why should I care? What is the temple of sacred ashes and what were people doing there? What was *I* doing there? Do I know anyone that was killed? To go along with that, too many characters are introduced to quickly and the game relies on the player having experience with the first two games so they already know Cassandra, Leliana, Cullen, and Varric. Add Solas and that's 5 major characters introduced within 20 minutes with hardly any screen time or interaction. Which brings me to:

 

-The game relies on the player's experience with past games and EU (books, comics, etc...) rather than doing much in the way of character development. Varric especially seemed so pointless in this game, I definitely felt like the writer's went "hey, Varric is popular, let's shoehorn him in!" Celine/Briala/Gaspard/Fiona weren't developed at all and I never read the books they were in so I had nothing to fill in the blanks with.

 

-The villain was painfully generic and boring. It takes a skilled storyteller to take the old and tired "ancient evil wizard threatens to destroy the world with his monster army" and make it interesting, DA:I wasn't one of these cases. It was as boring and cliche as you'd expect. The only thing that set it apart was that Corypheus was completely incompetent and your character just steamrolled over him and his plans at every turn. (The one exception being the battle for Haven which imo was the best sequence in the entire game).

 

-Outside of Skyhold there is almost nobody to talk to. The only NPCs you can interact with are shopkeepers and quest givers. No random NPCs you can simply have a conversation with to make the world feel more alive and get a handle on what's going on in the area. The quest givers themselves were also extremely lackluster to me. A lot of it is probably the zoomed out camera during conversations which doesn't let me see their face or connect with them emotionally but the dialogue with them is also quite short, usually only a few lines. BioWare didn't even bother to name most of them and instead they're "elven widow" or "herbalist" and so on.

 

-The companions: heresy, I know! While I didn't think the companions were horrible, imo they were weaker than any other BioWare game I've played (KotOR-present). This comes from the lack of character development for returning characters, the lack of connection between any of the companions and the plot, the lack of reaction or interaction during most quests (aside from maybe a short comment) and the fact that they never argue with or oppose you. In DA:O for example there were several times when characters would argue with you, question your decisions, suggest (or demand) you do something else, etc...In DA:I it just felt like they took a bunch of wacky personalities and put them all in a castle with no real reason to be there. 

 

-The combat: DA combat isn't my thing in general (I like the kind of combat you find in ME2 and 3, Skyrim, and so on) but in the other two games it let me automate the tedium by setting detailed companion tactics and didn't arbitrarily restrict me to 8 abilities (and no, consoles can't be blamed for this sudden limit since all abilities were available at any time through the radial menu before). The removal of healing and the fact that enemies are damage sponges even on casual made me bring companions that were resilient rather than ones I wanted to bring because I liked them. Don't even get me started on the pants-on-head retarded Ai...

 

-The exploration and side quests: The vast majority of (non-companion) sidequests were completely boring and unsatisfying to me. Each one was either: talk to nameless NPC who gives you one or two lines of dialogue about some trinket they lost or need then go get the thing and return, OR read a note talking about a lost trinket, get the thing and bring it to where the note says. They were all so generic and gave me zero reason to care. The best one by far was the Crestwood undead one but even that one is something I'd consider weak to mediocre in a better game. There's no human element. I cleared out some undead and sealed a rift but who did I save? A bunch of non-reactive, non-interactive cardboard cutouts in the village? I don't care about them. The game gives me no reason to. There's not a single (non-companion)sidequest in the entire game that I think "I can't wait to do that one again!" No choices, no interesting characters, very rarely any dialogue options, just trudging around looking for lost rings and goats. I might feel differently if I loved the combat and doing these tasks gave me an excuse to fight more enemies or something but that wasn't the case. To me the exploration was pointless as well since no matter where I went there was nothing of value to find. Not even any interesting looking armor or a special companion gift that would spark a conversation like in previous games.

 

-The limited armor options. I was very disappointed with how little variety there was in the armor you can craft, especially for the Qunari.

 

-Technical issues that were never fixed (for me at least) such as the male elf arms being broken and sucked into his torso, water effects covering everything both inside and out in Therinfall Redoubt and Crestwood, party banter only triggering once every 3-6 hours of wandering (and one of the recent patches made it so party banter is completely gone from my game. Companions don't even use battle shouts anymore).

 

-The plot: weak and disjointed with screwed up pacing and no sense of urgency that for the most part gave me little reason to care about what was happening. The whole "chosen one who is the only person that can save the world" was not compelling here either. I give them props for attempting to break from the trope by making the chosen status an accident but it ended up exactly the same. The exceptions were the Haven battle and the Temple of Mythal. The fact that the heroes just trample Corypheus with almost no setback, no tragedy, etc...Not fun.

 

-The inquisitor's limited choices and limited personality. I feel like this was another case of BioWare's notorious overreaction to criticism: DA2's tones were too comical and over the top so DA:I made it so you could only be very mild and never passionate. You can be polite, neutral, or slightly cranky or joking but never boisterous, evil, ruthless, no passion. There are no good or evil choices, only A or B and since the sidequests don't have roleplaying/flavor choices, you're left with a very bland character that you have to supplement with headcanon.

 

-Things that make no sense: The inquisitor is accepted as the leader immediately, even while still a prisoner. The reason they give for following her orders "you're the one with the mark and the one we have to keep alive" that's unreasonable and illogical. At the end Corypheus raises up a bunch of ruins high into the sky with magic but we are never shown how or why. If he could do that, why not just let the inquisitor fall to her death? Also how did the party get down safely after Corypheus dies? In Haven after the inquisitor starts the avalanche, Corypheus has time to fry her with magic but he just stands there staring at her running away and does nothing. A lot of random details in the game felt like they had hardly any thought or effort put into them.

 

-The mage/templar "war:" This was built up for the whole of DA2, it should have been the main plot of DA:I but was pushed aside and resolved in a side quest where you kill a few roving bands of mages/templars. You never see a war, at most you get a small cluster of mages or templars on whichever side you choose to recruit but this was supposed to be an uprising that rocked Thedas, not the equivalent of a bandit group. This could have been a great game with an interesting plot based on the mage/templar conflict rather than "defeat ancient evil guy."

 

I could say more but I've ranted enough and it's time to sleep.

[Elhanan]

* DAO was about origins, and DA2 spent a great deal of time on intros. DAI offered a different way to dive into the story. While I personally prefer the origins, this varied approach was not poor. Also the question concerning personal involvement for all the characters was available at the Official Site.

* Other info may have been helpful, but was not needed. The Keep took care of many such details.

* Personally wanted Cory to be the villain so I am biased and pleased.

* Scout Harding, Mother Giselle, and several NPC's in the starting area of Haven offer info and conversations.

* Cole - fave new character. Cullen - actually kind of like the guy I wanted to deck in DAO. Great writing, IMO.

* While I would prefer more Quickslots and more abilities, the options presented via Trespasser and combat in general was the best paced of the series, and less animated then what was experienced in DA2. While I would also request a return to that Tactics system, the one in DAI does work

* Almost every area had a major side quest for being there. Besides Crestwood, I enjoy helping in the Hinterlands, taking a Keep in the Western Approach, hunting treasure in the Hissing Wastes, saving soldiers in the Keep in the Exalted Plains, and aiding the Elves in all three sections of the Dales among other quests.

* Armor - most variety thus far. While I still love the looks in DAO, ended the game with almost the same look for each class.

* Never had a banter glitch, but understand this was fixed for others in the previous patch.

* Plot, choices, and personality - Disagree, and like all three components, IMO.

* The prisoner did not take over, but was allowed to have a say which path to take because they had a mark that was going to kill them. Leadership was not assigned until after, and that was bad on sealing the Breach, and helping at Haven. The Inq could have saved themselves from falling the same way they did earlier; by opening a rift. nd there re always the unknowns when dealing with magic.

* The majority of the War took place between DA2 and DAI, so that was not the focus. While some may wish it had, others preferred other possibilities including what was selected.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

**Disclaimer: These are all my personal opinions based on my own priorities, likes and dislikes in a game**

 

I believe DA:I sold very well so I assume it was a financial success and it clearly has a lot of fans as well. Personally I think it was much weaker than what I would have expected from BioWare and that has nothing to do with the elven storyline. With a few exceptions (hair, beards, most eyebrows, elf bodies) I thought the game was visually stunning. The level design was gorgeous and I loved the amount of care and detail put into everything. Even the fabric textures were spot-on realistic. The voice acting was also superb as usual and I really enjoyed getting to play a non-human again. That being said, in my book the game was weak in many ways:

 

-The intro: players are not introduced to the world and the story in a way that makes them care or attaches them to what's happening around them. They are simply thrust into action and explosions after two minutes of people simply telling you what happened. Who was Divine Justinia and why should I care? What is the temple of sacred ashes and what were people doing there? What was *I* doing there? Do I know anyone that was killed? To go along with that, too many characters are introduced to quickly and the game relies on the player having experience with the first two games so they already know Cassandra, Leliana, Cullen, and Varric. Add Solas and that's 5 major characters introduced within 20 minutes with hardly any screen time or interaction. Which brings me to:

 

-The game relies on the player's experience with past games and EU (books, comics, etc...) rather than doing much in the way of character development. Varric especially seemed so pointless in this game, I definitely felt like the writer's went "hey, Varric is popular, let's shoehorn him in!" Celine/Briala/Gaspard/Fiona weren't developed at all and I never read the books they were in so I had nothing to fill in the blanks with.

 

-The villain was painfully generic and boring. It takes a skilled storyteller to take the old and tired "ancient evil wizard threatens to destroy the world with his monster army" and make it interesting, DA:I wasn't one of these cases. It was as boring and cliche as you'd expect. The only thing that set it apart was that Corypheus was completely incompetent and your character just steamrolled over him and his plans at every turn. (The one exception being the battle for Haven which imo was the best sequence in the entire game).

 

-Outside of Skyhold there is almost nobody to talk to. The only NPCs you can interact with are shopkeepers and quest givers. No random NPCs you can simply have a conversation with to make the world feel more alive and get a handle on what's going on in the area. The quest givers themselves were also extremely lackluster to me. A lot of it is probably the zoomed out camera during conversations which doesn't let me see their face or connect with them emotionally but the dialogue with them is also quite short, usually only a few lines. BioWare didn't even bother to name most of them and instead they're "elven widow" or "herbalist" and so on.

 

-The companions: heresy, I know! While I didn't think the companions were horrible, imo they were weaker than any other BioWare game I've played (KotOR-present). This comes from the lack of character development for returning characters, the lack of connection between any of the companions and the plot, the lack of reaction or interaction during most quests (aside from maybe a short comment) and the fact that they never argue with or oppose you. In DA:O for example there were several times when characters would argue with you, question your decisions, suggest (or demand) you do something else, etc...In DA:I it just felt like they took a bunch of wacky personalities and put them all in a castle with no real reason to be there. 

 

-The combat: DA combat isn't my thing in general (I like the kind of combat you find in ME2 and 3, Skyrim, and so on) but in the other two games it let me automate the tedium by setting detailed companion tactics and didn't arbitrarily restrict me to 8 abilities (and no, consoles can't be blamed for this sudden limit since all abilities were available at any time through the radial menu before). The removal of healing and the fact that enemies are damage sponges even on casual made me bring companions that were resilient rather than ones I wanted to bring because I liked them. Don't even get me started on the pants-on-head retarded Ai...

 

-The exploration and side quests: The vast majority of (non-companion) sidequests were completely boring and unsatisfying to me. Each one was either: talk to nameless NPC who gives you one or two lines of dialogue about some trinket they lost or need then go get the thing and return, OR read a note talking about a lost trinket, get the thing and bring it to where the note says. They were all so generic and gave me zero reason to care. The best one by far was the Crestwood undead one but even that one is something I'd consider weak to mediocre in a better game. There's no human element. I cleared out some undead and sealed a rift but who did I save? A bunch of non-reactive, non-interactive cardboard cutouts in the village? I don't care about them. The game gives me no reason to. There's not a single (non-companion)sidequest in the entire game that I think "I can't wait to do that one again!" No choices, no interesting characters, very rarely any dialogue options, just trudging around looking for lost rings and goats. I might feel differently if I loved the combat and doing these tasks gave me an excuse to fight more enemies or something but that wasn't the case. To me the exploration was pointless as well since no matter where I went there was nothing of value to find. Not even any interesting looking armor or a special companion gift that would spark a conversation like in previous games.

 

-The limited armor options. I was very disappointed with how little variety there was in the armor you can craft, especially for the Qunari.

 

-Technical issues that were never fixed (for me at least) such as the male elf arms being broken and sucked into his torso, water effects covering everything both inside and out in Therinfall Redoubt and Crestwood, party banter only triggering once every 3-6 hours of wandering (and one of the recent patches made it so party banter is completely gone from my game. Companions don't even use battle shouts anymore).

 

-The plot: weak and disjointed with screwed up pacing and no sense of urgency that for the most part gave me little reason to care about what was happening. The whole "chosen one who is the only person that can save the world" was not compelling here either. I give them props for attempting to break from the trope by making the chosen status an accident but it ended up exactly the same. The exceptions were the Haven battle and the Temple of Mythal. The fact that the heroes just trample Corypheus with almost no setback, no tragedy, etc...Not fun.

 

-The inquisitor's limited choices and limited personality. I feel like this was another case of BioWare's notorious overreaction to criticism: DA2's tones were too comical and over the top so DA:I made it so you could only be very mild and never passionate. You can be polite, neutral, or slightly cranky or joking but never boisterous, evil, ruthless, no passion. There are no good or evil choices, only A or B and since the sidequests don't have roleplaying/flavor choices, you're left with a very bland character that you have to supplement with headcanon.

 

-Things that make no sense: The inquisitor is accepted as the leader immediately, even while still a prisoner. The reason they give for following her orders "you're the one with the mark and the one we have to keep alive" that's unreasonable and illogical. At the end Corypheus raises up a bunch of ruins high into the sky with magic but we are never shown how or why. If he could do that, why not just let the inquisitor fall to her death? Also how did the party get down safely after Corypheus dies? In Haven after the inquisitor starts the avalanche, Corypheus has time to fry her with magic but he just stands there staring at her running away and does nothing. A lot of random details in the game felt like they had hardly any thought or effort put into them.

 

-The mage/templar "war:" This was built up for the whole of DA2, it should have been the main plot of DA:I but was pushed aside and resolved in a side quest where you kill a few roving bands of mages/templars. You never see a war, at most you get a small cluster of mages or templars on whichever side you choose to recruit but this was supposed to be an uprising that rocked Thedas, not the equivalent of a bandit group. This could have been a great game with an interesting plot based on the mage/templar conflict rather than "defeat ancient evil guy."

 

I could say more but I've ranted enough and it's time to sleep.

Excellent post young one. I could not have said it better myself. DAI isn't bad and it was a financial success but it was weak sauce compared to most previous BW titles.

[Uccio]

^ I have to agree completely. Well put and thoroughly Nefla. 

[Panda]

Playing PS3 version is enough for me to think this game as failure.

[Ariella]

Fears don't have to be rational. I hope I am wrong about DA fading away into the night. Gaming like this is a form of art that should receive government sponsorship as far as I'm concerned.

No they don't but running around yelling that the sky is falling when there's no evidence of it is silly, in my opinion.

As for why DAI failed? They created the story line and then introduced a kill switch by presenting the theme of Thedas being destroyed. I see it as a failure because the story line creates unfulfilled expectations. The heroic death of the Inquisitor is an expectation created by the Solas romance option which abandoned it. In terms of the story line its an unsatisfactory ending. How many novels do you read that end like that? Computer gaming competes with cinema, TV, and novels for market share. Just because a title like DAI is a commercial success doesn't mean it is a literary success. When Bioware starts dropping out story elements it creates the impression that something is missing. People tend to view that as a problem and cause for concern. This is not arguing the point. I am just telling you which way the wind is blowing. I hope things work out because I would like to see a DA4. The real question is why Bioware would put a kill switch in DAI to begin with unless they intend to use it? Once Solas destroys Thedas the DA story is over.

A kill switch? Based on one iteration of the game which only the people who romance Solas saw. The ending, where you close the Breach for a second time, has no kill switch. You stop the threat: Corypheus and the Breach. Now we're on to a new threat.

Trespasser is an epilogue which sets up DA4. The main threat has been dealt with, the story is closing down, and this is setup for what comes next. Solas is a threat that's set to be dealt with in a later installment. This is Chekhov's law. We're seeing the gun in the first act, and we'll wait for it to be used in the third.

Yes, games compete with other entertainment media, but trying to compare books and movies, which are passive pursuits to games is foolish. You don't like the story, fine. Calling it a literary failure because you didn't like it is sounds pretentious and silly to me.

And for the record: Thedas was destroyed. The Conclave explosion was the final nail. Mike Laidlaw said the whole point of DAI was saving Thedas from itself. The game did that.

[darkway1]

NEFILA,that was a brilliant and constructive post,ty for posting.

[DanAxe]

Sadly the Dragon Age experience - from start to finish - is about how elvahn originally fell and their collective struggle to be restored. The entire concept of Thedas is merely the stage where this struggle is played out. Whether one chooses to play an elf or some other race merely determines whether the player is a means to the end, or an actual participant. By the end of Inqusition the player is left drained and exhausted. The true plot appears to be lost as the playing experience reaches what amounts to the lowest point since the series began. At this point it seems doubtful that the Dragon Age game designers can ever restore the hope of the elvahn. Players will progress towards less and less interest until the Dragon Age experience itself dwindles and dies with its elven story. Without hope for the elvahn there is no Dragon Age story.

 

Hmm... what?

 

Sure, the elvhenan plot and its pantheon is very important and front and center for DA:I. But what makes you think Dragon Age is ALL about that plot? What do you even mean by your post? That Dragon Age should go back to its (DA)Origins? You do realize the main plot of the first game is not resolved yet right? And that in order to resolve it, we need to understand what is really going on. There are still 2 blights to go, and make no mistake, we are going to fight them both before the series is done. And so far, there is no proof that the blights are connected with the elf plots. In the end, everything is probably connected because after all, elvhenan was in Thedas way before any of the other races and "gods" arrived there, so there's that. Also, in the next game everything indicates we are going to Tevinter to get hands-on on the Tevinter/Qunari plot. So, what are you really complaining about? I dont get it.

[Ariella]

Hmm... what?
 
Sure, the elvhenan plot and its pantheon is very important and front and center for DA:I. But what makes you think Dragon Age is ALL about that plot? What do you even mean by your post? That Dragon Age should go back to its (DA)Origins? You do realize the main plot of the first game is not resolved yet right? And that in order to resolve it, we need to understand what is really going on. There are still 2 blights to go, and make no mistake, we are going to fight them both before the series is done. And so far, there is no proof that the blights are connected with the elf plots. In the end, everything is probably connected because after all, elvhenan was in Thedas way before any of the other races and "gods" arrived there, so there's that. Also, in the next game everything indicates we are going to Tevinter to get hands-on on the Tevinter/Qunari plot. So, what are you really complaining about? I dont get it.

I'm not sure we'll have two more blights before the 100 years are up, but I do think we're going to find out a lot more about the Old Gods sooner rather than later.

Other than that I give a resounding A-freaking-men!

[DanAxe]

Do you really expect anymore DA games will follow? Inquisition was a finale. The entire game lore for Thedas magic begins and ends with the elvhen. The Bioware story doesn't provide much hope for a sequel and although Inqusition had excellent aspects it also had terrible ones as well. The War Counsel where you assign missions was boring and near the end of the game tedious. Eventually I found myself in a position where I spent less then 5 minutes playing and then had to wait 18 to 20 hours because I ran out of missions. It is probably the greatest flaw in the game. I was forced to either abandon the missions or wait because the only choice left was the ending. Not a very brilliant design.

 

Hmm... Yes. Yes i expect more games to follow. 3 more actually. Dragon Age Origins took 7 years to develop. You know why? Because it was the time it took for the writers to come up with the whole story of Dragon Age series. It didnt took them 7 years to develop Origins itself, it took them 7 years to develop the dragon age saga. And from the beggining they built Thedas lore to last for 6 games. Will they make 6 games? I guess it depends on sales and EA, but you can be sure they have enough story and lore to last 6 games. Which puts us at about half of the whole story at the end of Inquisition. 3 games is a lot to develop just the elvhen plots, they didnt write themselves into a corner with that, you can be sure. Did you know Dragon Age writers have their own internal Wiki with the WHOLE story from beggining to end? And its so big and complex that they NEED a Wiki so that every writer can consult it without feeling lost in all that lore.

 

People keep selling the saga short saying writers wrote themselves in a corner and retcon stuff and blablabla, when in fact they have showed from the beggining that is not true. Have some faith

[DanAxe]

I'm not sure we'll have two more blights before the 100 years are up, but I do think we're going to find out a lot more about the Old Gods sooner rather than later.

Other than that I give a resounding A-freaking-men!

 

Ye it would be weird to have 3 blights in the same age, when all the others were so far apart in time. But the 5th blight was not natural (or as natural as a blight can be), it was forced by the Arquitect. So its possible some other magisters or a whole different party will cause the last 2 blights to happen before the end of the Dragon Age. Either way, the whole plot of the series is going to be inside the 100years of the Dragon Age, so before this Age is done, I'm sure we are going to fight the last 2 archdemons. Wether it happens during blights or because some completely different reason, remains to be seen

[Ariella]

Ye it would be weird to have 3 blights in the same age, when all the others were so far apart in time. But the 5th blight was not natural (or as natural as a blight can be), it was forced by the Arquitect. So its possible some other magisters or a whole different party will cause the last 2 blights to happen before the end of the Dragon Age. Either way, the whole plot of the series is going to be inside the 100years of the Dragon Age, so before this Age is done, I'm sure we are going to fight the last 2 archdemons. Wether it happens during blights or because some completely different reason, remains to be seen

 

I'm thinking we'll at least see Razikale in some form with all the references to her in JoH. I'm not sure if we'll fight them, but we probably will interact with them more directly. Hell, fighting beside one of the Old Gods would be a real twist.

[Derrame]

to say DAI is failure is a bit hard, but i understand what you mean, anyway, my thoughts on the subject is that there is a war, which we never see, and so many "exploration focused" fetch quests turn out to be boring

[X Equestris]

Then...what is even the point? If there;s 200+ game of the year awards how is there even a game of the year?

People usually base it on who got the most awards in total. DAI had more than double the awards of the next closest game (Middle Earth:Shadow of Mordor). The one after that had even less. I think that was Far Cry 4.

[ComedicSociopathy]

How? If you personally thought it was failure that's fine. But for the most part DA:I was a financial and critical success. 

[darkway1]

Hmm... Yes. Yes i expect more games to follow. 3 more actually. Dragon Age Origins took 7 years to develop. You know why? Because it was the time it took for the writers to come up with the whole story of Dragon Age series. It didnt took them 7 years to develop Origins itself, it took them 7 years to develop the dragon age saga. And from the beggining they built Thedas lore to last for 6 games. Will they make 6 games? I guess it depends on sales and EA, but you can be sure they have enough story and lore to last 6 games. Which puts us at about half of the whole story at the end of Inquisition. 3 games is a lot to develop just the elvhen plots, they didnt write themselves into a corner with that, you can be sure. Did you know Dragon Age writers have their own internal Wiki with the WHOLE story from beggining to end? And its so big and complex that they NEED a Wiki so that every writer can consult it without feeling lost in all that lore.

 

People keep selling the saga short saying writers wrote themselves in a corner and retcon stuff and blablabla, when in fact they have showed from the beggining that is not true. Have some faith

 

DA may well be established and mapped out from beginning to end but that has very little to do with how each game gets developed and in what direction it takes,it's this aspect that's very much in the hands of "today's" writers.

[vbibbi]

**Disclaimer: These are all my personal opinions based on my own priorities, likes and dislikes in a game**

 

I believe DA:I sold very well so I assume it was a financial success and it clearly has a lot of fans as well. Personally I think it was much weaker than what I would have expected from BioWare and that has nothing to do with the elven storyline. With a few exceptions (hair, beards, most eyebrows, elf bodies) I thought the game was visually stunning. The level design was gorgeous and I loved the amount of care and detail put into everything. Even the fabric textures were spot-on realistic. The voice acting was also superb as usual and I really enjoyed getting to play a non-human again. That being said, in my book the game was weak in many ways:

 

-The intro: players are not introduced to the world and the story in a way that makes them care or attaches them to what's happening around them. They are simply thrust into action and explosions after two minutes of people simply telling you what happened. Who was Divine Justinia and why should I care? What is the temple of sacred ashes and what were people doing there? What was *I* doing there? Do I know anyone that was killed? To go along with that, too many characters are introduced to quickly and the game relies on the player having experience with the first two games so they already know Cassandra, Leliana, Cullen, and Varric. Add Solas and that's 5 major characters introduced within 20 minutes with hardly any screen time or interaction. Which brings me to:

 

-The game relies on the player's experience with past games and EU (books, comics, etc...) rather than doing much in the way of character development. Varric especially seemed so pointless in this game, I definitely felt like the writer's went "hey, Varric is popular, let's shoehorn him in!" Celine/Briala/Gaspard/Fiona weren't developed at all and I never read the books they were in so I had nothing to fill in the blanks with.

 

-The villain was painfully generic and boring. It takes a skilled storyteller to take the old and tired "ancient evil wizard threatens to destroy the world with his monster army" and make it interesting, DA:I wasn't one of these cases. It was as boring and cliche as you'd expect. The only thing that set it apart was that Corypheus was completely incompetent and your character just steamrolled over him and his plans at every turn. (The one exception being the battle for Haven which imo was the best sequence in the entire game).

 

-Outside of Skyhold there is almost nobody to talk to. The only NPCs you can interact with are shopkeepers and quest givers. No random NPCs you can simply have a conversation with to make the world feel more alive and get a handle on what's going on in the area. The quest givers themselves were also extremely lackluster to me. A lot of it is probably the zoomed out camera during conversations which doesn't let me see their face or connect with them emotionally but the dialogue with them is also quite short, usually only a few lines. BioWare didn't even bother to name most of them and instead they're "elven widow" or "herbalist" and so on.

 

-The companions: heresy, I know! While I didn't think the companions were horrible, imo they were weaker than any other BioWare game I've played (KotOR-present). This comes from the lack of character development for returning characters, the lack of connection between any of the companions and the plot, the lack of reaction or interaction during most quests (aside from maybe a short comment) and the fact that they never argue with or oppose you. In DA:O for example there were several times when characters would argue with you, question your decisions, suggest (or demand) you do something else, etc...In DA:I it just felt like they took a bunch of wacky personalities and put them all in a castle with no real reason to be there. 

 

-The combat: DA combat isn't my thing in general (I like the kind of combat you find in ME2 and 3, Skyrim, and so on) but in the other two games it let me automate the tedium by setting detailed companion tactics and didn't arbitrarily restrict me to 8 abilities (and no, consoles can't be blamed for this sudden limit since all abilities were available at any time through the radial menu before). The removal of healing and the fact that enemies are damage sponges even on casual made me bring companions that were resilient rather than ones I wanted to bring because I liked them. Don't even get me started on the pants-on-head retarded Ai...

 

-The exploration and side quests: The vast majority of (non-companion) sidequests were completely boring and unsatisfying to me. Each one was either: talk to nameless NPC who gives you one or two lines of dialogue about some trinket they lost or need then go get the thing and return, OR read a note talking about a lost trinket, get the thing and bring it to where the note says. They were all so generic and gave me zero reason to care. The best one by far was the Crestwood undead one but even that one is something I'd consider weak to mediocre in a better game. There's no human element. I cleared out some undead and sealed a rift but who did I save? A bunch of non-reactive, non-interactive cardboard cutouts in the village? I don't care about them. The game gives me no reason to. There's not a single (non-companion)sidequest in the entire game that I think "I can't wait to do that one again!" No choices, no interesting characters, very rarely any dialogue options, just trudging around looking for lost rings and goats. I might feel differently if I loved the combat and doing these tasks gave me an excuse to fight more enemies or something but that wasn't the case. To me the exploration was pointless as well since no matter where I went there was nothing of value to find. Not even any interesting looking armor or a special companion gift that would spark a conversation like in previous games.

 

-The limited armor options. I was very disappointed with how little variety there was in the armor you can craft, especially for the Qunari.

 

-Technical issues that were never fixed (for me at least) such as the male elf arms being broken and sucked into his torso, water effects covering everything both inside and out in Therinfall Redoubt and Crestwood, party banter only triggering once every 3-6 hours of wandering (and one of the recent patches made it so party banter is completely gone from my game. Companions don't even use battle shouts anymore).

 

-The plot: weak and disjointed with screwed up pacing and no sense of urgency that for the most part gave me little reason to care about what was happening. The whole "chosen one who is the only person that can save the world" was not compelling here either. I give them props for attempting to break from the trope by making the chosen status an accident but it ended up exactly the same. The exceptions were the Haven battle and the Temple of Mythal. The fact that the heroes just trample Corypheus with almost no setback, no tragedy, etc...Not fun.

 

-The inquisitor's limited choices and limited personality. I feel like this was another case of BioWare's notorious overreaction to criticism: DA2's tones were too comical and over the top so DA:I made it so you could only be very mild and never passionate. You can be polite, neutral, or slightly cranky or joking but never boisterous, evil, ruthless, no passion. There are no good or evil choices, only A or B and since the sidequests don't have roleplaying/flavor choices, you're left with a very bland character that you have to supplement with headcanon.

 

-Things that make no sense: The inquisitor is accepted as the leader immediately, even while still a prisoner. The reason they give for following her orders "you're the one with the mark and the one we have to keep alive" that's unreasonable and illogical. At the end Corypheus raises up a bunch of ruins high into the sky with magic but we are never shown how or why. If he could do that, why not just let the inquisitor fall to her death? Also how did the party get down safely after Corypheus dies? In Haven after the inquisitor starts the avalanche, Corypheus has time to fry her with magic but he just stands there staring at her running away and does nothing. A lot of random details in the game felt like they had hardly any thought or effort put into them.

 

-The mage/templar "war:" This was built up for the whole of DA2, it should have been the main plot of DA:I but was pushed aside and resolved in a side quest where you kill a few roving bands of mages/templars. You never see a war, at most you get a small cluster of mages or templars on whichever side you choose to recruit but this was supposed to be an uprising that rocked Thedas, not the equivalent of a bandit group. This could have been a great game with an interesting plot based on the mage/templar conflict rather than "defeat ancient evil guy."

 

I could say more but I've ranted enough and it's time to sleep.

 

I agree with all of this so much. Very well expressed and thought out points. People who criticize the critical/disappointed players say "if you don't like it, stop posting here." But for me, and from my impression of your post, we vocalize our criticism because we're so passionate about the franchise and Bioware's potential; there really aren't other games like Dragon Age in the current market. The criticism is not just to whine and moan, but to point out areas where we felt let down when Bioware has previously proven that they can do better. We WANT Bioware to succeed and do better, we don't want to have them fail and dance in their ashes. Tough love is still love!

 

So I'm glad there are posters like you who can rationally express areas they wish were improved, and provide solid feedback for future games. Thank you.

 

* DAO was about origins, and DA2 spent a great deal of time on intros. DAI offered a different way to dive into the story. While I personally prefer the origins, this varied approach was not poor. Also the question concerning personal involvement for all the characters was available at the Official Site.

* Other info may have been helpful, but was not needed. The Keep took care of many such details.

* Personally wanted Cory to be the villain so I am biased and pleased.

* Scout Harding, Mother Giselle, and several NPC's in the starting area of Haven offer info and conversations.

* Cole - fave new character. Cullen - actually kind of like the guy I wanted to deck in DAO. Great writing, IMO.

* While I would prefer more Quickslots and more abilities, the options presented via Trespasser and combat in general was the best paced of the series, and less animated then what was experienced in DA2. While I would also request a return to that Tactics system, the one in DAI does work

* Almost every area had a major side quest for being there. Besides Crestwood, I enjoy helping in the Hinterlands, taking a Keep in the Western Approach, hunting treasure in the Hissing Wastes, saving soldiers in the Keep in the Exalted Plains, and aiding the Elves in all three sections of the Dales among other quests.

* Armor - most variety thus far. While I still love the looks in DAO, ended the game with almost the same look for each class.

* Never had a banter glitch, but understand this was fixed for others in the previous patch.

* Plot, choices, and personality - Disagree, and like all three components, IMO.

* The prisoner did not take over, but was allowed to have a say which path to take because they had a mark that was going to kill them. Leadership was not assigned until after, and that was bad on sealing the Breach, and helping at Haven. The Inq could have saved themselves from falling the same way they did earlier; by opening a rift. nd there re always the unknowns when dealing with magic.

* The majority of the War took place between DA2 and DAI, so that was not the focus. While some may wish it had, others preferred other possibilities including what was selected.

 

I respect your right to your opinion and am glad that you are as passionate about the game as critics. But sometimes it seems like your posts are reflexive responses to criticism that refute everything posted without actually trying to understand where the criticism is coming from. Nefla clearly stated that this is her opinion based on her values in a game, not an objective fact. You seem to indicate (in my view) that what flaws she found in the game are false and she should not be posting her thoughts. You are stating what happened in the game and that you enjoyed it. Great, I am happy that you've enjoyed it. She is posting what she would have liked to see in order for her to have better enjoyed the game. Neither opinion is better or worse than the other.

 

And honestly, her points all resonate strongly with me, and your posts don't really refute any of what she said.

[Elhanan]

I agree with all of this so much. Very well expressed and thought out points. People who criticize the critical/disappointed players say "if you don't like it, stop posting here." But for me, and from my impression of your post, we vocalize our criticism because we're so passionate about the franchise and Bioware's potential; there really aren't other games like Dragon Age in the current market. The criticism is not just to whine and moan, but to point out areas where we felt let down when Bioware has previously proven that they can do better. We WANT Bioware to succeed and do better, we don't want to have them fail and dance in their ashes. Tough love is still love!
 
So I'm glad there are posters like you who can rationally express areas they wish were improved, and provide solid feedback for future games. Thank you. 
 
I respect your right to your opinion and am glad that you are as passionate about the game as critics. But sometimes it seems like your posts are reflexive responses to criticism that refute everything posted without actually trying to understand where the criticism is coming from. Nefla clearly stated that this is her opinion based on her values in a game, not an objective fact. You seem to indicate (in my view) that what flaws she found in the game are false and she should not be posting her thoughts. You are stating what happened in the game and that you enjoyed it. Great, I am happy that you've enjoyed it. She is posting what she would have liked to see in order for her to have better enjoyed the game. Neither opinion is better or worse than the other.
 
And honestly, her points all resonate strongly with me, and your posts don't really refute any of what she said.

Voicing my own opinion may not refute any points, but does indicate that not all believe the same conclusions. In this case, only a few points were seemingly invalid or already have been fixed.

[ESTAQ99]

**Disclaimer: These are all my personal opinions based on my own priorities, likes and dislikes in a game**

 

I believe DA:I sold very well so I assume it was a financial success and it clearly has a lot of fans as well. Personally I think it was much weaker than what I would have expected from BioWare and that has nothing to do with the elven storyline. With a few exceptions (hair, beards, most eyebrows, elf bodies) I thought the game was visually stunning. The level design was gorgeous and I loved the amount of care and detail put into everything. Even the fabric textures were spot-on realistic. The voice acting was also superb as usual and I really enjoyed getting to play a non-human again. That being said, in my book the game was weak in many ways:

 

-The intro: players are not introduced to the world and the story in a way that makes them care or attaches them to what's happening around them. They are simply thrust into action and explosions after two minutes of people simply telling you what happened. Who was Divine Justinia and why should I care? What is the temple of sacred ashes and what were people doing there? What was *I* doing there? Do I know anyone that was killed? To go along with that, too many characters are introduced to quickly and the game relies on the player having experience with the first two games so they already know Cassandra, Leliana, Cullen, and Varric. Add Solas and that's 5 major characters introduced within 20 minutes with hardly any screen time or interaction. Which brings me to:

 

-The game relies on the player's experience with past games and EU (books, comics, etc...) rather than doing much in the way of character development. Varric especially seemed so pointless in this game, I definitely felt like the writer's went "hey, Varric is popular, let's shoehorn him in!" Celine/Briala/Gaspard/Fiona weren't developed at all and I never read the books they were in so I had nothing to fill in the blanks with.

 

-The villain was painfully generic and boring. It takes a skilled storyteller to take the old and tired "ancient evil wizard threatens to destroy the world with his monster army" and make it interesting, DA:I wasn't one of these cases. It was as boring and cliche as you'd expect. The only thing that set it apart was that Corypheus was completely incompetent and your character just steamrolled over him and his plans at every turn. (The one exception being the battle for Haven which imo was the best sequence in the entire game).

 

-Outside of Skyhold there is almost nobody to talk to. The only NPCs you can interact with are shopkeepers and quest givers. No random NPCs you can simply have a conversation with to make the world feel more alive and get a handle on what's going on in the area. The quest givers themselves were also extremely lackluster to me. A lot of it is probably the zoomed out camera during conversations which doesn't let me see their face or connect with them emotionally but the dialogue with them is also quite short, usually only a few lines. BioWare didn't even bother to name most of them and instead they're "elven widow" or "herbalist" and so on.

 

-The companions: heresy, I know! While I didn't think the companions were horrible, imo they were weaker than any other BioWare game I've played (KotOR-present). This comes from the lack of character development for returning characters, the lack of connection between any of the companions and the plot, the lack of reaction or interaction during most quests (aside from maybe a short comment) and the fact that they never argue with or oppose you. In DA:O for example there were several times when characters would argue with you, question your decisions, suggest (or demand) you do something else, etc...In DA:I it just felt like they took a bunch of wacky personalities and put them all in a castle with no real reason to be there. 

 

-The combat: DA combat isn't my thing in general (I like the kind of combat you find in ME2 and 3, Skyrim, and so on) but in the other two games it let me automate the tedium by setting detailed companion tactics and didn't arbitrarily restrict me to 8 abilities (and no, consoles can't be blamed for this sudden limit since all abilities were available at any time through the radial menu before). The removal of healing and the fact that enemies are damage sponges even on casual made me bring companions that were resilient rather than ones I wanted to bring because I liked them. Don't even get me started on the pants-on-head retarded Ai...

 

-The exploration and side quests: The vast majority of (non-companion) sidequests were completely boring and unsatisfying to me. Each one was either: talk to nameless NPC who gives you one or two lines of dialogue about some trinket they lost or need then go get the thing and return, OR read a note talking about a lost trinket, get the thing and bring it to where the note says. They were all so generic and gave me zero reason to care. The best one by far was the Crestwood undead one but even that one is something I'd consider weak to mediocre in a better game. There's no human element. I cleared out some undead and sealed a rift but who did I save? A bunch of non-reactive, non-interactive cardboard cutouts in the village? I don't care about them. The game gives me no reason to. There's not a single (non-companion)sidequest in the entire game that I think "I can't wait to do that one again!" No choices, no interesting characters, very rarely any dialogue options, just trudging around looking for lost rings and goats. I might feel differently if I loved the combat and doing these tasks gave me an excuse to fight more enemies or something but that wasn't the case. To me the exploration was pointless as well since no matter where I went there was nothing of value to find. Not even any interesting looking armor or a special companion gift that would spark a conversation like in previous games.

 

-The limited armor options. I was very disappointed with how little variety there was in the armor you can craft, especially for the Qunari.

 

-Technical issues that were never fixed (for me at least) such as the male elf arms being broken and sucked into his torso, water effects covering everything both inside and out in Therinfall Redoubt and Crestwood, party banter only triggering once every 3-6 hours of wandering (and one of the recent patches made it so party banter is completely gone from my game. Companions don't even use battle shouts anymore).

 

-The plot: weak and disjointed with screwed up pacing and no sense of urgency that for the most part gave me little reason to care about what was happening. The whole "chosen one who is the only person that can save the world" was not compelling here either. I give them props for attempting to break from the trope by making the chosen status an accident but it ended up exactly the same. The exceptions were the Haven battle and the Temple of Mythal. The fact that the heroes just trample Corypheus with almost no setback, no tragedy, etc...Not fun.

 

-The inquisitor's limited choices and limited personality. I feel like this was another case of BioWare's notorious overreaction to criticism: DA2's tones were too comical and over the top so DA:I made it so you could only be very mild and never passionate. You can be polite, neutral, or slightly cranky or joking but never boisterous, evil, ruthless, no passion. There are no good or evil choices, only A or B and since the sidequests don't have roleplaying/flavor choices, you're left with a very bland character that you have to supplement with headcanon.

 

-Things that make no sense: The inquisitor is accepted as the leader immediately, even while still a prisoner. The reason they give for following her orders "you're the one with the mark and the one we have to keep alive" that's unreasonable and illogical. At the end Corypheus raises up a bunch of ruins high into the sky with magic but we are never shown how or why. If he could do that, why not just let the inquisitor fall to her death? Also how did the party get down safely after Corypheus dies? In Haven after the inquisitor starts the avalanche, Corypheus has time to fry her with magic but he just stands there staring at her running away and does nothing. A lot of random details in the game felt like they had hardly any thought or effort put into them.

 

-The mage/templar "war:" This was built up for the whole of DA2, it should have been the main plot of DA:I but was pushed aside and resolved in a side quest where you kill a few roving bands of mages/templars. You never see a war, at most you get a small cluster of mages or templars on whichever side you choose to recruit but this was supposed to be an uprising that rocked Thedas, not the equivalent of a bandit group. This could have been a great game with an interesting plot based on the mage/templar conflict rather than "defeat ancient evil guy."

 

I could say more but I've ranted enough and it's time to sleep.

 

 

Excellent post!!! Agree 100%.

 

I just would like to add that if Bioware will ever be allow to bring another DA game (most probably in a distant future), please make sure you hire the right person to direct and coordinate the pc platform of the game. One that had played at least once during the development process with a keyboard/mouse, unlike the guy they used this time who confessed on one of the threads here that he never, ever touched a k/m during the entire process of developing DAI (that explains a lot). The development of the pc platform for DAI was shameful mess.

[vbibbi]

Voicing my own opinion may not refute any points, but does indicate that not all believe the same conclusions. In this case, only a few points were seemingly invalid or already have been fixed.

 

Fair enough. And as I said, you have just as much right to voice your opinions as anyone else.

[vbibbi]

Excellent post!!! Agree 100%.

 

I just would like to add that if Bioware will ever be allow to bring another DA game (most probably in a distant future), please make sure you hire the right person to direct and coordinate the pc platform of the game. One that had played at least once during the development process with a keyboard/mouse, unlike the guy they used this time who confessed on one of the threads here that he never, ever touched a k/m during the entire process of developing DAI (that explains a lot). The development of the pc platform for DAI was shameful mess.

 

And hire a good project manager. For all of the development time provided, I would have thought the structure of the game would have been stronger. Why is the final quest so lackluster? Did they run out of time developing one of the many plot irrelevant zones to complete the main plot quests? Hopefully now that they've used the game engine they will have less trouble with the technical aspects going forward.

[duckley]

Huh????

[Elhanan]

Huh????

Long story; short - tis another complaint thread. Caution: slippery road ahead....