The thing is that people who love Bioware's games didn't like DAI that much and have stated reasons why they didn't, sadly Bioware does seem to ignore these concerns and even uses things people are concerned about as selling points of game.
Oh yes, so the people here who like DA:I aren't people who love Bioware's games, they are just... what? Bandwagoning? Fanboys?
Stop acting like you know what you're talking about.
I actually wrote about this in another thread so I will just copy paste it:
"Gaming sites love DAI, but actual fans of game not so much. Players tend to give it much lower scores, for example on Metacritic critic have given it 85/100 (average) and players 5.8/10 (average), none of critics have given negative review when majority of reviews from players are negative there. There is quite bit of difference on what players like and what critics like I guess.
I wouldn't say DAI a last straw, not really even bad game, but it was game with many faults, some from design, some from bugs that never got and will be fixed and the game is just simply far from the overwhelming positive reviews it got from game critics"
It scares me that game like DAI is seen as success, because it failed in many aspects that people like Bioware's games and is not even that loved within actual gamers. It scares me cause I think ME:A might just do what DAI did without looking into anything that players found wrong with the game: big empty maps, short main story, next to no side quest, fetch quest, lack of cinematic dialogue, bugs..
And FANS have also given it multiple gamer choice awards. This ideas that FANS don't like it is being pushed by a minority that just can't stand that their subjective dislike for the game is not universally shared. Gamer meta scores are almost universally LOWER than critics so yeah showing it lower than critics isn't actually and indicator that the game is disliked. It is a well know fact that you are more likely to complain vs compliment a product so negative comments always get skewed to appear like they are more representational then they are. Sales and awards show this isn't the fans dislike this game you don't win MULTIPLE gamer choice awards when your fans dislike your game.
The fact that it has won awards that are chosen by Fans shows that it is actually LIKE by fans. The fact that it has consistently done well in sales aka it wasn't just a large burst of sales at launch then poof no one bought is yet another sign that it was liked by fans.
So what are the FACTS to your claims?
Short main story? There are 12 main quests in DA:I and 13 main quests in DA:O and 5 of these main quests haven at Ostagar so there are only 8 main quests in all of DA:O once you leave Ostagar. So DA:I stands on PAR with DA:O the story quest length isn't short its roughly the same as other Bioware games in the series. SO Zombie lie told by those who don't like DA:I.
Next to no side quests
There are 23 companion quests in DA:I and 220 side quests compared to 6 companion quests in DA:O and 102 side quests. The ratios of how many side quests you can do to for ever single main quests and companion quests for each is roughly the same DA:O is 5.368 and DA:I is 6.286.
Fetch quests
The mechanics of the quests are the similar with some being 100% identical. The much maligned acquire 10 ram meat MMO style quest is 100% mechanically identical wit ha Lothering quest of get me X spider glans to poison my traps at roughly the same point story point in each of the games. Again yet another Zombie lie told about DA:I. Find love letters or places of power are collectable quests examples in DA:O and they are not limited to just these two. Bring x zombie brains to the chantry board is yet another fetch quest in DA:O exactly like the spider glans quest. This idea that past bioware games don't have them is false. It is BS. The mechanics of the quests are similar or identical. Zombie lie.
Cinematic direction
This is a real change not just a cognitive bias change that the FACTS don't support, And this is one of those things that players are going to be split on as there is no right or wrong answer. Some people like the new direction with fewer pointless cinematics for a unimportant conversations other people want more of the cinematic conversations. I side with you on this, I'd like to see more but this does not make it a bad game.
Bugs
Every game title has bugs and I never experienced a single one of the PC bugs and i was running the game on a 6 year old computer at the time, an i7 920 which I have to replace this year as it is getting long in the tooth. I did not find the game especially buggy nor unstable, yes i did experience some bugs but you do with every title. I find gamers who don't like a game always over claim it is bug ridden but I can't say that DA:I was anymore buggy then any other Bioware title or any other AAA game.
I get that if you don't like exploration in games then DA:I is NOT going to appeal to you. Exploration has always been a part of ME with hit and miss results for the mechanics and given the success of DA:I but both critics AND fans (sorry but fans do like it) expect it in ME:A especially when they said it is going to be a major focus of the game.
Lets not claim the BS about the quests are the reason the game is poor those lies are recycled over and over again but the facts don't support it. What is odd is that it is perfectly acceptable to say I just don't like X game and give no justification because likes are subjective. Yet this goal that SOME of the vocal minority have is they want to try and negate the success of DA:I because they don't like it so they recycle these falsehoods mostly because they don't expect hard numbers to show how wrong their claims are.
If you're gonna break it down by the numbers I won't argue with the part about which game technically had more filler. But if people are walking away from DA:O with smiles on their faces, and the same people are walking away from DA:I complaining too much about how side content overtook the main story, then something is wrong, and it was how it was all presented. I mean you can't just say "Well according to my calculations, DA:I is mathematically the better way for them to present their games", because human beings aren't that simple. That's just not a real proper way to try and evoke a positive emotional response from them. So number crunching aside, if a lot of fans are being very vocal about ME:A not being like DA:I, then DA:I shouldn't be how they present their future games.
That said, it took me 50 hours to pretty much 100% DA:O, but it took much longer to 100% DA:I. And I know for a fact I spent more time doing main story content in DA:O than I did DA:I. So whatever numbers you want to crunch is fine with me, I won't tell you you're wrong. But I'm saying from my personal experience, I don't feel the same way you do.
So don't give you facts because they conflict with your narrative about DA:I. "I know for a fact i..." err no you don't know for a fact you perceive this is the case but the actual FACTS given show that your perception is given rise to cognitive bias. Yes it takes much longer to complete the content in DA:I than DA:O because there is over twice the amount of content in DA:I HOWEVER the ratios (you know that unhelpful mathematics that proves your position wrong?) of the content shows it is roughly the same and the design of DA:I ALLOWS you to skip more content that DA:O allowed.
These are facts with sources provided it isn't like I pulled these numbers out of my ass like the claims people are making about DA:I but what? You don't like these facts so... Just ignore them? I happen to be an evidence based person I let evidence you know pesky facts shape my opinion and my position of issues but you appear to be emotionally based person who freely ignores facts that don't support your own private little narrative.
You don't like DA:I fair enough that is a valid position to have but stop manufacturing and recycling Zombie lies.
Yes, it already sounds so bad
Why are they telling these things to us like it's something positive is mystery to me. Are they going to kill hype? Warn people in advance?
Because more people liked DA:I then disliked it and many people actually LIKE exploration.
I get it you don't, but stop acting like you subjective likes and dislikes are synonymous with every gamer they are not.
Short main story? There are 12 main quests in DA:I and 13 main quests in DA:O and 5 of these main quests haven at Ostagar so there are only 8 main quests in all of DA:O once you leave Ostagar. So DA:I stands on PAR with DA:O the story quest length isn't short its roughly the same as other Bioware games in the series. SO Zombie lie told by those who don't like DA:I.
While I agree with a fair degree of what you've said, some of these things don't really work as simple number-crunchers. We'd need to go a bit deeper, wouldn't you say? Getting a cutscene in Val Royeaux's marketplace isn't on the level with pretty much any of DAO's main quests, for example. Am I misremembering, or was that not in essence the bulk of one of DAI's earlier quests?
Oh yes, so the people here who like DA:I aren't people who love Bioware's games, they are just... what? Bandwagoning? Fanboys?
Stop acting like you know what you're talking about.
Stop acting like I have been there before release and watched what people had to say?
I'm not saying that none is allowed like game and aspect of it. But it simply isn't as liked as many BW's previous games and most BSNers have serious problems with it.
And FANS have also given it multiple gamer choice awards. This ideas that FANS don't like it is being pushed by a minority that just can't stand that their subjective dislike for the game is not universally shared. Gamer meta scores are almost universally LOWER than critics so yeah showing it lower than critics isn't actually and indicator that the game is disliked. It is a well know fact that you are more likely to complain vs compliment a product so negative comments always get skewed to appear like they are more representational then they are. Sales and awards show this isn't the fans dislike this game you don't win MULTIPLE gamer choice awards when your fans dislike your game.
The fact that it has won awards that are chosen by Fans shows that it is actually LIKE by fans. The fact that it has consistently done well in sales aka it wasn't just a large burst of sales at launch then poof no one bought is yet another sign that it was liked by fans.
So what are the FACTS to your claims?
Short main story? There are 12 main quests in DA:I and 13 main quests in DA:O and 5 of these main quests haven at Ostagar so there are only 8 main quests in all of DA:O once you leave Ostagar. So DA:I stands on PAR with DA:O the story quest length isn't short its roughly the same as other Bioware games in the series. SO Zombie lie told by those who don't like DA:I.
Next to no side quests
There are 23 companion quests in DA:I and 220 side quests compared to 6 companion quests in DA:O and 102 side quests. The ratios of how many side quests you can do to for ever single main quests and companion quests for each is roughly the same DA:O is 5.368 and DA:I is 6.286.
Fetch quests
The mechanics of the quests are the similar with some being 100% identical. The much maligned acquire 10 ram meat MMO style quest is 100% mechanically identical wit ha Lothering quest of get me X spider glans to poison my traps at roughly the same point story point in each of the games. Again yet another Zombie lie told about DA:I. Find love letters or places of power are collectable quests examples in DA:O and they are not limited to just these two. Bring x zombie brains to the chantry board is yet another fetch quest in DA:O exactly like the spider glans quest. This idea that past bioware games don't have them is false. It is BS. The mechanics of the quests are similar or identical. Zombie lie.
Cinematic direction
This is a real change not just a cognitive bias change that the FACTS don't support, And this is one of those things that players are going to be split on as there is no right or wrong answer. Some people like the new direction with fewer pointless cinematics for a unimportant conversations other people want more of the cinematic conversations. I side with you on this, I'd like to see more but this does not make it a bad game.
Bugs
Every game title has bugs and I never experienced a single one of the PC bugs and i was running the game on a 6 year old computer at the time, an i7 920 which I have to replace this year as it is getting long in the tooth. I did not find the game especially buggy nor unstable, yes i did experience some bugs but you do with every title. I find gamers who don't like a game always over claim it is bug ridden but I can't say that DA:I was anymore buggy then any other Bioware title or any other AAA game.
I get that if you don't like exploration in games then DA:I is NOT going to appeal to you. Exploration has always been a part of ME with hit and miss results for the mechanics and given the success of DA:I but both critics AND fans (sorry but fans do like it) expect it in ME:A especially when they said it is going to be a major focus of the game.
Lets not claim the BS about the quests are the reason the game is poor those lies are recycled over and over again but the facts don't support it. What is odd is that it is perfectly acceptable to say I just don't like X game and give no justification because likes are subjective. Yet this goal that SOME of the vocal minority have is they want to try and negate the success of DA:I because they don't like it so they recycle these falsehoods mostly because they don't expect hard numbers to show how wrong their claims are.
Sigh.
My "facts" is players opinions in this site and what players themselves have said and are worried about. All of these are complaints people have said all over, they aren't invented to me and they have been commented about since release. I simply hasn't seen many people happy with the game and rating it higher than other DA games.
Compared to other content the main story of DAI is short and lackluster. I don't have exact timings though.
I do not count majority of DAI's side quest as side quest, since there is close to interaction with anyone, it's mostly hey these two are fighting there go kill them to get their loot. If you are lucky you get line or two of dialogue, no dialogue choices for you though. I agree that there was some fetch quest in DAO as well, but overall there was much more meaningful quest than in empty world that was DAI. At least there wasn't any collect shards by jumping around hours quests.
The real side quest that had something interesting going on were all wartable one's.
DAI is most buggy game I have ever played. Some of that is due to playing trainwreck that is PS3 version, but I also played trial version of DAI on PC and half of characters I made was lost in limbo (since first was I wanted to try out if it was based on race or gender of character like some said in internet, but for me it wasn't). That's enormous bug that prevents you from playing entirely if it's persistent, my friend had that year ago.
EDIT: And I finished playing trial PC version today so this is very recent bug that is quite big and I can't imagine why devs haven't still fixed it after all this time.
Because more people liked DA:I then disliked it and many people actually LIKE exploration.
I get it you don't, but stop acting like you subjective likes and dislikes are synonymous with every gamer they are not.
Where are these people who love exploration and want ME:A to follow DAI then? All I have seen is people being afraid it might happen.
You missed the five years of bitching since ME2 about how the Mako and exploration was cut from the series?
No, stop saying things like this:
But it simply isn't as liked as many BW's previous games and most BSNers have serious problems with it.
You have no data whatsoever to back up your assertion that "most" BSNers feel a particular way about any particular thing. All you have is your anecdotal observations of the things you see people say, complete with your own confirmation bias.
So knock it off.
While I agree with a fair degree of what you've said, some of these things don't really work as simple number-crunchers. We'd need to go a bit deeper, wouldn't you say? Getting a cutscene in Val Royeaux's marketplace isn't on the level with pretty much any of DAO's main quests, for example. Am I misremembering, or was that not in essence the bulk of one of DAI's earlier quests?
What so having a debate with your advisors on the next step you should take for the inquisition, going to Val Royeaux learning key bits of lore in a cutscene that directly leads to two more companions quests and provides context for an important story branch decision doesn't count? Why?
While I agree with a fair degree of what you've said, some of these things don't really work as simple number-crunchers. We'd need to go a bit deeper, wouldn't you say? Getting a cutscene in Val Royeaux's marketplace isn't on the level with pretty much any of DAO's main quests, for example. Am I misremembering, or was that not in essence the bulk of one of DAI's earlier quests?
Here's how I see the main quests broken down in both DA:O and DA:I
DA:O
Origin Story - Kokari Wilds - Battle of Ostagar - Lothering - Redcliffe - Circle Tower - Orzammar/Deep Roads - Brecilian Forest - Temple of Sacred Ashes - The Denerim Landsmeet - Battle of Denerim
DA:I
Temple of Sacred Ashes - Redcliffe/Templar Fortess - Battle of Haven - Winter Palace - Adamant Fortress - The Fade - Temple of Mythal - Final Boss
The thing about DA:I is people who wanna defend it are gonna try to pull a "technically" on me, and say I should be counting the 10 minutes you spend in Val Royeux, or how you need to see Mother Giselle to progress the story. I'm not gonna argue with these people, because it should be obvious why I'm not counting those in comparison to the ones I listen in Origins. I didn't even want to list "Final Boss" in DA:I, because the final mission in the game was literally just a final boss. But I felt it was only right that I did.
So when I hear people tell me that I spent just as much time doing DA:I's Main Story questline as I did with DA:O's.......no. Just no. I'm sorry but I was there in my chair not too long ago playing through through all three Dragon Age games. I know how much time I spent. Hell the time it took me to get through the Ozrammar Story Arc, I think I could've gone through the Templar Fortress, Battle of Haven, and the Winter Palace in that same amount of time if I had done those three missions back to back.
Maaaaybe not quite in the same amount of time, but pretty damn close.
What so having a debate with your advisors on the next step you should take for the inquisition, going to Val Royeaux learning key bits of lore in a cutscene that directly leads to two more companions quests and provides context for an important story branch decision doesn't count? Why?
As I said, I may have been misremembering.
Here's how I see the main quests broken down in both DA:O and DA:I
DA:O
Origin Story - Kokari Wilds - Battle of Ostagar - Lothering - Redcliffe - Circle Tower - Orzammar/Deep Roads - Brecilian Forest - Temple of Sacred Ashes - The Denerim Landsmeet - Battle of Denerim
DA:I
Temple of Sacred Ashes - Redcliffe/Templar Fortess - Battle of Haven - Winter Palace - Adamant Fortress - The Fade - Temple of Mythal - Final Boss
The thing about DA:I is people who wanna defend it are gonna try to pull a "technically" on me, and say I should be counting the 10 minutes you spend in Val Royeux, or how you need to see Mother Giselle to progress the story. I'm not gonna argue with these people, because it should be obvious why I'm not counting those in comparison to the ones I listen in Origins. I didn't even want to list "Final Boss" in DA:I, because the final mission in the game was literally just a final boss. But I felt it was only right that I did.
So when I hear people tell me that I spent just as much time doing DA:I's Main Story questline as I did with DA:O's.......no. Just no. I'm sorry but I was there in my chair not too long ago playing through through all three Dragon Age games. I know how much time I spent. Hell the time it took me to get through the Ozrammar Story Arc, I think I could've gone through the Templar Fortress, Battle of Haven, and the Winter Palace in that same amount of time if I had done those three missions back to back.
Maaaaybe not quite in the same amount of time, but pretty damn close.
Thank you for offering some insight.
So OP is "concerned" about Mass Effect milking with four games in nine years yet is complimenting Marvel for the children's movies they pump out every six months.
Troll?
Planning out is tricky and creating stories or planning out in advance is tricky just look at what happened to Xenosaga they had four or five games mapped out before hand and all that came crashing down when they were forced to wrap up the game's story in the third one. You never know how well it will do or what will have to be changed later on
So OP is "concerned" about Mass Effect milking with four games in nine years yet is complimenting Marvel for the children's movies they pump out every six months.
Troll?
Where are these people who love exploration and want ME:A to follow DAI then? All I have seen is people being afraid it might happen.
Where are they? they are playing the game. They were the ones that voted for DA:I in gamer choice awards. You know those awards that DA:I won that we given to DA:I by gamers not critics. The ones doing youtube videos and getting likes and subscriptions. They are people who always arise and say i don't share you position about DA:I on the forums. They are people who fill the companion threads with 
about their favourite companion.
You and everyone else on your side of the fence dismiss the facts because they conflict with your personal bias. You don't like the game so you refuse to accept any evidence that your position isn't a majority. Or try to claim its not shared by Us die hard bioware fans. Well sorry but I am an an old bioware fan and I like exploration so i liked DA:I. And i am not a blind fanboy...
I don't think DA:I perfect and I really think the story is weak because the game climaxes at Haven. Cory is presented as this all powerful ultimate evil out of legend, yet you never lose against him. Haven isn't a loss its a great victory. You can defeat his main military force while keeping yours intact, you lose a village with mud roads and gain one of the most powerful keeps in all of Thedas. That is not a loss by any rational standard. Then at every turn the story presents you with victory after victory. Nothing in the mechanics suggests Cory is powerful and the story tells you specifically that he's militarily weak. Solas tells you that you have defeated his military and the means to obtain a new one after the warden quest arc. When the theme of the game is defeat the all powerful enemy, the story and mechanics shouldn't go out of their way to undermine this theme. An all powerful enemy ceases to be "all powerful" when EVERY encounter becomes a cost free victory. When you never get defeated, you never lose a companion, when you never fail the all powerful enemy quickly gets demoted to punching bag. This is why so many people find the final fight with Cory so anticlimactic because the theme, the story and the mechanics where all at cross purposes.
This is a cut and past of part of a private message i had with Allan Schumacher. I do not think DA:I is perfect i am more than willing to tell an employee of bioware this. yet for ME the good out weighted the bad. I also don't try to invalidate anyone opinion that DA:I sucks i simply challenge falsehoods. i am not saying you are wrong for disliking DA:I I am only saying many of your reasons for liking it are not grounded in fact.
The fans that like the games are there but if you choose to ignore them you wont see them. And they aren't the best metric, awards and sales are.
people don't buy games in large numbers if the games is getting overwhelming bad word of mouth. You get a short surge at release and then it dies but DA:I kept selling making it the most successful. You also don't get awarded numerous gamer choice awards in the 2 to 3 months after release of your game if people bought the game and hated it. Fans do not vote for games they hate. So there is evidence that shows your position isn't a majority but you don't like the idea that your position isn't shared by a majority so you ignore the evidence.
So OP is "concerned" about Mass Effect milking with four games in nine years yet is complimenting Marvel for the children's movies they pump out every six months.
Troll?
Three things:
1. You probably shouldn't be calling people a troll when you refer to Marvel films as "children's movies". You know exactly what you're doing there.
2. My point in bringing up Marvel Films was that I like their approach in how they present and plan out their universe. By announcing future plans in films, it shows me that they have a lot of confidence in their vision and that in turn makes me confident and looking forward to what they have in store for future entries.
3. Regardless of what you think, a lot of people have responded very positively to them. I'm not really here to argue what defines "milking a franchise", but when a company keeps churning out products that range from decent to awesome, milking the franchise doesn't come to my mind.
Now releasing the same thing every year with little to no real changes to the series, that's a whole nother story.
I don't think DA:I perfect and I really think the story is weak because the game climaxes at Haven. Cory is presented as this all powerful ultimate evil out of legend, yet you never lose against him. Haven isn't a loss its a great victory. You can defeat his main military force while keeping yours intact, you lose a village with mud roads and gain one of the most powerful keeps in all of Thedas. That is not a loss by any rational standard. Then at every turn the story presents you with victory after victory. Nothing in the mechanics suggests Cory is powerful and the story tells you specifically that he's militarily weak. Solas tells you that you have defeated his military and the means to obtain a new one after the warden quest arc. When the theme of the game is defeat the all powerful enemy, the story and mechanics shouldn't go out of their way to undermine this theme. An all powerful enemy ceases to be "all powerful" when EVERY encounter becomes a cost free victory. When you never get defeated, you never lose a companion, when you never fail the all powerful enemy quickly gets demoted to punching bag. This is why so many people find the final fight with Cory so anticlimactic because the theme, the story and the mechanics where all at cross purposes.
Nice. I've had that conversation before, myself. Several times. It's a pretty huge minus for me, much as I like the game overall. I like the story, too, even -- but it really missed a trick, and then just... goes out of its way to keep missing said trick.
people don't buy games in large numbers if the games is getting overwhelming bad word of mouth. You get a short surge at lease and then it dies but DA:I kept selling making it the most successful.
This, however, may be misinformation. Where are you basing that the game has consistently sold? Which metrics? What we know is that it's "BioWare's best launch ever." As I've seen discussed on many sites, this could mean anything EA wishes for it to mean. In fact, it could thereotically mean precisely what you're explaining would be a bad scenario -- although I rather doubt it's so dire. I do believe Inquisition has sold decently, but no official press release has ever claimed it's the most successfully-sold title, merely that it allegedly opened the best. And even that data is frequently distorted within the marketing industry across all forms of entertainment.
There are possible retail-side hints that it has sold fairly well, such as the game not hitting proverbial "bargain bin" pricepoints at GameStop even ten months in. But that's about all we can look at, AFAIK, and even that could be intentionally distorted.
Where are they? they are playing the game. They were the ones that voted for DA:I in gamer choice awards. You know those awards that DA:I won that we given to DA:I by gamers not critics. The ones doing youtube videos and getting likes and subscriptions. They are people who always arise and say i don't share you position about DA:I on the forums. They are people who fill the companion threads with
You and everyone else on your side of the fence dismiss the facts because they conflict with your personal bias. You don't like the game so you refuse to accept any evidence that your position isn't a majority. Or try to claim its not shared by Us die hard bioware fans. Well sorry but I am an an old bioware fan and I like exploration so i liked DA:I. And i am not a blind fanboy...
Many of the players who dislike DAI's exploration and other aspect, think it was worst game of DA's and hope bad aspects of DAI aren't part of DAI still like DAI's characters, are part of character threads and watch youtube videos. Many of these people are diehard BW fans, so you are bit wrong about that.
No I dismish "facts" based on what I have observed and I very much doubt my position isn't majority here.
You don't have to have every detail of an entire series planned out before the first part drops, but you should have all the major beats planned out before the first part drops if you hype your story as a trilogy or series. That's where the ME trilogy falls apart. They hyped it as a trilogy when ME1 came out but they very clearly had no idea where they were going with the series. ME2 is largely pointless to the overarching story and ME3 wasn't even planned out while they were developing it. They waited until late in the development process before locking down an ending. That's horrible management of a trilogy/series.
Mass Effect 2 wasn't largely pointless it explains what really happened to the Protheans and how not all of them were wiped out and what the reapers really did to the race
2. My point in bringing up Marvel Films was that I like their approach in how they present and plan out their universe. By announcing future plans in films, it shows me that they have a lot of confidence in their vision and that in turn makes me confident and looking forward to what they have in store for future entries.
Mass Effect 2 wasn't largely pointless it explains what really happened to the Protheans and how not all of them were wiped out and what the reapers really did to the race
Plot pointlessness =/= story pointlessness; they're two different conversations and it troubles me to see this forum's population repeatedly fail to ensure a distinction is made when such ME2-related claims are made. So I'll try to save you a bit of trouble in advance and explain that I think Killroy is referring to the main, critical plotline as introduced in ME1 and mostly followed through with in ME3, whilst hitting the backburner overall in ME2. That is to say, "the Reapers are at our doorstep, and we must find a way to defeat them or die trying." In ME2, the Protheans, agents of Reapers, are abducting colonists for a mysterious purpose. Does this tie in with the Reaper plot? Absolutely, unequivocally. Does it set the Reapers back in their plans? Sure. Does it bring the Reapers themselves to the forefront again and have you and your able crew map out ways to stop their armada? No, and for much of the game you're dealing with the crew's interpersonal scenarios, anyway. To some, that makes ME2 rather plot-pointless.
Here's how I see the main quests broken down in both DA:O and DA:I
DA:O
Origin Story - Kokari Wilds - Battle of Ostagar - Lothering - Redcliffe - Circle Tower - Orzammar/Deep Roads - Brecilian Forest - Temple of Sacred Ashes - The Denerim Landsmeet - Battle of Denerim
DA:I
Temple of Sacred Ashes - Redcliffe/Templar Fortess - Battle of Haven - Winter Palace - Adamant Fortress - The Fade - Temple of Mythal - Final Boss
The thing about DA:I is people who wanna defend it are gonna try to pull a "technically" on me, and say I should be counting the 10 minutes you spend in Val Royeux, or how you need to see Mother Giselle to progress the story. I'm not gonna argue with these people, because it should be obvious why I'm not counting those in comparison to the ones I listen in Origins. I didn't even want to list "Final Boss" in DA:I, because the final mission in the game was literally just a final boss. But I felt it was only right that I did.
So when I hear people tell me that I spent just as much time doing DA:I's Main Story questline as I did with DA:O's.......no. Just no. I'm sorry but I was there in my chair not too long ago playing through through all three Dragon Age games. I know how much time I spent. Hell the time it took me to get through the Ozrammar Story Arc, I think I could've gone through the Templar Fortress, Battle of Haven, and the Winter Palace in that same amount of time if I had done those three missions back to back.
Maaaaybe not quite in the same amount of time, but pretty damn close.
So you arbitrarily cut bits out of the main story of DA:I because it doesn't fit your narrative and give no actual reason for this, provide no actual evidence you just make claims to try and dispute actual NUMBERS?
'Don't get "technical" with me! your puny facts are nothing compared to my emotional position, begone you fools who use facts and "mathematics!" They have no place in the real world. I know what I feel is truth and you are only using facts to cloud the argument and mislead.'
Sure whatever. Can't have actual facts used in the conversation. Can't count quests that provide an exposé of our situation, that create context because well reasons people isn't it obvious?
pffftt
Many of the players who dislike DAI's exploration and other aspect, think it was worst game of DA's and hope bad aspects of DAI aren't part of DAI still like DAI's characters, are part of character threads and watch youtube videos. Many of these people are diehard BW fans, so you are bit wrong about that.
No I dismish "facts" based on what I have observed and I very much doubt my position isn't majority here.
I like Dragon Age: Inquisition. Really, I do. I would put ME1, ME2, DA:O and KotoR above it, but I still had a good time with it.
That said, there were aspects of it I hated. The lack of a satisfying final battle was one of them. The balance between exploration and story was the other. I know plenty of people who enjoyed the game that didn't like the overabundance of side content and exploration. It's not that I hate DA:I, it's just that don't want ME:A to follow the same formula.
Mass Effect 2 wasn't largely pointless it explains what really happened to the Protheans and how not all of them were wiped out and what the reapers really did to the race
Retour en haut
