85 réponses à ce sujet

[DragonRacer]

Players foolishly seem to believe that they need to complete all the quests they can find, and that they should keep looking for them until they stop appearing.

 

But DAI's power mechanic requires that there always be more power available, just in case the player has inadvertently trapped himself.  So, we see the infinitely respawning requisition quests, which are awful.

 

I never realised quite what people meant when they talked about all the fetch quests in DAI, because I wasn't doing requisition quests.  I've always only done the quests that made sense for my character.  I love that there are a bunch of different ways to play this game, and that most of the content is optional.  I also love that areas don't generally get closed to you just because you left.  But players appear to have been trained to behave differently.

 

Despite BioWare's best efforts, players can't be protected from themselves.  Developers should stop trying to do that.

 

I hardly think we can be blamed for thinking we might have to resolve all quests in an area before moving on because that area might not be available after we leave.

 

Anyone who left Lothering early in DAO can tell you that. *ahem* 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I hardly think we can be blamed for thinking we might have to resolve all quests in an area before moving on because that area might not be available after we leave.

Anyone who left Lothering early in DAO can tell you that. *ahem*

Perhaps, but that is an unfortunate trend. If DAI helps reverse that, good for DAI.

DAI's is the superior design in that respect.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Only 25 hours? I think I must have been at least half way to that just looking for Ferelden Locks.

And no, I never did get enough.

This is what I mean.

I played through the whole game never even knowing about Fereldan locks. If the requisition quests were the problem, then I have no objection to discarding the requisition quests.

But I'm worried that BioWare will overreact to this complaint and eliminate great swaths of side-quests. Yes, perhaps Ram's Meat isn't the best quest, but it gives a reason to explore a section of the map a player probably hasn't seen yet.

Overall, I think DAI's quests were good, but I might think that because I only ever did the first requisition quest upon reaching a zone (and I could usually complete them with the materials I already had on me).

[JeffZero]

I'm hoping there are only a few open regions in DA4, and they are all large, diverse, contain day/night and weather patterns, and, most crucially, a fair amount of cinematics in their side content.

Sylvius, I will also hope, for your sake, that they are teeming with content in general.

[Wulfram]

I feel the problem with the Hinterlands is that it seems like you can never complete a quest without running into 2 more. So you can never leave without feeling you're leaving a whole bunch of stuff undone. And likely it's stuff that makes you feel rather a heel for not doing.

[Mr Fixit]

Overall, I think DAI's quests were good, but I might think that because I only ever did the first requisition quest upon reaching a zone (and I could usually complete them with the materials I already had on me).

 

I know you appreciate that DA:I gives players a large degree of freedom in how to approach the game, but there is something to be said about the preponderance of fetch quests. It's not only the requisitions, which are easily ignored anyway. The vast majority of quests in the Hinterlands boil down to fetching or its equivalent: meat, rings, potions, healing herbs, watchtowers, goats, druffalos, flowers... Would it have killed the dev team to include some true side quests, you know the ones with choices, meaningful conversations, etc?

 

Look at it from the world state / save importing point of view. In DA:O, each zone can be "resolved" in multiple ways - just check the Dragon Age Keep and you'll see that the possible variations there aren't relegated to the main storyline only. There's a LOT a character can influence in the side content. I struggle to see that same richness of material in DA:I's side quests. In a hypothetical DA 4, what would be "imported" from such a huge map as the Hinterlands? Ram meat or no ram meat? Wolves or no wolves? 

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, but its side content is truly lacking.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Look at it from the world state / save importing point of view. In DA:O, each zone can be "resolved" in multiple ways - just check the Dragon Age Keep and you'll see that the possible variations there aren't relegated to the main storyline only. There's a LOT a character can influence in the side content. I struggle to see that same richness of material in DA:I's side quests. In a hypothetical DA 4, what would be "imported" from such a huge map as the Hinterlands? Ram meat or no ram meat? Wolves or no wolves?

How many rifts did you close? Did you convert the rift cult? Did you build watchtowers? Did you end the local conflict between the templars and mages? Did you kill the dragon? Did you establish all the camps? Did you find the missing scout?

And I haven't even touched Redcliffe yet.

[Majestic Jazz]

Is the Hinterlands just this ridiculously large, special area where they threw a bunch of quests into for you to tackle when you're bored, or is the rest of the game similar in scope? I was having a good time with the game until I entered the Hinterlands and thought the game became a MMORPG and no longer had any idea what I was playing.

Unfortunately Hinterlands is a general representation of what the rest of the zones are:

No cutscenes, fetch quest, and MMORPG style gameplay. Even 2 of the 3 DLCs are similar to the Hinterlands.

[JeffZero]

Ehhhhh.

One out of three.

[Majestic Jazz]

Ehhhhh.

One out of three.

So JoH or Descent is similar to Trespasser in that it is narrative driven instead of exploration driven?

[JeffZero]

I just mean Descent is different from those regions. Maybe it isn't great, but it's a straight shot through with more cinematics than the open regions.

[Majestic Jazz]

I just mean Descent is different from those regions. Maybe it isn't great, but it's a straight shot through with more cinematics than the open regions.

Either way, Hinterlands is a representation of what the rest of the zones in DAI are like.

We have beat this horse many times but IF there is a DA4, hopefully Bioware learned their lesson with the fetch quest/filler content/limited cutscenes that DAI sported.

[JeffZero]

I'm pretty optimistic that there will be a DA4.

But yeah.

[Wulfram]

How many rifts did you close? Did you convert the rift cult? Did you build watchtowers? Did you end the local conflict between the templars and mages? Did you kill the dragon? Did you establish all the camps? Did you find the missing scout?

And I haven't even touched Redcliffe yet.

But the choice is almost always only whether you engage with the content or ignore it. That is a choice, but its a shallow one, particularly since there's no real limit to the content you could engage with and no real negative outcomes for doing so.

(Slightly more of choice for the cult, but its still not exactly deep)

[Kevinc62]

If you don't like doing thousand fetch quest and aren't a completist: run!

 

I loved DAI, but I only did the main quests in most areas and some missions. I cannot even imagine completing everything. I'd never touch a DA game again

[ArianaGBSA]

How many rifts did you close? Did you convert the rift cult? Did you build watchtowers? Did you end the local conflict between the templars and mages? Did you kill the dragon? Did you establish all the camps? Did you find the missing scout?

And I haven't even touched Redcliffe yet.

Spoiler

A lot of did or did not. That is the problem. Your only choice in DAI is choosing to accept or not a quest you do not choose the outcome. Some quests, something like 1~5% of them offer choices, but such minor things I can't really compare to DAO, like will the cult be agent for information, helping people or what? Helping the elven couple in DAO was way more relevant because I could talk to them enough to connect with them. Is it that hard to understand this MAJOR failure of DAI? Choices don't matter because the writting was so poor on side quests it is IMPOSSIBLE to matter in any way. Like Michel de Chevin, I help him because I'm completionist in all my playthroughs, but I couldn't care less about his reason, it doesn't move me, I just don't care. In THEORY, Michel's quest should be way more important than Camen bedding his fellow dalish babe, but writting made me completely ignore his big problem in Emprise du Lion.

DAI epicness and greatness worked AGAINST the player. Everything was just cold, distant from the player, even companions. Even when they try to put Varric giving us an option to say we are just humans it in fact proves that we are so distant, so sub-human, that people don't see us as someone apprachable. It is ridiculous. I'm realy glad that in JoH I had the opportunity to talk about it with Harding after defeating Hakkon, but such a minor dialogue doesn't really fix the problem, only Trespasser did.

 

Again, you are one of the few non-hatrs that still seem to have a brain, so I ask you honestly, did DAI emotionally move you like DAO or even DA2? When reading the dialog with NPC from side quests, did you feel like helping them? And I mean feel, not "thought it fit my character". I am not sure you will give the answers I want, you don't hate DAI more than everything like I do, but I can hope...

[Sylvius the Mad]

But the choice is almost always only whether you engage with the content or ignore it. That is a choice, but its a shallow one, particularly since there's no real limit to the content you could engage with and no real negative outcomes for doing so.

(Slightly more of choice for the cult, but its still not exactly deep)

I'd like something more, as well, but my point is that there are choices to be had. I'm combating hyperbole, here.

One thing I generally don't like about quests as you describe them is that the game doesn't respond to a choice not to do something. If it presents an A or B choice, I'd like Neither to be a viable option that actually does something. There should be some outcome that arises from non-intervention.

There should also be some alternatives when it comes to what sort of intervention is chosen (which DAI mostly doesn't offer).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Again, you are one of the few non-hatrs that still seem to have a brain, so I ask you honestly, did DAI emotionally move you like DAO or even DA2? When reading the dialog with NPC from side quests, did you feel like helping them? And I mean feel, not "thought it fit my character". I am not sure you will give the answers I want, you don't hate DAI more than everything like I do, but I can hope...

My character might feel those things, but I never do. I engage with these games intellectually, not emotionally.

How I feel also shouldn't matter. I don't exist within the game world.

[vbibbi]

How many rifts did you close? Did you convert the rift cult? Did you build watchtowers? Did you end the local conflict between the templars and mages? Did you kill the dragon? Did you establish all the camps? Did you find the missing scout?

And I haven't even touched Redcliffe yet.

 

Using the keep as a formatting example:

 

While DAO and DA2 have many less quests recorded in their sections, most of them have three or more outcome options, with a good degree of variety in those options. Not to say they are all perfect options, but at least there is variation.

 

In DAI if you list out most of the quests in the keep, it will look like Descent: did you do X quest or not? That's it, no different paths of completing the quest, no variety.

[vbibbi]

I hardly think we can be blamed for thinking we might have to resolve all quests in an area before moving on because that area might not be available after we leave.

 

Anyone who left Lothering early in DAO can tell you that. *ahem* 

 

Also, in a response to the more general attitude I've seen from posts saying "the content is optional, you're not forced to do everything!" yes that's true, BUT that's a horrible perspective for a developer to cater to. So...developers should churn out as much content as possible, knowing that most of it is optional and could (should) be skipped?

 

Many of the fans of the games play them to play ALL content in a game. If a developer gears content more toward players racing to get to the end of the game rather than enjoy all of the content that leads to the end, that is problematic.

[Majestic Jazz]

Also, in a response to the more general attitude I've seen from posts saying "the content is optional, you're not forced to do everything!" yes that's true, BUT that's a horrible perspective for a developer to cater to. So...developers should churn out as much content as possible, knowing that most of it is optional and could (should) be skipped?

Many of the fans of the games play them to play ALL content in a game. If a developer gears content more toward players racing to get to the end of the game rather than enjoy all of the content that leads to the end, that is problematic.

Its about adding meaningful content not just content for the sake of having more content like DAI.

Look at The Elder Scrolls games. Many of the side quest are just as interesting if not better than the main story like the Dark Brotherhood and Thieves Guild quest line in Oblivion or the Cerberus quest line in ME1 and the Bloody Baron quest line in TW3. DAI lacked such side quest.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Also, in a response to the more general attitude I've seen from posts saying "the content is optional, you're not forced to do everything!" yes that's true, BUT that's a horrible perspective for a developer to cater to. So...developers should churn out as much content as possible, knowing that most of it is optional and could (should) be skipped?

Many of the fans of the games play them to play ALL content in a game. If a developer gears content more toward players racing to get to the end of the game rather than enjoy all of the content that leads to the end, that is problematic.

I want basically all of the content to be optional.

In software development, often a divergence between the design and the user experience is seen as a problem. And sometimes developers try to deal with that divergence by putting fences around their design so we can't deviate from it.

But I don't think that divergence is a problem at all when it comes to CRPGs. But because I fear that the developer does, I want the developer not to have an intended path through the content.

[ArianaGBSA]

My character might feel those things, but I never do. I engage with these games intellectually, not emotionally.

How I feel also shouldn't matter. I don't exist within the game world.

Well perhaps that's the difference, I only exist in fantasy worlds, so they are the only places where I experience feelings.

[Elhanan]

Prefer the Hinterlands to tripping on roots in the Exalted Plains, or more so; the Emerald Graves. But even then, I remind myself that when I used to walk in real forests, the same thing would occur then, too.

As for time spent in the Hinterlands, if the Player simply follows to Journal/ Quest log as encouraged by the game, then spending so much time at this introductory area would not need to occur. And as one that really enjoys the freedom to choose what to do with the character, am rather pleased that the Devs did not force us away to follow a defined linear path.

[JeffZero]

My character might feel those things, but I never do. I engage with these games intellectually, not emotionally.

How I feel also shouldn't matter. I don't exist within the game world.

We truly could not be more different. It's incredible that we both like Inquisition.