242 réponses à ce sujet

[Ariella]

From a pure story point, I would do below
--> You need to move Inquisition and Orlais army through the Dales into Arbor Wilds
--> Freemen have been disrupting the civil war everywhere so makes sense that they would disrupt your army's movement also
--> Rifts would also cause problems
I would make the operations against the Freemen & Closing Rifts mandatory before entering Arbor Wilds. 
 
Similarly, we can also make capturing of Keep mandatory before going to Ritual Tower in Western Approach. They could have opened access road through Ritual Tower through an Operation. 
 
There are several ways to achieve better integration between main quest and side story
If main story can be  content is 30 hrs and side quest is 120 hrs, something is not right ...

How are operations all that different from codex? It's just a reward and you don't see anything directly in game anymore than you do with the codex.

And Arbor Wilds is being take care of, that's the whole montage. You've got Leliana's spies harassing the enemy, Josephine has called up your allies, and Cullen's got the army moving. Plus the fact that at this time the enemy is in disarray and retreating to the Wilds, they aren't in a position to attack. In fact, you're told directly by Cullen that Corypheus' forces were not prepared for this retreat to the Arbor Wilds. They're not in any position to harass the Inquisition's army.

Adamant, an access road? Why, the place is in the desert. And again, the trebuchet have been delivered by an ally, but it wouldn't be advantageous for Corypheus to flash his power around. The last thing Erimond wants is the Wardens asking questions. And if you're going to ask about water, already taken care of if you took the oasis.

And if you want to be "realistic" about things, Adamant and the wardens should have finished the ritual well before the army even got to Adamant considering the distance.

I disagree, and I'm not a fan of that whole "they should appear as what you desire!" line of thought. If desire demons should appear as what you want, then why don't rage demons appear as things that make you angry? Why shouldn't despair demons appear as things that make you sad? The little fearlings appear in different forms to people, but even they default to "spider" when the person doesn't fear anything, like Hawke and the Inquisitor.
 
The purple succubus is just the default form of the desire demon. They've looked into the dreams of mortals and crafted an exaggerated symbol of human sexuality to represent "desire." It's even stated in the lore that desire demons default to a female form just like the spirits of wisdom, although they don't actually have genders.
 
When they're out to seduce you, then yes, they should appear in a form ideally meant to please you. But if they're just trying to slay you in battle, then why would you care if they look like an attractive man/woman/other? THEY'RE TRYING TO KILL YOU. I wouldn't let a woman beat me with a croquet mallet just because she's good-looking.
 
Really, you're asking the devs to go to a lot of work for very little reward. They're just monsters.

Actually, I don't want changeable desire demons, I just want them to be rare and if they come into contact with mortals outside the Fade, they should be abominations. Both Desire and Pride should be used sparingly, and not as just hey we need a monster. If they're going to be used at all, I want an intelligent threat, who acts like a person.

Imshael and Allure are good examples, though Allure is outside a body, but I'm willing to give considering the circumstance. Connor is a good one as well. Give me a character not a boss fight.

If that's the case, I'm willing to put up with purple and horns in the Fade.

[ShadowLordXII]

I have to give a big no on that. Orgins have the character roleplaying edge because of the origins but no it does not have more memorable moments and character. DAI is way better in that.

 

How so?

 

I'd argue that Origin's better memorability comes from how many moments and characters that you meaningfully remember because of your character's interactions with said characters and moments.

 

What makes something memorable is how it sticks with you. Moments that stick with you and incite reactions like shock, anger, joy, humor, sadness, respect, excitement, dread and etc.

 

Origins has the 6 Origins; the Battle of Ostagar; the opening intro where Duncan narrates about the darkspawn and grey wardens; Meeting Flemeth and Morrigan; Soldier's Peak; The Deep Roads; The Anvil of the Void; The Broodmother; Redcliffe; Zathrian and his clan; the Dark Ritual choice; the Landsmeet; Loghain and his complexity; Arl Howe; Shianni; Slim Couldry's mission line; The Battle of Denerem; The Ultimate Sacrifice of your Warden or Loghain/Alistair; and all of your companions and their related quests are all just things that I can name off of the top of my head.

 

Contrast with Inquisition and there's a big difference due to how Inquisition presents itself: The intro is memorable; the Redcliffe mission; Champions of the Just; Adamant Assault and the Fade; Meeting Hawke and the Warden contact; Corypheus and his lieutenant; and all of your companions/advisors along with their related story content. But that's about it.

 

Mainly because a lot of moments where your supposed to feel something are conveyed in a way that places distance between the player and the moment.

 

Take Iron Bull's quest for example. If you choose to let the Charger's die, all you get is a quick aftermath scene with the Venatori standing over their bodies. No zoom in to their dead faces; no last stand from Krem where he desperately looks to Bull for help only to realize that none is coming; no lingering shot where one of the Chargers struggles against death is mercilessly slain; and there isn't even much emphasis on Bull's reaction as he watches his pseudo-family fight and die.

 

Divine Justinia? We're told about how her death is a big deal, but how can our character and therefore the player feel that if they've never been able to interact with Justinia or her conclave?

 

All of the above and more would be why I'd say that Inquisition is overall less memorable than Origins by a wide margin.

[leaguer of one]

How so?

 

I'd argue that Origin's better memorability comes from how many moments and characters that you meaningfully remember because of your character's interactions with said characters and moments.

 

What makes something memorable is how it sticks with you. Moments that stick with you and incite reactions like shock, anger, joy, humor, sadness, respect, excitement, dread and etc.

 

Origins has the 6 Origins; the Battle of Ostagar; the opening intro where Duncan narrates about the darkspawn and grey wardens; Meeting Flemeth and Morrigan; Soldier's Peak; The Deep Roads; The Anvil of the Void; The Broodmother; Redcliffe; Zathrian and his clan; the Dark Ritual choice; the Landsmeet; Loghain and his complexity; Arl Howe; Shianni; Slim Couldry's mission line; The Battle of Denerem; The Ultimate Sacrifice of your Warden or Loghain/Alistair; and all of your companions and their related quests are all just things that I can name off of the top of my head.

 

Contrast with Inquisition and there's a big difference due to how Inquisition presents itself: The intro is memorable; the Redcliffe mission; Champions of the Just; Adamant Assault and the Fade; Meeting Hawke and the Warden contact; Corypheus and his lieutenant; and all of your companions/advisors along with their related story content. But that's about it.

 

Mainly because a lot of moments where your supposed to feel something are conveyed in a way that places distance between the player and the moment.

 

Take Iron Bull's quest for example. If you choose to let the Charger's die, all you get is a quick aftermath scene with the Venatori standing over their bodies. No zoom in to their dead faces; no last stand from Krem where he desperately looks to Bull for help only to realize that none is coming; no lingering shot where one of the Chargers struggles against death is mercilessly slain; and there isn't even much emphasis on Bull's reaction as he watches his pseudo-family fight and die.

 

Divine Justinia? We're told about how her death is a big deal, but how can our character and therefore the player feel that if they've never been able to interact with Justinia or her conclave?

 

All of the above and more would be why I'd say that Inquisition is overall less memorable than Origins by a wide margin.

 .1. The origins are a given but for roleplaying. Not for moments. it's only personal.

2. As for the quest...Look. Any of the events the quis gone through. If you told a normal person of thedas that, they would tell you your making it up.

Every major quest the quis goes though is something you would only hear in a legend. Every single one except wicked eyes and wicked hearts which is the only mundane major quest the quis went through and it was all about deciding the fate of a major countries ruler ship.

 

The quis when into the fade physical twice, was sent to the future, or faced a demon trying to take their lives for themselves, stopped a demon army, fought a giant demon spider physically in the fade, found an ancient temple of mythal filled with ancient elves, met the first darkspawn and dropped an entire mountain on him and his armies, and met not one but two elven gods. Then fought the first darkspawn in a floating island in the sky, while 2 dragons are fighting above,one being a daughter of an elven goddess, and then the qus sucks the fist darkspawn into the fade.

 

Sorry but that is way more epic then what the warden went through. The closest the warden has to that all is facing the dark spawn army in denerum.

 

3. And don't get started with iron bull.

 

This guy has more growth, complexity and character growth then all dao character.

 

and let not start with the villain of dai...

Spoiler

 

Sorry, but dai characters are way more complex then dao character.

[Al Foley]

 .1. The origins are a given but for roleplaying. Not for moments. it's only personal.

2. As for the quest...Look. Any of the events the quis gone through if you told a normal person of thedas that, they would tell you your making it up.

Every major quest the quis goes though is something you would only hear in a legend. Every single one except wicked eyes and wicked hearts which is the only mundane major quest the quis went through and it was all about deciding the fate of a major countries ruler ship.

 

The quis when into the fade physical twice, was sent to the future, or faced a demon trying to take their lives for themselves, stopped a demon army, fought a giant demon spider physically in the fade, found an ancient temple of mythal filled with ancient elves, met the first darkspawn and dropped an entire mountain on him and his armies, and met not one but two elven gods. Then fought the first darkspawn in a floating island in the sky, while 2 dragons are fighting above,one being a daughter of an elven goddess, and then the qus sucks the fist darkspawn into the fade.

 

Sorry but that is way more epic then what the warden went through. The closest the warden has to that all is facing the dark spawn army in denerum.

 

3. And don't get started with iron bull.

 

This guy has more growth, complexity and character growth then all dao character.

 

and let not start with the villain of dai...

Spoiler

 

Sorry, but dai characters are way more complex then dao character.

As much as I prefer Inquisition to Origins there was the whole bit in the Temple of Sacred Ashes.  

[ShadowLordXII]

 .1. The origins are a given but for roleplaying. Not for moments. it's only personal.

2. As for the quest...Look. Any of the events the quis gone through if you told a normal person of thedas that, they would tell you your making it up.

Every major quest the quis goes though is something you would only hear in a legend. Every single one except wicked eyes and wicked hearts which is the only mundane major quest the quis went through and it was all about deciding the fate of a major countries ruler ship.

 

The quis when into the fade physical twice, was sent to the future, or faced a demon trying to take their lives for themselves, stopped a demon army, fought a giant demon spider physically in the fade, found an ancient temple of mythal filled with ancient elves, met the first darkspawn and dropped an entire mountain on him and his armies, and met not one but two elven gods. Then fought the first darkspawn in a floating island in the sky, while 2 dragons are fighting above,one being a daughter of an elven goddess, and then the qus sucks the fist darkspawn into the fade.

 

Sorry but that is way more epic then what the warden went through. The closest the warden has to that all is facing the dark spawn army in denerum.

 

3. And don't get started with iron bull.

 

This guy has more growth, complexity and character growth then all dao character.

 

and let not start with the villain of dai...

Spoiler

 

Sorry, but dai characters are way more complex then dao character.

 

Solas isn't even a villain. It's true that he inadvertedly helped start Inquisition's central conflict, but Cory is still the main villain since it's his plan and actions that started many of the major conflicts with the Inquisitor deals with. Solas had nothing to do with any of that, he intended for Cory to die at Haven, but didn't plan on Cory being basically immortal and thus becomes a hidden mentor.

 

Iron Bull's character and complexity is great, but not more so than any Origins character. Or do I need to bring up Morrigan, Sten, Leliana, Alistair or Loghain?

 

The Inquisitor's quests and moments are all great, but that's not what I'm talking about. How Inquisition handles those moments makes them less memorable because of the distance created between the player and the moment. Thus they are less memorable because they don't affect the player as much as Origins.

[Cobra's_back]

For real?

 

The Archdemon couldn't have any real personality because we aren't capable of talking to it, and Meredith went nuts and lost her agency.

Well don't forget they threw in Orsino to add in more CRAZY. The whole DA2 had nutty insane mages. Something in the air made them BATTY! 

 

Solas is the real villain in DAI playing both sides. He is the best villain in the whole DA series.

[Al Foley]

Well don't forget they threw in Orsino to add in more CRAZY. The whole DA2 had nutty insane mages. Something in the air made them BATTY! 

 

Solas is the real villain in DAI playing both sides. He is the best villain in the whole DA series.

I wouldn't declare him the winner until we see the results of his character arc.  After all Cory looked AMAZING in Legacy and then in Inquisition he just ended up being...pretty good. 

[DarthLaxian]

Just stating the obvious. I am replaying Origins now, and wow! What a big difference in the storytelling, even after so many times of playing it, and beating the game. It seems to get even better, especially having to return to it after taking a long break from the series.

 

Origins is, that I can agree on - DA2 though is not (even story wise, if you discount all those fetch- and side-quests)...I think Inquisition is a step - back! - in the right direction (races - though no origin stories sadly enough, agents and war-table - though badly executed (can't task other agents - only your advisors -.-), your own castle - though you can't fix it despite it being quite high up and it having a "sun roof" (where snow would get in -.-), interesting characters - though none (well, almost none!) as interesting as the ones in DA:O, etc. etc.), but it could have been way better...there could have been missions where two parties (one with the player-character and one lead by someone he/she trusts (like one of the advisors or simply another companion!)) for example, or real side-quest-archs (instead of "good doggy, go fetch"-quests -.-), mounts could have been fully implemented (no vanishing if you get off them, companions having mount's too, mounted combat etc. etc.) and the story could have been better, too (sorry, but Corypheus?- Really? I mean he's way to small-time a villain IMHO -.- and he's not all that interesting -.-...and him being there lead to the mage/templar/chantry war being resolved far to quickly and without solving the issues behind it!  (there could have been more political intrigue, backroom-deals, assassinations etc. etc.) - same for the Orlesian civil war (!)...

 

Still, DA:I is a pretty good game - just not spectacular (and not up to what I expect from Bioware (KOTOR, DA:O and ME1 and 2 that's what I expect!)), that's why I am not going to buy any DLC (unless they offer a package or something - after they've released the last DLC!) for it...but then again:

 

There aren't that many games I have bought DLC for so far (discounting those in GOTY-Editions) - all of those were spectacular though (like Dragon Age: Origins, Fallout: New Vegas, Mass Effect 2...there's a few more but I don't remember)...it's a kind of vote with your money thing for me (add to that that I only buy story/lore DLC - armor and weapons etc. are seldomly even considered (unless the game's in my top-10-list!) - of a certain length, like say Leliana's Song or Warden's Keep)

 

greetings LAX

ps: There's even less games I would consider getting something like a Season-Pass for (I don't trust that many devs so freely with my cash!) - the only one on my current shopping list is Fallout 4 (!)

[leaguer of one]

As much as I prefer Inquisition to Origins there was the whole bit in the Temple of Sacred Ashes.  

And dai did that 3 time over. The quis goes there, it explodes, the face the first darkspawn there, bring down a mountain there, and then they it's lifted up as an island in the sky where you fight the said darkspawn in the sky.

 

Let's not for get the quis has skyhold which was the castle of the dread wolf and where the veil was made.

[leaguer of one]

Solas isn't even a villain. It's true that he inadvertedly helped start Inquisition's central conflict, but Cory is still the main villain since it's his plan and actions that started many of the major conflicts with the Inquisitor deals with. Solas had nothing to do with any of that, he intended for Cory to die at Haven, but didn't plan on Cory being basically immortal and thus becomes a hidden mentor.

 

Iron Bull's character and complexity is great, but not more so than any Origins character. Or do I need to bring up Morrigan, Sten, Leliana, Alistair or Loghain?

 

The Inquisitor's quests and moments are all great, but that's not what I'm talking about. How Inquisition handles those moments makes them less memorable because of the distance created between the player and the moment. Thus they are less memorable because they don't affect the player as much as Origins.

Dude, yes he is the villian. It's not even the fact that he help cause the central conflict. It's that after it if went to plan or not he would of killed off everyone one in the world who is not an ancient elf. If his plans went as it should of, Cory and the quis would be dead and then soon after near everyone in the world would of died. His alternate was to get the quis to clean up his mess then end the world anyway, and that fail. Now he's going to do it the harder way and take the mark from the quis.

 

Sorry, but that makes him the villian...The villian that conned all sides of the conflict.

 

And yes, it much more complex then the origin character. Not one is even close to complexity. At the most Morrigan. We're taking about a guy broke so bad by fallowing the qun he wanted to kill himself. Tried to get fixed. Was made a spy in southern thedas. And had to pick between his faith or his friends.

 

And how the quis handles the event are fine,, as much as anyone would in there shoes. You're splitting hairs on subjective issues.

[Aren]

He tells you why. Also...

it was more related to the rebel mages and templars around rather than demons

[Aren]

 .1. The origins are a given but for roleplaying. Not for moments. it's only personal.

2. As for the quest...Look. Any of the events the quis gone through. If you told a normal person of thedas that, they would tell you your making it up.

Every major quest the quis goes though is something you would only hear in a legend. Every single one except wicked eyes and wicked hearts which is the only mundane major quest the quis went through and it was all about deciding the fate of a major countries ruler ship.

 

The quis when into the fade physical twice, was sent to the future, or faced a demon trying to take their lives for themselves, stopped a demon army, fought a giant demon spider physically in the fade, found an ancient temple of mythal filled with ancient elves, met the first darkspawn and dropped an entire mountain on him and his armies, and met not one but two elven gods. Then fought the first darkspawn in a floating island in the sky, while 2 dragons are fighting above,one being a daughter of an elven goddess, and then the qus sucks the fist darkspawn into the fade.

 

Sorry but that is way more epic then what the warden went through. The closest the warden has to that all is facing the dark spawn army in denerum.

 

3. And don't get started with iron bull.

 

This guy has more growth, complexity and character growth then all dao character.

 

and let not start with the villain of dai...

Spoiler

 

Sorry, but dai characters are way more complex then dao character.

Fight a demon is nothing special,also the Inq run away from the nightmare demon rather than defeated him,you didn't defeat the demons you closed the breach

Corypheus  is ancient as the Architect, both are powerful and dangerous the Warden defeated the architect who was in terms of power comparable to Corypheus,their abilities were different but both were dangerous.

Against the Architect and the disciples the quiz would have been probably infected before to even understand what was happening.

2 dragons that were incredibly weak compared to what you encounter in the franchise,a fake archdemon and a guardian or a woman (depend on choice) that would have been easily defeated by the warden,didn't took long to defeat Morrigan in WH 1 single attack.

If so i find Hakkon to be more powerful than these dragons.

There are many ancient temples in Thedas nothing is preventing the Warden to find them off-screen but the character simply doesn't care.

The 2 "gods" that the Inq met defeated the protagonist easly,one by mind controlling the protagonist or her daughter (she gave you a magic  slap that put you on the ground) the other tricked and used the Inquisitor.

While the Warden defeated two ancient beings,and was more powerful than each of the companions.

i will only accept Solas as a challenger

 

[correctamundo]

Solas isn't even a villain. It's true that he inadvertedly helped start Inquisition's central conflict, but Cory is still the main villain since it's his plan and actions that started many of the major conflicts with the Inquisitor deals with. Solas had nothing to do with any of that, he intended for Cory to die at Haven, but didn't plan on Cory being basically immortal and thus becomes a hidden mentor.

 

Iron Bull's character and complexity is great, but not more so than any Origins character. Or do I need to bring up Morrigan, Sten, Leliana, Alistair or Loghain?

 

The Inquisitor's quests and moments are all great, but that's not what I'm talking about. How Inquisition handles those moments makes them less memorable because of the distance created between the player and the moment. Thus they are less memorable because they don't affect the player as much as Origins.

 

They may not affect you but they do affect us other players. Stop confusing your opinions with any notion of facts. The characters in DAO are great but so are the characters in DAI. Your name-dropping is pointless. We have played the game. We ARE playing the game (at least I am). And Slim Couldry? Yes I like him but there is no character growth that I can recall. Sutherland on the other hand takes you on whole other journey.

[Al Foley]

Plus the mere fact that the Inquisitor was voice acted, expertly, makes them ten times more reltable to me then the Warden the silent death mute saving the world.

[correctamundo]

Plus the mere fact that the Inquisitor was voice acted, expertly, makes them ten times more reltable to me then the Warden the silent death mute saving the world.

 

=D Yes, I love my wardens but that muted dumb look. Anyways out exploring they at least voice their opinion - which amounts to - can I get you a ladder so you can get of my back.

[GoldenGail3]

But Origins was so sloooooooooooooow...
 
(and some of the writing was baaaaaad.....)

But DA2 made you have a insane companion that blew up a chantry

[Al Foley]

=D Yes, I love my wardens but that muted dumb look. Anyways out exploring they at least voice their opinion - which amounts to - can I get you a ladder so you can get of my back.

I made my Female Elf Warden an angry Warden who used that line and I found I just could not take her seriously and roleplay with her because she sounded so angry and snooty.  Her character arc was all about going from a very angry spoiled person to someone who was peaceful and found their balance...it just did not work out.  Worse of my RP protags I have created.  

[Darkly Tranquil]

Plus the mere fact that the Inquisitor was voice acted, expertly, makes them ten times more reltable to me then the Warden the silent death mute saving the world.

Not all of us regard that as a positive. For some of us, that's a mark against DAI.

[correctamundo]

Not all of us regard that as a positive. For some of us, that's a mark against DAI.

 

Which is fine ofc. But voice/no voice is a personal preference like more or less all the other differences between the games.

[Al Foley]

Not all of us regard that as a positive. For some of us, that's a mark against DAI.

I know.  Some people also like to eat bacon.  People can be weird. 

[ShadowLordXII]

They may not affect you but they do affect us other players. Stop confusing your opinions with any notion of facts. The characters in DAO are great but so are the characters in DAI. Your name-dropping is pointless. We have played the game. We ARE playing the game (at least I am). And Slim Couldry? Yes I like him but there is no character growth that I can recall. Sutherland on the other hand takes you on whole other journey.

 

Did I say that you couldn't be affected by these moments? No.

 

I'm simply pointing out the presented content in each game and comparing them in term. Or feel free to elaborate on a counterpoint to the following: " Origins has more replay value; more Role-Play freedom; a less restrictive gameplay dynamic and character build progression; More memorable moments and characters; Origins as an opportunity to help build your Warden; and a world with actual grit and darkness that wasn't afraid to showcase itself and punish it's players for their decisions including the possibility of a TPK (total party kill) or even your Warden's death."

 

The above isn't a biased assertion, Origins is objectively designed as the stronger game and RPG because of the above elements and this is likely because BW wanted Origins to stand as a strong standalone game in case the Dragon Age series never went beyond more than one installment. Inquisition is still a great game and has several elements which it does better than Origins such as Better Graphics; Improved Character Creation; A central theme that goes off the beaten trail and makes folks think; the Inquisition Influence system is better than the Skills system though it takes some getting used to; and the Presentation of Combat is better.

 

But Origins still edges out as the objectively stronger game for several reasons that I've already stated including An un-sanitized and yet intriguing atmosphere and much better implemented and more engaging antagonists (Loghain and the Blight, first and foremost).

 

I never said that the characters in Inquisition weren't good, I just said that Inquisition had less memorable moments than Origins and that's because of the inherent design of how Inquisition presents it's content and moments. The name-dropping was made in response to an unfounded opinion that Iron Bull is supposedly more complex and well-written than any character in Origins and I'm a fan of the Bull. I'm a fan of Inquisition, but I'm not obligated to blindly defend it or hold it to a higher standard than it deserves. Nor am I doing that for Origins as Origins also has it's share of flaws and problems, I just observe that Origins is a stronger game than Inquisition.

[Al Foley]

Did I say that you couldn't be affected by these moments? No.

 

I'm simply pointing out the presented content in each game and comparing them in term. Or feel free to elaborate on a counterpoint to the following: " Origins has more replay value; more Role-Play freedom; a less restrictive gameplay dynamic and character build progression; More memorable moments and characters; Origins as an opportunity to help build your Warden; and a world with actual grit and darkness that wasn't afraid to showcase itself and punish it's players for their decisions including the possibility of a TPK (total party kill) or even your Warden's death."

 

The above isn't a biased assertion, Origins is objectively designed as the stronger game and RPG because of the above elements and this is likely because BW wanted Origins to stand as a strong standalone game in case the Dragon Age series never went beyond more than one installment. Inquisition is still a great game and has several elements which it does better than Origins such as Better Graphics; Improved Character Creation; A central theme that goes off the beaten trail and makes folks think; the Inquisition Influence system is better than the Skills system though it takes some getting used to; and the Presentation of Combat is better.

 

But Origins still edges out as the objectively stronger game for several reasons that I've already stated including An un-sanitized and yet intriguing atmosphere and much better implemented and more engaging antagonists (Loghain and the Blight, first and foremost).

 

I never said that the characters in Inquisition weren't good, I just said that Inquisition had less memorable moments than Origins and that's because of the inherent design of how Inquisition presents it's content and moments. The name-dropping was made in response to an unfounded opinion that Iron Bull is supposedly more complex and well-written than any character in Origins and I'm a fan of the Bull. I'm a fan of Inquisition, but I'm not obligated to blindly defend it or hold it to a higher standard than it deserves. Nor am I doing that for Origins as Origins also has it's share of flaws and problems, I just observe that Origins is a stronger game than Inquisition.

I don't know how objectively Loghain and the Archdemon (Blight) are objectively more engaging antagonists considering I thought they were terrible, both from a writing stand point and from an execution standpoint and a character standpoint.  I felt more engaged by Corypheus in five minutes of his appearance, in either DA 2 or DA I, then I did by Loghain's or the Archdemon's entire arcs.  Cory's problem is he went kinda down hill from there...

 

Not to mention Lord Livius Erimond of Vyrantium, and to an extent Alexius is probably better antagonists then most of the secondary antagonists in DA O.  With the possible exceptions of Tuvok and Branka. 

[Abyss108]

Did I say that you couldn't be affected by these moments? No.

 

I'm simply pointing out the presented content in each game and comparing them in term. Or feel free to elaborate on a counterpoint to the following: " Origins has more replay value; more Role-Play freedom; a less restrictive gameplay dynamic and character build progression; More memorable moments and characters; Origins as an opportunity to help build your Warden; and a world with actual grit and darkness that wasn't afraid to showcase itself and punish it's players for their decisions including the possibility of a TPK (total party kill) or even your Warden's death."

 

The above isn't a biased assertion, Origins is objectively designed as the stronger game and RPG because of the above elements and this is likely because BW wanted Origins to stand as a strong standalone game in case the Dragon Age series never went beyond more than one installment. Inquisition is still a great game and has several elements which it does better than Origins such as Better Graphics; Improved Character Creation; A central theme that goes off the beaten trail and makes folks think; the Inquisition Influence system is better than the Skills system though it takes some getting used to; and the Presentation of Combat is better.

 

But Origins still edges out as the objectively stronger game for several reasons that I've already stated including An un-sanitized and yet intriguing atmosphere and much better implemented and more engaging antagonists (Loghain and the Blight, first and foremost).

 

I never said that the characters in Inquisition weren't good, I just said that Inquisition had less memorable moments than Origins and that's because of the inherent design of how Inquisition presents it's content and moments. The name-dropping was made in response to an unfounded opinion that Iron Bull is supposedly more complex and well-written than any character in Origins and I'm a fan of the Bull. I'm a fan of Inquisition, but I'm not obligated to blindly defend it or hold it to a higher standard than it deserves. Nor am I doing that for Origins as Origins also has it's share of flaws and problems, I just observe that Origins is a stronger game than Inquisition.

 

Quite a few things here completely biased.

 

More memorable moments and characters is 100% your opinion. I couldn't care less about half the cast of Origins. Whilst everyone in Inquisition I cared about in one way or another. Some I loved, some I hated. There was no one my reaction to was "meh" to, unlike in Origins. You might have preferred the cast in Origins, but that's your opinion, not an unbiased fact.

 

Both games have darkness, Inquisition just doesn't feel the need to be as in your face with it. One of the first things I heard about when I went to the Hinterlands was about about Mages burning refugees to death and then Templars trying to rape the burning bodies. I don't know what you class as dark, but that certainly classifies as dark to me. Origins is just screaming "look at me, look at me, oooooh aren't I edgy".

 

Origins is definitely scared of punishing you for the choices you make. They aways give you a perfect solution for every problem. When Conner is possessed, instead of choosing who to sacrifice, you can simply go to the mages (which makes no sense given the time that would take) and save all of them. Elves vs werewolves? You can save them all. Don't want anyone to die? Just have a baby, or let the villain do it.

 

Antagonists are awful in both cases (unless you count Solas, who was well done, but I don't him as you don't actually fight him in this game). Could not care less about Loghain, and I'm sure how anyone could class a generic evil monster army as a good villain.

 

All those are elements I think Inquisition did better. That's not "objective" though, just like your opinion about Origins isn't.

[ShadowLordXII]

snip

 

My opinion is that both games are great. My objective Origins is the stronger game between two great games. Or would you actually like to counter my previous points with an observation of your own rather than just say that "I liked things about Inquisition and therefore, I'm right." If it sounds like I'm patronizing you, that's because you somewhat annoy me. Believe it or not, there is an unbiased criteria with which one can judge a game's quality when compared to another game and find that one game is stronger than the other.

 

I understand the need for not always wanting to throw dark stuff in your face and yes, subtext and so on can be effective. But when dealing with a story with a primarily visual medium, it's more effective to show things than to talk about it or better yet, show and tell. Inquisition leaned too heavily on the "tell" aspect of "show and tell" and even the "show" aspect is watered down which minimizes the inherent effect that Inquisition's moments possessed. And for a game that's supposed to be about "saving the world from itself" or "restoring order to a world in chaos", the conflict was overall way too clean considering everything that's at play. It's not because this stuff isn't happening, it's because the game was intrinsically designed to distance the player from the grit and essence of darkness.

 

Do we actually tackle the mage-templar conflict and it's dilemnas? No. We side-step the situation by only engaging with one faction and leaving the other to the wolves. Even the stuff in the Hinterlands was described as conflicts between radical mages and templars rather divisions of the main factions.

 

The Breach? Closed within the first third of the game without much effort.

 

 

The Warden sacrifices? The two scenes that we see are too quick and swift to let that moment and what it means truly sink in. Contrast that with the Joining in Origins where there is a clear tension and weight to the deaths of Daveth and Jory. We see Duncan kill Jory with regret, we see Jory's face as he dies and blood flow from his body after he's fallen. We also see Daveth struggle against the Joining Juice even as Duncan apologizes for his inevitable death.

 

In contrast; both Duncan and Leandra personally met and interacted with the Warden and this created a more substantial bond. Therefore, when we see Duncan and Leandra die, there's actual room to be sad both because we knew who they were; had a chance to like them; and saw them die in undeservingly sad and horrific manners.

 

Not convinced? Take Justinia for instance. The game spends a lot of time trying to make her death into this big sad event and while this is true in-universe, neither the player nor the pc ever got to meet or know the woman. This could have been averted by putting in the Conclave meeting as an prologue and actually letting the player judge for themselves if Justinia is someone significant or someone worth mourning. Instead, we have to be told that Justinia was a great woman and that we should feel bad that she's dead.

 

It's this difference in presentation, content and atmosphere which makes Origins overall darker and stronger for being unapologetic for that darkness whereas Inquisition almost seems like it wants to hurry past it.

 

Considering that Origins actually lets you kill off your companions; have love triangles that can end badly; or even kill of your main hero, then it's pretty clear that Origins is less scared than Inquisition where this is greatly lacking. Trespasser not counting as much since it's a dlc that was added on later as opposed to Awakening where you could leave either an entire city or your own keep along with half of your companions to die and your companion may even turn on you depending on the choice that you make concerning the Architect's offer.

 

A third option is sometimes possible and Origins isn't less for having it at times as opposed to DA2 where the logical third or fourth option was cut out for the sake of pointless drama (siblings and Last Straw choice for instance). There were also missions where there was no third option like Orzammar; Anvil of the Void; Does Loghain live or die?; Take the Dark Ritual or not?; or if you don't take the DR then do you sacrifice yourself or send Alistair/Loghain to their deaths? And speaking of options, this plays into my point about role-play options because Origins isn't afraid of letting you be evil as opposed to Inquisition where you could only be a neutral jerk at worst with the moral spectrum of evil being completely omitted. Even letting Celene die isn't universally evil since neither she nor Gaspard have their hands clean of innocent blood or abuse of power.

 

There can be different types of antagonists and the darkspawn worked for what they were in Origins and Loghain worked even better. Corypheus? As many have pointed out before, he spends most of the game getting beaten by the Inquisitor and apart from Haven, there's never a "darkest hour" moment where Cory has the upper hand on the Inquisition and this is more disappointing considering all of the potential and the lore weight behind Cory's very existence.

 

Like Inquisition for the reasons that you want and if you personally prefer it over the other games fine. But don't act like any observation that doesn't put the game on a pedestal is just a biased opinion. I'm perfectly willing to admit that Inquisition is an objectively stronger game than Origins once the case can be presented and proven to me. Until then, I'm convinced that Origins is the inherently and objectively stronger game in the dragon age series. And that's even admitting that I like all of the games in the series. Some are just better than others. That's a fact.

[Al Foley]

Quite a few things here completely biased.

 

More memorable moments and characters is 100% your opinion. I couldn't care less about half the cast of Origins. Whilst everyone in Inquisition I cared about in one way or another. Some I loved, some I hated. There was no one my reaction to was "meh" to, unlike in Origins. You might have preferred the cast in Origins, but that's your opinion, not an unbiased fact.

 

Both games have darkness, Inquisition just doesn't feel the need to be as in your face with it. One of the first things I heard about when I went to the Hinterlands was about about Mages burning refugees to death and then Templars trying to rape the burning bodies. I don't know what you class as dark, but that certainly classifies as dark to me. Origins is just screaming "look at me, look at me, oooooh aren't I edgy".

 

Origins is definitely scared of punishing you for the choices you make. They aways give you a perfect solution for every problem. When Conner is possessed, instead of choosing who to sacrifice, you can simply go to the mages (which makes no sense given the time that would take) and save all of them. Elves vs werewolves? You can save them all. Don't want anyone to die? Just have a baby, or let the villain do it.

 

Antagonists are awful in both cases (unless you count Solas, who was well done, but I don't him as you don't actually fight him in this game). Could not care less about Loghain, and I'm sure how anyone could class a generic evil monster army as a good villain.

 

All those are elements I think Inquisition did better. That's not "objective" though, just like your opinion about Origins isn't.

Exactly.  And it wasn't hate from bad writing it was good or bad reactions from good writing.  Every single character I felt was well written.