821 réponses à ce sujet

[correctamundo]

The day you can fathom that your subjective opinion is not an objective fact then maybe we can talk. I mean did you even read your own post? It is full of blanket statements of your opinion and then you top it off with one game being "clearly the superior game".

[ShadowLordXII]

The day you can fathom that your subjective opinion is not an objective fact then maybe we can talk. I mean did you even read your own post? It is full of blanket statements of your opinion and then you top it off with one game being "clearly the superior game".

 

Not opinion, the truth based on verifiable facts and inherent qualities between the two games.

 

[Addictress]

I'm editing Origins into a movie file and just piecing together the cut scenes up to Lothering...

Goddam, son. That's some Academy Award sh* right there.

[Addictress]

Then I pieced together the cut scenes for Inquisition.


o_o

Okay....it is

a summer movie.

released

in the summer

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I can say that in Origins, DA2, Mass Effect 1-3, KotOR, even DA:Awakening, there was always a point where the story pulled me in and made me think "Alright, I want to see where this goes."

Inquisition? Nope. Not once did it evoke those feelings for me. A lot of people say it's "good but not great". I can't agree with that. It's so... bland. Mediocre is the best word for it.

[ioannisdenton]

I can say that in Origins, DA2, Mass Effect 1-3, KotOR, even DA:Awakening, there was always a point where the story pulled me in and made me think "Alright, I want to see where this goes."

Inquisition? Nope. Not once did it evoke those feelings for me. A lot of people say it's "good but not great". I can't agree with that. It's so... bland. Mediocre is the best word for it.

hmm yhe original ending with corypheus is lackluster and rushed, however trespasse really releases all the build up. have you played it? 
The ending moments of a game may fix it or ruin it. It 's the last impresion that counts sometimes.

[Al Foley]

You know I must say that to see DA 2s story getting praise and kudos is really, really nice. 

 

But seeing DA Is story getting dissed is pretty...not nice.  

 

They are both fine stories.  Yes, deal with it, etc etc. ad naseum. 

[robertthebard]

I wasn't asking your opinion, I was asking for your counterpoint to why Origins is an objectively and inherently stronger game than Inquisition.

 

But if you're going to chicken out and hide behind the whole "everyone has their own opinion" thing, then that's fine with me.

 

 

I personally like both games, but I can objectively judge Origins as the superior game.

 

And I'm going to keep using the word objective because there are ways to judge whether one of two games is inherently superior to the other. Otherwise, one could say that Superman 64 is as good of a game as The Last of Us. But that's not true. It's not true because Last of Us has inherently superior qualities that make it run laps around Superman 64 which is judged as one of the worst if not the worst video games ever made because of its inherent failings.

 

Seriously, stop with this extremist relativist nonsense and its a strawman anyway since I never claimed that my opinion is stronger than anyone else's. The OP wanted to ask folks about how they felt about Inquisition and I spoke both my personal and non-personal viewpoint on the game. I like Inquisition and do agree both personally and objectively that it's a good game, but I lament that its weaker than Origins since BW seemed capable of surpassing that game this time.

 

That's not an opinion. Origins has inherent qualities in its design that made it a spectacular game. Qualities which were abandoned in DA2 and then mostly forgotten for Inquisition. Hence why Inquisition has a weaker story compared to Origins; has weaker immersion compared to Origins; has weaker antagonists compared to Origins;has weaker gameplay compared to Origins; has a weaker PC compared to Origins and has weaker replay value. Inquisition does do a few things better than Origins such as graphics; character skills; Improved Character Creation; A central theme that goes off the beaten trail and makes folks think; the Inquisition Influence system; and the Presentation of Combat, but Origins is still clearly the superior game.

 

For example, you brought up how Inquisition side-steps the mage-templar conflict and were disappointed by it. Wouldn't you agree that how Origins handled a similar though smaller scale conflict is superior? Especially since that game let you engage both sides and make an effective and informed choice between the pro-mage, pro-templar or kill all mages options in accordance to your character's morality and beliefs?

 

Now if you'd like to debate this angle and counter with facts and reasoning to how Inquisition is a stronger game than Origins, then I'm all ears. If you don't want to debate, then feel free to walk away, I'm not forcing you to do anything.

 

I'm merely participating in the discussion. Don't like what I have to say? Too bad.

Actually, you can't claim anything like objective.  Well, you can claim it, but that doesn't make it accurate.  You see, using the actual definition of a term to define a term isn't a strawman, the strawman is misusing a term, and then justifying it with "saying I'm using it wrong is a strawman".  An argument made to be deconstructed, yes?  Because you feel that one is superior to the other is subjective, that is the very literal definition of the term.   I realize that this is the BSN, and that changing the definition to suit an argument is standard operating procedure, but that doesn't mean I'm going to buy into it.

 

An example:  I have a friend that loves the Mario games, above all else.  She made an attempt to play Baldur's Gate 2, but didn't like it, and went back to Mario.  To her, Mario was a superior game.  So, since you claim that liking one above the other is objective, Mario is a superior game to BG 2, right?  This is, after all, exactly what you're saying:  "I find Origins to be the superior game, and if you don't, you're wrong".  That is, by definition, the only way that your subjective opinion can be objective; if anyone disagrees, they're wrong.  But hey, don't take my word for it, Merriam-Webster is sort of an authority on what words mean, so let's consult them:

 

Objective

Subjective

 

Have fun.

[CronoDragoon]

Now if you'd like to debate this angle and counter with facts and reasoning to how Inquisition is a stronger game than Origins, then I'm all ears. If you don't want to debate, then feel free to walk away, I'm not forcing you to do anything.

Is this the part where I point out that you haven't actually bothered to explain any of this stuff you believe? Listing a bunch of things one does better than another doesn't qualify as a fact or an argument. If you want someone to engage you in debate, try establishing some good faith first by abiding by the standards you're demanding of others.

Such as: Origins has a stronger story than Inquisition because


And...go!

[Bob Walker]

I like all the Dragon Age Games very much. I enjoy them for what they are and they haven't disappointed me. That said, Origins is still my favorite.

[AlanC9]

Then I pieced together the cut scenes for Inquisition.
o_o
Okay....it is
a summer movie.
released
in the summer

I don't check you on this, at all. How about putting those vids up for all to see?

[Al Foley]

Is this the part where I point out that you haven't actually bothered to explain any of this stuff you believe? Listing a bunch of things one does better than another doesn't qualify as a fact or an argument. If you want someone to engage you in debate, try establishing some good faith first by abiding by the standards you're demanding of others.

Such as: Origins has a stronger story than Inquisition because


And...go!

...I got nothing.  Maybe the Temple of Sacred Ashes that quest was awesome.

[CardButton]

Is this the part where I point out that you haven't actually bothered to explain any of this stuff you believe? Listing a bunch of things one does better than another doesn't qualify as a fact or an argument. If you want someone to engage you in debate, try establishing some good faith first by abiding by the standards you're demanding of others.

Such as: Origins has a stronger story than Inquisition because


And...go!

Hmm ... I would only argue the strength of the Origins story over that of Inquisition on the basis that:

 

1) Origins had the advantage of being a self contained story. The events that began in Origins were more or less completed within the confines of the game and its DLCs. The same could not be said about Inquisition (so much dragged over from previous games), which inherently hurt both the story and the characterization of the Inquisitor themselves.  This is one of the reasons I actually would like Dual-PCs for DA4 (Inquisitor + Tevinter) so that a Tevinter on their own doesn't suffer the same fate.

 

And 2) The side quests, if they were not directly involved in the events of the main story, were structured in such a way that they could be done along the way to those main stories in Origins ... that can certainly not be said with Inquisition.  So many zones that had nothing to do with the bigger story at hand ... such a waist of both the setting and the insane amount of resources that it must have taken to develop them.  

 

Outside of that I have nothing else.  They are both good stories, they both had great moments and both added great things to the setting of Thedas. 

[CronoDragoon]

Hmm ... I would only argue the strength of the Origins story over that of Inquisition on the basis that:
 
1) Origins had the advantage of being a self contained story. The events that began in Origins were more or less completed within the confines of the game and its DLCs. The same could not be said about Inquisition (so much dragged over from previous games), which inherently hurt both the story and the characterization of the Inquisitor themselves.  This is one of the reasons I actually would like Dual-PCs for DA4 (Inquisitor + Tevinter) so that a Tevinter on their own doesn't suffer the same fate.
 
And 2) The side quests, if they were not directly involved in the events of the main story, were structured in such a way that they could be done along the way to those main stories in Origins ... that can certainly not be said with Inquisition.  So many zones that had nothing to do with the bigger story at hand ... such a waist of both the setting and the insane amount of resources that it must have taken to develop them.  
 
Outside of that I have nothing else.  They are both good stories, they both had great moments and both added great things to the setting of Thedas. 

1. This is true, and one of those things where two people can look at the same thing and either see a positive or a negative. While I agree that self-contained stories can be a good thing, I also felt very rewarded by Inquisition's reliance not only on previous games but also the lore in general. I felt rewarded as a participant for both playing through the older games (so that things like Corypheus' reveal had extra meaning) and also reading the lore books (so that when some historical assumption is proven false, it has extra weight). On the other hand, I think it's a negative that Inquisition now needs Trespasser to really feel like the main story is complete.

2. This is also true and I wasn't even thinking of side quests. When I think about "the story" of Inquisition I'm mainly thinking about the critical path. But if one considers the sum total of story content in the game, Origins has an edge on Inquisition in the side quest department.

[AlanC9]

Not exactly a waste... more like a deliberate design choice that you (and I, FWIW) just don't like. Some players, and designers, like sidequests that aren't substantially connected to the main plot.

[Iakus]

Not exactly a waste... more like a deliberate design choice that you (and I, FWIW) just don't like. Some players, and designers, like sidequests that aren't substantially connected to the main plot.

There's nothing wrong with having some random side quests to stumble into.  Though I do thin that for a large zone there should be an overall narrative to explain why you'd want to be there i the first place.

 

Which is why I think Frostback Basin in JoH has an excellent improvement over other regions, even though none of it had anything to do with Corypheus.

[Al Foley]

There's nothing wrong with having some random side quests to stumble into.  Though I do thin that for a large zone there should be an overall narrative to explain why you'd want to be there i the first place.

 

Which is why I think Frostback Basin in JoH has an excellent improvement over other regions, even though none of it had anything to do with Corypheus.

There was though.  In each region the Inquisition did have a reason to be there.  Its just that they did not always...make sense or resonate, with the player, apparntly.  What Jaws did is it was a structured zone.  It had a main story plot, finding out about Ameridan/ Hakkon, a side plot, exploring the Avarr, and then it had a few random side quests thrown in for good measure.  A lot like some of the Origin zones for that matter.  Hopefully they do more with it.

[CronoDragoon]

I can't even remember what your reason for being in the Exalted Plains is. That is the least of that zone's problems though.

[Al Foley]

The Exalted Plains was to investigate why communication was cut off with the two armies.  Love the Exalted Plains, by far my favorite regin in the game.

[CardButton]

I can't even remember what your reason for being in the Exalted Plains is. That is the least of that zone's problems though.

And the Fallow Mire, and the Hissing Wastes, and the Forbidden Oasis.  The Storm Coast and the Emerald Graves weren't much better in terms of relevance.  The only ones that seemed to actually matter were the Hinterlands, The Western Approach, Crestwood and Emprise du Lion.  

[Al Foley]

And the Fallow Mire, and the Hissing Wastes, and the Forbidden Oasis.  The Storm Coast and the Emerald Graves weren't much better in terms of relevance.  The only ones that seemed to actually matter were the Hinterlands, The Western Approach, Crestwood and Emprise du Lion.  

Rescue your captured soldiers held hostage by the Avarr, to investiagate what the Venatori were doing, Forbidden Oasis was to investigate the Shards, Storm Coast was to investigate more into the missing Wardens, and to make contact with Fairbanks. 

[Iakus]

The Exalted Plains was to investigate why communication was cut off with the two armies.  Love the Exalted Plains, by far my favorite regin in the game.

The Exalted Plains is probably the worst offender as far as DAI zones go.  You're basically there to...beat up some undead?  Then, I dunno chat up the Dalish I guess.

 

I would l have loved to have taken up the opportunity to explore the civil war and its effects on Orlais more.  Alas, it was not to be

[ioannisdenton]

There's nothing wrong with having some random side quests to stumble into.  Though I do thin that for a large zone there should be an overall narrative to explain why you'd want to be there i the first place.

 

Which is why I think Frostback Basin in JoH has an excellent improvement over other regions, even though none of it had anything to do with Corypheus.

this man gets it!!! do not forget the excellent crestwood.
Also i liked Hissing wastes a lot although i hated it in my 1 playthrough.
It is desolate, empty, calm and has the 5 tombs with their stories. Plus the colossal statue!

[ioannisdenton]

The Exalted Plains is probably the worst offender as far as DAI zones go.  You're basically there to...beat up some undead?  Then, I dunno chat up the Dalish I guess.

 

I would l have loved to have taken up the opportunity to explore the civil war and its effects on Orlais more.  Alas, it was not to be

i agree, it is a tiring zone for me due to undead who are a chore to fight and the endless dogs every 3 minutes. But it is very beautifully crafted.

[vbibbi]

Rescue your captured soldiers held hostage by the Avarr, to investiagate what the Venatori were doing, Forbidden Oasis was to investigate the Shards, Storm Coast was to investigate more into the missing Wardens, and to make contact with Fairbanks.

What relevance are shards to the Inquisition/closing the Breach/stopping Corypheus? I guess we can say the Venatori are investigating so we want to learn what they're up to, same in the Hissing Wastes, but there in no narrative payoff to either of these zones. For both of them, turns out the Venatori are just looking for gear that has been out leveled by our crafted gear by the time we complete the zones.

It feels like a Saturday morning cartoon: the bad guys are searching a cave! We'd better try to stop them from uncovering anything. Oh, turns out it was nothing relevant to anything and will never be referenced to in the future. But at least we got those meddling Venatori!

DAI relied way too much on every problem in the world being Corypheus' fault. That's why JOH is refreshing, there are no red Templars or Venatori, it's a zone related to the Inqusition but not Plot #473 that we have to stop.