821 réponses à ce sujet

[Giantdeathrobot]

Still like it a lot, albeit I prefer Origins for a number of reasons (mostly related to RPG systems and combat). But Inquisition is still way, way ahead of DA2.

[Cecylio19]

I think that Inquisition is not a bad game, but not a very good either. If you know what to except, it's fine. I excepted a lot walking and I was little overwhelmed, but maps are not THAT big. But I got bored in the end. I went for final mission without even starting three areas. It's just too much and it doesn't have effect on ending, sadly. I was excepting it, but still I'm dissapointed. Lame villain, pointless choices, maybe few differences here or there. I kinda understand, but I find it to be coward-ish. Mainstream is bad for BioWare. It seems that they fear to create less linear story. They're not the only one. More freedom, dear game devs, more freedom.

 

I don't think I'm going to play it again. Maybe in few years...

[Cantina]

Love? Uh no and no.

 

DAI is a decent game. There are far too many problems to make it in my top five of all time games.

 

Reasons:

 

The main story got stale after Haven. Not to mention so much conflicting information.

 

Skyhold was a wasted opportunity.

 

Cory was a boring as a villain. Not to mention the end fight was so easy even on nightmare.

 

Did not care for the DLCs. OK, Trespasser had ONE good thing - marrying Cullen.

 

Lack of setting up companion tactics.

 

Could not distribute my ability points the way I wanted. 

 

Combat felt like babysitting not to mention boring.

 

Only ability eight slots were open for use.

 

Several quests were either stupid or contrived.

 

MP was a waste of resources that could have been spent better on the main game.

 

 

Those are my main grips. I am sure there is more but, I've listed enough. DAI just did not feel like a DA game. Its not the best game nor the worst I've ever played. If DA had another year of development and the developers did not do such a hack and slash job then maybe...just maybe, I might have loved it.

[Qis]

They should remove all the fetch quest and put in all the DLC quests upon release...this will make everyone happy...

[Cantina]

They should remove all the fetch quest and put in all the DLC quests upon release...this will make everyone happy...

 

I don't mind fetch quests so long as they are fun and interesting. Dragging a Druffalo back to its owner because the asshat did not close the pen is NOT fun nor interesting,

[vbibbi]

DA:I is a game that doesn't seem to commit.

-And it has a main plot that doesn't thicken until after the game ends. In an epilogue DLC.

 

There's just so much about this game that is either on the fence or just not fully fleshed out; if it weren't dressed up so well by its graphics, characters, and my loyalty to the lore, I don't think I could have made it through at all. It's not a bad game, but it could have been so much more had it stuck to a single direction.

 

Incidentally, I think DA:I is a great Beta. Trespasser showed me exactly what Dragon Age could be when BioWare keeps focused and maintains a brisk-but methodical-pace. If that's what we can expect from DA4, then I'm totally in.

Yes. I've seen many posts saying "DAI was a good first step and DA4 will complete it." Um, why should we accept a half-baked game in the hope that it will be a good setup for the next game? A game should stand on its own merits, not as something building up to the next in the series. Yes, I hope that Bioware has learned from its mistakes in DAI and if it keeps some weak features for the next game, they're improved based upon feedback, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to overlook the weakness of those features in this game.

 

Especially when people say "I didn't care for X or Y until Trespasser, now I love it!" Okay...but we shouldn't need an ending DLC in order to enjoy an entire game. The DLC should supplement the experience, not correct it or act as a crutch.

 

Love? Uh no and no.

 

DAI is a decent game. There are far too many problems to make it in my top five of all time games.

 

Reasons:

 

Those are my main grips. I am sure there is more but, I've listed enough. DAI just did not feel like a DA game. Its not the best game nor the worst I've ever played. If DA had another year of development and the developers did not do such a hack and slash job then maybe...just maybe, I might have loved it.

Sadly, I don't believe extra development time would have made much of a difference. I think the features as we got them would have been fixed, except maybe adding more PC race details. Maybe fewer bugs but not improved content. The content was already decided long enough in the past that it would require starting over to revamp everything, plus dropping old gen systems to do some of the technical aspects they wanted.

[Almostfaceman]

I avoid the spoilers forum since i ve still yet to play the dlcs.
I am currently on my 2nd playthrough ; this time with all the DLCs.
Bioware has proven to me that the DLCs really enhance the game, every title was way different with them.
So far with the addition of trials from Trespasser the game itself has elevated for me (level 10).
Half XP, level scaling and tougher enemies make this game best of this gen for me only just behind from the witcher3.
Revisiting it the second time feels FANTASTIC. I am in love!!!!
I dare say that i cannot look back to previous dragon age titles. Sure there is a not good sidequest design but reading the codex and picking the quests with an ingame inquisitor logic and not just following the quest icons in the map (the way is SHOULD be played) makes the game totaly worth it.

I just entered crestwood and this map clearly shows what DA:I would be if there was more time:
interesting sidestory, the great damn-flood-deflood situation, the dragon, the flooded caves, mayor missing and NPCs that actually react to your presence and speak. Sadly the next zones i will visit willnot be of that quality.
But still this works to its advantage as crestwood really shines!

Anyway i was wondering: whats the consensus on Da:I. now that the game is finished?
Do you love it? 
Where do you stack this game?
Is this a "bioware" game? 

Pesonally i love this game.

 

I really enjoyed Inquisition. I think it's a step in the right direction, making Thedas more alive, immersive, and interesting. I also like the slow reveal of the true nature and history of Thedas and its cultures. The story has continued to be fun and engaging with the new characters and the evolution of some of the characters from previous games. 

[Dai Grepher]

Anyway i was wondering: whats the consensus on Da:I. now that the game is finished?
Do you love it? 
Where do you stack this game?
Is this a "bioware" game? 

Pesonally i love this game.

 

There are mixed feelings about every aspect of the game, but I think the general consensus is that DA:I was a giant leap in the right direction after DA2. Not as good as Origins, but still really good and a success. It should give EA cause to green-light DA4.

 

My opinion is that the main game was really good, but a little less than Origins. Jaws of Hakkon was an excellent DLC. Descent was... decent. Trespasser outright sucks on all levels.
 

[ComedicSociopathy]

Could of been better. 

[Al Foley]

I love it.  I love it very much.  If it were a woman I'd take it in a manly fashion.  

[vbibbi]

I really enjoyed Inquisition. I think it's a step in the right direction, making Thedas more alive, immersive, and interesting. I also like the slow reveal of the true nature and history of Thedas and its cultures. The story has continued to be fun and engaging with the new characters and the evolution of some of the characters from previous games. 

I guess I just don't understand the opinion many have that DAI felt more alive than previous games. Most zones had maybe one or two NPCs to interact with, and those were usually "Go get me X" and "Thank you for getting me X." Yes, companions and advisors and some people in the story missions had some interactivity, but the world as a whole felt very static and empty to me. In previous games, there was still dialogue with NPCs during quests (often even the enemies before battle) and there were more NPCs in hub areas to talk with. Shopkeepers here no longer have dialogue, except for that nuggalope merchant. They aren't people but walking stores, where previous games the merchants were individuals, even if they didn't have substantial dialogue.

 

I would honestly like to hear what elements in DAI feel more alive and immersive than the past two games. I'm not debating that there was a lot of lore involved and good companion interactions. But those alone weren't enough to rid me of the impression that the world was static and empty.

[AlanC9]

They should remove all the fetch quest and put in all the DLC quests upon release...this will make everyone happy...

Hmm... kind of hard to sell the DLCs, then. Sending the DLCs back in time to put them in before they're made might also be a problem.

[AlanC9]

My opinion is that the main game was really good, but a little less than Origins. Jaws of Hakkon was an excellent DLC. Descent was... decent. Trespasser outright sucks on all levels.

Haven't played Trespasser yet myself(probably won't until the GOTY goes on sale and I pick up everything). But I've been hearing mostly good things about it. What's wrong with Trespasser?

[wtfman99]

I loved it, I would always have suggestions for changes but overall, loved it.

 

Origins was probably about the only game I wouldn't change, but if I had to, maybe speed up combat a touch, not to DA 2 fast, but Origins was a bit slow. 

 

Can't wait for DA4. 

[Dai Grepher]

Haven't played Trespasser yet myself(probably won't until the GOTY goes on sale and I pick up everything). But I've been hearing mostly good things about it. What's wrong with Trespasser?

 

That's smart.

 

The problems are numerous. I will try to make a thread about it with some imagery. I'll let you know. But the gist of it is that the tone is goofy at first, then serious, and overall illogical. It doesn't know what it wants to be. Comedy? Tragedy? It doesn't know, and it ends up doing neither one well. It also has some character assassination, and a lack of player choice.
 

[Laughing_Man]

I didn't hate DA:I, but I was very disappointed, I felt in many ways that the game could have been so much better but ended up rather stale,

boring most of the time, and overall a mediocre experience.

 

I really disliked some of the gameplay elements, like the lack of a good tactics system, the terribad AI,

the 8 skill restriction coupled with the gutted skill trees, and the general MMO feel the game had.

 

I did buy the "Descent" DLC, and that was the final nail in the coffin of the game for me.

It was just... uninteresting, with a WTF plot and rather boring overall.

 

I didn't buy "Trespasser" because I mostly lost interest in DA:I. (also I have a feeling that I won't like the direction and tone of "Trespasser")

[D_Schattenjager]

Love the game

Excellent Dragon Fights ... best I have seen since BG2 from Biware ... 

Lots of scope to improve though ... hopefully DA4 will be better

[Realmzmaster]

Had a blast with DAI and all the dlc. Well worth the money IMHO. Had no problem with the gameplay elements. The tactics system while no as expansive as DAO and DA2 worth just fine for me. The eight skill restriction was not a limitation in my playthroughs.

 

I do not get the MMO feel. The game in most of its design felt like a throwback to BG1. Descent was what it was suppose to be a dungeon crawl. JOH was an interesting dlc with all the lore about the Avarr. Trespasser capped everything off nicely. Trespasser was funny in parts and serious in others and brought everything to a conclusion for the Inquisitor and set up the next game in the series.

 

Really like the options and trials that Trespasser brought to the game. DAI was a great game for me to play and I am still playing it. I am sorry but I like quite a few of the "fetch" quests especially Duffy the Duffalo. Using Duffy to take out the Fade rift and demons in the area is classic!

[Alex Hawke]

I love the original game and the DLC and looking forward to DA4.

 

Though, there's should be support for 5+-button mice. Missed it much.

[Amplitudelol]

I avoid the spoilers forum since i ve still yet to play the dlcs.
I am currently on my 2nd playthrough ; this time with all the DLCs.
Bioware has proven to me that the DLCs really enhance the game, every title was way different with them.
So far with the addition of trials from Trespasser the game itself has elevated for me (level 10).
Half XP, level scaling and tougher enemies make this game best of this gen for me only just behind from the witcher3.
Revisiting it the second time feels FANTASTIC. I am in love!!!!
I dare say that i cannot look back to previous dragon age titles. Sure there is a not good sidequest design but reading the codex and picking the quests with an ingame inquisitor logic and not just following the quest icons in the map (the way is SHOULD be played) makes the game totaly worth it.

I just entered crestwood and this map clearly shows what DA:I would be if there was more time:
interesting sidestory, the great damn-flood-deflood situation, the dragon, the flooded caves, mayor missing and NPCs that actually react to your presence and speak. Sadly the next zones i will visit willnot be of that quality.
But still this works to its advantage as crestwood really shines!

Anyway i was wondering: whats the consensus on Da:I. now that the game is finished?
Do you love it? 
Where do you stack this game?
Is this a "bioware" game? 

Pesonally i love this game.

 

The open-world sucked big time, but The Descent and Tresspasser was far better than the content of the original game. The way the story ends and character interraction in Tresspasser is the most awesome thing in Inquisition. The tac cam and combat system in general (PC) and the mostly lifeless grindy mmo zones reduced its value by a lot for me. Overall: without dlc-s its a "meh", with dlc-s its "good".

[Almostfaceman]

I guess I just don't understand the opinion many have that DAI felt more alive than previous games. Most zones had maybe one or two NPCs to interact with, and those were usually "Go get me X" and "Thank you for getting me X." Yes, companions and advisors and some people in the story missions had some interactivity, but the world as a whole felt very static and empty to me. In previous games, there was still dialogue with NPCs during quests (often even the enemies before battle) and there were more NPCs in hub areas to talk with. Shopkeepers here no longer have dialogue, except for that nuggalope merchant. They aren't people but walking stores, where previous games the merchants were individuals, even if they didn't have substantial dialogue.

 

I would honestly like to hear what elements in DAI feel more alive and immersive than the past two games. I'm not debating that there was a lot of lore involved and good companion interactions. But those alone weren't enough to rid me of the impression that the world was static and empty.

 

Without getting exhaustive... the more "open" environments helped them feel less artificial. Both Origins and DA2 were tightly constrained and felt more like a fake movie backdrop than a living world compared to Inquisition. Extremely poor graphics (in comparison to their peers) didn't help matters either. 

 

All three of them follow a similar formula in "Go get me X" and "Thank you for getting me X". The Lothering quests that were blatant "this is how our simple side-quest system works" were banal compared to the involvement with the introductory Haven area. Haven had tied-in exciting story cinematics, dynamic story-driven populace dialogue, and far superior backdrop (hey... that's a cool tear in the sky over there) and feel. 

 

Inquisition just did most things bigger and better for me. This is just one example. 

[RoboticWater]

That's smart.

 

The problems are numerous. I will try to make a thread about it with some imagery. I'll let you know. But the gist of it is that the tone is goofy at first, then serious, and overall illogical. It doesn't know what it wants to be. Comedy? Tragedy? It doesn't know, and it ends up doing neither one well. It also has some character assassination, and a lack of player choice.

I don't see how the shift between goofy and serious is a problem. Trespasser starts off as a sweet, nostalgic and yes, fairly goofy reunion of the "old team," (as any reunion is bound to be) and then the tone shifts as the plot thickens. That's not incoherent, that's just good writing. Switching between the two keeps the players on their toes by preventing them from settling into a single mood. The spurts of comedy surrounding the tragedy are made all the more endearing as they feel like well earned and well needed respites from reality, and the overall undercurrent of severity is made all the more real when contrasted with the lighter moments.

 

I don't really know what you're talking about with character assassinations, but to each their own.

 

As for choice, I thought there were about as many important choices in it as some of the main quests.

[vbibbi]

Without getting exhaustive... the more "open" environments helped them feel less artificial. Both Origins and DA2 were tightly constrained and felt more like a fake movie backdrop than a living world compared to Inquisition. Extremely poor graphics (in comparison to their peers) didn't help matters either. 

 

All three of them follow a similar formula in "Go get me X" and "Thank you for getting me X". The Lothering quests that were blatant "this is how our simple side-quest system works" were banal compared to the involvement with the introductory Haven area. Haven had tied-in exciting story cinematics, dynamic story-driven populace dialogue, and far superior backdrop (hey... that's a cool tear in the sky over there) and feel. 

 

Inquisition just did most things bigger and better for me. This is just one example. 

Thanks for the response. I can see the environment improvement, definitely. The environments were beautiful and felt more realistic than previous games, yup.

 

For the people, though, yes Lothering was pretty basic with introductory quests, but that's just one example, whereas areas like the Dalish camp, Denerim market, and Orzammar show many more options and personalities in the NPCs. Quest givers were still "Bring me X/Do Y" and "Thanks for that" but there was so much more interaction with most of them, and several options on how to complete the quests. Ruck's mother, Brother Burkel's chantry, the two Dalish lovers, bargaining the acorn from the Mad Hermit, all of these had multiple methods of completion, and the NPCs could discuss several lines of inquiry besides just the DAI one line of accepting the quest.

 

NPCs in DAI were quest vehicles. The lore and information was gained through codices, breaking immersion for me. YMMV

[Qun00]

Ohh, I absolutely love it. The characters are great, layered and very memorable.

Then you have the romances, which can at least please *most* tastes. You want fun and playful love? There is Sera and the Iron Bull. Do you like it adorable and sweet? Cassandra and Josephine are your best bet. Masochists will get their thrills with Solas and those who want a normal and heartwarming relationship got the commander.

Gameplay wise, I'm fairly satisfied with the variety in the locations we get to visit, the battles and the crafting system.

Any complaints I might have are mostly nitpicking, like... the dual wielding attack's animation. DA2's rogue moved swiftly while this one shoves the blades into the enemy slowly and clumsily like an amateur. But again, nothing that ruined the game for me.

[JenMaxon]

I think that Inquisition is not a bad game, but not a very good either.

That would be me too.  There are parts of it I liked but it was ... diffuse.  The story got lost and I got bored - many times.  Overall, I was unable to engage with it and by the end I didn't really care.  Trespasser was just 'meh' for me.  I liked JoH of the dlc.

 

The thing is, I like reading the boards and peoples' theories about this and that and finding stuff in the lore, so it seems to me that there is potential interest in there for me.  I generally like the way Bioware develops characters.  I think it was the execution of the story that was wanting.  Well, that and all the pointless side-quests and unused areas (I mean unused story-wise).

 

I've played it all through once with the dlc but I don't think I'll be playing it again.  I've been thinking about uninstalling as a matter of fact - even the multiplayer failed for me (it's soooooo empty).  I played ME's multiplayer to death, long after I'd played the game through.