375 réponses à ce sujet

[vbibbi]

Well, you've just answered yourself as to why many things are the way they are. The distance between Inquisition and the people is actually a team that is actively explored in the game. You may not like it, but the way things are portrayed actually serve the story.

 Yes, but I don't think that means the game was exempt from attempting to engage the player with more personal stories. Which is the issue I have where NPCs in Crestwood and Sarhnia have no personality and are completely unmemorable. Just because we're the leader of an organization doesn't mean we should be completely removed from the people we're trying to help.
 

I cannot even stress just how much more environmental storytelling there is in DAI compared to DAO. It's on such different level I can only express confusion that you don't see any of it. Perhaps it stems from the fact that I'm a visual artist so I simply pay attention to such things, so I see it pouring from everywhere, but I cannot even begin to start to list examples of environmental storytelling in each zone, from tiny little things (an enemy's skeleton pinned to the practice target with arrows in Exalted Planes) to absolutely huge clues (basalt columns exist anywhere there is a Titan. In Deep Roads section of Trespasser, or all along Strom Coast, under which Descent takes place. There are also basalt columns in the Hinterlands, especially close to Vallamar. Conclusion - there's a Titan under Hinterlands and it's probable that it's Blighted).

Mm, your Titan example is complete speculation, so I don't think that's a fair example of visual storytelling. I'll grant that you probably do see more of this visual storytelling than I do, but as has been pointed out, DAI is the most recent Bioware game I've played, not the first, so I'm used to and expect narrative storytelling more than visual.

 

Ironically, with larger maps that have more space to explore, the small visual storytelling elements you're describing seem like they would be more difficult to encounter. Easy to overlook or not fully explore the map in order to reach them.
 

[Addictress]

Yes, it's a very basic term taught in highschool English Literature classes, which refers to how things should be shown through description rather than stated by the author. 

 

Eg. "His eyes lit up", rather than "He felt happy".

 

It has nothing to do with the medium the information is presented in, and can be used in movies or games as well. For example, a character in a movie could state to another character that she was happy, rather than showing it through body language or actions. Same in a game. You can argue whether the specific text presented shows or tells, but it does not tell by simple virtue of being text.

The reason "his eyes lit up" is different from "he felt happy" in a book is because within the medium of the book, which is using language to activate images and feelings in our mind, the effect is demonstrative. A game is not purely language but visual and interactive as well, and in both cases you want to optimize the medium you have to demonstrate, to better active those feelings and impressions on the audience. The best way to demonstrate something optimally in the interactive medium is either to interact, or animate cinematically. A movie is closer to a game than a book is, although I do not discredit the value of text in games. And it is controversial as to how much 'movie' and how much 'interaction' should be in a game, and often it's just a careful balancing of the too. But  I just don't think the place of text should be to demonstrate in a game - it should only be to supplement. 

[midnight tea]

It is a matter of proportion. The text is unlocking very critical aspects of the plot.

 

Text has its place in games. It should not be a manner for narrative instigation but rather a user-interface tool and reserved for supplementary codex, or letters. A few letters can even be plot-critical. But unlocking huge segments of narrative through text feels cheap.

 

 

Huge segments of narative? War table is there predominantly to flesh out the details and react to choices made, NOT be there to unlock huge segments of narrative. If there's a more important segment of narrative, it's usually accompanied by unlocked cut scenes or dialogue options or new quests, which was already pointed out. And not that many elements on critical path are unlocked or revealed through War Table, so I'm not even sure what you're talking about.

 

And as CronoDragoon already explained, a lot it was also a matter of compromise - it was either a war table or nothing.

 

And I'll take "cheap" (though or me it is not) over non-existent pretty much any day of a week, especially if the text itself provides clues or interesting tidbits in itself.

 

Especially that this "cheap" only contributes to the immersion. You may dislike the War Table, but it was entirely appropriate for the Inquisition and how things were done. DAI is not DAO, neither on scope or storytelling level - it's something much bigger. We're not running a ragtag group of friends and travel in a band, mostly undetected, throughout Ferelden, but are people in position of tremendous power with a central base, who delegate our forces all across the continent. It's only natural and entirely fitting that there will be things done through others, who will later send written reports, alongside things the Inquisitor would have to take care on their own.

[Nefla]

I'm of the opinion that DA:I did a ton of telling, not showing. Instances of this that stuck out to me were things like the main characters in the Winter Palace. We were told "Celine is a master manipulator" "Gaspard is a ruthless military man" and so on but what we were shown didn't back it up in the slightest. None of them really did anything. They stood around and were all easily fooled by the clumsy and obvious Florianne and each of their plans weren't clever or impressive at all. I wanted to see some Grand Admiral Thrawn level machinations here. I was not shown anything to impress me or to reinforce what the advisors had told me. Another example is the crossroads. We are told "people are starving" yet there are wild goats running around 10 feet away with nothing dangerous in between the village and them. We are told "the people are freezing to death" and yet they're all hanging out in a sunny summer meadow with flowers in full bloom. Not to mention there are so few NPCs there that all of them would easily fit into the houses there. We get one scripted event where mage and templar mooks attack us and our soldiers near the crossroads and after that the village is completely left alone. Their attempt at environmental storytelling completely segregated the characters and the backdrops. There are demons spawning on the farm and none of the people who live there even care. You have some burning houses and some random bodies but then the village is completely safe when it shouldn't be. It would have been better if we'd had to fortify the town and if bandits/whatever occasionally attacked with our soldiers fighting them off. 

 

In general I'm someone who doesn't take well to just being given information. I need to experience it, I need a connection. I need to see that thing reinforced. For example in DA:O I knew the elves were oppressed because I got to see if firsthand and when I played an elf character they were often treated differently. In DA2 I was told the elves were oppressed but I wasn't shown any of it. One of the biggest disconnects with DA:I for me came from the intro. We were told there had been a mage/templar war, we were told there had been a conclave and a bunch of people died and the Divine died and so on but we didn't get to experience it. I know I'm unusual in this regard but flashy action doesn't do anything for me, it has to be tense and I have to care about those involved. When watching a superhero movie for example I will often get bored and tune out at the flashy action setpieces especially if they go on for too long. The event that started everything in motion for DA:I we never got to see or experience and I didn't care about it. More empty action, a tutorial level where we just fight a bunch of monsters up a hill and then fight a bigger monster. I didn't care at all. 

[Addictress]

I'm of the opinion that DA:I did a ton of telling, not showing. Instances of this that stuck out to me were things like the main characters in the Winter Palace. We were told "Celine is a master manipulator" "Gaspard is a ruthless military man" and so on but what we were shown didn't back it up in the slightest. None of them really did anything. They stood around and were all easily fooled by the clumsy and obvious Florianne and each of their plans weren't clever or impressive at all. I wanted to see some Grand Admiral Thrawn level machinations here. I was not shown anything to impress me or to reinforce what the advisors had told me. Another example is the crossroads. We are told "people are starving" yet there are wild goats running around 10 feet away with nothing dangerous in between the village and them. We are told "the people are freezing to death" and yet they're all hanging out in a sunny summer meadow with flowers in full bloom. Not to mention there are so few NPCs there that all of them would easily fit into the houses there. We get one scripted event where mage and templar mooks attack us and our soldiers near the crossroads and after that the village is completely left alone. Their attempt at environmental storytelling completely segregated the characters and the backdrops. There are demons spawning on the farm and none of the people who live there even care. You have some burning houses and some random bodies but then the village is completely safe when it shouldn't be. It would have been better if we'd had to fortify the town and if bandits/whatever occasionally attacked with our soldiers fighting them off. 

 

In general I'm someone who doesn't take well to just being given information. I need to experience it, I need a connection. I need to see that thing reinforced. For example in DA:O I knew the elves were oppressed because I got to see if firsthand and when I played an elf character they were often treated differently. In DA2 I was told the elves were oppressed but I wasn't shown any of it. One of the biggest disconnects with DA:I for me came from the intro. We were told there had been a mage/templar war, we were told there had been a conclave and a bunch of people died and the Divine died and so on but we didn't get to experience it. I know I'm unusual in this regard but flashy action doesn't do anything for me, it has to be tense and I have to care about those involved. When watching a superhero movie for example I will often get bored and tune out at the flashy action setpieces especially if they go on for too long. The event that started everything in motion for DA:I we never got to see or experience and I didn't care about it. More empty action, a tutorial level where we just fight a bunch of monsters up a hill and then fight a bigger monster. I didn't care at all. 

Yeah there you go, you said it better than I could.

 

My mind is broken   but I still feel things and don't know how to release the feels so I end up spouting words on this forum anyways. gah

[Abyss108]

The reason "his eyes lit up" is different from "he felt happy" in a book is because within the medium of the book, which is using language to activate images and feelings in our mind, the effect is demonstrative. A game is not purely language but visual and interactive as well, and in both cases you want to optimize the medium you have to demonstrate, to better active those feelings and impressions on the audience. The best way to demonstrate something optimally in the interactive medium is either to interact, or animate cinematically. A movie is closer to a game than a book is, although I do not discredit the value of text in games. And it is controversial as to how much 'movie' and how much 'interaction' should be in a game, and often it's just a careful balancing of the too. But  I just don't think the place of text should be to demonstrate in a game - it should only be to supplement. 

 

Whether you think text should be in the game or not has nothing to do with "show, don't tell". You can't hide behind a well known literacy term to make a completely unrelated point.

 

And it hardly makes sense to say a game should be cinematic like a movie if you are arguing format. If you want to play to the strengths of the medium it needs to be interactive, not cinematic. Otherwise you are simply choosing whether to replace parts of your game with parts of a book or parts of a movie. Both are terrible, and which you prefer simply comes down to whether you prefer reading or watching.

[AlanC9]

The missions ARE interesting, which is why it's disappointing they're just dialogue boxes.
 
Conceptually the inquisitor is receiving letters and information and reports...yeah... so.... why is this conveyed through click-click-dialoguebox-click-out? Is that really the best way to convey something when in the same amount of time you could have the advisor have a customized introduction to the mission, a few cut scenes or shots of the setting of the mission they're talking about, or something?

Exactly what are you proposing here? Massive cuts to the missions the PC personally participates in in order to devote more resources to the missions the PC doesn't personally participate in?

I don't see how this is a good use of development resources, no matter how divorced from reality the proposed budget gets.

[Nefla]

Exactly what are you proposing here? Massive cuts to the missions the PC personally participates in in order to devote more resources to the missions the PC doesn't personally participate in?

I don't see how this is a good use of development resources, no matter how divorced from reality the proposed budget gets.

It would have been cool if some of those wartable missions had been actual quests you could do. It would have been a lot more fun than finding goats and lost rings...

[midnight tea]

 Yes, but I don't think that means the game was exempt from attempting to engage the player with more personal stories. Which is the issue I have where NPCs in Crestwood and Sarhnia have no personality and are completely unmemorable. Just because we're the leader of an organization doesn't mean we should be completely removed from the people we're trying to help.

 

Thing is that there are so many people Inquisition is trying to help and so many people wanting to get help from Inquisition the faces of many (other than constant companions) not really sticking to Inquisitor's memory also serves as a pretty fitting storytelling device. It's not that Inquisitor doesn't care about it (depending on how plays), it's just that there's so much to do, that eventually the plight of a single person gets lost in the sea of plight of others.

 

 

 

Mm, your Titan example is complete speculation, so I don't think that's a fair example of visual storytelling. I'll grant that you probably do see more of this visual storytelling than I do, but as has been pointed out, DAI is the most recent Bioware game I've played, not the first, so I'm used to and expect narrative storytelling more than visual.

 

It is a speculation, but you have to admit that there's something happening there, isn't it? We do know that there's a lot of lyrium under Hinterlands - all of it red. It's being mined or stumbled upon all across the zone. And then there's Vallamar, which also happens to be a place where Bianca has her secret entrance for red lyrium studying and - later - mining. There's even a super-loud sound coming from under the ground the first time we enter the outpost, unlike anything we've heard before - too loud and huge to be made by regular darkspawn.

 

Heck, what if red lyrium is the reason why the main settlement there is called REDcliffe?

 

Anyway - speculation or not, it has all the good qualities of consistent storytelling and visual clueing us in - just like scattered wolves everywhere (be it statues, or packs of wolves) and Solas' wolf jawbone, which really drove me crazy the first time I played the game, ever since I've noticed it.

 

 

Ironically, with larger maps that have more space to explore, the small visual storytelling elements you're describing seem like they would be more difficult to encounter. Easy to overlook or not fully explore the map in order to reach them.

 

Lol, well - the point of exploration is to explore It'd be boring and kinda counter-productive if they just gave us everything on a silver platter. Visual overload is a thing that happens too. Still, it's not like there aren't hings we can't notice right away - like the fact that Exalted Plains, which doesn't just present bleached color palette, but also lacks environmental music... other than "static" that is really annoying after a while. Fully intentional, I'm sure - meant to convey the damage to the place the conflict brought, including damage to the Veil (hence all the demons roaming about). Its entirely different with, say, Emerald Graves - mysterious, somber, relaxing, but sad, some elvhen remains scattered about, and giant mansions of Orlesians clearly stating who currently owns the lands.

 

And one of my favorites - the Western Approach. It's INCREDIBLE. The Abyssal Rift especially - superbly menacing, dominating over already hostile and hard-to-dominate environment, like a supervolcano about to erupt. I could stare for it for hours and see it staring back (I love that we can actually find small text with reference to Nietzsche ). I just wish the banter wasn't broken there, so we could hear all the companions' reaction to the fact that despite such closeness to something so vile, life appears to be coming back on the desert, signifying that the Blight corruption may not be permanent.

[midnight tea]

It would have been cool if some of those wartable missions had been actual quests you could do. It would have been a lot more fun than finding goats and lost rings...

 

... Yes, because that's all we do - find goats and lost rings. All throughout the Inquisition. It's not like those are entirely inconsequential missions that Inquisitor can entirely ignore - little things to show that the grand Inquisitor sometimes cares enough to do something tiny for a person in need, without the narrative bending over backwards to spin it into something bigger than it should be. 

 

Also - our agents find more things for us through war table missions than it is required of us to find things on our own, like Cole's amulet, or things necessary to accomplish some quests. No need to fetch it personally.

 

That, plus many of the war table missions-that-could-be-turned-quests actually take place in regions not depicted in Inquisition, which speaks volumes on why they weren't depicted as anything more - the cost of including those quests is insurmountably higher than a simple quest Inquisitor can find in zones they have access to.

[Addictress]

Exactly what are you proposing here? Massive cuts to the missions the PC personally participates in in order to devote more resources to the missions the PC doesn't personally participate in?

I don't see how this is a good use of development resources, no matter how divorced from reality the proposed budget gets.

Okay well they'd have to redesign the whole game in order to make it flow properly.

 

Yes, the entire design of the game. 

 

Whether you think text should be in the game or not has nothing to do with "show, don't tell". You can't hide behind a well known literacy term to make a completely unrelated point.

 

And it hardly makes sense to say a game should be cinematic like a movie if you are arguing format. If you want to play to the strengths of the medium it needs to be interactive, not cinematic. Otherwise you are simply choosing whether to replace parts of your game with parts of a book or parts of a movie. Both are terrible, and which you prefer simply comes down to whether you prefer reading or watching.

A well-known literacy term that is perfectly applicable here. And yes, people disagree how cinematic and movie-like games should be. This where a lot of people diverge. I think it should be a mix, more cinematic, less text-y. Even in a text-based RPG, however, you affect the outcome of what's happening in the text more than you did in the war table, where your only option were do/not do and which advisor to sic on it.

[Addictress]

Thing is that there are so many people Inquisition is trying to help and so many people wanting to get help from Inquisition the faces of many (other than constant companions) not really sticking to Inquisitor's memory also serves as a pretty fitting storytelling device. It's not that Inquisitor doesn't care about it (depending on how plays), it's just that there's so much to do, that eventually the plight of a single person gets lost in the sea of plight of others.

 

 

It is a speculation, but you have to admit that there's something happening there, isn't it? We do know that there's a lot of lyrium under Hinterlands - all of it red. It's being mined or stumbled upon all across the zone. And then there's Vallamar, which also happens to be a place where Bianca has her secret entrance for red lyrium studying and - later - mining. There's even a super-loud sound coming from under the ground the first time we enter the outpost, unlike anything we've heard before - too loud and huge to be made by regular darkspawn.

 

Heck, what if red lyrium is the reason why the main settlement there is called REDcliffe?

 

Anyway - speculation or not, it has all the good qualities of consistent storytelling and visual clueing us in - just like scattered wolves everywhere (be it statues, or packs of wolves) and Solas' wolf jawbone, which really drove me crazy the first time I played the game, ever since I've noticed it.

 

 

Lol, well - the point of exploration is to explore It'd be boring and kinda counter-productive if they just gave us everything on a silver platter. Visual overload is a thing that happens too. Still, it's not like there aren't hings we can't notice right away - like the fact that Exalted Plains, which doesn't just present bleached color palette, but also lacks environmental music... other than "static" that is really annoying after a while. Fully intentional, I'm sure - meant to convey the damage to the place the conflict brought, including damage to the Veil (hence all the demons roaming about). Its entirely different with, say, Emerald Graves - mysterious, somber, relaxing, but sad, some elvhen remains scattered about, and giant mansions of Orlesians clearly stating who currently owns the lands.

 

And one of my favorites - the Western Approach. It's INCREDIBLE. The Abyssal Rift especially - superbly menacing, dominating over already hostile and hard-to-dominate environment, like a supervolcano about to erupt. I could stare for it for hours and see it staring back (I love that we can actually find small text with reference to Nietzsche ). I just wish the banter wasn't broken there, so we could hear all the companions' reaction to the fact that despite such closeness to something so vile, life appears to be coming back on the desert, signifying that the Blight corruption may not be permanent.

 You like the exploration. That's why we disagree, because I like bioware for story and narrative, not exploration.

 

Exploration is a nice side benefit and it should stay that - a side benefit.

 

I made an obsessive music video with shots of the regions as you saw in my other post, so I definitely do appreciate the beautiful scenery. But I really miss the integrated storytelling of the other games.

 

Skyrim is one of my top games, it's purely exploration too. 

[devSin]

No, BioWare will never make another game like Origins.

Origins itself never would have been released but for the fact that too much work had already been put into it (otherwise, it would have just been shelved in favor of something with more "modern" sensibilities).

[Nefla]

Thing is that there are so many people Inquisition is trying to help and so many people wanting to get help from Inquisition the faces of many (other than constant companions) not really sticking to Inquisitor's memory also serves as a pretty fitting storytelling device. It's not that Inquisitor doesn't care about it (depending on how plays), it's just that there's so much to do, that eventually the plight of a single person gets lost in the sea of plight of others.

For people like me who play for characters/personal connection & dynamics/etc...above all else, making all the NPCs indistinct and unmemorable isn't a good thing no matter how you slice it. There aren't even that many of them. It doesn't seem like a storytelling device(and I doubt the devs did it intentionally for that reason) it seems like a way to save time and put in more random timesinks for the player while putting less effort and resources into them.

 

... Yes, because that's all we do - find goats and lost rings. All throughout the Inquisition. It's not like those are entirely inconsequential missions that Inquisitor can entirely ignore - little things to show that the grand Inquisitor sometimes cares enough to do something tiny for a person in need, without the narrative bending over backwards to spin it into something bigger than it should be. 

 

Also - our agents find more things for us through war table missions than it is required of us to find things on our own, like Cole's amulet, or things necessary to accomplish some quests. No need to fetch it personally.

 

That, plus many of the war table missions-that-could-be-turned-quests actually take place in regions not depicted in Inquisition, which speaks volumes on why they weren't depicted as anything more - the cost of including those quests is insurmountably higher than a simple quest Inquisitor can find in zones they have access to.

You're right, sometimes we also fight the same generic demons over and over when closing the 100th rift or sometimes we follow short notes around or sometimes we collect herbs or rocks or whatever for people. Are you really saying you wouldn't WANT some of those story heavy, lore heavy, interesting wartable missions to be made into actual quests? :huh:They could have easily changed some of them to be set in the parts we have access to. I know they didn't have a lot of resources left over to make sidequests, but come on.

[Abyss108]

Okay well they'd have to redesign the whole game in order to make it flow properly.

 

Yes, the entire design of the game. 

 

A well-known literacy term that is perfectly applicable here. And yes, people disagree how cinematic and movie-like games should be. This where a lot of people diverge. I think it should be a mix, more cinematic, less text-y. Even in a text-based RPG, however, you affect the outcome of what's happening in the text more than you did in the war table, where your only option were do/not do and which advisor to sic on it.

 

It isn't applicable, it has a completely different meaning to how you are using the term here, but whatever, I understand what you are trying to say. You can enjoy games being more cinematic all you want, but it's not "better", that's just your personal taste. Anything that takes control away from the player is equally bad, because it means the game has given up on its own medium. 

 

You don't simply choose to do/not do a quest either. Who you choose can produce completely different results and even lead to completely different later quests. There's more choice and consequence than in most other side quests.

[Sarielle]

It's somewhat possible, but Bioware won't be the ones who do it first, if they're the ones who do it at all.  This cinematic style of RPG is popular now, but also is also getting more and more flak, and is not where the future of the genre lies.  I predicted a long time ago that the "silent protagonist" was not a dead feature, but actually the future of gaming, and now, more and more, technology is being released which should make that reality.  Someone just has to put it all together into an ambitious and exposed title.  Seriously, voice recognition software is actually pretty good these days, and now fledgling VR is right around the corner.  While the first big success will probably be something more akin to The Elder Scrolls where exploration is king, I think people will be driven by being the central character within epic stories.

 

Oh god. I like playing posh british protagonists, I don't want my Kentucky twang in Thedas LOL. Please no.

 

I think DAI was a big step up from Origins, although I enjoyed the first one as well. Women actually have a female frame and mocap, I enjoy the adviser mechanic, environments are way better, I prefer more "human" big bads than amorphous evil. Not to mention I feel like I have more choices for leveling up without doing every scrap of content.

[pdusen]

No, cinematics is right. When we say cinematic, we're not using the term as an applauding adjective. We're using the term in its technical sense. Like, the cinematics of the game. Not in the sense that, when compared to movie shots they look cinematic by comparison.

 

No, that usage is completely wrong in this context. A cinematic is an animated scene with direction and action. The conversations that you feel you're missing are simple back-and-forth camera switches whenever the person talking changes. Referring to those as "cinematic" is dishonest.

 

The actual cinematic conversations never left. Inquisition had plenty of those.

[Addictress]

No, that usage is completely wrong in this context. A cinematic is an animated scene with direction and action. The conversations that you feel you're missing are simple back-and-forth camera switches whenever the person talking changes. Referring to those as "cinematic" is dishonest.

 

The actual cinematic conversations never left. Inquisition had plenty of those.

Okay like I said, a poorly acted scene is better than no scene at all. A scene is a scene, if it's not animated well then that's a can of worms there but you're asking me to prefer no scene at all? And Inquisition had cinematic convos for the biggest quests but by proportion it had less.

[midnight tea]

 You like the exploration. That's why we disagree, because I like bioware for story and narrative, not exploration.

 

Exploration is a nice side benefit and it should stay that - a side benefit.

 

Um, and it stays a side benefit   Just because I enjoy exploring doesn't mean that I play DA games just for exploring. I enjoy it, because it serves purposes OTHER than exploration - they flesh out the world and actually makes the pacing and story of Inquisition more believable, funny as it may sound to some.

[AlanC9]

It would have been cool if some of those wartable missions had been actual quests you could do. It would have been a lot more fun than finding goats and lost rings...

See, this is exactly the problem with the idea. You take out that finding a ring quest and you've got enough wordcount for three NPC lines and four inquisitor lines, zero cinematics, one placed standard enemy group, one unique valuable, and scripting so the game knows that you've got that item. Throw those zots onto the war table and you've got .... enough wordcount for three NPC lines and four inquisitor lines, zero cinematics, one placed standard enemy group, one unique valuable, and scripting so the game knows that you've got that item.

If you want to start putting serious stuff on the war table, you've got to either cut serious stuff from the other parts of the game, or have a fantasy budget. It's OK to propose serious cuts, of course. What would you cut?

[AlanC9]

Okay well they'd have to redesign the whole game in order to make it flow properly.
 
Yes, the entire design of the game.

OK. That's at least intellectually coherent. But even when you've redesigned the entire game, I still don't see why that redesigned game couldn't have something like the current war table in it.

At any resource level you could add the war table missions on top for a trivial cost -- compared to standard content they're virtually free. What's the case against adding them? Put another way, cut the war table missions and what could you buy with those zots?

This argument reminds me a lot of those idiots who said that, for instance, ME3's Elcor Extraction mission "should have been" a real mission. You're not proposing anything that dumb, of course, but it still seems to rely on the same category mistake.

[Nefla]

See, this is exactly the problem with the idea. You take out that finding a ring quest and you've got enough wordcount for three NPC lines and four inquisitor lines, zero cinematics, one placed standard enemy group, one unique valuable, and scripting so the game knows that you've got that item. Throw those zots onto the war table and you've got .... enough wordcount for three NPC lines and four inquisitor lines, zero cinematics, one placed standard enemy group, one unique valuable, and scripting so the game knows that you've got that item.

If you want to start putting serious stuff on the war table, you've got to either cut serious stuff from the other parts of the game, or have a fantasy budget. It's OK to propose serious cuts, of course. What would you cut?

I think it should have been a priority in the first place to make a few longer, more engaging sidequests(other than the companion ones). I'm not saying every crappy gather herbs quest would be transformed but come on, there should have been a few. Even the zone quests were quite lackluster compared to how they could have been (compared to the planetary questlines in SWtOR for example). I think those resources would have been much better spent on that than all the extra huge pointless maps that weren't connected to the story in any way. I would have made fewer zones, have every zone relevant to the plot (and not in some "hey venatori might be here" way), and put a few more interesting and in-depth quests in each one.

[AlanC9]

Okay like I said, a poorly acted scene is better than no scene at all. A scene is a scene, if it's not animated well then that's a can of worms there but you're asking me to prefer no scene at all? And Inquisition had cinematic convos for the biggest quests but by proportion it had less.

But given that a poorly acted scene is better than no scene at all, and cinematic scenes are more expensive than non-cinematic scenes, is DAI's ratio actually worse? Increase the ratio of cinematic scenes and you're going to get less total scenes. The answer depends on how you score the two kinds of scenes. If Sylvius drops by, I imagine he'll say that DAI should have even fewer cinematic scenes -- IIRC cinematic aspects are of minimal or even negative value to him.

[KaiserShep]

This argument reminds me a lot of those idiots who said that, for instance, ME3's Elcor Extraction mission "should have been" a real mission. You're not proposing anything that dumb, of course, but it still seems to rely on the same category mistake.

 

 

We should've had a high stakes mission to uncover the book of Plenix. Imagine it, on some reaper-ravaged city on Irune, fighting cannibals through the ruins and grabbing the book from the library like Indiana Jones! 

[AlanC9]

I think it should have been a priority in the first place to make a few longer, more engaging sidequests(other than the companion ones). I'm not saying every crappy gather herbs quest would be transformed but come on, there should have been a few. Even the zone quests were quite lackluster compared to how they could have been (compared to the planetary questlines in SWtOR for example). I think those resources would have been much better spent on that than all the extra huge pointless maps that weren't connected to the story in any way. I would have made fewer zones, have every zone relevant to the plot (and not in some "hey venatori might be here" way), and put a few more interesting and in-depth quests in each one.

The total redesign Addictress mentioned? Sure. Sometimes the basic concept of a game just isn't for you.

But all of this has nothing at all to do with the war table missions.