609 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabraxal]

After catching up on some posts, it seens the issue people have is the presentation and not the actual content. Though I am puzzled to why some are "outside of the companion quests" locking the conversation. That alone is quite a few optional quests that practically equal the quantity of substantitve side quests in TW3... When you add in quests in the Fallen Mire, exalted plains, or other such quests, this argument that therecare LESS sunstantial quests is proven false. In DA:I there are 4 tiers of side quests: companion quests with depth and complexity, side quests of varying types that have several interactions but less complexity, "fetch" quests that add to lore, and requisition quests only there for influence/XP gain.

Not liking the presentation of some of those quests is far different than the quests not being meaningful or substantial. And given that they are additional quests on top of the strangely "barred from comparison"companion quests that more than match anything the Witcher offers...... Well, the argument that the side quests are lacking falls flat on its face. You don't like them. Not they are factually inferior to TW3.

[UniformGreyColor]

The point is what is unnecessary fat? Some posters feel that the shards, astrariums and bottles were unnecessary fat? I happen to like figuring out the astrariums and other puzzles. So that is not unnecessary fat to me. I also like the rewards that come from collecting the shards and figuring out how to reach them. So that is not unnecessary fat.

 

I liked uncovering the archaeology in the Hissing Wastes. Even the Duffalo quest was interesting because I found a way to tackle the rift that was there using the creature. 

 

So who is to define what unnecessary fat is? Who gets to decide what is and what is not a meaningful sidequest?

 

LOL. FWIW I agree with you on all counts. Some people just prefer "interactive narrative" above all else I guess.

[Kabraxal]

LOL. FWIW I agree with you on all counts. Some people just prefer "interactive narrative" above all else I guess.

And what's odd... DA:I gives us a lot of that type of content too. People are just weirdly focused on one type of content that is a rather small portion of the game.

[Bhryaen]

The point is what is unnecessary fat? Some posters feel that the shards, astrariums and bottles were unnecessary fat? I happen to like figuring out the astrariums and other puzzles. So that is not unnecessary fat to me. I also like the rewards that come from collecting the shards and figuring out how to reach them. So that is not unnecessary fat.

 

I liked uncovering the archaeology in the Hissing Wastes. Even the Duffalo quest was interesting because I found a way to tackle the rift that was there using the creature. 

 

So who is to define what unnecessary fat is? Who gets to decide what is and what is not a meaningful sidequest?

I liked the astrariums myself, more or less... at least once. The bottles... meh... though I did find them all. The point is not even what any one of us decides is the "fat to be cut." The point is that the DA franchise only introduced this type of "fat," and certainly this gratuitous quantity of it, with DAI. Other franchises have had it from the get-go. And that's fine for them. If that's the modus operendi for those games, who indeed is to decide it's anathema to playing them? There are simply many of us who would rather not see the DA franchise morphed into that given that it wasn't that before and is in no way a building upon what they've already created. It's a flagrant departure. And since the minor-puzzle/item-finding/uninvolved-fetching type of quests are rife in DAI, it's poses a concern about the future of the franchise. Is that what we can anticipate for DA4? And how much of it this time?

 

There will always be some fan of filler-based entertainment. The question is whether DA should descend into a game catering to that sort of entertainment given that up to now it hasn't. And with as many filler-based games as are out there already, it's not as if DA is filling a gap for such fans by including it... It's simply taking the easy road. That you're content with that in no way makes the concern any less palpable. If there were DA players who also would like to see more spaceships in DA and maybe some arcade mini-games, would that be an equally weighty fan feedback for you?

 

LOL. FWIW I agree with you on all counts. Some people just prefer "interactive narrative" above all else I guess.

Or they recognize that "interactive narrative" is part of the nature of a solid rpg. Killing, looting, XP, leveling up, collecting, fetching... you can get these in the most bare-bones of rpg's out there- even non-rpg's- easy-peasy to make and distribute. Just look at MMOs. So what makes a single-player rpg really stand out as an rpg? What adds to roleplaying and character-development? Why, finding a series of bottles, of course. And clicking a farmer's wife to get an instant map marker, going to the map location to kill, kill, pick up a ring, and go back to the farmer's wife to click her again. Roleplaying!! I'll play that differently next time... Some of us appreciate when "interactive narrative" is truly invested in because, well, first of all it's not always a guarantee. It's the quality content that takes a more skilled game developer to produce well. And even the DA franchise has dropped it as a priority for the majority of the content in its latest release... But "interactive narrative" also has the greatest ability (again, not a guarantee) to engross the player in a narrative and instill an investment in game immersion. Tell me that clicking an astrarium node to be whisked into a star puzzle feels like you're really there facing tough choices or gaining an emotional sensibility of the world... It's not even that there are those of us who "prefer" "interactive narrative" "above all else." It just happens to be "above all else" in terms of narrative development and player involvement in it... and there are those of us who thus value it.

 

Earlier you acknowledged that you recognize the non-"interactive narrative" content is just "filler." I suppose I'll just have to chalk you up as a fan of "filler" entertainment with...

 

And what's odd... DA:I gives us a lot of that type of content too. People are just weirdly focused on one type of content that is a rather small portion of the game.

When the content that's not "interactive narrative" dominates a far larger portion of one's time navigating DAI than in previous DAs and compared with the content in DAI that does hold such weight, it's not a "rather small portion of the game." DAI is a huge game... and a "rather small portion" of it involves the main quest or companion quests. This causes inevitable rankling for those who'd rather not have such a hefty portion (if any at all) of the DAverse devoted to point-and-click solutions and hack-and-slash. We know they can do better, so... why not mention this? Just because you're content with cream-filled donuts? If you had that sort of interest in higher-quality content, the reactions of those do have it wouldn't seem so "odd" and "weird." But you don't, so... *shrug*

[CronoDragoon]

Astrariums are awesome, and it was excellent design to have completing a set of them lead to treasure. Of course, because of no level scaling and crafted weapons, the treasure was usually crap, but that's a flaw in execution rather than concept.

[Kabraxal]

I liked the astrariums myself, more or less... at least once. The bottles... meh... though I did find them all. The point is not even what any one of us decides is the "fat to be cut." The point is that the DA franchise only introduced this type of "fat," and certainly this gratuitous quantity of it, with DAI. Other franchises have had it from the get-go. And that's fine for them. If that's the modus operendi for those games, who indeed is to decide it's anathema to playing them? There are simply many of us who would rather not see the DA franchise morphed into that given that it wasn't that before and is in no way a building upon what they've already created. It's a flagrant departure. And since the minor-puzzle/item-finding/uninvolved-fetching type of quests are rife in DAI, it's poses a concern about the future of the franchise. Is that what we can anticipate for DA4? And how much of it this time?
 
There will always be some fan of filler-based entertainment. The question is whether DA should descend into a game catering to that sort of entertainment given that up to now it hasn't. And with as many filler-based games as are out there already, it's not as if DA is filling a gap for such fans by including it... It's simply taking the easy road. That you're content with that in no way makes the concern any less palpable. If there were DA players who also would like to see more spaceships in DA and maybe some arcade mini-games, would that be an equally weighty fan feedback for you?
 

Or they recognize that "interactive narrative" is part of the nature of a solid rpg. Killing, looting, XP, leveling up, collecting, fetching... you can get these in the most bare-bones of rpg's out there- even non-rpg's- easy-peasy to make and distribute. Just look at MMOs. So what makes a single-player rpg really stand out as an rpg? What adds to roleplaying and character-development? Why, finding a series of bottles, of course. And clicking a farmer's wife to get an instant map marker, going to the map location to kill, kill, pick up a ring, and go back to the farmer's wife to click her again. Roleplaying!! I'll play that differently next time... Some of us appreciate when "interactive narrative" is truly invested in because, well, first of all it's not always a guarantee. It's the quality content that takes a more skilled game developer to produce well. And even the DA franchise has dropped it as a priority for the majority of the content in its latest release... But "interactive narrative" also has the greatest ability (again, not a guarantee) to engross the player in a narrative and instill an investment in game immersion. Tell me that clicking an astrarium node to be whisked into a star puzzle feels like you're really there facing tough choices or gaining an emotional sensibility of the world... It's not even that there are those of us who "prefer" "interactive narrative" "above all else." It just happens to be "above all else" in terms of narrative development and player involvement in it... and there are those of us who thus value it.
 
Earlier you acknowledged that you recognize the non-"interactive narrative" content is just "filler." I suppose I'll just have to chalk you up as a fan of "filler" entertainment with...
 

When the content that's not "interactive narrative" dominates a far larger portion of one's time navigating DAI than in previous DAs and compared with the content in DAI that does hold such weight, it's not a "rather small portion of the game." DAI is a huge game... and a "rather small portion" of it involves the main quest or companion quests. This causes inevitable rankling for those who'd rather not have such a hefty portion (if any at all) of the DAverse devoted to point-and-click solutions and hack-and-slash. We know they can do better, so... why not mention this? Just because you're content with cream-filled donuts? If you had that sort of interest in higher-quality content, the reactions of those do have it wouldn't seem so "odd" and "weird." But you don't, so... *shrug*

Funny how you have to again put companion quests out of the equation in order to keep the agenda going... Put out everything else but the companion quests and the main quest and the game is still massive. In fact, it's not much smaller than Origins. The only way people can continue this argument is by saying companion quests don't count... That is because if you correctly count it as the substantial optional content it is, it destroys the narrative that DA:I suffers in comparison to its predecessors in your case, and in comparison to TW3 in other posters cases.

If I was at a PC to properly take the time to type it out, I'd list out the substantial optional content in DA:I... Even though the naysayers will hand wave it away.

[UniformGreyColor]

Or they recognize that "interactive narrative" is part of the nature of a solid rpg. Killing, looting, XP, leveling up, collecting, fetching... you can get these in the most bare-bones of rpg's out there- even non-rpg's- easy-peasy to make and distribute. Just look at MMOs. So what makes a single-player rpg really stand out as an rpg? What adds to roleplaying and character-development? Why, finding a series of bottles, of course. And clicking a farmer's wife to get an instant map marker, going to the map location to kill, kill, pick up a ring, and go back to the farmer's wife to click her again. Roleplaying!! I'll play that differently next time... Some of us appreciate when "interactive narrative" is truly invested in because, well, first of all it's not always a guarantee. It's the quality content that takes a more skilled game developer to produce well. And even the DA franchise has dropped it as a priority for the majority of the content in its latest release... But "interactive narrative" also has the greatest ability (again, not a guarantee) to engross the player in a narrative and instill an investment in game immersion. Tell me that clicking an astrarium node to be whisked into a star puzzle feels like you're really there facing tough choices or gaining an emotional sensibility of the world... It's not even that there are those of us who "prefer" "interactive narrative" "above all else." It just happens to be "above all else" in terms of narrative development and player involvement in it... and there are those of us who thus value it.

 

Earlier you acknowledged that you recognize the non-"interactive narrative" content is just "filler." I suppose I'll just have to chalk you up as a fan of "filler" entertainment with...

 

To me its kinda like the difference between reading something and watching TV. TV can have its appeal at times, but a lot of the time it caters to people who are not necessarily looking to expand on ideas and instead acts as a over streamlined form of entertainment (I'm in the U.S so YMMV). I don't have problems with "interactive narrative" in a game and I actually prefer for it to be in games, but that should not be the only thing the game tries to accomplish. If "interactive narrative" is the pinnacle of what you personally look for in a game, then games like the Uncharted series would prolly be something that more aligns with what you're looking for. All I ask for is a decent balance between interactive narrative and other content that I also think is fun that does not necessarily need to be only dialog options. Asid from that, I would say interactive narrative does prolly have more pull when it comes to immersion that most things, that that too is not necessarily the only means to an end of what immersion entails. If I said anything that is not interactive narrative is filler, I misspoke. I will say that yes, good interactive narrative is what we should look for in games to measure the quality of the game as a whole, but to say that anything that is not interactive narrative is filler is not intellectually accurate.

[Witch Cocktor]

When doing side quests I tend to forget all about what I'm playing. When I came back to Skyhold after doing a set of side quests, I remember oh right, I have companions and friends here, there's also a story and Cory is out there doing stuff, we are supposed to go to Halamshiral oh right yeah. It just felt like whenever doing quests, it was ripped way too far from the actual story. It was like there was two games, there was the '' go to these areas, seal rifts and do quests (which don't affect the story if you clear them) your scouts should be doing '' and then there was the actual game, with the story.

 

I honestly felt a bit lonely doing all the side quests, DESPITE having 3 companions that talked every now and then. There should be more cutscenes, more things happening that your companions want to point out/discuss about. Sometimes, the best conversations and banter was when you entered this place or killed that thing. But there was quite little of that, sadly.

 

I think, they should've cut down the number of areas, and beefed up the locations that remained, putting more story content, cutscenes, banter, culture and history of Thedas/Orlais/Ferelden. Some areas were in desperate need of more NPCs and people to talk to as well.

[Bhryaen]

Funny how you have to again put companion quests out of the equation in order to keep the agenda going... Put out everything else but the companion quests and the main quest and the game is still massive. In fact, it's not much smaller than Origins. The only way people can continue this argument is by saying companion quests don't count... That is because if you correctly count it as the substantial optional content it is, it destroys the narrative that DA:I suffers in comparison to its predecessors in your case, and in comparison to TW3 in other posters cases.

If I was at a PC to properly take the time to type it out, I'd list out the substantial optional content in DA:I... Even though the naysayers will hand wave it away.

Um... yeah... I put companion quests out of the equation because they aren't the problem. Not sure what this conspiratorial "agenda" is, but fortunately you're there with your tinfoil hat to uproot it. The companion quests are quite high quality: this is why they're exempt from the same criticism. If all other content in DAI had been their quality, we wouldn't be having this discussion, people would never have endured it for any amount of time, the article mentioned in the OP wouldn't have happened, article upon article about the game's inattention to side-venture quality wouldn't have been written, and this thread wouldn't exist. I certainly wouldn't mind either, despite my active membership in the Agenda Pushers, Inc.

 

"The main game and companion quests combined are massive." Yeah... no. That combo is not best described as "massive..." unless you compare it to, say, "The Order: 1886" which, yeah, was apparently pretty short shrift and uncompellingly emphasized cutscenes over character-driven content. But it's not so "massive," not compared to the previous DAs and certainly not when compared with the rest of the game. Clearly it was a lot of work for the designers, but that's not what you're saying. You're stating that it's "enough," so to say, is to ask the player to ignore the vast bulk (the massive part) of the game in order to get the most out of the game. Which means, ignore anything but main and companion quests. How is it even an open world game anymore then? That would be a first for me in any rpg. Some of the greatest fun to be had in an open-world rpg are the non-main and non-companion quests you stumble upon (BG1 the best example)... unless it's DAI where they dropped the ball on quality. Are you seriously suggesting, "Just do that limited portion of the game then"? So they could've made the other 70% of the game a WW2 FPS for that matter, wouldn't have mattered because we can always just play the MASSIVE main and companion portion... Not only is that not even possible given that the Inquisition requires the Inquisitor to going out farming for resources themselves, but... screw that. I'm not buying a game with the requisite to not play most of it. "Oh, come on, that's enough quality crap for your type. Just do that and mind your own business." Now there's a good marketing strategy. Maybe that's how they reasoned it, for all I know. However, intentional ignorance isn't my strong suit, and it's also a matter of a slippery slope. Just how much of the game can be made into fluff before even someone like you will say, "Uh, the good stuff isn't so massive anymore"? And why wait for that to happen? Why accept any fluff at all in DA? DA would have to matter very little to you in that case... It's just a game after all, right? If the devs are making a virtue of lowest-common-denominator design in any respect, but particularly in the actually most massive portion of the game content, is that something to condone... much less encourage?

 

I'll save you some trouble in listing out the "substantial optional content" that exists apart from the companion quests. You've already mentioned a few repeatedly, especially the Fallow Mire as if the quintessential example... and I can't see why. First there was only one quest- get to the boss and kill him- with a number of little things you could do around the area (clicking a pillar for combat and loot, finding the unspeaking hidden mage for combat and loot, gaining Amund as an agent (as good as the interactivity of the area ever got), etc.), killing infinite undead respawns, killing bogfishers for mid-level pelts, a few codexes, and at the end all the boss does is yell something inaudible and it's kill, kill, loot. (Amund says something after, I think.) That's your idea of substantive quests? That's not nearly the caliber even of the companion quests you're equating them with where there were cutscenes, impactful decisions to make, relationships being forged, dialog at all, game-altering shifts... meaningful content. Or are you including the trial of the Fallow Mire boss... which happens only after leaving the Fallow Mire- i.e., a Skyhold side-quest, not a Fallow Mire one? The main Exalted Plains quests didn't even have a trial moment to fish out and were only interesting as an environment within which fight undead groups and click mass graves... Or do you mean the Dalish camp? Bring a halla over? These are qualitatively different from getting to know companions, learning key aspects to their lives and personalities, discovering how they respond to events, interceding in them in the way your own character would...

 

Suffice it to say that the devs accepted a significantly lower quality of content when it comes to player experience in side-venturing, not to mention a number of the basic mechanics (crafting, combat, exploration), and there are many of us who would prefer the higher quality of such content in DA that it's already had. If you'd prefer to "naysay" such calls for quality, that's your prerogative...

[Nefla]

Funny how you have to again put companion quests out of the equation in order to keep the agenda going... Put out everything else but the companion quests and the main quest and the game is still massive. In fact, it's not much smaller than Origins. The only way people can continue this argument is by saying companion quests don't count... That is because if you correctly count it as the substantial optional content it is, it destroys the narrative that DA:I suffers in comparison to its predecessors in your case, and in comparison to TW3 in other posters cases.

If I was at a PC to properly take the time to type it out, I'd list out the substantial optional content in DA:I... Even though the naysayers will hand wave it away.

Companion quests were fun but have been present in every DA game (and even so I still feel TW3 sidequests and the secrets of Loc Muinne from TW2 were better). We're not complaining about the companion quests, we like them and want BioWare to continue making them. The problem is that the more substantial non-companion sidequests with roleplaying opportunities and multiple ways to resolve that were present in DA:O and DA2 are missing from DA:I. Also the majority of companion content is either at Skyhold or its' own small area so those big pretty zones that aren't used for the main plot also don't contain any meaty sidequests.

 

We're never going to convince you that the sidequests in those zones are bad, shallow, boring, etc...and you're never going to convince us that they're good. I literally can not understand how you could like the sidequests in DA:I or think they're substantial in any way. I feel like I've had this argument a million times with people who are diehard fans of the Star Wars prequel trilogy. They don't get how I could think it's bad and I don't get how they could think it's good. Just know that people like different things than you do and were disappointed when those things weren't included. I know you don't like the quests being criticized since you like them but I promise we really do feel how we say we feel. We're not TW3 fanatics, naysayers, or whatever you want to call us. We're going to keep voicing these criticisms and concerns in hopes that BioWare makes sidequests more to our liking in the future.

[Kabraxal]

Um... yeah... I put companion quests out of the equation because they aren't the problem. Not sure what this conspiratorial "agenda" is, but fortunately you're there with your tinfoil hat to uproot it. The companion quests are quite high quality: this is why they're exempt from the same criticism. If all other content in DAI had been their quality, we wouldn't be having this discussion, people would never have endured it for any amount of time, the article mentioned in the OP wouldn't have happened, article upon article about the game's inattention to side-venture quality wouldn't have been written, and this thread wouldn't exist. I certainly wouldn't mind either, despite my active membership in the Agenda Pushers, Inc.
 
"The main game and companion quests combined are massive." Yeah... no. That combo is not best described as "massive..." unless you compare it to, say, "The Order: 1886" which, yeah, was apparently pretty short shrift and uncompellingly emphasized cutscenes over character-driven content. But it's not so "massive," not compared to the previous DAs and certainly not when compared with the rest of the game. Clearly it was a lot of work for the designers, but that's not what you're saying. You're stating that it's "enough," so to say, is to ask the player to ignore the vast bulk (the massive part) of the game in order to get the most out of the game. Which means, ignore anything but main and companion quests. How is it even an open world game anymore then? That would be a first for me in any rpg. Some of the greatest fun to be had in an open-world rpg are the non-main and non-companion quests you stumble upon (BG1 the best example)... unless it's DAI where they dropped the ball on quality. Are you seriously suggesting, "Just do that limited portion of the game then"? So they could've made the other 70% of the game a WW2 FPS for that matter, wouldn't have mattered because we can always just play the MASSIVE main and companion portion... Not only is that not even possible given that the Inquisition requires the Inquisitor to going out farming for resources themselves, but... screw that. I'm not buying a game with the requisite to not play most of it. "Oh, come on, that's enough quality crap for your type. Just do that and mind your own business." Now there's a good marketing strategy. Maybe that's how they reasoned it, for all I know. However, intentional ignorance isn't my strong suit, and it's also a matter of a slippery slope. Just how much of the game can be made into fluff before even someone like you will say, "Uh, the good stuff isn't so massive anymore"? And why wait for that to happen? Why accept any fluff at all in DA? DA would have to matter very little to you in that case... It's just a game after all, right? If the devs are making a virtue of lowest-common-denominator design in any respect, but particularly in the actually most massive portion of the game content, is that something to condone... much less encourage?
 
I'll save you some trouble in listing out the "substantial optional content" that exists apart from the companion quests. You've already mentioned a few repeatedly, especially the Fallow Mire as if the quintessential example... and I can't see why. First there was only one quest- get to the boss and kill him- with a number of little things you could do around the area (clicking a pillar for combat and loot, finding the unspeaking hidden mage for combat and loot, gaining Amund as an agent (as good as the interactivity of the area ever got), etc.), killing infinite undead respawns, killing bogfishers for mid-level pelts, a few codexes, and at the end all the boss does is yell something inaudible and it's kill, kill, loot. (Amund says something after, I think.) That's your idea of substantive quests? That's not nearly the caliber even of the companion quests you're equating them with where there were cutscenes, impactful decisions to make, relationships being forged, dialog at all, game-altering shifts... meaningful content. Or are you including the trial of the Fallow Mire boss... which happens only after leaving the Fallow Mire- i.e., a Skyhold side-quest, not a Fallow Mire one? The main Exalted Plains quests didn't even have a trial moment to fish out and were only interesting as an environment within which fight undead groups and click mass graves... Or do you mean the Dalish camp? Bring a halla over? These are qualitatively different from getting to know companions, learning key aspects to their lives and personalities, discovering how they respond to events, interceding in them in the way your own character would...
 
Suffice it to say that the devs accepted a significantly lower quality of content when it comes to player experience in side-venturing, not to mention a number of the basic mechanics (crafting, combat, exploration), and there are many of us who would prefer the higher quality of such content in DA that it's already had. If you'd prefer to "naysay" such calls for quality, that's your prerogative...

The point that you are intentionally missing is that JUST WITH the companion quests and main quests, this game is nearly as big as Origins. The other side content, ranging from "fetch" to more substantial, are in addition to that.

In order for you to continue saying DA:I is lessee than Origins in side quests, is to say companion quests do not count and only the other side content can be factored in. Your argument is intentionally creating segration because your argument has no actual weight. DA: I has side content to nearly match Origins in companion quests alone. Your argument that it fails in comparison to Origins is already proven wrong before any other content is taken into account.

I know that you'd prefer the echo chamber of "filler!"... Sorry I'm actuasly knowkedgable about the game and can so easily debunk that bogus claim.

[Kabraxal]

Companion quests were fun but have been present in every DA game (and even so I still feel TW3 sidequests and the secrets of Loc Muinne from TW2 were better). We're not complaining about the companion quests, we like them and want BioWare to continue making them. The problem is that the more substantial non-companion sidequests with roleplaying opportunities and multiple ways to resolve that were present in DA:O and DA2 are missing from DA:I. Also the majority of companion content is either at Skyhold or its' own small area so those big pretty zones that aren't used for the main plot also don't contain any meaty sidequests.

We're never going to convince you that the sidequests in those zones are bad, shallow, boring, etc...and you're never going to convince us that they're good. I literally can not understand how you could like the sidequests in DA:I or think they're substantial in any way. I feel like I've had this argument a million times with people who are diehard fans of the Star Wars prequel trilogy. They don't get how I could think it's bad and I don't get how they could think it's good. Just know that people like different things than you do and were disappointed when those things weren't included. I know you don't like the quests being criticized since you like them but I promise we really do feel how we say we feel. We're not TW3 fanatics, naysayers, or whatever you want to call us. We're going to keep voicing these criticisms and concerns in hopes that BioWare makes sidequests more to our liking in the future.

The double standard is mind boggling... TW3's side quests barely manage to "equal" the DA: I Companion quests in content while taken as a whole... Yet it only gets praised despite every other side quests matching the repetitive filler mantra perfectly. That is the issue I have. TW3 dies not have more substantial side content. You just PREFER it. It is not fact that DA: I is lacking in substantial side content in comparison to TW3 at all and as long as that BS is repeated I will take issue with it. It is flat out false.

[In Exile]

From reading through just this thread, and yes I know it's not a relevant sample survey but in that case your own arguments can't be considered accurate, most people explaining how they found DAI side quests lacking are providing examples of what they didn't like and some suggestions of how it could be improved. Most people arguing the point are either saying they hate TW3 (irrelevant) or they disagree with the arguments provided. Objectively, there are less NPCs with conversation that extend beyond "kill his" or "fetch me that" than in previous Bioware games. And if someone doesn't have a problem with that fine, but don't claim people who see this as a flaw are objectively wrong or that their opinion that DAI needs to improve its side quests have no foundation on which to stand.

 

That doesn't make it objective, but the actual point here is that it doesn't matter whether it's objective. If the majority of the audience doesn't like a product - even if it's for totally different and inconsistent reasons - then the product has to change. All that the inconsistency means is that the product can't appeal to anyone in particular and has to change radically. 

 

This strange need to justify taste as objective is a problem. There aren't less "NPC" interactions. How do we measure that? By wordcount. What's the DA:I wordcount versus the DA:O wordcount?  The real issue is that NPC interaction is very heavily skewed toward critical path quests, and then very generally spread out over a lot of quests, so that instead of having a small set of badly designed side-quests with a lot of interaction, you have a lot of badly designed side-quests with very little interaction, which exposes the **** side-quest design that's been a plague on Bioware since ME1 and KoTOR. 

 

I didn't claim that people are objectively wrong. Point out where I said people are objectively wrong, please. 

 

All I said is that I think "immersion" is a worthless concept. 

[Nefla]

The double standard is mind boggling... TW3's side quests barely manage to "equal" the DA: I Companion quests in content while taken as a whole... Yet it only gets praised despite every other side quests matching the repetitive filler mantra perfectly. That is the issue I have. TW3 dies not have more substantial side content. You just PREFER it. It is not fact that DA: I is lacking in substantial side content in comparison to TW3 at all and as long as that BS is repeated I will take issue with it. It is flat out false.

Look at a video of someone playing through one of DA:I's quests and one of TW3's quests and see which one is entertaining to watch (I conveniently linked you to several a few posts back). You keep claiming that DA:I has substantial side content but you're not describing what makes it "substantial." You've said that you're satisfied just reading codex entries scattered around but that's not what your average gamer looks for in a quest. Most gamers want interactivity. This can be given through puzzles, conversations, unique combat encounters, roleplaying options, story choices and so on. Reading a note on the ground (or a string of notes) isn't a substantial quest, nor is it a good way to develop the world and the lore. We're being told things rather than shown them. There's a reason these criticisms of the DA:I side quests are common and there's a reason people prefer the sidequests of TW3. The sidequests available out in the big empty zones of DA:I are the same level of depth and quality as the randomly generated "another settlement needs our help!" quests from Fallout 4.

[In Exile]

Um... yeah... I put companion quests out of the equation because they aren't the problem. Not sure what this conspiratorial "agenda" is, but fortunately you're there with your tinfoil hat to uproot it. The companion quests are quite high quality: this is why they're exempt from the same criticism,

 

Resources aren't unlimited. People use TW3 as an example of a game that had higher resource side-quests than DA:I. But TW3 didn't have companions. There was no companion banter. Sure, the banter was designed in an incredibly stupid way that made it impossible to trigger for most people and was a huge waste of resources ultimately, but it was still a huge VO cost. TW3 cuts all of that, and invests it in dialogue. 

 

Companion quests - and companions - should be part of the criticism. Because they are part of the actual reason why the quests were so sparse in terms of dialogue. 

 

 

Companion quests were fun but have been present in every DA game (and even so I still feel TW3 sidequests and the secrets of Loc Muinne from TW2 were better). We're not complaining about the companion quests, we like them and want BioWare to continue making them. The problem is that the more substantial non-companion sidequests with roleplaying opportunities and multiple ways to resolve that were present in DA:O and DA2 are missing from DA:I. Also the majority of companion content is either at Skyhold or its' own small area so those big pretty zones that aren't used for the main plot also don't contain any meaty sidequests.

 

Here I have to object. And I have to object because Bioware - in DA:O and DA2 - did not have quests with multiple paths. They had quests with multiple outcomes, and that's really not the same thing. These quests had one way to resolve them - until the final decision, which gave you some minor variability. Like Magistrate's Orders - the quest is identical all the way through to the end, where you have two choices: turn in the child, or not. Then you have the option to say varied things.

[Nefla]

Here I have to object. And I have to object because Bioware - in DA:O and DA2 - did not have quests with multiple paths. They had quests with multiple outcomes, and that's really not the same thing. These quests had one way to resolve them - until the final decision, which gave you some minor variability. Like Magistrate's Orders - the quest is identical all the way through to the end, where you have two choices: turn in the child, or not. Then you have the option to say varied things.

Multiple outcomes/resolutions is what I meant. Though I do love games where the entire quest can diverge depending on your approach (stealth, diplomacy, information gathering, blackmail, etc...) I don't expect that of BioWare. I don't think I'm being unreasonable or asking too much, but I love having different outcomes in quests. Anything that lets me define my character and gives me a reason to play it through again and try something else (I'm also obsessed with dialogue). Things like "go find my ring" aren't fun even the first time, don't let me roleplay different personalities, and give me no reason to do them again.

[AlanC9]

Resources aren't unlimited. People use TW3 as an example of a game that had higher resource side-quests than DA:I. But TW3 didn't have companions. There was no companion banter. Sure, the banter was designed in an incredibly stupid way that made it impossible to trigger for most people and was a huge waste of resources ultimately, but it was still a huge VO cost. TW3 cuts all of that, and invests it in dialogue.

It's a pity that Frostbite doesn't seem to handle its localization text files as transparently as previous Bio engines did. It was a lot easier to do straight-up comparisons when everything was there as plaintext.

[Kabraxal]

Look at a video of someone playing through one of DA:I's quests and one of TW3's quests and see which one is entertaining to watch (I conveniently linked you to several a few posts back). You keep claiming that DA:I has substantial side content but you're not describing what makes it "substantial." You've said that you're satisfied just reading codex entries scattered around but that's not what your average gamer looks for in a quest. Most gamers want interactivity. This can be given through puzzles, conversations, unique combat encounters, roleplaying options, story choices and so on. Reading a note on the ground (or a string of notes) isn't a substantial quest, nor is it a good way to develop the world and the lore. We're being told things rather than shown them. There's a reason these criticisms of the DA:I side quests are common and there's a reason people prefer the sidequests of TW3. The sidequests available out in the big empty zones of DA:I are the same level of depth and quality as the randomly generated "another settlement needs our help!" quests from Fallout 4.

Any companion quest for one... O right they don't count because they prove this argument wring right away. And again, Crestwood/Suledin Keep, Exalted Plains, and the bloody judgements all offer not only lore content, but decisions the player can make.

TW3 has some quests like that and companion quests... But then it has hundreds of points of interest, dozens of repititive contracts, and multiple "talk here walk there use senses and get object" quests. Yet it gets a pass while you sit here trying to hand wave all proof that TW3 is not objectively better.

Sorry, but TW3 doesn't offer more substantive quests and less filler. If anything, its filler is far more numerous in comparison. If DA: I suffees from a filler problem then so does the Witcher and so does Origins. But I suspect you'll hand wave this all away since yoy've already reduced my point to "it adds lore!" So you can straw man and claim your false argument has won. Reality: you are still wrong.

[Bhryaen]

The point that you are intentionally missing is that JUST WITH the companion quests and main quests, this game is nearly as big as Origins. The other side content, ranging from "fetch" to more substantial, are in addition to that.

In order for you to continue saying DA:I is lessee than Origins in side quests, is to say companion quests do not count and only the other side content can be factored in. Your argument is intentionally creating segration because your argument has no actual weight. DA: I has side content to nearly match Origins in companion quests alone. Your argument that it fails in comparison to Origins is already proven wrong before any other content is taken into account.

I know that you'd prefer the echo chamber of "filler!"... Sorry I'm actuasly knowkedgable about the game and can so easily debunk that bogus claim.

Oh, yes, I'm intentionally missing... ohhh, that's your point. Silly me. Except I already addressed this. *sigh* In all honesty I can't decisively say that the total main + companion quests in DAO outweigh in total time those of DAI. DAO always seems to loom larger for me, so it's hard to estimate. There was certainly a shyte-tonne of companion reactions back at Skyhold and Haven, always new stuff after every main mission bump. I'd go and find everyone down to Krem had something to say. That's not even real questing, but I'll certainly count that as part of companion content. And I believe DAO had far shorter (like one segment) companion quests for each companion, and nothing even as elaborate as Iron Bull's "kill Krem or the qunari" scenario. So that's all true. Have I ever argued differently? No. Me say, "Companion stuff good in DAI! Me like!"

 

But that's not the end of the argument, just as that's not the end of the content in DAI. Let's say DAI has even twice the content in its main and companion content than DAO- and that both are of veritable quality. Is DAI itself then as a whole free of issues contentwise? And that's where you're INTENTIONALLY MISSING THE POINT in your echo chamber and easily-debunked bogus claims and... stuff! (lol) Because, you see, DAI isn't free of content issues. It's seriously riddled with them and would naturally concern anyone who most values the better content. They released a game where one smaller portion- fortunately the main and companion content (what if they'd have gone low-quality on those but made the side-content high-quality? we'd have to swap "echo chamber" sides then, eh?)- is more or less applaudable and widely enjoyed, really the reason DAI won Game of the Year (I'm sooo genuinely glad it came out in 2014, not TW3's year), while the largest bulk of the game, the part where most of your time is going to be spent, where the most combat happens, where you're doing the whole adventuring thingy... is more than a little disappointingly conceived and constructed. In fact, it compromises replayability of the game itself. So when assessing DAI, well, it's just not enough to say, "That 30% portion is great so... whatever! Everything's great!... And if you don't agree, you're intentionally missing the point and making bogus claims I can easily refute! HA!"

 

And since everything else has been addressed already, this is where the exchange with you starts to be like a Don Quixote windmill run... so off I go...

[Nefla]

Any companion quest for one... O right they don't count because they prove this argument wring right away. And again, Crestwood/Suledin Keep, Exalted Plains, and the bloody judgements all offer not only lore content, but decisions the player can make.

TW3 has some quests like that and companion quests... But then it has hundreds of points of interest, dozens of repititive contracts, and multiple "talk here walk there use senses and get object" quests. Yet it gets a pass while you sit here trying to hand wave all proof that TW3 is not objectively better.

Sorry, but TW3 doesn't offer more substantive quests and less filler. If anything, its filler is far more numerous in comparison. If DA: I suffees from a filler problem then so does the Witcher and so does Origins. But I suspect you'll hand wave this all away since yoy've already reduced my point to "it adds lore!" So you can straw man and claim your false argument has won. Reality: you are still wrong.

*sigh* Are you even reading our responses or just copy/pasting the same reply over and over? No one is saying TW3 doesn't have filler, however it also has a ton of real quests (a lot more than DA:I has companion quests). DA:I has only the companion quests and almost all of them are located in their own self-contained areas. The point is that there is NOTHING FUN TO DO OUT IN THE ZONES. Companion conversations? Skyhold. Judgements? Skyhold. The main plot? Self contained areas. Those zones have tons of quests but they're all shallow. Even the ones you mention as being good are just more than one of the standard fetch quest but strung together. Tell me, what was substantial about going to a place, killing all the bandits there then going into a cave and killing all the demons in the cave and sealing yet another rift? That was hands down the BEST quest set in any of the zones IMO and the only things that happen are: 1) it stops raining and 2) You get to change the water level. Because we at least got to see some effect (unlike the majority) that quest was ok but definitely not good. It's at the same level as your average witcher contract.

 

How am I supposed to know what your point supposedly is when all you keep repeating is that

1) People who think TW3 quests are better are wrong

2) Companion quests are good (no one is debating this)

3)TW3 includes optional filler content as well (no one is debating this either)

 

You seem to be unable to back up or defend your opinion. The only thing you've told us about why you like DA:I's side quests is that you like reading the codex entries. You disregard criticism of the majority of DA:I's quests by upholding companion quests but have not been able to defend any of the non-companion quests. Why do you think the Fallow Mire quest is good? Why do you think the Emprise du Lion quest is good? Why do you think the Crestwood quest is good? You list them as if we should automatically recognize their merits but obviously we don't hold those quests in high regard like you do. Your unwillingness or inability to explain your reasoning or opinions is starting to make me think that you're a troll. If you're not a troll and are instead very young (which is another suspicion) then please tell me now and I'll stop arguing with you.

[hoechlbear]

The double standard is mind boggling... TW3's side quests barely manage to "equal" the DA: I Companion quests in content while taken as a whole... Yet it only gets praised despite every other side quests matching the repetitive filler mantra perfectly. That is the issue I have. TW3 dies not have more substantial side content. You just PREFER it. It is not fact that DA: I is lacking in substantial side content in comparison to TW3 at all and as long as that BS is repeated I will take issue with it. It is flat out false.

 

Here we go again. Lol

 

Since we're talking about companion's quests, here's a couple of sidequests from one of the "companions" in TW3.

 

 

 

There are more quests for that character alone, btw. There's also Keira (also has more quests), Zoltan, Yennefer, Dandelion (that leads to a whole new detailed questline, Carnal Sins), Roche, Lambert, Cerys, Hjalmar, Letho and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone. They all have personal sidequests that are on par or are even more complex than DAI's companion sidequests. I'm not even saying those quests are better (which I think they are but that's not the point), but you can't seriously tell me they aren't substantial and that you think they are "repetitive filler"? 

 

 

Any companion quest for one... O right they don't count because they prove this argument wring right away. And again, Crestwood/Suledin Keep, Exalted Plains, and the bloody judgements all offer not only lore content, but decisions the player can make.

TW3 has some quests like that and companion quests... But then it has hundreds of points of interest, dozens of repititive contracts, and multiple "talk here walk there use senses and get object" quests. Yet it gets a pass while you sit here trying to hand wave all proof that TW3 is not objectively better.

Sorry, but TW3 doesn't offer more substantive quests and less filler. If anything, its filler is far more numerous in comparison. If DA: I suffees from a filler problem then so does the Witcher and so does Origins. But I suspect you'll hand wave this all away since yoy've already reduced my point to "it adds lore!" So you can straw man and claim your false argument has won. Reality: you are still wrong.

 

Well, I see you at least acknowledged that, that's a start. But I already spent time searching for the videos so I'll keep my comment above as it is. 

 

Again, no one is saying TW3 doesn't have filler. TW3 has abandoned places to clear, DAI has rifts to close, TW3 has bandit camps, DAI has setting up camps, TW3 has guarded treasures and smuggler's caches, DAI has the shards and bottles, TW3 has Gwent, DAI has the Astrariums, TW3 has monster nests, DAI has the requisitions, TW3 has the witcher contracts, DAI has the war table missions. That last one is not exactly the same thing, but they have in common one thing: that you have only one way to deal with them. In TW3 you talk to the victims, use your witcher senses and solve the case, in DAI you send one of your advisors and solve the mission. But we're discussing the sidequests. There's a difference. Again, I can give you examples of TW3's sidequests if you want and then you can tell me if you still think they are not substantial and more elaborated than "go fetch this/go kill that" that is all over DAI's sidequests.

[Bhryaen]

To me its kinda like the difference between reading something and watching TV. TV can have its appeal at times, but a lot of the time it caters to people who are not necessarily looking to expand on ideas and instead acts as a over streamlined form of entertainment (I'm in the U.S so YMMV). I don't have problems with "interactive narrative" in a game and I actually prefer for it to be in games, but that should not be the only thing the game tries to accomplish. If "interactive narrative" is the pinnacle of what you personally look for in a game, then games like the Uncharted series would prolly be something that more aligns with what you're looking for. All I ask for is a decent balance between interactive narrative and other content that I also think is fun that does not necessarily need to be only dialog options. Asid from that, I would say interactive narrative does prolly have more pull when it comes to immersion that most things, that that too is not necessarily the only means to an end of what immersion entails. If I said anything that is not interactive narrative is filler, I misspoke. I will say that yes, good interactive narrative is what we should look for in games to measure the quality of the game as a whole, but to say that anything that is not interactive narrative is filler is not intellectually accurate.

I certainly never claimed that "interactive narrative" is all and anything else is filler. I'm not sure what "intellectual accuracy" is, but it wouldn't be honest of me: I like all sorts of things. I've mentioned the background art as one. As much as I'll continue to rail against the devs relying on the background artistry too heavily, creating a plethora of scenic vistas and rock paintings and such to discover. I've extolled those artists' virtues elsewhere, entreating the devs to bring them back. I'll also stick to another non-narrative, non-interactive compliment I've bestowed elsewhere and that's the appearance of the combat. I'd just come off of DA2 where the effects were waaay overdone, constantly filling the screen and blocking the view, so when I got to see the more modest (not entirely, but...) effect in DAI, I couldn't help but mention how much I like them.

 

The best game is indeed going to combine the talent of a number of different types of artists- musicians, voice actors, graphic artists, creature designers, cinematics creators, dialog and other writers, editors, yada yada- in that "decent balance" way you mention. What it won't do, however, is settle for filler content. Why would it? What incentive was there? You get all that talent together and say, "Make... oh, just make some meh stuff to do. They're mindless cows. They'll graze it up." And it certainly won't settle for a heapin' hell o' a lot of filler content. If DAI therefore being far from the "best game" as a result doesn't bother you, so be it. I have an irrational admiration for this particular game franchise and its devs and highly anticipate a DA4 and all it could offer, even if ultimately in vain for all I know, so this sort of thing bugs me significantly more than if I were wasting my time clearing every minefield across the extensive terrain of Mad Max's game world...

[hoechlbear]

I don't have problems with "interactive narrative" in a game and I actually prefer for it to be in games, but that should not be the only thing the game tries to accomplish. If "interactive narrative" is the pinnacle of what you personally look for in a game, then games like the Uncharted series would prolly be something that more aligns with what you're looking for. All I ask for is a decent balance between interactive narrative and other content that I also think is fun that does not necessarily need to be only dialog options. Asid from that, I would say interactive narrative does prolly have more pull when it comes to immersion that most things, that that too is not necessarily the only means to an end of what immersion entails. If I said anything that is not interactive narrative is filler, I misspoke. I will say that yes, good interactive narrative is what we should look for in games to measure the quality of the game as a whole, but to say that anything that is not interactive narrative is filler is not intellectually accurate.

 

I'd just like to point out one thing that might have lead to a wrong impression. I said "what I love the most about these sidequests is the ability to interact with other NPCs other than the companions" but maybe I should've said "one of the things I love about..." because that's obviously not the only reason why I like sidequests and it's definitely not the only thing that makes a sidequest a good experience for me. But to me there's a huge difference between a sidequest that involves NPC interaction, from a quest where you only need to read a codex entry and go to the X mark on your map to finish the task. It gets tiring having to read so many letters and notes and after a while, I just don't care anymore. I feel a lot more connected to the story, the NPCs and the world when the quest is explained to me by an actual person and when I can respond to that person like a normal human being would, instead of acting like a robot that doesn't react at all to what people are saying. I don't think anyone is suggesting that every quest that doesn't include NPC interaction is filler. But it does make it limiting to how these quests unfold because there's so much you can do when you don't have NPC interaction. For one, you can't really have choices, can you? Because there is no dialogue so there's nothing to choose. I'm not sure if I'm getting my point across, I'm struggling with words today.

[Nefla]

Speaking of companion quests, these two scenes from DA:I and TW3 are so similar and yet IMO the one from DA:I is simply "nice" it made me smile, but the one from TW3 had me shrieking with laughter but also had so much heart and I really felt these 3 characters had a history and friendship (and I love Geralt's drunk voice lol).

 

[hoechlbear]

Speaking of companion quests, these two scenes from DA:I and TW3 are so similar and yet IMO the one from DA:I is simply "nice" it made me smile, but the one from TW3 had me shrieking with laughter but also had so much heart and I really felt these 3 characters had a history and friendship (and I love Geralt's drunk voice lol).

 

 

"This is a job.... for Vesemir!" I had tears falling down my cheeks by the end of that. Specially because I did not see it coming, at all. I mean, the mood is super heavy at that point so it was really unexpected. It's the best comic relief I've seen in any videogame ever.

 

I'm actually one of the (probably few) people who thought the wicked grace scene was super cringy. The way each companion slowly and individually reacts to something that was said 10 seconds ago is just weird. Not to mention, I don't see these characters as a close group of friends, so that scene didn't really have any effect on me. In fact, I found it all very forced. But well, I can see why most people love that moment.