609 réponses à ce sujet

[UniformGreyColor]

I'm pretty sure the goat quest is a critical path quest, isn't it? 

 

I didn't find the quest particularly brilliant when I did it, I don't know about you..

[UniformGreyColor]

Amusing though it may be, to be fair, it's not actually part of the Druffy quest. Buuuuut there's an idea of how they could have made it more interesting! Druffy killing demons for you is part of the quest, and rewards you with a Druffy mount

 

We are talking about the quest where we lead the druffalo past a fade rift correct?

[Nefla]

I didn't find the quest particularly brilliant when I did it, I don't know about you..

It wasn't supposed to be brilliant but it was pretty funny for a short and simple quest. The druffy one had nothing going for it, a little would have gone a long way. Details make a lot of difference.

[UniformGreyColor]

It wasn't supposed to be brilliant but it was pretty funny for a short and simple quest. The druffy one had nothing going for it, a little would have gone a long way. Details make a lot of difference.

 

And that's my point. It matters how you look at those details to say whether there is a story there or not. There were details, its just that in the presentation of those details the details were missed by some.

[Addictress]

And that's my point. It matters how you look at those details to say whether there is a story there or not. There were details, its just that in the presentation of those details the details were missed by some.

The problem is, not only do the details also exist in previous games' and other games' side quests, they are also presented better.

[Details + better presentation] > [Just Details]

[UniformGreyColor]

The problem is, not only do the details also exist in previous games' and other games' side quests, they are also presented better.

[Details + better presentation] > [Just Details]

 

How would you go about making the details better?

[correctamundo]

You bring up the article. I'd say it doesn't do DA:I justice and the very comparison that the article writer has made between two quests that are largely the same is an erroneous comparison and what is said about the goat quest could very well be said about the Druffalo quest. People like this comparison because it seemingly looks like the article writer is making a strong point, but you don't seem him at all saying "Watching the druffalo demolish the demons was so funny" which, is a matter of opinion that the article writer fails to observe. My guess is that the article writer is simply feeding off of the comparisons that he has already heard about and is not making an honest comparison between the two.

 

That is because the "writer" is a DAI-basher. First rule of DAI-bashing is:If it's in DAI, it's bad. If it's in whatever other game, it's good. Second rule of DAI-bashing: Cherry pick. Third rule of DAI-bashing: If something good is in DAI, ignore, cherry pick and apply first rule of DAI-bashing.

 

Amusing though it may be, to be fair, it's not actually part of the Druffy quest. Buuuuut there's an idea of how they could have made it more interesting! Druffy killing demons for you is part of the quest, and rewards you with a Druffy mount

 

The only reason Druffy is where she is, is because of the rift. It's so blatantly obvious it's screaming in your face. Druffy mount would be good so here's to you.

 

 

And that's my point. It matters how you look at those details to say whether there is a story there or not. There were details, its just that in the presentation of those details the details were missed by some.

 

Not just missed but ignored as well. Like the typical DAI-basher claims that Judging Movran, Mayor, Servis etc are not part their respective questline. Because admitting that would also be admitting that there are cinematics, choices (some of which are grey ones) and consequences in a DAI sidequest.

 

Just look at how the Crestwood questline was reduced in this thread. I could - for the sake of argument - just as disingenuously reduce Possession to running around and fetching, a little fighting and RMB-spamming. But I won't because it would be dishonest.

[UniformGreyColor]

That is because the "writer" is a DAI-basher. First rule of DAI-bashing is:If it's in DAI, it's bad. If it's in whatever other game, it's good. Second rule of DAI-bashing: Cherry pick. Third rule of DAI-bashing: If something good is in DAI, ignore, cherry pick and apply first rule of DAI-bashing.

 

 

The only reason Druffy is where she is, is because of the rift. It's so blatantly obvious it's screaming in your face. Druffy mount would be good so here's to you.

 

 

 

Not just missed but ignored as well. Like the typical DAI-basher claims that Judging Movran, Mayor, Servis etc are not part their respective questline. Because admitting that would also be admitting that there are cinematics, choices (some of which are grey ones) and consequences in a DAI sidequest.

 

Just look at how the Crestwood questline was reduced in this thread. I could - for the sake of argument - just as disingenuously reduce Possession to running around and fetching, a little fighting and RMB-spamming. But I won't because it would be dishonest.

 

You get points for not being serious with that post and bonus points for using a gif I've never seen. Druffalo mount would be fun, yes.

[Aren]

This part was particularly interesting

 

"Why am I, the Inquisitor and leader of an increasingly powerful and influential army, killing goats for a hunter’s dinner?"

 

I don't know the answer to be honest

[correctamundo]

 

This part was particularly interesting

 

"Why am I, the Inquisitor and leader of an increasingly powerful and influential army, killing goats for a hunter’s dinner?"

 

I don't know the answer to be honest

 

 

Well I would say, first it isn't the Hunters dinner. Second it isn't the job for the Inquisitor and leader. It is for the Herald an agent of a fledgling organisation trying to restore order with meager resources. Third: Why would a journalist be subject to actually researching and knowing anything about the subject he is commenting? I mean really? That would make him serious and we can't have that in journalism.

[Addictress]

How would you go about making the details better?

Cut scenes. No broken animation such as with the warrior bro in Jaws of Hakkon outside the Hut of the guy who became crippled. He was cycling through the same hand gesture animation repeatedly the whole time. This type of broken animation is awful, and not seen in previous games where it seems the animation is either customized or stock but fluid and natural even for Slim Couldry in DAO.

[Nefla]

That is because the "writer" is a DAI-basher. First rule of DAI-bashing is:If it's in DAI, it's bad. If it's in whatever other game, it's good. Second rule of DAI-bashing: Cherry pick. Third rule of DAI-bashing: If something good is in DAI, ignore, cherry pick and apply first rule of DAI-bashing.

 

The only reason Druffy is where she is, is because of the rift. It's so blatantly obvious it's screaming in your face. Druffy mount would be good so here's to you.

 

Not just missed but ignored as well. Like the typical DAI-basher claims that Judging Movran, Mayor, Servis etc are not part their respective questline. Because admitting that would also be admitting that there are cinematics, choices (some of which are grey ones) and consequences in a DAI sidequest.

 

Just look at how the Crestwood questline was reduced in this thread. I could - for the sake of argument - just as disingenuously reduce Possession to running around and fetching, a little fighting and RMB-spamming. But I won't because it would be dishonest.

-_-' do you honestly think that people who have criticisms of DA:I are just a bunch of meany-poops who are making things up for the sake of it? We couldn't possibly have loved BioWare previously and hope they'll hear some of our critiques and improve future games, that would be outrageous.

 

The Druffy quest wasn't made interesting by the fact that Druffy could attack demons any more than any other escort quest is made interesting by the thing you're escorting being able to attack enemies. It wasn't funny, it wasn't sweet, it wasn't tense or scary, it didn't give any interesting lore, it was just nothing.

 

Do you think the judgments being entirely in Skyhold was a good thing? Because I don't. We should have been able to make those choices in the field, separating it from the quest gives a big disconnect. Besides, there's what, 1 judgement per zone at most? It's not like these things are plentiful. My point wasn't that no quests had cinematics (companion quests do) it's that there is nothing I find fun or interesting in those big empty maps. Almost everything of any interest including the main plot is in Skyhold/Haven and self contained areas.

 

I don't know why some of you guys seem to take our criticisms of the game so personally. Like the game if you want, be entertained by the druffalo attacking enemies if you want, more power to you but that does nothing for us.

[robertthebard]

 

This part was particularly interesting

 

"Why am I, the Inquisitor and leader of an increasingly powerful and influential army, killing goats for a hunter’s dinner?"

 

I don't know the answer to be honest

 

This is why it's hard to take people seriously when they try to bash one game in favor of another.  The first error in this post?  You're not the Inquisitor when you get it.  It's hard to take a position seriously when it starts out completely ignoring in game, rather obvious details.  When you try to argue with hyperbole, you're going to find yourself coming up short.  Such as this post.

 

The second problem is that it's not the Hunter's dinner, but food for all the refugees and people in the little village.  The hunter explains exactly why he can't go, but because they didn't hit you upside the head with it, you didn't pick it up.  There is a war raging between the Mages and the Templars in the surrounding countryside, and so, it's not safe for him to be out there, as he indicates with "More likely to find mages than mutton".  Again, this is plainly laid out.  If that didn't drive the point home, how about the mage and then Templar forces you had to fight off when you first arrive at the Crossroads?  Were these not evidence enough that both sides were warring right outside?  It's amazing to me the context, and let alone subtext that people "miss" in the name of bashing DA I.

 

You don't know the answer because you chose to ignore the answer.  You had to, in order to support your DA I is bad position.  You deliberately misinterpret events in the game to add more "weight" to your argument.  It falls flat, because it's simply not how the quest is presented in game.  It's so far from accurate that it has to be deliberate.  You know it's not true, but you have to wave that flag.

[Addictress]

This is why it's hard to take people seriously when they try to bash one game in favor of another. The first error in this post? You're not the Inquisitor when you get it. It's hard to take a position seriously when it starts out completely ignoring in game, rather obvious details. When you try to argue with hyperbole, you're going to find yourself coming up short. Such as this post.

The second problem is that it's not the Hunter's dinner, but food for all the refugees and people in the little village. The hunter explains exactly why he can't go, but because they didn't hit you upside the head with it, you didn't pick it up. There is a war raging between the Mages and the Templars in the surrounding countryside, and so, it's not safe for him to be out there, as he indicates with "More likely to find mages than mutton". Again, this is plainly laid out. If that didn't drive the point home, how about the mage and then Templar forces you had to fight off when you first arrive at the Crossroads? Were these not evidence enough that both sides were warring right outside? It's amazing to me the context, and let alone subtext that people "miss" in the name of bashing DA I.

You don't know the answer because you chose to ignore the answer. You had to, in order to support your DA I is bad position. You deliberately misinterpret events in the game to add more "weight" to your argument. It falls flat, because it's simply not how the quest is presented in game. It's so far from accurate that it has to be deliberate. You know it's not true, but you have to wave that flag.

Technically she isn't inquisitor yet but the spirit of the argument remains. She's a chosen one. Cullen said "we need more agents in more places...I'm not certain we have enough influence to approach the Mages/Templar's." So you are correct, the inquisitor is going about getting her hands dirty for a reason of sorts. Notice how in DAO, the warden helps a dwarf in the shaperate get back her claim to Ortan by finding records in the Ortan Thaig.

Presentation:
1. Cut scenes for Ortan Thang dwarf, none for hunter
2. You meet with that dwarf again in the assembly, which drives the point home she was actively putting those records to use. Unlike the hunter who stays in the same spot and just says something in passing. A good way to tie this side quest back in to the comment Cullen made at Haven when he sent the inquisitor to the hinterlands would've been a few simple shots of the hunter distributing the food, or a refugee chiming in that they now have a better view of the Inquisition, or "surely the inquisition is doing the maker's work," or maybe Corporal Vale could mention how it bolstered agents or public perception of the inquisition.
3. Notice how the Ortan Thaig quest could not be completed until you met up with the dwarf in the assembly. Corporal vale or mother Giselle may have mentioned what I referred to above, to re-enforce why you did the quest in the first place or the impact of it, but the quest marker did not force you to hear it to complete the quest.
This seems small, but almost every quest was like that. You waste potential immersion value by not leading the player through each sidequest with care.
You got points in your influence bar. Um, okay that's nice, but if I wanted to play a game where all my actions were converted into just a bar with points, I'd go to an arcade. One extra scene in a different spot, some cut scenes, would greatly improve the quality of the side quest and re-enforce the points you receive - the meaning of the points.

[Addictress]

And while the warden had no reason to help the Ortan dwarf as relates to the blight at hand, it helped you immerse in lore by re-enforcing:

The importance of caste
The role of the assembly
The impact of severed thaigs

Ram meat and refugees are general problems you can find in Afghanistan, not really DA-lore-specific.

[Addictress]

Right so in summary.

If it isn't lore-specific, make it tie to the larger quest at hand, and no, expecting me to hear it from someone I wasn't aware I could follow up with after doesn't count. Vice versa. At lease some closeups. Even nug wrangler got closeups. And nugs are DA-specific, and funny. Rams? I can find those in the middle east. So the direct impact? Influence points. Not very effective presentation. I'd rather there be simultaneous cinematic or in-game demonstration of that influence. Not just the fact I now have enough points to click the icon on the war table. :/

[Reighto]

No, wasn't annoyed at what you wrote. Only somewhat annoyed at/tired with the "Gah this game/dlc/idea sucks!" *buys it anyway* (see: CoD) trend that happens. I think I wrote my comment a little too personal and rude, probably shouldn't have used 'stupid consumer' So I'd also like to apologize for my rude comments.

 

Gah! What is this civilized manners doing on the forums?! Not enough fanboying and ad-hominems!

Now to add some fanboying: " How can you like Dragon Age it's just so blatantly bad. I mean one just needs to take a look at Barbie Horse Adventures, which is clearly the superior game in every regard! The horse animations are top notch and magnificent. It is clearly the epitome of a perfect game, there is no reason to develop games anymore." ( I'm of course joking, so i hope nobody takes me serious )

[UniformGreyColor]

Cut scenes. No broken animation such as with the warrior bro in Jaws of Hakkon outside the Hut of the guy who became crippled. He was cycling through the same hand gesture animation repeatedly the whole time. This type of broken animation is awful, and not seen in previous games where it seems the animation is either customized or stock but fluid and natural even for Slim Couldry in DAO.

 

Cut scenes with a voiced protagonist is expensive. Why do that when you can drive home the point by other means? There were plenty of quests in DA:O that were just "go here, kill this, come back to collect your reward" mages collective comes to mind.

[BansheeOwnage]

We are talking about the quest where we lead the druffalo past a fade rift correct?

Correct.

[correctamundo]

-_-' do you honestly think that people who have criticisms of DA:I are just a bunch of meany-poops who are making things up for the sake of it? We couldn't possibly have loved BioWare previously and hope they'll hear some of our critiques and improve future games, that would be outrageous.

 

The Druffy quest wasn't made interesting by the fact that Druffy could attack demons any more than any other escort quest is made interesting by the thing you're escorting being able to attack enemies. It wasn't funny, it wasn't sweet, it wasn't tense or scary, it didn't give any interesting lore, it was just nothing.

 

Do you think the judgments being entirely in Skyhold was a good thing? Because I don't. We should have been able to make those choices in the field, separating it from the quest gives a big disconnect. Besides, there's what, 1 judgement per zone at most? It's not like these things are plentiful. My point wasn't that no quests had cinematics (companion quests do) it's that there is nothing I find fun or interesting in those big empty maps. Almost everything of any interest including the main plot is in Skyhold/Haven and self contained areas.

 

I don't know why some of you guys seem to take our criticisms of the game so personally. Like the game if you want, be entertained by the druffalo attacking enemies if you want, more power to you but that does nothing for us.

 

I don't mind discussing quest design, flaws and future but this "article" is no more than flamebait. The writer never bothered with even the most basic research.

 

As for Druffy, Woolsey, Grandfather quests I don't find them very exhilarating. On the other hand I didn't find the Pellars goat particularly intersting either. Difference though, I felt more or less forced to do the Pellars goat thing whereas Druffy I can just let be. Those quests are something I do, if I do them, en route to someplace important. The overarching sidequests can of course be worked on to make them better and I do find them better then their DAO counterparts. I mean Dirty back alleys etc... TW3 however is a rather pointless comparison since that is a game where you are stuck as a very specific character with no companions. Allocation of resources will wildly different and if the feedback that reaches BW is to scrap gender, race and class differentiality then nothing has been won since DA2.

 

Servis could have been judged in the field or we could have been given the choice to kill him on the spot. Movran the under and Crestwoods Mayor will have to be tried at Skyhold though.

[Realmzmaster]

You're pointing to a side quest that is blatantly

 

*lacking animation

*lacking any type of cinematic direction

*strictly collection

 

And you call our disgust a subjective reaction?

 

At what point is it obvious to you that the side quest is not only lazily implemented but completely scarce? If I gave you a 300-page novel and a 5-page booklet with simple and rudimentary illustrations, and I told you I thought the 300-page-book was higher quality, would you really want to say "oh it's just subjective?"

 

Clearly one is higher quality, even if you hate reading voluminous novels rich with Russian history.

 

Perhaps you simply don't like large Russian novels. So in that extent, it is subjective, but the objective point remains that one side quest model clearly is more complex and engaging than the other and that, given a set of basic standards, should be deemed higher quality.

 

You can also have a 300 page novel that is complete garbage that misses the point and a 5 page booklet whose simple and rudimentary illustrations convey the message of the booklet  quite well.and gets its point across.

[Realmzmaster]

 

This part was particularly interesting

 

"Why am I, the Inquisitor and leader of an increasingly powerful and influential army, killing goats for a hunter’s dinner?"

 

I don't know the answer to be honest

 

 

Because at the time you are not the Inquisitor but the herald and trying to expand the influence of the Inquisition, One way of reaching the masses is through their stomachs. Unless of course you choose to do the quest after reaching Skyhold.

[Shechinah]

I've come across books that went on for much more than three-hundred pages and that I've considered terrible: the common reason being a lack of effort as well as missing in-depth thought about how in-universe elements worked.

 

 I've also come across booklets that were roughly five pages but because of the thought as well as effort put into it, they managed to convey so much more in such a better and more refined fashion than the aformentioned books attempted.

 

Basically, I'm in favor of judging books by their content, not by their page or word count.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

The only reason Druffy is where she is, is because of the rift. It's so blatantly obvious it's screaming in your face. Druffy mount would be good so here's to you.

Thanks. But think about this scenario. Under most circumstances, the player will talk to the farmer to activate the quest, then move toward Druffy. However, that rift happens to be in between the two, so on a first playthrough, odds are you'll deal with it before even reaching Druffy. If, say, it only appeared after she started following you, that would have helped.

 

And it might have funny if they had a short cutscene where demons came out of the rift and incapacitated Quizzy, and just as they were about to attack again, Druffy bolts into the shot and rams one! That's just some random idea off the top of my head, I'm sure people who design quests for a living could do better if they tried.

 

Well I would say, first it isn't the Hunters dinner. Second it isn't the job for the Inquisitor and leader. It is for the Herald an agent of a fledgling organisation trying to restore order with meager resources.

Sort of. At this point, you're a grunt in some ways, but still special. The troops look up to you, you have influence, and presumably they will try to keep you alive. So I propose an idea to make that quest a bit better and more realistic that I've suggested in the past:

 

You know that platoon of Inquisition soldiers parked just outside the village, doing target practice? How about we have the option to ask/order a few of them to use some local rams for practice instead? It's not like demons are covering the Hinterlands or anything, and even if they run into one, it's part of the job. Or, you could do the quest how you have to now, and choose to get the meat yourself. Even just that adds a fair bit of roleplay value, for the same result.

 

 

Do you think the judgments being entirely in Skyhold was a good thing? Because I don't. We should have been able to make those choices in the field, separating it from the quest gives a big disconnect. Besides, there's what, 1 judgement per zone at most? It's not like these things are plentiful. My point wasn't that no quests had cinematics (companion quests do) it's that there is nothing I find fun or interesting in those big empty maps. Almost everything of any interest including the main plot is in Skyhold/Haven and self contained areas.

This is something I've thought about, though not for the exact same reasons. In some ways, it makes sense to have them in Skyhold; you can't judge someone formally in the field. But the reason it irked me by the end was because it happened to basically anyone important, and seemed pretty contrived that everyone of import that you fight would just barely survive when no one else does, and that the Inquisitor would auto-dialogue to take them back to Skyhold for judgement.

 

It's a bit of "Oh, thanks for making that decision for me" sprinkled onto a large portion of plot-convenience.

 

Cut scenes with a voiced protagonist is expensive. Why do that when you can drive home the point by other means? There were plenty of quests in DA:O that were just "go here, kill this, come back to collect your reward" mages collective comes to mind.

First, it depends what you mean by "cutscenes". Yes, the ones with actual animations besides the stock hand gestures - moving around, things happening - can be expensive. Though not always. I can't imagine simply having a character or two walk and not physically interact with anything being prohibitively expensive.

 

Anyway, I think most of the "cutscenes" people are imagining and referring to in previous games are simply cinematic dialogue. "Shot-reverse-shot" with some facial expressions and standard stock body language. That is not expensive, as evidenced by virtually every conversation in the entirely of DA:O and DA2 being done in this format (or a cutscene).

 

This would have been a great help to Inquisition as a whole, sidequest or not. To actually be able to see the person you're talking to in enough detail to remember them, their face, seeing their expressions... Do I really need to explain how that can make all the difference?

[Kabraxal]

I don't mind discussing quest design, flaws and future but this "article" is no more than flamebait. The writer never bothered with even the most basic research.

As for Druffy, Woolsey, Grandfather quests I don't find them very exhilarating. On the other hand I didn't find the Pellars goat particularly intersting either. Difference though, I felt more or less forced to do the Pellars goat thing whereas Druffy I can just let be. Those quests are something I do, if I do them, en route to someplace important. The overarching sidequests can of course be worked on to make them better and I do find them better then their DAO counterparts. I mean Dirty back alleys etc... TW3 however is a rather pointless comparison since that is a game where you are stuck as a very specific character with no companions. Allocation of resources will wildly different and if the feedback that reaches BW is to scrap gender, race and class differentiality then nothing has been won since DA2.

Servis could have been judged in the field or we could have been given the choice to kill him on the spot. Movran the under and Crestwoods Mayor will have to be tried at Skyhold though.

So now it's "judgements don't count because they happen realistically in the throne toom like most judgements would!"? Man, missed some more terrible arguments it seems.

And like you and others say, these people have to ignore things to be able to make their point. Most of the judgements not only offer great roleplaying, but you can outright miss them or choose to ignore them as well. I didn't even know two judgements were possible because I missed one quest/item and did't complete the ball as needed.

To appease some those posters... without any guide in front of me, I can only think of two stand out quests from TW3 (baron and helping cerys) while the rest tend to be repititive and quite fetchy... fetch a goat (and this is tied to the main quest), fetch a pan, play errand boy for your "friends" (which is mostly fetching...), kill this group, follow senses and kill target, gather herbs, get tools and kill more things... TW3 is literally filled with the kind of quests some are slamming DA over. And that isn't even mentioning the awful and dull main quest that is one giant search/fetch extravaganza or the rather unrewarding and dull points of interest.

Comparing that to shards, murals, astrariums (o hey some puzzles to add variety), and a few quests like the goat meat and druffalo missions and suddenly TW3 isn't looking all that better from any objective front. They actually look quite equal.

I have no issue if someone did not like Inquisition's offerings. I mean, Outside of the Baron and the witcher drinking scene, TW3 was a dull, shallow slog in my opinion. But I can admit that the side quests aren't better or worse on any objective front in comparison to DA. I can only say the cliched dark fantasy workd bored me from the start and the content never enriched or drew me deeper into the world. So I say I didn't like the content, not that it was objectively bad.

With Inquisition, The world started out as something richer already (two games adding differing flavours to the history) and the content managed to add and enrich a deep world even more. I already enjoyed just walking the maps because they convey a sense of history before you read or hear about it. The fact the side quests often trickled more lore to me is why I tend to like them or give them a pass at worst. Again, no objective proclamation of quality.

Unlike some, I don't scream that TW3 has a filler problem and it needs to learn from game "x" when it is cleary a BS claim. I just admit that TW3 did not give me want I wanted instead of trying to spin and BS my way to a false claim that breaks under any scrutiny.