847 réponses à ce sujet

[Shechinah]

That seems to be some high praise.  Once I get some more free time, I will have to finish it.

 

Even some people who genuinely loathed Inquisition genuinely loved Trespasser so it has gotten some high praise.

[Addictress]

Even some people who genuinely loathed Inquisition genuinely loved Trespasser so it has gotten some high praise.

Yup

Then strangely, I liked trespasser so much I obsessively played he main game over and over until I no longer feel the loathing, and genuinely like the entire game. Like Stockholm Syndrome.

[JoltDealer]

Legitimately awful. Like, watching a B movie, where the script and direction are so cheesy, you're wondering if a highschooler was directing.

But no, DAI main game...literally reeked.

 

See, I have a hard time believing that, especially since there are games out there that are legitimately so much worse.  The ending did come a tad too fast, but I felt the story was far more complex and entertaining than a good portion of other games on the market.  I mean, Watch_Dogs came out that same year, as did Titanfall and Destiny -- games that lacked even a basic story and actually could've been written by a highschooler as well.

 

But Trespasser is beautiful. It blows open this...aspect of he main game that, I personally could not have predicted and depending on your romance options can make the main game take on a new level of meaning. It also has the best songs , the best soundtrack ever. It's also an eye-opener of how awesome Dragon Age lore is....it reveals a whole dimension to the same lore you've been familiar with since DAO. It makes you feel like even though you thought DAO was done...you discover you didn't even know what was really happening back in DAO. That good.

 

Oh.  Wow.  That just sounds...wonderful.  I feel very tempted to drop everything else I'm doing and start playing it, but I have big responsibilities to handle at the moment.  Anything that expands on DAO will be very interesting.

 

Also want to mention, I like every other dragon age game and I know what you mean about the pressure to be overly critical. I liked ME3 and its ending. I always defend it. I defend DA2 as well. I'm flexible and appreciate a variety of storytelling methods.

 

I'm not of the same mind.  I didn't like Dragon Age II and I still stand by that statement because it was an incomplete story.  None of the main plot is wrapped up by the end and, instead, it's left open for the obvious sequel.  Unlike Inquisition, which had a clear beginning, middle, climax, end, and resolution.  Add in Trespasser and you even have an epilogue that contributes more.  Ultimately, Hawke's story and actions had no effects on the series beyond the Red Lyrium he stumbled upon.  His/her tale didn't come to an end -- it just ended.  I still didn't hate it though.  I just wished that it wasn't such a prime example of sequel-bait.

[Addictress]

A rote ending in which the characters literally bow and exit the stage and Disney music plays as everyone cheers the chosen one like a Las Vegas magic show applauding a magician who just unveiled a fake-boobed assistant kept whole :/

[von uber]

Oddly enough I have ground to a halt halfway through ME2 as well on my current playthough. A few missions aside, it really doesn't grab me as much as it used too, certainly not as much as ME1 or ME3 do (well ME3 up to Chronus anyway).

[Sylvius the Mad]

We're getting a bit OT here, since Trespasser doesn't have the DAI features which some of us are worried about showing up in ME:A. But what did you think was wrong with Trespasser?

I haven't played it yet, but I fully expect to dislike it. It sounds like it's largely linear and story-based, which runs contrary to everything DAI did right.

This is largely the same reason I disliked Awakening.

[Addictress]

I haven't played it yet, but I fully expect to dislike it. It sounds like it's largely linear and story-based, which runs contrary to everything DAI did right.

This is largely the same reason I disliked Awakening.

Ew

You either do Bethesda right, or you do Bioware right.

You do Bethesda but do it wrong and it's awkward.

[Shechinah]

I haven't played it yet, but I fully expect to dislike it. It sounds like it's largely linear and story-based, which runs contrary to everything DAI did right.

This is largely the same reason I disliked Awakening.

 

It is very story-focused and very linear so you would likely dislike it if you do not look favorable on such. It's basically what Trespasser is focused on in addition to lore revelations. 
 

[Giantdeathrobot]

I liked Inquisition a lot and loved Trespasser, but I doubt that I would like an entire game of Trespasser. It is indeed very linear

[sjsharp2011]

I liked Inquisition a lot and loved Trespasser, but I doubt that I would like an entire game of Trespasser. It is indeed very linear

yeah but to be fair most of the DLC's generally are moer linear than the main games simply because they'er add ons. Still makes a good ending for the DAI game though.

[Sylvius the Mad]

yeah but to be fair most of the DLC's generally are moer linear than the main games simply because they'er add ons. Still makes a good ending for the DAI game though.

JoH had a good balance of linearity, I thought.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ew

You either do Bethesda right, or you do Bioware right.

I expect you and I disagree about what defines BioWare.

When I think of traditional BioWare, I point to BG, NWN, and DAI. DAO and KotOR were both excellent compromises, but compromises nonetheless.

The less said about the ME games, the better.

[Elhanan]

I haven't played it yet, but I fully expect to dislike it. It sounds like it's largely linear and story-based, which runs contrary to everything DAI did right.

This is largely the same reason I disliked Awakening.

Trespasser is linear and story based, and is also an epilogue. As such, it is rightfully a self-contained tale. It is a well crafted one at that.

Yet it also has the added options for every spell and ability upgrade, and Trials which allows for tailoring difficulty for full game replays. These mechanics alone help make the entire game more like something I believe you will appreciate.

[RoboticWater]

I expect you and I disagree about what defines BioWare.

When I think of traditional BioWare, I point to BG, NWN, and DAI. DAO and KotOR were both excellent compromises, but compromises nonetheless.

The less said about the ME games, the better.

On the Mass Effect forums...

[Master Warder Z_]

On the Mass Effect forums...

 

He often doesn't make much sense, and seems to think its the 1980s.

 

I'm surprised he hasn't brought up the Berlin Wall or Grenada.

[sjsharp2011]

JoH had a good balance of linearity, I thought.

 

 

I agree but then strangely Jaws is my favourite of the DLC's I like all 3 but that one for me I found the most interesting

[In Exile]

ME2's plot is responsible for a lot of ME3's problems, I think. By bringing the Reaper storyline to a screeching halt and focusing instead on a cast of characters that would by necessity be rendered anecdotical in the third game (by virtue of everyone being able to die in the Suicide Mission), it ensured ME3 needed to focus on all the Big Issues: the Reaper wars and how to beat them, the Genophage, the Geth-Quarian conflict, the end of Cerberus, which is a lot for one game. By comparison, ME2 only dealt with one big issue decisively, the Collectors, and it wasn't even an issue until the game made them one. So ME3 was crammed with major storylines to resolve, to its detriment.

I mean, ME3's ending is crap all by itself. But I'm sure some of the above plotlines would have been well served by being resolved in ME2. I think they should have introduced the Crucible in ME2 (with data from the Collector Base forming the basis of the project instead of ass-pulling it from the Mars Archives) and maybe manage to resolve the Geth-Quarian conflict then and there.

Technically, the Geth-Quarian conflict was more of an ME2 introduction than an ME1 introduction. The Geth in ME1 were mooks for Saren. Had you not then tried to create this rich Geth culture, and also suddenly have the Quarians decide this is a great time to actually attack the Geth, this plot doesn't even exist.

[In Exile]

All Tali's audio says is that Saren is trying to bring back the Reapers. The rest is Shepard guessing at unclear images in his head. You're told you can't find Saren and to follow up on a few leads. However you're also told you can do what you want and don't answer to the people who give you the leads. Not all, but many side missions have to do with Geth or even husks. Now some of this is meta-gaming as it would make sense to just do the main quests and perhaps a few of the side quests like the geth bases where you get the data Tali wants. But Saren is still nothing compared to the Reapers actually being around killing people.

Shepard is frothing at the mouth like an unstable loon in every conversation about how the reapers will obliterate all organic life. Shepard knows full well that this is a clear and pressing danger.

You can, I guess, play an incompetent or stupid Shepard (who thinks Saren is hiding on a lifeless planet in the middle of nowhere) but there's no rook in the plot to believe that the threat is not immediate.

[sjsharp2011]

Even some people who genuinely loathed Inquisition genuinely loved Trespasser so it has gotten some high praise.

 

 

I liked both but then for me it wrapped up the story of the Inquisition well. Yes there were 1 or 2 gaps left open but I' assume that's for DA4 rather than just careless abandonment. I don't want to go into i9 ttoo much as I wouldn't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't played.

[AlanC9]

Well, to be honest it's less what Trespasser did wrong within itself and more what it did to the rest of the game and the next game. For example it ruins the base game for me while adding nothing new to replace that, which gets even worse with what we know their plans for the next game are.

This would be clearer if you could say what was ruined, and how it was ruined.

If you're with Sylvius, yeah, it's a lot more linear and story-focused than DAI was. I'd argue that it earns this; the threat really is imminent, and most Inquisitors would find that threat to be a really bad thing, and the nature of the situation doesn't really allow for a lot of free movement. So that's just the situation the Inquisitor is in.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Trespasser is linear and story based, and is also an epilogue. As such, it is rightfully a self-contained tale. It is a well crafted one at that.

Yet it also has the added options for every spell and ability upgrade, and Trials which allows for tailoring difficulty for full game replays. These mechanics alone help make the entire game more like something I believe you will appreciate.

Those upgrades seem to have nerfed Chain Lightning. I remember it having a paralyzing effect when used on just two targets.

I remember when those upgrades were announced, they didn't just add options - they took some away.

Also, by adding more points to spend on usable skills (given the 8 slot limit), they removed some of the incentive to buy useless abilities in order to unlock cross-weapon passives (I still think the sword & shield passives are the best way to start a 2H build).

I'm not saying the new options are bad, I just wish they'd been implemented differently.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

This would be clearer if you could say what was ruined, and how it was ruined.

Spoiler warning for those not wanting to be spoiled: 

Spoiler

It ruined everything. It ruined the Inquisition that you spent all game making only for it to be ripped apart either completely or to a shadow of itself. So much for the Jedi Order line they sold us in marketing, and good to know all my choices and efforts were worthless. It also ruined and/or will ruin my Inquisitors with the end game revelations. My Inquisitors would never sit on the side lines after that, and yet that's exactly what we're going to do apparently since some newbie is going to face Solas, or even worse they are going to get a Hawke treatment and be unrecognizable as my character. They threw away a great connection between the protagonist and antagonist just so they could stick to their stupid "New PC every game rule". The base game still did everything good the Trespasser DLC did, even better since Solas still had an air of mystery about him but now he'll just be another crazy person trying to destroy the world, and the Inquisitor and the Inquisition had a happy ending.

[pdusen]

Spoiler warning for those not wanting to be spoiled: 

Spoiler

It ruined everything. It ruined the Inquisition that you spent all game making only for it to be ripped apart either completely or to a shadow of itself. So much for the Jedi Order line they sold us in marketing, and good to know all my choices and efforts were worthless. It also ruined and/or will ruin my Inquisitors with the end game revelations. My Inquisitors would never sit on the side lines after that, and yet that's exactly what we're going to do apparently since some newbie is going to face Solas, or even worse they are going to get a Hawke treatment and be unrecognizable as my character. They threw away a great connection between the protagonist and antagonist just so they could stick to their stupid "New PC every game rule". The base game still did everything good the Trespasser DLC did, even better since Solas still had an air of mystery about him but now he'll just be another crazy person trying to destroy the world, and the Inquisitor and the Inquisition had a happy ending.

First, everything you just said boils down to the story going in a direction you don't like.

Second, if Bioware really wanted to reuse a protagonist, they would just do it. They aren't being hamstrung by some rule that some guy made up when DAO was being developed. They make the games they want to make, and that's how it should be. So stop acting like they're bending over backwards just to avoid breaking a rule.

[Gothfather]

Spoiler warning for those not wanting to be spoiled: 

Spoiler

It ruined everything. It ruined the Inquisition that you spent all game making only for it to be ripped apart either completely or to a shadow of itself. So much for the Jedi Order line they sold us in marketing, and good to know all my choices and efforts were worthless. It also ruined and/or will ruin my Inquisitors with the end game revelations. My Inquisitors would never sit on the side lines after that, and yet that's exactly what we're going to do apparently since some newbie is going to face Solas, or even worse they are going to get a Hawke treatment and be unrecognizable as my character. They threw away a great connection between the protagonist and antagonist just so they could stick to their stupid "New PC every game rule". The base game still did everything good the Trespasser DLC did, even better since Solas still had an air of mystery about him but now he'll just be another crazy person trying to destroy the world, and the Inquisitor and the Inquisition had a happy ending.

 

 

What that 'rule' that said the concept of the franchise was to create a series of games about a time period of HISTORY vs the exploits of a single hero. Yeah what a terrible thing to take a new approach to a franchise while their other IP does the exact opposite and make a series of games just about a single individual. What were you not paying attention to Bioware's press releases? They have been pretty bloody up front about this.

 

What boggles the mind for me is that when companies TELL players what to expect and it isn't something they like but buy the game anyway they blame the company for the bits they don't like. How the FRAK is that Bioware's fault? They told us on multiple occasions that Dragon Age is about an age in history called the Dragon Age. i get being upset about being misled but Bioware never did this about Dragon age with regards to this being about an age vs a single protagonist.

 

Suck it up.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

First, everything you just said boils down to the story going in a direction you don't like.

Second, if Bioware really wanted to reuse a protagonist, they would just do it. They aren't being hamstrung by some rule that some guy made up when DAO was being developed. They make the games they want to make, and that's how it should be. So stop acting like they're bending over backwards just to avoid breaking a rule.

Then the people in charge now are stupid writers, throwing away a story with more potential for essentially a rehash. That's so much better. 

 

What that 'rule' that said the concept of the franchise was to create a series of games about a time period of HISTORY vs the exploits of a single hero. Yeah what a terrible thing to take a new approach to a franchise while their other IP does the exact opposite and make a series of games just about a single individual. What were you not paying attention to Bioware's press releases? They have been pretty bloody up front about this.

 

What boggles the mind for me is that when companies TELL player what to expect and it isn't something they like but buy the game anyway they blame the company for the bits they don't like. How the FRAK is that Bioware's fault? They told us on multiple occasions that Dragon Age is about an age in history called the Dragon Age.

 

Suck it up.

If they ended at the base game, I would have no issue with that rule since there the story had an established conclusion and was complete, leaving the franchise ready to start a new story with a new cast. But with Trespasser, they set up a new story only for that story to never go anywhere.