Dragon Age: Inquisition - Redeeming the Series

forgottenlor said:

I bought Dragon Age 2 on sale and have now played through about 5 hours of it. Granted I had little expectations and already know about what people dislike (such as the lack of inventory and the extremely linear levels), but have found myself enjoying it. It's really not a bad game, but it all depends on what you are expecting. On the other hand, I feel Bioware games rarely feel fresh anymore. They use elements that have worked well in the past (and still do), but the games just don't make an impression like they used to. Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect at least were the first in their series, and so seemed at least a little fresh, because they were in different universes with different visions.

Click to expand...

I'd be curious to know how you feel about the game once you're done with it.

For what it's worth, I also found it to be decent fun for the first few hours - until the worst parts of it became very apparent, and I did NOT expect anything good either.

DArtagnan said:

That's how everything since Dragon Age has felt like, to me.

Not bad, and partially well executed - but without passion or vision.

SWtOR is like the epitome of that, frankly.

Bioware games of today feel like they've been bought - rather than created.

Click to expand...

Yeah i agree i guess, when i think on Mass effect 2 it wasn't a bad game but not very memorable. Same for ME3 except the end.

In hindsight as odd as it is i think the main reason i kept playing them is Jennifer Hales voice acting of Shephard.
I think she nailed that pretty well and it added alot to the atmosphere for me.

If they changed her out i doubt i would have finished ME2 or ME3 lol

When you consider the potential - and what they had to work with after Mass Effect, I found them tremendously disappointing.

They had the potential to create deep and compelling sci-fi RPGs - and they turned them into run-of-the-mill shooters with constant filler combat. I can deal with Bioware writing if the gameplay is engaging - but I struggled to get through Mass Effect 2, and I just couldn't stomach ME3 enough to get through it.

Even though Mass Effect 2 was a big step down, Mass Effect 3 felt like a rush job to me.

I think DA1 was over-rated and DA2 was under-rated. To be honest the only part I absolutely hated about DA-2 was the constant re-use of miserablly small (and uninteresting) 'mazes' (or areas). If they had made them larger, more complex and not reused them many times (using them twice is fine) iI thik it would have been a decent game. DA1 was enjoyable and I don't want to be too critical of it but I thought bg2/iceiwnd dale had better combat mechanics (not so much dnd rules but front/back line issues).
-
I have no clue what to expect from DA3 and will wait for reviews and specific comments (also if it has a ton of dlc I will wait for 'compelte' edition - as this DLC model is making me ill).
-
Not sure how much talent is left at Bioware - seems like a lot has left but not sure.
-
With regards to ME1-2-3 - I liked ME1 quite a bit but also liked ME3 a lot ('cept for the stupid pointless unrelated to-whatever-i-did ending. It is amazing how a few minutes at the end can spoil a fantastic game and it is also utterly stupid. They had a history of your decisions leading up to the end and they could have very easily had incorporated your decisions with the ending.
-
Anyways I don't want to predict that DA3 will be good or bad but rather wait and see. Oh i guess it will be an origin game so that is also an insta wait till $5 requirment as I don't expect origin to exst beyond EA and I think EA is 'doomed' with the move away from publishers (some for UBI/uplay); the days of large in-effiicent publishers is all but over.

Erm…

(Re)play NWN 1 and NWN 2 then tell me DA:O is overrated. It is not. It is exactly what NWNs should have been or should I say, DA:O was NWNs upgraded and enhanced so damned good it's almost unbelievable. You don't think both NWNs were rubbish? Well, I do. And I also think that DA:O was a great game. Not without flaws, of course, but why would I go nitpicking it now?

DA2 is not underrated. What they did was polishing the gameplay and dumbing down everything else. Story, visuals, sound, enemy mechanics (and AI), etc… Everything was worse than in DA1. I'm not saying they shouldn't have touched the gameplay. But it is not Tetris to concentrate only on gameplay and let everything else to rot!

Well daggerford on nwn is really good

Just curious, but for those who enjoyed it, what parts of DA2 were enjoyable or well executed?

I only ask because, despite the following comment from the original article, he only points out DAII's shortcomings... I've noticed many people who claim to have enjoyed DAII(to some degree anyway) find it hard to qualify/quantify the reasons.

I however, fall into a middle ground, appreciating the game for what it did well but also recognizing it had many missteps.

Click to expand...

Personally, I thought it was an abortion of a city adventure paired with a disjointed framed narrative...

MasterKromm said:

Just curious, but for those who enjoyed it, what parts of DA2 were enjoyable or well executed?

Click to expand...

First, I don't need a game to be perfect so I can enjoy it and I don't spend my time comparing games between themselves. I play a game and decide if I like it or not based on what it does provide, not what I think it should provide.

Saying that, in DA2, I liked:

• The story: I like the adventurer at home feel of it and the can't do anything in face of destiny plot. I don't need to be a savior every game
• Sarcastic!Hawke
• The characters: I find them more interesting than the DAO ones (companions and NPCs, having most of them recurring through the game might have helped with this though)
• The combat: I consider it improved over DAO, the only thing combat wise I liked less than in DAO was how the combo works and rogue losing their utility role except for lock-picking.

I also love the DA settings and DA2 was filled with new lore.

MasterKromm said:

Just curious, but for those who enjoyed it, what parts of DA2 were enjoyable or well executed?

Click to expand...

I didn't liked most of the game but I can be objective (when not angry).
What I liked about the game:
The Qunari plot.
Siding with the Templars quest line.
Some of the companions:
Merril was an odd character, but was very enjoyable.
Sebastian, was my kind of character from the beginning, in terms of ideal/vision/opinions.
Bethany, was a good character (my favorite). The fact I cared about her until the last part of the game (SPOILER), and finally was relieved when she was safe.
I think I can write a book with the things I didn't liked.

The elements of DAII I liked were:

• I enjoyed the sense of having a family and belonging to a community, with a house, internal problems, and written communications with the rest of the city.
• I particularly liked the two rogue characters, Isabella and Varric. They both had personality; Varric felt like a good-natured scamp while Isabella seemed like a female pirate out of a Conan novel.
• The artwork was pretty decent, conversations were fluid for the most part, and a number of the extended battles were quite enjoyable.
• Some elements of the game design felt well done. The rogue-specific combat abilities made them feel more useful in battle. The lightweight interface felt polished and didn't get in the way. Character special abilities seemed balanced. The character-specific armor was irritating at first, but it grew on me.

Overall, I enjoyed the game despite some of the annoyances. But it wouldn't be my first pick for a sequel.

I feel joxer nailed it. Don't forget DA1 was supposed to be a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate, and in my opinion it was. That's what we wanted from Bioware and for the most part they delivered. I think everyone wanted and was expecting more of the same for DA2. I was hoping that DA2 was going to take the same formula and tighten in up a bit while continuing the story. DA2 was a dramatic change and was unpopular because of it.

DA:O was indeed supposed to be a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gates. You can think it achieved that as you can think it did not.

MasterKromm said:

Just curious, but for those who enjoyed it, what parts of DA2 were enjoyable or well executed?

I only ask because, despite the following comment from the original article, he only points out DAII's shortcomings… I've noticed many people who claim to have enjoyed DAII(to some degree anyway) find it hard to qualify/quantify the reasons.

Personally, I thought it was an abortion of a city adventure paired with a disjointed framed narrative…

Click to expand...

For me, it was:
1) Varric
2) Some of the party banter
3) er...that's about it I guess.

Varric struck me as the one character who was well-executed and more than satisfactorily fulfilled his intended role. Not original or even brilliant, but well done nevertheless.

spiraling69 said:

DA2 was a dramatic change and was unpopular because of it.

Click to expand...

To me, that was a big part of the problem. They were trying to lead the audience toward a system approach where they didn't want to go, rather than looking for a new audience. Taken by itself, DA2 may just have been accepted as a semi-typical action console game.

DA2 was a fricking rushjob. All the talk about "change of direction" or "new approach" was just a smoke and mirror PR newspeak to paper over this fact.