Dragon Age: Inquisition - Review Roundup # 5

Not amazingly, reviews for Dragon Age: Inquistion are still pouring in from the smaller, more obscure sites.

Gamengage gives it an 8.5/10 and has the following to say:

Dragon Age: Inquisition is strangely addicting. Yep it’s a little surprising to be saying after the miserable failure that was Dragon Age 2. It was widely anticipated that Dragon Age: Inquisition was a bit of a tossup when it came to the expected quality. I went into the game with an open mind and I am grateful that I did. Without worrying about the creators and publishers of Dragon Age: Inquisition I was able to actually enjoy the game as it was intended.

Click to expand...

GameCritics.com didn't enjoy it quite as much and gave it a 6.5/10.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is a frustrating game. I often found myself scratching and clawing through boring, MMO-like content for enough power points to progress to the next major plot event. However, the fact that I was willing to slog through it at all shows just how good this game can be when it hits its stride. The dichotomy between the narrative parts and all that shoddy fetchquesting is a shame because when it hits those high notes, Inquisition is an absolutely beautiful experience.

Click to expand...

The Koalition however calls it "Savior of the Industry" and finds only tacked-on multiplayer and a bug, which locks up the game during conversations, to be critique-worthy. The final score is 95/100.

There is more that can be said about this game but it really is one of those titles that has to be experienced to be appreciated. Granted that RPGs aren’t for everyone but fans of the genre will find little to complain about here. Bioware have truly gone out of their way to deliver one of the most deeply satisfying titles out there. A game of this scope is rare and having it released in a year where nearly every major title disappointed makes it stand out even more. Dragon Age: Inquisition is the title that the game industry needed.

Click to expand...

More information.

The game is getting a large number of negative reviews showing up in metacritic. The same phenomenon happened with DA2. Not sure if this is just a reflection of all the BioWare haters out there, or an indication of a real problem.

The quote from gamecritics.com nails the game perfectly.
The score however is unfair.

Koalition seems played only multiplayer part.

For DA2 phenomenon it was an utter disappointment with the game after all praise it got from (paid to praise) reviews.
That game was dull and empty. People bought it just to discover everyone, from EA to Bioware and major critic sites, everyone lied. It all looked like a pure scam.
It was not a scam, of course, but tell that to a player who expected DA:O sequel and got something that is anything, just not DA:O.

Superlow scores to DA3 is another phenomenon IMO. Honestly, it's not just slightly above average game, it's highly above average. Without grinding and with proper inventory system (and we deserve it!) it'd be, as someone already said, a pure gold.
But if a developer says and promises "we're making a game with PC as the main platform", and delivers a port of a console grinder, people will get angry. And instead of being objective, all people will notice is DA3's trio horriblicus:
grinding, retarded inventory and unfriendly controls.

Just one thing you should spot on metacritic.
D:OS is 1 point above DA3's critic score and customers are also praising it.
It's only you who can think and say how come. What D:OS has that made it more likeable than AAA title both from critics and audience.

It's honestly a good game.

On the pc, however, it's an exercise in frustration. The movement, camera, UI and mundane things like searching and picking up items are HORRIBLY done.

Especially as a melee class. It helps a lot to be ranged and just stand and pause, target, fire - not moving.

Half the time you'll be fighting a camera that clips through geometry in combat, changes direction on a whim, and when you DO get to the enemy you want to hit, movement will jerk you 'round the battlefield, through/past your intended target, firing abilities into the air or at a rabbit hiding behind the tree your camera is now inside. Next up - searching and looting - with all the same issues.

And don't even get me started on the inventory… ughhhhh.

I cannot believe the level of incompetence that went into actually *doing* stuff in this game. When you have decent spots between the jankiness, the game emerges, and it is damn good.

But MAN do you have to wade through shit as a pc player to get to the game…

Personally I'd say 7/10. Fun, but nothing I want to play through a second time, because way too much tedium.

Hamsternator said:

It's honestly a good game.
On the pc, however, it's an exercise in frustration.

Click to expand...

Yeah, pretty much my thoughts exactly. I'm really enjoying the game a great deal (have been playing it tons since release and feel like I have many more hours to go). However, if someone were to ask me whether they should buy, I'd recommend (at least for now) strictly picking it up on the new consoles. I feel those were the obvious target platforms and that PC was (as is typical with large publishers) an after-thought platform that didn't get the full QA cycle it deserved.

Disregarding the clumsy controls, many, MANY people have had severe crashing problems and other oddities that are easily reproduced on a variety of systems and were obviously known issues when the game was shipped to production. They simply decided that it was more risky/costly to miss the holiday shopping season on the new consoles than it was to release a buggy PC version for us "master race" types.

Which is a bummer… I've been lucky enough to have a relatively bug-free experience, aside from the minor, expected glitch here or there. But my wife, who actually has a superior machine to mine, ran into all sorts of problems and nearly gave up on the game, until we finally managed to solve her issues with some old-school jury-rigging courtesy of the Bioware forums.

Bioware… EA… one of you… own up to the crappy job QA'ing the PC version and fix your dang-blasted game.

Imho, as long as the PC sales continue to do well despite the way they treat PC, they will also continue to give PC the same crappy treatment. There's just no incentive for them to put resources into improving the PC version if PC players will continue to buy the game despite the way it handles

If you're implying that PC gamers who bought the game on release deserve to be burned, I tend to agree with you. However... that's a sad state of affairs that we literally can't buy a major publisher PC game on release anymore without fear of it running like a steaming turd.

Well thanks for the reviews anyway. This seemed to be getting sufficiently good reviews I was contemplating getting it but I think it sounds like it could use some patches and refinement of controls (though I do have an XBox controller for PC and dont mind using it when well supported).

It sounds like a good one to wait for sale though EA is getting better about waiting a long time before dropping price if it sells well enough on release. Anyway I suppose I have enough to play as it is.

problem is if people don't buy thr PC version we will not even get it because the crappy quality is never the reason why people don't buy for them but rather they blame the platform.

I'm not buying this game. I'm a PC gamer through and through, and I've now read enough negative reviews from 'actual PC players' to know that I need to steer clear of this one.

All I can say is thank god for Metacritic!

joxer said:

The quote from gamecritics.com nails the game perfectly.
The score however is unfair.

Koalition seems played only multiplayer part.

For DA2 phenomenon it was an utter disappointment with the game after all praise it got from (paid to praise) reviews.
That game was dull and empty. People bought it just to discover everyone, from EA to Bioware and major critic sites, everyone lied. It all looked like a pure scam.
It was not a scam, of course, but tell that to a player who expected DA:O sequel and got something that is anything, just not DA:O.

Superlow scores to DA3 is another phenomenon IMO. Honestly, it's not just slightly above average game, it's highly above average. Without grinding and with proper inventory system (and we deserve it!) it'd be, as someone already said, a pure gold.
But if a developer says and promises "we're making a game with PC as the main platform", and delivers a port of a console grinder, people will get angry. And instead of being objective, all people will notice is DA3's trio horriblicus:
grinding, retarded inventory and unfriendly controls.

Just one thing you should spot on metacritic.
D:OS is 1 point above DA3's critic score and customers are also praising it.
It's only you who can think and say how come. What D:OS has that made it more likeable than AAA title both from critics and audience.

Click to expand...

The score is fairly typical for Game Critics, though. Dragon Age II got a ridiculously low grade (even for that disappointing game), Witcher II received a bad review as well. In the case of Game Critics, it’s best to ignore the actual grades and just read the review and agree or disagree.

Regarding user reviews on Metacritic, the PS4 average actually sounds reasonable – a 7.5, which considering the fact that DA:I has some major weaknesses is pretty good. It’s what I would give DA:I if I average my bad DA:I experiences (6-ish) and my good DA:I experiences (8-ish). While too low, it does seem that the PC and Xbone Metacritic user ratings somewhat reflect the relative quality – the Xbone version being somewhat less pretty, the PC version having bad controls and plenty of bugs.

SonOfCapiz said:

Imho, as long as the PC sales continue to do well despite the way they treat PC, they will also continue to give PC the same crappy treatment. There's just no incentive for them to put resources into improving the PC version if PC players will continue to buy the game despite the way it handles

Click to expand...

I am not sure it is this black and white. I mean if PC users stop buying the games it is more likely they would just stop making them for the PC. Why make games for PC if no one buys them?

Bug wise it is often those who buy the early games who help make the game better for the rest of you who wait … even if it should be done by the company of course. Again if no one brought them and waited … they might be waiting a very long time.

I wonder what the tipping point is and how much longer companies will even bother with making PC versions of games. Consoles seem to be the bigger market and if the PC versions tend to cause the most headaches for companies it raises the question of why do they continue making them? Obviously there is still a market but it is certainly not what it once was.

In regards to the issues around the PC ... I tend to disagree. I have got 80 hours in the game now without a single crash. I have seen bugs (the assassin one being annoying but found plenty of solutions at least) but nothing game breaking at the moment. Many issues tend to be users who have very unusual set-ups, beta drivers, old drivers, pirated copies they don't disclose, and problems they have caused themselves. Of course there are plenty of very valid bugs and complaints but having done tech support I know just how often many problems are really on the user side - especially in this day and age where it seems no one has the patience to try and think things through on their own.

I am glad I don't read metacritic and instead avoid obvious extreme feedback on either side (good and bad) and base my purchase decision on a fairly thorough review.

I find the game to be about an 8 and I should finish it tonight or tomorrow I think. Parts of it are an easy 6 (fetching, grinding, some of the controls) but other parts are a 10 in regards to story, companions, and overall "fun" factor which is, of course, subjective.

The controls are not that horrible once you get use to them. They could be a hell of a lot better ... but I think people just like to use a lot of hyperbole and exaggeration on forums. Another reason I tend to take places like metacritic with a bucketful of salt.

Actually the game has more problems on consoles than on PC.
I have yet to see corrupted saves reports and gamestopper problem on PC (and I did check almost all threads on EA answers HQ), crashes on consoles are frequently reported.

wolfgrimdark said:

pirated copies

Click to expand...

The game is not being pirated on PC, so… No.

One thing though. People think something is bugged because they don't read and are used to grinders for braindead people. Or they lack of imagination.
For example, there are reports on Vivienne not possible to recruit. In fact, some people, for whatever reason, are trying to recruit her with (nonexisting) wartable mission. Go figure.
Another example, some astrarium puzzles have additional stars and people report it as a bug. It's not a bug, those stars are deliberately there to make the puzzle at least a bit harder.

Oddly, noone reported the power amulets bug I've mentioned about certain party member (and in fact it's not just his amulets but also any power amulets and also you can use the same exploit for getting more schematics).
DA3 is not Skyrim. I can safely say it has less bugs than Skyrim with final patch applied. What I don't understand from the community is deliberate hiding obvious exploits and reporting stuff that's not broken as bugs.

wolfgrimdark said:

I wonder what the tipping point is and how much longer companies will even bother with making PC versions of games. Consoles seem to be the bigger market and if the PC versions tend to cause the most headaches for companies it raises the question of why do they continue making them? Obviously there is still a market but it is certainly not what it once was.

Click to expand...

Actually, the PC gaming market is larger than consoles right now (this is hardware sales comparison, it compare gaming accessories and full rig sales. Consoles were on top of PCs for years).

Yeah a qwerty keyboard designed around 1900 and a mouse is the final pinnacle of all game design, ever.

I'm happy they're designing games for controllers. My main criticism is that they didn't implement the PS4 touch pad. Playing this on the PS4, only about 20 hours so far (not far in because of restart-iris) and only had one crash.

azarhal said:

Actually, the PC gaming market is larger than consoles right now (this is hardware sales comparison, it compare gaming accessories and full rig sales. Consoles were on top of PCs for years).

Click to expand...

Okay that was unexpected! Thanks for linking to that. Totally my bad. For some reason I thought consoles were still in the lead as far as top gaming device. Probably biased in my opinion though since I like to blame consoles for a variety of negative (well what I see as negative) changes to games.

Despite a declining overall PC market, gaming systems are alive and well. So alive, in fact, that the PC gaming segment is already twice the size of the console gaming market – and growing

Click to expand...

It does beg the question than why some companies (not just EA) seem to put so little focus on the quality of their game for a PC.

@Joxer - also nice to know the game, so far, hasn't been pirated. Things change so fast I wasn't sure if someone had figured it out yet or not. I do know, based on past articles and comments in forums, that people do get cracked copies then complain about bugs that can be caused by using a pirated version.

@Ovenall - A PC can offer more to a game than just a mouse and a keyboard.

wolfgrimdark said:

It does beg the question than why some companies (not just EA) seem to put so little focus on the quality of their game for a PC.

Click to expand...

It's was an unexpected shift to analysts, that's why. They expected mobile to overtake PC in 2014 (with people ditching their old PCs for tablets). So everything in development in the last 2 years is going to be "off" from the market.

Consoles and their inferior hardware were killing the industry for ages.
Guess why am I allergic on checkpoints. It's not a design to make things more challenging. It's a design to cover the limited storage options on old consoles. Endless respawns? The same thing, they couldn't save changes a player made in the world so nothing could be killed or destroyed for good.

And phones are a reason for another trend. Dumbing everything down just because phones can't run stuff and some schmucks just have to release their game also on phones. Sorry but I'm disgusted.

If you're making a PC game with crap controls when it comes to keyboard+mouse on PC, expect a very angry audience. That audience, if they wanted to play a game with a controller, wouldn't buy a PC game. They'd buy console games.
DA3 was supposed to be, according to Bioware, a game with PC as a main platform. Obviously it's not. And people are very, very angry. Metacritic angry. Especially when that same audience paid a fortune for the game.

SonOfCapiz said:

Imho, as long as the PC sales continue to do well despite the way they treat PC, they will also continue to give PC the same crappy treatment. There's just no incentive for them to put resources into improving the PC version if PC players will continue to buy the game despite the way it handles

Click to expand...

I disagree with your logic here. Lower sales will not encourage more development focus. Quite the opposite, it would make Bioware (or insert other AAA developer) think that console focus is the more lucrative path.