Dragon Age 3: Inquisition announced

[Mem]

The masses' opinion isn't necessarily the same as your opinion. DAI feels like a response to all negative feedback DA2 got, in the first place.

When I say masses I mean all the hot topic threads about the changes in DA:I that people hate,they were in previous DA games.

I'm never a fan of anything being dumbed down in any game.

 

[Red Hawk]

When I say masses I mean all the hot topic threads about the changes in DA:I that people hate,they were in previous DA games.

I'm never a fan of anything being dumbed down in any game.

That isn't necessarily a reflection of the masses, either. People who are discontent are much more likely to get online and talk about it at length than people who are content with the game.

 

[zinfamous]

You have to accept it. It is reality that the combat system is simple. You don't have to agree with something to accept it. You can accept that the combat system is bad, but still choose to enjoy the other parts of the game. What I'm saying is to overlook some of the issues with the game to enjoy the rest of the good parts. That doesn't mean you shouldn't speak out against the stuff you didn't like. Do it, maybe they will make the changes. These types of games don't come out very often, so don't pass up an incredible world to explore because the combat is lacking.

I mean, combat in Skyrim was absolutely dreadful--but it's probably my favorite game of the...decade or so.

couple of things:

--I do not mourn the lack of healing spells in DAI. In fact, I'm glad they are gone. Screw healing. It was always a resource waste, anyway, and you're almost always better off working to prevent damage and kill stuff before it can ever hurt you (doesn't mean damage will never happen, but the idea is to spend less time making red bars go up, and more time killing). Good riddance.

--It does feel more open world, and it also feels very gated, as with DAO, though it's not like you can run from region to region endlessly. It doesn't feel MMO-like to me--outside of the map design being somewhat similar to ToR. At least, I don't have 6 useless skill bars in my face and covering 30% of the screen. I'm not running into random players camping out at a bear cave or cybersexing in some corner of the woods near some elf temple.

 

[Mem]

It depends on what you must have in the game to enjoy it. From what you have said, you have a very specific formula for combat and character distribution that you need out of a game to enjoy it. From a game developer point of view, I doubt they want to keep making the same structure for a game over and over. They'd like to explore new mechanics, much like the Final Fantasy series has done over the years. For me, these games have mostly been about the story, character progression, and exploration. The combat has always been secondary for me, so I'm not as affected.

Perhaps a good way to enjoy these games is to not focus so much on the combat aspects and try to wring more out of the ambiance and story, because there is certainly a lot of that.

I never understand any games company that dumbs down their third game and removes stuff that's my main concern,I'm all for open big worlds when they work great,DA:I in many ways is over hyped from its great game or game of the year rating IMHO.

I'm pretty flexible with my RPGs since I like it all from Planescape Torment to Witcher series.

DA:I feels like a lot is missing to me,could of been a better game but they had to change too much of the good things from previous DA games and make it worst not better.

I'm already stuck on skills since all slots used up already,don't developers play these games and think they might use more then eight skills,I'm going back over old ground again but it's just too many obvious things as you probably know.

I do miss the attribute points as well on characters,auto level of them in DA:I is no fun and can never understand why they removed that as well,dumbing down again and again.

Ironically if you jump into DA:I and never played the first two DA games then you probably would not know any better.
So for me too many annoying negative or bad changes that all add up.


Change works when it's an improvement,not the other way around.

 

[KeithTalent]

How is this a valid complaint? They created a straight, female character and you want to complain that she wouldn't experiment with your female toon? Hopefully you don't have the same expectations of real life.

Alistair and Morrigan were straight, Zevran and Leliana were bisexual. That's already a healthy bit of diversity, right there.

Everyone being bisexual in DA2 actually kills cast diversity, and it was just Bioware feeding into the fan desire to virtually romance whoever they wanted, regardless of how the NPC have been originally conceived. Forget playing a role where you have to be straight and of the opposite sex of a straight NPC, just bang whoever you want. That makes sense.

That's not how it works in real life, and mirroring that in a game helps give it a lot more believability.

In my opinion, obviously.

Not really a complaint, was just disappointed because I liked Morrigan. /shrug

KT

 

[bystander36]

You have to accept it. It is reality that the combat system is simple. You don't have to agree with something to accept it. You can accept that the combat system is bad, but still choose to enjoy the other parts of the game. What I'm saying is to overlook some of the issues with the game to enjoy the rest of the good parts. That doesn't mean you shouldn't speak out against the stuff you didn't like. Do it, maybe they will make the changes. These types of games don't come out very often, so don't pass up an incredible world to explore because the combat is lacking.

It really depends on what you find to be a good combat system. I personally find the combat fun, though you need to hit your teens before it can really shine. If you explore the combos, and how to create synergies within your party or your own skills, the combat becomes a lot more interesting.

With my dual wield rogue, I learned how to use his stealth well, and that staying in combat was not how he is best played. I learned to bounce around the battlefield, how to position and pounce at the right times. He became a lot more fun once I realized how he played best.

With my Rift Mage, I found there is great synergy with "pull of the Abyss" and fire mine, and stonefist. Now stuff is dying left and right. I spec'ed Vivienne to initiate combos with lightning and freeze. Now she sets them up, and my character gets AE damage when he uses Stonefist.

I'm saving 2h warrior for my next play through, which has great synergies with mages and battle field control.

 

[Mem]

Not really a complaint, was just disappointed because I liked Morrigan. /shrug

KT

Hehe I always play a male character in RPGs so I can romance the females .

I leave female alts to MMORPGs.

 

[Subyman]

I never understand any games company that dumbs down their third game and removes stuff that's my main concern,I'm all for open big worlds when they work great,DA:I in many ways is over hyped from its great game or game of the year rating IMHO.

I'm pretty flexible with my RPGs since I like it all from Planescape Torment to Witcher series.

DA:I feels like a lot is missing to me,could of been a better game but they had to change too much of the good things from previous DA games and make it worst not better.

I'm already stuck on skills since all slots used up already,don;t developers play these games and think they might use more then eight skills,I'm going back over old ground again but it's just too many obvious things as you probably know.

I do miss the attribute points as well on characters,auto level of them in DA:I is no fun and can never understand why they removed that as well,dumbing down again and again.

Ironically if you jump into DA:I and never played the first two DA games then you probably would not know any better.

I played DA:O, Awakening, all the DLC, and part of DA2. I'm not against them trying new stuff. I don't think they nailed the combat with DA:I. I enjoyed DA:O's more. I've decided to play DA:I differently because of it. In DA:O I always paused and issued commands. In DA:I, I run and gun and pause every now and then if the AI is wigging out. This change hasn't really affected how much I enjoy the game, not as much as you. I got my fill of great tactical combat in Divinity and am enjoying a faster paced experience right now.

Do you plan to finish the game?

 

[KeithTalent]

Hehe I always play a male character in RPGs so I can romance the females .

I leave female alts to MMORPGs.

I don't know why but I always end up making a female character in these games. Maybe that says something about me.

KT

 

[bystander36]

Not really a complaint, was just disappointed because I liked Morrigan. /shrug

KT

As far as disappointments go, I'm not really liking the straight male romance options. I liked DA:O and DA2's options much better.

 

[Mem]

It really depends on what you find to be a good combat system. I personally find the combat fun, though you need to hit your teens before it can really shine. If you explore the combos, and how to create synergies within your party or your own skills, the combat becomes a lot more interesting.

With my dual wield rogue, I learned how to use his stealth well, and that staying in combat was not how he is best played. I learned to bounce around the battlefield, how to position and pounce at the right times. He became a lot more fun once I realized how he played best.

With my Rift Mage, I found there is great synergy with "pull of the Abyss" and fire mine, and stonefist. Now stuff is dying left and right. I spec'ed Vivienne to initiate combos with lightning and freeze. Now she sets them up, and my character gets AE damage when he uses Stonefist.

I'm saving 2h warrior for my next play through, which has great synergies with mages and battle field control.

Combat is a bit boring to me,limited to eight spells you just end up spamming same ones over and over(apart from cooldowns),mage starts same way ie barrier up and chooses one of the limited spells,yes fun not,in DAO and and DA2 you could have more fun in combat with spells with mages.

I'm not talking about being overpowered because that's all down to level you play at and gear plus also how well you adjust your attribute points etc...

Cooldowns on spells in DA:I as well means you end up spamming default staff range attacks,in DAO and DA2 you had more spells with different cooldowns so had far more options in combat.

Now mage in DA:I is almost like a range version of hack and slash melee character,they really can't make mages much worst.

 

[ControlD]

I don't believe I have ever pursued a romance in any RPG. I sort of forget that part of the game is even there.

 

[Mem]

I don't believe I have ever pursued a romance in any RPG. I sort of forget that part of the game is even there.

Depends if the character is interesting or not,so all to do with storyline etc...


In DA:I I have not bothered so far ,says it all really .

 

[zinfamous]

As far as disappointments go, I'm not really liking the straight male romance options. I liked DA:O and DA2's options much better.

sex up Iron Bull as a male Inquisitor.

 

[zinfamous]

Depends if the character is interesting or not,so all to do with storyline etc...


In DA:I I have not bothered so far ,says it all really .

takes a while to develop in DAI compared to DAO.

 

[ControlD]

There is something about the combat in this game, and also in DA2, that I really didn't pick up on early enough and I really don't think either game does much to explain it either.

Combat is all about combos. Sure, you can just go in Rambo style and whack anything that moves, but to really start enjoying the game you need to learn the various Starter / Detonator / Status combinations that are available. I am really just starting to get a handle on a lot of the combos out there, but once you get one down the combat changes quite drastically for the better.

Perhaps this is why I don't care that much anymore about being limited to just 8 skill slots. Those 8 skill slots become a lot more interesting when I start thinking about how they can be Starters / Detonators that work in conjunction with my other party character's 8 skills. It is really awesome to pull of something like throwing knockout powder on a group of enemies with Varric followed by a whirlwind attack from Iron Bull. Or simper combos like Winter's Grasp from me and then a shield bash from Cassandra.

Using combos really requires going into the tactical combat mode however.

 

[Mem]

I played DA:O, Awakening, all the DLC, and part of DA2. I'm not against them trying new stuff. I don't think they nailed the combat with DA:I. I enjoyed DA:O's more. I've decided to play DA:I differently because of it. In DA:O I always paused and issued commands. In DA:I, I run and gun and pause every now and then if the AI is wigging out. This change hasn't really affected how much I enjoy the game, not as much as you. I got my fill of great tactical combat in Divinity and am enjoying a faster paced experience right now.

Do you plan to finish the game?

I played first two DA games as mage healer,obviously in the third that's out due to dumbing down or removal,whatever you want to call it.

As to DA:I yes I plan to finish the game and get my money's worth but little at a time,might play a bit tonight see how I feel,does not have me hooked like previous DA games.

Never know might get a great new patch down the road,I hear one is in the works for PC controls.

Btw I enjoyed Divinity Sin(very good game).


Side note I even tried multiplayer in DA:I anybody else tried that?...I do find you get a lot of players leaving or waiting awhile for players to join in MP.

 

[Red Hawk]

As far as disappointments go, I'm not really liking the straight male romance options. I liked DA:O and DA2's options much better.

I like Cassandra. In general I like religious types, since I myself am a religious person and try to make my primary player characters in these games religious. Dragon Age is pretty good with that; there's Cassandra, but also Leliana in DAO and Sebastian, the DLC character, for female player characters in DA2 (speaking of whom, it is worth noting that Sebastian is a straight love interest in DA2).

I did enjoy romancing Morrigan in DAO, because mmmmmmm first of all, and secondly because there is some interesting character depth to her. I fully acknowledge that she's quite a bit of a sociopath and I would not try a relationship with her real life. That said, my import into DA2 and DAI did romance Morrigan; it was something like my 4th playthrough of DAO, a Dalish elf who wasn't quite supposed to be a reflection of myself.

Alistair makes for a "cute" romance for my female Warden playthrough, and I like how you can end up as his queen. No interest in Zevran.

DA2...bleh. Isabela makes for a kind of interesting character, but as a love interest? Stay 10 feet away from my bedroom, woman. I'd rather not go where half of Thedas has gone before. Merrill...she's not actively repulsive like Isabela, I just don't find her attractive. For femHawke, Anders and Fenris...meh. Sebastian is interesting, but I haven't actually finished a DA2 femHawke playthrough to find out how that ends.

Aveline was the most appealing female to me, and I tried to make advances on her...only to have the game pull the rug out from under me and make it so she isn't interested in me, no matter what I do. In one sense, it's a realistic approach to relationships -- not everyone is going to be open to a relationship with you, that's just life. On the other, it's a shame that it leaves the game with no interesting romances for my male Hawke, personally.

As I said already, I like Cassandra. Like, really, really like her. I like her devotion, her determination, her desire to make the Seekers and the Chantry better. Josephine I can see as an enjoyable romance as well. I foresee either Cullen or Blackwall as good romances for my femInquisitor. Sera can go jump in a Fade rift, as I've already talked about. Dorian is a great character, but that's just never going to happen in my playthroughs.

Iron Bull...you know, people talk like Iron Bull is the breakout character of DAI, but to me, he's the least interesting of the whole bunch. Mildly entertaining. He's no Wrex, Mordin, Garrus, Varric, etc.

 

[ControlD]

As I said already, I like Cassandra. Like, really, really like her. I like her devotion, her determination, her desire to make the Seekers and the Chantry better. J

I feel a little dirty just having read that.

 

[Red Hawk]

takes a while to develop in DAI compared to DAO.

Meant to comment on this too. Yeah, in DAO, after a few conversations with Morrigan as early as Lothering, you're already making out with her. In fact, making out is the start of that romantic relationship. DAI is more mature in that there's more of a progression to relationships. And there's a bit more to the relationships than just building their approval with you until you can bang them.

Morrigan's " 'Tis cold in my tent, all alone..." line is always fun, though. "Have I ever licked a lamp post in winter?" is even better.

 

[facetman]

I like Sara's banter with Vivian- Makes me LOL. I think both Cassandra and Josephine have attractive personalities- but both are not attractive physically IMHO. Much preferred Liliana or Morrigan. But hey -it not all about what someone looks like -right?? After all this is fantasy isn't it.

I just read that if you put on " chance to stagger" on your bow it wont work unless you are in melee range- WHAT !!

 

[escrow4]

There didn't seem to be many choices in Inquisition at all. And your choices amounted to next to nothing. Apart from Orlais and the Wardens - ? DA: 2 and even Origins had more. You also couldn't really influence the world at all, which was a cop out. Why couldn't you burn down the chantry permanently as I was dying to do? You can't shape the world really at all. I'd say the next stage of RPGs would be choices that are random and may not even be replicated. Not "set" choices. Every play-through has the potential to be 100% different. But then consoles wouldn't be able to handle it . . . .

 

[StinkyPinky]

I decided to wait on Inquisition and just grab DA2 for ten bucks instead. I'm only about 10 hours into it, but I am loving the game. Not really sure why it received all of the hate. Yes, there are some stupid things (no choosing armour for companions is what I find the most annoying) but overall it feels like I was just plunked into a different part of the world from DA:O. The story and characters, which is what I loved about the first one, seem to be about on par so far.

At this rate I will be on to Inquisition by the new year and it sounds like I am in for more of the same, which is great.

KT

Dragon Age 2 was a mostly fun game. However it gets worse the more you play it as you come across recycled map after recycled map.

IMO it's clearly the weakest of the three games but I have never thought of it as "bad", but rather just a lazy game that wasn't up to Bioware's usually very high standards. I would still seriously suggest that any fan of RPG's plays it however. It's basically Mass Effect in a fantasy setting, and the core combat was actually fun.

 

[Red Hawk]

There didn't seem to be many choices in Inquisition at all. And your choices amounted to next to nothing. Apart from Orlais and the Wardens - ? DA: 2 and even Origins had more. You also couldn't really influence the world at all, which was a cop out. Why couldn't you burn down the chantry permanently as I was dying to do? You can't shape the world really at all. I'd say the next stage of RPGs would be choices that are random and may not even be replicated. Not "set" choices. Every play-through has the potential to be 100% different. But then consoles wouldn't be able to handle it . . . .

I feel like I've made pretty significant choices so far. What you're talking about doesn't sound like it'd be possible in a video game on any platform, at least not a game with the level of intricacy and nuance to the plot and characters as a BioWare game. We're a long, long way off from computers being able to spontaneously write stuff. Random but detailed scenarios is more the realm of game masters for pen & paper RPGs.

 

[bystander36]

Combat is a bit boring to me,limited to eight spells you just end up spamming same ones over and over(apart from cooldowns),mage starts same way ie barrier up and chooses one of the limited spells,yes fun not,in DAO and and DA2 you could have more fun in combat with spells with mages.

I'm not talking about being overpowered because that's all down to level you play at and gear plus also how well you adjust your attribute points etc...

Cooldowns on spells in DA:I as well means you end up spamming default staff range attacks,in DAO and DA2 you had more spells with different cooldowns so had far more options in combat.

Now mage in DA:I is almost like a range version of hack and slash melee character,they really can't make mages much worst.

In normal combat, my mage is almost casting spells 100% of the time, once I got into my teens. You want to pick up the frost mage 50% regen ability along with the fade walk thing. Then with fire, when you crit it lets your next spell be cast without a cooldown and I have 46% chance to crit. That means I get a crit almost every immolate and fire mine I cast. Then, because of mana difficulties, Rift mage has an ability that gives you mana based on 10% of the damage you do against weakend enemy (all Rift mage abilities weaken), so that always caps off my mana when casting stonefist. As a result of the build, I am casting almost 100% of the time. The only time I'm not is against Dragons, as I'm bouncing between all my characters trying to position them.

Edit: I was just playing, and noticing that my mage casts about 90% of the time. I'll usually get in about 5-8 spells before I have to slow down most time. My typical start is Pull of the Abyss, Fire Mine, wait 1 second, Stonefist, then often, I get in a crit cycle with stonefist or fire mine, and cast about 3 more spells before I slow down. Of course, most the time everything is dead by then, but different resists sometimes play a factor.

Now you did mention something I do find annoying, and that is games which make all 3 archtypes fight the same. Where mages, rogues and warriors all feel like the same character. I think the absolute worst example I've seen of that was Asheron's Call 2. I can see how it applies a bit here, but they do all seem to fight different from my experience.