The Dragon Age: Inquisition Thread

It wouldn't be the Codex if we didn't bitch about shitty games.

 

I've been playing the DAI multiplayer for the past few days, it's more fun than the actual game. Which is pretty weird, considering how extremely limited the gameplay and (hahahaha) roleplaying system is in the multiplayer, compared even to the singleplayer.

For one, you can only use four abilities and four potions. Yes, eight abilities is too many for the fast-paced combat. There's only three areas - Orlesian chateau, Tevinter ruins and Dalish ruins, randomly filled with three types of enemies - demons, red templars and venatori. There's twelve classes, but only three are available at start - the others have to be unlocked, and it takes time. There's only two ability trees and they are mostly filled with passive abilities - makes sense, considering you only have space for four of them.

Why is it more fun? Because there's a certain challenge as well as reward-failure threshold that makes you look forward to your next fight with the same bunch of enemies. The class system is restricted, but each individual class is given a selection of roles they can play on the battlefield - no two mages are alike. The only real way to get phat loot is by painstakingly gathering the right elements and then crafting it - very little chance of finding anything worthwhile in the ruins/buying at the store. Max level is 20, so you won't have enough ability points to max out either of the two trees - and the only way to respect is to get to max level. I bollocksed my initial Keeper build, making her virtually useless at both defense and offense, and then started over, focusing on maxing out shields to make party members last longer, and took fadewalk to quickly teleport in and out of battle. I'll try playing an elementalist afterwards, and then try to unlock Arcane Warrior.

It's really not much to write home about, not too much variety, and I doubt anyone will remember DAI for its multiplayer - not even shills and biodrones, but it goes to prove one point. Sometimes, in order to make a fun, playable, addictive game, you don't need to reinvent the bicycle, satisfy every expectation, grab stars from the sky and create pure genius.

Sometimes you just need to not make it awful. Keeping it simple and to the point has a higher chance of success than far-fetched projects that actively sabotage themselves in a deluded attempt to be speshul and incloosive. Bioware lacks the talent to make anything beyond brainless actuion-blockbuster entertainment. It was always this way, even in its best days. Any attempt to deviate from this niche ends in disaster - DAII had a godawful melodramatic story that ended up being disjointed and pointless, DAI has a godawful bloated gameplay that's trying to be every popular fantasy series and video game at the same time.

You're a fucking moron if you think Tolkien "changes his mind" in the course of a single paragraph. Tolkien was obsessed with revising and refining every detail of his work, especially worldbuilding material. Whether or not the balrog had actual wings is an irrelevance to the power of irrelevance. He is never shown to be able to fly, even while falling into the abyss or battling Gandalf on top of a mountain peak. Which means, whether the balrog had non-functional wings, or the wings are merely a metaphor for his power/influence - it makes no difference whatsoever to anyone except autists.

 

a) it's a joke? it's obviously a joke. it's a silly concept.
b) do you know what "revising" means? it means -changing.- ie, creating inconsistency. his works are riddled with inconsistency. that's why the "changed his mind over a paragraph" thing is funny. that's what it's all about. his stories are an insane mish-mash of ideas he had at the time presented as history. that they're presented as history and have interconnections does not make them coherent. they were not coherent. the balrog is the epicenter of the incoherence, as a tiny amount of googling will reveal to you.

I'm not surprised you're impressed with Tolkien as your reading level is clearly riiight there

 

Ah... man... who keeps bumping this thread

 

You're wasting your time. Here...

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/the-second-list-of-incline-new-poll.91705/

http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=9453

Don't pay much attention to the actual order of the top 70 list (due to the way the voting was done) More so, look at the list as a whole.

 

It's clear you don't know what any of these words mean, and that revising/changing source material is not tantamount to creating inconsistency. You can create inconsistency without ever revising your writings (in fact, it's almost certain that the less revision you do, the more inconsistencies your writings will contain). Seriously, where the fuck did you get the idea of equating revision with creating inconsistency, are you high, or just really really dumb?

I'm eager to hear these inconsistencies - if Tolkien's works are indeed "riddled" with them, you should have no problem providing 5-10 of the most egregious ones.

How dare Tolkien write a fictional story with the ideas he had at that time, the nerve of that guy. And you're right, being presented as a fictional mythology and being interconnected on numerous narrative and thematic levels does not make them coherent. Being coherent makes them coherent. Since you haven't established any incoherence, your words ring hollow.

Reading comprehension problems? As I said, there's nothing incoherent or inconsistent about the balrog. It would be inconsistent if the balrog was said to have no wings, but then was able to fly. The whole reason for your autistic tantrum is a single line in LotR where the balrog is described as "spreading his wings" which can be read as either literal or metaphorical, depending on one's reading comprehension ability (the real answer is: the balrog has no wings, the wings mentioned in the line were previously established to be wing-like shadows and not real wings, and there's absolutely no reason to assume that a balrog would have wings, and every reason to assume that he wouldn't - inability to fly, an impossibly huge wingspan, etc).

A brain-dead troglodyte may interpret this as incoherent, because you're used to simplistic scribbles that painstakingly explain every little thing to make it obvious.

 

The inconsistency regarding the Balrogs is because Tolkien Sr. died before he ever really finished these things up. His son, instead of just picking a canon, presented Tolkien's writings as is (as he should have). That's why you get different descriptions of them (it's mostly in regards to their strength and the amount of them). Christopher Tolkien said that he is pretty sure his father settled on very few Balrogs but they were very powerful.

Really the only inconsistency from Tolkien published works is The Hobbit. He had to revise parts of that book to remove Gollum just giving Bilbo the ring after he won the game of riddles. Obviously nobody would part with the ring even if they lost. That's the only thing that Tolkien ever retconned (as far as I can tell). Can't really blame the guy for changing his mind on things that he never got a chance to edit or publish.

 

I'm new here and trying to fit in ,so deal with it.

I'm trying to think what kind of shit went through my mind spending 50 bucks for this crap ,so i made a big rant about it. It's called:

My review of ''Kingdoms of amalur 2'' (Very subtle eh?)

As well all know ,KoA was an interesting game but with so many mmo features that left so many people with a bad taste in their mouth.
The main problems were the fetch quets ,filler quests ,the leveling system ,mediocre story,grinding, the combat was pretty interesting tho but got a little tiresome toward lategame
All these ''perks'' are included in Inquisition but lord ,i tell you, they are worse to some degree.
So enough blabering about KoA and let's get this review started.


Graphics

We all know the famous frostbite engine and what it can do ,so the graphics are pretty good,but a little too colorful and stylish compared to it's predecessors.
-The environments are pretty nice and quite large but sadly ,they feel so empty that most of the time you never care about them.
-Facial animations are worse than ever and i'm quite baffled how could they achive such a feat.Most of the time my inquisitor was frowning and grining like a ''retard'' for no reasons .
-They improved the character models which is quite nice ,but you can see they recycled some animation from it's predecessors.

I'm not going to dwell too much on graphics because they are good ,but we all know that graphics don't make an rpg but it helps at building the immershun.


Sound and Voice Acting

-The soundtrack in this game is pretty sweet at times and it helps building that feeling that you are really there ,sadly the game doesn't want you there.
-The main problem is the voice acting,i don't understand how could they botched one of their main strength in games ,and when i mean botched,it got pretty bad at times.It felt like most of the actors didn't even tried to deliver their lines or didn't care ,or they were simply amateurs because compared to Origins and DA2,Mass Effect they are miles behind.
-The worst are the voices for the protagonist ,they were really bad at delivering their lines when comunicating with a companion ,trying to get close,they were just weak.

I don't know if the budget was a problem but this game was a big Meh in the voice acting department.



Gameplay

Like everyone else i'm going to yell HORRRIBLEEEE!!!

-Playing this game on pc is like playing a Flight sim without a joystick ,that's how bad it is.The tactical view is a mess and it's a disaster to get the right camera angle and this can be shown in so many fights where it's almost imposible to adjust the camera correctly due to size of enemy models and trying to click certain assets.
-If you liked DA2 combat, you'll probably like this. If you preferred the RPG style in DA:O, you'll be disappointed as not much change has occurred here.

Let's watch a small video that they made a few months ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0Dp7HeW9vs

-Did you watched the video ? Now go and play the game..(waiting)…. and exactly,nothing from that video made it into the game,at least not in my game ,maybe it was a dlc promotion and i forgot to buy it…

-And to make it worse ,this game is based on grinding now and you will fight a alot,after a while i just gave up trying to fight smart and just went full retard agaisnt most enemies and hey,it worked.
-I'm not going to talk about classes ,balance because it's just not worth it,i played with a mage, which class they butchered ,having less spells than a facebook game.

I'm going to describe the gameplay in one word ''Disgusting".Feels like an mmo,plays like an mmo.



Story,C&C,Side quests,Companions,Content

And now we got to the culminant part of the review.

Can i just yell HOORRRIBLEEE!!! like in the gameplay section ? Yes i can,because it is.

-Alright, we got another game (typical Bioware title) where you are the only one that can stop everything ,but now you are not just a recruit trying to rise to power ,now you are fluffy and special from the begining.

-You are the only one who can do everything in this game,you are the only one who can collect 50 flowers for a mage,you are the only one who can slay 10 rams for meat ,you are the only one who can refund the game and get your damn money back(Yhea i tried and it didn't work ,not feeling like the chosen one now,eh?)

-Oh lord where do i start,i tried so much to feel involved in the story but i just couldn't ,the characters were so off and they kept throwing names of dukes and duchess that you will never meet in the game,they tried so much to involve you in their bland politics and give you some bland choices which are worse than the first neverwinter game.
-They told us you could visit the capital of Val Roycrap and what do we get instead ,we get a bland section with 3 bland quests for the whole game,well ladi ****** da,way to ruin an experience eh? but i digress.
-The story is subpar even for bioware standards ,i mean yhea, their games were cliche as heck but they were never like this game and Mass effect 3 ,it feels like they fired all the writers after they made mass effect 2 ,which was pretty decent.



C&C
-They told us that you have so many choices that will have dire consequnces,that you can shape the inquisition at your will,that you can change fate of countries ,that you can do so many things once you get to be the leader of the inquisition.Is any of this true? Maybe 0.5% ,because i got 4 choices along the whole damn game if i remember corectly and it didn't change squat ,only 3 sliders at the end of the game.
-You don't have a saying in this game,everything is shoved down your throat by your advisors and the only thing you can say is yay or nay.
You just feel like a puppet the whole game and you as a player because sometimes even the inquisitor does whatever the hell he wants ,without you having to chose a dialogue option.

This is the worst Bioware game to date in term of C&C ,replaying this game is absolutley meaningless,there is nothing to chose ,no factions,no twists,nothing.
Only to grind more power for the sake of grinding and pick more flowers,stones,herbs etc.


The replay value for this game is less than 5%



Side quets

-The only thing that comes in my mind is mmos and Kingdoms of amalur.There are almost no interesting side quests in this game ,beside the ones for companions but those doesn't count,because every bioware game had them.

-I'm fairly sure that 95% percent of this game is made of fetch quests ,filler quests ,kill this crap quests and the main problem is that you don't even get to talk to an NPC to get them.

-Almost every side quest comes from a lousy letter,a diary,by examining a body,touching a weird shaped rock and rarely talking with a peasant that has less than 3 dialogue options and yes the ''Bye'' option counts.
Even tho Kingdoms of Amalur had the same problem,at least most of the quests came from a voiced NPC and a pretty good voice acting as well.

Too much filler crap ruined this game ,for a while i thought i was playing Assasins Creed.

Another part of the game where Bioware failed miserably and tried to appeal the skyrim crowd.At least Skyrim had a lot of intersting side quests.




Companions
Never liked to talk about companions ,because it's always a matter of taste here.Some people like assholes,asskissers and what not.They were good,but the problem was there was no interaction between them like in the other games,they trew a few lines here and there and that's all.
They never felt like a team or something was off,i don't know.





Conclusion
If you like grinding,bad gameplay,mediocre story and poor interaction with the world,this game is 100% made for you.

And there goes 50 bucks down the drain.
And please, excuse my english.


The rating for this game?
5/10


And yes,i'm still crying for those 50 bucks.

 

As far as I see, the thirty seconds of gameplay they show in that video in-between sessions of corporate blathering are exactly like the actual game, except for the tactical cam, which is a bit higher than in the actual game. You also don't realize that tactical cam moves with keyboard and not mouse. Everything else is exactly like the actual game.

 

Glaurung
Seriously dude, change that fucking avatar.

 

Maybe you are a bit blind and deaf ,because i wanted you to listen and watch it at the same time.In those 2 minutes they presented like 10 sec of gameplay and they kept telling how everything is smooth and fluent on pc ,that it feels exactly like Origins.
Well it sure didn't feel like Origins to me,it felt worse even than DA2 .So yhea ,next time please listen and watch at the same time

 

dragonul09

The voice acting is also bad from a technical point of view. It feels like they are in a studio while they talk even in wilderness. It isn't the first BioWare game with this issue. I think the voice acting is a mixed bag. Some are good while others are mediocre. Not worse than many other games in my opinion.

 

lol why?

Maybe you're a bit rude and dumb. Nobody cares what corporate executives and their shills will prattle on about the game, they'll say anything to sell their game. Gameplay footage is the only real indicator, even from a company that deserves trust.

 

Elhoim

I get you two mixed up, it hurts my weak brian.

 

'k.

 

Currently the best thing I can think of them doing in this game was reintroducing race selection, however it doesn't have the impact it did in DA:O. I thought it did, I thought my dwarf was having a hard time because the dialogue specified it as so. Yet playing as an elf, a qunari, and even a cis white male human warrior you get the same crap, just without reason. It's kind of funny, the only reactivity I can think of in that department is the fucking romances, LOL. The reactivity and early c&c is strong there, not really anywhere else.

Also: "INquisitor, it's pr. cold, could you go get some blankets? Be a dear and get me a glass of water and my fucking slippers while you're at it."

 

So is that crazy Jenny girl hot at least?

 

You mean the dike elf? Not really, she looks like she was raised in a gutter and has OMG SO RANDUM!!!1! humor like DA2's "clever" Hawke.

 

To be fair, making some of the romances race-restricted is for Bioware fans the C&C equivalent of shutting out half the game.

 

Actually come to think of it the most c&c is probably at the war table. The quests are branching, you can fail them, the outcome and rewards at the end vary on the path you took.(Agents you assigned.)
Too bad they didn't bother to make any of it playable .

 

Playing "clever" Hawke is a guilty pleasure of mine. DA 2 is the only game in which playing an inane cretinous jackass is fully supported.

 

Just because I'm about to go watch The Hobbit...

It's been a while since I read LOTR but I'm pretty sure Gandalf's 'powering up' vs. the Balrog is still as deus-ex-machina as ever. Tolkien wrote himself into a hole, literally, with Gandalf's fall in Moria so as to further the plot along the path of the little men - again, literally - making all the difference. But then he didn't want to just kill off Gandalf, because that'd be too, you know, against the Christian metaphor he was writing. So instead Tolkien has Gandalf defeat the Balrog in a scene that in Jackson's adaptation is the most blatant example of a 'holy fuck how do we portray this utterly illogical fight' seen on film. It's up there with Yoda fighting Count Dooku except that one was funny. In this one, the Balrog basically impales itself on Gandalf's sword after he does the whole 'I AM SHE-RAH' lightning rod trick.

So yea, calling it Eldar Powah is against the lore, but in this case the lore is servant to a plot device. In Tolkien's mind Gandalf was able to beat the Balrog because they were both Maiar. He did beat the Balrog, however, because Toklien needed to show that good is greater than evil in the cosmic sense. How Gandalf accomplished this, Tolkien never gave a damn because he wasn't a fight choreographer. He certainly didn't compose the Peter Jackson scene.

 

What...

Gandalf was able to beat the Balrog because Gandalf was more powerful (or just as powerful depending on your perspective). You didn't have to be a Maia to do so. The Silmarillion has at least two Balrogs (maybe 3) Balrogs being killed by Noldor who were most certainly not Maiar.