Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Review RPG Codex Review: Dragon Age: Inquisition

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,316
Location
Hyperborea
A person has to understand the environment that the so called "elitist" Codex view of games is formed in, at least on my part, and why opposing views are important to understand, and why dissenting opinion is important. This is an environment where even so called professionals don't bother supporting their proclamations. The average review, and the average forum goer logic boils down to "Game X was great because element A was good/fun/enjoyable." This is ok for casual jibber-jabber with friends hanging out, but in venues that are designed for discussion to take place, this is useless. Adjectives are not analysis. How was element A made to be fun by the design choices and execution of the developers? If they can't be descriptive, how persuasive can their argument be? Not enough to support bold proclamations about the quality or GoTYness of a game (yes, I'm back on that again.)

There is also a lack of understanding of a fundamental rule of criticism: Good is not the same as Like, Bad is not the same as Dislike. To believe otherwise is to believe that no one can ever enjoy/dislike something that is poorly/well crafted, that we all have immaculate taste and complete grasp of everything. This doesn't serve good argument, this serves ego. I'll be first to admit I know fuck all about what makes a good piece of music, or good musicianship. I like what I like. But I will not go into places and dig my heels in and proclaim that my opinion on the matter is just as valid (meaning: informed) as everyone elses. My opinion on the matter is only as good as my support of it, and my support on it depends on my effort and the ability to learn about music, musical standards, musical history, etc.

So if I say the combat in a game is poor, or underwhelming, or below par and I make an effort to explain the underlying design choices that I think lead to this, a simple "well that's your opinion. I enjoyed it," takes all the air out of a discussion. But I'll take that over outright dishonesty and illogic. For example take a common exchange I've seen in discussions of DAI's tactical combat, or lack there of:

Salty Grognard: The combat does not require tactics. The enemy AI engages in very direct and simplistic routines that can be neutralized by holding down R2 and doing so and so. You can essentially faceroll them.

Unwashed Pleb: But you didn't play on Nightmare. I had to pause the game and issue orders. It became more tactical.

Now, think about whether this is true or not. Is tactics defined by being able to pause combat and issue orders? Why do we find ourselves needing to pause combat and issue orders on the higher difficulties? Is it because the tactics of the enemies change and they become more effective in implementing those tactics, and thus you have to think tactically to counter their cleverness? Or is it because you find yourself in a situation where damage and HP bloat is forcing you to pause to keep up with the higher rate of damage-over-time being delivered to your party; is having to pause time because of the AI's systemic advantage in managing multiple actors simultaneously really "tactics"? Is that a logical conclusion to come to? Or how about this chestnut:

Salty Grognard: I played the game for 60 hours. Here's my critique

Unwashed Reddit Pleb: But you didn't play the whole 100 hours it takes to complete the game

Salty Grognard: I played the entire game. Took me 150 hours. Here's my critique

URP: If you put that much time into it, you must have liked it!

:hmmm: :nocountryforshitposters::what:
:dead:

As with SJWs, you can't win. Either 60% of a game isn't enough to criticize a game's core features, as if that other 40% is where the REAL good stuff is; or you secretly loved it and your criticisms are suspect.

Then there is the old "Waah, stop liking what I don't like" dismissal. Nevermind that "like" has nothing to do with it. In fact, I'm almost convinced that, for the sake of a critic's sanity, a review should consist of telling a person what is happening as objectively as possible "In combat encounters, I only had to do X over and over. That was enough to win 90% of the time. Enemy encounters on Nightmare are tougher only because enemies have more hitpoints and do more damage." Don't even say you think this is bad or good, just let people sort it out for themselves. And frankly, I don't really care if Yurin Toil'ette over at Eurogamer enjoyed shit or not - I don't care about your feels, or hearing about how the game is best or better than or how majestic it is, just describe the content and its workings in detail, then get out of the way.

So, it's not a matter of changing people's minds to not like or like a game. It's a matter of being frustrated that people's minds aren't working at all. Yet these unthinking minds think they hold some kind of truth. When it's time for forum e-peen measuring contests, scores and GoTY awards matter a whole lot. The Last of Us is objectively the best game of the year, all the reviews said so, all your awards belong to Us, etc. But if everyone hated the game they love or Gamespot gave it an 8 instead of 9.5? "Opinions, how do they work?" "I'm never coming to this site again!" "In what world is Demon's Souls better than Uncharted 2? Eat shit, GS!"

Personally, hugboxes sicken me. Consensus is tyranny.
 
Last edited:

GrainWetski

Arcane
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
5,080
I had no idea Teal'c was on this site.

You could sum up the game with: Ubisoft™ presents Mass™ Effect™ 3.3™!
 

deus101

Never LET ME into a tattoo parlor!
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
2,059
Project: Eternity Wasteland 2
Bioware are not concerned about making a decent game they just want to promote a 50 dollar movie and since "GAMES ARE ART" people are gobbing it up.

Any news on KOTC2?
 

Xorazm

Cipher
Joined
Jan 22, 2015
Messages
106
Bioware are not concerned about making a decent game they just want to promote a 50 dollar movie and since "GAMES ARE ART" people are gobbing it up.

Any news on KOTC2?

I'm not so much bothered by the suggestion that Inquisition is art than I am by the suggestion that Inquisition is, in any meaningful sense of the word, an RPG.

"Art" is such an elusive term, particularly after late twentieth-century postmodernists mangled it into nothing, that you can shove Spaghetti-Os up your butt "because art" and no one will bat an eye. However, I never thought I'd quite see the day that you'd have people sincerely arguing (as I have) that party stats, tactical combat and meaningful choices don't really matter to a cRPG and that the term needs to "evolve."

I'm looking forward to 2022 when I can walk down the cinema to "play" Bioware's latest RPG, a stirring tale in which Magical Fantasy Jesus #14 and His Merry Band of Quirk save the world from the latest thing that Bethesda thought of first. Hell, maybe I'll bring along a controller and mash a few meaningless buttons just for old times' sake while I watch the pre-figured story play out in front of me.
 

PhantasmaNL

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
1,653
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Grab the Codex by the pussy Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria
That is a solid post Machocruz.

It seems you are asking for objective and purely descriptive reviews, whereas reviews are per definition subjective (we are not talking about scientific dissertations here). Ideally they offer a blend of consumer information and entertainment (you want people to read or view it), not evenly mixed perse. Once established as a knowledgeable reviewer (and good writer/presenter) buyers with aligned tastes will even favor the subjectivity, it will assure they will (dis)like the product as much as the reviewer. Of course the subsidized incorporated commercial "reviews" dont work like that, they are just an extension of the marketing department.

The codex review blend offers more consumer information and less (codexian) entertainment but that is ok and as i said makes it more digestable for the non codex crowd.
 

Shannow

Waster of Time
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
6,386
Location
Finnegan's Wake
I find reaction to Codex reviews interesting for a few reasons. Firstly, it reminds one of what the tastes of the masses out there are really like. It's possible to forget when only spending time on the Codex and it explains a lot in terms of modern gaming. It's also pretty lulzy seeing the bizarre ideas people have about the Codex, like the tard who thinks "they don't like PST". Finally, it's interesting to see a couple of people in the "finally, a review I agree with" camp. Always a minority, but positive nevertheless.

A brief search turns up hundreds of "DAI is awesome, GOTY" reviews. At least having a more critical review out there serves as a contrasting opinion for people who have only been fed Dorito-laden hype. Even if they liked the game and disagreed with the Codex review, it may make a few people think about the game slightly differently and open their eyes to what Bioware could have done better.
Assuming you haven't lurked that long, here is a little piece of codex-lore for you:
While Oblivion was hailed as the be all end all RPG by mainstream-dorito journalism, a significant portion of players disagreed. The codex gave them voice with VD's review: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=129

Caused quite a large influx of new members here. ESF-refugees was a thing for quite a few years. Though I doubt Daaeye will cause a large influx of BSN refugees. ESF was very heavy-handed in stamping out negative opinions and links to the codex. Modern companies aren't so unaware of the Steisand-effect. (And the Daah franchise was pretty much "shit" long before Daaeye. So I doubt any modern-day BSN member would be converted to the codex. Perhaps to the Watch [or GD].)
 
Weasel
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
1,865,661
Assuming you haven't lurked that long, here is a little piece of codex-lore for you:
While Oblivion was hailed as the be all end all RPG by mainstream-dorito journalism, a significant portion of players disagreed. The codex gave them voice with VD's review: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=129

Caused quite a large influx of new members here. ESF-refugees was a thing for quite a few years. Though I doubt Daaeye will cause a large influx of BSN refugees. ESF was very heavy-handed in stamping out negative opinions and links to the codex. Modern companies aren't so unaware of the Steisand-effect. (And the Daah franchise was pretty much "shit" long before Daaeye. So I doubt any modern-day BSN member would be converted to the codex. Perhaps to the Watch [or GD].)

Yes, I did read VD's Oblivion review at the time, it was pretty well known. Still great to read now actually. I'm sure you're right about the refugees, the average BSN drone is unlikely to suddenly become a Codexer, but it was interesting to see a couple of people even there saying they agreed with the review.
 

Jools

Eater of Apples
Patron
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
10,652
Location
Mêlée Island
Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Insert Title Here Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2
Wow. I had no intention of playing this game, but then RK47 's LP kinda made me feel like playing it for teh lulz. Now, reading this review gave me quite a few lulz, while conversely it stripped me of whatever small will I had to even try the game. Both the review and RK's LP seem to be way more entertaining than the game itself, I recently forced myself through ME3 (expected lulz, was catered bitter tears of fail), so screw it. The Codex just saved me some time, and dollars: that is what I call service!

Great review, good job. 8/10 would read review again.
 

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,316
Location
Hyperborea
That is a solid post Machocruz.

It seems you are asking for objective and purely descriptive reviews, whereas reviews are per definition subjective (we are not talking about scientific dissertations here). Ideally they offer a blend of consumer information and entertainment (you want people to read or view it), not evenly mixed perse. Once established as a knowledgeable reviewer (and good writer/presenter) buyers with aligned tastes will even favor the subjectivity, it will assure they will (dis)like the product as much as the reviewer. Of course the subsidized incorporated commercial "reviews" dont work like that, they are just an extension of the marketing department.

The codex review blend offers more consumer information and less (codexian) entertainment but that is ok and as i said makes it more digestable for the non codex crowd.

Yeah. If I trusted the average reviewer's motivations and they were better at describing things, I wouldn't mind them putting color in their reviews, or editorializing. But they have to describe first, then the enthusiasm/dissatisfaction has something to stand on. As it now, not only does telling me something is "majestic" not of any personal use, as aspects that impress one person might not another, it's often smacks of salesmanship, or leading the witness so to speak.It's the readers job to decide "hey that sounds great!/like shit!"

But I was thinking of the reviewer's benefit. The dissenters in their comments section would have to address the facts, instead of attacking the adjectives. Of course the most idiotic among them are consistent, and will attack the review based on score alone if they don't agree with i.
 
Last edited:

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,316
Location
Hyperborea
And that Vault Dweller review is pure ownage. See, your opinion is only as good as the support you can mount for it.

The one disagreement I have is that I do think it is a bad game, in that it's poorly constructed and quite lazy, and they put value in the wrong things. Great looking landscape for the time, at the expense of butt ugly character modeling and ridiculous animation, as if they spent no time observing human movement or couldn't replicate what they saw. I know MW had that too, but the new ES audience that praised Oblivion to the sky didn't play it. I'll keep the rest short: Completely boned the progression system, copypasta dungeons, non-sensical AI behavior, lack of overall polish, crummy melee hit detection, a poor simulation of force dynamics in combat, borked level up modifier calculation. It's a mess. I can understand why open world newbies and graphic whores thought it was the bees knees, but I would think that Spore is the best shit ever if I never played a sim before.
 

Riel

Arcane
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
1,357
Location
Itaca
I want to thank the reviewers, this is probably the first time I read a review start playing the game and find it to be perfectly accurate.

I don't know..... Bioware could be honest to itself and admit they aren't doing CRPGs any more, there are lots of genres in gaming and none of them is wrong if you do it right, but their fixation with staying rpgish is hurting their games more than helping. I remember playing Jedi Academy II a long time ago it has a branching plot, cut scenes, some C&C and skill trees you can't just complete, Lucas Arts never sold it like an RPG, it was a good action game and Bioware would do well in admitting what they do is cinematic driven story action games and do the action part well not that stupid mindless click combat.

That said DAI is a decent game, Bioware (and tech) has gone a long way since the cutscenes from NWN2, some of them now are very good, there are of course glitches in many and the story is a childish as it can get, but some cutscenes actually were interesting and properly delivered.
Graphics and music are great, this is true in general for all art in the game: I give art a 10/10. :incline:

So just a couple suggestions for Bioware that will go nowhere.
Stop saying action rpg game, and say just action then deliver a good action game play.
Try to do a more mature and coherent story next time, Bioware's plots are like Harry Potter with violence and tits.
 

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Patron
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
1,655
Location
Germany
Divinity: Original Sin Shadorwun: Hong Kong
lolz, I somehow missed the Watch's thread on this review: http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27532
Jesus fuck, I didn't remember that Watchers are that colossal retards. "I love companions but hate PST!" "The game is so fucking good that I'm starting my fourth playthrough, but I hate Ultima"

:flamesaw:

And in totally Codexian fashion you are ignoring all the other different opinions in this thread.
Haters gonna hate...
duRUZyV.jpg
 

deus101

Never LET ME into a tattoo parlor!
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
2,059
Project: Eternity Wasteland 2
Bioware are not concerned about making a decent game they just want to promote a 50 dollar movie and since "GAMES ARE ART" people are gobbing it up.

Any news on KOTC2?

I'm not so much bothered by the suggestion that Inquisition is art than I am by the suggestion that Inquisition is, in any meaningful sense of the word, an RPG.

"Art" is such an elusive term, particularly after late twentieth-century postmodernists mangled it into nothing, that you can shove Spaghetti-Os up your butt "because art" and no one will bat an eye. However, I never thought I'd quite see the day that you'd have people sincerely arguing (as I have) that party stats, tactical combat and meaningful choices don't really matter to a cRPG and that the term needs to "evolve."

I'm looking forward to 2022 when I can walk down the cinema to "play" Bioware's latest RPG, a stirring tale in which Magical Fantasy Jesus #14 and His Merry Band of Quirk save the world from the latest thing that Bethesda thought of first. Hell, maybe I'll bring along a controller and mash a few meaningless buttons just for old times' sake while I watch the pre-figured story play out in front of me.
"Complaining about post-modernists" ugh ..you'd fit in here allright other then that solid post.
 

zero29

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
136
...
And in totally Codexian fashion you are ignoring all the other different opinions in this thread.
Haters gonna hate...

well, it would be easier to see those different opinions if most of the posters there - especially those with higher post counts - weren't constantly burying all attempts to discuss the game's flaws under their "everything's subjective/everyone's allowed to like it" shit. of course you're allowed to have fun with this game, but let's face it, you might still be a filthy casual for liking it (can't say for sure, haven't tried the game myself yet). watchers gonna watch, i guess...
 

Necroscope

Arcane
Joined
Jul 21, 2012
Messages
1,985
Location
Polska
Codex 2014
Finally, it's interesting to see a couple of people in the "finally, a review I agree with" camp. Always a minority, but positive nevertheless.
I believe that's how many ppl ended up here. My first contact with the Codex was after playing Oblivion; I didn't know what was wrong with me, that I couldn't force myself to enjoy that game even though all the reviews declared it the second coming, and then I came across the VD's review - reading it was like catharsis to my tormented soul. Hence I started checking this site for news frome time to time, then lurking forum, eventually made an account.
 

turul

Augur
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
149
...
And in totally Codexian fashion you are ignoring all the other different opinions in this thread.
Haters gonna hate...

well, it would be easier to see those different opinions if most of the posters there - especially those with higher post counts - weren't constantly burying all attempts to discuss the game's flaws under their "everything's subjective/everyone's allowed to like it" shit. of course you're allowed to have fun with this game, but let's face it, you might still be a filthy casual for liking it (can't say for sure, haven't tried the game myself yet). watchers gonna watch, i guess...

I don't consider myself a hardcore rpg player. Yes I played a good number since I started playing games on PC (1995), but I equally play from other genres. My old time favorite are flight sims, which went extinct before rpgs wen't extinct. I like complexity. Things, that require more than just reflexes. That's why my pity for consoles came about, after owning a Sega Genesis.
So anyway about the casual thing - There are plenty of games that many codexers seem to worship, which were considered casual rpgs, or rpgs with very simplistic gameplay. Some of them are on a level of Megaman or Mario.
They look old and maybe have a story, but they are simple and lacking any real structure or branching story. You can be a mage or a barbarian and blast your way across the 2D map and there is no way you gonna miss the salesman, selling armor or staves. This is just as bad - if not worse- than having a compass pointing to your next objective in an Oblivion/Skyrim clone aRPG. I guess, they just like them and worship them, because they are old and they feel comfortable looking a the map from a bird's eye view.

So the "casual" title thrown at people who are easily amused with simplistic games is usually directed to people who are almost definitely playing a fairly new game. Even though there are plenty of codexer veterans are in love with casual games, made in another era. And just because it was made 20 years ago, it must be a classic.
It kinda reminds me of people, talking about the "Golden Era" of USA, which is the 60s. They forget the bad stuff, only remember the good stuff.

On the other hand, I have a hard time understanding the new developers, what is so hard about coding a game with real choices? Here is an easy example I just brainstormed:
What if I don't approach the monsters (which seem to have intelligence, since they speak) and instead of blasting them with fire, I make a deal.
-Hey you guys there, let's make a deal. I leave your green hellgate open, in exchange of a nice set of armor!
---
Consequences:
1. I have a nice set of armor made from unobtainium, compared to those who play a holy crusader and kill every creature from the drit.
2. The town near the hell gate hates my guts, they may be hostile for the rest of the game. They may get wiped out by the demons. (Although I couldn't give a shit, I won't be visiting this area anymore).

..
What is so hard about making such choices, instead kissing asses in cutscenes with absolutely no consequences to the story or even just a part of the game world?
 
Last edited:

zero29

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
136
...
So anyway about the casual thing - There are plenty of games that many codexers seem to worship, which were considered casual rpgs, or rpgs with very simplistic gameplay. Some of them are on a level of Megaman or Mario.
They look old and maybe have a story, but they are simple and lacking any real structure or branching story. You can be a mage or a barbarian and blast your way across the 2D map and there is no way you gonna miss the salesman, selling armor or staves. This is just as bad - if not worse- than having a compass pointing to your next objective in an Oblivion/Skyrim clone aRPG. I guess, they just like them and worship them, because they are old and they feel comfortable looking a the map from a bird's eye view.

So the "casual" title thrown at people who are easily amused with simplistic games is usually directed to people who are almost definitely playing a fairly new game. Even though there are plenty of codexer veterans are in love with casual games, made in another era. And just because it was made 20 years ago, it must be a classic.

just checked the last codex top 75 list and i'm unable to find a game that really suits your description. care to give some examples? epecially for those 2d map games where you are unable to miss the saleman that are more casual than oblivirim or rpgs with gameplay on a level of Megaman or Mario, certainly bold claims on the codex where non-linearity and engaging gameplay are two of the most cherished aspects of crpgs.

and the preference of top-down-viewpoints vs. 1.p or 3.p view is without a doubt connected to the tactical aspect of crpgs with good combat systems. some people here indeed project this preference on games with mediocre/simplistic combat, but the reason for this preference is way more than pure nostalgia. btw, if you want to see a tactical view thrown in solely to invoke such top-down-nostalgia, just have a look at the game of this topic.

It kinda reminds me of people, talking about the "Golden Era" of USA, which is the 60s. They forget the bad stuff, only remember the good stuff.
...

and AAA-games tend to forget the good stuff, only remember the bad stuff. in this light, how is focussing on the good aspects of old games because you miss them in newer games bad? that's not nostalgia, that's common sense.
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,871
Divinity: Original Sin
OMG the nostalgia argument! I've totally never seen this one. It's not like we have someone bring it up every week or anything.

Oh and the multitude of threads where someone who wasn't even born when we were playing the classics comes out, plays the classics, writes about his experiences, and says "this game is fucking good!" don't exist. Move along.

I'm also sure that the Bard's Tale thread in which I went back and re-played BT2 must have something wrong with it. I mean, I spent 27 years claiming BT2 wasn't a good game. Then, a week ago, I went back, replayed it, found out I was wrong, and decided it really is a great dungeon crawler. Oh I know! I hated it back then because it was a new game, and now I like it because it's more than 20 years old! You were right all along, it must be the age. All other considerations such as the quality of the game, or a better capacity to appreciate what it does, or being able to enjoy it more because the quality of the current games has nosedived, all these are totally wrong. Because after all it's just nostalgia isn't it.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
They look old and maybe have a story, but they are simple and lacking any real structure or branching story.
Yeah...

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,2365.0.html

And just because it was made 20 years ago, it must be a classic.
Plenty of games made 20 years ago were shitty. Nobody's ever claimed otherwise.

On the other hand, I have a hard time understanding the new developers, what is so hard about coding a game with real choices?
:nocountryforshitposters:

Because it's a LOT of work, which means extra time, which means extra money against a very low return on investment. Rocket science it's not.

Back in 2003 David Gaider said:
[It's not worth it to make multiple plot choices in CRPGs]. Don't believe me? I speak from personal experience. The main reason why this is true is the following: when you start adding radically different plot paths into a story, the complexity of that story increases exponentially. So there too does the probability of bugs cropping up in said story increase exponentially. Thus you spend more time to do less. As an example: in an average day of work here at Bioware, I average about 3,000 to 5,000 words of dialogue written. If, however, I am working on a complex character (a major NPC like, say, Aribeth or Aarin Gend in Chapter 2 of the OC), that speed slows down to 2,000 words or less in a day due to the time spent on arranging the structure.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Only a noob plays games on release. A true connoisseur waits 20 years until a game is properly patched, the graphics are aged to perfection, and there are several dozen guides and mods to choose from.

Can't wait to play Stonekeep - it's going to be 20 years in Nov. It's a true gem, with live acting cutscenes and a straight-from-the-future holographic skeleton on the box.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom