Dragon Age: Inquisition Pre-Release Thread

[tuluse]

Uh, I don't know about this, Skyrim writing wasn't servicable for me, it was quite terrible actually. And anyway let's wait what CDPR has to say about the "story in a opern-world game" problem. Those Polacks are fucking inscrutable, they very well may cut the Gordian "an open-world game cannot have a good story" Knot.

Didn't Tim Cain and co do this decades ago?

And of course, Richard Garriot before that.

 

[Lancehead]

Skyrim's writing is serviceable when it's kept to the point, which is actually a good way to handle story in open-world games as it generally has implications to quest design (see Gothic 3 for a similar example). The writing falls on its face, not surprisingly, when they try to inject any personality or complexity into characters or events.

Uh, I don't know about this, Skyrim writing wasn't servicable for me, it was quite terrible actually. And anyway let's wait what CDPR has to say about the "story in a opern-world game" problem. Those Polacks are fucking inscrutable, they very well may cut the Gordian "an open-world game cannot have a good story" Knot.

It's only really terrible if you're looking for complex characters which are more the domain of games with handcrafted narrative, such as DA2. An open-world game necessarily has a minimum of such characters.

The main objectives of writing in an open-world games are to introduce the main conflict and the players involved in it, to flesh out the game-world with details of places and factions (and persons where required), and finally to play its necessary basic job in quests. The writing in Skyrim does all of those adequately. And a significant part of those objectives are accomplished by the in-game books (e.g., The Great War, volumes of Rising Threat) which traditionally in TES are of good quality.

 

[Infinitron]

Uh, I don't know about this, Skyrim writing wasn't servicable for me, it was quite terrible actually. And anyway let's wait what CDPR has to say about the "story in a opern-world game" problem. Those Polacks are fucking inscrutable, they very well may cut the Gordian "an open-world game cannot have a good story" Knot.

Didn't Tim Cain and co do this decades ago?

And of course, Richard Garriot before that.

You don't even need go that far back - New Vegas says hello! CD Projekt even admitted themselves that they were improving on what New Vegas had already done: http://www.rpgcodex.net/article.php?id=8791

 

[Delterius]

There is not greater testament to Dragon Age's decline of quality when a discussion of the second game manage to elevate Skyrim to levels.

Mind you, Skyrim and Dragon Age are different enough that I wouldn't bother comparing them.

 

[Rake]

There is not greater testament to Dragon Age's decline of quality when a discussion of the second game manage to elevate Skyrim to levels.

Mind you, Skyrim and Dragon Age are different enough that I wouldn't bother comparing them.

For all it's shit i prefer DA2 to Skyrim, but i get what you mean.

 

[DalekFlay]

i prefer DA2 to Skyrim

 

[meanwhileInPoland]

both are shit. one is shitty turd and other is crappy shite.

 

[Rake]

i prefer DA2 to Skyrim

I actualy managed to finish DA2, even if the game is mostly shit. But i loath first person games with a passion. Same with action games. So Bethesda's games are completely unplayable to me.
That's why i said "prefer" and not "better". But Skyrim is shit as well.

You will never hear me say that New Vegas is a terrible game. Even if i couldn't finish it, i read let's plays, and i liked most of what i saw. Pitty it had that atrocity as an engine.

 

[DalekFlay]

But i loath first person games with a passion.

Oh... well, yeah, okay then. And point taken on "prefer."

I have to ask though: how the fuck do you cope being a PC gamer if you hate first-person?

 

[Rake]

But i loath first person games with a passion.

Oh... well, yeah, okay then. And point taken on "prefer."

I have to ask though: how the fuck do you cope being a PC gamer if you hate first-person?

Actualy i don't consider myself a "gamer" to be honest. I only like RPGs, but only as long as they are isometric, and not actiony like Diablo. Preferably 2D and text heavy. Do the math. I 'm not interested in 99% of the games out there.
And it's not nostalgia either. I'm 23, but until the last couple of years i couldn't care less about games. I always considered them an idiot's hobby, not so much because i thought the idea of gaming was bad but becuse of the games themselves. The games my friends gave me to try was along the lines of Oblivion, KOTOR and various shooters and sports games.
And i always was "why would anyone want to waste his time playing that shit when there are a ton of things he could be doing instead?" I simply never saw the appeal.

It was a client in my gym that pointed me to BG2 when we talked about games. And i liked it. For the first time i found gaming a valid alternative than hiting the clubs/ read a book or whatever. I moved to the rest of BI games, then Troika, then older games. But still my dislike for FP/OTS continues. Even with games that i should like. The only non isometric games i have managed to finish are KotOR2 and VtM:B. I loved the games, but i loathed the gameplay.

 

[funkadelik]

The only non isometric games i have managed to finish are KotOR2 and VtM:B. I loved the games, but i loathed the gameplay.

The edge is over 9000.

 

[Rake]

The only non isometric games i have managed to finish are KotOR2 and VtM:B. I loved the games, but i loathed the gameplay.

The edge is over 9000.

Achievement unlocked!

Spoiler

Why? Black Isle was my favorite company, so i gave Obsidian and Troika a shot. That i liked the games despite the FP view just speaks well for the games. Or just that BIS/Obsidian/Troika have something that i find appealing. (even if i couldn't stand Alpha Protocol or F:NV)

 

[Ninjerk]

Why do you loathe FPP? This isn't a pretext to insult you; you seem intelligent enough to articulate your reasons.

 

[DalekFlay]

Actualy i don't consider myself a "gamer" to be honest. I only like RPGs, but only as long as they are isometric, and not actiony like Diablo. Preferably 2D and text heavy. Do the math. I 'm not interested in 99% of the games out there.

I think "gamer" is a stupid term now-a-days, the experiences being offered are dramtically varied. My wife is not a "gamer" because she occasionally plays Peggle on her phone. Media drives me nuts with that shit. I only play PC RPG, FPS and adventure games.

 

[cvv]

Actualy i don't consider myself a "gamer" to be honest. I only like RPGs, but only as long as they are isometric, and not actiony like Diablo. Preferably 2D and text heavy. Do the math. I 'm not interested in 99% of the games out there.

I think "gamer" is a stupid term now-a-days

It was always stupid, people don't say "I'm a TV watcher" or "I'm a book reader", as if it was their job.

Korean kids playing Starcraft for dough are gamers, that's about it.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Using GAYmer to describe oneself sounds faggy anyways.

 

[Rake]

Why do you loathe FPP? This isn't a pretext to insult you; you seem intelligent enough to articulate your reasons.

Not spesific reason.I just don't find them appealing. Fighting, even moving around from that view is annoing to me. For some reason the only gameplay i find fun is point & click.

Stratery and Adventure games could be my cup of tea as well, and indeed, without some strategy/RPG hybrids like Sacrifice or Spellforce i would have run out of games a long time ago. Problem is that i'm a storyfag.
I will like the game that has a strong single player campain(starcraft/warcraft/heroes of M&M) but that's it. As for adventure games, i have tried a couple and i liked them, but i have trouble to get in the "puzzle mentality" of older games, nor do i find puzzles in general especialy appealing. It's just something i do to progress the story. And that's not the most fun way to play them. I still do, but it's something rare enough to say i'm into adventure gaming. I have played what, 4 adventure games until now?

But jokes aside, i never insult a game only because i don't like it because of that reason. I know my tastes are extremely narrow and somewhat arbitrary, so i try at least to read a Let's Play before i have an opinion for the game.

Spoiler

Skyrim is still shit

 

[Akratus]

There is not greater testament to Dragon Age's decline of quality when a discussion of the second game manage to elevate Skyrim to levels.

Mind you, Skyrim and Dragon Age are different enough that I wouldn't bother comparing them.

For all it's shit i prefer DA2 to Skyrim, but i get what you mean.

Skyrim is like a large field of shit. Dragon Age 2 is like a pipe of shit. Both are bad but atleast in skyrim you can fuck around. DA2 is just concentrated shittyness.
And mods certainly make Skyrim good for what it is.

 

[Kidd]

Skyrim is like a large field of shit. Dragon Age 2 is like a pipe of shit. Both are bad but atleast in skyrim you can fuck around. DA2 is just concentrated shittyness.
And mods certainly make Skyrim good for what it is.

I don't know how you played your DA2, but I certainly managed to fuck around a lot.

 

[hiver]

I dont see anything strange in Rakes preference. Its pretty much the same as mine.
(i always knew he was a good newfag... wipes a proud tear)

FP is simply a limiting, unnaturally constraining point of view that is not fit for RPG games.
Its fit for action games that try - largely - to involve the player not through the quality of the game itself but through flashy cheap special effects, by pushing things in your nose, by ACTIUNZ!!, various sexual content (TITS IN YOUR FACE!!!) and other types of cheap, superficial attempts of extreme emotional engagement.

Introducing FP view into RPGs was done specifically to bring them closer to "larger audiences" - which inevitably introduced all of the decline we have witnessed.
It marks the turn of designers (forced by publishers ofc.), trying to make better games to instead opting to make games that will have bigger audience - i.e rake (pun not intended) more money.

I played Witcher in close isometric view, Skyrim and Morrowind and NV in third person, using any mod that could increase the distance, switching to FP only when i couldt interact with some small object - which the badly designed third person PoV necesitated sometimes.

As for the obvious counter argument about "unnaturality" of Isometric vs FP PoV... i would say that having the view from above is more natural in its execution than FP.
Less disorienting and much more valuable - while any unnatural effect of you seeing too much can be easily limited through fog of war and similar features - if necessary.
Besides it fits much better for games where youre not exactly supposed to play yourself.

Of course it is a personal preference each and every one of us gets through playing our first games and living our first great experiences with the medium.
Yet... i dont see any way someone could argumentatively prove to me that FP is "better"... except for specific kinds of games like shooters are.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

^

I would also add that out of our 5 senses only 2 receive any real feedback I.e. hearing and sight.

Fp perspective castrates the tactical visual feedback an iso perspective provides.

 

[Rake]

Introducing FP view into RPGs was done specifically to bring them closer to "larger audiences" - which inevitably introduced all of the decline we have witnessed.

I don't know if i would go that far. Weren't classics like Wizardy or M&M series also first person? It seems a natural evolution from that.
Agree with the rest.

 

[Storyfag]

Introducing FP view into RPGs was done specifically to bring them closer to "larger audiences" - which inevitably introduced all of the decline we have witnessed.

Weren't classics like Wizardy or M&M series also first person? It seems a natural evolution from that.

These had properly done breadth of view. The UI covered the lower half of the screen, but it did not obscure things. That's why those games were bearable.

 

[hiver]

Well yes, there were RPGs with FP before the mainstream age. Always hated those. Cant stand blobbers to this day, where supposedly im having a whole party but i look through this horrible constricted single PoV.
besides - i think most of those games were heavily combat oriented and therefore could be called action RPGs?

Lets say that my sentence above covers most of the later games done when games entered the mass market and AAA production levels. And i dont think those old classics have anything to do with later games made by mass market publishers.
They just compared numbers from best selling shooters and then went for "the FP makes people "immersed" into teh game world!!!" logic, forgetting that what really immerses someone is a well built game world, well made game - not the PoV itself.
This actually worked for the dumb mass market - the millions and billions are the proof. But the consequences on game design in general, the reduction in quality - are very visible too.

 

[Space Satan]