[POLL] Let's settle this - did you buy Dragon Age: Inquisition?

[Slow James]

Not really. What's your big issues with it?

Haven't played, but the feedback and videos made it seem like you'd be fighting the camera ok the time, no click to move/target, looting which requires walking over to every single item before being able to pick it up, mechanics that seem ripped right out of Zelda with things like the hookshot or roll dodge, using WASD to walk, using WASD to aim, no tooltips for skills, only eight skills to map, companions not listening to your orders longer than three seconds...

Not all patchable fixes, but to put up with all the other things in addition to the UI being difficult... No thanks.

 

[Slow James]

It was retail but most video game stores are empty and the counter guy will suck your dick for buying something (anything) so there's no risk of embarassment.

Well, if I wanted an actual human to suck my dick, I wouldn't be buying a Bioware game, would I?

 

[DalekFlay]

Haven't played, but the feedback and videos made it seem like you'd be fighting the camera ok the time, no click to move/target, looting which requires walking over to every single item before being able to pick it up, mechanics that seem ripped right out of Zelda with things like the hookshot or roll dodge, using WASD to walk, using WASD to aim, no tooltips for skills, only eight skills to map, companions not listening to your orders longer than three seconds...

Not all patchable fixes, but to put up with all the other things in addition to the UI being difficult... No thanks.

Most of that is gameplay related, it's much more of an action RPG now. The Witcher 2 didn't have click-to-move either. I've seen this a lot on the Bioware forums... people are mad it controls like an action game, but it IS an action game. If you don't want to play an action game don't buy it. Patching in click-to-move, if it were even possible, wouldn't suddenly make it a tactical PC RPG.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Yes, YES, I did it, I admit, I admit everything!

 

[Siveon]

I'm not a masochist, so no. After playing and beating Dragon Age 2 I think I've had enough of Dragon Age and Bioware for quite a while.

 

[Grunker]

I rarely buy games without demoing, and this is no exception.

 

[Roguey]

Might buy it a year or more from now when it's discounted and/or bundled with DLC and such. Ideally they'll fix the god-awful mouse and keyboard controls, hearing about that was the funniest thing. Lovely how DA:O/2's controls were only as adequate as they were because it started out as a PC-exclusive. Double-lovely how the tactics system was dumbed-down too; even considering how this turned out to be DA2-executed-better as I predicted it would, I can't even figure out the path of intent there.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

Well, if I wanted an actual human to suck my dick, I wouldn't be buying a Bioware game, would I?

Well, if you actually told someone on BSN that you bought it and enjoyed it, someone probably would.

 

[Infinitron]

Might buy it a year or more from now when it's discounted and/or bundled with DLC and such. Ideally they'll fix the god-awful mouse and keyboard controls, hearing about that was the funniest thing. Lovely how DA:O/2's controls were only as adequate as they were because it started out as a PC-exclusive. Double-lovely how the tactics system was dumbed-down too; even considering how this turned out to be DA2-executed-better as I predicted it would, I can't even figure out the path of intent there.

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

 

[LeStryfe79]

I would play it drunk, but I've got health problems.

 

[Roguey]

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

Nonsense. How is it different from DA2 other than the fact that you have to hold down the mouse-button instead of click and forget?

 

[Slow James]

Most of that is gameplay related, it's much more of an action RPG now. The Witcher 2 didn't have click-to-move either. I've seen this a lot on the Bioware forums... people are mad it controls like an action game, but it IS an action game. If you don't want to play an action game don't buy it. Patching in click-to-move, if it were even possible, wouldn't suddenly make it a tactical PC RPG.

No, it wouldn't. I didn't get more than a few hours into The Witcher for these same reasons. I'm not gung ho about playing an ARPG at all, but it's never going to happen if the controls are pretty incompatible with the standard UI (like KBM).

But I agree - it's not a game I'm interested in and little can be done to patch that. Ergo, I voted "No" in the poll.

 

[Infinitron]

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

Nonsense. How is it different from DA2 other than the fact that you have to hold down the mouse-button instead of click and forget?

Somebody who has actually played the game (*cough* DalekFlay) might be able to tell you that!

 

[AwesomeButton]

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

Nonsense. How is it different from DA2 other than the fact that you have to hold down the mouse-button instead of click and forget?

Trust me, they found a way to make it worse than DA2, at least in some of the aspects important for any RPG.

 

[Slow James]

Nonsense. How is it different from DA2 other than the fact that you have to hold down the mouse-button instead of click and forget?

Roll dodge/hookshot skills?
Auto-assigned attributes?
Only 8 skill hotkeys?
Simple "on-off" AI tactics?
Reflex-based combat?
Tactical camera being shallow to the point of uselessness?
Incongruent stats/damage/HP between party and enemies (200 HP PC deals 12,345 damage to a bandit and barely scratches the health bar while bandit does 32 damage to PC)?

I could go on... this is an action RPG, console click fest filled with fetch and harvest quests like an MMO. This gameplay is punctuated by story and dialogue that has received tepid reception in its quality.


Sounds like a winner to me.

 

[DalekFlay]

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

Nonsense. How is it different from DA2 other than the fact that you have to hold down the mouse-button instead of click and forget?

Somebody who was actually played the game (*cough* DalekFlay) might be able to tell you that!

I feel like this has been covered thoroughly in the main thread, but a short list: no (or very few) designed battles, it's all random trash mobs in the woods. You have to move to your enemy to hit using the control stick or WASD, and you have to press attack and hit them (in other words your attacks can miss despite being targeted at the enemy because you physically missed). You can dodge projectiles. You have no need at all to control your party even a little. Abilities are all actions and not buffs or battlefield control, other than a couple spirit magic spells. Placement doesn't matter at all. Archers can run around while shooting. It goes on and on.

Dragon Age 2, for all its faults, was Origins on speed more than anything else. This plays more like Kingdoms or Amalur than Dragon Age Origins.

 

[Grunker]

Hah, you're the last one who can talk about predictions. Surprise surprise, the game turned out to be an action-RPG and not "same old Dragon Age gameplay", as I predicted.

Nonsense.

Based on what? Pretty much everyone who have posted actual feedback and not just "lol bioware" have painted a picture of a game that is very different. Most impacting in terms of core gameplay seem to be that instead of the trappings of a tactical game, this game is more like a traditional RPG beat 'em up: no auto-attack, useless movement by clicking, no tactial positioning mechanics (relying instead on reflex-dodging), reflex based projectile-dodging and reflex/coordination based targeting and attacking instead of stat-based attack and ability resolution.

I have no idea myself since I haven't played it, but most of the trustworthy people just recounting the mechanics make it seem like something entirely different. DA2 was a shitty version of DA:O's mechanics. This sounds more like an action game with a few bells & whistles reminiscent of DA2.

I mean, I'm the first to be glad if I can get me some DA:O-like combat in Inquisition, but since you so far base your comment on... absolutely nothing at all, I'm curious what gave you an impression so contradictory to non-troll Codexers and a few of my IRL pals.

EDIT: ninja'd by the entire world.

 

[Roguey]

Roll dodge/hookshot skills?

DA2 had dodging too.

Auto-assigned attributes?
Only 8 skill hotkeys?
Simple "on-off" AI tactics?

Irrelevant.

Reflex-based combat?

You can pause and issue orders while paused, making reflexes entirely optional.

Tactical camera being shallow to the point of uselessness?

DA2 had no tactical cam.

Incongruent stats/damage/HP between party and enemies (200 HP PC deals 12,345 damage to a bandit and barely scratches the health bar while bandit does 32 damage to PC)?

DA has always had an asymmetric ruleset. There's no law saying a RPG must be symmetrical.

I feel like this has been covered thoroughly in the main thread, but a short list: no (or very few) designed battles, it's all random trash mobs in the woods.

Also applicable to DA2.

You have to move to your enemy to hit using the control stick or WASD, and you have to press attack and hit them (in other words your attacks can miss despite being targeted at the enemy because you physically missed).

Sounds more like a "designed first and foremost for a controller" issue.

You can dodge projectiles. You have no need at all to control your party even a little.

Applicable to DA2.

Abilities are all actions and not buffs or battlefield control, other than a couple spirit magic spells.

Irrelevant.

Placement doesn't matter at all.

Applicable to DA2.

Archers can run around while shooting.

That's a funny decision, but it doesn't make it an action game. If quick reactions are optional, then it isn't.

 

[Achiman]

I bought it, who gives a shit? Unless you are in some 3rd world country it's not a huge expense.
The game is ok so far (bout 4 hours), my expectations were very low going in however.

Tbh I had alarm bells going off in my head when they said that it was going to be open world.
I read "open world" and think "aimless gameplay", and yep, you have to make your own fun. If you think that there is going to be some tight quest structure with a nice flow to plot progression and character development you are going to be disappointed.
They tried to make their version of Skyrim, if you hated Skyrim, you will hate this.

 

[Great Deceiver]

I bought it and initial impressions were terrible - the Hinterlands (first big area) is honestly the worst part of the game; thankfully later areas have the MMO-ness dialed down a bit and some are even ok (like the Fallow Mire). Story/NPC interactions/dialogue are all universally awful - in fact, many times laughable and/or cringeworthy, the combat is pretty shitty (although it opens up a little once you get to the specialization trees) and exploration isn't great because loot is generally very boring and unlocking a codex entry isn't really exciting. Boss fights are pretty shitty as they're just tedious trudging through HP bloat (although the first dragon you fight is alright).

There's no room for creative thinking in combat, no cool usable items, in short, no variety; the level system acts as a very hard cap just like in MMOs (meaning, if you're outside a couple levels of the intended enemy there's no way you're beating them - you do zero damage and take a ton). I'm playing on Hard, can't imagine how extra boring it would be on Nightmare.

The game can look good at times, but really all that makes me think about is how awesome it might be if a competent developer had this kind of budget/technology at their disposal.

Overall, I couldn't possibly recommend this to anyone, but I have disposable income and was curious about how bad it would be. Part of the problem?

 

[Grunker]

BTW, Infinitron, I think Pope Amole II's points about codexers buying it being some kind of travesty are ludicrous. Firstly, for most adult, working people (so not me until I finish this master's ), DA:I's pricetag is a random grab for spare change in the pocket.

Secondly, Pope infers from the fact that codexers are buying DA:I that they must be choosing not to buy something else (e.g. his favourite indie pet project). Well, certainly not because of money reasons I'd wager. I doubt most poor-as-shit codexers are spending their wad on this game, and if you're lower middle class and above living in a Western country (i.e. part of the main source of sales for this game), you'll have no issues forking out 10 bucks for any indie game what might interest you.

In essence, I find no basis for a claim as preposterous and unfounded as "codexers buying DA:I are actively hurting the creation of indie RPGs."

In fact, if we investigated, there might even be truth in the reverse statement. Many gamers spend loads of money on games they never play because they promise one or two of the same trappins promised by [AAA game they like]. Just look at all the fags who gave money to our favourite Kickstarters like Wasteland 2 or Pillars of Eternity because they expected romance or Fallout 3-like mechanics or whatever the fuck retarded thing they were hoping for. That's mainstream cash going into our interests.

In all other areas of economics, mainstream products are necessary for the existance for a sub-market to exist at all. The same can easily, and is probably, true here.

I'm not saying it is, we really have no clue, it's just that I have a fucking hard time spotting how on earth Codexers throwing their dollars at DA:I could ever hurt the production of the games we like. The reason DA:I sells a fuck-trillion and [insert Pope's favourite RPG] doesn't is because DA:I has mainsteam appeal, while whatever Pope and the rest of us really like doesn't. You show Lords of Xulima to the vast majority of human-fucking-beings and they laugh it off. They don't even consider it something real. Just today I had one of my room mates P&P geeks enter my room while I was playing it, and he commented "my God that looks like shit, why the fuck are you playing something like that?"

That from a man sitting in the next room rolling dice and casting spells with a battlemat and a character sheet.

Let's be honest: no matter how we slice it and how much the Codex has grown, representative of mainstream tastes it is not. If DA:I sells 6 billions and Pope sees a couple of his pet projects go unfunded, it has nothing to do with the spending habits of the core Codex crowd.

 

[Slow James]

Irrelevant

Cool story, bro.

 

[Bester]

I'll buy it on torrents some day when I'm really out of all possible things to do.

 

[cw8]

Wanted to buy initially, can't figure anything to be worse than DA2 right? Then I read the posts here and DalekFlay's posts on GOG, saved some good money.

 

[Slow James]

BTW, Infinitron, I think Pope Amole II's points about codexers buying it being some kind of travesty are ludicrous. Firstly, for most adult, working people (so not me until I finish this master's ), DA:I's pricetag is a random grab for spare change in the pocket.

Secondly, Pope infers that codexers buying DA:I are choosing not to buy something else. Well, certainly not because of money reasons. I doubt most poor-as-shit codexers are spending their wad on this game, and if you're lower middle class and above living in a Western country (i.e. part of the main source of sales for this game), you'll have no issues forking out 10 bucks for any indie game what might interest you.

In essence, I find no basis for a claim as preposterous and unfounded as "codexers buying DA:I are actively hurting the creation of indie RPGs."

In fact, if we investigated, there might even be truth in the reverse statement. Many gamers spend loads of money on games they never play because they promise one or two of the same trappins promised by [AAA game they like]. Just look at all the fags who gave money to our favourite Kickstarters like Wasteland 2 or Pillars of Eternity because they expected romance or Fallout 3-like mechanics or whatever the fuck retarded thing they were hoping for. That's mainstream cash going into our interests.

In all other areas of economics, mainstream products are necessary for the existance for a sub-market to exist at all. The same can easily, and is probably, true here.

I'm not saying it is, we really have no clue, it's just that I have a fucking hard time spotting how on earth Codexers throwing their dollars at DA:I could ever hurt the production of the games we like. The reason DA:I sells a fuck-trillion and [insert Pope's favourite RPG] doesn't is because DA:I has mainsteam appeal, while whatever Pope and the rest of us really like doesn't.

And let's be honest: no matter how we slice it and how much the Codex has grown, representative of mainstream tastes it is not.

A game sells a fuck-trillion because it is fun. That's why Minecraft, which by any stretch of the imagination should have been a total failure according to what the mainstream audience likes in a game. Blocky graphics, limited combat, no cutscenes, no voice acting... yet it is one of the highest selling games out right now.

Turn based games are SO impossible for the mainstream gamers... until you look at a game like FF10, which was wildly successful and turn based as fuck.

Silent protagonists can't sell in today's market... except every Bethesda game ever, so fuck your face, publishers.

Games with deep systems like crafting aren't what players want... until suddenly every game wants to do crafting, it's the cool thing all the kids love.


Features of a game do not make it antiquated or unplayable, nor do things like voice acting and action combat make something immediately fun to the masses. It is all about presentation, pacing and how enjoyable it is to just pick up and play. You can have a text-based game with no graphics that is bought by millions if you make the game enjoyable enough and grab the player's imagination and sense of fun.

The problem is that you can make things LOOK fun with some flashy graphics and whiz-bang gameplay demos. Which sells almost as good as games actually BEING fun. The same can be said of the movie industry, where movies with high production value and flashy trailers can sell tickets before people realize the movie isn't nearly what it was presented to be.