Dragon Age: Inquisition Review Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can take companions in any direction you want inside a class. You can even give Varric daggers (though why the eff would you do that...).

Ha ha...I know its insane, but I'm probably going to do that. Just something awesome about a squat little dwarf running into battle, chopping at peoples' knees
 
This game series has one glaring issue:

Too many interesting characters and you can only bring like 3 with you. I'd love to have Iron Bull come with me as well. But I'm not replacing Varrick. Or Cassandra. Or Whatever mage I bring with me (probably freddie mercury for debuffs).

Unless the game forces you to switch party members at points (like during a personal quest or at a point in the story) I don't ever see myself switching this dynamic. Varrick and Casanda for the Morrigan/Alistair banter, and Freddie Mercury to remind me that he has to break free.

This is the main problem I had with Mask of the Betrayer. You can have 3 party members with you and you get 4 and you could even have a 5 member party in the OC. I'm glad to see PoE is returning to the 6 member party size.
 
Ha ha...I know its insane, but I'm probably going to do that. Just something awesome about a squat little dwarf running into battle, chopping at peoples' knees

it'd probably be immersion breaking. If he's anything like he was in DA2 then his weapon, Bianca, levels up with him throughout the game and ends up being the best for him to use. Not to mention all the dialogue about how much he loves Bianca. If you give him something else and he keeps talking about his crossbow it'd be a bit weird lol
 
it'd probably be immersion breaking. If he's anything like he was in DA2 then his weapon, Bianca, levels up with him throughout the game and ends up being the best for him to use.

Varric can't use anything else than Bianca in this game. You don't level it up, but you can upgrade it with various stuff. Near end-game, his Bianca was pretty damn powerful with all my upgrades.
 
Is sixty fps really worth much for an rpg? Sure it's nice to have but pretty damn far down on the list of things that matter.

60 FPS matters in ALL games. There is more temporal information. Things look sharper, more detailed - and this adds to imemrsion - pretty important in an RPG. Animations are not only more detailed but more fluid. And most importantly there is a significant difference in control responsiveness. Everything from navigating the GUI to actually manipulating the game/your character.

Anyone who tells you differently is working for Ubisoft marketing. ;p

Now, there are certain game types in which it's tolerable to play at below 60 FPS, but those games tend to be the ones that are easiest to run at 60+ FPS, and regardless, they would STILL be better at 60 FPS.
 
Don't care about resolution I care about the performance and if the multiplayer is worth it or not.

My PC should have no issue but I won't ever touch the multiplayer on the PC version. We still have controller support confirmed on the PC correct?

Now it's down to Xbox (Friends will have it to play online), PS4 (no friends to play with might as well get the PC version).

Need a digital foundry performance analysis.

I'm in the same boat as well. Friends on PS4 or solo on PC. I had a blast with ME3 multiplayer so I'm sure I'll put in more than a few hours on DA:I multiplayer.

Can always buy the game on PC later when it's cheaper and hopefully there will be mods out by then. Unless performance is really lacking, digital foundry please, I'll probably go PS4.
 
60 FPS matters in ALL games. There is more temporal information. Things look sharper, more detailed - and this adds to imemrsion - pretty important in an RPG. Animations are not only more detailed but more fluid. And most importantly there is a significant difference in control responsiveness. Everything from navigating the GUI to actually manipulating the game/your character.

Anyone who tells you differently is working for Ubisoft marketing. ;p

Now, there are certain game types in which it's tolerable to play at below 60 FPS, but those games tend to be the ones that are easiest to run at 60+ FPS.

Well, 60fps is always better. But 30fps, especially in RPGs, isn't exactly as bad as "tolerable"
 
This is the main problem I had with Mask of the Betrayer. You can have 3 party members with you and you get 4 and you could even have a 5 member party in the OC. I'm glad to see PoE is returning to the 6 member party size.

Yeah, I'm loving the fact that in Wasteland 2 I have my 4 person part AND can recruit another 4 people too ;) Nice big coteries.
 
60 FPS matters in ALL games. There is more temporal information. Things look sharper, more detailed - and this adds to imemrsion - pretty important in an RPG. Animations are not only more detailed but more fluid. And most importantly there is a significant difference in control responsiveness. Everything from navigating the GUI to actually manipulating the game/your character.

Anyone who tells you differently is working for Ubisoft marketing. ;p

Now, there are certain game types in which it's tolerable to play at below 60 FPS, but those games tend to be the ones that are easiest to run at 60+ FPS, and regardless, they would STILL be better at 60 FPS.
For some games 60fps is required, RPG are rarely one of them.

Don't confuse a WANT with a NEED.
 
After seeing that fade weapon in action, I think I'm gonna have to go mage and knight enchanter. But I think I'm gonna jump into a multiplayer game right away so I can make sure that's what I like most.
 
Varric can't use anything else than Bianca in this game. You don't level it up, but you can upgrade it with various stuff. Near end-game, his Bianca was pretty damn powerful with all my upgrades.
So you get even less customization of the party´s weapons than there already is in Dragon age by picking Varric? Well that made the choice of who the designated rogue is going to be in my party a lot easier.
 
For some games 60fps is required, RPG are rarely one of them.

Don't confuse a WANT with a NEED.

Sorry, I searched through my entire post and I didn't see "required" anywhere. I said it matters. It does. To what degree, that's up to you, but it's an objectively better experience.
 
I tihnk they do better whent he main thread is more personal. Take BG/BG2, for example. Sure, the ramifications might have been global, but the main thread is really about your character's personal demons and background.

Eh, while the core storyline of BG2 is certainly personal it still suffers from the classic "you can screw around and do unrelated sidequests for 50+ hours and the main story will wait."

Bioware seems to be trying to address this with the Power system in Inquisition and I'm anxious to see how it works out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Inquisition is case where gameplay dictated story. I can see Bioware asking themselves "OK, we want to have a huge open world with tons of sidequests. What story framework can we use that would tie this together?"
 
YMMV of course. But to me it is. I haven't played an RPG at 30 FPS since.... hmmm....

For most, it offers a minimally improved experience that doesn't sway decisions on it. It would be nice, but it doesn't bother many except the most picky of people on graphics, I'd imagine.
 
Eh, while the core storyline of BG2 is certainly personal it still suffers from the classic "you can screw around and do unrelated sidequests for 50+ hours and the main story will wait."

Well, sure, but what si the alternative? A narrow path with limited quests all requiring immediate attention?

Blech. Add 80 hours of cutscenes and you might as well play a JRPG.
 
Aw man, I had the previous two games in my library since forever now. Guess I gotta go play them if I'm gonna really enjoy this one.
 
For most, it offers a minimally improved experience that doesn't sway decisions on it. It would be nice, but it doesn't bother many except the most picky of people on graphics, I'd imagine.

In my experience it doesn't bother people who for one reason or another can't play x game at 60 FPS, or have never played games at 60 FPS.

That's not universal, and like I said some games are definitley playable and fun at 30 FPS. But as I said, it's an objectively betetr experience. You cna say "minimally" all you want, but it's not to most people I know who routinely play games at 60 FPS.

Everyone seems to be praising the MCC for example, for bringing the Halo games back at 60 FPS.
 
I think I've finally decided Human Reaver first. Then Elven Tempest. Then Qunari Knight Enchanter.

Nice.

Damn I thought I spent a long time making my Destiny character... DA 3 gonna have me sat there for over an hour tweaking the look and playing style argh, LOL.
 
ITT:

B2PxaDrCcAAw6oj.jpg


Lol if she was a guy that would totally be me. I even work in a lab lol.
 
Well, sure, but what si the alternative? A narrow path with limited quests all requiring immediate attention?

Blech. Add 80 hours of cutscenes and you might as well play a JRPG.

That's not what I said at all. But I think it's very hard to do a compelling, original plot and still leave room for a lot of sidequests. I'm sure there are other examples but, offhand, The Witcher games are the only 2 that come to my mind at the moment.

As I said in my previous post, Bioware seems to be trying to address this in Inquisition by at least making the side activities tie into the over-arching narrative.
 
In my experience it doesn't bother people who for one reason or another can't play x game at 60 FPS, or have never played games at 60 FPS.

That's not universal, and like I said some games are definitley playable and fun at 30 FPS. But as I said, it's an objectively betetr experience. You cna say "minimally" all you want, but it's not to most people I know who routinely play games at 60 FPS.

Everyone seems to be praising the MCC for example, for bringing the Halo games back at 60 FPS.
Thirty frames per second for this game is definitely servicable considering the type of tactical combat. I mean you can freeze the action and plan things out almost like a rts game for crying out loud. Halo and all other first person shooters should be 60 frames per second.
 
I played Origins, but didnt find it that awesome. I mainly just rushed through the story. I even missed a major character that one of the dlcs focused on. I really am not a fan of that type of combat. I played dragon age 2 for about 10 minutes and stopped, just because I thought it was really boring. Is there any chance I will enjoy this?
 
Just saw the tactics menu options, they nerfed the heck out of tactics menu. Preferred? 4 rows of tactics? 2 used for potions? Gah!!!

The tactics menu is one of the best things about Dragon Age and FFXII to me. It let's me figure out how to set the party up so the AI don't screw up with my plans as much. I will surely be pausing often. Heck I might have to live in it with the slow motion play to move things along.
 
Hi Gaf,

I desperately want to play this game, but i need to know. Do i necessarily have to play Origins and its expansions (and part 2) in order to jump in?

IMO, no. Each DA game is its own self-contained story - just set within the same setting/universe.

There is of course the awesome Dragon Age: Keep to help fill in the really detailed lore, but I've found the main things you need to know for DAI are:

- Templars are a force that used to oppress Mages. Now the Mages have broken free of Templar control, but the two factions have been at war.
- There is a conclave (a gathering) of those two factions to try and establish peace.
- The game starts as the conclave is about to happen.

(I'm super simplifying it, but that's the basic idea)

Also, the Fade is an alternate dimension (in layman terms), held back from our world by "the veil". When the veil is torn, demons can come into the world through it.
 
In my experience it doesn't bother people who for one reason or another can't play x game at 60 FPS, or have never played games at 60 FPS.

That's not universal, and like I said some games are definitley playable and fun at 30 FPS. But as I said, it's an objectively betetr experience. You cna say "minimally" all you want, but it's not to most people I know who routinely play games at 60 FPS.

Everyone seems to be praising the MCC for example, for bringing the Halo games back at 60 FPS.

Comparing it to a FPS... Which are based on reaction times and 60fps makes a huge difference...

Its really hard to take you seriously right now.
 
Just saw the tactics menu options, they nerfed the heck out of tactics menu. Preferred? 4 rows of tactics? 2 used for potions? Gah!!!

The tactics menu is one of the best things about Dragon Age and FFXII to me. It let's me figure out how to set the party up so the AI don't screw up with my plans as much. I will surely be pausing often. Heck I might have to live in it with the slow motion play to move things along.

Yeah it just further cements my decision to do first playthrough Hard and second Nightmare. If the AI is nerfed might as well play on the difficulty where you have to micromanage anyway.
 
I played Origins, but didnt find it that awesome. I mainly just rushed through the story. I even missed a major character that one of the dlcs focused on. I really am not a fan of that type of combat. I played dragon age 2 for about 10 minutes and stopped, just because I thought it was really boring. Is there any chance I will enjoy this?

Probably not? I mean DA:O was all about the story and interactions. And you rushed through it because you didn't like the combat.
DA:2 changed the combat to be less strategy (which you said you hated) and more action - and you were bored.

Not all games are for everyone. :)
 
Comparing it to a FPS... Which are based on reaction times and 60fps makes a huge difference...

Its really hard to take you seriously right now.
I played Far Cry 3 on my PS3 and noticed nothing, only after reading a bit on GAF I learned about those differences. And still enjoyed it.

What am I trying to say?

I really don't care about fps.

I feel so alone. :-(
 
Quick question.

Is the story continuous with the previous of Dragon Age games? Thinking of getting this on PS4 after hearing so many good things but have missed out on the first games.

p.s. Also, is there an official thread for the game? Can't find it.
 
Quick question.

Is the story continuous with the previous of Dragon Age games? Thinking of getting this on PS4 after hearing so many good things but have missed out on the first games.

p.s. Also, is there an official thread for the game? Can't find it.

Yes, but not like Mass Effect. Different main character.

No OT yet.
 
Quick question.

Is the story continuous with the previous of Dragon Age games? Thinking of getting this on PS4 after hearing so many good things but have missed out on the first games.

p.s. Also, is there an official thread for the game? Can't find it.

Yeah dude .. its pretty much a continuation of the same lore and world. Tons of returning characters and story points.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom