Dragon Age III: Inquisition

[Vajra]

[Ak3mi]

Originally Posted by Sakuranbo

Only a month and a bit to go. I love Dragon Age, this seems like a really good mix of strategy and action.

[Flying Dagger]

Been watching some more videos: seem like the gameplay may once again disappoint.
There still seem to be a lack of meaningful skills: other than your attacks, i would like to see more buffs and debuffs.

I remember in DA:O, a low power blizzard spell can also act as a fire ward (since blizzard gives fire resistance to everyone underneath). Some of the very unique combos such as oil+fire are just a lot more memorable compared to the status based system in DA2.

DA has always been sort of plagued by its attack-spam based gameplay. Just use whatever is available. The mana/stamina thing: not sure if they have fixed by finally implementing regeneration (in the past, adding points only increase your maximum pool, which is really pointless imo), this lead to just telling the AI to potion spam...

Also curious if they added avoidance into the game... melee rogues have always been somewhat inferior to warriors...

[BetoJR]

Originally Posted by Flying Dagger

Been watching some more videos: seem like the gameplay may once again disappoint.

Yeah, speak for yourself. I'm finding it all very interesting.

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

https://www.origin.com/en-au/store/b...andard-edition

Currently can get DAO for free on Origin, if you don't have it already.

[Xacual]

Originally Posted by BetoJR

Yeah, speak for yourself. I'm finding it all very interesting.

I'm honestly curious because what about it is interesting? I'm not really seeing anything about the game that looks at all appealing. Admittedly I never thought DA:O was anything but an average game so I never rode the hype train there but the gameplay for DA:I looks extremely boring based on the combat videos I've seen.

[BetoJR]

Originally Posted by Xacual

I'm honestly curious because what about it is interesting? I'm not really seeing anything about the game that looks at all appealing. Admittedly I never thought DA:O was anything but an average game so I never rode the hype train there but the gameplay for DA:I looks extremely boring based on the combat videos I've seen.

Well, you just answered your own question, right there.
DA:O is one of my favorite games of all time, and the mix of strategic micro-managing and real-time combat being displayed so far in DA:I very much appeals to me - you can play it slow or fast, it's entirely at your own discretion. Also, it all looks really pretty and I have no doubt the story will be glorious.

So, what's not to like?

[Flying Dagger]

What is there not to like? The lack of uniqueness of an attack ("this is an aoe attack, and this is a single target attack"), a playstyle that seem to be once again revolving around spamming whatever button that lights up (MMOs tend to have priorities and rotations, while other RPGs such as Witcher and Dark Souls are timing based: you want to dodge/parry/block a hit and only swing your weapon at the right time).

DA:O at least had some rather interesting spell combos and builds (such as battlemage, which runs heavily on reserved mana but is extremely tanky - though boring to play).

Story wise I have voiced out my concerns in an earlier post, probably a few months back. A lot of the story seem to be getting pushed aside again... Remember the whole mage revolting across the world? What about stuff like the darkspawn? And dragons being aspects of old gods (correct me on this one if I am wrong)? So far the story in DA:I seems to be about "getting everyone to stop fighting, band together to form this United Nations like society (the inquisition) and combat this new threat. How about more meta political issues such as a possible invasion of Feredan? Will the grey wardens, something we still know little about, just show up twice in a game, pretty much only to remind us "oh we are still here"?

Orlean is not a run-down hub like Feredan, nor a prisoner camp like Kirkwall. It is supposed to be very culture rich, an established powerhouse in Thedas. This is why I have very high expectations for the game in terms of story and settings.

In DA:O, you have ambiguous choices that have a somewhat lasting effect to how the world is shaped (until they decide to canonize certain choices/avoid them all together in DAII). DA2 seem to always put you in the 'good guy' position until... maybe the very end where you choose two sides. I don't want to see these "everyone get along and let's fight a common foe" story. Even *IF* the various factions must attempt to band together, there should still be a lot of conflicts (see the Mass Effect world), people shouldn't get along - and the templars and mages within the Inquisition should try to undermine each other's position to a point where it is almost detrimental to the alliance...

At least in DA:I, I think your mages no longer dances around during the fight with their staff... that was kind of funny to watch...

[Chaos2Frozen]

[BetoJR]

Cool vid!

So, Flying Dagger, you haven't really been paying attention to the videos, have you? Not a jab, a legitimate question.

Because I can very clearly notice differences between the attacks/spells, the classes (a rogue archer plays nothing like a stealthy dual wielder, or a mage for that matter) and the tactical camera/real-time combat. This is classic WRPG gameplay, and I see no reason to mix it up with the other games (or genres) you mentioned.

Also, how can you say that "the story seem to be getting pushed aside again"? That's one thing this series has never been guilty of. You may not like the story (and that's your prerogative), but it has always been central to the core game. Even with the semi-open world approach that they seem to be taking on this one, I don't see that as a concern. This is not GTA, after all.

The mage/templar "war" is in the game. They showed, several times, group skirmishes between those factions that you may or may not participate in. That's there, in the game. I'm sure they'll explore it.

The darkspawn threat was averted in the first game. They'll most likely still show up, but the archdemon is long gone. Without it, they lack guidance and motivation. So, why concentrate on them so much?

And dragons are dragons. Not all contain aspects of old gods - those are usually the vessel of the archdemon, though, after the dragon is tainted. They're simply majestic beasts.

Finally, I disagree with your notion that DA2 seems to always put Hawke in the "good guy" position... The character is more of an (unlucky) everyman and his relationships are entirely cultivated by you. I've always preferred sarcastic mean Lady Hawke, who was rivals with as many characters as possible, myself. Also, I'm one of those that actually liked DA2, so...

As for the rest of your points, I'd suggest waiting for the game. A little over a month, now.
One thing, tho: while Orlais is supposed to be a location for at least a mission, it's not the main scenario. Don't hold your breath for it.

[Who]

From what I remember, I'll say this much; the archdemon topic was brought up in DA2, and will more than likely be addressed again in DA:I as a continuation of what happened in DA2. How important it is to the actual DA:I main plot, I can't really say, though.

And the mage/templar war is definitely the basis for the Inquisition. I won't disagree that it'll take a backseat to the 'get everyone to play nicely long enough to kill the big bad', however.

[Chaos2Frozen]

As I've recalled, a number of people weren't happy that DA2 broke away from "save the world from ancient evil" formula, so I see Inquisition as trying to bring that back.

Most of Bioware's RPG these days seems to be half gathering allies, one quarter strengthening them, and only fighting the big evil in the last quarter.

[Flying Dagger]

Sure, an archer plays differently from a melee rogue, but how is it different from say, a mage? You got your single target shot, multi target shot. Mages got their single target spells, and multi target spells. A fire spell might leave behind a burning DoT, while a poisoned arrow may leave behind a poison DoT, a cold spell might snare/freeze a target, while a pinning arrow might daze or pin down the target... and for the most part you just want to unload all your spells asap.

I think the game needs more situational abilities.

And how about a melee rogue and a dps warrior? Mind you, a dps warrior too, wants to flank and enemy and not just facetank everything.

This article is another person's perspective on the same problem:
http://www.idigitaltimes.com/dragon-...ng-game-389278

[zztop]

The developers have confirmed Inquisition mage characters will not have instant healing spells that fully restore your health bars, unlike the first 2 games.
Healing can only be done through drinking potions, other related items, or resting at camp.

One of the head writers said they purposely did this to increase the game's challenge levels and prevent players from 'spamming' health spells, which they felt caused imbalances in gameplay. Quote "...by reducing healing, by actually defining HP to a range that can have real numbers in it, we can better balance encounters."

The writer said they wish to make players adopt more tactical approaches when fighting enemies, and to take more advantage of character abilities to lessen damage to themselves. Quote "Limiting health and balancing enemies accordingly makes more tactical choices viable while keeping the challenge."

He concluded by saying that Nightmare level (the hardest) will give the greatest challenge, while Casual(easiest level) is a walk in the park for players, citing his 7 yr old child made it through 2 hours of gameplay battling without being wiped out.

http://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/co...soning_behind/

[Chaos2Frozen]

Originally Posted by zztop

One of the head writers said they purposely did this to increase the game's challenge levels and prevent players from 'spamming' health spells, which they felt caused imbalances in gameplay. Quote "...by reducing healing, by actually defining HP to a range that can have real numbers in it, we can better balance encounters."

I have no idea what this means.

[zztop]

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

I have no idea what this means.

I think they mean they want to reduce player's reliance on repeatedly casting healing spells to keep characters alive when fighting strong enemies.

[Chaos2Frozen]

Originally Posted by zztop

I think they mean they want to reduce player's reliance on repeatedly casting healing spells to keep characters alive when fighting strong enemies.

No I got that part, but what I meant is this line specifically- "by actually defining HP to a range that can have real numbers in it"

[zztop]

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

No I got that part, but what I meant is this line specifically- "by actually defining HP to a range that can have real numbers in it"

That I'm not too sure. Sorry.

[Flying Dagger]

It means it is easier for the developers to know how much damage can be dealt out reasonably, instead of wondering if ppl will have a party with no healers, 1 healer, or 2 healers.

[LoweGear]

Since this is the current Dragon Age thread, Dragon Age: Origins is currently FREE in the Origin store till tomorrow.