The problem with Dragon Age Inquisition. (May be spoilers)

I don't have much of a problem with the gameplay at all. While there is some fetch quests, quests are done quickly. The combat system is alright, but can use a lot more enemy variety. It has good not great gameplay.

However DAI has the worst story in a Bioware game since Neverwinter Nights. It goes downhill after finding Skyhold. The story does have some great moments, such as both quests in recruiting Templars or mages, the attack on Haven and its aftermath, and Morrigan with her son if allowed by DAO, but the overall story is weak. The main villain is a clichéd evil overlord who wants to remake the world his way, has very little depth, and the final battle against him is dreadful. Half the party members have no reason to be in the game, with very weak connection to the main plot. Lackluster character quests, a huge step down from the character quests in DA2 and ME2, and the plot roles the characters had in ME3. Seriously only Cassandra and Iron Bull has big character quests along with advisors.

Nevermind the rushed and weak plot itself, with only 6 or 7 real missions, one which basically wraps up a novel. Outside the Mage and Templar quests, they are all weak and/or clichéd missions, reeking with every Biowarism. Seriously, another party infiltration quest, now that's the FOURTH time Bioware has done it. Outside the missions and the weaker than Bioware past games character content, we have the side story stuff, which is very weak. I noticed outside Harding's briefing, many of the maps had no cut scenes. No quests with big story choices, no moral dilemmas, etc. Never have I seen a game that Bioware made had the side quest content been so weak. The outside of cutscene dialogue wheel instead of helping the game, it becomes a crutch and a way for Bioware to get lazy. And nevermind that the approval system is basically meaningless. You have to actually punch them to get them to leave.

DAI is only a better game than DA2 overall because it checks more boxes, but surprisingly DA2 is better at key areas....storytelling, characterization, side quests (at least what DA2 calls secondary quests) and even some of the gameplay systems. In fact, Bioware simply put, also got rid of things that DA2 actually did right. No more friendship/rivalry system where you could develop a character by disagreeing with them. No more unique character trees that the party members had, replaced with the 9 specializations your own character can choose in DAI. No more multiple character quests for each character, and no more far more original plot.

DAI is a game that may be popular and well liked, but following what it does will not bode well in Bioware's future. What is encouraging at least is that the next mass Effect will not look to emulate DAI, at least what they say.

It needs more red, blue or green endings.

I thought the story in DA:I was fine, it was definitely more interesting then DA2. DA2 didn't even really have a main story. All of the acts in that game are individual stories which weren't strong enough on their own.

Specially the first act, go do a bunch of fetch quests for an hour so you can advance. Not to mention the characters, except for Varric, terrible.

And of course it doesn't have the instagram colored endings TGR loves.

Yea, I hated the characters in DA2 except Varric and maybe that slutty pirate chick. DAI doesn't have the best companions but Iron Bull and Cassandra are way better than any of the characters in DA2. Also, Anders and that emo elf from DA2 are fucking horrible.

The last third of the main story really went downhill.. We went from facing this, what appeared overwhelming opponent, to a impotent jackass who wasn't very dangerous.. And the finale scene was not only disappointing but made no sense.. It explains earlier that he could no longer open the rift like he could have in the beginning of the game, that it would never work now that the artifact was bound to you and had to find another way.. After you foil the other way he is just like "**** it! we'll do it live!".. It made absolutely no sense.. It felt forced and it felt like the writers ran out of ideas.. They must have all huddled in a room and said "Hey you know that event that started the rift that we later explain he no longer can do to achieve his goals? What a twist it will be for him to make him do the thing that the story explains he can not do anymore to force a final confrontation!".. I was confused that the entire sequence because the entire middle part of the story was closing the other avenues he was attempting to reach his goals.. Also he was alittle bit too cliched, the should have tried to humanize him to understand his goals and the reasons he was doing it outside of "MOARR POWA!".

I was OK with the story... It wasn't a masterpiece or anything, but it was the first time in a while I actually enjoyed being my character in a game. I'm not about to nitpick a developer that actually puts effort into telling a story, when so many others write stories akin to the skill of a baboon. The solas ending was especially cool too if you read up on the significance of it.

Coripheus wasn't Saren or anything... But there were enough cool moments throughout that kept me engaged in what would ultimately happen.

I think Mass Effects new tale has the ability to be something special, but I worry the franchise is going to be even more shooter, even less rpg and that worries me.

Absolutely agree with the story.

Corypheus was just bad villain design. You don't even get to despise him enough (as villain) because he wasn't seen until the last segments of the game. He did had good lines, but was forgettable.

Huge step back from the Arishok or Meredith from DA2.

Hell, even the leader of the Mage Rebellion Fiona, who's a big deal in the comics was not given enough screentime. When you get to even remotely confront her by the outcome of your decisions, she's just treated as a random regular enemy and not given a cutscene / dialogue to acknowledge her downfall.

Wrong, lets hear that buzzer sound.

DA2 definitely did have a main story, it is about how a city's society collapsed leading to global war because everyone instigated everything and how one person, Hawke, was not wholly responsible. The individual stories converge, you have to pay attention.

Yes....there are so many good villains from Bioware Jon Irenicus, Master Li, Saren. The Illusive Man, even Malak. Hell, even General Rakton, who was the Trooper's antagonist in SWTOR was a good Bioware villain. Corypheus is not, hell, he is even worse than he was in DA2 Legacy, where he was introduced.

And the thing with DA2 is, it doesn't have a main villain. The entire city was, including much of your party. All that instigated the downward spiral that was Kirkwall. That's what many idiots simply do not get. So we get another Sauron in the sequel.

Honestly I just lost interest in the story after reaching Skyhold. The premise itself was generic for a medieval fantasy but something I didn't mind putting up with, so long as there was an interesting villain to redeem the cliched plot. Corypheus wasn't that.

Wow. Ok I'm going to start by saying i love dragon age Inquisition, but yet; now you say it, I completely agree with pretty much everything tc said. Not sure if this now ruins the game for me now realising how glaring the floors are in the game but ah well. Nice thread anyway :p

The problem with DA:I for me is that it crashes every half an hour or so, rendering the game very much unplayable for me.

From the little I played, though, "additions" like PRESS AND HOLD TO ATTACK! didn't really make me want to play more.

What I hated about the gameplay was the lack of skills you could use. Remember how in Origins you didn't even know where to start with investing your skills due to the sheer amount of trees available? Inquisition gives you fire, ice, lightning and spirit healer branches as a magician. At first I thought you just had to buy spells at shops simply because I couldn't believe that it had gotten this shitty. What I do like is the crafting, equipping, enhancing, to keep it short the amount of customization Inquisition gave you when it comes to armoring your character and the character selection screen (Qunari <3). Otherwise the game didn't do much, and to be honest, when I compare the side quests in Origins to the ones in Inquisition I get depressed. In Origins, while randomly walking through a forest, you could find an old magician in a dispute with an old talking tree, here you get letters about dead loved ones and boring, generic drivel like that. Also, the war room was a nice idea, but it is a shame that the quests there barely affect your gameplay (I was a Lavellan, and I was pissed about how no one gave a shit when my entire clan was wiped out). As such, I can't really call the gameplay good.

Agreed with the moments you pointed out, and also with the assessment that the overall story is weak. However, I wouldn't blame it on Corypheus. On paper, he is far from cliched and generic. A magister who reached the Golden city, became one of the very first darkspawn, the man who said a badass line like "Beg that I succeed, for I have seen the throne of the gods, and it was empty. " sure does not sound bad to me. His entire motivation wasn't to destroy the world, it was merely to take the reigns of a world he saw as broken and deserted due to the absence of a god. Meaning, unlike generic overlords, he actually had a reason for his goal (Golden city + 'empty throne'), a goal which boils down to giving meaning to a lost world, even if that meaning is corrupted / twisted. Nothing truly outstanding per se, but it offers a lot of potential, and frankly, the one reason why I can't call him a good villain is because he lacked exposition. His concept was nice, it was the execution, or rather, the lack of focus on him that made him generic.

Cassandra, Solas, Varric, Blackwall, Dorian, the advisors and Vivienne had a reason to be there. The ones who were truly random were Cole, Bull and goddamn Sera. I never talked to the girl, so I can't talk about whether she was written well or not, but she is so annoying I never even wanted to bother about her, but I digress. Anyways, I didn't dislike the character quests to be honest. I liked everything involving Dorian and Solas, and as you mentioned yourself, Cassandra, Bull, and the advisors have some rather lengthy quests themselves. Aside from a certain few, I did like most party members, so I guess even lesser quests and events were okay-ish for me (lol at Cassandra reading shitty books Varric wrote). But I understand your feeling, they weren't as epic in nature as in other games, nor did they reveal/develop the cast all too much.

As I said, the side content is utter crap in here, no need to debate that. The approval system never was that impactful, was it? Even in Origins the only real way to lose companions was to enrage them by your plot choices like destroying the urn of sacred ashes. The lack of a rivalry system is a real shame though. Nevertheless, I wouldn't call Dragon Age 2's characterization better, mainly because the dialogues you could have with your companion in Inquisition were already enough to make them look interesting.

Again, it wasn't his concept that was bad, it was his implementation in the game. His design was fairly good, or rather, held a good amount of potential.
Regardless of what they did with Fiona, I liked that Tevinter was actually somewhat involved in this game, so I can forgive that. I'd even propose to have the next game take place in Tevinter, as it seriously is the most interesting place in Thedas.

One thing I REALLY have to praise the game for though is the fact that this one IS a dragon age, with 10 high dragons and whatnot. Nothing game-changing, but hey, better than nothing.

The game had a lot of problems but the biggest of them all is the Ass Creed/FC feel. Huge world, map full of stuff to do but in reality there's like 4-5 different things for you to do. I finished DA2 but couldn't bother with DA:I...

I played the XBL free trial. Other than a strong presence of Oblivion Gates, I was meh. I would still buy it but just not right now. Might pick it up in a bargain bin at a flee market one day.

Here is my character a few missions in.

The main problem is Mike Ladlaw, the game director. He suffocates the game. The writers did a good job, it was well written, but its not well directed and it shows. Corypheus is that example. He could have been a great foil to the protagonist if executed correctly, like Saren and The Illusive Man were to Shepard, but instead we got a routine dark lord whose motives are not touched upon outside of a little exposition. And he could have been a unique villain in gaming, an atheist dark lord opposing a heroic religious backed movement, the games writers did a great job with the portrayal of religion (a flawed institution but with those who seek to do the right thing), but Ladlaws direction dovetails it. Instead of having a complete story, its an advertisement for the sequel or expansion in the end. Nevermind the side stuff doesn't integrate well with the story.

The only characters that mattered in the story were Cassandra, Leliana, Varric, Solas, Josephine, and Cullen along with later Morrigan. That's it. Dorian and Cole take roles in missions but then become irrelevant. Blackwall, Iron Bull, and Sera simply have no real role in the story, and Vivienne only becomes key to the story if she becomes Divine. Contrast with DA2 where everyone in the party was part of the plot, outside of Fenris and Merrill who were extremely important with the themes of the story so they belong. Nevermind DAI also had very weak character quests outside Cassandra and the advisors, where they just involve a conversation. DA2 on the other hand had three character quests per character (outside the sibling). Look at Merrill, she gets a whole map to have quests on. I do call DA2's characterization better, they had much more character development, which DAI lacks outside say Iron Bull, Cole, and Leliana. And even with the friendship/rivalry system, members can leave or turn against you depending on your choices.

If DAI is the future of Bioware storytelling, than Bioware has a terrible future ahead. Its such a huge step back from ME3, that's for sure. Its a game that tries not to cause offense and it shows.

@FoxbatAlpha: the red rocker... Nailed it.

@TheEroica: he looks kinda funny on close ups. I made his face sunk in to the point where his beard doesn't contact his face. It is a certain quality he posses.

The problem with DAI is first and foremost the UI and menus, followed by the shit action-oriented gameplay, finally backed up with lackluster story. It could've been great.....

Its hard to understand how a company that puts so much time into its lore, which is insanely detailed, could also come up with such a piss weak main thread that amounts to just save the world from the evil bad guy.

I also think they've pinched quite a lot of story moments from the Harry Potter series as well.

Bioware has always been known for good characters, not so much story.

If you want great story in rpg go play Obsidian games or CD Projekt Red

KOTOR, Jade Empire, and ME1 and ME3 have good plots

And not all Obsidian games have good plots, Alpha Protocol and Dungeon Siege III for example.

Well it felt like they had different teams of writers in all honesty doing different parts of the game.. Looking back at it, the game feels REALLY modular.. I expect we are going to see some huge DLC's in the future.. Now whether they are going to be worthwhile or not is anyones guess.. Though I am quite surprised there hasn't been any word of a DLC.. I mean the game released 4 months ago.. It is still frusrtrating that bioware hasn't put it's DLC on sale, like ever.. The Mass Effect 2 and 3 DLC's have become more expensive than the actual base games.. You can get the entire trilogy of Mass effect for $15 on sale.. Which is slightly more expensive than just one of the larger DLC for ME3 alone..

KOTOR was definitely a great game with a good story.. I don't understand the hate for that game.. People forget nothing quite like KOTOR existed for Star Wars before that.. And it didn't just give us great narrative unlike anything before it, but it created one of the most popular and best eras in Star Wars fiction..

what does this have to do with SW? blog it

#@texasgoldrush:

That I can agree with. At first it seemed to me as if you were criticizing Corypheus' very design, not his implementation. But yes, the execution of the story was what dragged it down so much. Regarding the religious aspect of Inquisition, I liked talking to Giselle and Cassandra about whatever they knew about it. Giselle was more tolerating than other characters in the game, but it was also quite interesting and realistic for her to react in a condescending manner to Dorian and in general everything that defied what she had been taught, showing that she was not yet capable of truly accepting everyone else. An example would be her justification of the war led against the dalish in case your character is an elf. So indeed, the amount of knowledge we learned about the Andrastian Church is on another level than in the previous games and one of the aspects which the execution didn't **** up (which can be attributed to the fact that it would have been hard to do so considering that most that we learnt came from talking to side characters, a mechanic that is based more on script than implementation).

Dorian and Vivienne are not tied to the main story as much as other characters, but some basic connection is there (at least more so than with Cole, Sera, and Iron Bull). For Dorian it would be his connection to the Venatori, a group of Tevinter magisters obedient to Corypheus. Or rather, the fact that Corypheus is a former Tevinter magister and basically everything the Venatori wanted to be makes it viable for that faction and Dorian to take part in the game. Not necessary, but understandable. Vivienne is only relevant when elected as a Divine, true, but the fact that she's a contender is already SOME sort of justification. That she is an important aristocrat and a former first enchanter adds to her role in a faction as political as the Inquisition. Cole, aside from the templar story-line, and Bull have no relevancy to the story at all. The worst would still be Sera, I can't even imagine why she would be aiding the Inquisition. It seems contradictory to her character, and makes every scene with her unbearable.
Actually, I'd argue that Blackwall was somewhat relevant to the story of the game. Incoming spoiler:

While he is no real Grey Warden, he is quite a devoted man, and idolizes them, views them as heroes (which often leads to banter with Vivienne, dunno if you had both in your party). Later in the game, we find out more about the connection between darkspawn and the Grey Wardens, thus adding to what the first game already established. Corypheus, having the power to simulate the calling, was easily able to corrupt the whole faction, took away their freedom and sanity, and then used them as his minions. It was almost inevitable for the Grey Wardens to appear again thanks to Corypheus' identity and true nature. Blackwall may not have been influenced by the calling himself (actually, a situation like that would have held a lot of potential for a potential moral dilemma, too bad the developers didn't take that path), but having him witness the fall of an organization he idolized for his entire life is quite an impactful scene and only adds to our own opinions about the faction). Again, he was not truly needed in the story, but he had a reason to be there and positively influenced some of the scenes in the main story. Aside from that, I did find his character quests to be quite good, with the revelation about him being Thom Rainer and whatnot. That quest at least let you choose whether to forgive Blackwall for what he had done as Thom Rainer, or to shun him. Combined with his idolization of the Grey Wardens, it sheds some light on his desire to become a better man, or rather, a more just one.

I just sort of found the characters in Dragon Age 2 to be...lackluster, or boring for a lack of better words. An aspect of characterization I value in games and stories in general is the memorability of the cast, if they had any notable quirks or anything remotely weird/unique about them. As much as the cast may have developed, I just found myself to be bored when having to deal with most of them. Then again, this is a really subjective criticism of mine, so it may just as well not count.
Iron Bull got developments? Can't remember any notable ones at the moment tbh.

Still hoping for a sequel that takes place in Tevinter.

As much as I loved all those games, they didn't have amazing stories...... It was more about the characters in the gameworld more than the stories.

Hell, KOTOR 2 had a much much much better story than KOTOR 1, Obsidian showed Bioware how to write a KOTOR rpg (writting in KOTOR 2 was far better than in KOTOR 1 or SWTOR) not to mention Neverwinter Nights 2 had better story than NWN1 (especially its expansion pack Mask Of The Betrayer). Me, same thing more about the characters than the story itself. Once again if you want more story, Obsidian or CD Projekt Red >>

I love Bioware for Baldurs Gate, KOTOR, ME,etc.. but there characters are far better than some of the generic average stories they do imo. The draw for me to BIoware is the characters and the worlds they create.

The problem I had with DAI is it was too big for the level cap. Weird I know to complain about an open world RPG being too big but you could happily skip most of it because most of the areas were similar levels and the loot was all the same. The loot was rubbish too.

I loved the game but if it had been up to me I would have had a much higher level cap and made it slightly more linear and steered people towards certain places when they got in level range. That way they would have wanted to see the every area in the game and become more powerful and get better loot before the final area which would have been much more difficult (higher end of the level cap).

As it was, I visited every place but mostly just to see the sights. You could finish that game while actually giving half of it a wide berth which I thought was strange. Still a great game though. Even the throwaway plot didn't bother me much it was just great fun to explore.

i enjoyed the game. invisible walls, annoying characters, and the other tons of small bothers did not keep me from playing through. i am glad it was much more open than Dragon Age 2 and much more rpg based. 2 was just a huge disappointment in every way for me.

i would love to see big "expansion" packs. not just crappy DLC that has become the trend.

Agree to a point. I think KOTOR 2 is better written than KOTOR 1, but the first is better directed, outside the character direction, where 2 wins.

ME1 and ME3 have good plots however. In fact I scrutinize ME1 and ME3 and find that they actually hold up. ME2 has a weak plot however.

There were definitely more than a single problem with DA:I. Still pretty good though, far more enjoyable than DA2 as an overall product.

This is a Games Discussion topic either way.

I will have to admit even though the big bad looked intimidating he sure was lacking.

This ENTIRE sequence just makes me face palm. So many blown opportunities and poor direction moments

1. What a stupid waste of Hawke. It was a great idea bringing him/her back but they really used him/her poorly. Once again, not fully taking a step forward. He/she would have been a great party member. Lets not forget, that was a stupid choice. Why should I even have to leave anybody behind, just run. Forced choice.

2. That's not why you would exile the Wardens. Bioware did provide a good choice here, use the Wardens as an ally but risk them falling prey to Corypheus's power or exiling them, keeping them out of reach. But nope, Bioware forces the inquisitior to be petty and vengeful, banishing them for idiotic petty reasons and never providing a good rational reason to banish them.

3. Ugh, Blackwall can stay? Are you kidding. Talk about all choice and no consequence. So basically, you can avoid the negative ramifications of your choice by choosing not to suffer from it, whatever. And this is before you know who Blackwall really is.

In contrast to this...this was Bioware doing it better. (Mass effect 3 spoilers)

Here, there is no way to save Tali. Take this choice and a major character dies. You cannot change the consequences. No cop outs. Its moments like this that DAI completely lacks.

"The problem with Dragon Age Inquisition"

Is that it sucks, the story is nothing more than SJW Circle Jerk

Better than that pillars of eterenity 2d crap that hermits love to brag about

Forget Pillars of Eternity....Tides of Numenera is where its going to be at.

lol still top down indy looking

Isn't that what Sony are forcing on their gamers ATM? Those indies...

@Shielder7: /eyeroll

It's the kind of game you can boot up and do some side quests in for 20 minutes or so, so in my eyes it's a good game. A fantastic game even. It only takes up as much of your time as you want it to.

However, at great cost to its story, the reason why I play Bioware games.

DAI had one of the worst since Neverwinter Nights.

You seem to like one thing while I like another. How very interesting. Bioware stories have always been kind of crap. Much of the focus seems to be placed on the characters which is something they do quite well though.

Not really, Bioware has some very good plots....like Mass Effect 1 and 3 as well as several class stories in SWTOR. Also while the sequel is kinda better, KOTOR had a great story, and Jade Empire is not bad either.