Support NeoGAF

[Tohsaka]

I liked Inquisition a lot more.

 

[Wulfram]

Is Obsidian really that great at writing? The main reason I can't motivate myself to play Pillars of eternity is the story. I have played Kotor 2 and I liked it when I started but when I replayed it years later I couldn't stand Kreia's ramblings which had once seemed so wise.

Lots of people love them, but they don't really work for me. Their writing is generally clever, but for me not engaging. Also sometimes I think its too "purple" - it draws too much attention to itself.

 

[Alebelly]

If that is true that is pretty terrible, and yeah, Fallout 4 is flat as hell. The main character is particularly bad which gave them a lot of flak. It does somewhat make sense to have a silent protagonist in a game with the customisation levels of Fallout. People aren't going to beat Bethesda up for it. What they did respond badly to is when sketchy quality VA is added.

Fallout 4 seems to be trying to be a set in stone main character, such as a Geralt, but in a world where they still want to have the Fallout 3/NV level of avatar customisation. Especially with going after the partner/child storyline. It didn't quite work. Frankly, it was as if they were trying to "Mass Effect" up Fallout 4. Forgetting that deep roleplay is a huge part of Fallout, just like it is TES, whereas other games get by with limited character role play (Mass Effect, which really just comes down to male or female) or none at all (TW3, Geralt is the main character, end of). Yes the actual quests in TW3 still have roleplay in your decision making, but the writing is all based on a set in stone avatar, which is Geralt. In TES you can be a damn cat or lizard if you want, Fallout sticks to humans, but you can create a pretty diverse human and want to roleplay to a degree and if Bethesda shoehorns you a bit too much into a voice acted, pre-set story, it breaks the immersion. These games often need a pretty "loose" main story, which can make writing challenging, but then the sidequests, lore, characters and so on can provide a lot of top quality writing to be added to the main story.

This is going a bit off-topic, but the thing both series have in common right now is a huge dip in writing quality for some overlapping and unique reasons.

I think this is the article I read, but it does seem there's a fundamental problem with this, because this actor did have a somewhat large/important role to the narrative
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...or-who-didnt-know-he-was-working-on-fallout-4

Also Todd Howard seems undecided in how to approach the narrative in his games, and he alo seems a bit ambiguous about the importance of Fallout to the studio in general. (But that could just be me reading between the lines)
http://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/...alks-switch-vr-and-elder-scrolls-wait-w451761

Old news, but still interesting

 

[Wulfram]

I don't think an actor needs to know that they're in "Fallout 4" to deliver a good performance. You can give an actor the relevant context for their character without telling them the game.

 

[Ridesh]

DAI is a great game with abysmal sidequest.

MEA is a mediocre game with good combat and mediocre everything else.

 

[Audioboxer]

I don't think an actor needs to know that they're in "Fallout 4" to deliver a good performance. You can give an actor the relevant context for their character without telling them the game.

Yeah, but the above reads like a publisher crawling a bit too far up inside their own ass. When we start to get to the point where it's CEOs and suits running every square inch of games development like a run of the mill business venture. Where's the passion? Where is the real care for the IP? Where is your sense of god damn respect for your own work/projects? $$$.

Suit fuckery also heavily suggested with

There's also a more cynical angle to consider. If an actor isn't being told they're working on Fallout 4, a game that had 12 million copies shipped to retailers around the world for its launch day alone, how are they supposed to properly negotiate their fee for the project? They can't.

Although, for the quality of performance angle I'd like to focus more on actors being given suitable information for the role. Not acting like a damn Fallout game is a Government FBI secret. Sadly, given how badly this industry treats voice actors, I wouldn't be surprised if part of keeping it low-key isn't "omg the leaks bro", but partly to do with contract negotiation.

 

[Alebelly]

I don't think an actor needs to know that they're in "Fallout 4" to deliver a good performance. You can give an actor the relevant context for their character without telling them the game.

Read the article, its interesting

 

[hydruxo]

Andromeda has better gameplay but I think DAI surpasses it in just about everything else.

 

[Wulfram]

Read the article, its interesting

I read the article, I don't think it made a persuasive argument that the actors performance would be improved by knowing the name of the game

 

[Rodney McKay]

Is Obsidian really that great at writing? The main reason I can't motivate myself to play Pillars of eternity is the story. Though suppose the weird mystical stuff might have played a role.

I have played Kotor 2 and I liked it when I started but when I replayed it years later I couldn't stand Kreia's ramblings which had once seemed so wise.

Personally, I feel the same way you did about KOTOR 2.

I think in general with the Obsidian games I've played, they have a problem with brevity in their writing. Their characters talk A LOT which I think is refreshing for their fans, but personally I didn't actually find the writing better than other developers, there's just more of it.

DAI is a great game with abysmal sidequest.

MEA is a mediocre game with good combat and mediocre everything else.

Haha, as simple as this is, it matches my feelings in them.

To expand on what I posted earlier, I did play a lot of ME:A, and it was OK for the most part, but unlike every other Bioware RPG (I've played them all since KOTOR 1), I feel no urge to replay it.

That's not a knock on the world's or the gameplay or even the story itself, but rather how little your decisions seem to matter. In most of the games, you don't really see a result from your choices, but they still felt like big decisions and you could imagine how they'd play out (even if they ended up being minor). But in ME:A, none of the choices felt big or important. Choosing whether some random characters die or another one lives, choosing to blow up and enemy base or not, choosing a military or science base. I have zero urge to go back and do things differently because it doesn't feel like it would matter.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

They're not less popular on GAF, though. If GAF were more representative of the general gamer we'd talk about COD, Madden and Ubi open world games a lot more.

They are.

FFXV is less popular then Horizon for exemple or The Witcher or even Fallout around here.

And that's the biggest Japanese game of the decade.

There's just a lot of talk around them here then elsewhere but even here they're quite niche compared to the Western AAA juggernauts.

For someone that's never played either series, are either worth buying?(PC)

I would say that DA:I is enjoyed best if you played the previous instalments (yes even Dragon Age 2) otherwise most of what made it engaging for me (returning characters, exploration of new territories only spoken about etc.) would be lost.

If you don't want to play the previous game of either series, Andromeda is more suitable but I don't know if it's even worthwhile to play it.

 

[xealo]

I thought gaf hated Dragon Age: Inquisition.
How the fuck, Divinity: Original Sin didnt win RPGOTY?

Opinions on the game has generally turned for many since it came out with the releases of better console rpgs than DA:I.

However, in 2014 it was one of the first bigger RPGs to hit the new console generations, and were received perhaps more favourably than it should have, while by no means a bad game.

 

[Son Of Sparda]

Yeah, having DLC like that is always a compromise. In actuality only about 30-40% or so of people even finish the main story of any game, not just DA:I and even less so with DLC. Obviously they learned a lot from DA:I when they got to make their DLCs in such a way that obvious deficiencies were greatly improved. But yeah, with regards to the story and the revelations, I guess it's going to come down to how well they summarize DA:I/DA:I DLC's events in DA4 for new players/returning players who never bought the DLC. It's a concern of mine, mostly because the situation is so nuanced, but I'm hoping for the best.

The thing with Bioware and their DLCs is that, the devs seem to be on the right track (as to what people liked and didn't from the base game) with DLCs, but when they finally go on to develop the next big sequel, they somehow mess it up in another way.

So I personally don't find them making good DLCs that much reassuring anymore.

As for the Trespasser and what it did storywise.

Spoiler

No matter what they do, it's just gonna feel cheap and frustrating to DA:I only players, when they say that the Inquisition is disbanded and Solas was the big villain all along.

It might've been a good DLC, but I don't think it was a smart idea for Bioware to do it that way. That should've been an extra epilogue thing in the base DA:I or some sort of a prologue in DA4.

 

[Yeul]

The thing with Bioware and their DLCs is that, the devs seem to be on the right track (as to what people liked and didn't from the base game) with DLCs, but when they finally go on to develop the next big sequel, they somehow mess it up in another way.

So I personally don't find them making good DLCs that much reassuring anymore.

As for the Trespasser and what it did storywise.

Spoiler

No matter what they do, it's just gonna feel cheap and frustrating to DA:I only players, when they say that the Inquisition is disbanded and Solas was the big villain all along.

It might've been a good DLC, but I don't think it was a smart idea for Bioware to it that way. That should've been an extra epilogue thing in the base DA:I or some sort of a prologue in DA4.

Yeah I get that. The base ending of DA:I leaves a lot to be desired and not everyone wants to go into ancillary material/DLC in order to feel like the book has been closed on a game. It's a valid criticism for sure. I do think BioWare has a tendency to overcorrect, which I've mentioned before. I think the thing is though, when you're working on a AAA game and you're in the weeds of development, it's a constant measure of what gets cut versus something else. It's a Sophie's choice situation that might never result in what people want. As for DLC, in some cases DLC development might begin while the base game goes into cert so that extra time and detachment from the base game where they know what the problems are can be corrected in the DLC. An example would be something like why they have to keep adding in the Black Emporium as a patch versus having it in the main game even though they know people want it from the get-go. It's really a matter of resources and triaging.

For the story, I don't think it'll feel cheap necessarily. There are certainly ways they can go about it that can make it work.

Spoiler

I.E. Make the Inquisitor and the new protag dual-protagonists with the Inquisitor coming in only in moments of import so that it's not completely arbitrary as to why you're the new person who has to handle the Solas situation. But that's just my personal wish.

 

[IlGialloMondadori]

Inquisition is better in almost every way except the combat. Better story, characters, environments, etc

Of course, Andromeda is a shooter compared to Inquisition.

Sweet Jesus. Thank God I skipped Andromeda. I hated Inquisition so much.

 

[Alebelly]

I read the article, I don't think it made a persuasive argument that the actors performance would be improved by knowing the name of the game

The game is a themed game, one of Fallout 4s big problems is everyone supposed to exist in a future dystopian 1950, its the premise of the entire game, but everyone talks like they are your asshole neighbor, like me

 

[Son Of Sparda]

For the story, I don't think it'll feel cheap necessarily. There are certainly ways they can go about it that can make it work.

Spoiler

I.E. Make the Inquisitor and the new protag dual-protagonists with the Inquisitor coming in only in moments of import so that it's not completely arbitrary as to why you're the new person who has to handle the Solas situation. But that's just my personal wish.

No, I'm saying that the fact that these stuff happened outside of the base game, will result in people getting frustrated. Even if you play as a completely new character, it'll still feel cheap when they say that

Spoiler

Inquisition is no more and Solas is a bad guy.

I doubt many people know about this, and I think to them it'll just come off as a cheap way to set up DA4. (since they haven't played Trespasser and haven't seen the reveal)

 

[Ryzaki009]

No, I'm saying that the fact that these stuff happened outside of the base game, will result in people getting frustrated. Even if you play as a completely new character, it'll still feel cheap when they say that

Spoiler

Inquisition is no more and Solas is a bad guy.

I doubt many people know about this, and I think to them it'll just come off as a cheap way to set up DA4. (since they haven't played Trespasser and haven't seen the reveal)

Spoiler

? you learn about Solas being the antagonist in the ending credits of DAI. "you shouldn't have given your orb to Cory dread wolf." Trespasser just gives you his backstory.

 

[Son Of Sparda]

Spoiler

? you learn about Solas being the antagonist in the ending credits of DAI. "you shouldn't have given your orb to Cory dread wolf." Trespasser just gives you his backstory.

I don't remember that and it's probably something that I didn't understood its meaning, when it happened. Though I guess you can say that's on me.

Edit: Wait I just checked and I don't remember that scene at all. Was this a secret ending or something?

 

[Laughing Banana]

I don't remember that and it's probably something that I didn't understood its meaning, when it happened. Though I guess you can say that's on me.

Edit: Wait I just checked and I don't remember that scene at all. Was this a secret ending or something?

Not really. It's an after-credit scene. There's no requirement to view it other than finishing the main game and viewing the credits.

 

[Ryzaki009]

I don't remember that and it's probably something that I didn't understood its meaning, when it happened. Though I guess you can say that's on me.

Edit: Wait I just checked and I don't remember that scene at all. Was this a secret ending or something?

Spoiler

Nope it's the post credits scene.

 

[devonodev]

ME:A gave us some good memes, so I think it wins.

 

[MartyStu]

Lots of people love them, but they don't really work for me. Their writing is generally clever, but for me not engaging. Also sometimes I think its too "purple" - it draws too much attention to itself.

This is not even close to being true. Like at all.

Is Obsidian really that great at writing? The main reason I can't motivate myself to play Pillars of eternity is the story. Though suppose the weird mystical stuff might have played a role.

I have played Kotor 2 and I liked it when I started but when I replayed it years later I couldn't stand Kreia's ramblings which had once seemed so wise.

Obsidian is consistently better than pretty much everyone else in the space. New Vegas sort of cemented their legacy.

Pillars is a lesser effort writing-wise though.

 

[GameAddict411]

Inquisition had a much better set of characters, but I think that Inquisition also suffered from a worse side quest structure. Gameplay wise, they are a very different kind of games. Inquisition also felt 100x more polished than Andromeda.

 

[thsantos]

People labeling Inquisition's combat as an action rpg resumes everything Bioware is doing wrong with the franchise. Not that people are wrong in assuming this, but it shows Bioware total lack of focus when they develop a game that looks like an action game but is better played as a crpg. I really miss the DA:O days...

 

[Rogan]

I stopped playing ME: Andromeda when I landed on the first planet as pathfinder. Its exactly like DA.

Nothing original about this game or gameplay.

 

[RedAssedApe]

Equally mediocre. Combat is more fun in mea.

 

[Wind's Howling]

I had tons of more fun with Inquisition, but that was also due to the fact that there weren't any great WRPG's to begin with when that game got released.

I have no idea how it holds up now.

 

[MartyStu]

I had tons of more fun with Inquisition, but that was also due to the fact that there weren't any great WRPG's to begin with when that game got released.

I have no idea how it holds up now.

Played some of it recently: not very well.

The characters are still fun and the saving grace of the game by a long shot. I prefer the cast from Origins and Awakening infinitely more.

 

[autoduelist]

Inquisition is far superior and better in every way except arguably combat.

Inquisition had absolutely terrible combat. Spam X, and no matter how much time you put into tactics setting up your team, they moved out of position right away.

I haven't played ME:A yet, but own it. Now I'm sad I bought it.

 

[TrueDefault]

I prefer Inquisition. The world looks more beautiful. I prefer fantasy. Also dragons.

 

[Staf]

I liked the combat in Dragon age. Really disliked that you had to hold a freaking button to attack or advance time in tactical view.