So to add to some of the other posts in the last few pages, I'm picking up the GOTY edition after beating this twice at launch. Woo, DLC. Played the knight enchanter when it was God King, but the one thing I haven't done is nightmare. Am I gonna suffer terribly with certain classes on nightmare? No idea what they're changed in patches over the last year.
So, thoughts on fun builds to play that would be OK on higher difficulties? And I see we've added 'trials' that seem to bring additional challenge, any of those you'd recommend trying?
DA:O is a pretty solidly written stock fantasy story. It's the last Bioware story I felt really came together into a solid piece, it just doesn't really do anything out of the ordinary for the genre.
I know this is ~20 days old, but I had to comment.
DA:O worked because the threat felt viable. We see the Darkspawn lay waste to Ostagar, we learn of their sacking of Lothering (and the game prevents us from returning), we fight a broodmother in the Dead Trenches. And the final battle is interesting with the fight through the city culminating with the Archdemon.
There's also the lesser but persistent threat presented by Logain.
DA2 was largely just a series of misadventures. It suffered by making just about every mage we encounter crazy and dangerous, so the ethical questions surrounding the Templar/Mage relationship largely fall flat. There's no main antagonist. Things largely go to shit organically, but because the first couple of chapters merely keep the Templar/Mage conflict in the background, the ending happens somewhat abruptly. I think that if it was written better, with Kirkwall's fucked up everything and the main mage guy being active in the game for more than the last chapter it would've been a lot better. It had the potential to be amazing.
DA:I fell flat for me because
Corypheus never feels like much of a threat, IMO. His only real victory happens right at the start of the game, which itself was a bit of a mess because it started in medias res. After that, he's essentially off screen until the Temple of Mythal, which leads directly to the final fight.
The bulk of the game is spent merely putting out the fires he caused. Some of the things he does - corrupting so many Grey Wardens and Templars - are played up as big deals, but we don't actually know how much damage he caused with them. And those fires are put out fairly easily.
Thinking about it, it seems like the game wanted to borrow from both ME2 and ME3. A simplistic main plot held aloft by strong characters and their personal quests, and lots of tapping into the nostalgia created by the previous two games. Unfortunately for me, I really didn't like DA:I's set of companions and the nostalgia fell flat because my Grey Warden never made an appearance, DA:I Hawke didn't act like my Hawke, and Morrigan has always been terrible.
And, again, even in ME2 the Collectors destroy the Normandy, kill Shepard, attack another colony, invade the second Normandy, and kidnap most of the crew. As weak of a villain as they are in the scheme of things, they're still better than Corypheus who merely corrupts people and kills an old lady.
Corypheus never feels like much of a threat, IMO. His only real victory happens right at the start of the game, which itself was a bit of a mess because it started in medias res. After that, he's essentially off screen until the Temple of Mythal, which leads directly to the final fight.
The bulk of the game is spent merely putting out the fires he caused. Some of the things he does - corrupting so many Grey Wardens and Templars - are played up as big deals, but we don't actually know how much damage he caused with them. And those fires are put out fairly easily.
Thinking about it, it seems like the game wanted to borrow from both ME2 and ME3. A simplistic main plot held aloft by strong characters and their personal quests, and lots of tapping into the nostalgia created by the previous two games. Unfortunately for me, I really didn't like DA:I's set of companions and the nostalgia fell flat because my Grey Warden never made an appearance, DA:I Hawke didn't act like my Hawke, and Morrigan has always been terrible.
And, again, even in ME2 the Collectors destroy the Normandy, kill Shepard, attack another colony, invade the second Normandy, and kidnap most of the crew. As weak of a villain as they are in the scheme of things, they're still better than Corypheus who merely corrupts people and kills an old lady.
I wouldn't say the whole game fell flat for me because of...
Corypheus, but yeah... he loses his sense of menace by mid-game. Some mechanics showing what Corypheus was up to and how he was kicking ass everywhere the Inquisition wasn't directly interceding would have made him a lot more interesting.
Like... in ME3, even though Shepard wins all her fights, Reaper control of the galaxy increases over time. That makes the player feel like the Reapers are winning the big picture, in spite of Shepard's heroics, and it adds to the tension of the main plot.
So I'm finally getting around to playing DA:I with Trespasser and the last patch. In honor of the fact that I've built a new PC, I'm starting a fresh play through with ALL the fanciest mods.
One thing I noticed when setting the game up was the new "Even Ground" trial, which causes enemies to be scaled. Does that mean what I hope it does? Does playing with "Even Ground" turned on mean that it's finally rewarding to play DA:I as a completionist? <.<
Just finished my first shot thru with all the DLC tonight... fuck. I specifically went with a lady elf and romanced Solas this time to see what that was all about.
Trespasser spoilers
I also got a little lazy and didn't get around to doing Iron Bull's personal quest because I hate having to choose between the alliance with the Qunari and his Chargers. He was my tank this whole playthru. Fuuuuuuuuck that was a bitch. Kudos to Bioware for punishing me for that.
The whole conversation with Solas was awesome.
Goddamn I love this game. May turn around and do playthru #4 after a short palate cleanser.
The problem is that I am a crazy person. Enough time has passed from my aborted replay of the game that i'd feel like i'd need to start over entirely. Much too much time has passed for me to use my initial endgame save from launch.
I guess I do have plenty of game time until Dark Souls 3 that it could work. It's just a bit of a commitment.
So, it's been long enough after playing all the dragon ages to form a solid opinion of the games, and I am surprised to admit that Dragon Age 2 was the best one. It's quite clearly the easiest one to recall, and I'll chalk that up as being the one with the sharpest teeth.
Dragon Age Tactics in the vein of XCOM and Fire Emblem? God fuck yes!
Well considering how each game they try to outdo themselves to make tactics more and more unusable....
...which makes the possiblity of a truely tactical turn-based Bioware game all the more desirable. Boiling down a Bioware-style RPG to its essence? Decisions about the story and characters. Decisions in battle. Trimming off the fat? Making something simple and pure, yet mechanically deeper and more challenging? I'd love that.
It almost sounds like you don't believe they could do it. I think if their design is not stifled by a corporate mandate to increase mass market playability at all cost, if the scope and scale and cost of the project reflects its niche appeal, the guys at Bioware are perfectly capable of doing great turn-based combat.
And who knows, if a little niche Dragon Age Tactics game does well, maybe even better than projected, we might yet again get more complex and tactical *full Bioware RPGs* with the depth of a Baldur's Gate 2 in the future.
Mass Effect going the whole hog into action gameplay and multiplayer and open world exploration? A 3rd person Destiny of sorts, with a massive budget and extensive live support and far reaching content plans? And Dragons Age becoming a 100% turn-based tactical and narrative driven pure singleplayer experience? A relatively low budgeted western Fire Emblem meets XCOM meets The Banner Saga? Releasing an iterative 30$ stand-alone product every year, with an epic continuous and interwoven storyline? Yes fucking please!
Dragon Age Tactics in the vein of XCOM and Fire Emblem? God fuck yes!
Well considering how each game they try to outdo themselves to make tactics more and more unusable....
...which makes the possiblity of a truely tactical turn-based Bioware game all the more desirable. Boiling down a Bioware-style RPG to its essence? Decisions about the story and characters. Decisions in battle. Trimming off the fat? Making something simple and pure, yet mechanically deeper and more challenging? I'd love that.
It almost sounds like you don't believe they could do it. I think if their design is not stifled by a corporate mandate to increase mass market playability at all cost, if the scope and scale and cost of the project reflects its niche appeal, the guys at Bioware are perfectly capable of doing great turn-based combat.
And who knows, if a little niche Dragon Age Tactics game does well, maybe even better than projected, we might yet again get more complex and tactical *full Bioware RPGs* with the depth of a Baldur's Gate 2 in the future.
I don't really believe they can do it. They talked up the tactical changes in DAI, and we saw how that turned out. The last TB game they had was sonic, wasn't it?
Dragon Age Tactics in the vein of XCOM and Fire Emblem? God fuck yes!
Well considering how each game they try to outdo themselves to make tactics more and more unusable....
...which makes the possiblity of a truely tactical turn-based Bioware game all the more desirable. Boiling down a Bioware-style RPG to its essence? Decisions about the story and characters. Decisions in battle. Trimming off the fat? Making something simple and pure, yet mechanically deeper and more challenging? I'd love that.
It almost sounds like you don't believe they could do it. I think if their design is not stifled by a corporate mandate to increase mass market playability at all cost, if the scope and scale and cost of the project reflects its niche appeal, the guys at Bioware are perfectly capable of doing great turn-based combat.
And who knows, if a little niche Dragon Age Tactics game does well, maybe even better than projected, we might yet again get more complex and tactical *full Bioware RPGs* with the depth of a Baldur's Gate 2 in the future.
I don't really believe they can do it. They talked up the tactical changes in DAI, and we saw how that turned out. The last TB game they had was sonic, wasn't it?
I think you underestimate corporate mandates and the power of the dreaded focus group. I just think that a Dragon Age Tactics game would be a smaller budget production, and thus might allow for much more creative freedom. Or do you suggest the problem lies with the talent of people making the games, rather than with how corporations tend to try and mitigate their immense finacial risks by putting the opinion of their focus groups and general market research over the creative freedom of their game makers? I highly doubt people who manage to ship modern AAA games lack in talent and passion and commitment. The games we are getting out of Bioware are a result of circumstance. Suits homogenizing EA's products for the unwashed masses.
Skyhold and Inquisition could have excelled with an XCOM style base building component and "strategic layer" that was more reactive than the damn war room. It's certainly not a good action RPG, although reaving things does have a certain joy to it.
Skyhold and Inquisition could have excelled with an XCOM style base building component and "strategic layer" that was more reactive than the damn war room. It's certainly not a good action RPG, although reaving things does have a certain joy to it.
I've read that a lot of complexity had to be removed because Inquisition was announced as cross-generation. Some of those kind of systems were in the original design.
+1
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited February 2016
Honestly. I wish they would go ahead and just make Dragon Age's main series action by now.
Feels like what they've been wanting to do for the last two games but they're scared or something.
Dragkonias on
+3
Options
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
edited February 2016
Because the old hats who cling exclusively onto Dragon Age: Origins would collectively wee themselves in anger (not that it didn't already happen come Inquisition after II) and fan-based vitriol, as anyone on the internet knows, is a powerful poison
Well I mean DA:O was vastly better than 2, and I'd rather see them try and recapture tactical combat than go full Destiny Warriors.
DAO was an awful unbalanced mess, DA2 would have destroyed it if they had time/a budget for encounter design. The act bosses(Elder Rock Wraith, Arishok, Meredith) all blew any DAO fight out of the water, but everything else was incredibly samey-feeling.
There's a balance to be found there, but they keep missing the mark substantially. Completely changing the status quo(ie turnbased tactics) would almost certainly be a really good thing.
Well I mean DA:O was vastly better than 2, and I'd rather see them try and recapture tactical combat than go full Destiny Warriors.
I can never understand anyone saying DA:O was tactical. Anyone who wasn't a mage spent 90% of their time standing in place auto attacking, and mages could do that better. 99% of positioning was 'put tank in front of squishies' and 'put rogue in backstab zone.' This was all you had to do on friggin nightmare. Nothing required any thought.
Well I mean DA:O was vastly better than 2, and I'd rather see them try and recapture tactical combat than go full Destiny Warriors.
I can never understand anyone saying DA:O was tactical. Anyone who wasn't a mage spent 90% of their time standing in place auto attacking, and mages could do that better. 99% of positioning was 'put tank in front of squishies' and 'put rogue in backstab zone.' This was all you had to do on friggin nightmare. Nothing required any thought.
It's simple tactics, but it is at least tactics. Positioning is always going to be important in tactical games; probably the most important thing (as in life). Fighting on "Prepared Ground" that's advantageous to your side is key in winning any battle. The Art of War says this in several different ways all throughout the book.
DA:2 doesn't have this, at all. It has teleporting enemies just to really stick it in and break it off in the tactics department. Meanwhile, you've got your lolrogue running around backflipping through town. It's ridiculous. The only tactic I remember employing in DA:I is "Have tank." For dragons that escalated to "Have tank; dodge fireballs." I like DA:I, but it's pretty much just an action game with a pause button.
If you want a more tactical RPG, then Pillars of Eternity is tearing it up on that front.
How was DA2 any less of an awful unbalanced mess than DAO? (or Inquisition for that matter)
DA2 gave each tree in each class a distinct role, and they're all fairly well-balanced against each other. They also had a very effective and good cross-class combo system that wasn't limited to mages (Origins) or broken and ineffectual (Inquisition)
There's some optimal builds in DA2 sure, but there's nothing that's broken to the point of trivializing the entire game unlike Arcane Warrior(or any Origins Mage,) Inquisition Reaver, or Knight-Enchanter.
DA2s problems lie entirely with presentation, in UI, encounter design, and the tactics menu/screen, but it's by far the best combat engine DA had had.
Replaying DA:I again, I'm realizing that the complete lack of ambient music when exploring makes the game feel very lifeless. DA:O had music for every area, and so did DA2.
But in Inquisition you can explore an area for hours and not hear any music outside of combat. It makes makes exploring dull and limits immersion.
Skyrim, whose big and explorable areas served as an inspiration for Inquisition, had an incredible ambient music soundtrack. You don't always consciously know that it's there, but you sure as hell notice when it's not there.
PreciousBodilyFluids on
+2
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Honestly. I wish they would go ahead and just make Dragon Age's main series action by now.
Feels like what they've been wanting to do for the last two games but they're scared or something.
Isnt that essentially what DA:I was?
Kinda. But it was pretty janky in a lot of places and I feel its because they were trying to balance the two.
Instead you got a mix that wasn't very satisfying on either end of the spectrum.
Like the combat isn't the worst I've encountered and its enough to keep me somewhat engaged. But it feels like it could be better than what it has been.
How was DA2 any less of an awful unbalanced mess than DAO? (or Inquisition for that matter)
DA2 gave each tree in each class a distinct role, and they're all fairly well-balanced against each other. They also had a very effective and good cross-class combo system that wasn't limited to mages (Origins) or broken and ineffectual (Inquisition)
There's some optimal builds in DA2 sure, but there's nothing that's broken to the point of trivializing the entire game unlike Arcane Warrior(or any Origins Mage,) Inquisition Reaver, or Knight-Enchanter.
DA2s problems lie entirely with presentation, in UI, encounter design, and the tactics menu/screen, but it's by far the best combat engine DA had had.
DA2 has the same problem all the DA games do, and that it's largely pointless to play anything but a Mage. As someone who abhors magic users, I basically got to choose from whichever mechanically useless melee class looked most rad. The terrible combat system in DA2 didn't make up for the characters looking slightly more rad.
Uh. Mages are the worst class in DA2. They're not bad, because nothing in DA2 is bad, but they're a far cry from the overwhelming gods of Origins. Their most powerful abilities are support for the rest of the team, and they don't even come close to the DPS a Rogue can put out or the survivability of a warrior. Running mageHawke Alistair Merrill Aveline is a great team, because Aveline is literally indestructible, but you'll get faster results with rogueHawke, Fenris, Aveline, and a mage of your choice.
DAO is Mage-Rogue-Warrior
DA2 is Rogue-Warrior-Mage
DAI is Warrior-Mage-Rogue, but Reaver vs Knight Enchanter is arguable since Reaver takes more effort but kills way way way faster. Tempest Rogues cheating to do repeat Thousand Cuts doesn't count since it's clearly not intended.
Reaver in DAI is the first time taking anything other than a 1h+s warrior was worthwhile, you can't say "nothing in DA2 is bad" and then ignore two thirds of the class.
Posts
The part where the store is is available pretty early and remains open until the end of the game.
Not unlimited I think but they refresh pretty fast.
So, thoughts on fun builds to play that would be OK on higher difficulties? And I see we've added 'trials' that seem to bring additional challenge, any of those you'd recommend trying?
I know this is ~20 days old, but I had to comment.
DA:O worked because the threat felt viable. We see the Darkspawn lay waste to Ostagar, we learn of their sacking of Lothering (and the game prevents us from returning), we fight a broodmother in the Dead Trenches. And the final battle is interesting with the fight through the city culminating with the Archdemon.
There's also the lesser but persistent threat presented by Logain.
DA2 was largely just a series of misadventures. It suffered by making just about every mage we encounter crazy and dangerous, so the ethical questions surrounding the Templar/Mage relationship largely fall flat. There's no main antagonist. Things largely go to shit organically, but because the first couple of chapters merely keep the Templar/Mage conflict in the background, the ending happens somewhat abruptly. I think that if it was written better, with Kirkwall's fucked up everything and the main mage guy being active in the game for more than the last chapter it would've been a lot better. It had the potential to be amazing.
DA:I fell flat for me because
The bulk of the game is spent merely putting out the fires he caused. Some of the things he does - corrupting so many Grey Wardens and Templars - are played up as big deals, but we don't actually know how much damage he caused with them. And those fires are put out fairly easily.
Thinking about it, it seems like the game wanted to borrow from both ME2 and ME3. A simplistic main plot held aloft by strong characters and their personal quests, and lots of tapping into the nostalgia created by the previous two games. Unfortunately for me, I really didn't like DA:I's set of companions and the nostalgia fell flat because my Grey Warden never made an appearance, DA:I Hawke didn't act like my Hawke, and Morrigan has always been terrible.
And, again, even in ME2 the Collectors destroy the Normandy, kill Shepard, attack another colony, invade the second Normandy, and kidnap most of the crew. As weak of a villain as they are in the scheme of things, they're still better than Corypheus who merely corrupts people and kills an old lady.
I wouldn't say the whole game fell flat for me because of...
Like... in ME3, even though Shepard wins all her fights, Reaper control of the galaxy increases over time. That makes the player feel like the Reapers are winning the big picture, in spite of Shepard's heroics, and it adds to the tension of the main plot.
One thing I noticed when setting the game up was the new "Even Ground" trial, which causes enemies to be scaled. Does that mean what I hope it does? Does playing with "Even Ground" turned on mean that it's finally rewarding to play DA:I as a completionist? <.<
Trespasser spoilers
The whole conversation with Solas was awesome.
Goddamn I love this game. May turn around and do playthru #4 after a short palate cleanser.
It's so good.
Really like a whole 'nother act for the game.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I guess I do have plenty of game time until Dark Souls 3 that it could work. It's just a bit of a commitment.
Dragon Age Tactics in the vein of XCOM and Fire Emblem? God fuck yes!
It's still $15 on Origin?
God i'm stupid. See a new post in the thread and think it's the month-old one. DERP.
Well considering how each game they try to outdo themselves to make tactics more and more unusable....
...which makes the possiblity of a truely tactical turn-based Bioware game all the more desirable. Boiling down a Bioware-style RPG to its essence? Decisions about the story and characters. Decisions in battle. Trimming off the fat? Making something simple and pure, yet mechanically deeper and more challenging? I'd love that.
It almost sounds like you don't believe they could do it. I think if their design is not stifled by a corporate mandate to increase mass market playability at all cost, if the scope and scale and cost of the project reflects its niche appeal, the guys at Bioware are perfectly capable of doing great turn-based combat.
And who knows, if a little niche Dragon Age Tactics game does well, maybe even better than projected, we might yet again get more complex and tactical *full Bioware RPGs* with the depth of a Baldur's Gate 2 in the future.
I don't really believe they can do it. They talked up the tactical changes in DAI, and we saw how that turned out. The last TB game they had was sonic, wasn't it?
I think you underestimate corporate mandates and the power of the dreaded focus group. I just think that a Dragon Age Tactics game would be a smaller budget production, and thus might allow for much more creative freedom. Or do you suggest the problem lies with the talent of people making the games, rather than with how corporations tend to try and mitigate their immense finacial risks by putting the opinion of their focus groups and general market research over the creative freedom of their game makers? I highly doubt people who manage to ship modern AAA games lack in talent and passion and commitment. The games we are getting out of Bioware are a result of circumstance. Suits homogenizing EA's products for the unwashed masses.
I've read that a lot of complexity had to be removed because Inquisition was announced as cross-generation. Some of those kind of systems were in the original design.
Feels like what they've been wanting to do for the last two games but they're scared or something.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
DAO was an awful unbalanced mess, DA2 would have destroyed it if they had time/a budget for encounter design. The act bosses(Elder Rock Wraith, Arishok, Meredith) all blew any DAO fight out of the water, but everything else was incredibly samey-feeling.
There's a balance to be found there, but they keep missing the mark substantially. Completely changing the status quo(ie turnbased tactics) would almost certainly be a really good thing.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
Isnt that essentially what DA:I was?
Maybe it was just because DA:I was so much longer I got fatigued by the combat and DA2 was short enough to never get a chance.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I can never understand anyone saying DA:O was tactical. Anyone who wasn't a mage spent 90% of their time standing in place auto attacking, and mages could do that better. 99% of positioning was 'put tank in front of squishies' and 'put rogue in backstab zone.' This was all you had to do on friggin nightmare. Nothing required any thought.
It's simple tactics, but it is at least tactics. Positioning is always going to be important in tactical games; probably the most important thing (as in life). Fighting on "Prepared Ground" that's advantageous to your side is key in winning any battle. The Art of War says this in several different ways all throughout the book.
DA:2 doesn't have this, at all. It has teleporting enemies just to really stick it in and break it off in the tactics department. Meanwhile, you've got your lolrogue running around backflipping through town. It's ridiculous. The only tactic I remember employing in DA:I is "Have tank." For dragons that escalated to "Have tank; dodge fireballs." I like DA:I, but it's pretty much just an action game with a pause button.
If you want a more tactical RPG, then Pillars of Eternity is tearing it up on that front.
DA2 gave each tree in each class a distinct role, and they're all fairly well-balanced against each other. They also had a very effective and good cross-class combo system that wasn't limited to mages (Origins) or broken and ineffectual (Inquisition)
There's some optimal builds in DA2 sure, but there's nothing that's broken to the point of trivializing the entire game unlike Arcane Warrior(or any Origins Mage,) Inquisition Reaver, or Knight-Enchanter.
DA2s problems lie entirely with presentation, in UI, encounter design, and the tactics menu/screen, but it's by far the best combat engine DA had had.
But in Inquisition you can explore an area for hours and not hear any music outside of combat. It makes makes exploring dull and limits immersion.
Skyrim, whose big and explorable areas served as an inspiration for Inquisition, had an incredible ambient music soundtrack. You don't always consciously know that it's there, but you sure as hell notice when it's not there.
Kinda. But it was pretty janky in a lot of places and I feel its because they were trying to balance the two.
Instead you got a mix that wasn't very satisfying on either end of the spectrum.
Like the combat isn't the worst I've encountered and its enough to keep me somewhat engaged. But it feels like it could be better than what it has been.
On the other hand, the difference in two-handed warriors and dagger rogues could not be more extreme
Such a huge downgrade
Well, it does a better job at least. Magic users are still stupid OP.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
DAO is Mage-Rogue-Warrior
DA2 is Rogue-Warrior-Mage
DAI is Warrior-Mage-Rogue, but Reaver vs Knight Enchanter is arguable since Reaver takes more effort but kills way way way faster. Tempest Rogues cheating to do repeat Thousand Cuts doesn't count since it's clearly not intended.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists