/dag/+/bwg/ - Dragon Age & Bioware General #1037

No, Inquisition doesn't have save file import. You have to enter your choices from the previous games in DAI Keep. Read the OP.

It is okay. Much better than Dragon Age 2 but lacks depth compared to Origins.

Sort of depends on what you're trying to get.
IT fleshes out a lot of the stuff that was on the periphery of other Dragon Age games, in particular it does a lot with Southern Thedas (Ferelden and Orlais), Elven lore and some of Tevinter.

Combat is okay, sort of a slower brand of DA2's, but enemy design is much much better. IT feels a bit off at times (like how enemies can sometimes block but it's sort of standardized and you can't lock onto enemies like in Dark Souls despite how the combat and animations seem to be geared towards that).

Grab the GOTY version and have a good time though. Figure out the sort of arc and personality you want to roleplay ahead of time.

It has about as much depth as DAO, just a bit more sparsed out given the open-world segments.

Some tips for enjoyment:
>Play around with the up-level Trial in the options
>Once you complete a zone, don't bother going back unless you need resources or something. Ideally you make enough dosh to just buy things you need from the Black Emporium
>Play through story missions one level behind the upper-limit that is recommended.

Each of the DLC sort of focuses on each of the races
>Jaws of Hakkon, Avvar humans
>Descent, Dwarves
>Trespasser, some Qunari, tons of Elven

It's a solid 8/10 in my book.
You can also do your party in one of two ways: either stick with a single set in which case you can get some story lines that play out in their ambient dialogue or touch on all of them a bit.

Dorian: What would you say Blackwall's best feature is, Vivienne?
Vivienne: His absence, of course.
Blackwall: I can hear both of you.

Bring Vivienne at all times, switch up the other two as you please.
I usually make Vivienne a fire mage...cause she burns people so much

Meredith did nothing wrong.

It's insane how neither of the sequels gave a good sense of army scale. It was like 5 people at best was to be seen as an "overwhelming force".

It tries to be a Skyrim clone. Take that what you will.

Are you guys hyped for Neir:Automa?

Yes. A Yoko Taro game is far over due

Page 10..

It was mostly cutscenes but yes, Inquisition doesn't show huge numbers as much.

No. Don't listen to . It's mediocre at best. The companions are all dog shit and all their personalities can basically be described with 2 words. The combat is the worst in the series by far. It legitimately feels like a offline mmo when going through the zones. The game completely forgets what made Origins good despite one of main visions Bio set out for it was a comeback of sorts for DA. The main plot is not bad but not good it's "decent". At best it's a 6.5/10.

I'm aware it's cutscene but both in that and atmosphere you got a better sense of how dire things were. When storming the Adamant Fortress it didn't feel like you were facing off both with thousands of wardens and demons so much as just cleaning out a skeleton crew and their demon stragglers. Both at Ostagard and the final battle it felt like you were cutting thought the horde both in cinematics and visuals.
>tfw you get a surprise 'hold the line' mission for all your followers not with you.

The companions are no more dogshit than those in Origin. You can be reductive to those as well

I agree that it feels like an offline MMO though. Especially with how janky the combat feels.
The main thing they needed for it to feel more like the Original was the Tactics menu for have companions know what to do when you did something (Like setting up combos and the like).
On the topic of Zones, that's why I said to not bother going back to old ones ever. There's no development after more plot points, so each is basically just a set up for the main quest line through each and then you don't bother touching them again. The other big issue is that all the zones are about 40% too big. Like there is 40% of space that is just completely unnecessary: not useful for setting up the narrative of the space, not useful for missions or resources.

They do better with Trespasser and Descent I thought

Also, Origins was never that good. It was just the first breath of Role playing air people had breathed in a long while.

It was 'good' compared to the nothing that preceded it.

Ostagar felt big, but the final battle never felt that strong for me given how few enemies you encounter and how clear it is that they go down like they're suddenly made of tissue paper.

Adamant's big issue, as is the biggest issue with DAI in general is that it tries to go for Souls' pacing of combat but fucks it up for three big issues:
>Enemies aren't designed for lock-on
>Enemy placement doesn't work well for presenting problems to solve
>Yours and the Enemy's list of tools are very key-lock designed rather than timing and decision designed, ie each enemy move has a clear counter in your party's repertoire

Hence, when you're righting at Adamant it feels about the same as any other zone and, what's moreso, the placement of enemies does not suggest deep-encampment but more like these guys were hanging out here.

I listed out my own feelings about the combat in one of the longposts above. There's a lot that the DAI combat has that is interesting but there's a disconnect with other elements that makes it feel off and takes a lot of the tension and decision making out of it.

There is exactly one thing that made DAO's combat semi-enjoyable and what a lot of people liked: the threat enemies, even bandits, could pose to you. Things can go horribly wrong if you play directly into a group of bandit's strengths, like keeping your mage in the mosh pit with your warriors getting melee'd.
There is stuff like that in DAI but the shitty tactical cam as well as the garbage teammate AI makes those moments feel like they're out of your control rather than a result of your carelessness.

Bioware's approach to game design is generally pretty lazy when they deal with any single given element. Their approach to combat was an expanded version of DA2's but they only changed animations rather than actually thinking hard about what made DAO's combat good or Dark Souls' combat good.

I honestly doubt anyone at Bioware aside from beta t's plays their own games

Why do Isabela, Varric, and Merrill all look super pissed?

>they go down like they're suddenly made of tissue paper.
You must have been either playing causal or the scummiest of arcane warrior builds.

>Bioware's approach to game design is generally pretty lazy when they deal with any single given element.
it's kind of amazing how they have gotten worse and worse with each game while romance shit keeps growing. Kotor was very solid combat and mechanics, Jade Empire while experimentally simple still demanded skill and technical planning. Mass Effect is when I started to see the cracks in the system, two classes were way to broken and most AI was way to easy to exploit. You could still get punished for being careless however.

Concept Art, everything is edgier when your artists get to decide on personality
I was doing a Warrior berserker on Hard and it was in the initial push where you get sent waves and waves of darkspawn that used to take a bit of thinking to kill. They go down in one or two shots. Once you get to the various other parts of the battle, they get tougher but it felt weird to go from Tough to easy to tough again.
I get that it was to be a cool Tolkien-Battle moment but it made me respect the Darkspawn a bit less as enemies.

That is the one thing that both DA2 and DAI sort of lack: a big payoff for all the resources you've accumulated. There's no real meta-game. Every resource acquired by the Inquisition is for yourself, the Inquisition's power level and influence level is only for your personal benefit mechanically.
DA2 had it a bit better where the friends you help throughout the game can show up wordlessly in the final battle (Donnic, Zevran, Nathaniel) but it wasn't very overt.

I mean Kotor and Jade Empire and DAO are all basically DnD type games with various different UI systems to in place to obscure the similarities.

ME was them trying to do a shooter but they also tried to simplify dialogue in favor of having a voiced protagonist.

The issue is that they get pushed in directions that they aren't mechanically suited for. I heard that ME3's combat was designed by someone out of Bioware, by an honest to god Epic studios dev.

Honestly Bioware should just be left to write the story and some systems for how they want things to work. They should be given thrice as much pre-production time as they do now, then hand off game systems to other devs who have specialties in other game genres. Hand off combat to Respawn or DICE or the Crytek guys.

>The companions are no more bad than those in Origin.
>Also, Origins was never that good.

DELETE that.

I mean, Origins had a slightly more consistent style of writing across the board but it followed the tropes of Bioware games to a tee generally.

I preordered!

Dark Souls 3 dlc or Mass Effect Andromeda?

Origins was good because it did everything very good. The combat is good it captures crpg combat whilst being a bit more action oriented perfectly. The fact that you said that Origins companions are as shit as Inquisitions really grinds my gears. Sera is LE RANDUM HUMOR the character. Iron Bull is LE BIG FUNNY GUY the character. Solas is good. Viviene is decent I guess, she's funny sometimes. Dorian is not bad, although his backstory is pretty standard when you realize it's just
>my dad made fun of me for being a fag
Cassandra is good. But they're all so boring and lifeless even Cass and Solas which I guess are my favorites out of them are still so fucking boring. I'd say all the Origins companions were written pretty well for the amount of time we actually got to talk to them, they all had good designs and had interesting things to say. They also all had really good backstories. They weren't robotic they actually made moves on you and would ditch your ass if you were a dick. In DAI your companions are static robots that wait for you to do everything. The other things that Origins does well is the fact that every single enemy imposed a threat and all the difficulties were extremely balanced, even on nightmare enemies weren't super tanky they just hit like trucks which put a deeper thought on the player for positioning and combos. The choices are by far the best part about Origins if we're discussing the story, you could kill all of your companions with the exception of Morri. There was almost always a way between hard choices but made things more difficult for yourself. Origins gave you choice that impacted the world in every major decision. I don't get why people say it's not a good game but it was just the best in a while. It did everything right. A true 9/10 in my opinion, it would be a 10 but that's for my own personal opinion regarding the way that it sealed any way we could play as the warden again

>I heard that ME3's combat was designed by someone out of Bioware, by an honest to god Epic studios dev.
Correct. It was the team that work on Gears of War combat and level design. They were outsource to meet the winter/spring release date. They also work in hand with Straight Right making the multiplayer. Another fun tidbit, the money EA put into the MP was about 20 million, half of the game's development cost. To give context ME2's total budget was about 25 million and DA:O was little over 30 million in spite of the near 10 year development hell it suffered.

>Dark Souls 3
lol

So Mass Effect Trilogy on sale but it doesn't come with DLC's.

Can I just skip the DLC's or are they absolutely recommended?

ME1's DLC is passable

ME2's is mostly good-great and should be played (but skip Arrival)

ME3- Citadel is required, Javik is good, Leviathan is lore retcons galore but is decent, Omega is shit

Both? The DkS3 DLC will be like 2 hours long at best.

Sera has a bit more depth than RANDUMB but that was clearly the intended niche, and it's what she herself is going for in-universe. She's considered childish by effectively every other character in the game. She has more going on under the hood though. She's a casual Andrastian and painfully close-minded on the subject matter of religion and other cultures. She's got a lot of resentment towards Dalish culture for putting expectations on her.

Iron Bull is more too, though he's a bit less clear than Sera is. He's got identity issues about where he belongs. He clearly wants to belong somewhere, he handed himself in for voluntary brainwashing so he wouldn't have to question his purpose anymore after his time in Par Vollen. He enjoys life outside the Qun but also clings to the certainty that it gave him (Part of that is why he keeps his Chargers so small relative to other bands, it lets him keep everyone in clear roles while also letting him act freely enough to know his soldiers personally).

I mean I could say Leliana is CHEERY FRENCH GIRL or Alistair is SARCASTIC MANCHILD. There's more to them obviously, Leliana's whole arc has to do with revealing how much more of a 180 she is.

The romances aren't something I can say I'm familiar with in either game, I never bother with them but I do see your point, how Morrigan would come on me if my approval with her got high enough.

I was a overrexagerating a bit with my LE shit but honestly I really hate all the shit eating I see when it comes to Inquisition. People giving it any more than a 7 is fucking disgusting. Bioware have potential to do such good, BG2, Origins and ME are all fantastic games although I think ME is overrated. But when Inquisition came out it was clear who they were pandering to which were open world faggots, and degenerate tumblr tier idiots. People nowadays think that a linear or level based game is unacceptable which is mind boggling. Bio put so little depth into Inquisitions characters with the exception of my previously mentioned characters or returning characters such as Lel or Morri. I also hate when people say "Origins was only good because it was a decent rpg when there were none" which is just plain wrong. Origins is damn fine rpg with so much replayability within the relationships with your companions which are all pretty deep and the choices the game offers you in the main plot. Sure the plot is generic but a rpg doesn't have to be good when it comes to plot in order for it to be a GOOD rpg. It's about your impact on the story and how much choice you have within it. And Origins had so much of that. One of the biggest indications that Bio is giving in to low effort in their games is just the designs of the characters.

On Combat, DAO is very CRPG because it IS a CRPG. There isn't anything particularly actiony about its combat, save for maybe the animations. Mechanically, it runs about the same as a Baldur's Gate or NWN.

I already touched upon the two things that DAO did well in combat that DAI could have introduced and they tried but failed.
>Danger from enemies, particularly on the tactical level
>Competent AI tactics' settings

I'll say that the story in Origins was, again, pretty standard fare for Bioware and for anything derived from a Tolkien fantasy mold. The choices were strong because they didn't think it was going to get a sequel, so you can do choices that have huge ramifications without thinking about how it affects anything later. That's the big issue with these continued world-states: they make the issue of writing exponentially harder the longer you go on.

DAO did everything right but nothing exceptional. That's why it's an 'average' game...that's the definition of average. It did somethings wrong but didn't get much wrong for the genre.
It made an interesting take on a Renaissance-era Europe-esque setting.

Did everything adequately, nothing exceptional, it gets an 8/10 in my book.

Inquisition is a much more mixed and varied bag in my opinion. There are times when I love the combat (The combo system is fairly rewarding) but other times when the hit boxes and pacing of it put me to sleep. There are parts of the story that are fascinating on both lore and character development (mid to late of the base game, Descent and Trespasser come to mind) but the beginning of Inquisition is long and tedious on second runs whereas Origins has, well, alternate beginnings you can choose from to keep playthroughs fresh. Character writing is a bit spotty on Inquisition but it's stronger on its strong points than DAO was on its strong points, as it is weaker on its weak points too (the Blackwall "When I was a boy" speech comes to mind as a strong point)

>The companions are no more dogshit than those in Origin
This is wrong on so many levels it's like your mind has become confounded.
For starters there was a lot more depth to the approval and personality systems. Alister and Morrigan were the only two true "good/evil" follower types (even then they had their exceptions) with everyone else having their own agenda and morals making both conversations and mortality fluxes seem more realistic than DA:I's 2D personalty squad where you just keep feeding/starving the one personality trait for approval/disapproval. Another big factor is depth of characters. At the start all you know about Alister is that he is a Templar in training turn Grey Warden that hates making choices and fears responsibility. Come later in game you discover he is actually a bastard prince and could be king do to the events in game, suddenly his fears of taking charge, his insecurities and flaws all add up. Sten is a gateway to the alien world of the Qunari but it's presented more in how he acts and deals with you than just some info dump every time you ask "Tell me more about X" his personal quest opens up a lot of how military their race is and how you earn his respect shows you just how pragmatic these people are. Compare that to DA:I. Cassandra is just married to her work, Iron Bull is just a "quirky" Qunari that feels more like his existence is some boring commentary on "It's ok to be different", Vivienne is just your cookie cutter aristocrat and so on. The only one that had a real shot at depth is Blackwall/Thom but even then they script him in such a way he just seems boring most of the time because again, his only interesting quality is his deception. DA:O has it's flaws but to even think DA:I's companions hold any semblance over Origin's makes me think you either haven't played it or are just shitposting.
I'm going as far as to say DA2 had better companions.

I agree, the Open Worlds for Inquisition felt like a clear corporate decision, and a lot of the initial advertising was meant to go to normies and tumblrites. But I'd say Bioware salvaged some solid bits, some real diamonds in the rough with certain conversations and character arcs.

Incidentally, I'd say that the ambient conversation between companions in Inquisition is several times stronger than Origin's in general. That's where most of the best character development tends to happen.

That's what makes Inquisition so weird, the best parts are off to the side most of the time while the weakest parts (the enemy lay out and interaction, the open worlds, your own janky combat) are put to the forefront.

Whole character arcs happen in the background or subtly enough that they can be mistakened for something else altogether (Trespasser does a bit to bring them back to the forefront) but it's just a weird game how it brings it weakest points to the spotlight and its more interesting or profound bits to the sideline.

I'd say I liked the actual visual designs, since they tend to keep a more consistent silhouette across armor types than in Origins. Origins was, from a design stand point, a budget game for Bioware that they didn't expect to do well. So they did whatever they wanted from writing and pre-production in their budget and didn't give a shit about what came after.

Your question is like asking if you should eat fast food or pay twice as much to dumpster dive for food. Get the DS3 DLC..

I couldn't even take most of the DA:I companions seriously as characters. Like him or not but there was much more effort put into Solas than pretty much all of the others and it shows how he is surrounded by half assed companions where BW put more thought into what would avoid triggering people about their sexuality than anything else. Blackwall was a nice idea on paper but people already saw through him before the game was even out.
And yeah, fuck open world. And their collectables.

But that's a big part of the companions in DAI vs DAO.
DAO, most have their own arc but are also meant to be ambassadors from other regions (Leliana: Orlais, Alistair: Ferelden, Morrigan: The Wilds and Apostates, Wynne: the Circle, Sten: Qunari, Ohgren: Dwarves, Zevran: Antiva and city elves)

Each Dragon Age game has its own throughline theme on companions.
DA2 has pariah's of society (Apostate/abomination, slave, pirate, refugees, dwarven desher, blood mage)

DA:I's are the individuals within those societies that defy expectation (Ironbull, a Qunari who went native (both in Thedas and in Seheron), Sera a city elf who despises the Dalish and Elven culture, Cassandra a 'templar' who isn't a hardline chantry fanatic, Vivienne a mage who wants to suppress other mages).

That's just in terms of their backstory. Their character arcs are a bit trickier to compare. DAO has clear arcs of consistent writing that you can typically choose one of two ways that they play out.
DA2 has the friend/rivalmance system where your relationship type affects how those characters progress as well (which was really interesting)
DA:I has spottier writing quality in general but, again, there are moments that shine through in a way that work really well and better than most anything DAO had (Sera's moments when you discuss the fade, andraste or the Elves with her, Iron Bull deciding between the absolutism of the Qun or the choice he made in the Chargers, Blackwall's revelation, Cassandra's crises of Faith).

The writing is the thing that I'm generally pretty mum on Bioware for because I generally feel like it's pretty cohesive around themes (not hte same theme every game though)

The Collectibles are the mortal bane of my life with Inquisition. I've spent some time defending its story at least but the open worlds were just obnoxious in general and the myriad of collectibles were tedium made flesh.

Again, it felt like a purely corporate design decision. "Ass Creed and Skyrim and Ubisoft Open worlds have tons of meaningless side quests and collecties, lets put that in. Those sell well"
And it did.

This is the core issue with post EA Bioware.
After ME and DAO, they were expected to feed into sequels of games where people became massive attached to worlds and characters. So they have to take into account your choices.
The issue is that no game company making a game with meaningful assets beyond text can meaningfully create unique world states where your decisions mattered. So there are two types of decision outcomes. Either it's a death flag (something bad happens or doesnt depending on some decision back when) or it's a purely cosmetic outcome (people saying stuff to you about your decision, different aesthetic thing, etc).

>but are also meant to be ambassadors from other regions
At best Leliana and Sten. because Ohgren and Alister don't tell you shit from their areas and Zevran doubles for Leliana.
>DA2 has pariah's of society
That's actually all but one of DA:Is crew. Actually that descries most of DA:O's as well.
You are way overthinking this.

>Ohgren
>ambassador to dwarves

Ambassador from the standpoint of the story and worldbuilding. Ohgren actually tells you about Orzammar and general dwarven culture a lot. The focus of his arc isn't his pariah nature within Dwarven culture (If I remember, it has to do with his son and babymama, is that just Awakening?).

DA2 has people actively outside of the core organizations set forth in DAO (The Dwarven Kingdoms, Dalish Clans, the confines of the Law, etc) with Aveline as the sole exception.

DAI has characters that, with the exception of Varric again, are largely both within and without their personal cultural norms.
Bull is a qunari who has developed a fairly extensive personality and set of preferences outside of his role in the Qun.
Blackwall is a grey warden by his own proclamation alone.

I agree that the DAI description is a bit far fetched but I still think that they represent almost subversions of what we would expect people from their surface backgrounds to be like.

>(Sera's moments when you discuss the fade, andraste or the Elves with her, Iron Bull deciding between the absolutism of the Qun or the choice he made in the Chargers, Blackwall's revelation, Cassandra's crises of Faith
You miss the flaw. These are all told to you in very info dump ways. Compare it to Sten where regardless of Approval rating, he will attack you over the Ashes quest, he see's it pointless and is to the point he wants to take over. Leliana will try to kill you over poisoning the sacred ashes, unless you have corrupted her to a point that she will fall back in line because you convinced her she was a killer not a savior. Zevran's personal crisis could lead where he turns on you for the sake of his former masters or would rather go on the lamb to be your friend. Again compare this to DA:I where you basically hold everyone's hand like they are some pull horse toy. Iron Bull shouldn't just go "whelp ok" to what ever choice you make about his friends or people, there should be a default outcome based on either conversations you had up to that point or at least a skill check to convince him to do otherwise, but nope, like a lost puppy he looks to the oh great and special snowflake in how he should live his life. That's the flaw with DA:I companions. They just feel like toys with no soul less they upset the player.

>Ohgren actually tells you about Orzammar and general dwarven culture a lot
He tells you very little. In fact I challenge you to share what info does he really give? Hell you have to tread through all of Ozammar to get him, by then you know the dwarfs inside and out. What good is he?
>(If I remember, it has to do with his son and babymama, is that just Awakening?)
Yes and culture isn't there. Once again, we get all that shit through 3 sidequests and a main quest in Orzammar before you even recruit the drunk.
>still think that they represent almost subversions of what we would expect people from their surface backgrounds to be like
I have to disagree Bull is all you really got. Cassandra is what a seeker is general seen as, Vivienne is a aristocrat, Blackwall lie or no is the Grey Warden ideal, Solas is so fucking cliche I kept waiting for him to drop lines from Tolkien books about the elves. Most of the cast is just toys with little depth.

Ah, I see your criticism now and I completely agree.
It's the kind of issue that is easily solved in fact, literally just a matter of a companion talking to you as you return to Skyhold or Haven.
Now, as for the info-dump part, this is sort of what I was talking about how the best character development happens off to the side in the ambient conversations you can hear while you're roaming with your party. The info dumps generally make sense half the time since they only really happen after major events and people want to get things off their chest but it makes things very mechanical in terms of how you basically 'make the rounds' after each story mission or loyalty mission.

Some of the situations you mention (like Iron Bull's but also Sera's) make a bit of sense given the religious attachment there is to the Inquisitor as well as the or your position as leader of the organization.

The one that sticks out to me as being unusual is the conversation with Cassandra after you learn the truth about the Seekers. She has a crisis of faith but why talk to you, why not to Cullen or Leliana or Mother Gisele, most people would have better experience and a more sensitive moral compass for this situation than her literally-who boss.

Yeah, that's a valid criticism on a lot of parts of Inquisition's character arc pacing and delivery.

One of the first things you can ask Ohgren is "What is it like to be in Orzammar"

Cassandra is seen as a seeker but she regularly has her doubts and questions both her faith and the righteousness of her actions. Compared to how the Templars (the Seekers' contemporaries) act throughout the game, she's practically heretical for all the actions and doubts she has.

Vivienne is an aristocratic mage from humble origins who, herself, wishes to place restrictions on mages (compared to apostates or Magisters) and is thus within the system as well as defying the typical expectation of mages (as all wanting freedom outside the chantry).
Solas is one of the exceptions because we don't really have an idea of what apostates are supposed to be like aside from Morrigan and he's not SO different from her on the surface.

>Some of the situations you mention (like Iron Bull's but also Sera's) make a bit of sense given the religious attachment there is to the Inquisitor as well as the or your position as leader of the organization.
To be so washy as to let your friends die though? or the flip to forfeit your faith? Tough call or no I find it hard that Bull wouldn't take charge and say 'to hell with both of you' and save his friends.

>Vivienne is an aristocratic mage from humble origins who, herself, wishes to place restrictions on mages (compared to apostates or Magisters) and is thus within the system as well as defying the typical expectation of mages
user that's Wynne. They just copy Wynne and made her political.

Iron Bull works for you and he's wrestling with his own commitments. That's the whole point of that mission, he couldn't decide between the Chargers (his impromptu family on Thedas) and the Qun (the system he was born into that has defined his concept of himself from birth and gave him absolution).

He himself could not decide between the two options in that mission so he leaves it to you, his superior, to decide (incidentally, that also falls in line with his Qunari conditioning to seek out the guidance of an authority figure)

Only partially.
Wynne was more of a mix of Solas and Vivienne. She had an open but cautious attitude towards spirits and the Fade but she also realized the harm Magic, both intentionally and out of weakness, did to innocents in Thedas.

The core difference in the three (Solas and Vivienne and Wynne) is that the DAI mages exist in a situation where abuses on both sides reached a fever pitch and so the question of how to move forward and prevent such occurrences in the future is on the table.

Wynne largely lived in a stable situation until DAO. She was literally the Ferelden Circle of magi because, well, she lived there.

I mean it's pretty clear how someone from a politking nation and background like Vivienne would be more political than Wynne who came from a stable but segregated background.

There's also a difference in their personalities beyond that: Vivienne wants influence and power where Wynne was content with her life in the circle as it was.

Vivienne is fundamentally more self centered than Wynne, not just more political. Vivienne is also considerably more severe than Wynne ever was.

Inquisition does things decently well all things considered.
You have references or tangential relations to the previous games and things you did in the previous games, but it never goes into enough detail to outright challenge or invalidate previous choices. TW3 by contrast did just that in many instances because it couldn't write everything in due to the detail of the choices, like when Thaler appears even though it was possible to let him die in TW1. It assumes a canon playthrough, and even most of what you did in TW2 doesn't end up mattering. I guess it's part of the luxury of having the game stories separated by years or a decade in the case of DA:O to Inquisition, and having the story focused on completely different characters to boot.

The collectibles are pretty shit, and I really feel like the overall early game is the worst paced and designed portion. The game wants you to rush through to skyhold to open up resource gathering quests for your agents to do the tedious work, but Hinterlands is fuckhuge and fairly nicely scales until you've cleared out 90% of it and there's just the dragons left in the northeast.

Something is odd..

what

Left is ugly, right is ugly with elf ears.

Rude!

>make dwarf
>half of the cinematics have me at human height and I see myself drop down after it ends
>sometimes my character jumps mid cinematic to match the camera level
fucking christ

>make a dwarf
Stopped reading there.

>Morrigan cutscene as a dorf
>See her from another angle
>tfw giantess waifu

...

you have to leave

i can't play dwarfs because playing a manlet kills my immersion

>tfw manlet and playing dwarfs doesnt break immersion

>Immersion in DA
Your characters have a weak but existent backstory so it generally can't be you

u're not a beautiful elf princess irl you know......

prove it

no!

Renn...

Lit who?

>tfw you can see poster IPs
It's more pathetic than I thought

Hi!

samefag

youtu.be/kT6P3wIvp3Y

Suvi...

Why does her voice sound so wrong

Jannies can't do that and there's no way a mod posts in a dead shithole like /dag/.

she scottish

She's not all Scottish, she's like a half-breed who has only half a Scottish accent. Fucking disgusting aberration.
t. scot

ummm her actress IS scottish

kinda racist of you t b h

GET TAE FUCK YE WEE BASTAR'

>quarians
dropped

...

Josephine really needs to get more sleep.

Tired waifus are the cutest.

I'm going to marry Jien!

want to kiss.

Don't do meth, kids.

Oh thank christ, she sounds normal and not like Donnelly.

...I want to be a VA now. ;~;

>She's not all Scottish
>she sounds normal
I choose to believe Asunder!

I concede user has a bit of a point, it's a very mild accent, even milder than my own. She sounds as though perhaps she's been living abroad for a while, or comes from a posh area. But it's real.

I just bought the goty edition of Inquisition on PS4 because it's on sale, but the damn thing won't load. It's just stuck on a loading screen with a little green symbol in the bottom right corner and has been for 20 minutes. What do?

your ps4 is trying to save you from playing this shit game

ensure it's fully installed and patched

or try disconnecting from the internet before launching