Bringing back anything to inquisitor points would be a step back.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Bringing back anything to inquisitor points would be a step back.
I do not necessarily mean ad hoc, but improving on Inquisition as it was the most successful and widely praised should be part of expectations.
I think it would be better to build on DAO's, I also do remember them saying something about making it a more focused experience since many people had issues with Inquisition suffering from bloat and being tedious. Ive been replaying it, and it quickly becomes boring getting caught up in all the open world fetch quests and gathering you can do. Then I remember its not so bad when I get back to the story.
Hope not, I still think this game isnt coming out for another two years.
They will likely incorporate positive elements from both games and hopefully have more meaningful activities in the open zones.
Maybe not for a 2022 game.
HmmYep, they are going for a cyberpunk-medieval look with DA4
I am feeling it!
DAO is pretty much a worse RPG in every way, presentation, writing, music, art, mechanically, etc. DAO tries to stick with D&D because it's openly a rip-off, but that's also why the gameplay is worse than simply doing something new. Even with how bad the Hinterlands are- the latter areas like Crestwood and eventually the Frostback Basin are better designed than any of the areas in Origins.
If you're on PC, get one of the mods on Nexus that adds gathering items to some of the vendors.
The world and lore while having some interesting ideas in Origins didn't really come into it's own until DA2 and then majorily DA:I where it felt like they finally knew what they wanted to do. DAI felt like they realized they didn't need to do the whole: "D&D but waaaaaay edgier" shtick and just do their own thing.
How is origins to much D&D but Inquisition isn't? I think origins has a lot of issues, especially the combat. But Inquisition follows much of the same structure while being bloated and boring in so many other areas. I'm only replaying it to get to the DLC which I heard is great.
Playing on console. Mods would probably help. Im not to worried about all the gathering. Its easy enough to get through the story, ignoring everything with very little consequence. The issue is feeling like I have to clear maps.
Like I said, the early areas like the Hinterlands or Storm Coast are bad, but you can see how they learned to design their areas to be more guided experiences like Crestwood and Frostback where they make the narrative of the area is designed to take you places naturally.
Theres definitely elements of Inquistion that are good. Just personally the inquisitor point system and there not really being a lot of main missions (as the game was mostly just side content you'd do to unlock said story content) is the primary aspect I don't want to see return in any form.
The wartable and stuff was IIRC their compromise for having the game need to run on the 360 because I think they had army and base building instead. I personally don't think it returns anyway.
😬
Those cookie-cutter sidequests were bad, though. They all even used the same 3 or so level layouts. lmao
ME1 get a pass for that. DA2 should too!
And I also should add that by far the weakest area in Inquisition was Val Royeaux, which I would go to the lengths of saying is one of the worse, if not the very worst, cities in a RPG. Kirkwall in comparison was pretty cool, if not exactly top tier material. So if Bioware wants to deliver the potential of that picture of the Tevinter capital that was posted before, then have to rethink how they approach level design in the next DA.
Normally I would agree. But some of these sidequest areas were literally one room! And it was the same room pretty often! I understand having to deal with limited resources, but this was pretty bad.
It wasn't a very fun area, I'll give you that. I think comparing it against all cities across every RPG is a bit much, though. I'm sure there are far worse.
oh my sweet summer child
the business model of a game absolutely determines how a game will be designed and what type of genre it is
I'm surprised this needed to be said, if it was always going to be a SP RPG why was it news when it was reported otherwise?
That's Bloomberg. "Heavy multiplayer component" "Significant shift". This is 1 month old revisionist history, bravo.
Both Mass Effect 3 and Andromeda had a heavy multiplayer component. The key difference that I think some people and I are saying is that we don't think the singleplayer and multiplayer were integrated into one another. Ever since the first trailer in 2018, there was a story about Solas. We don't know how big the changes were. We're only saying that there was a singleplayer mode, and it's still there.
Ok, come on, spare me the condescending "summer child" thing. Specially if you're going to reply to a single line out of my entire post. GaaS isn't a genre. There are GaaS shooters, GaaS RPGs, GaaS racers, GaaS fighting games, GaaS MOBAs, GaaS card games. There are GaaS titles of every genre. The last three Assassin's Creed games are GaaS titles that play exactly like a non-GaaS Assassin's Creed would, except Ubisoft is out there releasing new items to be purchased. The prototype footage BioWare showed made it clear that it was going to be a game very much in line with the rest of the series, and as people have posted above, Bloomberg has reported the game used to have a "multiplayer component". It wouldn't be a "component" if being a GaaS title was dictating how the game as a whole was being designed.
Take it from the same Bloomberg article; if the cancelation of the "multiplayer component" represented a big drawback, the report would've mentioned it.
It doesn't have to spell out it's a drawback, just saying it's a big shift and change in priorities. What I assume that user is inferring is that repeatedly interrupting development to put out fires in other BW games, and shifting first from SP only to GaaS and then backwards again is probably not a recipe for cohesion and success.
Which is the entirely non controversial point that user was alluding to in the first place, worried about where the game will end up. Well that is understandable considering recent BW history and what has been reported about this specific game's development.
There are a lot of lapsed fans that want to be excited about BW games again, I think most people just want to see them put out a great game and jump back in the fan train.
And just because I know it's coming: no one has a problem with GaaS when it's Horizon getting a big DLC expansion, it's more the treadmill stuff people are tired of, and things like RE3 remake cutting out half the og locations but finding the time and money to add a MP thing no one was asking for or wanted apparently.
Or for a more topical example, wasn't Anthem sold as being a story heavy Bioware thing? But it didn't pan out because they had to shoehorn in the whole living game thing? I'm not up to date on my Anthem lore but I think that's what happened.
Last edited:
Every time a studio is going through issues developing a game, reports state it outright. And Schreier's sources have always been very blunt about the issues BioWare had, that was very much clear in his pieces about Anthem and Andromeda. A "big shift" most likely means there was a considerable part of the team working on the multiplayer and now they're free to focus on the single player portion.
The narrative that the next Dragon Age was going to be a full-fledged GaaS title in the likes of Anthem was dismissed by Schreier's sources quite a while ago:
Source
So there's that. There's a lot of work involved in making a separate multiplayer mode, specially nowadays when the bar for multiplayer mode has been set rather high. They would also need to plan a long roadmap for post launch updates, because the point was to keep that multiplayer mode alive for as long as they could. So obviously not having to even think about that anymore is going to represent a big shift in the team as they can now fully focus on one thing.
It never read as "Well, they're starting from scratch again because everything revolved around GaaS", which is what that member's worry seemed to stem from, as they said (well, actually, they said it meant changing genres, which is what I initially argued against because GaaS isn't a genre).
Last edited:
Yep, they are going for a cyberpunk-medieval look with DA4
I thought the art in the OP was fine, but this got me going.
That looks really cool.
None of this is true, many genres can adopt different business models and GAAS is not a genre.
Val Royeaux was so disappointing. You hear about Orlais all the time in the first games and supplemental material as being so grand and amazing... and then you get to hang out in a courtyard, essentially. Denerim was more impressive.
Looks gr8. They're really setting up a great look to Tevinter, very distinctive (Bloodborne did not invent hats).
I've been meaning to play the Dragon Age games for almost a decade. I don't know why I did not. It seems to fit all of my fantasy world checks... Did it stand the pass of time or should I wait for a collection?
As for this art and the one from the trailer, it looks really good.
As for this art and the one from the trailer, it looks really good.
I assuming we are looking at a dark alley way in Tevinter, where I assume DA4 will take place, going by the events in DA:I and its DLC.
And I really don't like the design, honestly. It looks like a very stereotypical wizard. Especially the hat. The overly flat look of the concept art doesn't really help here either.
When I look at existing designs for Tevinter mages here, https://dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Tevinter_Imperium#Culture,
and compare them against this, then this one for DA4 seems incredibly safe and boring.
And I really don't like the design, honestly. It looks like a very stereotypical wizard. Especially the hat. The overly flat look of the concept art doesn't really help here either.
When I look at existing designs for Tevinter mages here, https://dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Tevinter_Imperium#Culture,
and compare them against this, then this one for DA4 seems incredibly safe and boring.
I assuming we are looking at a dark alley way in Tevinter, where I assume DA4 will take place, going by the events in DA:I and its DLC.
And I really don't like the design, honestly. It looks like a very stereotypical wizard. Especially the hat. The overly flat look of the concept art doesn't really help here either.
When I look at existing designs for Tevinter mages here, https://dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Tevinter_Imperium#Culture,
and compare them against this, then this one for DA4 seems incredibly safe and boring.
We don't even know if the character in the art is a Tevinter mage. And isn't that specifically a Venatori mage?
I think so, but I posted it as a reference for how mages in Tevinter can look like. My understanding of the Venatori as a nationalist cult means they would likely go for more traditionalist designs (relative to their culture).
But it's a fair point, the character could very well not be Tevinter. Still looks dull to me. 🤷♀️
It's the opposite though, the more they move away from BG, the better.
And why is their most beloved fantasy game and they have gone downwards since then?.
Dragon Age is their most popular and beloved series and Inquisition is the most popular game they've ever released. Boomers are just attached to their old stuff.
Hahaha I swear. Calling artstyle anime or mobile seems to be the go-to disses around here.
