Good:
- the game looks very good, better than what BioWare has done previously
- the color palette in this place reminds me a lot of the first forest map in BG
- personnally, as I don't like open worlds much for their lack of rhythm, I like the fact there are obvious "beaten paths". They made it clear in multiple interviews that exploration is important, so I'm not really concerned about that
- the UI looks practical to me. I wonder if they'll make adjustments for PC but I'm not holding my breath
- combat
- the fight against the dragon is spectacular
- a lot of things to eavesdrop (maybe too much in fact, in this demo) to strenghten the story and lore
Bad:
- yes, the "templar bastards killed my husband" part is awkward. Have yet to see if it's a common thing in the whole game
- Sera's voice. She won't spend too much time in my party...
- the shard thing. It looks like Ubisoft collectibles to me
- showing the party fast travelling in a demo doesn't feel good at all
- a LOT of animations
- mounts: the 3 other party members disappeared
Come on now, Bioware wrote some of the best stories in RPGs history.
I'm not sure "story" is BioWare strong point. I would say BioWare are more into creating characters and relationships, and maybe creating their own setting.
May be I am irreversibly corrupted by TW games, but why a hell do we attack everyone, even people from our own faction? If we are with inquisition, shouldn't we at least have an option of TALKING to them, before starting a fight? I just don't get it - who a character likes to fuck is something important, but who we are killing is irrelevant. How on earth are we going to become leaders if in our spare time we kill our own followers left and right Is it so hard to make a gameplay not to directly contradict a narrative?
I don't understand, you want to talk to the templars or the mages battling near Redcliffe? Because templars or mages don't have to be in our faction, as far as I know.
From the mages point of view, the Inquisition spawns from the Chantry. From the Templars' point of view, well, first you're a mage yourself, and your focus in on ending the mage-templar conflict, which contradicts their purpose and faith.
"You are the leader!" So you must go out and kill things like a grunt.
"You are the leader of leaders!" So these important NPCs have nothing better to do then follow you like grunts.
Why in fuck is Redcliffe a mage stronghold?! So much for what we did in Origins, I bet there are Demons.
There was another footage at E3 showing demons and Tevinter soldier in Redcliffe castle, yes. It doesn't matter to me, I don't see why Redcliffe shouldn't become a mage stronghold.
As for the leader part, I'm not sure I want to stay in a stronghold or on top of a hill overseeing the battlefield in a Dragon Age. Awakening was also like that and now that the Inquisitor has the power to close the rifts it feels even more justified. Of course I would like some RTS parts a lot (like Suikoden series did).
am I the only one struck by how no friendly fire is going to to be a real "immersion breaker" in this one (bit of an assumption on my part, but with the way your followers - and thats really all they are at this point - prance about I'd imagine friendly fire would not work well at all).
Hard and Nightmare difficulties always had friendly fire on in previous DA. I believe they we're planning on adding an option to enable it for easier difficulties.
I really hope the Witcher devs see this and cringe. No offense. It just seems like a lesson in what not to do.
I'm not sure they're cringing. The E3 gameplay footage for TW3 was underwhelming to me and felt like Witcher 2 2.0, especially for combats... The animations are smoother, classier, but the core mechanics seem to stay the same. As for other things, I don't know yet how the world is built in TW and the little glimpses of it I saw at E3 doesn't feel ideal to me.
