Dragon Age: Inquisition Demo - Your Stories are Thedas' Stories

[roseofbattle]

Dragon Age: Inquisition Demo - Your Stories are Thedas' Stories

BioWare?s Dragon Age: Inquisition has an expansive world that you affect through your choices.

Read Full Article

 

[Sanunes]

Well, that could still just be hype and bullshit on the part of EA, I'd be lying if I said it didn't sound pretty freaking cool, and that I'm not going to regret picking up the Deluxe Edition (I'd get the Inquisitor's Edition, but it's rare as fuck in Canada). I really hope Bioware can pull this off, because it kind of sounds like everything good about the previous two installments combined into one kickass package.

Also, Qunari female?! SQUEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

In my city all five Electronic Boutiques were sold out in a couple of hours (the time I couldn't get to the store), but the more I think about it I probably would have cancelled that pre-order for the Deluxe version anyway.

They posted a bit of this hands off demonstration on Twitch and its on YouTube now if you wish to see some of it, its a 20min video, but they were only showing the game for 10min.

 

[putowtin]

1st: Some new(ish) info in there, so for that I thank you.
2nd: Glad I've preordered my Inquisitor Edition
3rd: Varrrrrrrriiiiiiiiccccccccc! "Cough" Sorry, just my girly fan girl making an appearance!

 

[El Luck]

hands off demo? Well I'll be taking this information with a jar of salt then

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Every location discovered is a part of a larger story.

Sounds like every other Bioware game ever.

Actions have consequences, even if what you think you're doing is the right choice.

Actions have consequences? In a role playing game? I am truly awestruck by this development.

Inquisition has the largest cast of characters to recruit in the Dragon Age series, resting at nine followers.

As opposed to the 9 in Origins and the 9 in Dragon Age II...

Each party member has different helpful skills

Fancy that.

You can easily switch between controlling different characters and bounce among support, close-range attacks, and offensive magic from afar.

Whoa, don't overload us with too much innovation at once, Bioware...

People have different facial shapes, different principles. Within the cast of characters are people not of the assumed default.

Do they seriously expect us to give them a round of applause for designing characters with varying personalities?

Seriously, I would love to hear at least one thing that isn't a regurgitation of previous ideas or just generic marketing jargon. This right here is why people get jaded by E3.

 

[Nimcha]

Every location discovered is a part of a larger story.

Sounds like every other Bioware game ever.

Actions have consequences, even if what you think you're doing is the right choice.

Actions have consequences? In a role playing game? I am truly awestruck by this development.

Inquisition has the largest cast of characters to recruit in the Dragon Age series, resting at nine followers.

As opposed to the 9 in Origins and the 9 in Dragon Age II...

Each party member has different helpful skills

Fancy that.

You can easily switch between controlling different characters and bounce among support, close-range attacks, and offensive magic from afar.

Whoa, don't overload us with too much innovation at once, Bioware...

People have different facial shapes, different principles. Within the cast of characters are people not of the assumed default.

Do they seriously expect us to give them a round of applause for designing characters with varying personalities?

Seriously, I would love to hear at least one thing that isn't a regurgitation of previous ideas or just generic marketing jargon. This right here is why people get jaded by E3.

Yeah this is pretty much all standard PR-crap. But I read between the lines and watched the videos and I have to say it does look pretty interesting so far.

That said, I loved DA2 so I guess I do have a weakness for this series.

 

[alj]

I hope its good, i am looking forward to the game but i will wait and see how it works out. Looks nice but then again you can make anything look nice in a screenshot or demo.

 

[Yossarian1507]

Actions have consequences, even if what you think you're doing is the right choice.

Actions have consequences? In a role playing game? I am truly awestruck by this development.

Well, to be honest this isn't as standard in BioWare RPGs, they really struggled with this lately. I'm not even talking about ME3 ending flushing down the drain EVERYTHING we did from the start of trilogy, but also DA2, which really looked like it had those meaningful choice moments, only for me to realize, that I cannot really stop Anders from blowing up the Chantry, make an alliance between mages and reasonable templars, or even NOT fight both Orsino and Meredith. Such a bullshit.

Alpha Protocol did it right, from in-game decisions (arresting the gun dealer? He stays silent, so no new leads for you, but at least without him the enemies will be worse equipped later down the line) to even order of doing missions (for example, having SIE as a handler in one of the missions in Rome, if you happened to meet her [and get on her good side] in Moscow before). The Witcher series did it right with decisions that actually helped you (or bit you in the arse) later. Heck, Fallouts did it right just by acknowledging player's actions and telling him in the end what happened to people he met along the way. It's not that hard. BioWare? No, they like their stories kept in check. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that usually, but if you promise a proper choice&consequence (which is probably my favorite part of role-playing in general), you better deliver.

I'm one of those few people on the planet who were actually disappointed with DA:O, I didn't like the story and characters. I went for DA2 specifically, because everybody cried that it was so different, therefore I thought that could mean I'll like it. And it was true up to the second act (Arishok is probably one of the most well written antagonists in recent gaming history), but then the third act crapped all over itself. I'll pass on Inquisition, at least on the launch day, simply because I lost faith in this series. Who knows, perhaps this time they'll actually fix their game, but I'll have to see it first. Thoroughly.

 

[irishda]

So Theda had a really embarrassing incident in second grade too involving Jenny Patkins and a dodgeball too, eh?

 

[Atlon]

Actions have consequences, even if what you think you're doing is the right choice.

Actions have consequences? In a role playing game? I am truly awestruck by this development.

Well, to be honest this isn't as standard in BioWare RPGs, they really struggled with this lately. I'm not even talking about ME3 ending flushing down the drain EVERYTHING we did from the start of trilogy, but also DA2, which really looked like it had those meaningful choice moments, only for me to realize, that I cannot really stop Anders from blowing up the Chantry, make an alliance between mages and reasonable templars, or even NOT fight both Orsino and Meredith. Such a bullshit.

Alpha Protocol did it right, from in-game decisions (arresting the gun dealer? He stays silent, so no new leads for you, but at least without him the enemies will be worse equipped later down the line) to even order of doing missions (for example, having SIE as a handler in one of the missions in Rome, if you happened to meet her [and get on her good side] in Moscow before). The Witcher series did it right with decisions that actually helped you (or bit you in the arse) later. Heck, Fallouts did it right just by acknowledging player's actions and telling him in the end what happened to people he met along the way. It's not that hard. BioWare? No, they like their stories kept in check. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that usually, but if you promise a proper choice&consequence (which is probably my favorite part of role-playing in general), you better deliver.

I'm one of those few people on the planet who were actually disappointed with DA:O, I didn't like the story and characters. I went for DA2 specifically, because everybody cried that it was so different, therefore I thought that could mean I'll like it. And it was true up to the second act (Arishok is probably one of the most well written antagonists in recent gaming history), but then the third act crapped all over itself. I'll pass on Inquisition, at least on the launch day, simply because I lost faith in this series. Who knows, perhaps this time they'll actually fix their game, but I'll have to see it first. Thoroughly.

You pretty much nailed it.
A linear story isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but it becomes one if what you are promising are meaningful choices that in the end aren't meaningful at all.
Just like you I didn't like Origins very much, and the reason I think is the fact that they decided to go with a customizable protagonist in a predetermined setting and linear story. This mix just didn't work out for me; the silent warden just felt disconnected from the rest of the characters, and his/her choices just were not strong enough to give him a proper characterization weight. And the story was bad too.
In DA2 they decided to go with a Shepard-esque protagonist, in which you can choose sex and appearance, but whose background, personality and actions are more predetermined. And tell you what, it fit way better with the kind of story Bioware likes to tell.
Sure, there were some glaring issues with the game, but overall it felt more solid and coherent to me, and that's why I liked it a great deal more that its oh-so-praised predecessor. (Arishok was awesome)

Inquisition, besides looking prettier, still has to prove everything to me. They are again trying to give the player freedom in choosing their protagonist, which is great and all, but I really hope this time it will feel as an impactful choice, which means that it doesn't end at a couple different dialogues while you stroll in the wilderness.
As for actual decisions during the story that could affect the end result, well, I'm sorry but if all their recent games are anything to go by, then I'm not biting this one. Hope I'm wrong.
I'll definetely keep an eye on Inquisition, and sure hope it will be the long-expected turning point for Bioware; but for now I'm all over The Witcher, which, for me, never failed to deliver.

 

[Animall]

Everything look very promising. I hope this game don't disappointed me because I can't wait for it.

 

[AdagioBoognish]

Oh man, I totally read that headline and thought they were actually putting out a demo.. I so miss the days when you could get a little hands on time with a game before committing to the product.

 

[Seracen]

Oh man, I totally read that headline and thought they were actually putting out a demo.. I so miss the days when you could get a little hands on time with a game before committing to the product.

Right? It's become a complete mess. Instead, it's as if the devs are doing us a favor by deigning to make anything other than another FPS. It's not as if we didn't have crappy games before, but at least demos allow one to decide if it's their particular brand of crap.

As for DA3...I fully intend to pick it up, once the GOTY edition drops. EA has burned me too many times to trust ever again. I will likely borrow a friend's copy until EA makes it worth my while. Too bad BW will have to suffer as a result, but that's what EA does to their subsidiaries...and then has the gall to blame it on the devs they shut down.

I swear, it's a miracle EA ever produces anything anymore, barring Madden and Battlefield. I think it is a sign of how screwed the system is that they decided to kill the NCAA series, even though it sold well, simply b/c they didn't feel like paying the colleges for rights to the players.

 

[Seracen]

ergmagherd!!! Double post! my bad...

Darn you captcha!!! why on every bloody post?!?!?!

 

[Notshauna]

Actions have consequences, even if what you think you're doing is the right choice.

Actions have consequences? In a role playing game? I am truly awestruck by this development.

Well, to be honest this isn't as standard in BioWare RPGs, they really struggled with this lately. I'm not even talking about ME3 ending flushing down the drain EVERYTHING we did from the start of trilogy, but also DA2, which really looked like it had those meaningful choice moments, only for me to realize, that I cannot really stop Anders from blowing up the Chantry, make an alliance between mages and reasonable templars, or even NOT fight both Orsino and Meredith. Such a bullshit.

Alpha Protocol did it right, from in-game decisions (arresting the gun dealer? He stays silent, so no new leads for you, but at least without him the enemies will be worse equipped later down the line) to even order of doing missions (for example, having SIE as a handler in one of the missions in Rome, if you happened to meet her [and get on her good side] in Moscow before). The Witcher series did it right with decisions that actually helped you (or bit you in the arse) later. Heck, Fallouts did it right just by acknowledging player's actions and telling him in the end what happened to people he met along the way. It's not that hard. BioWare? No, they like their stories kept in check. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that usually, but if you promise a proper choice&consequence (which is probably my favorite part of role-playing in general), you better deliver.

I'm one of those few people on the planet who were actually disappointed with DA:O, I didn't like the story and characters. I went for DA2 specifically, because everybody cried that it was so different, therefore I thought that could mean I'll like it. And it was true up to the second act (Arishok is probably one of the most well written antagonists in recent gaming history), but then the third act crapped all over itself. I'll pass on Inquisition, at least on the launch day, simply because I lost faith in this series. Who knows, perhaps this time they'll actually fix their game, but I'll have to see it first. Thoroughly.

You pretty much nailed it.
A linear story isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but it becomes one if what you are promising are meaningful choices that in the end aren't meaningful at all.
Just like you I didn't like Origins very much, and the reason I think is the fact that they decided to go with a customizable protagonist in a predetermined setting and linear story. This mix just didn't work out for me; the silent warden just felt disconnected from the rest of the characters, and his/her choices just were not strong enough to give him a proper characterization weight. And the story was bad too.
In DA2 they decided to go with a Shepard-esque protagonist, in which you can choose sex and appearance, but whose background, personality and actions are more predetermined. And tell you what, it fit way better with the kind of story Bioware likes to tell.
Sure, there were some glaring issues with the game, but overall it felt more solid and coherent to me, and that's why I liked it a great deal more that its oh-so-praised predecessor. (Arishok was awesome)

Inquisition, besides looking prettier, still has to prove everything to me. They are again trying to give the player freedom in choosing their protagonist, which is great and all, but I really hope this time it will feel as an impactful choice, which means that it doesn't end at a couple different dialogues while you stroll in the wilderness.
As for actual decisions during the story that could affect the end result, well, I'm sorry but if all their recent games are anything to go by, then I'm not biting this one. Hope I'm wrong.
I'll definetely keep an eye on Inquisition, and sure hope it will be the long-expected turning point for Bioware; but for now I'm all over The Witcher, which, for me, never failed to deliver.

See I find that odd, because in DA:O all my characters have felt really different despite the linearity of the game, it's entirely possible to have a consistent believable character with pretty much any attitude whereas Hawke doesn't really make any sense as anything but a pro mage warrior or rogue (seriously half of his/her family are apostates, and if he happens to be one no one notices some how). And that is present in pretty much all mechanics in the game, the companions aren't as well designed as in Origins (Anders' new direction isn't very good, Fenris is pretty terrible), the talent tree is less variable and lacks the flavor of gaining a new specialization (becoming a templar warrior in DA:O felt far more impactful than in DA2), and perhaps most of all the regular bread and butter NPCs aren't as well thought out as in DA:O, almost all of them aren't as creative as many of the origins characters and they alternate from unbelievable to dull.

 

[Atlon]

See I find that odd, because in DA:O all my characters have felt really different despite the linearity of the game, it's entirely possible to have a consistent believable character with pretty much any attitude whereas Hawke doesn't really make any sense as anything but a pro mage warrior or rogue (seriously half of his/her family are apostates, and if he happens to be one no one notices some how). And that is present in pretty much all mechanics in the game, the companions aren't as well designed as in Origins (Anders' new direction isn't very good, Fenris is pretty terrible), the talent tree is less variable and lacks the flavor of gaining a new specialization (becoming a templar warrior in DA:O felt far more impactful than in DA2), and perhaps most of all the regular bread and butter NPCs aren't as well thought out as in DA:O, almost all of them aren't as creative as many of the origins characters and they alternate from unbelievable to dull.

I think both Origin and DA2 companions are not very good; I think I only ever liked Sten and Varric, the others were forgettable or badly characterized.
My focus was more on the Warden vs. Hawke side of things, with the latter fitting more with Bioware's style than the former. I'm not saying that Hawke is without flaws, and the apostate thing you mentioned (I haven't played a mge myself, but I trust you it is so) is just another proof of Bioware's struggle to handle protagonists that are variable.
As for the combat I'm not gonna judge. I enjoyed the one in DA2 more, but just because I'm not much of a challenge seeker; it was flashier, more fluid and easier to get into, so I liked it better. But I'm sure that Origins combat had more depth and challenge, and was overall better if you wanted something engaging.

 

[Notshauna]

See I find that odd, because in DA:O all my characters have felt really different despite the linearity of the game, it's entirely possible to have a consistent believable character with pretty much any attitude whereas Hawke doesn't really make any sense as anything but a pro mage warrior or rogue (seriously half of his/her family are apostates, and if he happens to be one no one notices some how). And that is present in pretty much all mechanics in the game, the companions aren't as well designed as in Origins (Anders' new direction isn't very good, Fenris is pretty terrible), the talent tree is less variable and lacks the flavor of gaining a new specialization (becoming a templar warrior in DA:O felt far more impactful than in DA2), and perhaps most of all the regular bread and butter NPCs aren't as well thought out as in DA:O, almost all of them aren't as creative as many of the origins characters and they alternate from unbelievable to dull.

I think both Origin and DA2 companions are not very good; I think I only ever liked Sten and Varric, the others were forgettable or badly characterized.
My focus was more on the Warden vs. Hawke side of things, with the latter fitting more with Bioware's style than the former. I'm not saying that Hawke is without flaws, and the apostate thing you mentioned (I haven't played a mge myself, but I trust you it is so) is just another proof of Bioware's struggle to handle protagonists that are variable.
As for the combat I'm not gonna judge. I enjoyed the one in DA2 more, but just because I'm not much of a challenge seeker; it was flashier, more fluid and easier to get into, so I liked it better. But I'm sure that Origins combat had more depth and challenge, and was overall better if you wanted something engaging.

I really don't think that's true, hell in Baldur's Gate there are so many options that it blows modern games out of the water, (though I've not done enough play throughs recently enough to judge the effectiveness of the character changes) and DA:O really didn't have those problems at least not that often. And honestly, I think that your disconnection is because the Warden wasn't voice acted, as they are factually more connected to the world than Hawke is.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Please be the truth. Please don't lie through your teeth again BioWare. I still love the Dragon Age series, so I am willing to believe that you will come through on these amazing promises, but I cannot shake the doubt in my mind from one of your other big franchises...

If this game comes through, it will be the one that makes me get a PS4 I think.