I Played 3 Hours of Dragon Age: Inquisition and It's Awesome

[Scorpus]

Dragon Age: Inquisition is third main title in BioWare’s action RPG series, and it’s a much more expansive and ambitious game than those that came before it. Part of this is explained because it’s launching on ‘next-gen’ consoles, and part of it is thanks to the use of DICE’s Frostbite 3 engine. Another factor is simply that Creative Director Mike Laidlaw wanted this game to finally realize the vision for Dragon Age.

I was one of the lucky few at EA’s event to test the game on PC (instead of PlayStation 4), and the first thing that struck me was how unbelievably good it looked. The graphical detail on Ultra settings is jaw-dropping: everything from the particle effects, to the lighting, to the textures looks incredible. It is easily the most visually astounding RPG game I have ever played.

Read the complete article.

 

[SirGCal]

Too bad EA owns it. I won't have any part of it.

 

[VitalyT]

I played 3 hours of Donkey Kong, and it was awesome!

 

[EEatGDL]

Too bad EA owns it. I won't have any part of it.

It sounds pre-recorded and just repeated over and over again through the internet. Right now, Ubisoft is the one being the douche; everyone deserves another chance if they're trying to mend past mistakes and improve.

Right now I totally hate a particular local cellphone carrier, but if they do an effort to improve their quality of service for a fair price and nice attention, I wouldn't have a problem going back with them -but as of right now they act as if they're doing you a favor.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

I have no problem giving EA a 2nd chance but RPG's aren't my cuppa tea, neither is fighting aliens or monsters so it's already dead in the water as far as I'm concerned. I'll take a look at their game portfolio again once they release something that piques my interest. So far I'm liking what I see in this new Battlefield title of theirs but my purchasing decision lies in the single player campaign, no decent single player campaign, no purchase, I couldn't care less about the multiplayer part.

 

[cmbjive]

no decent single player campaign, no purchase, I couldn't care less about the multiplayer part.

A problem with a lot of games coming out in the next generation is that many of them are multiplayer only. While I enjoy the MP aspect of Titanfall, there is a great single player campaign that is waiting to be told there.

But the worst is having to play multiplayer in order to get some exotic upgrade. Destiny is the worst for this. I recently came across an exotic handgun, but in order for me to use it I have to rack up 500 kills in the Crucible (Destiny's PvP arena). That's a problem in and of itself, but if you die at any point while trying to rack up your kills the counter resets and you have to start over. Stuff like that just makes the game less fun to play.

I think developers need to tamp down on forcing multiplayer on gamers and try to find the balance between both single and multiplayer aspects of their games.

 

[davislane1]

no decent single player campaign, no purchase, I couldn't care less about the multiplayer part.

A problem with a lot of games coming out in the next generation is that many of them are multiplayer only. While I enjoy the MP aspect of Titanfall, there is a great single player campaign that is waiting to be told there.

But the worst is having to play multiplayer in order to get some exotic upgrade. Destiny is the worst for this. I recently came across an exotic handgun, but in order for me to use it I have to rack up 500 kills in the Crucible (Destiny's PvP arena). That's a problem in and of itself, but if you die at any point while trying to rack up your kills the counter resets and you have to start over. Stuff like that just makes the game less fun to play.

I think developers need to tamp down on forcing multiplayer on gamers and try to find the balance between both single and multiplayer aspects of their games.

It sounds like you're talking about Thorn. The counter does not reset each time you die. Rather it deducts points from the kill progression. If I recall correctly, you gain 3 points for each kill and lose 1 for each death (alternatively, it may be +5 per kill, -3 per death). Assuming they haven't nerfed fusion rifles, an hour or two of camping a hallway with one of those should yield you the necessary points, provided a minimum 1.0 KDR. The gun would actually be worth the trouble if not for that particular bounty requirement.

As for MP/SP in games... Devs will never be able to make everyone happy. As long as the SP/MP feels intentional and not tacked on to appease an additional market segment, I'm happy enough. Special SP/MP requirements for unlocks and special content only becomes an issue when the SP or MP game is underdeveloped, forcing you to play an afterthought for the ability to use something in the main event.

 

[cmbjive]

It sounds like you're talking about Thorn. The counter does not reset each time you die. Rather it deducts points from the kill progression. If I recall correctly, you gain 3 points for each kill and lose 1 for each death (alternatively, it may be +5 per kill, -3 per death). Assuming they haven't nerfed fusion rifles, an hour or two of camping a hallway with one of those should yield you the necessary points, provided a minimum 1.0 KDR. The gun would actually be worth the trouble if not for that particular bounty requirement.

You're probably right about that requirement. Still, you would have to go on a really good kill streak in order to maximize farming for the points needed to satisfy the requirement (your minimum KDR confirms that). I can tell you that when I play PvP my KDR, at least for Destiny, is below 1 so it would be highly unlikely that I would get the requirement. I don't mind satisfying requirements to get certain equipment, but if the requirement is that you need compete in the PvP in order to use equipment in the campaign the requirement should be made lower unless the equipment is very powerful. I don't think Thorn is that powerful, especially considering that with most well-timed hand cannon shots you can instantly kill weaker enemies and PvP opponents.

 

[Adhmuz]

I played 3 hours of Donkey Kong, and it was awesome!

I played 3 hours of Destiny, and it was not awesome!

But as someone else said, EA, stay AWAY

Origin can disappear and no one would miss it.

 

[Guest]

"But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I couldn’t resist"

That's a funny way of saying "But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I knew I couldn't give it a bad review or I wouldn't get another chance to review their games ahead of time"

 

[SirGCal]

Too bad EA owns it. I won't have any part of it.

It sounds pre-recorded and just repeated over and over again through the internet. Right now, Ubisoft is the one being the douche; everyone deserves another chance if they're trying to mend past mistakes and improve.

Right now I totally hate a particular local cellphone carrier, but if they do an effort to improve their quality of service for a fair price and nice attention, I wouldn't have a problem going back with them -but as of right now they act as if they're doing you a favor.

They had their 2nd chance... and 3rd... etc. There is a reason they are voted the "Worst Company in America" multiple years running. Worst of all, they are proud of it. http://www.dorkly.com/post/51363/eas-reponse-to-being-named-the-worst-company-in-america

I don't support companies that drive their developers like this. This currently includes EA and Activision. There are plenty of other games on the market to play without supporting them and I stick to my principles. There are no new games from those developers in my library for a few years now. And I'm not missing out on anything. And from their own link above, I follow their advice. I do not buy their games. Period.

 

[RustyTech]

Too bad EA owns it. I won't have any part of it.

...everyone deserves another chance if they're trying to mend past mistakes and improve..

Hello, I guess you just woke up because you obviously don't know that EA doesn't give a flying flip about the players nor about fixing anything. They have demonstrated this over and over and over AND OVER AGAIN!

thanks, but no thanks!

 

[Nero7]

No offence but this "article" sounds an awful lot like fanboy hype.

 

[Evernessince]

This article is totally one sided. It's your job to critique the game, not froth at the mouth like a fan-boy. You go around saying "it won't have the same combat as 2" but in reality it does. Adding a half-baked 3rd person mode doesn't change the fact that the combat was designed with action in mind.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

It sounds like you're talking about Thorn. The counter does not reset each time you die. Rather it deducts points from the kill progression. If I recall correctly, you gain 3 points for each kill and lose 1 for each death (alternatively, it may be +5 per kill, -3 per death). Assuming they haven't nerfed fusion rifles, an hour or two of camping a hallway with one of those should yield you the necessary points, provided a minimum 1.0 KDR. The gun would actually be worth the trouble if not for that particular bounty requirement.

As for MP/SP in games... Devs will never be able to make everyone happy. As long as the SP/MP feels intentional and not tacked on to appease an additional market segment, I'm happy enough. Special SP/MP requirements for unlocks and special content only becomes an issue when the SP or MP game is underdeveloped, forcing you to play an afterthought for the ability to use something in the main event.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if there's MP included with a game, I just ignore it and play SP only.

 

[Scorpus]

No offence but this "article" sounds an awful lot like fanboy hype.

This article is totally one sided. It's your job to critique the game, not froth at the mouth like a fan-boy. You go around saying "it won't have the same combat as 2" but in reality it does. Adding a half-baked 3rd person mode doesn't change the fact that the combat was designed with action in mind.

I understand how this could come across, but I guess it's quite difficult to express how good I thought the game was without sounding like a fanboy.

Obviously I had concerns with the game: it's not perfect. For example the learning curve (as I mentioned) is huge, with BioWare chucking a whole ton of content at you in the first hour or so. This is pretty overwhelming.

But this is an RPG that you're supposed to enjoy for hours so it's not a big deal. I thought Inquisition was really fun and it should please fans of the Dragon Age series, especially Origins.

"But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I couldn’t resist"

That's a funny way of saying "But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I knew I couldn't give it a bad review or I wouldn't get another chance to review their games ahead of time"

I have no real burning desire to play games ahead of when they come out. I get invited to play all sorts of stuff and turn most of it down because it's inconvenient to get to (eg. requires plane travel).

I'll be buying Inquisition on the release date just like everyone else. Our allocated review copy will be going to Steve for PC performance testing.

Hope that provides a bit of transparency about this preview.

 

[TitoBXNY]

I am a big fan of the series and I am excited that it is so close to release. I will be home on 11/18 and 19 in my man/son cave playing this.

 

[davislane1]

No offence but this "article" sounds an awful lot like fanboy hype.

This article is totally one sided. It's your job to critique the game, not froth at the mouth like a fan-boy. You go around saying "it won't have the same combat as 2" but in reality it does. Adding a half-baked 3rd person mode doesn't change the fact that the combat was designed with action in mind.

I understand how this could come across, but I guess it's quite difficult to express how good I thought the game was without sounding like a fanboy.

Obviously I had concerns with the game: it's not perfect. For example the learning curve (as I mentioned) is huge, with BioWare chucking a whole ton of content at you in the first hour or so. This is pretty overwhelming.

But this is an RPG that you're supposed to enjoy for hours so it's not a big deal. I thought Inquisition was really fun and it should please fans of the Dragon Age series, especially Origins.

"But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I couldn’t resist"

That's a funny way of saying "But when EA and BioWare invited me to a private hands-on session for one of the most anticipated games of the year, I knew I couldn't give it a bad review or I wouldn't get another chance to review their games ahead of time"

I have no real burning desire to play games ahead of when they come out. I get invited to play all sorts of stuff and turn most of it down because it's inconvenient to get to (eg. requires plane travel).

I'll be buying Inquisition on the release date just like everyone else. Our allocated review copy will be going to Steve for PC performance testing.

Two questions: How is the game world designed geographically? For instance, is it a segmented world where openness is achieved by connecting large sets (like in Destiny), is it an entire landmass (like in Skyrim or the Witcher), or is it somewhere in between? I've seen a few gameplay videos, but have not been able to make this determination.

Additionally, does the relationship system tie into the game in an important manner? As mentioned in a post deleted by a mod, I don't generally care for these systems, so their involvement in the core game impacts my buying decision.

 

[Scorpus]

Two questions: How is the game world designed geographically? For instance, is it a segmented world where openness is achieved by connecting large sets (like in Destiny), is it an entire landmass (like in Skyrim or the Witcher), or is it somewhere in between? I've seen a few gameplay videos, but have not been able to make this determination.

Additionally, does the relationship system tie into the game in an important manner? As mentioned in a post deleted by a mod, I don't generally care for these systems, so their involvement in the core game impacts my buying decision.

I haven't played Destiny, but it's like what you described for that game. There are several (really) large areas connected by fast travel systems. Unlike DA2 there are no repeated sections, and the one area I played in felt enormous. But it's not Skyrim with one landmass: BioWare wanted to cut out boring bits of travel between each important area (which usually features villages and surrounding terrain) so that's why there's a fast travel system instead of a true open world. Furthermore, not every area is available to you initially: you need to unlock areas as the game progresses.

Despite it not being truly open world, the world of Inquisition feels open enough that you can play in that sort of manner. That's to say, there's lots to explore and uncover simply by walking around in each area.

As for the relationship system, I didn't get enough time to fully explore how it works. From what I understand, like previous BioWare games, it's an optional component that's akin to a side mission/side story. However, it could be tied into the story at some point, I just didn't get that far.

 

[EEatGDL]

I don't support companies that drive their developers like this. This currently includes EA and Activision. There are plenty of other games on the market to play without supporting them and I stick to my principles. There are no new games from those developers in my library for a few years now. And I'm not missing out on anything. And from their own link above, I follow their advice. I do not buy their games. Period.

Update your arguments please. They are at least trying and changing their attitude, how many hated big companies do that? I would be glad for just that change in the attitude from a lot of hated companies over here. I know about the "worst company of the year" thing and I hated them back then, but they're showing clear signs of change.

I got Dragon Age Origin for free and tried PvZ: GW and Titanfall on Game Time. I know Steam does the same, but hey, I can do the same in Origin [and I'm aware about the "spyware" thing about it too]. My catalog is indeed bigger in Steam than Origin's, and again in my opinion: Origin is better than Uplay and EA is making better decisions than Ubisoft lately. Next time "worst company of the year" will be Ubisoft, no doubt.

If you want, look at me as the "devil's advocate", not a full supporter of EA, whom I'm not.

 

[Evernessince]

I understand how this could come across, but I guess it's quite difficult to express how good I thought the game was without sounding like a fanboy.

Obviously I had concerns with the game: it's not perfect. For example the learning curve (as I mentioned) is huge, with BioWare chucking a whole ton of content at you in the first hour or so. This is pretty overwhelming.

But this is an RPG that you're supposed to enjoy for hours so it's not a big deal. I thought Inquisition was really fun and it should please fans of the Dragon Age series, especially Origins.



I have no real burning desire to play games ahead of when they come out. I get invited to play all sorts of stuff and turn most of it down because it's inconvenient to get to (eg. requires plane travel).

I'll be buying Inquisition on the release date just like everyone else. Our allocated review copy will be going to Steve for PC performance testing.

Hope that provides a bit of transparency about this preview.

Excellent response, it does a good job explaining how you arrived to some of your points in the article. I know that this is more a less a first impression of the game but maybe a bit of skepticism would do some good. I remember the first impressions going around when dragon age II was about to come out. While it wasn't a bad game, it was nowhere near as good as it was hyped to be. EA knew that these early reviews were going to be important so they threw pzazz at the start. Just looking at the latest sims and all the other mistakes EA has made recently, I really doubt the game will have the amount of content or quality that dragon age origins has.

 

[niklabs]

But as someone else said, EA, stay AWAY

Origin can disappear and no one would miss it.

The argument it's owned by EA can't stop me to play this awesome game! Who cares if the gameplay and graphics are epic? Not me.

 

[Scorpus]

EA knew that these early reviews were going to be important so they threw pzazz at the start. Just looking at the latest sims and all the other mistakes EA has made recently, I really doubt the game will have the amount of content or quality that dragon age origins has.

Not that I often attend game previews, but I believe that most of the time they curate the content specifically, eg. they only show one particular (probably the best) bit of the game.

This did not happen at the Dragon Age event. We were given near-retail code and told to play the game from the start. So what I played is what people starting to play Dragon Age will experience.

I think one of the things that makes Inquisition more enjoyable than Origins or II (at least from what I remember of those games) is the openness. I love exploring things and there seems to be a fair bit of this in Inquisition, even if it's not truly open world. And the combat system, while tricky to master in just 3 hours, feels very solid and well-featured, as I mentioned.

 

[DanUK]

Holy smokes I'm excited for this game.
I'm not a huge single player fan but went out on a limb and brought Dragon Age Origins Ultimate Edition for £5 on steam sale last christmas and must have lost 70 or so hours to it within a week or two.
I skipped DA2 and glad to see they've added back in some combat elements from Origins. Also nice to see that they've dedicated so much time to the PC version, will definitely be pre-ordering (although from somewhere like G2A where I'll pay half price... or normal price depending on how you look at things)

 

[Guest]

I still won't be buying an EA game.