Forum:Biggest complaint about DA:I?

Forums: Index > Game DiscussionBiggest complaint about DA:I?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 3180 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

Now that the game's been out long enough that no one should still be in a blind haze of "OMG! DRAGON AGE IS AWESOME!" or "the damn game sucks! Rawr I'ma rage on the internet!" I just thought it would be nice to make a sort of list of all our biggest issues with it as a community. I don't want to just bash it, I'm more looking to have a serious talk about what we think could be improved in future titles, and what mistakes the Devs should really try to avoid in the next game. You know, if one of them is crazy/awesome enough to read something like this. So, I'll start:

It really bugs me how your character is as powerful as Varric and Cassandra at game start (Solas less so, even fanboyish as I am and taking into account the ending). Just think about this for a second: The game is basically telling you that either A) Varric and Cass just lost all of their experience or that, even more worryingly for most origins, B) the Inquisitor-to-be is as skilled as a minimum end level DA2 character. How? Yes, I know, it's in the interest of the game, but Alistair had his character concept completely redone from a veteran warden to rookie just so the Ostigar segment would make sense as I understand it. And that's the problem I have with DA:I's opening: it doesn't really make sense from a gameplay-to-lore comparison perspective. It would have been entirely possible to give the player some meat-shield companions at the start: just some soldiers or some such, and use Varric, Cass, and Solas to show just how badass you'd get to be at higher levels, but instead your just allowed to stand toe-to-toe with people who, by rights, should be able to turn you into a nicely roasted kebab on arrows. It does the other characters, and in my mind the player, a great disservice. I know, I know, empowerment fantasy, etc. But if there's anything that Bioware seems to need to figure out in DA games it's that gameplay shouldn't be allowed to dictate narrative: that's how we got Orsinblob for a mage-friendly Hawk.

Am I being to critical? Probably. Am I just ranting? I don't think so, but I'm the last person to judge that, lol. Either way, I want to put this out there so everyone has some place to put what disappointed them about the game out there, because I really love the Dragon Age universe and want to see it be the best it can be, and you don't get that by only talking about what's good. Eggy the Duck (talk) 20:28, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

This has been bugging me recently. I felt as though the Origin characters and Hawke even, had a good enough background to explain their fighting abilities. I remember my Cousland warrior felt like a natural fighter, but my human Inquisitor for some reason, felt a bit out of place as a warrior who was holding up with the best of them. This has been a problem with me with RPG's in general anyways: where there's a lack of a substantial background. No biggie. However I get that it's a fantasy game; it's a personal problem, so BW aren't really to blame for it. Regardless, I disagree, I believe gameplay should be allowed to dictate narrative. Unless you meant something else? It's what makes BW games. DA2 however, failed to grasp that.

One of the major things that disappointed me however, was the vast empty areas of forestry and pointless side quests. I really hope BioWare tackle that. I liked the size of the game, but felt it wasted its potential in a way. 21:05, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

what I mean by "gameplay shouldn't be allowed to dictate narrative" is that you shouldn't decide things based off of only the gameplay. That the narrative and gameplay should be braided together. one without the other should be diminished, almost meaningless. They should play off of each other, build on one another. Also, I suppose narrative was the wrong word. I really mean that the world and the characters should feel the same in both, say, the combat and the dialogue. And any disparity there should be intentional, be part of the setting. But, more on topic: I agree that Origins was way better at logically explaining player character ability than 2 or Inquisition. Hawk just didn't feel reasonable, and basically only the Qunari Inquisitor strikes me as unquestionable. Eggy the Duck (talk) 09:13, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

I should have made it clear that I meant mage Hawke, I agree, the other classes seemed out of place, especially in regards to the overall narrative. And yeah, I believe the two can be infused together, without one out-balancing the other. 22:18, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

When Hawke joins your party, you can check out his stats using the tactical camera. I believe it says he is level 12 (or something close to that). When I last left my Hawke, he was level 23/24. So what the hell happened? Did he just sit on his ass for three years, causing his XP to drop? This makes only slightly more sense for Alistair/Loghain. Maybe as they got older they became weaker. But Hawke should still be at the the top of his game.

With Varric and Cassandra I get why they needed to be the same level as everyone else - they're normal companions, and having them start at level 20 would be completely unbalanced. But there's no reason they couldn't do that with Hawke, and/or Alistair/Loghain. The only time they join the Inquisitor in combat is during Here Lies the Abyss, and I think they could have gotten away with showcasing Hawke's (or Alistair/Loghain) power by having him be level 20 or so. I haven't checked Morrigan's stats, but I doubt she's any higher than 19, which is what the mobs in the Arbor Wilds max out at. Again, my party is usually level 24 or 25 by the end of Origins. There's really no reason for her to not be level 25 or so - she's with you for even less time than Hawke, and the level difference isn't as big there. Not to mention that my party is around level 23/24 by that point anyway.

Back to the OP: The biggest gripe I have with Inquisition is that Inquisitor isn't fully developed as a character. Inquisitors of every race, sex, and class feel the same. Sure, there are a few comments here or there if the Inquisitor is not human or a mage, but he/she is still the same blank character. He/she is the Herald, and anything he/she was before that is almost completely irrelevant. In Origins, the different Wardens were different characters. In Inquisition, there is one Inquisitor with a range off possible identities. The difference is subtle, but it's extremely important. The Inquisitor should feel like a person, not a body that holds the Anchor or a symbol of the Inquisition. Silver Warden (talk) 21:48, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

I had a lot to say about the power scale between the main characters, but It was getting too long, and too off topic, so I deleted it. To be ON topic however I will say these 2 things. 1) After playing Elder Scrolls Online, I'm disappointed DA:I didn't deliver on their word about actually siegeing a keep in order to take it. Having to set up Trebuchets and battering Rams, direct troops and such is A LOT of fun, and I wish they could have had the time to implement it. 2) The War table. That whole thing is one giant missed opportunity. Does anyone actually wait for those missions? Everyone I know just skips the clock ahead to complete them right away, and if you don't there's a few huge story-related missions that can go missed. Since they kept saying "You're the leader of leaders" They could have at least made it so recruiting party members opens up more options on the War table missions. For instance; you recruit Viv, you get her Tarot Card as an additional option labeled "Mages" you recruit Bull, His card appears with the name "Bull's Chargers." You could complete War table missions by actually sending out the Bull chargers. It would make it feel like these people who you've recruited are actually adding to the Inquisition, not just your personal inner circle. If they wanted to take it a step further, you could have it so when you Send in the Bull's Chargers, or the Mages, or Carta Thugs, or whoever, you could go to the map and actually see them completing the mission, or just "in the middle" of it. That way you have a physical presence on this fantasy world you're impacting. as an added Bonus I also would have preferred if it wasn't JUST the Inquisitor who could seal breaches. Maybe the Big one, or maybe he's more adapt at closing them, But if they had established Mages or Templars had the ability to close them, it sets up so that the Inquisition could last longer than this one conflict. I see them going the way of the Gray Wardens, once all the trouble is done, what use do they serve? If they had members who could seal smaller rifts, you could argue the Inquisition becomes a place where mages are not only taught how to use their skills, they're specifically taught how to seal rifts,and fight demons. Same for the Templars, taught anti-magic, how to seal rifts, have them working together. Heck they could then absorb the Grey Wardens, and be this neutral super group dedicated to rooting out all forms of generic "evil". Warden Mage: Ferris (talk) 23:05, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

Actually, there are a series of War Table missions that involve the chargers. You just need to speak to Krem to get them. Anyway, what's this about advancing the clock? Is that something you can only do on PC? I thought you just had to wait for it to finish. Silver Warden (talk) 00:21, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

It's basically setting the clock forward, or even the calendar by a day, and all operations you've started are done. If you set the time back, then it's as much longer as you set it so. It's noted on the article of the War Table I think, but it's definitely on the Wiki somewhere. It's not just for PC but consoles too, it's just I heard with the console it can get complicated because of how you change time on them. I've recommended this method to fix the Xbox 360 bug when operation timers would reset when consoles are turned off, it has worked out just fine as far as I know. --Liaison Shaw (talk) 03:38, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

The ps3 version takes a bit longer because you have to completely back out of the game, but on PS4 it's SUPER fast and super easy to just jump to your settings, push the date forward and hop back into the game, instantly the mission is done. I know they had their own missions but I meant more towards allowing them to complete other missions as well, sending them to gather resources, or having them escort rebel mages instead of templars or scouts. just little things that could totally be added via a patch or DLC. Warden Mage: Ferris (talk) 15:43, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

Hrm... the biggest problems I had were the fact we couldn't manually put points into stats. There are less customization possibilities with it gone. Like now you can't really have a tanky mage or a warrior with high dodge chance. Plus with extra attribute points tied to passives, if a player wants to make a character with all the available stat increases then they will have to put points into skill trees that they otherwise might not have wanted to put points in.

I also disliked that we were relegated to 8 skills per character. It doesn't even make sense from a practical standpoint. I mean that if somebody is in a fight, they're gonna use all the skills they have at their disposal instead of arbitrarily having restrictions on how many skills they can use during any given fight. Sure you can switch out skills when out of combat to suit the situation but then you'd have to do that before every fight and you'd need to know in advance what type of enemies you'll be facing. Plus there are skills that a lot of people might think are essential so that leaves less slots for other skills. Like most mages need barrier so they can cast it on their allies so that already limits them to 7 other skills right there. Then add in skills that are used to cover more distance like Fade Step, Combat Roll, or Charging Bull and skills from specializations. That leaves even less free slots.

The final problem I had was that enemies' levels didn't scale to your level or at least scale in a way that makes some sort of sense. By enemies I mean non-animals potentially barring dragons and giants. If I go back to the Hinterlands after Red Templars and Venatori have moved into the area then I expect them to be much stronger than the bandits that were there previously yet they are about the same level as the bandits if I recall because the Hinterlands is supposed to be a low level location. Conversely, I don't want to see level 15 nugs in the Emerald Graves just because that is a high level area. I guess it probably didn't help that it is pretty easy to gain levels and so I wound up going into main missions and areas pretty over-leveled. By the time I did Here Lies The Abyss, I was almost twice the level of the enemies there and I hadn't even opened up the high level level locations like the Hissing Wastes, the Emerald Graves, or Emprise du Lion.

Those were really my major problems with the game. Don't get me wrong, I still like the game but I'm not blind to its problems. 184.101.232.173 (talk) 23:21, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

Twice their level? That's impossible. The mobs in Here Lies the Abyss max out at 15. There's a level cap of 27, and barring JoH, it's virtually impossible to get any higher than level 24 before the endgame. I assume you're exaggerating, especially if you haven't completed the higher level areas yet. I'm typically level 16/17 by the time I do Here Lies the Abyss, but I save those three areas plus the Exalted plains for afterwards. If you do all of the possible sidequests right after reaching Skyhold, of course, you'll be overleveled for the main quests.

I don't have a problem with the existence of the level caps themselves. It's just that their ranges are off. In the Hinterlands they go a bit too high. Things go okay after that until you reach the Western Approach. The level of the mobs there and in the Exalted Plains & Emerald Graves should be a bit higher. The real issue is the level cap on the main quests. 15 is too low for Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts, and 19 is way too low for What Pride Had Wrought. Given the boss fight at the end of that quest, it doesn't make much sense for there to any templar/Venatori resistance left after that point, so the quests in the Hissing Wastes and Emprise du Lion should take place before that. A level 24 party can steamroll past level 19 mobs, even on nightmare.

All in all, the difficulty of the game is pretty much backwards. Sometimes that happens with RPGs - as skills and equipment increase, the enemies will naturally become less challenging. But in this case it is entirely due to incorrectly leveled mobs. QA at BioWare dropped the ball there. And there's no excuse for poor QA. Silver Warden (talk) 00:21, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

I may have been exaggerating about being twice their level but I was still higher level than them. It was somewhere between 18-20 when I did that quest If I remember correctly. 184.101.232.173 (talk) 06:55, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

I can't agree any more about the number of skills at your disposal. The HUD for the consoles is different, and will always be, I honestly do not get why the bloody hell PC gamers couldn't get the same old 15-30 ability slots. I'm not a fan of "PC mustard race" mentality, I just really wish they didn't make the PC interface so console friendly. This, coupled with a low level cap, makes me feel like I have to be either a weak generalist, having only a couple of weaker abilities of all trees - or having all the powers from a single tree as a specialist. As an ice mage for the very first time, all the ice dragons were hard as balls. Bless the KE sword for bypassing that issue. --Liaison Shaw (talk) 03:48, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

I don't know about PC's but for consoles the radial menu was completely gutted compared to Origins and DA II. (Adopts elderly man's voice) "back in the old days, we could go to the abilities part of the menu and CHOOSE from our talents and use those. Not be resricted to this the Inquisitor is only smart enough to remember 8 things at a time BS."

Another far more minor complaint is we don't get to have sustained abillities anymore. It solidifies my head-canon when my Cousland always had her Breserker rage thing going on after her family got murdered in front of her. "Yes Bioware your horse is very pretty, and I just adore the Battle Nug (bow before his unending glory! You scum!), but...I like hearing what my companions have to say. Can we pretty please have haste as a sustained again or somthing? And your hurting my head-canon you bastards!" (Strange mix of sarcasm and whinning...with hints of "gamer entitalment") John the Manic (talk) 04:58, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

Bit off topic, but at the same time I guess not. Now that you mentioned banter, this bug also bugged me heelllaaaa lot - that is, if it's actually a bug and not just bad design. Here's the thing about it: there's a timer for banters, about 600-900 seconds or something like that. So according to that, every 10-15 minutes we should hear something. Everytime the timer reaches zero, a banter should trigger, but usually it fails to trigger for one reason or another. This made all the times I wanted to listen to companions by not using mounts ever a pain, because I was going through vast spaces in absolute silence. But blessed be the smart people who figured out how to fix it, though it's possible only for PC players sadly. Since then I've been firing up banters at will and it's so much nicer like that. --Liaison Shaw (talk) 05:36, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

It was a bug. They had to put out 2 patches for console to try to fix it and I think it might only really work on new games made after you've installed the patches because my dwarf Inquisitor playthrough that I made before those patches can have anywhere between 30 minutes to 2 hours of silence between banter while my qunari playthrough made after the patches has banter at regular intervals. 184.101.232.173 (talk) 06:55, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

Not a lot of replay value. henioo ^{(da talk page)} 06:41, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

My biggest problem is how it promises so much but never delivers anything. We need to stop the wars between mages and templars, but hardly ever see what's really going on with either side other than the briefest chat with Fiona before passing the ball to a plot device (the Venatori), same with just barely speaking to Barris (though the templar side was MUCH worse with not showing anyone's opinion about the war) and then hey, speak to crazy Denam here. And that was the best one! The civil war is a thousand times worse, you never see Briala's network of eluvians or her elven uprising (in fact, you don't speak to alienage elves at all), speak to no chevaliers, not even Orlesian peasants. It's just a bunch of rubble and a stalemate in the Dales, so not even some fighting. The Game gets reduced to throwing a few coins in a pond. I honestly felt cheated by WEWH because it had tons of potential to be extremely complex but was reduced to a time 'get the collectibles' minigame. The inquisitor wins at wars despite never being part of one, has everyone's secrets despite taking part in no intrigues, is a skilled diplomat that never speaks to anyone.

Other problems I have are

1) how little reason you have to visit nearly all the maps other than to run pointless side quests in the middle of nowhere, though some like the Hissing Wastes (what are the Venatori looking for? Turns out we're not quite sure either but thanks for coming) or the Exalted Plains (that's entirely destroyed by the time you get there and both sides of the war were forced to stop fighting anyway, so nothing you can do about it. Also, run some errands for the Dalish elves who, as usual, are here to be murdered by the plot) are by far the worst. I think the only map that never feels like a chore is Crestwood, and the Fallow Mire is small and gives you a clear enough reason to be there that you don't get to be bored

2) how clunky the game feels if you don't play a human. An elf saying "which is?" when Morrigan mentions Mythal's temple is still the most obvious, well-known example of the game, though Lavellan inquisitor prancing around the temple saying 'who's this supposed to be?' to elven mosaics of someone wielding a bow are still grating. But the Inquisition was incredibly accepting of a Qunari inquisitor all things considered, and Cadash is oddly okay with all this Fade stuff happening around them. By the end of the game you're still regularly solving human society's issues, intimately connected to the Chantry, surrounded by Andrastians who usually react negatively to either pro-mage or pro-elf views (you can't show any dwarven or qunari characterization at all). Why even bother with races then?--ssalgnikool (talk) 07:54, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

Really? I thought it worked pretty well as the elf, aside from the example at the temple of mythal which they said is a scripting error. It comes up quite a bit, Fiona, Lucius, Briala, they all and a bunch of others, all comment on the oddity of a non human as andraste's prophet

-HD3 ^(Talk) 10:17, July 22, 2015 (UTC) -HD3 ^(Talk) 10:17, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

That's the thing though, it's mentioned it's odd and then the game follows with no difference. I understand the message that they were trying to pass that you can't help how people view you, so even if you reject the "herald" title you're still viewed as one by the masses, but the elf inquisitor especially should be a lot more foreign and detached from the human atmosphere of the inquisition and the way they're treated, since the Qunari inquisitor is vashoth and the dwarf one is a surfacer, but they're from a Dalish clan that supposedly avoided humans.

You can't prepare one game for each race, but when I play other races I feel something is fundamentally odd about the way the inquisition develops with strong ties to the Chantry, either the former circle mages or former templar order, and the Orlesian empire. Elves still get some credit for the game usually remembering they're not humans, at the very least. I remember a grand total of three dialogue choices in the two times I played a dwarf (one with Scout Ritts, another when Cassandra asks you if you believe in the Maker and a third in Therinfall when a noble says they didn't expect the inquisitor to be so, ah, earthy). I did like the elf version of discovering who Flemeth was though.--ssalgnikool (talk) 10:47, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

While we're talking about how the world interacts with you, does anyone else remember them saying they would react to your choice of specialization? We all thought it would finally mean somone calling you out for being a Blood mage, or acting suspicious of a Templar, instead all I got was 1 party member telling me to "cool it with the magic" and another patting my back saying "great choice buddy" and nothing else. Side note: Did anyone have their Hawke as a blood mage? cuz I think it would have been funny to see a Blood Mage Hawke complaining about the Wardens use of blood magic. Warden Mage: Ferris (talk) 16:22, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

A warrior can have a conversation with Cullen about potentially becoming a templar, which is nice. There's another one if you actually become a templar and you ask about the effects of lyrium. Sera and Iron Bull both make comments about the Inquisitor being a champion, and you can even talk to Gaspard about it. Sera disapproves of the Inquisitor becoming a Knight Enchanter, while Vivienne is all "welcome to the club!" and Solas explains how Knight Enchanter skills come from Arcane Warriors.

Sure, it's not much but in both Origins and DA 2 no one mentioned your specializations at all. The only real exception is if a mage Warden becomes a blood mage: Wynne gets pretty pissed and Morrigan makes a vague reference during the dark ritual about blood magic not bothering "someone like them". At the time I was thinking "Seriously Morrigan? How about a blood magic high five before we make a baby? 'Someone like me'...since when are you subtle?"

Also, Merrill asks Hawke to help her friend out after he dies if he is a Spirit Healer. But that's literally the only specialization reference in all of DA 2. So while it may not seem like much, Inquisition does do a much better job of recognizing the your specializations than the previous games. Of course it would be nice if they had done more, but it's a step in the right direction. Silver Warden (talk) 21:21, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

A rift mage can also point out that the crossroads feel unnatural and that it will eventually collapse on itself, I think. Tested it with an elven rift mage, but I don't remember it coming up when I played an elven knight enchanter or a human knight enchanter. You also get a special dialogue choice during Solas' personal mission but I believe there were other ways to have access to it as well. And Bianca mentions that you're an artificer, I think. But yes, templar and necromancer feel like they should be mentioned more often, but they have to start somewhere.

About blood mage Hawke, I believe the devs say Quentin was the last straw for Hawke as far as blood magic is concerned? Though I imagine it's still weird if you romanced Merrill since she never says she'll stop using blood magic, not even at 100% rivalry. Hawke had a problem with being railroaded into being what BioWare wanted them to be very often when compared to the Warden or the Inquisitor, so it's not totally surprising.--ssalgnikool (talk) 21:43, July 22, 2015 (UTC)

Blackwall makes a comment on that you're a necromancer now and he seems to think you also kinda turn into a necrophil as well. All I could say when I saw that scene was "dude...". --Liaison Shaw (talk) 05:25, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

What I remember and wasn't mentioned here - Dorian makes a comment when you choose assassin. Iron Bull also comments on Tempest. Katschaba (talk) 18:29, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

My point wasn't that there was no mention, my point was just that the game just has 1 or 2 party members point out to you, that you chose a specialization. What they mentioned was the "world" reacting to your specialization and I was given to understand THAT was why we were limited to just 1 specialization option. I would have liked maybe my own extra mission, or perhaps things in the world (like barriers) could be auto removed because you're a Templar or a Knight-Enchanter. They already started to kinda do that when it came to classes, Only warriors can break down those walls, and only rogues can lock pick, why didnt they just take it to the logical next step and add in a few specialization obstacle. Heck I would have liked just some more time with my Trainer, they could have given you additional optional quests meant to represent you "training" Warden Mage: Ferris (talk) 15:49, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

Well, you do get some specialization specific War Table missions. Again it's not much, but it's a lot more than the previous games. The way I see it, if Inquisition did something better than Origins or DA 2, it really shouldn't be considered a major flaw of the game. Not when there are ways in which it was inferior to the previous games. Not living up to hype is not the same thing as being deficient. Silver Warden (talk) 17:09, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

In DAO if you were a templar you could feel something strange in the elven alienage and the blind templar there would say that you are a templar like him, you also has a new dialog option while talking with Alistair about his templar time.

so a dialogue option and a statement that you are a templar. Inquisition brought nothing new there if you ask me.

Eroian (talk) 22:14, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

My complain: Weapon Pack here, Weapon Pack there, another Weapon Pack, one more Weapon Pack, 1 story DLC, one customization and gear crafting DLC, an Armor Pack,.. Mass Effect and DA1 had so wonderful story DLCs.. --Organichalcyon (talk) 13:16, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

One thing that's really been bothering me about Inquisition is the LACK OF PROBLEM SOLVING, the very reason for said organization's existence. For example, The game hands us the Elder One's true identity WAY TOO EARLY in the game, instead of building up to the revelation later on by allowing us players to solve that mystery for ourselves. Delaying the revelation would have kept us guessing as we gathered clues, and would have made Corypheus' a MUCH MORE INTRIGUING adversary than he is. --JordanHawker (talk) 00:39, July 25, 2015 (UTC) JordanHawker

To briefly summarize my thoughts (and this is a grievance with the whole series more than just DAI) - I loved Origins, and it's a shame Bioware doesn't seem to share that sentiment. ----Isolationistmagi 02:00, July 25, 2015 (UTC)

Right. Down with Origins, Down with the Wardens! That was my first impression... Boy was I right. The lead writers hate Grey Wardens that's why in the next installment we can expect them to return as major villains, possibly we may have to kill the First Warden then choose between restructuring or destroying the group for good. Anyway, my gripe (not the biggest, just what I think isn't mentioned yet...) is that the main character wins using a special item and not by pure skills. The Warden had nothing special apart from being tainted. He won because he was skilled. I want a main character that wins fair and square. I wish my Inquisitor was just "one of the soldiers" who may or may not climb the ranks but still gets to defeat the villain because he was a normal soldier but with exceptional combat skills. [][][][]120.29.107.90 (talk) 16:05, July 25, 2015 (UTC)

Are you talking about how the Inquisitor killed Cory in the final battle or about how the Inquisitor came to lead the Inquisition? Because in the final battle, the Inquisitor doesn't win using the Anchor, he/she merely uses it to deal the killing blow. He/she defeated Cory before that. However, in a more general sense most of the things the Inquisitor does - from gaining the mark to closing the breach to leading the Inquisition - happens because of fate or sheer luck. So I agree with you there, to an extent. Though it's obvious that this is intentional. The Inquisitor is supposed to be blessed by fate. That's not a flaw of the game per se, just something that may not suit an individual's personal taste. Silver Warden (talk) 19:19, July 25, 2015 (UTC)

What let me down the most was that I was doing every meaningless sidequest and operation in order to be ready for the final confrontation in the game. I thought that results of some operations will have an impact during the final part of game but there is none. For example when you build that road in Fallow Mire, if Corypheus attacked Skyhold building it would be important for your forces to reach Skyhold in time after the battle in the Arbor Wilds. if you did not finish the road your forces at Skyhold would be weakened and some companions or advisors would die. Also there could appear some unexpected demands for using inquisition´s power in order to defeat Corypheus and if you didn´t have enough power you would not manage to defeat Corypheus without losing on some other front, or you would fail entirely if you have insuficient power and have not completed some essential operations or upgrades of Skyhold. There would be more tension but when I was fighting Corypheus there was no need for me to be woried about my companions or anyone else, So in the end I have about 200 Power good for nothing and this potencial is not used. Roach22 (talk) 23:03, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

First the size of the map. This was of course intended as something positive but it made going through the game a chore, especially on a level of replayability becauese it caused you to run around doing minor sidequests instead of the deeper ones most of the time, the game should have been more concentrated in it's content. Second was the personality of Hawke, which was just too... static, something that I had feared from the beginning. They really should not have included him in the first place because no matter his or her personality in the previous game they will still be pretty much the same. My evil Hawke (who I had made to look like Lord Voldemort just for the fun of it) sounded so immensily wrong every time he opened his mouth. He might be harsh but he was still quite righeous which did not fit at all with his attempt to sacrifice himself and such. Finally there is the almost complete lack of strategy despite you leading the inquisition. If the battle of Adamant fortress or the Temple of Mythal would have been more dependant on your power rating, your completed missions, aquired resourses oryour tactical decicions then the game would have been much better. Caspoi (talk) 23:00, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

My biggest complaint? The underwhelming story, and how little any of the quests in the game affected later actions. It was disappointing that our actions had little impact (if any) on the main missions. It's like everything that happened in Inquisition happened in their own little worlds, like none of the resource gathering, inner circle approval, Skyhold rebuilding, influence gathering, etc, affected the main story. Sure, it all helps in leveling up, but what difference did it make in building force strength when storming Adamant? Did it matter if we saved the Grey Wardens? Templars? Mages? Did it really matter who we put on the Orlesian throne? Honestly, I didn't even feel like the Inquisitor's inner circle ended up caring about one another, or on the other hand, making strong rivalries, which is something even Dragon Age II got right. Okay, so they enjoy a game of cards or picking on each other in banter, but none of their personal stories seemed to involve one another aside from Cole's personal quest.

My second biggest complaint is that "Inquisition" and "Inquisitor" are just... awkward to hear over and over again. The whole concept of the Inquisition felt like, I don't know, something other than an inquisition. --Death by Cheese (talk) 01:16, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

I think the reason that all of the "power" and resources acquired by the Inquisition wasn't used in the endgame was because that's what BioWare did with Mass Effect 3, and they're terrified of a repeat. Honestly though, of all the things wrong with ME's ending, the metagame war power system was the least of it. Implemented correctly, a similar system in Inquisition could have been pretty cool, although BioWare probably would have screwed it up somehow. Silver Warden (talk) 02:58, July 28, 2015 (UTC)

Oh boy. I have been waiting for this one.

First of smart combat. Before the game came out we were told this would be the most strategic game in the series, but it's not. It's a watered down system of 2. Enemy Warriors, Mages, and Rouges are all the same. In Origins, they had talents and spells like you. They had different weapons and armor. They were vastly more interesting. Now, the combat was faster, and it didn't take two seconds to do something. But I expect to see the same level of variety among enemies.

Main story. Once you get to Skyhold, nothing seems to be a challenge anymore. You never lose a battle, you do a complete 180 and start to wreck Corypheus. Never again does he feel like a threat. Even the final battle, he just rage quits and tries to destroy everyone because he already lost. I didn't feel like I was battling evil. I felt like I was an overpowered character who had a 100% chance of victory (I'm not talking about combat here). The Darkspawn were a threat. The Archdemon was a threat. What was the threat here?

Here Lies the Abyss. This was just a personal insult. All Wardens in Orlais just disappear. But what about those in Ferelden? What about the ones from Awakening? Where did they go? Sure, maybe they all were not effected. But don't you think they would show up? Unless they were all in a place where you don't here a thing about what's going on, all of them? That is horribly convenient. And why was Hawke there? He could have been used in so many ways, but instead he gets thrown in to the Grey Warden quest do he could get killed off.

Filler quests. Nothing felt important. The quests for characters were bland. The NPC's didn't feel like people, they didn't make me care. I never felt like I was talking to someone who was actually a part of this world. I didn't feel like I was helping anyone. I felt like I was on a casual walk.

Character models. They still look awkward. Not the designs, mind you. When they touch you, move their hands. It looks ugly.

The Inquisition. We get told how great it has become, but I never got that feel. Sure, we have an impressive castle. We see more people show up. But nothing feels like I truly rule. In Awakening, you had interactions with people who you very clearly ruled over. Here, not really. You talk to some soldiers. That's fine. But I didn't feel like they meant anything. We were never given what we rule over. We were just told we do.

Keep in mind that these are strictly my opinions. You could have had a completely different experience from me. And that's fine. I still like the game. But it is far from what I wanted. --Blood Prince (talk) 20:18, July 30, 2015 (UTC)

I agree so much about the animations thing though. BioWare's been using the same animations since freaking Jade Empire. They seriously need to update the library. I hear they only use mocap for the romance scenes, but there's ways of making a scene not look ridiculous without mocap. Like when they're talking to you, never changing their expression, not moving at all. Just making them move their arms a little bit, or tilt their heads to the side, look in another direction. People do that when they talk. The wicked grace scene makes me feel so uneasy because of the terrible expressions I usually skip the whole thing.--ssalgnikool (talk) 20:28, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Was anyone else bothered by the sub-par villain? The stakes were depicted to be extremely high, but it never felt like that. To me, there wasn't a sense of urgency; the threat seemed really non-existent, apart from the now and then reminder that there's a hole in the sky.I will say, DAO and even DA2 to a lesser extent, portrayed that; companions actually felt as though the end of the road had arrived; they new this is it, we might never see each other ever again. I really felt as though BioWare didn't want to take certain risks in that regard. Also, Cory--despite being a monumental threat--was never depicted as being so. We literally beat his ass all the way through the game: yeah, he attacks us 12 hours in, but the Inquisitor still gets the last laugh. I felt as though BW could have made him do more; a few losses here and there would only raise the stakes at the end. I get he did pose a substantial threat through his influence on secondary antagonists like Erimond and Florianne, but even then, they seemed a step below compared to characters like Loghain and Howe. I dunno, it might just be a thing that bothered me; at least in DAO, the bad guys actually won sometimes. That said, I still thought the plot was good, it just lacked a memorable antagonist. I think the Inquisitor lacked a certain emotional connection to any of the villains, something that could have brought the best out of both the protagonist and antagonist. 14:58, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

I think he just doesn't get enough screen time. Before the final fight he's in exactly three scenes, two of which happen during the penultimate quest. If Cory had shown up at Adamant and/or the Winter Palace, or if we at least got to see him interacting with his lackeys in a few cut scenes (like with Loghain and Howe in Origins), that could have done a lot to help develop his character.

Also - and I don't know if this is a failing on the part of the voice actor or directors - some of Cory's dialogue came across as unnecessarily flat. I get that's he's supposed to be a cold, calculating monster, but he could have seemed more threatening if some extra umph was put into certain lines. "I saw the throne of heaven, and it was empty!", really should have been an exclamation. It's the defining line of his entire character. And "witness death at the hands of a new god!" and "bow before your new god and be spared!" really could have used more dramatic flair. I'm not saying the voice actor did a bad job, necessarily. Perhaps the directors told him to be monotone when they should have asked for more volume. If that's the case, it was a huge mistake. If Cory had been more threatening in the scenes he was in he would have come across as more of a...threat. Silver Warden (talk) 18:55, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

I agree for the most part; adding more scenes would have been cool, heck it would have been brilliant if he killed some of his lackeys/servants because of certain failures or something. His presence just felt...meh. He really never did anything substantial in the times we don't see him, and for the all powerful individual he was supposed to be, he really didn't utilise his mind. Plus, BW could have given him this Darth Vader-like vibe; or something more akin to Sidious--he can plan his machinations behind the scenes whilst a real threatening figure led most of the charges--Samson or Calpurnia could have done that, but they were a miss to me too. I just don't think "Southern Thedas" really felt the repercussions of a demon invasion. I would have preferred a bittersweet ending; in DAO we really feel a sense of loss and destruction; Cory just felt like a footnote to me in the grand-scheme of things.

In regards to his voice, I actually liked the voice acting but more emotion to it would have been worthwhile. I wish BW would have transformed him though; as a last attempt to win, him taking a huge dose of red lyrium or utilising old magic to become something monstrous, may have made the final battle a bit more entertaining. Him actually infusing with the Lyrium Dragon after it'd been killed would have been phenomenal. I can just imagine a Cory-Dragon hybrid--but that's just me. I really hope DA4 or whatever, takes more risks in that regards; also really would have liked some companions to have actually had a chance of dying, it would have made it more dynamic in some ways. The final battle really should have been a battle between whatever was left of the Inquisition/allies vs Cory and the demons. 20:30, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

I personally loved Corypheus' voice actor and felt he was seriously misused. But then again I love nearly every voice talent used for major characters in BioWare titles, save for a few bland ones that should stay unmentioned. That's something they always do an amazing job with. Corypheus' problem really was a lack of screen time, and I think even Weekes admitted that. He had huge potential as a villain, being the leader of the seven magisters and all, having seen the Golden/Black City firsthand and being connected to Dumat.

If you've played the first Mass Effect, I think scenes like Saren had interacting with people who weren't Shepard would have been very useful to let us know how his mind works. The only scene where the inquisitor isn't present is the one between Solas and Flemeth at the end, sadly. We need to see more characters interacting among themselves. Possibly the inquisitor being "alone" more often as well, kind of like when Leandra died and the focus of the scene was on how Hawke felt, even though Aveline or your love interest were always there. It's when you remove the sense of urgency for a few seconds and let characters be idle that you see what they're made of.--ssalgnikool (talk) 20:28, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Nightmares would have been cool too, just as a way to give Cory some more screen-time. Anything to give him a larger presence! But like I said, if they were going for the behind the scenes, puppeteer/mass manipulator sort of villain, like Darth Sidious, then a better secondary villain should have been created, one that actually got the better of you at times. Does anyone remember that doppelgänger in the trailer? I just think it would have been an excellent choice to threaten you. Heck, put a mask on your doppelgänger, and reveal it towards the end, shit would have been freaking amazing. Imagine the shock and fear your Inquisitor would have felt! Cory could have still retained less screen time that way, but would still exhume danger. As I mentioned, despite the attempts to create a real emotional connection to the dire situation, there wasn't one--well at least that's what I think. The mark was supposed to provide that, but it really didn't. After the major attack by Cory, you grew into it, and it felt normal. Though, that's not something i have a problem with, as my Inquisitor felt as though there was no time to dwell on it ; I just believe the Inquisitor felt somewhat empty--that could have been fixed if there was a prologue that focussed on the conclave: having the chance to interact with some there, whilst later finding out that some individuals you know were in cahoots with Cory, could have made it personal. DAO and DA2 had plots that connected to you, as a player, on the personal level. DAI felt like business for the most part. 20:40, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Dragon Age already has a Darth Sidious, and her name is My- I mean, Flemeth. I guess that makes ::SPIOLER:: Darth Vader. And the ::SPOILERS:: are the Sith. That actually fits better than it should. Silver Warden (talk) 22:56, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Lel, so are the Wardens supposed to be the Jedi? XD Though I still see My- I mean, Flemeth as a somewhat ambiguous hag than an outright evil badass. Just imagine Flemeth trying to convince Kieran to join the dark side. "Angerrr....Hate...hmmmmm." Better yet, DA4 already has a title: Dragon Age: The Elves Strike Back. 23:09, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Actually, it would be Dragon Age: The Elves Awaken. Cause of what ::SPOILER:: did at the end of Inquisition. Let's just hope we don't have to suffer through three prequels of suck before we can play it. Dragon Age: The Phantom Orlesian, Dragon Age: Attack of the Darkspawn, and Dragon Age: Revenge of Flemeth. Ick. Silver Warden (talk) 19:38, August 2, 2015 (UTC)

I'd presume it'd be Elves Strike Back, since they've been through some pretty tough shit for a....ahem...a while, to put it lightly :P. Though Dragon Age: Fen'Harel Awakens could work! Also: Dragon Age: The Phantom Sandal sounds way better. Let's just hope that we get a Dragon Age: Return of Hard in Hightown and Dragon Age: A New Nug. 22:08, August 2, 2015 (UTC)

I really hope someone from BW does read this, or one of the other similar threads that must be around the internet, as I agree with most of what's been said and really should be taken into consideration for DA4.

My biggest personal gripe is the whole 'open-world' nonsense; something which seems to be infecting so many games these days. Sure it's a big selling point and works great for RPGs like Elder Scrolls, but for some games it just doesn't work. DA and BW games in general have always been about story and characters, and the story in DAI didn't gel with the world we played in. The areas in Origins each encompassed a main quest, this gave our meanderings through them purpose, and the side quests we undertook tied into the main story making them feel more worthwhile. Inquisition main quests, on the other hand, all took place in isolated zones - completely removed from the other explorable areas which, to me, really disconnects you from the world, and makes all the wandering through these other places pointless, beyond the 'gameplay' need to gain xp. Not only that, but I feel that the effort put into making these vast, and ultimately empty, areas is what ultimately left the main missions feeling short in length, few in number and low in impact, and the woefully lacking side quests.

And was I disappointed by the side quests in DAI; so, so many didn't even involve any NPCs, and were of the "find letter, go to place mentioned in letter, kill thing and get item" design. Where's the mental equivalent of solving the murder in KOTOR, or the personal aspect of aiding Dagna, or uniting the the elven lovers from DAO? Hell, even a Towers of Hanoi would have been a step up. A glance at the Keep shows how few of the side quests mattered to the developers; Denerim alone has more flags than the entire of Inquisition.

Blimey, that turned into more of a rant than I expected; should have left it at smaller world, more focused on integrating story and quests together with the areas. Ohh, and a few more companion-companion interactions beyond banter would have been nice, they were always the best bits of DA2 --Bel3338 (talk) 03:45, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

I find the OP rant highly flawed. You want to start a game with the companions at very high level? That'd unbalance the game.

Anyway my biggest gripe with this game would be the limited customisation it presents and romance options. I would've liked if the BE add-on had added more hairstyles or face presets, it's disappointing that it didn't. And the romance options for a male player character is limited to uninteresting character imo. I don't like Cassandra (speaking as someone who hasn't played the previous DA games), her personality rubs me off the wrong way. I don't like Josephine either, she's boring, her design is ugly (honestly IMO) and I rarely speak with her. Dorian is a more interesting character than either of them, and Iron Bull well... that'd be too weird except for Qunari inquisitors.

Another thing which disappointed me was that there was no Day-Night cycle. It's an open world game, so come on now, there should have been a day cycle. It's flawed to wander a place without the time ever changing.

Other than that I loved the game. I have no idea how the other DA games went because this was my first. {{SUBST:User:Finchelfanno1/Sig|06:27 am,Aug/4/15}} 06:27, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

Um, WTF? Forget everything else you said, you think Josephine is ugly? I can't really defend her personality, but seriously she is one of the most beautiful characters in the series. And hands down the most beautiful character in Inquisition. Only Morrigan from Origins ties her (golden eyes > yellow eyes). Yes, her romance is the worst one I've experienced so far (haven't done Cullen or Blackwall yet), but the model itself is absolutely gorgeous. The only thing wrong with her is that her eyebrows are a bit too thick. I get that different people have different tastes, but beauty isn't actually all that subjective. I could see someone thinking Leliana looks better, but calling her ugly? That's insane. Literally insane. It would be like someone calling Scarlett Johansson ugly. Am I alone here? Does anyone else think she's unattractive? Silver Warden (talk) 19:34, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

I think Josephine is the best looking of relevant female characters in Inquisition, but as you said, it's really a matter of personal taste and I'm fine with someone not finding her attractive - I don't find Leliana attractive at all, but get why someone would. I do wonder what women people who genuinely find Cassandra and Josephine genuinely below average in looks interact with on a daily bases though, since they are covered in makeup and have plenty of facial harmony. There was this psychotic dude some time ago that was furious about Cassandra looking like a man because of her square jaw and short hair and wouldn't stop bothering the devs about it.

I personally like the saccharine tone of Josephine's romance as well and thought the duel thing was fun, though it's obviously not for everyone (just like Solas' or Bull's or anyone else's, really. The romances are meant to cater to different tastes, after all. At least it's not like in DA2 where if you wanted to romance a man you were stuck with broody and broodier).--ssalgnikool (talk) 20:17, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

There's taste and then there's objective beauty. It exists. Some people will same this particular person looks better than that particular person, that's taste. But everyone - well every sane person with working eyes - knows a beautiful person when they see one. Otherwise everyone would completely disagree about who was hot and who was ugly. There are innate, biologically driven archetypes of attractiveness. Things like symmetry (particularly in the face), youth, and prominent secondary sexual characteristics are universally seen as ascetically pleasing. The amount and degree of which qualities will vary according to culture and taste but beauty exists objectively, beyond personal taste or even sexual attraction. Infants can tell beautiful faces from ugly ones. So an adult person who cannot recognize the pure ascetic appeal of beautiful face is either blind or crazy. And anyone who can read these forms isn't blind.

It would be one thing if Finchel said he/she wasn't attracted to Josephine. It would be another if he/she said he/she thought Leliana or Sera or even Cassandra looked better. But to call her ugly? That's nuts. Thinking feces smell good is nuts. Thinking a rotting carcass tastes good is nuts. Thinking a beautiful person is ugly is nuts. Silver Warden (talk) 01:44, August 5, 2015 (UTC)

You my friend need to learn to handle opinions. I said "honestly IMO" to avoid the "how can you think that" fiasco and yet you completely disregarded that. Perceptions depends on the perceiving person. Beauty means something pleasing to the senses, Josephine is not, to me. Ergo she is not beautiful IMO. Simple as that. If you can handle an opinion, okay. If not then there's nothing I can do about it. Goodbye. {{SUBST:User:Finchelfanno1/Sig|08:17 am,Aug/5/15}} 08:17, August 5, 2015 (UTC)