Dragon Age Inquisition character models look like there's from a PS2 game.

#31Izraeil(Topic Creator)Posted 8/22/2014 5:14:07 AM
mokmuud posted...
http://i.imgur.com/FqihZMh.jpg PS2
http://i.imgur.com/tAdSs79.jpg DA:I

Look I can't tell them apart.


Oh please, that's not even a screenshot, it's promotional image.
PS2: http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/13800000/Basch-final-fantasy-xii-13823563-312-283.jpg
DA:I: http://static.squarespace.com/static/51b3dc8ee4b051b96ceb10de/t/53c49d66e4b0b234f89d9289/1405394279330/

The only think DA seems to have over FFXII character models is resolution, heck FFXII has better hair physics to boot, DA hair looks like plastic and acts like plastic.
#32gohoanqPosted 8/22/2014 5:17:22 AM
dnmt posted...
Why anyone would give this game the benefit of the doubt after DA2 is beyond me. This is still EA we're talking about, as well.


DA2's only real problem was a lack of environments. The story, characters, and gameplay were all still good. Everybody that has actually seen the game in person and/or played it themselves has had nothing but positive comments about it. They also say the game looks amazing... so I'm excited as hell. It has been my most anticipated game since it was announced, hearing people praise the crap out of it only makes me more anxious.
---
---
"Bad biscuits make the baker broke bro" - Jake the Dog.
#33Crystyn_7BPosted 8/22/2014 5:35:49 AM
GladiatorDanger posted...
Crystyn_7B posted...
*they're

Don't see it, the hair looks crap but from what I've read that's due to Frostbite.

The character models look great, every companion has a unique body, crafting is supposed to be very extensive, we don't know if only daggers will be dualwieldable DA2 also had axes,...

The game looks incredible, not like W3 which looks astonishing but DAI is set to give you much more freedom.


Freedom in what regard?


Freedom from not only determining your characters personality but also race, gender and class. Not only being able to customize your own character but also any of the companions and even your own organization (we've to wait and see how that turns out).

The Witcher is restricted by it's nature, being based on source material. Geralt can't be anyone or anything. He is who he is, though they went the route where you can form his character because of amnesia, kinda cheap if you ask me. The Witcher 1 was kinda cheesy if you read the source material.
Not that that's all bad. It opens up the game to be much more characterdriven and customization be more neat. Less clipping, etc.
---
GT:Schreckstoff PSN: JudasInHell
Destiny Clan: Inquisition (http://www.bungie.net/en/Clan/Detail/164812)
#34Dark_SpiretPosted 8/22/2014 5:36:41 AM
gohoanq posted...
DA2's only real problem was a lack of environments. The story, characters, and gameplay were all still good. Everybody that has actually seen the game in person and/or played it themselves has had nothing but positive comments about it. They also say the game looks amazing... so I'm excited as hell. It has been my most anticipated game since it was announced, hearing people praise the crap out of it only makes me more anxious.
uhh there was a hell of a lot more wrong with that game than just the environments. the environments were just one of the majors.
---
Currently playing: Risen 3 - FTL - The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky
#35Bikes-Posted 8/22/2014 5:45:56 AM
gohoanq posted...
dnmt posted...
Why anyone would give this game the benefit of the doubt after DA2 is beyond me. This is still EA we're talking about, as well.


DA2's only real problem was a lack of environments. The story, characters, and gameplay were all still good. Everybody that has actually seen the game in person and/or played it themselves has had nothing but positive comments about it. They also say the game looks amazing... so I'm excited as hell. It has been my most anticipated game since it was announced, hearing people praise the crap out of it only makes me more anxious.


The plot was a pretty bad train wreck, and while the new characters were ok for the most part, they screwed Anders and Justice over rather badly. Gameplay also suffered terribly from the constant 2nd waves, there were several fights you couldn't win your first try simply because you didn't know that another wave would spawn over where you were keeping your mages, not to mention the friendly fire in nightmare was absurd.
---
FC: 2921-9087-2265
#36InjusticeRebornPosted 8/22/2014 5:51:20 AM
SoulTrapper posted...


No one said it ever had it.
It's one of the things a lot of people (mostly actual RPG fans) wanted since the first.

The more important part is, of course, the fact that you can't choose what weapon your equip on what character and no dual wielding

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/dragon-age-inquisition-will-not-support-armorweapon-decay-will-limit-gamers-to-class-restricted-weapons/


Why ever bring it into the discussion then? It's like me complaining that there aren't any robots in Inquisition.

And I must say, you're the first I've ever seen even mention the want of weapons degrading with use in Dragon Age. Ever. I'm not going to lie and say I sit in front of the screen 24/7 on the BioWare forums, but the times I did lurk there, I don't recall such a thing on anyone's wishlist. Never seen it here (both 360 and PS3 boards), never on the other gaming related sites I used to/usually visit.

I expect a dig to rival an archaeologist in an attempt to show me that isn't the case though.

As for 'mostly actual RPG fans' wanting it. What is that, some sort of snide remark or something? "You're not an actual RPG fan if you don't want weapon decay in RPG's"?

And as for the limitations in what you can equip, I won't really judge until I see how it plays out.

What with the vast cast of characters there is supposed to be, I'd like to differentiate them, which would have me agree with you that it is a shame that Warrior's (or their sub-classes) cannot dual wield heavier weapons. Perhaps it'll play into BioWare attempting to give their classes a bit of character, what with class specific weapons? I don't know.

I will say though, the classes in Dragon Age 2, despite the limitations put in place, made for more interesting classes, in my opinion. In Origins, everyone but a mage (I can't remember if you could DW daggers with them) could dual wield, and then if you fancied, you'd improve you ability in doing so. Minus the mages, it felt like the other two classes could branch into other styles more easily. It didn't feel like being a 'Jack' came with that much of a consequence

In DA2, only a rogue could go down that route, be it that you didn't fancy being an archer. A warrior had the choice of sword and shield, or double handed. The only problem in my opinion was that Arcane Warrior didn't make a return, or that Force Mage didn't allow for a weapon equip other than a staff.

I think that is what they're trying to expand on? Whether or not the cast of allies we'll have in Inquisition poops on that shall be seen when the game comes out.
---
Soon to be PlayStation 4 owner.
"So you like the inferior console" - Izanaml
#37GladiatorDangerPosted 8/22/2014 5:53:32 AM
Crystyn_7B posted...
GladiatorDanger posted...
Crystyn_7B posted...
*they're

Don't see it, the hair looks crap but from what I've read that's due to Frostbite.

The character models look great, every companion has a unique body, crafting is supposed to be very extensive, we don't know if only daggers will be dualwieldable DA2 also had axes,...

The game looks incredible, not like W3 which looks astonishing but DAI is set to give you much more freedom.


Freedom in what regard?


Freedom from not only determining your characters personality but also race, gender and class. Not only being able to customize your own character but also any of the companions and even your own organization (we've to wait and see how that turns out).

The Witcher is restricted by it's nature, being based on source material. Geralt can't be anyone or anything. He is who he is, though they went the route where you can form his character because of amnesia, kinda cheap if you ask me. The Witcher 1 was kinda cheesy if you read the source material.
Not that that's all bad. It opens up the game to be much more characterdriven and customization be more neat. Less clipping, etc.


So freedom to customize your characters looks and pick a gender, race and class? Apart from these aspects I really would not say the Dragon Age series gives much more freedom than the Witcher series, perhaps even less due to the fact that any choice the game gives you is fairly meaningless, does not really matter what choice you make in the Dragon Age games as everything roughly plays out the same while choices made in the Witcher games seem to have a larger impact on how the story plays out.
---
"Behold, I shall corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces" Malachi 2:3, The Bible
#38Crystyn_7BPosted 8/22/2014 6:11:20 AM(edited)
GladiatorDanger posted...
Crystyn_7B posted...
GladiatorDanger posted...
Crystyn_7B posted...
*they're

Don't see it, the hair looks crap but from what I've read that's due to Frostbite.

The character models look great, every companion has a unique body, crafting is supposed to be very extensive, we don't know if only daggers will be dualwieldable DA2 also had axes,...

The game looks incredible, not like W3 which looks astonishing but DAI is set to give you much more freedom.


Freedom in what regard?


Freedom from not only determining your characters personality but also race, gender and class. Not only being able to customize your own character but also any of the companions and even your own organization (we've to wait and see how that turns out).

The Witcher is restricted by it's nature, being based on source material. Geralt can't be anyone or anything. He is who he is, though they went the route where you can form his character because of amnesia, kinda cheap if you ask me. The Witcher 1 was kinda cheesy if you read the source material.
Not that that's all bad. It opens up the game to be much more characterdriven and customization be more neat. Less clipping, etc.


So freedom to customize your characters looks and pick a gender, race and class? Apart from these aspects I really would not say the Dragon Age series gives much more freedom than the Witcher series, perhaps even less due to the fact that any choice the game gives you is fairly meaningless, does not really matter what choice you make in the Dragon Age games as everything roughly plays out the same while choices made in the Witcher games seem to have a larger impact on how the story plays out.


While I agree that Wicher has more meaningful consequences that comes through having less choices and being character driven.

DAO had very different experiences by race, gender and or being a mage.


To me DA and W are very different experiences that both have their merit. Witcher being more restricted but also more meaningful, DA being less consequential but much more open to personal input.

Also I played both Witcher 1 and 2 and am currently reading the books, the choices aren't even that consequential, just more than in Bioware games.
In Witcher 1 it was just the final armor that was different depending on faction and the last chapter.
Witcher 2 had 1 quest area and the ensuing quests be different, you still explored both areas. Carried over decisions were nods similar to those carried over from DAO to DA2.

Also if you read the books Witcher 1 is one long train of you know all these guys.
---
GT:Schreckstoff PSN: JudasInHell
Destiny Clan: Inquisition (http://www.bungie.net/en/Clan/Detail/164812)
#39Exodus_PrimePosted 8/22/2014 6:17:02 AM
Izraeil posted...
mokmuud posted...
http://i.imgur.com/FqihZMh.jpg PS2
http://i.imgur.com/tAdSs79.jpg DA:I

Look I can't tell them apart.


Oh please, that's not even a screenshot, it's promotional image.
PS2: http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/13800000/Basch-final-fantasy-xii-13823563-312-283.jpg
DA:I: http://static.squarespace.com/static/51b3dc8ee4b051b96ceb10de/t/53c49d66e4b0b234f89d9289/1405394279330/

The only think DA seems to have over FFXII character models is resolution, heck FFXII has better hair physics to boot, DA hair looks like plastic and acts like plastic.


So mokmudd proceeds to owning your cave man statement of PS2 graphics. Then you reply to him and make yourself look even more sad...I mean know the 360 outsold the 360 but this is just sad now.

Worried and comparing hair physics. Gamers today man.


---
---
Bungie's "Destiny" Has Reached A New Level Of Gaming
(Only On Multi Consoles)
#40SoulTrapperPosted 8/22/2014 6:28:59 AM
InjusticeReborn posted...
SoulTrapper posted...

No one said it ever had it.
It's one of the things a lot of people (mostly actual RPG fans) wanted since the first.

The more important part is, of course, the fact that you can't choose what weapon your equip on what character and no dual wielding

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/dragon-age-inquisition-will-not-support-armorweapon-decay-will-limit-gamers-to-class-restricted-weapons/


Why ever bring it into the discussion then? It's like me complaining that there aren't any robots in Inquisition.


Because it's mentioned in the article I posted, of course.
And it's something I would have liked seeing added as well.

And I must say, you're the first I've ever seen even mention the want of weapons degrading with use in Dragon Age. Ever. I'm not going to lie and say I sit in front of the screen 24/7 on the BioWare forums, but the times I did lurk there, I don't recall such a thing on anyone's wishlist. Never seen it here (both 360 and PS3 boards), never on the other gaming related sites I used to/usually visit.

I expect a dig to rival an archaeologist in an attempt to show me that isn't the case though.


Again, read the article.
It's one of the first things mentioned.

As for 'mostly actual RPG fans' wanting it. What is that, some sort of snide remark or something? "You're not an actual RPG fan if you don't want weapon decay in RPG's"?


And again, read the article.

It's not snide remark, it simply adds to the role playing.

Having to take care of your equipment instead of just running in and trashing about adds to the role playing aspect of the game.
Not having that included is a missed opportunity, in my opinion.

And as for the limitations in what you can equip, I won't really judge until I see how it plays out.

What with the vast cast of characters there is supposed to be, I'd like to differentiate them, which would have me agree with you that it is a shame that Warrior's (or their sub-classes) cannot dual wield heavier weapons. Perhaps it'll play into BioWare attempting to give their classes a bit of character, what with class specific weapons? I don't know.

I will say though, the classes in Dragon Age 2, despite the limitations put in place, made for more interesting classes, in my opinion. In Origins, everyone but a mage (I can't remember if you could DW daggers with them) could dual wield, and then if you fancied, you'd improve you ability in doing so. Minus the mages, it felt like the other two classes could branch into other styles more easily. It didn't feel like being a 'Jack' came with that much of a consequence

In DA2, only a rogue could go down that route, be it that you didn't fancy being an archer. A warrior had the choice of sword and shield, or double handed. The only problem in my opinion was that Arcane Warrior didn't make a return, or that Force Mage didn't allow for a weapon equip other than a staff.

I think that is what they're trying to expand on? Whether or not the cast of allies we'll have in Inquisition poops on that shall be seen when the game comes out.


That's great.
I think it's silly to remove options from an earlier game for no clear or good reason.

I believe the reason is simply because they're re-using a ton of stuff from DA2, so they're most likely re-using animations as well and didn't feel like adding extras for dual wielding different weapons.