For those who liked and didn't like MEA, do you think DAI was better?

The character creators I would say are about the same though I would give MEA the edge in hairstyles
This is from MEA.


And this is from my playthrough I just finished a short time ago

Can't really say which one is better, but I definitely enjoyed DAI a lot more than Andromeda. The companions were more enjoyable and more memorable to me, their banter (when I could get it to trigger lol) made me laugh a lot more, the maps were much better, more interesting, and more varied than Andromeda's (even if they were filled with tedious fetch quests), the soundtrack was more memorable, etc.

Inquisition has its share of flaws, and I could go into great detail on those, but I really enjoyed the parts that mattered most to me and above all, it was more memorable to me. Not to mention I didn't experience nearly as many game-breaking bugs or save issues in Inquisition as I did in Andromeda.

I hated the CC in MEA. You could make a good looking Ryder, but not a very distinct one. it was so very limted. Too limited.

I prefer the CC in DAI. I don't think MEA's is terrible, but I got the game after the adjustment patch and not being able to change certain parts of my face is ridiculous.

In terms of the actual games, I like MEA but DAI is better. Their main storylines and antagonists are equally average but all of DAI's main quests individually blow any of MEA's out of the water excepting the finale IMO. I think MEA has better combat, better side questing, and a better open world, but what matters to be is story and characters. DAI just has better companions IMO, and I'm able to interact with them more.

Plus I really like judging people? It makes me happy and compensates for some of the Inquisitor's more milquetoast qualities.

Hate to break it to you, but Inquisition has started to rise in internet opinion lately... and Breath of the Wild already starting to lose its "holy" status. Surprised the Nintendo defense force couldn't maintain the illusion longer. But then any veteran gamer has seen the mechanics BotW "innovated" for years. People stopped regurgitating that blatant lie quite quickly.

The only place I see it touted as a classic is you and gamefaqs. BotW didn't even last a year before being questioned by a large swoth of gamers. Skyward Sword did. Hell, even as much as TW3s praise has balanced out, it is 2 years later and enough people outside of dedicated topics will call it classic. I've yet to find anyone outside niche sites still talking about BotW.

It will not stand the test of time like Skyrim or Origins. It will be the one last gasp of Nintendo diehards as the company inevitably fades into complete irrelevance. Sad to think Nintendo used to be the best.

I don't mind the info-dumps if they are delivered in the style Dorian and Anders manage to do it - as a subject of a discussion, and argument, the sort of a chat sitting around the kitchen table in the wee hours of the morning. And, yep, that Friendship-Rivalry system and the way the characters' dialogues adapted was a stroke of genius. The best part was still how heavily involved into the game's world and events all the companions were.

I honestly couldn't disagree with the bolded more. I understand what you're saying, that they connect them a bit more to plot bits, but none of them besides Drack and Jaal are essential. Vetra could be gone and it would change nothing in the main story. Cora and Liam could disappear after the first mission and change nothing. Peebee doesn't tell you anything you couldn't figure out yourself so boom, she's gone too.

But I don't think companions have to be important to the story. No Bioware game has a cast that is entirely important. Everyone in ME1 and 2 certainly weren't, the only people you need in 1 is Liara and Tali for storyline purposes and 2 (and the Dragon Ages) lets you kill or skip people because they can be glossed over easily enough. Companions are mostly there to add flavor and give exposition when needed IMO.

Then again, I also don't think DA2 has the better cast. (Also, besides Anders, Aveline, and Varric, not relevant to the story. They add flavor but you can skip recruiting Fenris, Isabela, Merrill and Sebastian for good reasons.) I like them, very much so but you know these people for seven-nine years and unless you force change upon them or they're Aveline, they don't develop in what I felt was a significant way. Drastic change isn't always necessary in a character but seven-nine years is also a freaking long time. But that's all very MMV and I know mine is an unpopular opinion when it comes to DA2.

EDIT TIME: I forgot about Grey Warden Carver! He is the best.

I do wish the cast of Inquisition was integrated more, like someone taking a vested interest in the Hinterlands' refugees or giving Vivienne a better showing when it comes to the Exalted Plains where her country's (?) war is happening. I think in that regard MEA has an edge re: companions. But most of them are just so boring.

Also, freaking yes! I liked the friendship/rivalry system and wish they would have kept it. Low approval in DAO and DAI didn't do anything but stagnate discussion. It would be even better in Inquisition because unlike in DA2 where Fenris hated my mage guts but for some reason still hung out with me, all the characters in DAI are there for the Inquisition. They're not there for me, so they'd stick around.

Merrill is required? I thought for sure you could tell her you didn't wanna hang out with her anymore, but hey. I learn something new every day, thank you.

That's actually a really interesting way of looking at MEA, I didn't think of it like that, and I do see your point through that lens. I don't agree with all of it - I don't hold the same opinion about Cora, so even if the game intended that, it didn't sell me on it. So kinda DAI characters are world builders, MEA characters are story builders? Makes sense for the kinds of games they are, DAI being the third in a series and MEA being a new start in an old universe. It also explains a lot about the characters themselves, now that I think about it. Still, I would have to say I think the DAI cast is superior to MEA. 'Which has the better cast of characters' isn't something you can measure on a large scale except by opinion poll in the end. Yours was 'are they important to the story?' I don't need them to be. Mine is 'are they interesting to me?' To me, MEA's mostly aren't as.

By that same token though, if you think the narrative web is weak, would it not weaken everything in it? Because I think the kett storyline is weak. I think the Archon plot is weak. I think the Remnant storyline is derivative of Mass Effect itself and lazy. Ergo, the whole of MEA would be weakened as a result. A narrative web is great when your narrative is on point. If it isn't, the whole thing will suffer, including the characters. (I do agree that character integration is better in MEA. That's great, and an improvement on DAI. But if I don't like the characters, then it doesn't matter.)

So I'm not sure I can agree with the narrative web idea...except for one half of the game. The exploration and building outposts stuff is A Plus and the reason I like MEA as much as I do, and the best place the cast is integrated. I agree with you on Liam, that's exactly why I like him so much. But see, I like every single part of DAI's story, I'm just not sure it created an overall strong picture. DAI's main failings to me are 1) the obviously forced and stupid decisions some characters make and 2) the fact that after you find Skyhold, nothing really stands in your way. You just accumulate power until the big battle. Now the quests to get to that battle, I like a lot, but the fact that it's basically a steamroll I do not. I feel MEA has just a tinge of the same problem, though not nearly as bad. In MEA the adversity lies in getting those outposts up and finding your people a home, and that I did really enjoy and find rewarding. But I disliked the other story and main threat of the game. I love the conceit of MEA: finding a new home, fighting through adversity for something more, not letting the little arguments destroy the future like it could have in the Milky Way. I think they executed it well. I do not love the rest of it. I'm interested in learning about the Benefactor and the Quarian Ark, but the Jardaan and the rest of the kett can go hang. With DAI, I can't pick one direction they could go that I wouldn't be excited about. Except the Deep Roads. Fuck that horrible place.

IMO both stories are on par with each other, succeeding in one place where the other failed. As a whole, maybe DAI's is weaker (which is debatable as they have a lot of similarities) but in individual beats, MEA is, because I am deeply apathetic to one half of the whole game. They're very hard games to compare, though. Their aims and stories are much different. Also, DAI is all polished up and DLC'd by now while MEA is all by its lonesome so. Not exactly fair.