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

Aug 14, 2017 17:46:40 GMT alanc9 said:

Aug 14, 2017 17:35:05 GMT themikefest said:

If the player wants the knight enchanter specialization, he/she has to go to the Fallow Mire to collect 3 wisp essence. Its possible that the player has collected 3 from closing rifts, but in my case, I've always ended up going to Fallow Mire

Yeah, each spec requires you to go to one area. Some aren't mandatory areas, some are. But I'm not aware of having to go to two areas for one spec.

Sorry, it was not the Artificer, it was the Tempest

It needed the Containment Apparatus & Spirit Essence. Since you need Power Points to unlock all areas, Fallow Mire is an easy place to farm Spirit Essences & the only place it dropped for me.

Aug 14, 2017 17:18:54 GMT Kabraxal said:

Aug 14, 2017 12:28:34 GMT txgoldrush said:

You mean the story about random sheep herding?

Sorry, but its almost FFXV levels of bad. And its far worse than Breath of the Wild.

Hell, DAI's side quests don't even connect thematically like TW3's do, or even MEA's.

And playing gwent does? Also, BotW's quests are a shalliw joke... so don't even try to claim those were done better.

As for the sheep herding: one is a minute long quest. The other might be slightly longer and even has a twist that has interesting conotations that tie into several aspects DA lore teases. And you don't want me bringing up more quests that fo the same on top of a world so intricately designed it tells its own stories without quests or even dialogue needed.

Maybe you don't like it and want everything in your face and easily digestable. Fine. But it's best to stop trying to act like Inquisition isn't full of little stories and quests that not only feedback into the main quest, but the overwll themes of the franchise. It is only proving that you completely miss subtlety.

Sorry, but BOTW has some absolutely brilliant side quests, better than DAI's. And it uses the immersive sim style gameplay BOTW has.

And Inquisition's little stories simply put, didn't connect to the themes of the main story. That's the problem. Quit trying to say it doesn't exist.

Aug 14, 2017 21:56:55 GMT bossattack said:

Aug 14, 2017 12:37:01 GMT txgoldrush said:

However once again, DAI won all those awards in a very weak year for gaming, and was completely shut down by The Witcher 3.

Next critical acclaim or response out of the gate doesn't mean its success in the long road. Look at MGS V. It had the highest MC average that year, but after release it was torn apart by gamers for being incomplete and a directorial mess. On the other end of the spectrum, Life is Strange had a mid 80's or less reception from critics out of the gate, but its considered a classic now, with overwhelmingly positive reception from gamers.

MEA was released way after the new bar was set from TW3, DAI was released before it. Had DAI been released now, it would have been eviscerated.

Huh? First, I'm gonna just excuse the whole "weak year in gaming" because it's nonsense. There were plenty of great titles that came out in 2014, Inquisition happened to be the best among many. If we're gonna go with the "weak year" approach then we may as well abolish GOTY awards altogether. Second, you make these sweeping assertions about two separate games and then accept them as fact. MGSV received great reviews because it is a genuinely, great game with amazing GAMEPLAY. What I, and many other fans, complained about post-release was the lackluster story, something that is supposed to be a strength for the series. I think most fans generally agree that MGSV has probably the best gameplay in the entire series, it's only the story and the supposed missing "Chapter 3" that got folks riled up. But, that didn't detract from the great gameplay and all around package that was MGSV. Life is Strange receiving a mid 80's critical score means that it was well received, it was a good game. The idea that it is only "now" a classic is nonsense, even at release it was considered good. Secondly, it was a mid-tier game. It was never expected to and never did sell gangbusters. Most of the "praise" now comes from gamers that picked up the game at bargain bin prices and were surprised it was as good as everyone already said at the time.

As for your final point, I disagree to an extent. If DAI were released now I think it would score in the low 80's and at worst high 70's, it wouldn't have been torn apart as badly as MEA because DAI is still a great game even now. But, the bar has been raised two years later which would lead to some criticisms of its MMO-Lite design. Still, DAI is the better game than MEA despite coming out years before. I'm also not a fan of this retroactive judging of DAI to "better" games that came out after its release. It makes no sense. If DAI came out now why would we expect it to be the same game that came out two years before? Wouldn't it have spent the extra time to make an even better game?

2014 definitely was a weak year, when GOTY winners score in the 80's, its weak. Its even weaker than last year, which was also a weak year. DAI took advantage of it and won with a late release. You got Dark Souls II which needed a new version to reach its potential, Shadow of Mordor has the great nemesis system, but the game has a lot of weaknesses. Nintendo's offering were more of the same.

MGSV has gone down as a critically overrated game. It simply put, was not the complete experience. This is why it did poorly in GOTY polls when it comes to people's choice. the all around package WAS THE PROBLEM.

Life is Strange is seen as the bar in episodic adventure games, has probably matched The Walking Dead Season 1's success comparing the period it was released, and basically put Telltale in a hole. Its also the first Peabody recognized game. SquareEnix didn't announce a sequel and a prequel for nothing. Gamer reception has been far stronger than critical reception, along with games like Rocket League.

And no, DAI would be torn apart if it was released today, simply put, its model has been surpassed. Retroactive judging is part of life. Some works get widely praised and awarded on release, but fail to stand the test of time. How many Oscar best picture winners are seen as inferior to the movies they beat? A lot. Then you have works that did not get great reception on release, but have become classics. Blade Runner for example. It happens.

It needs to be accepted that DAI failed with the test of time. Many games do

Aug 14, 2017 22:36:47 GMT Sanunes said:

Aug 14, 2017 21:56:55 GMT bossattack said:

Huh? First, I'm gonna just excuse the whole "weak year in gaming" because it's nonsense. There were plenty of great titles that came out in 2014, Inquisition happened to be the best among many. If we're gonna go with the "weak year" approach then we may as well abolish GOTY awards altogether. Second, you make these sweeping assertions about two separate games and then accept them as fact. MGSV received great reviews because it is a genuinely, great game with amazing GAMEPLAY. What I, and many other fans, complained about post-release was the lackluster story, something that is supposed to be a strength for the series. I think most fans generally agree that MGSV has probably the best gameplay in the entire series, it's only the story and the supposed missing "Chapter 3" that got folks riled up. But, that didn't detract from the great gameplay and all around package that was MGSV. Life is Strange receiving a mid 80's critical score means that it was well received, it was a good game. The idea that it is only "now" a classic is nonsense, even at release it was considered good. Secondly, it was a mid-tier game. It was never expected to and never did sell gangbusters. Most of the "praise" now comes from gamers that picked up the game at bargain bin prices and were surprised it was as good as everyone already said at the time.

As for your final point, I disagree to an extent. If DAI were released now I think it would score in the low 80's and at worst high 70's, it wouldn't have been torn apart as badly as MEA because DAI is still a great game even now. But, the bar has been raised two years later which would lead to some criticisms of its MMO-Lite design. Still, DAI is the better game than MEA despite coming out years before. I'm also not a fan of this retroactive judging of DAI to "better" games that came out after its release. It makes no sense. If DAI came out now why would we expect it to be the same game that came out two years before? Wouldn't it have spent the extra time to make an even better game?

Just want to say I agree with what you are saying.  If Inquisition won because it was a weak year in gaming you could use that for every year for there are only generally a handful of really good games that stand out.
 

My personal favorite game of 2014 was Shadow of Mordor because of the Nemesis system and was really looking forward to Shadow of War this year until recently.

No, you can't. Because many other years have games that have been critically and commercially successful that stood the test of time. 2013, The Last of Us and GTA V (which still sells!!!!), no game from 2014 can compare to those two objectively. 2015 was loaded and so is 2017.

And come to think of it Divinity Original Sin stands the test of time more than DAI.

Aug 15, 2017 5:53:29 GMT Sanunes said:

Aug 15, 2017 4:54:04 GMT txgoldrush said:

No, you can't. Because many other years have games that have been critically and commercially successful that stood the test of time. 2013, The Last of Us and GTA V (which still sells!!!!), no game from 2014 can compare to those two objectively. 2015 was loaded and so is 2017.

And come to think of it Divinity Original Sin stands the test of time more than DAI.

Test of time doesn't mean there is more competition against those games each year.  How much competition was there in 2013 aside from Last of Us and Grand Theft Auto 5? The only other game that might qualify there is BioShock: Infinite and it was a generic shooter that was over promised.  There were plenty of good games such as Shadow of Mordor and Alien: Isolation and to dismiss them because you feel Inquisition doesn't stand the test of time is dismissing those games and what they achieved as well.

Zelda: A Link Between Worlds, Super Mario 3d World, Gone Home, Tomb Raider, AC4: Black Flag have all stood the test of time. Bioshock Infinite, not so much.

I like Mordor and Alien Isolation, but they do not stack up to top games of other years. The reason why Shadow of War is hyped is we want to see a better game with the Nemesis system.