Recommend it to G*mers
recommend it simply because it's a great game but don't be surprised when a gamer who doesn't have a surface-level familiarity with marx comes away thinking "wow what a fun quirky game that satirizes all sides"
Most of my friends played like an hour and a half and the general sentiment was “this is pretentious.” :deeper-sadness:
Increasingly convinced that the only way to make games with good stories is to make it a book. If the final product doesn't look like a visual novel or some ancient CRPG, you're doing it wrong.
The less direct gameplay agency you give the player the more freedom you have in not having to accommodate what is essentially a main character who can and will do anything.
It's possible to make a game with lots of action and shit that has a well written story, but fundamentally it's gonna have to be shaped around the actually existing great man that is the player character.
If Disco Elysium had the combat originally suggested in the early documents, people would simply end up winning the tribunal with epic cowboy moves, and the story would either have to accept that or be a poorly written story.
Yeah, a lot of games struggle with having the player character forced into circumstances that make no sense given the wild abilities of the player. I recall being put off by the rapid alternation in FFXIV between killing actual gods and getting owned by random dudes.
I'm no game designer, but I think the best way to do it is to focus more on the quality of the writing. It's what gives a story those moments that really stick with you. When I think back on Disco Elysium, it's not about being disappointed that such and such options weren't available for me to say or do, it's on "That the bourgeoisie are not human."
It’s possible to make a game with lots of action and shit that has a well written story, but fundamentally it’s gonna have to be shaped around the actually existing great man that is the player character.
I'm going to mention Pathologic 2 here as well, as an example of a game that very much doesn't do this. There's lots of action (depending on how you play, I guess) and the story is fantastic, but despite the fact that your character is a bit more important than most other characters, it's not like you're super human or anything. You're very much just trying to survive an impossible situation, exactly like everyone else.
That being said, I think your general point stands, because I can't think of a single other game that does what Pathologic 2 does. That game is truly special.
From what I know Pathologic 2 has a good setup for it, being limited in scope(easy to be the Great Man of one village) and each character being uniquely capable by virtue of having a comparatively rare medical skill or ability that would be scarce in a rural area.
You don't need to have the protagonist be a Great Man, even though most games do that.
Well yeah theres no rule to say you need to do it, but if you let players have enough freedom within the gameplay to become godlike compared to every other character, then it preserves the coherency between story and gameplay to make the character a Great Man in some way. Compared to just not doing that and making players frustrated and unimmersed, or having to scale back what the player can realistically do so the character can also be credibly limited in ability within the story(which can be better but is harder and requires good balance and time to fine tune.)
I never said it was trivial to write stories that aren't just arcade games for the MC to win, but it's by no means difficult if you have aims more interesting than shoveling power fantasy slop into the player's gullet.
Fr, origins actually had good world-building and character writing.
Have you played the other two? Trespasser is the best dragon age ever got
I tried to enjoy the sequels, but Origins was honestly the last BioWare game I enjoyed. They are popular though, so more of a me issue than anything else.
Ah no plenty of popular shit is trash. Honestly, I had to learn to appreciate the last two. Origins was my favorite game of all time so I went into the sequels comparing to that and I didn't enjoy it. But, once I learned to appreciate each for its own reasons I began to enjoy all of them. Origins is incredible and was my favorite game for a long time, but I might like inquisition the best now, with the addition of the DLC. high school me was so disappointed with Dragon age 2 that it made me less passionate about gaming as a whole. Now I think that its actually a really great game with the best characters of the whole series. Each of them does things the others don't, each of them has strengths and weaknesses the others don't.
I'm honestly a bit of a fangirl with the series. I visit the subreddit most days, and I've played inquisition 5 times, DA2 3 times and DAO 6 times. I'm a big art snob but I have a soft spot for fantasy and DA does it really well.
That’s a ringing endorsement and honestly convinced me to give it another go.
I know it’s at least partially the age I was at the time, but origins really was perfect to me. Well, that and Inon Zur’s amazing work.
What mindset would you recommend approaching inquisition from in order to appreciate it?
Ok lets start with the basics. Mods. Inquisition has some quality of life issues that mods help with alot. This list is recent enough that it should be comprehensive. The important ones are war table - no waiting, increased search radius, quicker looting, more banter, DAI Community patch, increase inventory capacity (if you don't enjoy inventory management). You could also download some texture mods or character creation mods.
I'd recommend going rogue artificer. Get the fun upgrade, stack crit (iirc), and go nuts. When I first went through the series origins combat was my favorite, now its probably inquisition.
Leave the hinterlands as soon as you can. Focus on the main zone quest line when you go to a new zone. The best one is probably crestwood. Fallow mire is decent for how short it is. Western approach is the worst one. Do not, under any circumstances, do the skull minigames. if you want to unlock the vault just use a save editor.
The highlights of the game are probably the templar recruitment quest, which I only did once because I always pick mages, and the DLC. The mage quest is good too though so if you want to pick mages just do it. The main point is that unless you just really like the game like I do don't try to 100% zones. You'll burn yourself out. The DLC is all meant for endgame though so don't do it too early. You could try dropping the difficulty and doing them early, but I don't remember how level scaling works. Do Jaws of Hakkon - Descent - final battle - trespasser.
Now, in terms of appreciating the story. The tone is lighter overall, though the writing isn't actually much lighter. It's the lack of horror elements and the pretty art style that are the big differences. There is still some body horror but its much tamer. If you're like me and as time has gone on you care less about things being "gritty" and "dark" you will like it more than you did before.
Additionally the structure is quite different. In Origins you follow a more typical fantasy story where you start as a nobody and have to prove yourself, not truly being respected until just before the final battle. There is a rhythm to this kind of story that people are very used to, and inquisition doesn't follow it. That is one of the biggest reasons some fans prefer origins. Inquisition is about being thrust into great responsibility and power completely by chance. It's also less about you and your companions and more about the inquisition. It serves to tell the story they want to, but its less of an individual story and some fans don't like that.
You have to understand going in that it is a different kind of story than Origins, less individual and personal and more about the wider world. It's worse as a power fantasy because of the way you are thrust into the inquisition and given so much power so early. It does politics pretty well and the world itself feels quite believable.
If you go into it wanting to experience a bigger, more interesting world, with a complex, believable political landscape, and you aren't married to a gritty presentation with a typical fantasy powerclimb you'll do fine. The characters are great, cassandra, varric, solas, and dorian are probably the highlights, though I think all are well done. Its a bioware RPG so talk to companions after every main story quest
The main point overall is that none of the games are direct sequels to each other. They exist in the same world, have similar themes, but are all very different. If you golly gee I sure do love origins and go into the others you'll be dissapointed. If you approach it with a desire to appreciate what each does better than the others you'll have a great time.
:read-theory: People's favorite game isn't origins like :reddit-logo: thinks. It's just whichever game you played first. /r/dragonage has comprehensive surveys about preferences and that seems to be the case. :read-theory:
By the way this is what each do well
Origins: origin stories! Horror, slower more tactical combat (if you like that), and macro plot pacing and delivery.
DA2: Characters and character development, best companions. Each companion has a unique specialization which makes them fun to experiment with and feel distinct. Unique story progression. Meredith and the arishok are good villains
DAI: Art style, expansive world, distinct well written cultures and societies. Worldbuilding, my favorite part of inquisition was literally just learning about thedas and exploring. Probably the best codex entries. Dragon fights are probably the best boss battles of the series.
they all have their struggles
Origins: Drab artstyle, brecilian forest, combat is slooooww and not as good as more recent CRPGs like Deadfire.
DA2: Reused assests, smaller scope/less to explore
Inquistion: Shit villain, bad plot pacing (at the end), worst horror, boring open world, besides jaws of hakkon!
:cat-trans: :only-good-gamer:
Eastern Europeans have game dev magic unknown to the rest of humanity.
In all seriousness, I like games with stories that would be hard to tell in other media. Cool game
New Vegas? Also stuff like the original Half Life, Deus Ex, GTA San Andreas (Or 4), Star Wars KotoR (or the Jedi Knight series), etc.
Speaking for the ones I've played, KOTOR (my beloved) and Deus Ex are both pretty wordy, and KOTOR is a CRPG in all but camera perspective. I didn't think of Jedi Knight as having a particularly good story, although it is a very fun game.
Fan translation of kurvitz novel “sacred and terrible Air” dropped on the disco sub last week.
:reddit-logo::kitsuragi-depress:
:kitsupogi: https://libgen.is/fiction/?q=Robert+Kurvitz+sacred+terrible+airI didn't use the mirrors, just the GET links, sorry, didn't mean to disappoint anyone. Good heads up for others. I'll post the current direct links but don't know they expire or anything. They are http and not https for firefox might ask for an additional click if you have strict https mode enabled. Or go to hellsite but having not used them cannot confirm.
Robert Kurvitz - Sacred and Terrible Air.pdf
Robert Kurvitz - Sacred and Terrible Air.epub
These worked a second time for me but it might be a "works on my machine" thing or something.Yea nevermind, I think it was my https-everywhere thingy interfering. Sorry for the bother
No bother, comrade! :rosa-salute: Don't want to give out bad links.
The true spiritual successor for the throne after Planescape Torment (i've been told)
It really is. Tides of Numenera ended up being a pretty good game, but nowhere near the one it aimed to be a spiritual successor to. Small parts of it, on occasions, managed to replicate the feel you had playing Planescape but never for long.
And then Disco did it, from an entirely new angle. And it was fucking awesome. Mind you, given ZA/UM's legal issues, I'm trying to resign myself to the fact we might not see another one, at least not from them.
My usual description of it is: it can touch you as deep as a very good book can. That's basically because, as you said and like DE, it's basically a great interactive book.
I regularly post this here but if you're looking for other games where writing, worldbuilding and dialog are - by far - the main focus of the game and quality of the same is excellent: Sunless Skies, Sunless Sea, Pentiment, A House of Many Doors.
It's excellent, just dont go into it thinking it's like Baldur's Gate or one of those other isometric tactical rpgs, it really isnt. Honestly the closest I can think of would be Disco Elysium.
It hurts a bit to read Baldur's Gate described as a "tactical RPG" given it's one of the classic CPRGs and perhaps, if talking about BG2 at least, the most well-rounded of them all to this day (when you consider not just writing but combat, ruleset, gameplay, amount of content - including a metric shitton of secret content - etc. as well). The writing in BG/BG2 is good - above most games. It just pales in comparison to games like Planescape or DE, obviously. I'd say a pure combat / tactical version of BG would rather be the Icewind Dale games.
Anyway, your point was that combat in planescape (and in fact most aspects outside of writing/dialog/atmosphere) is nothing special / sucks, and you're absolutely right.
The writing in BG/BG2 is good - above most games.
Damned with faint praise.
I kid, I kid, I did enjoy my time with the Baldur's Gatesies story wise just fine, but it is a lot more of a tactical rpg than Planescape could ever hope to be. I just didnt want to call it a crpg which is a category so wide as to be meaningless.
I just didnt want to call it a crpg which is a category so wide as to be meaningless
For a few years now tons of people have also been using it as meaning "Classic RPGs" - and not in the sense of "one of the old games" but more like those old games, meaning "getting closer to that formula from the isometric golden age of RPG". So using the term to describe PoE, PoE2, Tyranny, DE, the Pathfinder games from Owlcat (all of which putting quality-of-writing as an important selling point if not necessarily the main one), etc. but not, say, Skyrim (which doesn't - you have a sandbox and it's very fun in its own way but the sand is not that deep, and the writing is poor mostly - compare it to Morrowind for example, which was much closer to the former examples despite its gameplay being much closer to the latter). Basically describing the similar games of the new golden age for them we've entered for a few years now.
With a few exceptions, it seems Steam at least now does the same, too - see the CRPG tag over there. It's almost exclusively that kind of games, or very close to it.
how i wish sometimes that terms like "Doom-like" or "Rogue-like" became the actual genre names, the description of the gameplay is right in the name :sicko-wistful:
Also with the situation vis a vis Za/um being over took by market ghouls you might as well just pirate it
Everyone I know doesn't like games with too much reading/little to no action:sadness:
