🤮The Absurdity of Breaking Objects for Resources🤮

Well, you honorable warrior, why did you destroy the scaffolding in the first place? It was in first hour of game play and your actions got Varric almost killed and another companion badly hurt. Not to mention that your "honorable" actions brought Thedas on brink of destruction. You should take this argue to those who said "this is a Disney game" misleading you so bad that you though the main story is breaking barrels. Loot is a concept present in any RPG games in case you wonder. Even Mario (despite the game type) was collecting stars spoiling the view so you should got use to that already.

Can't make an omelet without breaking eggs.

What bothers me most about the breakable objects is the inconsistency: either make all small, loose objects breakable, or make none of them breakable. The current mix makes the game feel less immersive. Breaking stuff here also feels more like a chore than a fun mechanic, as it’s tied to finding items needed to upgrade equipment. If I don’t break every object, I risk missing out on important resources.

Instead, there could be a more engaging way to farm gold and valuables—something fun and creative. Breaking objects could then be more about immersion or optional gameplay rather than a requirement. For example, you could make breaking things in town affect your reputation, leading to consequences like NPCs reacting negatively or other implications. This could add a deeper layer of strategy and role-playing. I realize this would be more complex to implement, but for a triple-A game with a 10-year development cycle, it feels like a missed opportunity.

Another issue: treasure chests. Why are they randomly scattered across the world? It feels absurd. Finding a rusty item or coins lying around makes sense, but stumbling upon a massive treasure chest in the middle of nowhere? Not so much. Chests should feel logical and intentional—hidden in places like a dragon’s lair, a villain’s backroom, or a locked chest in a looted house.

If lootable items must be placed in other areas, there are better ways to do it. Replace random treasure chests with more immersive options: coins in a ruined cart, a weapon leaning against a wall, or valuables dropped by defeated enemies. It’s not rocket science, but it would make the world feel far more believable.

From a roleplay perspective, I don't smash crates in city streets or populated locations. In unpopulated areas I will if I think there may be a chest or crystal hiding behind some. There seems to be more than enough resources in-game to make it unnecessary, it's kind of the equivalent of Elfroot, there's more than is needed but it can be picked up.

"From a roleplaying perspective, I don’t break crates in city streets or populated areas. In deserted areas, I do it if I think there might be a chest or crystal hidden behind some."

Let’s break this down. You’re trying to justify the mechanic by saying you only “break things in deserted areas”? How convenient, right? This seems like a desperate attempt to rationalize something that is clearly inconsistent and poorly implemented. The fact that you have to “decide where to break” already shows that the mechanic is clunky and poorly designed. Comparing this to "Elfroot" does not help either; Elfroot was organically integrated into the world, while breaking barrels screams of 'lazy, forced mechanics.'

If the resource system were well-designed, we wouldn’t need this type of mental gymnastics to justify where or when breaking objects makes sense. The reality is that the mechanic makes no sense, whether in populated cities or deserted ruins.

I completely agree with the points raised about the inconsistency and lack of immersion caused by the mechanic of breakable objects and treasure chests. The duality of some objects being breakable and others not makes the world feel disconnected and sloppy. Worse still, the system encourages players to “break everything compulsively” to avoid missing important resources, turning the experience into a tedious chore rather than something fun.

A brilliant suggestion would be to connect the player’s actions to world consequences. For example: breaking objects in cities could harm your reputation or cause NPCs to react negatively, while doing so in deserted areas would be more acceptable. This would add a layer of strategy and dramatization, transforming a boring mechanic into something with purpose.

As for treasure chests? I completely agree that their current placement is absurd. Randomly scattered chests in the middle of nowhere break any sense of logic or immersion. Replacing them with more organic options, such as coins in ruined carts, items on abandoned walls, or treasures left behind by defeated enemies, would feel much more cohesive and natural to the world.

This isn’t a difficult idea to implement; it’s simply a matter of respecting the quality level expected from a AAA RPG. A game with a 10-year development cycle cannot afford to offer mechanics this lazy. 

"Well, your honorable warrior, why did you destroy the scaffolding in the first place? It was in the first hour of the game, and your actions nearly got Varric killed and another companion seriously injured..."

This defense is, frankly, embarrassing

First, bringing up a scripted event from the main story to justify a globally repetitive mechanic is as fragile as the scaffolding you mentioned. Confusing a planned narrative decision with a systematic mechanic that turns the entire game into a nonsensical treasure hunt shows a glaring misunderstanding of the issue. The problem here isn’t what happens in the story but the absurdity of turning Dragon Age into a “break-everything” simulator where collecting resources feels more like clearing out debris.

Second, trying to divert to an isolated plot incident only highlights how difficult it is to defend the mechanic itself. A loot system based on destruction has no logical or emotional connection to the narrative. It doesn’t enhance roleplaying; instead, it breaks immersion. Why would an honorable warrior or a charismatic leader be smashing barrels and vases randomly, like some medieval warehouse raider?

Third, comparing Dragon Age to Mario is, at best, laughable. Let’s make this clear: Dragon Age is a AAA Western RPG that positions itself as a mature, narrative-driven experience. Mario is a platformer designed for casual fun with simple mechanics. Making this comparison is like trying to justify "Game of Thrones" using "Tom & Jerry" logic. Dragon Age deserves more respect than being placed on the same level as games with such vastly different purposes.

Finally, the cliché phrase “you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs” is an insult to the discussion. Sure, you can make a good omelet, but BioWare clearly used rotten eggs when implementing this mechanic. Cheap comparisons and generic metaphors won’t hide the fact that breaking barrels as a method of progression is not only lazy but also a disrespect to the level of complexity and maturity that Dragon Age fans expect.

If you genuinely believe that loot “justifies” this primitive approach, perhaps it’s time to reevaluate what you expect from a quality RPG.

"Well, your honorable warrior, why did you destroy the scaffolding in the first place? It was in the first hour of the game, and your actions nearly got Varric killed and another companion seriously injured..."

First, bringing up a scripted event from the main story to justify a globally repetitive mechanic is as fragile as the scaffolding you mentioned. Confusing a planned narrative decision with a systematic mechanic that turns the entire game into a nonsensical treasure hunt shows a glaring misunderstanding of the issue. The problem here isn’t what happens in the story but the absurdity of turning Dragon Age into a “break-everything” simulator where collecting resources feels more like clearing out debris.

Second, trying to divert to an isolated plot incident only highlights how difficult it is to defend the mechanic itself. A loot system based on destruction has no logical or emotional connection to the narrative. It doesn’t enhance roleplaying; instead, it breaks immersion. Why would an honorable warrior or a charismatic leader be smashing barrels and vases randomly, like some medieval warehouse raider?

Third, comparing Dragon Age to Mario is, at best, laughable. Let’s make this clear: Dragon Age is a AAA Western RPG that positions itself as a mature, narrative-driven experience. Mario is a platformer designed for casual fun with simple mechanics. Making this comparison is like trying to justify "Game of Thrones" using "Tom & Jerry" logic. Dragon Age deserves more respect than being placed on the same level as games with such vastly different purposes.

Finally, the cliché phrase “you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs” is an insult to the discussion. Sure, you can make a good omelet, but BioWare clearly used rotten eggs when implementing this mechanic. Cheap comparisons and generic metaphors won’t hide the fact that breaking barrels as a method of progression is not only lazy but also a disrespect to the level of complexity and maturity that Dragon Age fans expect.

If you genuinely believe that loot “justifies” this primitive approach, perhaps it’s time to reevaluate what you expect from a quality RPG.

Such a refreshing post! I absolutely love how clearly and logically you’ve articulated both the 'whats' and the 'whys' here. Your breakdown not only dismantles the flawed arguments but also highlights exactly why this mechanic is such a misstep for the series. Truly a masterclass in reasoning! Didn't BioWare have anyone with a shred of logical reasoning on hand when making these decisions? 😂

Not to mention the barriers and locked doors that 'magically' unlock all of a sudden—just because you decide to start a companion side story or something similar. It’s not even that the companion has a unique way to open them; the door might simply be open, or the barrier might suddenly vanish. It creates this weird, disjointed feeling, making the game feel overly streamlined.

And then there’s the strange mechanic with Harding’s power—suddenly, you can just do it yourself using Solas’s knife. I mean, seriously?

Then we come to the dialogue choices. No matter how moody or intense your response seems, they’re almost always positive. The clenched fist option, for example, looks like you’re about to give an order or threaten someone, but it ends up being a fairly polite comment anyway.

It’s like they went overboard to ensure that every line of dialogue is so safe it couldn’t possibly offend anyone. 🤐

Ah, my friend, you’ve hit a nerve here! Ten years, man... ten long years waiting to find out how Solas and that whole epic story would unfold. We spent all this time scouring every corner of Dragon Age, revisiting Origins, mentally interrogating poor Varric, theorizing over every line of dialogue, every mural, every single easter egg we could find. I know it wasn’t just me; there was a legion of fans doing the exact same thing while we waited.

And all of it... for what?

To smash vases and barrels like we’re at some aimless medieval yard sale? Not only is the mechanic tedious, but the game essentially forces you to go back and farm if you want to progress in "adventure" mode, as if nobody’s time has any value. And don’t even get me started on the so-called "puzzles." If you can even call them puzzles, solving an obvious sequence of symbols that even a child could figure out blindfolded isn’t challenging; it’s downright depressing.

Honestly, it’s the kind of thing that makes you want to cry. But, as you rightly pointed out, let’s laugh, because laughing is all we have left in this circus. What did they do? Hire interns to design these "mechanics"? These ten years could have been so much better spent creating something truly memorable. Instead, here we are, cracking jokes about the situation just to hold on to the last shred of sanity we have left as fans.

But hey, we carry on... because, let’s face it, we’re stubborn. 😂