Dragon Age - overhyped

H

housecat

Gawd
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
753
I wanted to hear from those who believe DA is not all it's made out to be. Why didn't you like it?


Personally, I feel there's nothing new besides some combat elements. The story was pretty generic, one seen a thousand times. Also, the silent protagonist strikes me as slightly lazy. Right now, speaking ill of DA is blasphemy, I know. I wanted to hear from the other guy who feels the way I do. I'd recommend people try it if they want to, otherwise you can always watch the walkthroughs on youtube to get the story.
 
Oh it's definately not perfect, but I think it tells a great story with some of the best video game voice acting I've heard in quite some time.

If you don't like tons of dialogue, you won't like this game, plain and simple.

I've certainly played worse games this past year however

.....cough.....Borderlands......cough.....lame......ending.......
 
They hype for this game is well deserved IMO. If you don't like story-driven RPGs and tactical combat then chances are you won't like this game. Personally, I'd give the most overhyped game award to Modern Warfare 2.

At the end of the day though we all like different stuff. Nothing wrong with that.
 
housecat said:
I wanted to hear from those who believe DA is not all it's made out to be. Why didn't you like it?


Personally, I feel there's nothing new besides some combat elements. The story was pretty generic, one seen a thousand times. Also, the silent protagonist strikes me as slightly lazy. Right now, speaking ill of DA is blasphemy, I know. I wanted to hear from the other guy who feels the way I do. I'd recommend people try it if they want to, otherwise you can always watch the walkthroughs on youtube to get the story.
Click to expand...


Shhh, they'll stone you on the cross for talk like that!

But, I agree. The game started off well but I soon became bored of it, seemed very linear to me. The story didn't draw me in, I can't quite put my finger on it. And yeah I agree too much dialogue, if I wanted to listen to endless diatribe I'll talk to the wife ;)

OUCH, who threw that rock!
 
Last edited:
While I liked the game a lot, one of my favorite game in the last year, it still has a long way to go before it's actually 'good'. There wasn't anything truly above satisfactory with the game, but it put it all together in a way that made it enjoyable. Story was on the average side, characters were a little bland, combat could involve a lot more strategy (there's only so much you can do with a limited character/skill set, even on nightmare).

All that said though, I still played through it four times, trying out different party combinations, story arcs, difficulty levels. So it was entertaining.
 
spicey said:
Shhh, they'll stone you on the cross for talk like that!

But, I agree. The game started off well but I soon became bored of it, seemed very linear to me. The story didn't draw me in, I can't quite put my finger on it
Click to expand...

I do think the game's hype was impossible to live up to and I confess that I fell for it a bit.

Speaking just for myself: I've never been that good at these old school/D&D style of RPGs and I tend to not jump into them more often than not. I should have waited on this because

1.) I'm not that good at it.

2.) I'm simply not in the mood for this particular kind of RPG right now and unfortuantely most of the time that's the case.


That being said: What this game does for itself it does quite well. Some of the gameplay and combat mechanics aren't fully to my personal preferences but that doesn't mean it's "bad."

I kind of feel dumb that I bought it on day one at full price but I was jonesing for something new to play and I was hungry for an immersive RPG and I did fall for the hype. Simple as that.

Maybe a few weeks or months from now, especially as I get more into the winter months, I may suddenly take a real liking to it and then all will be well. :)

Oh well...I know I certainly have bought far worse games on less ground than this.

For me, lumps and all, I'd have to say Risen is the best RPG that I've played this year and is more to my liking and personal preferences in several key areas, particular in some of the gameplay and such.
 
Q-BZ said:
For me, lumps and all, I'd have to say Risen is the best RPG that I've played this year and is more to my liking and personal preferences in several key areas, particular in some of the gameplay and such.
Click to expand...

I'd say for me Risen is overhyped - no freedom for creating your character.... no matter of what you choose, you get same bossfight done in same way. Speaking not of SuperMario type ending but, it's just my view on that game.

Anyways, I do agree that story is generic and very similar to Mass Effect. But... most of fantasy games have generic stories, even my all time best RPG - Betrayal at Krondor was generic :) Yes, I do find muted protagonist a bit bad idea. Worst thing for me was bridge puzzle, this thing was absolutely unneeded.

Still... I got sucked into it, been playing it for last month, but I do understand views of other posters, and I won't be throwing stones at anyone who provides valid critics... and not "this game sucks because it sucks, and you are stupid" :)
 
DA is pretty damn good, if you like that 'type' of game, which I happen to. It does a better job at story telling than BG II did but BG II was more epic and overall a better game IMO. But I try relate DA to BG 1 where you're just setting up the world. I would expect the next DA game to be much better and more open. DA:O feels a little linear to me when compared to BG 1. The weapon selection was also poor in DA and I want 6 party member combat, not just 4. I do think the game mechanics/character development is pretty good. Much like DnD 3.
 
I personally think DA:O was underhyped(for a bioware title) and almost under the radar. It even had just Good reviews, 8-9's, not GOTY reviews, but once people started playing it, word of mouth about went rampant.
 
EA had some interesting marketing schemes. They made the game seem more childlike than the game really was. I'm sure some of the kiddies expected a game that was more simplified.

(Not accusing you of being one of those kiddies)

So, you'd like the game if the main character had a voice, and the plot was totally different than you've ever experienced?
 
I'd like the game if it was original in any way.
Other than some combat elements.

As far as "kiddies" not liking the game. My first PC game was King's Quest 3 back in '87 and before that I was gaming on the Commodore, so I've probably seen more games than most here. Not accusing you of being a kiddie or noob either. I'm 30.

Honestly, I think it's the kiddies who enjoy this game who haven't seen much before (maybe BG1/2 at most), but I didn't want to go there. I think fault lies in the fact the game is unoriginal and getting more credit than it deserves from the "kiddies" you described.

Every generation has their games they start out with and grow up with.
 
MorgothPl said:
I'd say for me Risen is overhyped - no freedom for creating your character.... no matter of what you choose, you get same bossfight done in same way. Speaking not of SuperMario type ending but, it's just my view on that game.

Anyways, I do agree that story is generic and very similar to Mass Effect. But... most of fantasy games have generic stories, even my all time best RPG - Betrayal at Krondor was generic :) Yes, I do find muted protagonist a bit bad idea. Worst thing for me was bridge puzzle, this thing was absolutely unneeded.

Still... I got sucked into it, been playing it for last month, but I do understand views of other posters, and I won't be throwing stones at anyone who provides valid critics... and not "this game sucks because it sucks, and you are stupid" :)
Click to expand...

Maybe I was under a rock or something but at least for me Risen came out of nowhere and with little to no hype or fanfare of any kind. If anything, when it came out, it had an immediate bias against it in the form of: "This is from the Gothic 3 people and it's enough like Gothic 3 so watch out!" which was negative hype.

For the record, thanks to community patches and such, Gothic 3 is way more viable these days and I think it's a game that RPG fans ought to give another look at if they haven't.


I don't really disagree with your criticisms of Risen, either. In fact, the other main criticisms I'd have of it that I'm surprised you didn't mention was how unevenly paced it is in terms of the main storyline. Once you get to chapters 3 and 4 you're basically mostly cave bound and most of your other worldly duties are either finished or mostly rendered moot and pointless. Sure you can come and go as you please but for some reason the last half of that game really feels like they want to jam you through the story and get it done.

For all that...Risen just worked for me. I got into it fast, easy, and was very sorry when I beat it.
 
I don't remember there being much hype for this game to be honest. I do remember seeing stuff written about it, but it wasn't plastered all over the place like a lot of games I see. That being written, I may have just overlooked all the hype or missed it for some reason or another.

The game looks very deep and has lots of tactical challenges and whatnot, but I just couldn't get into it. I got Morrigan in my party and made it to some bridge where some highwaymen tried to extort money out of me. I morphed her into a spider and she didn't really do any damage or anything. I just got kind of bored shortly after that and gave the game back to my friend.

Maybe if I get sick and bedridden and have more free time (probably my biggest obstacle to playing) I'll pick it back up, but my guess is I'll probably want to play through ME2 again (assuming it's as good or better than the first one).
 
No one appreciates expansive dialogue options these days. Too many are looking for the immediate gratification of beating the shit out of something whether it serves a purpose or not. This argument is not about age; it is about taste. This game was so engrossing story wise that a person with "taste" could be consumed with the rich essence of the plot and successfully become emotionally attached to it. This is the fundamental definition of Role playing. You assume a role and you feel as you believe that role should feel, you act however you believe that role should act, and you allow that role to consume you whilst playing. This is what a true RPG should be and this is what a true RPG fan should come to expect. Bioware develops games with this philosophy and DA:O was another masterpiece authored by these gifted souls. DA:O truly incorporates tough, tactical battles that require special planning in many circumstances, with a storyline so rich that a person with "taste" could easily be consumed by it.

A RPG of this proportion is not appreciated by everyone. For instance, my brother likes the action but is bored by the dialogue. He is not to be considered a fan of a RPG of this caliber.

If you have been gaming for a while, you should know that you wont possible enjoy a Bioware RPG if you think dialogue is boring. Do some research and you wont end up expecting only glorious action filled battles that occur for no reason. This isn't a MMO where you obtain and complete various quest. This isn't a Hack & Slash like Diablo 2, Titans Quest, or Borderlands (though I also enjoy those sorts of games) where you kill countless enemies in search of better gear without any real necessary attachment to the plot (fun but not necessary). This is a hardcore Bioware RPG and few do this as well as they do.

*****RECOGNIZE BITCHES*****
;)
 
MorgothPl said:
my all time best RPG - Betrayal at Krondor
Click to expand...

That game was way ahead ot its time in many ways. Two thumbs up

As far as Dragon Age being overhyped goes, well EA did publish it, they overhype anything.

It all depends on what type of RPG you like, I am lucky enough to like most types, but especially the oldschool cRPG.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
That game was way ahead ot its time in many ways. Two thumbs up

As far as Dragon Age being overhyped goes, well EA did publish it, they overhype anything.

It all depends on what type of RPG you like, I am lucky enough to like most types, but especially the oldschool cRPG.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say EA overhyped Dragon Age but they definitely marketed it weird with all that Marylin Manson "This is the new shit!" stuff. Really, EA?
 
edifyingkarma said:
No one appreciates expansive dialogue options these days.
Click to expand...

Actually this and the storytelling are far and away what I admire about Dragon Age the most.


Too many are looking for the immediate gratification of beating the shit out of something whether it serves a purpose or not.
Click to expand...

True.


This argument is not about age; it is about taste. This game was so engrossing story wise that a person with "taste" could be consumed with the rich essence of the plot and successfully become emotionally attached to it.
Click to expand...

And you're home free if you're talking about a book or a movie but what if the person loves these two things but maybe the gameplay doesn't fully do it for them?

This is the fundamental definition of Role playing. You assume a role and you feel as you believe that role should feel, you act however you believe that role should act, and you allow that role to consume you whilst playing. This is what a true RPG should be and this is what a true RPG fan should come to expect. Bioware develops games with this philosophy and DA:O was another masterpiece authored by these gifted souls. DA:O truly incorporates tough, tactical battles that require special planning in many circumstances, with a storyline so rich that a person with "taste" could easily be consumed by it.
Click to expand...

So anyone that doesn't get consumed by this game doesn't have any taste?

Ok. I figured one of these kinds of posts was coming sooner or later.


A RPG of this proportion is not appreciated by everyone. For instance, my brother likes the action but is bored by the dialogue. He is not to be considered a fan of a RPG of this caliber.

If you have been gaming for a while, you should know that you wont possible enjoy a Bioware RPG if you think dialogue is boring. Do some research and you wont end up expecting only glorious action filled battles that occur for no reason. This isn't a MMO where you obtain and complete various quest. This isn't a Hack & Slash like Diablo 2, Titans Quest, or Borderlands (though I also enjoy those sorts of games) where you kill countless enemies in search of better gear without any real necessary attachment to the plot (fun but not necessary). This is a hardcore Bioware RPG and few do this as well as they do.

*****RECOGNIZE BITCHES*****
Click to expand...

Agreed except you can have great writing, you can have great storytelling and these two things can make you a great book, a great movie, and PART of a great game.

The other PART of a great game is the gameplay and that's where personal preferences come into play that may not have anything to do with people having "taste" or not having "taste."
 
Last edited:
I couldn't get into DA. I had the same feeling about The Witcher. I really wanted to like both games, but neither "clicked" for me. Of course, I never understood the appeal of Planescape Torment, either.

I know, let the heresy inquisition begin!!! :p
 
Q-BZ said:
Maybe I was under a rock or something but at least for me Risen came out of nowhere and with little to no hype or fanfare of any kind.
Click to expand...

In Poland the game publisher made a little bit hype, along with some game mags. After all it's European game, so we had bit more fuss and bit more news about our side of the pond :)

Same as you'd say that Witcher wasn't much hyped in US - in Poland, taking that character was taken from one of best selling fantasy books and one of best modern Polish writers it was way too hyped, but it lived to most of it's promises :)
 
MorgothPl said:
In Poland the game publisher made a little bit hype, along with some game mags. After all it's European game, so we had bit more fuss and bit more news about our side of the pond :)

Same as you'd say that Witcher wasn't much hyped in US - in Poland, taking that character was taken from one of best selling fantasy books and one of best modern Polish writers it was way too hyped, but it lived to most of it's promises :)
Click to expand...

That would explain it. :)

Witcher...now there's a game I need to start giving a closer look to. I have it installed along side Dragon Age here.
 
One of the things the plot lacked in my opinion was a certain level of intrigue. It doesn't necessarily take mystery, but while the plot had direction, it didn't keep me guessing as to what would happen next. It didn't draw me in to find out how it would progress in the way that the Assassin's Creed plot (for instance) does. Mass Effect and NWN's storylines were generally better in my opinion.
 
Q-BZ said:
So anyone that doesn't get consumed by this game doesn't have any taste?

Ok. I figured one of these kinds of posts was coming sooner or later.

Agreed except you can have great writing, you can have great storytelling and these two things can make you a great book, a great movie, and PART of a great game.

The other PART of a great game is the gameplay and that's where personal preferences come into play that may not have anything to do with people having "taste" or not having "taste."
Click to expand...

Ya, I knew that the trolls would come in and derail the thread from those of us who DON'T like the game (or were disappointed) with the endless praise that I alluded to in the OP.

I like to read, I like movies. I probably read more than the average gamer, but this game is no substitute for reading a book. Yet, I have inferior taste to someone who is clearly in the upper rung of society, due to his videogame preferences.

Reminder- thread is for those who don't like the game to share why, not weak attempts to belittle those of us who have the experience and wisdom to not fall for the newest trend for a pretty average game that's packaged well (and hyped by fans who'd take any decent RPG they can get in today's market). There's nothing new in Dragon Age, especially the story, it's as generic as it gets. :mad:
 
housecat said:
I wanted to hear from those who believe DA is not all it's made out to be. Why didn't you like it?


Personally, I feel there's nothing new besides some combat elements. The story was pretty generic, one seen a thousand times. Also, the silent protagonist strikes me as slightly lazy. Right now, speaking ill of DA is blasphemy, I know. I wanted to hear from the other guy who feels the way I do. I'd recommend people try it if they want to, otherwise you can always watch the walkthroughs on youtube to get the story.
Click to expand...

Simplified and dumbed down for the console crowd. It has neither the storyline caliber or intrigue of proper console RPGs (Final Fantasy), but all the simplistic character customizations and lack of sufficient combat nuances - you can't even queue up actions.

I find my $60 DA sitting in a box. I can't even sell it for full value since the DLC is linked to the original owner.
 
MJZ said:
Simplified and dumbed down for the console crowd. It has neither the storyline caliber or intrigue of proper console RPGs (Final Fantasy), but all the simplistic character customizations and lack of sufficient combat nuances - you can't even queue up actions.

I find my $60 DA sitting in a box. I can't even sell it for full value since the DLC is linked to the original owner.
Click to expand...

^^ Now THIS is harsh and especially putting the game beneath Final Fantasy games and console RPGs...whew, pal, I hope you're wearing a nice sturdy flame retardant suit. ;)
 
Q-BZ said:
^^ Now THIS is harsh and especially putting the game beneath Final Fantasy games and console RPGs...whew, pal, I hope you're wearing a nice sturdy flame retardant suit. ;)
Click to expand...

Comparing a masterpiece like Final Fantasy 7 to the most generic "dungeons & 'Dragons'" game in years is pretty humiliating.
 
I'm a character development whore and wouldn't mind hearing anything neutral/negative/lacking in this area. The problem I usually see with RPGs is that the static encounters wind up dictating your party makeup, skill training and weapon selection, or else the game is so easy it doesn't matter. Success/failure (for me) tends to be how well the devs balance this out. It's a very picky thing but that's what sells me on a game.

Basically, if and when I get this game I want a repeat of my Rogue 16 / Fighter 4 combo from NWN. Greatsword + sneak attack = pwn. RP'ers might call this powergaming, and it is. Deal with it. :p
 
petertew said:
I don't remember there being much hype for this game to be honest. I do remember seeing stuff written about it, but it wasn't plastered all over the place like a lot of games I see. That being written, I may have just overlooked all the hype or missed it for some reason or another.
Click to expand...

This.

I didn't see any hype for this game before hand, I saw some videos on gametrailers.com for it only a few months before it was released and pre orderd after watching a video and thinking it looked good.

Most of the "hype" I've read is from real players who have played the actual game and commented on how good it is. The game doesn't really bring any new ideas to the table and isn't likely to win over any gamers who are not into RPG's. You could argue about how generic the story line is...

BUT

The entire game is incredibly well executed from start to finish, Bioware mastered every department on this one. Reminding us all that you dont need to innovate to be good, you can just bring a solid game to a platform which hasn't had any solid games for a very long time.

It's heavily story based, afterall it's an RPG, so much like a movie or a book it has a certain starting period which is not that exciting while you get to grips with the game mechanics and characters and all the basic lore. The more complex ideas come out later in the game where the lore gets fleshed out and things star to make sense, the whole game is great in my opinion but it shines best during the last 15-20%, the payoff of the story and some of what occurs near the end is truly fantastic to play through. Some of the most deeply satisfying gaming I've ever had the pleasure to experience.
 
It's a good game, but it's not BG2/PST-good.

My biggest gripes are the reduced party (should be six), the enemy auto-leveling (aka "loudness war"), and the deep ever-present Static World Syndrome, where people just stand in place waiting for you. Even BG had a day/night cycle of sorts (with separate day/night graphics). Also some nits with the interface.

There are also some omissions that should be patchable, like a log window for feedback.

As a beginning of something that will probably have a second and third game, with one or two expansions to each, well, it's a damned good start. I just wish they'd taken that extra step and made the world come alive because that's something major that sadly I don't thing we'll see for years.
 
MJZ said:
Simplified and dumbed down for the console crowd. It has neither the storyline caliber or intrigue of proper console RPGs (Final Fantasy), but all the simplistic character customizations and lack of sufficient combat nuances - you can't even queue up actions.

I find my $60 DA sitting in a box. I can't even sell it for full value since the DLC is linked to the original owner.
Click to expand...

Er what?!

Oblivon...Fallout 3, and to a certain extent Mass effect, these are dumbed down RPG games, Dragons Age is way closer to some of the best and original RPG games on the PC like Baldurs Gate. Now I've not played the console version of DAO but I assume its basically same except for dumbed down graphics and control methods (which are restrictions of the technology).

JRPGs are clearly appealing in a different way, designed more or less around an entirely different culture, one of which the PC crowd tends to stay well away from and the console crowd seems to gravitate towards, I think it's all the flashy/streaky glowing swords the size of houses or something, who knows.

I dont doubt games like Final Fantasy have good story, they are afterall RPGs and it's expected, but the primary reason why Dragon Age did so well was because it mastered all game elements, there isn't one thing I can find it did badly, in fact my only complaint about the game was the occasional spike in difficulty.

I watch people play the FF games and all i see is gameplay which would bore me to tears, repetative battle music, completely unrealistic....well...everything, not believeable in the slightest, in fact suspension of disbelief in a JRPG is practically impossible for me.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Er what?!

Oblivon...Fallout 3, and to a certain extent Mass effect, these are dumbed down RPG games, Dragons Age is way closer to some of the best and original RPG games on the PC like Baldurs Gate. Now I've not played the console version of DAO but I assume its basically same except for dumbed down graphics and control methods (which are restrictions of the technology).

JRPGs are clearly appealing in a different way, designed more or less around an entirely different culture, one of which the PC crowd tends to stay well away from and the console crowd seems to gravitate towards, I think it's all the flashy/streaky glowing swords the size of houses or something, who knows.

I dont doubt games like Final Fantasy have good story, they are afterall RPGs and it's expected, but the primary reason why Dragon Age did so well was because it mastered all game elements, there isn't one thing I can find it did badly, in fact my only complaint about the game was the occasional spike in difficulty.

I watch people play the FF games and all i see is gameplay which would bore me to tears, repetative battle music, completely unrealistic....well...everything, not believeable in the slightest, in fact suspension of disbelief in a JRPG is practically impossible for me.
Click to expand...

Believable and Video Games do not belong in the same sentence.

Dragon Age doesn't even come close to the Baldurs Gates. Those games have complex combat, builds, and fascinating storylines. Dragon Age has 3 character classes, hugely unbalanced difficulty favoring Mages, and terrible combat mechanics. Dragon Age really doesn't do anything exceptionally except the storytelling, which is compelling, until you find the story itself is nothing special.
 
MJZ said:
Believable and Video Games do not belong in the same sentence.

Dragon Age doesn't even come close to the Baldurs Gates. Those games have complex combat, builds, and fascinating storylines. Dragon Age has 3 character classes, hugely unbalanced difficulty favoring Mages, and terrible combat mechanics. Dragon Age really doesn't do anything exceptionally except the storytelling, which is compelling, until you find the story itself is nothing special.
Click to expand...

Of course they belong in the same sentance, great storytelling requires suspension of disbelief from the person following the story, if you cannot find the experience believable it becomes increasingly harder to appreciate the game.

This is not to be confused with plausible, obviously dragons do not really exist but within the games lore they do and it explains what they are and it becomes believeable. But I will avoid JRPG bashing, it's not the purpose of the thread and you're not going to agree anyway :)

Dragons Age has 3 character classes and multiple archtypes below that, as your character progresses you specialise in one or more of these archtypes allowing further customisation of your character. More over each character has way more spells and abilities than they can take during a reasonable play through which means how you build your character can be vastly different each time, warriors can be 1 handed + shield plus shield skills for tanks, OR 2 handed and 2 handed tactics for damage OR spec'd long range with archery skills, the same goes for the other classes, mages can be attack/buff/debuff or a general mix, rouges can be assassins, bards etc...

Mages can definately deal a lot of damage in the right circumstances but thats primarily their job, the game is party based and the idea is to have a balanced group, that means some of each class where possible, a group full of mages would simply be cut down in the game in a great many of the fights, especially ones where endurance matters because they're next to useless once they've burnt through their mana.

I can't agree the combat mechanics are terrible, the game is fun to play and requres a good mixture of both skill and tactics/planning.

I think it does everything exceptionally well, the music, the dialogue, the graphics and the speed at which it renders is a great balance, the plot and story telling mehacnics, the lore and depth of story, the locations and veriaty of enemies. Everything is just incredibly well done.
 
I'm not super-upset about the few class choices, but I think there could be room in the already generic list for a 'priest/scholar' type class.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that they might extend the list in a sequel.
 
"Suspension of disbelief" is a strange phrase to me. In fantasy, nothing is real. No matter how far you push things to the very edge of the abstract, it is still fantasy, and equally as believable as everything else. Whether it be dragons/dwarves/elves, or planets in the shape of a cone slowly being eaten by forces created by the snow-cone king, it's all equally believable in a fantasy setting, since anything is possible in a fantasy setting :) Now, if we're talking about a movie that is meant to depict real life, then we can start talking :p
 
MJZ said:
Believable and Video Games do not belong in the same sentence.

Dragon Age doesn't even come close to the Baldurs Gates. Those games have complex combat, builds, and fascinating storylines. Dragon Age has 3 character classes, hugely unbalanced difficulty favoring Mages, and terrible combat mechanics. Dragon Age really doesn't do anything exceptionally except the storytelling, which is compelling, until you find the story itself is nothing special.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with your points, except I think the one thing that WAS exceptionally well done was the quest structure. After the mindless one-off quest gind of MMOs, it was a refreshing change to only have to deal with a few uber long quest chains, some of which I wondered if they would EVER end. For me, it caused less confusion, it was more immersive, and created more of a sense of accomplishment at the end.

One of the things that really bugs me about the game is the invisible walls. After WoW, where you can pretty much go anywhere and do anything at any time with no barriers, I kind of expect that in an RPG. Instead, it used the same type of move system as GW or NWN.

I guess I was expecting more of a revolution in computer RPG gaming. Instead what we got was an evolutionary and even somewhat dumbed down version of NWN.
 
Fantasy and sci-fi isn't different from other genres in that the world must be internally consistent for the reader/player to be able to 'willingly suspend disbelief' and 'believe'. There must be rules, and where these rules differ from the real world (magic, flux capacitors) they must be spelled out clearly, or the reader/player will fill in with assumptions and if you break those assumptions, you're screwed.

Of course, you'll have some of it for free simply by building on established lore (which is where DA:O earns much of the "generic fantasy" ire).

Orson Scott Card's "How to Write Science Fiction & Fantasy" is a good beginning resource for anyone wanting to learn the basics of world construction and story-telling in these non-everyday settings.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
eloj said:
It's a good game, but it's not BG2/PST-good.

My biggest gripes are the reduced party (should be six), the enemy auto-leveling (aka "loudness war"), and the deep ever-present Static World Syndrome, where people just stand in place waiting for you. Even BG had a day/night cycle of sorts (with separate day/night graphics). Also some nits with the interface.

There are also some omissions that should be patchable, like a log window for feedback.

As a beginning of something that will probably have a second and third game, with one or two expansions to each, well, it's a damned good start. I just wish they'd taken that extra step and made the world come alive because that's something major that sadly I don't thing we'll see for years.
Click to expand...

Agreed, the story is less intriguing than BG1&2, never mind the sheer brilliance of PS:T. Torment didn't really have great gameplay, but DA certainly falls short of BG2. The static world is a problem as you say, also no repurcussions for a rogue picking locks and swiping valuables in plain sight. Most of the characters feel very 'alive', sadly the world doesn't.

My main gripe is the narrow skill/talent selection and rather illogical progression of some trees. I understand needing a short range or single-target spell before moving on to AoE damage, but feels unnecessary to learn Frost Weapons in order to get Cone of Cold when you've already mastered Winters Grasp. Also, the fact that you can obtain the most powerful spells at a fairly low levels means you'll just be learning weaker ones from different trees rather than being able to focus on one or two areas of expertise.
The levelling of mobs is handled better than Oblivion, but I have a dislike of this technique. Fighting endless groups of thugs/darkspawn who are all somehow as capable as an adventurer who has slain a dragon is just stupid. They also have a ridiculous amount of health. Facing off against a mob of thugs while half a dozen archers repeatedly stun your entire party with Scattershot (a skill which conveniently ignores missile deflection, pah) is bloody annoying. If they are a powerful named NPC then it makes sense, but for generic enemies it shows a lack of effort - "bah, just re-use the same guys and give them some more HP and better skills".

DLC is also rubbish. Stone Prisoner came free with my retail copy, but it only gives you an hour or two of extra gameplay - well shy of what they advertise and it simply isn't worth the asking price.

I really hope they address the underlying system for future games, as it just isn't very good. I like the fatigue (not so sure about using it for spells as well though) and the fact they have separated defense skill and armour (something I felt D&D should have done). Spell combos are neat, but there is some balancing of power levels required. Cone of Cold is arguably the most unfair spell in the game considering its cost and cool-down time - 2 mages with this spell (and a good Spellpower) are enough to keep the High Dragon frozen for the majority of the battle.
I understand they built the system "from the ground up" but imo it's not a particularly good attempt and doesn't suit a game that is so dialogue-heavy and thoughtful. Surely they have experienced tabletop roleplayers in-house?
 
eloj said:
I'm not super-upset about the few class choices, but I think there could be room in the already generic list for a 'priest/scholar' type class.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that they might extend the list in a sequel.
Click to expand...
The skill tree allows you to basically make any class you want, at least for mages.
 
I have absolutely no idea why Dragon Age didn't work for me.

I waited five years for this game. In February of this year I bought a new Core i7 from Alienware chiefly to be ready for Dragon Age (the very next day Bioware announced that the game would be delayed - lol!). I ordered the collector's edition and bought the collector's edition game-guide. I then reserved the entire weekend for Dragon Age.

I never got into this game, even though I went in thinking it was gong to be one of the greatest RPGs I would ever play.

So were my expectations too high? Well, I had high expectations for Fallout 3, and my expectations were actually surpassed. Was it because I've grown bored with the narrow, confined spaces that define Bioware RPGs? Well Mass Effect's level design is pretty confined as well, and I loved that game. Maybe it was because I just didn't want to pause the game all the time, even though I used to do a lot of pausing in the older Bioware games. Well, again, in Mass Effect, I actually did pause a lot.

All I know is that Dragon Age now lies abandoned on my shelf. I have no desire whatsoever to launch it.

Now as far as Risen is concerned - I've been fighting the temptation to start it up and play again. There's a whole new story in there, because the next time I play I'll be going the route of the wizard. I want to hold back on this until next spring, though, when I've finished with Mass Effect 2, Bioshock 2, and Assassin's Creed 2.

For me Risen was the best RPG of the year, and Drakensang, which I spent the whole summer with (at one point I actually posted about Drakensang, wondering aloud if there was any possibility that this game might end up being a better game than Dragon Age - I foolishly dismissed that idea) was second. That's right, Dragon Age comes in a distant third.

The one thing I am noticing however is that a lot of people who are saying that Dragon Age is great don't actually seem to be the hardcore role-players of yesteryear. They're mostly newer people who aren't drawn towards RPGs so much.

Anyway, this will be my last post on the matter (I promise) but for me Dragon Age is the letdown of the decade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top