Poll: Favorite Dragon Age

Recommended Videos
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
LifeCharacter said:
KingsGambit said:
They also did the same thing we saw later with ME3. They simply didn't make any good choices available to us as the player. Your choices were bad, worse or less bad. That is not morally grey, that is lazy and bullshit. Have grey endings, have bad endings and have good endings too. That at least covers all bases. Simply removing the possibility of a good ending is nothing but annoying. See how ME3's ending got received for proof of how players feel when the character they've roleplayed for 100+ hours can only pick between choices that are incongruous with everything else they've done prior to that point.
I don't really understand this complaint. There were plenty of "good" choices available in Origins so long as you tried to get them. The good choice for the Dalish quest was to cure the werewolves. The good choice for Branka's quest was to side with Caridin and protect another generation of Dwarves from being subjected to the Anvil. The good choice for the Circle Tower quest is to save the mages instead of kill them all. The only major quests with no obviously good choice was the Orzammar quest where you have to choose between the nice traditionalist or the harsh progressive and maybe the final battle where you have to choose whether to sacrifice yourself or Alistair (or possibly Loghain), or give Morrigan an Old God baby.

OT: I'm currently waiting on Inquisition to download and haven't played 2, so I'm kind of stuck choosing Origins, which I'm fine with because I really enjoyed Origins.
I was talking about the ending for the most part. F.ex, it was not possible to have Alistair and the Warden survive without Morrigan's ritual. It was not possible to sacrifice Loghain without losing Alistair from the party. It was not possible to have Alistair crowned and survive without the Warden dying or doing the ritual. In other words, we couldn't have everything because BioWare forced the ritual, choice and other factors on us.

From a story point of view, I can't deny it is not as valid or interesting as anything else (it is). Ultimately it doesn't matter a great deal barring the epilogue and one cameo in DA2. It does add a difficult decision to make. Saying all that, it would have been nice to have the option to save both Warden and Alistair without resorting to Morrigan's ritual. It's a moot point anyway, the ending is what it is. I just think it was indicative of BW trying too hard even then.
 

spartandude

New member
Nov 24, 2009
2,721
0
0
Ive only just started Inquisition so my opinion isnt complete yet, although i will say its Bioware's best game in years... which isnt saying much as I hated DA 2, SWTOR and ME 3. But Origins is still one of my favorite games of all time. In fact after hearing glowing praise for Inquisition I decided to replay Origins and force myself to actually complete DA 2 for the first time (always gave up through the first act) and I ended up playing through Origins (Awakening and Witch Hunt) twice.
 

DarkhoIlow

New member
Dec 31, 2009
2,531
0
0
Origins is by far the best of the three followed by DAI and then DA2 dead last.

It was the closest thing to Baldur's Gate's Bioware of old greatness that we've gotten.
 

Amaror

New member
Apr 15, 2011
1,509
0
0
Origins is by far the best one, not a single doubt about that. Gameplay, Story, Characters it just all works perfectly together to create an amazing experience.
DA 2 is the worst by far. Origins without good gameplay, and interesting story or sane characters. Just bad all around. DAI is better in many aspects, but the combat is barely more enjoyable than the one of the second one, just no challenge or engagement whatsoever. The story is rather boring, too. I just don't care what happens. Loghain was an interesting oponent that felt like a challenge to oppose. Inquisition just has you kill Satan. It's basically like Origins if they cut out all of the Civil war storyline, you know the interesting part of the story, and just have you go straight to the archdemon to punch his face in. Just boring and predictable all around.
That being said, i know that DAI has to be somewhat better than 2 because it took me a whole 30 hours to get bored of it, compared to the 2 it took me to get bored of DA 2.
 

ZiggyE

New member
Nov 13, 2010
502
0
0
I liked Origins, I disliked 2 and I have no intention of playing Inquisition.

My favourite part of Origins is the Deep Roads segment in Orzammar with the Broodmother and the Anvil of the Void, though I hear most people don't like that part even though they liked the game.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
True, but at least it had Loghain to add some morally grey and character development to the mix. DA:I on the other hand just had the mustache twirling Corypheus for the entire game.

That role was taken by Alexius, Clarel and the Orlesian court in Inquisition.

***

While *he* genuinely believed he did right, from any other point of view I think it's clear he betrayed his King and Kingdom and usurped the throne.

The problem with Loghain is that Ostagar is only the first thing he does: he spends the rest of the game acting completely irrationally: he could have claimed that Duncan made a mistake by tasking the two novices in his order with lighting the beacon without accusing all the Grey Wardens of betrayal, he could have welcomed the Orlesian Wardens and kept the Orlesian army out of Ferelden instead of keeping both groups outside, he could have let his much more politically savvy daughter dealing with the nobles instead of proclaiming himself regent and trying to browbeat the banns into accepting his rule, he could have negotiated an alliance with the Free Marches' cities instead of of selling elves to Tevinter for mercenaries' cash, he could have tried to convince Eamon that he had no chance of saving Cailan by working the "Beacon was lit too late" angle, etc, etc, etc... Everything he does post Ostagar point toward Loghain being either completely inept in politics, or being so haunted by what he did to Cailan that it made him incapable of thinking straight.

***

I don't really understand this complaint. There were plenty of "good" choices available in Origins so long as you tried to get them. The good choice for the Dalish quest was to cure the werewolves. The good choice for Branka's quest was to side with Caridin and protect another generation of Dwarves from being subjected to the Anvil. The good choice for the Circle Tower quest is to save the mages instead of kill them all. The only major quests with no obviously good choice was the Orzammar quest where you have to choose between the nice traditionalist or the harsh progressive and maybe the final battle where you have to choose whether to sacrifice yourself or Alistair (or possibly Loghain), or give Morrigan an Old God baby.

Indeed: there's not much grey morality in Origins, since most of its chapters have clear golden endings Even the Old God Baby cease to be that ambiguous once you encounter Morrigan in Origin and discover that she turned into a loving mother and that Kieran is not about transform into a blighted Archdemon once he reaches puberty.
Dragon Age 2 was much better at making telling a morally ambiguous tale, and ironically reached that result by dropping the pretense that the game was about giving players a lot of agency to craft their own emergent narrative.

***

The characters are unremarkable, I frequently find myself having no idea what to do to progress the story and the little silly side quests are really boring

They wanted to give the players more freedom, which was build upon a huge misconception: the Dragon Age audience does not want freedom: they want a story-heavy JRPG with a customizable overpowered protagonist (preferably one who wins at the end: making Dragon Age 2 the tale of a formidable charismatic hero who fails to stem the tide of centuries of accumulated prejudice and distrust was not well received, even if it was the smartest tale they ever wrote). That's what Origins did, and that's why its the most popular game in the franchise.
So to give their audience a freedom of exploration they didn't want in the first, they mimicked Skyrim's high sidequest/main-quests ratio, which makes the game's story feels disjointed.

Instead of making 90% of the game's content sidequests (which everyone ends up doing anyway because they need the XP/loot/crafting material) they should have turned many sidequests into parts of the main story: for instance, instead of making "Gain 8 Points of our new super-abstract Power Points Score in the Hinterland" the condition to reaching Val-Royaux, they should have made "complete the dozen of quests connected to the locals/refugees caught in the crossfire of Mages & Templars fighting and close half the rifts in the Hinterland" the precondition to accessing Val Royaux, instead of making the Exalted Plains, Emerald Graves and Hissing Wastes optional areas they should have included mandatory quests: make the Ball in Halamshiral available only after you made contact and helped both Orlesian strongholds, make assisting Fairbank's followers the requisite for accessing the Arbor Wilds, make ending the Orlesian Civil War the precondition before accessing the Western Approach and make kicking the Venatori out of the Hissing Wastes mandatory to access Adamant Fortress. It would have made the game a lot more linear, but virtually no one would have minded and the plot and gameplay would have felt a lot less disjoined.
 

TT Kairen

New member
Nov 10, 2011
178
0
0
Origins is easily the worst game in this series by a fairly wide margin. The story is just a boring 'save the world from evil monstrosity X' plot. A mindless monster with an army of mindless monsters is not a compelling villainous force. Loghain was better, but it really felt like he was spinning his wheels, because the civil war plot never really affected your journey until you called the Landsmeet to resolve it. You come across a singular small skirmish between the Bannorn and Loghain's forces, and that's it.

The plot had no sense of urgency because the darkspawn (and any other villain) will politely wait for you to finish any and every thing you want to do to prepare for them. It is stated in the game that it's a week's journey from Redcliffe to the Circle Tower. So to get the "perfect" resolution to the Redcliffe story, you need to carve through the undead/demon armies, beat the crap out of the Desire Demon, and then journey a WEEK to the Circle Tower to then fiddle around with saving the Mages, however long that takes, and then journey a week back to have the mages do their little ritual. So what, was the demon just lying dormant not doing anything for TWO WEEKS?! And nobody in Redcliffe thought to move a muscle or do anything to get back to normal because they felt the need to wait two weeks for you to come back. Brilliant.

The combat is complete toss, with absolutely game breaking balance issues (Mana Clash, Arcane Warrior and Blood Mage in general), awful healing mechanics that removed all challenge, and a mind-numbingly slow pace that made me want to claw my eyes out (not because I can't handle slow games, I love 4X strategy games, among others, but because the combat was already decided minutes ago and I'm just watching tedious animations play out). While the graphics were passable, the art style was beyond boring. Just brown ground, brown wood, grey stone, grey bricks, and the Deep Roads, oh god. Nothing at all made it stand out. The darkspawn just look like Tolkien orcs, and it seems like they tried to excuse their poor game design with characters stating, "Ferelden is so practical, here, let us tell you about all these other extravagant locales that would be infinitely more interesting if the game were to take place there!"

The characters are the only place that has some fun to be had, most of them are at least fairly interesting, though the whole gift system made earning their affection FAR too simple, so your decisions had little weight on their opinions. The voiceless protagonist feels dead and immersion-breaking. They just walk around with a completely blank expression, carrying out your will while exuding a literal void of interest because they do not express any emotion at any action at all, no matter how abhorrent. The only time they do make a single expression (horror) is when Duncan stabs Jory, which is the only time I DIDN'T want to have an expression, because he was a gormless coward and deserved it, the ponce.

Dragon Age 2 is a step up, in a lot of ways, though it did have some pitfalls. The plot was far more interesting in this game, if mishandled a bit. The story of Hawke and friends trying to take care of their own and work to stem the tide of Kirkwall's descent into madness (and eventually failing) had a much more personal weight to it. The time skips were a bit jarring, but that feeling quickly passed after you started to get your bearings, and catching up with your friends after each one is something I look forward to. Graphics are better, but the textures still look like muddy garbage. However, the art style is an actual style now. The sharp lines of armor, architecture, and art in general is easily distinguishable as Dragon Age, rather than Generic Fantasy Setting D.

Combat is also a step up as the balance is much better, animations are fast and fun, and combat has more of a focus on active skill use rather than passives and sustained modes. Healing is much more scaled back with longer healing and potion cooldowns. The reinforcement waves force you to adapt your tactics mid-battle rather than being able to plan the entire thing out beforehand. A common complaint is that the waves would come from behind and kill their squishies, ruining their battle-plan. No shit? Attacking from a vulnerable flank is obviously good strategy. Perhaps put your mages in a corner, or keep them close and personal with your tank so you can protect them directly, rather than banging your head against the wall and continuing to try an Origins approach for the entire game and then just complaining that it doesn't work. Leveling was also made more interesting, as you now had to make choices on your skill path. Do you upgrade a favored skill, or learn that shiny new passive you've been eyeing? Origins seemed to just have a lot of pointless fluff on it's skill lines. I suppose it is a choice to go down a path that has good skills at the beginning and good skills at the end, or a path that has irrelevant garbage at the beginning and amazing skills at the end, but it isn't a fun one.

The companions here are a joy (even the ones I didn't like as much) because they feel like real people with lives. They have homes, goals, things they do when they aren't with you. They'll even hang out with each other sometimes when you go to visit them (something I was happy to see they lifted for Mass Effect 3). The voiced protagonist, while sometimes having acting of dubious quality, is much more immersive because you can see them react to things. Having tone indicators on dialogue options is also very handy, as more than a few times in Origins I'd say something I'd think was a joke, only to have it be a grave insult, or vice versa, because the sentence given has no context to it.

As for its flaws, it has many. Many enemies are huge damage sponges, which is just tedious, not difficult. Reused caves and dungeons are a common complaint. I've seen it said, and said myself, that it somewhat makes sense because since it IS the same area, why would it wildly change layout all of a sudden, but that only goes so far. When a cave in Sundermount and a mine in the Bone Pit have the exact same layout, something's wrong. Plot threads are sometimes resolved in an unsatisfactory way, or not at all. A lot of the side quests made no damn sense. How do I magically know who exactly to deliver this pile of ambiguous junk to to complete the quest? However despite this, I still had far more fun in Kirkwall than in Ferelden.

Inquisition stands tall above the rest here. I've heard complaints that it's just a 'save the world from evil monstrosity Y' plot again... but wait, isn't that what you LIKED? Sorry Origins fans, but you made that bed. The second game tried to tell a different kind of story with a more small scope feel, and you threw it in their face. You don't get to complain that they went back to a safe plot like this after nearly tearing down the sky in rage at the last one.

However, despite my own annoyance at the main plot, it's everything else that holds it up here. Environments are huge, gorgeous and hi-res, with refreshingly bright colors and varied landscapes, while retaining the unique art style of Dragon Age 2. There are many fetch-quests, true, but there are just as many side quests that are totally optional, yet easily tie back into the main plot and goal of strengthening the Inquisition to face the Elder One. The War Table is thematic and cool, with the approach you use in a lot of them missions causing a different outcome or granting a different reward. Exploration is rewarded well, with hidden treasures, secret dungeons, and puzzles to occupy your time.

Combat is fast, fun, and tactical (though the actual tac-cam controls on PC are infuriating, no question), though the balance goes back to shitting the bed. Knight Enchanters are immortal gods of doom, while Tempests are capable of felling a High Dragon in a single blow (no joke). However things like position and damage management matter more than ever, because healing magic is gone, meaning you need to be active and intelligent when it comes to your mitigative abilities. Dragon battles are just amazing as well. I had tons of fun hunting them all down and collecting their huge troves of treasure.

The crafting system is also very rewarding. The most powerful gear I obtained was a mixture of crafted and unique drops, so you don't NEED to do it if you don't want to, but trust me when I say building a suit of dragonbone plate, and then building the arm and leg modifications to your specifications to grant you a self-tailored masterwork is a great feeling.

Characters here are just a twitch below 2, in my opinion. They're in most cases better written, but for some reason they've gone back to being your pawns, there for the cause, not really bonding or interacting with each other at all outside of party banter. However, they manage to get me invested in their troubles and their goals. Dorian, Iron Bull, Vivienne, and Cassandra all are especially endearing to me. As far as your own character, you're more customizable than ever, with four races of each gender to choose from, two voice actors per gender, and the ability to really flesh out your beliefs and morals through your dialogue options.

I sunk over 100 hours into my first playthrough of Inquisition, and I'm about to sink another 100+ into my second. It is easily the best BioWare has done in years.
 

votemarvel

Elite Member
Legacy
Nov 29, 2009
1,353
3
43
Country
England
Casual Shinji said:
Dragon Age: Origins allows way more freedom to role-play, compared to the others. Yes, not having a voiced protagonist might be a bit outdated, but it also means you're not stuck with a monotonous voice spouting oneliners, and it grants the developers more resources to expand the dialoge options.
The lack of a voiced Warden is one of the reasons that Origins is the favourite of the series for me.

Hearing only the lines in my heads lets me put my own spin on not only what the warden is saying but why. I had one female human noble Warden romance Alistair for love. Yet those same romantic words took on a whole new meaning on a recent play, when another human female noble Warden was saying the lines simply to get into a position of power.

The combat is the best of the series in Origins for me as well. I have no worries about admitting that the combat looks a lot better in DAII and Inquisition but the experience in Origins is just a lot more fun for me.

With Inquisition I feel as if I am fighting the controls, keyboard and mouse, more than any enemy in the game. The tactical view just feels like something they tacked on rather than a natural part of the game as in Origins.

I don't think either of the two Dragon Age: Origins sequels are bad games but Bioware seem to want to take them into a direction that I'm not sure I want to follow them in.
 

babinro

New member
Sep 24, 2010
2,518
0
0
Up till about 6 months ago I'd have gone with the popular opinion that Origins is best. Having replayed that game for the 8th time or so and DA2 again for the 5th time I changed my mind.

DA2 suddenly had the more intriguing story for me. The gameplay was always far superior in DA2 and the pacing was also better. I prefer the characters in Origin and the major decisions but as an overall game it simply didn't hold up quite as strong.

I've already spoken out against Inquisition plenty. I can't get into it and put the game down within a few hours of play. Needless to say, this makes it far and away the worst entry in the franchise for me. Heck, I put 10x more time into the facebook Dragon Age game than I did Inquisition.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
Inquisition stands tall above the rest here. I've heard complaints that it's just a 'save the world from evil monstrosity Y' plot again... but wait, isn't that what you LIKED? Sorry Origins fans, but you made that bed. The second game tried to tell a different kind of story with a more small scope feel, and you threw it in their face. You don't get to complain that they went back to a safe plot like this after nearly tearing down the sky in rage at the last one.

If there's one thing that the Zelda Cycle [http://nintendo3dsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ZeldaCycle1.png] taught me is that when people complain about a sequel changing things, returning to the original formula never succeeds at shutting off the indignant wails.
 

Darth Rosenberg

New member
Oct 25, 2011
1,288
0
0
Y'know, reading through this thread gives me an insight into how BioWare must feel. And whilst in the past I've slagged them off for however the hell they ended up making Inquisition the way they did (no attribute point allocation, no auto-attack, no Tactics, MMO filler, a disdain for the 'cinematic' dialogue style they themselves championed, dull Big Bad antagonist plus Chosen/Marked One narrative, Ubisoft-esque mark-on-map-and-run game flow, crappy ability limitations in combat, removal of the normal and useful/easy Tac-pause, etc), I think I'll cut them more slack in the future...

This thread would eventually just be white noise to someone actually making the next Dragon Age game; all it is, is opinions flat out contradicting each other, and there is no value in that from a development point of view.

Some people can express themselves lucidly and rationally - others much less so, and there are likely 'good' or potentially productive observations and ideas in both forms. Who should BioWare listen to? If they answered 'no one', I think I'd see why, now.
 

Gennadios

New member
Aug 19, 2009
1,157
0
0
Well, my opinion hasn't mellowed on DA2.

In fact, I only bought Inquisition on the 30% off sale. I lost my old saves, played through DA:O but couldn't bring myself to replay DA2. Generated the save for it at the keep.

As for Inquisition, I'm only a few hours in. It's not great but not horrible either. I'm not exactly what one would call a "fan" of EAWare anymore so I don't plan on being too disappointed if things go south.
 

TT Kairen

New member
Nov 10, 2011
178
0
0
Nixou said:
If there's one thing that the Zelda Cycle [http://nintendo3dsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ZeldaCycle1.png] taught me is that when people complain about a sequel changing things, returning to the original formula never succeeds at shutting off the indignant wails.
Yeah but this isn't Nintendo, where fans will lap up anything they put out. People had lost a lot of faith in BioWare. They basically had two options. Play it safe, which is what they did, and on the whole, the reception is moderate to positive, or take a major risk again, with failure spelling the final nail in the coffin of people's respect for them, likely sealing their demise as a studio. Which one would you pick?
 

TravelerSF

New member
Nov 13, 2012
116
0
0
Had they dumped the open world idea and managed to create a more compelling ending, Inquisition might've taken the #1 spot for me. As it is, Origins stands high above the other two in my books.

The idea to make Dragon Age, a series known for it's story, open world is just mind boggling. Because now all the good things are there, the characters are great, the story is intriguing and I even got to go asleep depressed once, but it's all diluted thanks to the soulless, bland sidequests. Which you are of course going to do, given how much Bioware games stress the importance of gathering resources and allies. In the end most of it was just so... cold. I loved to moments I got to share with my companions, but was saddened how they were little more than silent pawns following me around during most of the game. I needed to be reminded that they were real characters more often.

As for Origins, I'm a complete sucker for story so I can easily ignore the gameplay flaws. The story might be generic, but I'm not too familiar with Tolkien-style fantasy, so it wasn't a problem for me. Ad truthfully, I liked the generic evil villain/thingy we had to beat. The Blight felt like such a gigantic, ruthless force that wept over the lands with pain and misery and only thing we could hope for was to try to survive it THIS TIME and that the next time wouldn't be worse.

I also remember being extremely impressed with Origns' dialogue options. It might just be my rosy memories, but I felt that every kind of answer or choice I could come up with was represented. The dialogue wheel changed that. Not to mention it's Russian roulette trying to guess how the Inquisitor is going to say a certain line. Try to be understanding and en up being snarky instead.

And the choices in Origins, ooooh...

This game made me hate myself. First I had to send Alistair away because I felt that sacrificing "one of the most brilliant strategists of our time" instead of recruiting him wouldn't gone well with the "whatever it takes to end a Blight" -thing we had going on. And then immediately after that I lost Morrigan because I felt that this "capture the soul of an Archdemon" -plan created by her child sacrificing mother and which she refuses to tell me anything about MIGHT bite us in the ass somewhere along the line. And I still stand by that choice. Reading some of the posts here it might not have been THE RIGHT choice, but it was the choice my Warden would make in that situation.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
Had they dumped the open world idea and managed to create a more compelling ending

Come on: you should know that the ending will come alongside the 30$ expansion they'll release before next summer.
 

thehorror2

New member
Jan 25, 2010
354
0
0
I think that, objectively, Origins and Inquisition are about as good for different reasons (Inquisition is the most polished, Origins stands alone the strongest) while DAII falls short. However, Inquisition retroactively makes a lot of the plot of II work better, to the point that DAII actually makes an effective "prologue" to Inquisition, which would be a bold move if it seemed like that was at all what Bioware meant it to be. It's an interesting meditation on the nature and limits of heroism, and the expectations people place on their heroes, but in a franchise otherwise founded upon straightforward saving-of-the-world, it has no place. In other words, it's like Bioware tried to imitate Obsidian's way of making sequels to their games, but didn't quite pull it off.
 

PPB

Senior Member
May 25, 2009
257
0
21
I'm still very early in DA:I but so far I really like what I see. I predictably rank Origins much higher than DA2, but DA:I is giving Origins a run for its money at this point. To be honest though, I had much higher expectations for Origins (many of which weren't met) than for Inquisition, which probably explains why I'm more impressed by DA:I as far as first impressions go.
 

BoukenJima

New member
Dec 11, 2014
5
0
0
My main gripe with Inquisition is that they took the consolization and modernization of gameplay too far. It doesn't play like Dragon Age anymore. Which in itself isn't automatically bad but they turned it into Dragon's Dogma lite with less options and a much worse party AI. That, less customization, the potion system and all the MMO elements make DA:I far inferior to DA:O for me.

Also el oh el @ the guy two posts above me claiming Inquisition is "the most polished". How can you look at any of these cutscenes and tell me they are polished? I mean just go to those tents where Cassandra and Cullen are in Haven and at any given time take a look at how many of the fighting soldiers there are completely out of sync with their sparring partners.
 

pearcinator

New member
Apr 8, 2009
1,212
0
0
I really liked Inquisition but I just don't think it has the replayability that Origins has. I would say I like Inquisitions combat better, and I definitely like the graphics more but Origins is the better game even with the annoying parts such as the Deep Roads and The Fade. It just feels more deep.

Never played DA2 but people said it was shit so I don't care.

However, Dragon Age has always been my 'fallback' game to play when there's no Mass Effect. I prefer sci-fi to fantasy. To put it another way, I played through Origins 3 times, Mass Effect I have played through each game at least 3 times (ME2 I played through about 6 times) and I never lost the motivation to continue playing.