Poll: Is there any hope Dragon Age?
- Thread starter Nicholas Woodruff
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am honestly sick of hearing about how DA2 ruined the franchise and how some people believe it is the downfall of the modern RPG. Go on to Bioware Social Network Forum and people are going crazy and using hyperbole and saying Bioware sold out.
Honestly there was some bad parts about DA2 but I thought it was one of the few games that the companions feel like living characters. The fact they have a relationship with each other was quite amazing because as people who played Mass Effect know- not one of your crewmate seem to interact with each other much beside that silly confrontation scenes.
The characters were quite amazing.
Aveline is one of the most original characters of Bioware ever created for example.
I could admit the recycled parts was unforgivable and that it definitely felt rushed.
But overall, Dragon Age 2 made a good step forward in terms of creating a medium to tell a story.
Honestly there was some bad parts about DA2 but I thought it was one of the few games that the companions feel like living characters. The fact they have a relationship with each other was quite amazing because as people who played Mass Effect know- not one of your crewmate seem to interact with each other much beside that silly confrontation scenes.
The characters were quite amazing.
Aveline is one of the most original characters of Bioware ever created for example.
I could admit the recycled parts was unforgivable and that it definitely felt rushed.
But overall, Dragon Age 2 made a good step forward in terms of creating a medium to tell a story.
DA2 Ended even in a sadder way than I expected... with my head hanging, dropping the controller and realizing I was done with this game after about 20 minutes of playing. I liked DAO but this wasn't even close. Companies and their evil scemes to make a fast buck on a title that rocked... it's a shame!!!
+100slash00 said:
I also found myself comparing DA:O to Baldur's Gate 2, and in terms of scope, storytelling, and characters, DA:O fell way short. Heck, I even liked BG2's gameplay more, but I think that's just bias.
Mass Effect is tons better than Dragon Age though. ME1, I mean. Give it a shot if you ever have time to kill.
I thought DA:O sucked actually. Maybe because I was comparing it to Morrowind, Oblivion, KOTOR and Mass Effect.
In comparison to the Elder Scrolls games, the invisible walls were ridiculous. If Bethesda can put Morrowind on one CD (and Oblivion on one DVD) with massive worlds fully explorable, why couldn't BioWare do that with Dragon Age? The graphics in DA:O really weren't that good, they couldn't have been taking up that much space.
Compared to other Bioware games like KOTOR, the story was not very good which was supposed to be what seperates Biowares games from those made by Bethesda. If your claim to fame is story, make it a good one. DA2, I didn't get that far into it. Maybe 10 hours and I was done. I bought the guide with it because I like to have RPG guides, it's still shrink wrapped.
There is apparently a Facebook Dragon Age game too. Don't know how that is but I can't say I am excited to play it.
In comparison to the Elder Scrolls games, the invisible walls were ridiculous. If Bethesda can put Morrowind on one CD (and Oblivion on one DVD) with massive worlds fully explorable, why couldn't BioWare do that with Dragon Age? The graphics in DA:O really weren't that good, they couldn't have been taking up that much space.
Compared to other Bioware games like KOTOR, the story was not very good which was supposed to be what seperates Biowares games from those made by Bethesda. If your claim to fame is story, make it a good one. DA2, I didn't get that far into it. Maybe 10 hours and I was done. I bought the guide with it because I like to have RPG guides, it's still shrink wrapped.
There is apparently a Facebook Dragon Age game too. Don't know how that is but I can't say I am excited to play it.
Dragon age pretty much turned me off of ever buying an EA game anywhere close to release time. Year+ out cash in pack all release is the time for me. At least that way I'm not left feeling like I am playing a blank slate with a few missions chipping away at a gray expanse of nothingness.
I'm probably going to find this to be the norm in the future as I don't feel like paying three times the normal price for a game to actually play the whole game.
I'm probably going to find this to be the norm in the future as I don't feel like paying three times the normal price for a game to actually play the whole game.
I personally preferred 2 to Origins. I liked the fact the story was about the character and politics rather then saving the world. I liked the characters better. Merril was cute and lovable, Varric was fun to talk to, Isabella's interactions with Aveline were hilarious, the characters felt real and were well written. I'd say something nice about Anders but I have nothing nice to say about him. Whiny twat. I guess if you can dislike a character on a personal level that's a sign of good writing though lol.
Origins felt drawn out. I found myself thinking many times, can I just not do this? Quests shouldn't be tedious but in Origins they often were. Also it was all so... Brown. To me RPG's need to be more colourful, there's enough brown in shooters nowadays without putting it in my beloved RPG's. That said I preferred the more tactical combat of Origins and the system for talking to characters. I'm not saying Origins was a bad game but I don't see why you're all worshiping it like it's the greatest RPG ever made.
Origins felt drawn out. I found myself thinking many times, can I just not do this? Quests shouldn't be tedious but in Origins they often were. Also it was all so... Brown. To me RPG's need to be more colourful, there's enough brown in shooters nowadays without putting it in my beloved RPG's. That said I preferred the more tactical combat of Origins and the system for talking to characters. I'm not saying Origins was a bad game but I don't see why you're all worshiping it like it's the greatest RPG ever made.
I thought Dragon Age 2 was solid? >.>
It didn't work the exact same magic for me that Origins did but I thought it was an improvement in many ways. Things were more organized and streamlined without losing the complexity and the combat felt faster and more conducive to having to fight mobs of enemies, as well as just generally cooler to watch and participate in.
And yes, it lacked the grand, epic story of DA:O, but you know what? That's all right. The story itself was still well enough written and the characters were all as near and dear to me as in Origins. Just because the story takes place on a different scale(Confined to Kirkwall as opposed to spread all over Ferelden) isn't a bad thing. We're not here to rehash the same old shit, after all.
The only problems I really had with DA2 was the use of copy pasted dungeons and the lacking companion customization. Besides that, the game endeared itself to me quite nicely.
Besides, DA2 still sold like freaking hotcakes and PLENTY of people still loved it enough to warrant a sequel. And hell, even if the fans are bitching now, they're fans for a reason. Whatever most of them say, when DA3 comes out, they'll buy it anyway because it's Dragon Age and more importantly, because it's Bioware. And then they'll ***** about that game too.
It didn't work the exact same magic for me that Origins did but I thought it was an improvement in many ways. Things were more organized and streamlined without losing the complexity and the combat felt faster and more conducive to having to fight mobs of enemies, as well as just generally cooler to watch and participate in.
And yes, it lacked the grand, epic story of DA:O, but you know what? That's all right. The story itself was still well enough written and the characters were all as near and dear to me as in Origins. Just because the story takes place on a different scale(Confined to Kirkwall as opposed to spread all over Ferelden) isn't a bad thing. We're not here to rehash the same old shit, after all.
The only problems I really had with DA2 was the use of copy pasted dungeons and the lacking companion customization. Besides that, the game endeared itself to me quite nicely.
Besides, DA2 still sold like freaking hotcakes and PLENTY of people still loved it enough to warrant a sequel. And hell, even if the fans are bitching now, they're fans for a reason. Whatever most of them say, when DA3 comes out, they'll buy it anyway because it's Dragon Age and more importantly, because it's Bioware. And then they'll ***** about that game too.
copy/paste game design has no right to exist anymore. ESPECIALLY from Bioware, they included enough ctrl-c ctrl-v in Mass effect 1 to last a life time. Ditched it for Dragon Age, which is impressive considering it's size, ditched it for ME2 which was totally welcome. Then brought it back for DA2, lazy, rushed and arrogant when considering the leap in quality between ME1 and 2.
*sigh* If there's one thing the internet loves more than hyperbole, it's whinning about things.
I liked Dragon Age Origins, but 2 was better in my opinion. Why? Because they didn't just re-release the same game with different characters. They actually went and made a different game.
A lot of the critisism of DA2 seems to be that it's not DAO. Yet what's good for the goose is not good for the gander because ME2 was hailed as a great game because it was so different from 1, partially because the parts of ME1 they removed for ME2 sucked quite frankly (especially that huge skill tree, because that sucked balls).
Also, people seemed under the impression that Dragon Age was going to be more like Mass Effect in terms of characters going from game to game, failing to realise that Dragon Age allowed you to make some very, very huge choices that quite frankly makes a direct sequal impossible; There's no way to make a satisfying experience while simaltanious writing, modelling, coding and executing every possible outcome from Origins (to put it into perspective: They'd need to do two very different dwavern kingdoms, two very different Mage Circles, three different Dalish choices, two different Redcliff choices, god knows how many different "Whose ruler" choices, etc.).
Now, DA2 is not without faults, but I can blame EA for imposing such a short deadline on this one. But it was still a solid game: You actually had to participate in fights instead of just watching the AI do everything for you, a more local-based story compared to National Scope of the last game, more focus on your characters and their character growth, etc. etc.
So anyone who honestly things this is a franchise killer are the same sort of people who'd say the sky was falling at any given moment.
I liked Dragon Age Origins, but 2 was better in my opinion. Why? Because they didn't just re-release the same game with different characters. They actually went and made a different game.
A lot of the critisism of DA2 seems to be that it's not DAO. Yet what's good for the goose is not good for the gander because ME2 was hailed as a great game because it was so different from 1, partially because the parts of ME1 they removed for ME2 sucked quite frankly (especially that huge skill tree, because that sucked balls).
Also, people seemed under the impression that Dragon Age was going to be more like Mass Effect in terms of characters going from game to game, failing to realise that Dragon Age allowed you to make some very, very huge choices that quite frankly makes a direct sequal impossible; There's no way to make a satisfying experience while simaltanious writing, modelling, coding and executing every possible outcome from Origins (to put it into perspective: They'd need to do two very different dwavern kingdoms, two very different Mage Circles, three different Dalish choices, two different Redcliff choices, god knows how many different "Whose ruler" choices, etc.).
Now, DA2 is not without faults, but I can blame EA for imposing such a short deadline on this one. But it was still a solid game: You actually had to participate in fights instead of just watching the AI do everything for you, a more local-based story compared to National Scope of the last game, more focus on your characters and their character growth, etc. etc.
So anyone who honestly things this is a franchise killer are the same sort of people who'd say the sky was falling at any given moment.
Unlikely. Loved the first. Couldn't stand the second. They are unlikely to revert to the previous formula as that would be admitting they made a mistake (one which isn't reflected in sales). If it the third is more like DA:O in gameplay I may yet get it, but if they insist on the 'action RPG' style I will give it a miss.
It's less that it's a franchise killer (if anything, the sales are going to ensure that we'll see a DA3) and more that it isn't very good.Shaoken said:
And people are pretty annoyed with it not only because of the general lack of quality but also because it represents a lot of things that are wrong with the industry in general and Bioware in particular.
See also:
But apparently, we do! Didn't you know?lithium.jelly said:
Apparently, most of the gameplay decisions across BioWare series are (now?) made in direct response to player feedback on social.bioware.
In spite of all the little tricks to make the fights feel more visceral and engaging, when I last played I still felt the same kind of "oh, this is a bizarre abstraction that I can't make sense of" feeling that I'd occasionally get from DA:O. I often found myself vexed when I couldn't get a good handle on the odds of a monster making a "saving throw" or a shield bash releasing a grab, but it was way worse in DA2 when my two-handed sword just glided through enemies who gave it not the slightest care.
As a disclaimer, I've only played these on consoles. So maybe there's a comforting dialog box that you can open up on the PC that makes the underlying systems transparent a-la BG2 (though now that I think about it, calling 2nd ed. D&D transparent is blatant misinformation).
I hear that there was a tactical view available on PC. Which likely would've set the tone better for the slower pace of combat in DA:O. DA:O is slower than even BG1 and to be honest, I think I like it for that pace. Where blows seemed to be "big" and "have weight", and the swing-and-parry animations of dueling warriors looked like the animations of warriors dueling in 40 pounds of armor. Warriors for whom overextending an attack would have fatal consequences, rather than impervious-until-downed supermen fighting a-la Final Fantasy.
I don't think I mind the change in scope, or tone, or the additional cheap pandering. Maybe the cheap pandering. I do know that I play western RPGs as a means of creepy self-insertion of the most depressing sort, so I guess I shouldn't complain too much about cheap pandering. But I think I will join the hordes complaining about how the elves are now Na'vi.