mass effect 3's writing was pretty good, apart from the ending. it wasnt ME 1 level good, but better than most other games. if that wasnt up to snuff for you, then you must not play many games, then?Threeseventyfive said:
So Dragon Age 3.... No Pressure?
- Thread starter Fappy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
As someone who genuinely enjoyed DA2 (It had problems but 'unmitigated disaster?' Feeling a bit hyperbolic today?) I still want DA3. Bioware have yet to show me any reason I should not trust their skills, even if it does turn out poorly (Which I personally would blame EA for, they seem to be on some kind of crusade against quality and effort in the medium), I think it's safe to say that they'll still put as much effort into it as they can.
I didn't intend for "unmitigated disaster" to reflect on how I personally viewed the game, but rather the very negative response by the fans. I played the game twice and was disappointed by how incredibly rushed it felt. I have plenty of things to criticize about the game, most of which stem from nothing more than disappointment. As a stand alone product it is meh.kickyourass said:
boag said:bullet_sandw1ch said:Fappy said:took me a bit to figure out what you ment since you quoted the wrong F%$#%^G post will correct nowbullet_sandw1ch said:ecoho said:
adding thisline for the low content ^#@!*%^ that loves slapping those warning to people.
Yeah, Bioware is probably getting a little hot under the collar. They've certainly taken their share of hits with their recent releases. While none of these were failures per se, they've certainly damaged the company's image and standing. So yeah, I think you're right, the developers at Bioware are probably going to feel the pressure to do much better this time. On the other hand, I think these events are also going make the developers (or just the executives the control the developers)want to make a product that is as "safe" as possible: smaller budget, fewer resources, less creative control, -no- risks.
So number three is just going to be a god-awful, shallow, pointless RPG with your main character being voiced by some kid whose balls haven't dropped yet?Corax_1990 said:
As for the OP I'll wait for the reviews to come out first, Bioware has disappointed me as of late and has left me wary of them.
I think people were too general about the lack-lustre Mass Effect 3 endings and blanketed hated Dragon Age 2 without much discussion. That's the problem with the internet, it's hard to find somewhere to discuss, even on these forums.
I'm concerned that with Dragon Age 3 they may have looked at what other people were doing that was popular and basically are trying to do it (looking at TES for open-world). I don't oppose open-world. I oppose copying an idea so it's just an idea without any soul.
I'm concerned that with Dragon Age 3 they may have looked at what other people were doing that was popular and basically are trying to do it (looking at TES for open-world). I don't oppose open-world. I oppose copying an idea so it's just an idea without any soul.
3 things that would make Dragon Age 3 good.
A red explosion
A blue explosion
and a green explosion.
I joke, I joke.
It's going to be set really far in the future (far enough that there are guns) and it's going to be a cover based shooter.
None of the support characters are going to talk (because conversations are for fags)
and it's going to have multyplayer (Possibly deathmatch style multyplayer, because that was the only thing Mass Effect 3 was missing)
I'm still joking nothing can make Dragon Age 3 good. EA has their grubby mits on it, they don't think RPG's can sell so what chance does an EA RPG have?
I saw the DA 3 Pax panel and they were like "We're going to let you change your squad-mates equipment!" and I was like. "You guys know there's only one RPG that won't let you do that and it's called Dragon Age 2."
Just give up on Bioware. They made Baldur's Gate, KotOR, The first 2 Mass Effect games and Dragon Age Origins. They've had a good run and made games that nobody will top. But their dead now. Just let them rest.
A red explosion
A blue explosion
and a green explosion.
I joke, I joke.
It's going to be set really far in the future (far enough that there are guns) and it's going to be a cover based shooter.
None of the support characters are going to talk (because conversations are for fags)
and it's going to have multyplayer (Possibly deathmatch style multyplayer, because that was the only thing Mass Effect 3 was missing)
I'm still joking nothing can make Dragon Age 3 good. EA has their grubby mits on it, they don't think RPG's can sell so what chance does an EA RPG have?
I saw the DA 3 Pax panel and they were like "We're going to let you change your squad-mates equipment!" and I was like. "You guys know there's only one RPG that won't let you do that and it's called Dragon Age 2."
Just give up on Bioware. They made Baldur's Gate, KotOR, The first 2 Mass Effect games and Dragon Age Origins. They've had a good run and made games that nobody will top. But their dead now. Just let them rest.
I adore Dragon Age: Origins. I love the lore and get lost in the world. If Alistair were a real person, he'd have broken ribs from the hug I would give him, and Morrigan would be eternally confused because I keep being unexpectedly nice to her. I have four complete playthroughs of the game and I'm probably going to play it again at some point. I really liked Awakening, too. Anders was hilarious, and Ser Pounce-a-Lot was a welcome addition to my party.
I came late to the Dragon Age party, on the whole, though, so I saw that DAII got some criticism for re-using dungeons and mob combat and all the other things people generally don't like about it. Upon telling an acquaintance that I liked the first game, I was told, flat-out, not to even bother with DAII because it was shite.
I played it through anyway. And I could harp on the wave combat and the re-used dungeons (one review I watched called it a "cave management simulator," which I thought was appropriate), or I could talk about how the darkspawn look completely different and lament the new art style. I could even say that Kirkwall could have been a good setting if I had given a crap about the city and if it had seemed to evolve over the seven years we were there. But that's not the issue I had with DAII.
The problem is that DA:O is what it promised to be: a spiritual sequel to Baldur's Gate. DAII is Mass Effect with dragons. There's nothing particularly wrong with either approach, but the change in structure is jarring, to say the least. Then on top of that, the game goes from High Fantasy in Origins, where the Big Bad is always evil, to Heroic Fantasy in Awakening, with some new insight about the darkspawn, to Low Fantasy in DAII, where shit just happens and there is no real Evil That Must Be Stopped. All of this could have worked well, but the transition was just... too big. The characters in DAII were still lovable if you let yourself love them, and the banter was still entertaining, but it just didn't feel the same as DA:O. It didn't even feel similar.
I really, really WANT to be excited for DAIII. I want to explore Thedas some more and see if Alistair and my Warden defied the odds and made little doofy, sarcastic babies to inherit the throne of Ferelden. I want to see if my Hawke and Anders were able to escape the templars forever. But I don't see how they can combine two completely different games with different core mechanics and different game feel into something that will please the fans of DA:O and the fans of DAII.
So, yeah, Bioware. No pressure.
I came late to the Dragon Age party, on the whole, though, so I saw that DAII got some criticism for re-using dungeons and mob combat and all the other things people generally don't like about it. Upon telling an acquaintance that I liked the first game, I was told, flat-out, not to even bother with DAII because it was shite.
I played it through anyway. And I could harp on the wave combat and the re-used dungeons (one review I watched called it a "cave management simulator," which I thought was appropriate), or I could talk about how the darkspawn look completely different and lament the new art style. I could even say that Kirkwall could have been a good setting if I had given a crap about the city and if it had seemed to evolve over the seven years we were there. But that's not the issue I had with DAII.
The problem is that DA:O is what it promised to be: a spiritual sequel to Baldur's Gate. DAII is Mass Effect with dragons. There's nothing particularly wrong with either approach, but the change in structure is jarring, to say the least. Then on top of that, the game goes from High Fantasy in Origins, where the Big Bad is always evil, to Heroic Fantasy in Awakening, with some new insight about the darkspawn, to Low Fantasy in DAII, where shit just happens and there is no real Evil That Must Be Stopped. All of this could have worked well, but the transition was just... too big. The characters in DAII were still lovable if you let yourself love them, and the banter was still entertaining, but it just didn't feel the same as DA:O. It didn't even feel similar.
I really, really WANT to be excited for DAIII. I want to explore Thedas some more and see if Alistair and my Warden defied the odds and made little doofy, sarcastic babies to inherit the throne of Ferelden. I want to see if my Hawke and Anders were able to escape the templars forever. But I don't see how they can combine two completely different games with different core mechanics and different game feel into something that will please the fans of DA:O and the fans of DAII.
So, yeah, Bioware. No pressure.
Honestly, my thoughts on the future of Bioware have been pretty negative since before DA2 released. I saw the direction they were taking with it and the statements they made about why it was a good thing, and felt pretty sure that from then on, while they might be releasing games others liked, none of it would be things I enjoyed as much as their previous games. No use getting angry about it, but I have to say I'm rather disappointed, as the sorts of RPGs I most enjoy are practically non-existent at this point. Bioware was one of the last companies making them, and the success of DA:O had given me hope that we'd be seeing even more.
I quite enjoyed it. What was wrong with it again?Fappy said:
SWTOR sinking fast might also be a factor in this.
Half of these are completely subjective and the other half are far from perfect.Norrdicus said:
Not wanting to sound stubborn, but you're argument is completely invalid. Nice list though.
The original premise of your post was "wasn't as good as the original, but that can be said of any sequel ever."El Dwarfio said:
Therefore stating that no game sequel has been better than the original.
Which is a downright false statement.
There have been tons of sequels that have improved upon the originals, ill just throw Street Fighter 2 into the comment to completely cement the absurdity of your original statement.
Ok, Here is my two cents about why DA II was like it was. It was a introduction. Wait, stay right there while I explain this. We will start with another Bio-Ware series.
Mass Effect 1's storyline was introducing a conflict. It set up the Reapers as antagonists and established Shepard as a main character. It also served as the introduction to the ME Universe. It was designed to line up the big conflict so the next few games could be "Reapers coming, getting ready" instead of setting up plot points. It also lined up a few of the major recurring issues that were dealt with in ME:3. Genophage, Geth vs. Quarrian, and so on. ME:3 elaborated on these, but they were all introduced in the first one. Now if only that Dark-Energy problem had been looked into...
DA Origins was not like ME1. It didn't exist to set up for a sequel. Instead it was a entire series put into a single game. It was focused on introducing us the Thedas via Ferelden. It introduced us to the Darkspawn, Flemeth, The Warden, The Dalish, the state of Mages, ans whole lot of other things that could be used to start a conflict. DA Origins was exactly what it says on the tin, the Origin Point for the series. It didn't set up a long running conflict, it started the Blight and ended it all in a single game.
As for DA:II, it was like ME 1 more than Origins was. DA:II exists to set up a future conflict, or rather two future conflicts. Hawke killing the Arashok could cause the Qunari to speed up their war preparations to take revenge on every other race in Thedas. Then there is the little business of a Mage/Templar war raging across Thedas. After that we have the fact that both Hawke and the Warden have disappeared. Oh and Flemeth is still flying around somewhere, and Morrigan and the god-child should he exist in your timeline are not in the Fade or Thedas. Did I miss anything?
So what will DA:III be? I think its probably going to be worthy of the subtitle, "Flemeth Strikes". We know she is planning something, her little plan to create the god-child was enough to convince me of that. And she knew that the Mage-Templar war was going to start, she practically told Hawke that in Act 1. Come to think of it, with how old she is it wouldn't surprise me if she was behind everything in the series. If Bio-Ware uses the Flemeth as Antagonist and Chessmaster angle, the story will at least be good as long as they land the ending.
Yes I think they might be able to land the ending again.
So to bring me back to my point, DA:II may not seem to be connected to everything else, but thats because it wasn't intended to connect back to Origins. Its purpose is to set up the next few games by sparking a few conflicts. It would have come across better with a Act 4 to wrap things up a bit better though.
I would also like to mention that the combat did get simpler, but there is a explanation for why the extra enemies dropped in so frequently. Varric was telling the story.
Mass Effect 1's storyline was introducing a conflict. It set up the Reapers as antagonists and established Shepard as a main character. It also served as the introduction to the ME Universe. It was designed to line up the big conflict so the next few games could be "Reapers coming, getting ready" instead of setting up plot points. It also lined up a few of the major recurring issues that were dealt with in ME:3. Genophage, Geth vs. Quarrian, and so on. ME:3 elaborated on these, but they were all introduced in the first one. Now if only that Dark-Energy problem had been looked into...
DA Origins was not like ME1. It didn't exist to set up for a sequel. Instead it was a entire series put into a single game. It was focused on introducing us the Thedas via Ferelden. It introduced us to the Darkspawn, Flemeth, The Warden, The Dalish, the state of Mages, ans whole lot of other things that could be used to start a conflict. DA Origins was exactly what it says on the tin, the Origin Point for the series. It didn't set up a long running conflict, it started the Blight and ended it all in a single game.
As for DA:II, it was like ME 1 more than Origins was. DA:II exists to set up a future conflict, or rather two future conflicts. Hawke killing the Arashok could cause the Qunari to speed up their war preparations to take revenge on every other race in Thedas. Then there is the little business of a Mage/Templar war raging across Thedas. After that we have the fact that both Hawke and the Warden have disappeared. Oh and Flemeth is still flying around somewhere, and Morrigan and the god-child should he exist in your timeline are not in the Fade or Thedas. Did I miss anything?
So what will DA:III be? I think its probably going to be worthy of the subtitle, "Flemeth Strikes". We know she is planning something, her little plan to create the god-child was enough to convince me of that. And she knew that the Mage-Templar war was going to start, she practically told Hawke that in Act 1. Come to think of it, with how old she is it wouldn't surprise me if she was behind everything in the series. If Bio-Ware uses the Flemeth as Antagonist and Chessmaster angle, the story will at least be good as long as they land the ending.
Yes I think they might be able to land the ending again.
So to bring me back to my point, DA:II may not seem to be connected to everything else, but thats because it wasn't intended to connect back to Origins. Its purpose is to set up the next few games by sparking a few conflicts. It would have come across better with a Act 4 to wrap things up a bit better though.
I would also like to mention that the combat did get simpler, but there is a explanation for why the extra enemies dropped in so frequently. Varric was telling the story.
Ha! I never thought of that! Oh, Varric. You lovable mug.Andrew Drake said:
As for everything else you said, I hope you're right. I would love a Flemeth as Puppet Master kind of thing. That would be pretty neato.