Dragon Age

[alanschu]

I have seen the light, Dragon Age will be awesome. I am running out today to buy the entire Bioware back catalogue, and am re-installing NWN1 to remind me how wrong I was about Bioware marketing.

 

 

Because that's exactly what we're saying.

 

If you have grievances towards what you perceive from DA to not be what you're looking for, then fine. The game doesn't seem to interest you and virtually every facet of it seems to be subpar. But hey, I'm sure if Gorion's last name had been Cousland and hence your character was known as a Cousland by some in the game, Baldur's Gate would have been an infinitely subpar game.

 

 

This thread would be pretty boring if everyone was just praising the game...

 

Criticism spurs the conversation.

 

I agree. The concerns about things like the E3 trailers are valid. If you mention you'd be interested in a more unique setting then fine. Creating threads about writing the most generic RPG story ever while at one point stating that it'll be hard to do because a name of a mountain range in DA is called the Frostback Mountains is getting pretty trivial.

 

 

Dragon Age is not a game without fault. There are some things I really like about the game, and some things that I don't care so much for. There are certainly things I think can be improved upon, and I'll join in on discussions that people have about what could have been done better, what they liked, and so forth.

 

 

Maybe we're just a bunch of jaded "old school" gamers, who can't get past the glory days of late 90's with Infinity Engine games and whatnot. Or maybe that's just me?

 

No I certainly think that plays a part. You are right that one advantage that games like Fallout and Baldur's Gate have is simply that they came sooner. I think that in spite of people's claims, more games just like Baldur's Gate would be bad because it'd just be more of what we've already experienced. However, I think given the circumstances, games like Fallout and Baldur's Gate, as well as Planescape: Torment, are put up on pedestals simply because they were new and fresh, coming during a huge cold spell for RPGs. A lot of people, myself included, have such powerful memories about the great times we had playing those games.

 

 

At the same time though, I don't really know what to think about people that are disheartened by the fact that Dragon Age is a "generic" fantasy setting with some common fantasy archetypes in it. It seemed like that was the way from the get go.

[bhlaab]

Whoa whoa whoa, Crysis was not a bad game! It's just a shame it was so short, I mean the world turns to ice and the game just instantly ends, right there, at that point, before you can even explore any ice levels.

[Hell Kitty]

Guess I'm just clueless, too intellectually stunted to recognize wretchedness, because I happen to have enjoyed playing Bethesda games.

 

Probably, yeah, but that's okay, because apparently it's okay to enjoy bad games.

[Purkake]

Whoa whoa whoa, Crysis was not a bad game! It's just a shame it was so short, I mean the world turns to ice and the game just instantly ends, right there, at that point, before you can even explore any ice levels.

 

It was a generic shooter with pretty graphics and a few gimmicks. The gameplay felt uninspired, there was so much potential for cool stuff, but it was mostly unfulfilled. The zero-g stuff was cool, but that level was horribly confusing. It lost the Farcry-style "choose your own approach" thing half-way through and turned into a lame linear shooter.

 

I did have fun with it, but I wouldn't call it a good game, I'd call it adequate.

[Hell Kitty]

Actually, Crysis had a lot more "choose your own approach" than Far Cry.

[Purkake]

Actually, Crysis had a lot more "choose your own approach" than Far Cry.

 

Damn those Trigens!!

 

I wanted the whole game to be like that. Who needs damn freeze-happy aliens? And the ending was also lame.

 

I feel that Farcry accomplished what it wanted to do and was a good game, especially for it's time. Crysis, on the other hand, feels like a bunch of crazy ideas duct taped together with extra shiny duct tape.

Edited July 3, 2009 by Purkake

[Aristes]

"Can we call criticism where we see it is warranted, such as cliched stereotypes,"

 

is not possible to see such until game is played. is only cliche if is done poor. back in the other thread we addressed the Ancient Evil complaints. is more than a few fantasy and sci-fi stories that is considered groundbreaking in spite of Ancient Evil.

This is true, but if you read the back of the book, the impression you might get is that it will be cliched. You might think individual ideas are cliched, but the presentation or the mix or some other aspect of the story might make up the difference.

 

This was true for KotOR, where I saw the plot twist coming a mile away, but I thought the actual moment was so well done I enjoyed it immensely. This could very well be true for every complaint I have about what I see in the DA story. I might think the part elves and dwarves play in the story is compelling. I might see the social aspects of society as gripping.

 

So, I might rightly think an idea sounds cliched right now, which is no different than getting an impression from reading a book jacket. In that sense, I'm still trying to assess the title before I purchase it. I figure that's what most folks do before they buy something. Once I buy it, however, all my assumptions fly out the window because I have actual experience. In that sense, all you have to do is convince me to purchase and I'll see for myself.

 

But, hell, I'm buying this title anyhow. If one of our regular board monkeys is working on it, I'm going to buy it. So, Alan assured the oh so important demographic of Aristes.

 

As far as the 6 origins... I don't really care. I guess I see it as a net positive, but I don't expect it to start a revolution in game story design. I never thought it would.

 

The three different antagonists idea is intriguing. You've posted it before, but I didn't really catch what you were saying until now. It's a possible fix if it makes meaningful consequences easier to implement without sacrificing the integrity of the story line. I guess most folks would rather see it from the prots point of view, and that is undoubtedly more intuitive, but the point is to create a great story with meaningful consequences. If an antagonist centered design makes that possible, then there is no arguing with success.

[Oner]

@Whoever said backgrounds are cliche on the last page: Backgrounds are tropes, not cliches.

[Purkake]

@Whoever said backgrounds are cliche on the last page: Backgrounds are tropes, not cliches.

 

As funny as it may be, everything on TvTropes is a trope

 

Still an awesome site, though.

[HoonDing]

Whoa whoa whoa, Crysis was not a bad game! It's just a shame it was so short, I mean the world turns to ice and the game just instantly ends, right there, at that point, before you can even explore any ice levels.

That was the Purple Clan, not the aliens!*

 

 

 

 

 

*Indigo Prophecy reference.

[Purkake]

Whoa whoa whoa, Crysis was not a bad game! It's just a shame it was so short, I mean the world turns to ice and the game just instantly ends, right there, at that point, before you can even explore any ice levels.

That was the Purple Clan, not the aliens!*

 

 

 

 

 

*Indigo Prophecy reference.

 

But how does the AI play into this? Everybody always forgets the AI...

[Oner]

But how does the AI play into this? Everybody always forgets the AI...

'Cause there is no AI, only Artificial Stupidity.

Especially in RPGs.

 

[Purkake]

*Another Indigo Prophecy reference

 

I thought everyone had played it by now

[Oner]

Froze at start up. And I will never install it again after reading the plot synopsis.

[Purkake]

Froze at start up. And I will never install it again after reading the plot synopsis.

 

It's no fun when you know of the MADNESS that is Indigo Prophecy's "plot". The only way to experience it is to play it without spoilers.

[Oner]

I couldn't play it, so..

[Purkake]

I couldn't play it, so..

 

You missed all the fun. Oh well.

[Magnum Opus]

6 vague origins is better than a single vague bhaalspawn? maybe. keep in mind that Gromnir has always complained 'bout overemphasis on a necessarily vague and fluid crpg protagonist. is a dead end from a writer's pov. 'course, 'stead o' having 6 different protagonists why not instead has 3 different antagonists that change depending on gameplay choices? actual meaningful bifurcations 'stead o' inevitable chokepoints and merging regardless of origins. villains not need to be vague... can be static.

3 different antagonists places too much story emphasis on others, maybe? Bio's stories revolve around player, not antagonist, and that strokes player's ego. Bio's worlds revolve around player character, too. Have since BG2. When the sun literally rises and sets for the player (character), is very hard to go back to a more nebulous PC concept in favour of all the attention being shifted to the guy you're ultimately just going to kill anyway. Many people state that IWD's story wasn't as good as BG's. Me, am not at all convinced on that one. I think it's got more to do with the player's place in that story than the story itself.

 

At this point, would think that the backlash against Bio doing that would ultimately be even greater than if they decided they weren't gonna do romances anymore.

 

From a pure story perspective, would agree: defining static characters much easier than defining ones where some million or so unknown third parties are going to be bending, twisting, and breaking concept at every turn. Taking into account the player's ego, though... am thinking that maybe Bio's got the right of it (maybe), despite the inherent limits of the approach. Game stories aren't just about the story, after all. They're about the player in the story. Makes things kinda wacky.

 

And, as I've heard remarkably frequently on the DA:O boards recently, it's just a game. Story, even in a Bio game, will play second fiddle. Lot of competing interests there.

[Monte Carlo]

I have seen the light, Dragon Age will be awesome. I am running out today to buy the entire Bioware back catalogue, and am re-installing NWN1 to remind me how wrong I was about Bioware marketing.

 

 

Because that's exactly what we're saying.

 

If you have grievances towards what you perceive from DA to not be what you're looking for, then fine. The game doesn't seem to interest you and virtually every facet of it seems to be subpar. But hey, I'm sure if Gorion's last name had been Cousland and hence your character was known as a Cousland by some in the game, Baldur's Gate would have been an infinitely subpar game.

 

OK, I get the message. Now you can stop playing board cop.

 

I agree. The concerns about things like the E3 trailers are valid. If you mention you'd be interested in a more unique setting then fine. Creating threads about writing the most generic RPG story ever while at one point stating that it'll be hard to do because a name of a mountain range in DA is called the Frostback Mountains is getting pretty trivial.

 

Now you're being precious. If I wanted to join a knitting circle I'd go to the Bio forums. This one is a good blend of jaded gamers without being too Codex and fairly positive, balanced views.

[Gromnir]

"am thinking that maybe Bio's got the right of it (maybe), despite the inherent limits of the approach."

 

bio thinks like does you... and that is why we will never see no genuine improvement. the inherent limitations is insurmountable. a new approach, player focused or otherwise, is necessary to make actual progress.

 

iwd is an interesting case. black isle hurts self by calling it a dungeon crawl 'cause most story elements were superior to bg. even so, once you label as a dungeon crawl, you is telling fans and critics that story is not a strength. mistake. in addition, the lack o' vacuous party banter, necessary given iwd's streamlined production, were also much missed by fans. in spite o' such, iwd were black isle's most successful game... period.

 

regardless, bio puts lots o' effort and considerable hype into a DA feature that is ultimately broken. is not an improvement on bhaalspawn, so much as it is a multiplication.

 

actually, this is one of those situations that requires pre-game hype to be successful. the typical player only plays a game once, so the average player is unlikely to get any use out of the other 5 origins. if you is able to convince fans Before they play game that those 6 origin choices is meaningful, then as a developer you has already won. player feels as if their character is more special because they gots an opportunity to choose something important. ultimately not matter if developers convince fans through content or guile, 'cause if player actually believes the origin choice were meaningful, then it IS meaningful.

 

given the "inherent limits" of the approach, is gonna be real interesting to see if this feature is actual 'bout genuine improvement, or is more a matter o' smoke n' mirrors.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited July 3, 2009 by Gromnir

[Niten_Ryu]

6 origins is a weird design choice. I've always assumed that it's because of long development time and things have changed a lot in 5 years. I'd bet more players don't even finish first run compared to those who try two or more origins. It's wasted development time in todays casual market.

 

While 6 origins don't make sense for the majority of players, it's great for me. Unless the game is truely horrible, I most likely have at least 2-3 runs with it.

[alanschu]

I don't think it's because of the long development time. I think BioWare just wanted to give players some flexibility in how they start things off in the game. It also lets them make use of the world they created.

 

I know there aren't going to be huge differences no subsequent playthroughs, but I am curious how some places are different because of your origin story.

[Kelverin]

I think BioWare just wanted to give players some flexibility in how they start things off in the game.

Lets hope its deeper than say TOEE alignment beginnings (How could it not be?)

[Aristes]

I think BioWare just wanted to give players some flexibility in how they start things off in the game.

Lets hope its deeper than say TOEE alignment beginnings (How could it not be?)

I remember lurking while folks defended the ToEE alignment beginings and thinking that they had a point. Then I remember playing ToEE and seeing that the folks defending the alignment beginnings had been wrong. They were virtually pointless. The idea was, "While alignment sucks, the game will feature alignment and so maybe this will actually make the mechanic worth something." Nope.

[alanschu]

Well, I can definitively state that the Origin beginnings have an influence beyond just the origin part haha.