Dragon Age

[Purkake]

The latest Idle Thumbs podcast said some nice things about the PC interface and something about a presentation having two monitors with with totally different parties playing the same portion of the game and having totally different dialog options etc.

 

Maybe there is hope after all?

[HoonDing]

No ascerbic preview is going to change my mind, I've already marked October 20th on my calendar. I even got myself a special piggy bank marked with "I luv Dragon Age" that I need to get filled until that time.

[aries101]

Even if I'm one of the codexers and share some (less and less, it seems) of the same design philosophies when making a game, I can't stand or muster some of the opinions said on the codex. So, I'll speak frankly to them about it; luckily, the codex actually values well planned arguments as to why a game is good or not. I think I've defended both Oblivion and Fallout 3 - but also pointing out the flaws in both games.

 

Most people at the codex seem to praise Troika's games, and the Fallout games. I agree, they're awesome games. I also think that many (or most? people from rpgcodex don't like games with realtime combat or 3D games at all, at least not when it comes to rpgs. Some of them (or many or most of them?) prefer rpgs to be fully-turnbased when it comes to combat. I don't. I like Bioware's realtime with pause combat.

 

To me, it seems DA: Origins will bring the combat from BG1 and BG2 or at least as closely to this combat as Bioware possibly are able to make today.

It also seems like we get more strategic, tactical combat options, like we've had in BG1 and BG2. I still somewhat object to the main quest in which you play as an elite spectre - ehm - grey warden - to fight the rising ancient evil...

[Maria Caliban]

...but just how much of that solid base is going to be eaten away from the inside by gimmicks grown larger than life (romances / cutscenes) remains to be seen, especially in light of the marketing.

 

The crux, sir, of the argument. More than the optimists think, I fear.

 

Or maybe the optimists like romance and cut-scenes? It's a thought.

[Morgoth]

Bio romances. In the end, it comes just down to **** each other, as Bio has succesfully demonstrated in their latest video.

[Niten_Ryu]

I'd say Codex are fans of the game design that died about 10 years ago so no wonder why they attack against just everything with extreme hostility. I find it very relaxing to read the Codex, don't know if it's fun to see relics argue about obscure things of the by-gone era or if my IQ is just slowing dropping close to zero because retardism overdose.

 

Can't really blame the poor guys over there. Each and everyone of 'em know that they'll never see the game they like so it's kinda understandable that they are angry. I think I'd be angry too if I'd be a fan of very narrow design and none would make games for that niche. I guess I'm fortunate that I'm able to enjoy different genres of games and most importantly - to be able enjoy less then PERFECT games.

 

Dragon Age will probably be good example of this - Boring generic fantasy setting, utterly stupid ad campaign, cliche characters, ugly graphics and animations. Still I think there's enough good features that I'll probably buy the game if reviews are at least ok.

[alanschu]

Personally I feel that the terms "generic" and "cliche" are tossed around a bit too much.

 

What makes a game "Generic?" I can understand cliche characters, but at the same time, is that necessarily bad?

 

 

What are people hoping for in terms of things not being cliche or generic?

[Purkake]

Personally I feel that the terms "generic" and "cliche" are tossed around a bit too much.

 

What makes a game "Generic?" I can understand cliche characters, but at the same time, is that necessarily bad?

 

 

What are people hoping for in terms of things not being cliche or generic?

 

Generic: Elves, Dwarves, Great Evil coming to destroy world, hero being a lame farmboy, your village burning down, your mentor dieing.

 

You can still do it right, but it makes the game less interesting at a glance.

[alanschu]

Does that make it generic, or does that just make it fit within a particular genre?

 

Isn't there a bit of familiarity with making a fantasy game with making a fantasy game that has Elves and Dwarves. The type of context that helps people establish a sense of the setting?

 

Would people still be happy buying a fantasy game that is set with races called the Hibone, Jeebway, and Marklarks? Maybe "happy" is not the best word to use, but hopefully you know what I mean.

 

 

I remember people criticizing Alpha Protocol because Michael Thorton "looked generic." Well, what exactly are people hoping for with respect to a spy?

 

 

Though perhaps appropriately, when I see your examples of great evils, lame farmboys, and village burning down, I would consider those cliches.

 

Were people hoping that elves and dwarves wouldn't be in Dragon Age? Would people have been happier if elves are subterranean mountain dwellers, and dwarves living in the forest?

 

 

People hate the amnesia thing today, but many of us are quite okay with it in Planescape: Torment, for example.

[Oner]

People hate the amnesia thing today, but many of us are quite okay with it in Planescape: Torment, for example.

I find KotOR 2-s amnesiac beginning a funny example, as a lot of people don't realise that the amnesia goes as far as..a week? And it's just temporary too.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Oner

[Niten_Ryu]

Personally I feel that the terms "generic" and "cliche" are tossed around a bit too much.

 

What makes a game "Generic?" I can understand cliche characters, but at the same time, is that necessarily bad?

 

 

What are people hoping for in terms of things not being cliche or generic?

 

Nope, generic or cliche don't make it bad. I'd rather see Planescape or some weird Final Fantasy world (note, just world as characters and plot in JRPGs are very generic) rahter then another ye olde semi medieval tolkienesque world. This don't mean that setting is nothing but carbon copy of Tolkien's Middle earth (or some other famous setting) and it can have some good features. Generic sells as majory of games want something familar. They are happy that elfs don't have beards or that Dwarfs mine "exotic" minerals in DA. They are more then happy to fight against orcs (or hurlocks as they are called in DA) and enjoy their "exotic beauty, who has come to hold rest of mankind in contempt".

 

I'd prefer some other type of setting then generic fantasy, but it's not the key factor if the game is good or not. I really liked BG, BG2, NWN 3rd expansion and MotB even when they were set in generic fantasy (FR) and used horrible rule system (AD&D). Dragon Age use custom rule system so in theory it has chance to work better then AD&D rules. IMO of course as many love AD&D rules in PnP and in computer games.

[Purkake]

Does that make it generic, or does that just make it fit within a particular genre?

 

Isn't there a bit of familiarity with making a fantasy game with making a fantasy game that has Elves and Dwarves. The type of context that helps people establish a sense of the setting?

 

Would people still be happy buying a fantasy game that is set with races called the Hibone, Jeebway, and Marklarks? Maybe "happy" is not the best word to use, but hopefully you know what I mean.

 

 

I remember people criticizing Alpha Protocol because Michael Thorton "looked generic." Well, what exactly are people hoping for with respect to a spy?

 

 

Though perhaps appropriately, when I see your examples of great evils, lame farmboys, and village burning down, I would consider those cliches.

 

Were people hoping that elves and dwarves wouldn't be in Dragon Age? Would people have been happier if elves are subterranean mountain dwellers, and dwarves living in the forest?

 

 

People hate the amnesia thing today, but many of us are quite okay with it in Planescape: Torment, for example.

 

It's not about renaming elves and dwarves into something different, it's about them always having the same basic features. Elves are always the wild, lean, keen-sighted people who live a long time and suffer from a superiority complex while dwarves are the short, grumpy bearded people who live underground.

 

It's about taking the genre forward, moving away from generic "fantasy" stuff and building a world that is not a "medieval Europe with magic". The possibilities are endless, but still everyone must lean on the Tolkin and DnD crutch. The further away you get from the usual cliches and tropes the more unique and memorable the setting(and the game) will be. How about a race of invisible people? Think how different their cities, society etc. must be because of that. A race of immovable people? They haven't even run the "hivemind race thing" into the ground yet, you could do some cool stuff with that.

 

Even when people try something new, it's like everything mus have a "Proud Warrior race" and a "Wise long living race" and so on. It's like creativity is all but dead.

 

The amnesia thing is way overused and lame, it was okay in PS:T, because the rest was so great.

Edited July 2, 2009 by Purkake

[Niten_Ryu]

I remember people criticizing Alpha Protocol because Michael Thorton "looked generic." Well, what exactly are people hoping for with respect to a spy?

 

Well, Michael Thorton is based on James Bond, Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer. Those characters are extremely popular and it's very good choice to use 'em as inspiration. Bond got so popular that even the real world spies dream to be more like Bond. I've seen interviews in TV where solders say they want to be more like Jack Bauer (he was to Bush Jr administration same as Clint Eastwoods Dirty Harry was to Reagan administration). Obsidian made all the right moves but it does make Michael Thorton to seem bit generic (again, not a bad thing per se).

 

What if Obsidian went for some obscure way and used following characters as inspiration ? NKVD Chief Executioner Major-General Vasili Blokhin who killed tens of thousands of prisoners with pistol. Or perhaps Chuck Barris, a gameshow host who clamed to be CIA hitman. Or Klaus Fuchs, a scientist who sold nuclear secrets to russians.

 

Maybe some gamers are jaded enough that they wouldn't be suprised to see spy game start at the settings on game show but I'd certainly enjoy it

[Tigranes]

I'd say Codex are fans of the game design that died about 10 years ago so no wonder why they attack against just everything with extreme hostility.

 

Quite apart from the Codex as an entity - there's no reason why older styles of game designs cannot return (it has happened before for other media forms), and the 'oldness' doesn't say anything about their quality. In fact, both dismissing design because it's 'old' and abhoring anything 'new' are just as nonsensical as the other.

 

re. Generic: I think anyone hoping for Dragon Age to provide a wildly different setting were fooling themselves from the start. Alanschu, I think the challenge for Dragon Age, and what its creators probably want to do as well, is to provide a world that feels fantasy and has a lot of familiar ('generic') things to ground you in, but uses those familiar ingredients to develop more unique, complex or unusual situations than before. Thus the attention to lore. I am happy with that as long as it doesn't turn into another Latter Day Elder Scrolls - books and books of lore that the games can't take any advantage of (apparently ME suffered from this too, but I can't say).

[Enoch]

I think anyone hoping for Dragon Age to provide a wildly different setting were fooling themselves from the start.

Exactly. Genre conventions were in the cards from day one-- I mean, they named the damn thing Dragon Age fercrissakes! I'm guessing that their second choice was either "Sword Quest" or "Knight Land."

[alanschu]

People hate the amnesia thing today, but many of us are quite okay with it in Planescape: Torment, for example.

I find KotOR 2-s amnesiac beginning a funny example, as a lot of people don't realise that the amnesia goes as far as..a week? And it's just temporary too.

 

 

Are you referring to KOTOR's amnesia? It's hard to say it only lasts a week when there's really no context of time given in the game.

[Maria Caliban]

What makes a game "Generic?"

 

It's adherence to the tropes and styles of its given genre.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Its a Bioware game. Generic settings, cliches, and formula writing comes standard with their games. At least people know what they are getting when they play it.

[Aristes]

Your point about the amnesia aspect of PS:T really makes the case. It was okay then, but now it's cliched. For everything cliched, there was once something new to someone. In fact, the amnesia in PS:T is often a point of criticism for the game and has been. Amnesia in literature falls under attack in general.

 

We computer gamer geeks hadn't seen it played quite so well in a crpg. It was okay then, but it has become so much of a staple that folks rebel against it. Frankly, I think there is room for the cliched ideas. I thought, and clearly I was wrong as MC and Gromnir have set the record straight as regards the details of the Dragon Age plan, that Bioware was going to try to escape from the more or less cliched notions. ...But, forewarned is forarmed. Now that I know, it's no big deal.

 

Even within cliches, there are different levels of acceptance. Take me, for example. I don't mind elves and dwarves and whatnot. Having the cliched notions of elves and dwarves doesn't bother me. However, I would like to see elves and dwarves used in a different way. I don't offer it as a serious setting, but I do think the idea of dwarves being the big guys on the block and the elves, through no real fault of their own, being the new upstarts who threaten the status quo. I think cliches will be with us for a long time. Hell, I'm all for it. However, it would be nice to see a game that doesn't depict the same old notions we have in sooooo many computer games. Downtrodden 'demi-humans.' Humans who are the most vigorous and widespread. It is so tiring to see the same ideas recycled.

 

Bioware is making the game they want to make and I'm sure it will sell gangbusters. It's not the new and invigorating path I'd hoped they would take, but I'll pick it up and enjoy it anyhow.

Edited July 2, 2009 by Aristes

[Killian Kalthorne]

I will be getting the XBox 360 version. I only game on the XBox now. It beats trying to upgrade my computer every year or three.

[Aristes]

I'll pick it up PC since I don't have a 360. We can compare notes about how each plays.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Sounds like a plan. We could do that with Alpha Protocol if you wish. One thing I am wondering is if both these games will have a different GUI for their respective platforms, kind of like Mass Effect GUI differs between the PC and 360 platforms, or are try to pull what Bethesda did with Fallout 3.

[Aristes]

I'll post AP and DA screenies for you to peruse.

[Killian Kalthorne]

I wish there was a way to take screenshots on the XBox 360, and save them on an external hard drive.

[Aristes]

Actually one will be good enough. If I post mine, then you can say what's different about yours. Should give us something. It might also prove interesting to folks who have both platforms and want to decide which one to use.