Dragon Age Origins

[Maria Caliban]

I assume as he's no longer interested in the Dragon Age game, he won't be frequenting that forum anymore.

 

At the same time, he'll likely continue posting in this thread and the other DA ones. I am rather skeptical about his claim that he won't be buying the game.

[RPGmasterBoo]

... was? Does that mean you have an interesting story to tell? Please do.

 

Nope. I just decided as of this evening, that there are too few people on the Bioboards to have meaningful discussions with (in fact none, the Maria chick above excluded), the rest pretty much are nodders (as in they nod to every dev post) and clappers (guess what they do), and there was no point in hanging around anymore.

 

You lot might be *bleep* but at least its fun to argue with you. I think.

[Volourn]

What you mean to say is you disliked being disagreed with so you came here where more people think BIO sucks too? Cool.

 

P.S. DA:O will be awesome but it's not eprfect. But, it's guaranteed to be a better RPG than BG. Not that that's hard.

[RPGmasterBoo]

What you mean to say is you disliked being disagreed with so you came here where more people think BIO sucks too? Cool.

 

P.S. DA:O will be awesome but it's not eprfect. But, it's guaranteed to be a better RPG than BG. Not that that's hard.

 

That's why i have you to disagree with me, since you post about as much as the lot of them.

 

Your definition of better RPG is understood only by you alone, and I dont see how repeating it will enlighten us as to what the hell you're talking about.

[Volourn]

"Yourr definition of better RPG is understood only by you alone, and I dont see how repeating it will enlighten us as to what the hell you're talking about."

 

Why are dissing Alanshu like this? He seems to understand it just fine. Or is he nothing to you?

[Guest Slinky]

Boo, just out of curiosity, what does in your mind make BG2 still so great rpg generally? It's a great game, but the only things in it, in my opinion, are the combat/magic systems that still kick other games asses.

 

On the M/M F/F romances, okay, they are optional, so I don't care. Just more flesh on the bones.

[Bos_hybrid]

Thus ceases my interest in this game, at least in buying it.

 

I don't really see how such a small thing can cause a reaction like this. Bio romances are always optional, so if you aren't interested in them, don't do them. The Witcher forced you into a romance/relatioship with either Triss or the other girl and yet you seem to rate that very highy. If it's the fact that same sex romance is in the game, well we always knew that F/F was going to be in the game and has been in every game since KoTOR.(and some say it was inferred in that) Then it must be the M/M option that for some reason bothers you, which still hasn't been confirmed by the way, just same sex romance has been said.

 

I just never understand the knee jerk reaction that romances can recieve, whether in or out. IMO they are an extra, and there inclusion or non inclusion will not factor into my decision making.

 

Edit: It appears I was wrong, it seems M/M is in.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Bos_hybrid

[RPGmasterBoo]

Boo, just out of curiosity, what does in your mind make BG2 still so great rpg generally? It's a great game, but the only things in it, in my opinion, are the combat/magic systems that still kick other games asses.

 

On the M/M F/F romances, okay, they are optional, so I don't care. Just more flesh on the bones.

 

Its plot is better, its characters are more interesting, its huge and offers a lot of exploration, it has great quests and spans a single storyline over three games that really deserves the word epic. Its a unique experience to watch your character come so far from the first game, from a nobody to a god, and its pulled off as believably as such a thing can be. Its eight years now and nothing significant has been improved over it in any game apart from graphics and the amount of voice acting.

Purely as a game it lacks nothing, it has no major flaw and even minor flaws are in short supply.

The much vaunted choices in latter games are ridiculous because they as a rule boil down to a saint/genocidal maniac choice. Choices themselves mean nothing if they are not made in a believable, immersive context. Who cares about any choice in NWN when the entire gameworld is so drab and your charater a nobody?

Same goes for KOTOR. The Jedi/Sith thing is shoved so far down the players throat that you're locked into playing either of two extremes.

Mass Effect was even worse, it color coded the dialog so you don't make a mistake. The last choice over saving the fleet or the council came off as so irrelevant i was begging for a "I dont care" dialog option... no such luck.

 

Baldurs Gate gets only one choice at the end of ToB and that one carries real weight since you've gone through hell to get to it. Baldurs Gate is not a game about such a superficial thing as Intimidate/Diplomacy/Bluff skill checks. Its a game about an inescapable fate and crawling through blood and guts to get to decide your place in the world, either to get power for yourself or to get some peace at last. It carries a real struggle of the hero against the world and against himself, and when in the end you stand triumphant you can say: its been a hell of a journey.

 

If someone wants real role playing with choices that matter I point them in the way of Torment or Fallout. Both of them do their job great but I see them as equal to Baldurs Gate, not superior or inferior since the experience offered in those games is wildly different from BG. However they are all successful games in the sense that they deliver on what they try to do. Unlike the crap that came afterwards, that doesn't have either the epic of BG, the personal of Torment or the freedom of Fallout.

Edited August 28, 2009 by RPGmasterBoo

[Guest Slinky]

Okay, cool.

 

I agree on most parts, except on the characters and on the rpg choices. I did like the characters personalities, especially Imoens, but they were pretty one dimensional. And it has been couple years when I last played through BG2, but I really don't remember much other choices than keep your money / I don't care / die!. That's not very complex or innovative, it's the basic stuff. Good if you liked BG2, but I'm not ready to crown it as the absolute king of the hill. Actually, I wouldn't do that to any game.

 

But I find it really, really hard to compare BG's and Fallout's to games today. I don't know how long did it take to make a 2D map, but I do know it takes loads longer to make 3D map + all the characters, animations and stuff like that. And that costs money and time, so it's harder to get content in games. Unfortunately 2D rpg wouldn't sell today (I would buy though). I don't like it but there is nothing that can be done to change that.

 

So I think it's not fair to compare 10 years old rpg games to games today. BG series is great, but you shouldn't get stuck on the past.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Slinky

[Purkake]

I agree that BG's strongest point is the combat/magic system and the open world with lots to do. The main story is also pretty good, but the characters really are one-dimensional and the choices might just as well not be there for the most part. I certainly wouldn't put it next to Torment, it was and still is a fun game, but the writing and characters are nowhere near as awesome.

[RPGmasterBoo]

I agree that BG's strongest point is the combat/magic system and the open world with lots to do. The main story is also pretty good, but the characters really are one-dimensional and the choices might just as well not be there for the most part. I certainly wouldn't put it next to Torment, it was and still is a fun game, but the writing and characters are nowhere near as awesome.

 

Baldurs Gate is a masterpiece in a game as game way. Torment is a game as art. They don't offer the same experience at all, in fact they complement each other with either one having what the other lacks.

No use comparing games that are required playing anyway. Add Fallout and you've basically seen the entire genre.

[Purkake]

The art argument will always end the same way. Either everything is art or what you personally consider art is art.

 

I don't have any problem comparing them. Torment has some pretty obvious flaws, while BG is a smoother ride but with less awesomeness.

[Pidesco]

No M/F/F/M/F/M/MF/HG romance option in Dragon Age? Clearly, Bioware discriminates against minorities.

[Purkake]

No M/F/F/M/F/M/MF/HG romance option in Dragon Age? Clearly, Bioware discriminates against minorities.

 

I'm sure the sheep make up for it.

[alanschu]

The much vaunted choices in latter games are ridiculous because they as a rule boil down to a saint/genocidal maniac choice.

 

Or sometimes something subtle like using a persuade check to get past something instead of forced combat. This was common in NWN.

 

 

I understand you like BG series, but it's not as immaculate as you make it out to be. The game has some serious flaws, especially the first one, although both are still excellent games.

[RPGmasterBoo]

No M/F/F/M/F/M/MF/HG romance option in Dragon Age? Clearly, Bioware discriminates against minorities.

 

Mhm, its that policy of appeasement that infuriates me. It doesn't matter which minority gets their fill (as far as I am concerned), what does is the sucky self righteous way the people in Bioware go about it. I raise the issue and they talk about oppression and what not. Canadians talking about oppression... to someone whose country has gone through 4 wars in the last century + 1 US bombing, three complete devastations, and 3 total economic collapses, situations such as not having enough money to buy bread, the possibility of being stabbed just so someone could get your new sneakers or jacket, or merely catching a stray bullet from the mutual slaughter of local gangsters... sorry but its LAME. No, actually its insulting. I can appreciate that a society can come to the point where gay rights are the only topic of interest, but that's not the way the rest of the world works. If they want to appease the oppresed there are a whole lotta people standing in line from south america to Indonesia

[Purkake]

Former Yugoslavia isn't the rest of the world and ending world hunger or stopping wars isn't part of a video game developer's job description.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Purkake

[RPGmasterBoo]

Former Yugoslavia isn't the rest of the world and ending world hunger or stopping wars isn't part of a video game developer's job description.

 

And supporting gay rights is?

[Purkake]

They're just providing a more complete roleplaying experience. That's something that they can do.

 

So you want less options?

[RPGmasterBoo]

They're just providing a more complete roleplaying experience. That's something that they can do.

 

So you want less options?

 

How would addressing more serious topics in a fantasy setting be less options or less roleplaying?

 

The Witcher had a crude and simplistic way of doing it, but at least they tried. If you want to do social commentary of a sort there is a host of issues that would take precedence over homosexual romances.

Edited August 28, 2009 by RPGmasterBoo

[Maria Caliban]

Former Yugoslavia isn't the rest of the world and ending world hunger or stopping wars isn't part of a video game developer's job description.

 

And supporting gay rights is?

 

Apparently, BioWare should not let FemShep get blue alien nookie until they've finished curing cancer.

[Purkake]

They're just providing a more complete roleplaying experience. That's something that they can do.

 

So you want less options?

 

How would addressing more serious topics in a fantasy setting be less options or less roleplaying?

 

The Witcher had a crude and simplistic way of doing it, but at least they tried. If you want to do social commentary of a sort there is a host of issues that would take precedence over homosexual romances.

 

 

How do you know what other issues are in the game?

 

Also, it's not an "issue", it has nothing to do with gay rights. It's about providing you with the options to better flesh out your character, should you so choose.

 

EDIT: There isn't a list of issues, listed by their importance that every game developer should tackle in their game. They put whatever they want in their game. If one is unhappy about them, one can vote with one's wallet.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Purkake

[RPGmasterBoo]

Also, it's not an "issue", it has nothing to do with gay rights. It's about providing you with the options to better flesh out your character, should you so choose.

 

I disagree. Its about appeasing a very vocal and pushy number of fans, which was justified to me by David Gaider himself as being (in a nutshell) an opportunity for oppressed people to play a character they could identify with. Which is all fine and dandy, except for the fact that there are millions upon millions of oppressed people, for reasons much much worse than sexual preference.

 

Coming from a place with a host of issues, each more terrible than the other I fail to see the relevance of Gaider's explanation and I completely fail to sympathise.

Edited August 28, 2009 by RPGmasterBoo

[Purkake]

If that is indeed why they are doing it(was it also the case with ME?), how do you propose they use their game to help the people oppressed by wars, famine, diseases etc.?

 

Just because you were "more" oppressed, doesn't give you the right to judge other people. The world is not objective.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Apparently, BioWare should not let FemShep get blue alien nookie until they've finished curing cancer.

 

I would have thought sarcastic comments of this sort were beneath you. I can see where you are coming from, but do try to see my point as well.