Dragon Age discussion

[Gromnir]

am sorry, but anybody that thinks that the initial raison d'

[RPGmasterBoo]

am sorry, but anybody that thinks that the initial raison d'

[Monte Carlo]

Two things ---

 

(a) BG2. I'm actually indifferent about the backstory, I think DA is far superior. I know it's intangible and not even defensible (I don't even think it need be either), but I just find BG2 more fun. I know, go figure. Maybe it's a D&D thing, that it doesn't take itself seriously, that it's hokey and all the rest of it. It's the apogee of hammy H&S, Monty Haul, Gygaxian fun on the PC as a gaming platform. It's flaws make it more enjoyable for me, as much as DA's just make that fingernails-down-a-blackboard sound in the back of my head. This doesn't change the fact that I enjoyed 75% of DA, (and of that I loved 25% of it) and hated 25% of it. The lack of an urge to replay it is for me telling... and that's never been a problem for me even with mediocre CRPGs.

 

(b) Now you've got my wargamer head on by making perfectly valid points about how you stymie the advance of an amorphous, leaderless horde living off the land with no other objective than destruction. Hmmm. Look at the battle of Ostagar clip. The Darkspawn use skirmishers, archers and ogres as arty support with boulders. They rely on emmissaries as their officers. They do have a rudimentary organisation. I don't know if they need food or water (I presume so) but it is a big army. Flood fields to slow them down, salt the earth to spoil food, reinforce key points and delay them, harass them with skirmishers --- the Crusader armies of the 12th Century were slow-moving and were constantly hampered by Saladin's light cavalry and mounted archers.

 

Now, I know that the Darkspawn really are a plot device, a trope, a meme. They aren't meant to be anything else than a screensaver villain lurking in the wings to give you a reason to plunder all the key hubs. But wouldn't it be nice if they at least gave a nod to their key bad guy, the Horde that is allegedly driving the whole game onwards?

 

Cheers

MC

[Gromnir]

Yes the part of BGII that goes up untill Spellhold leans heavily on your compassion for a companion. After that, it becomes a must.

 

 

*chuckle*

 

depending on how much you choose to do before brynlaw, that is potential over 1/2 of the game. raison d'

Edited February 15, 2010 by Gromnir

[Monte Carlo]

^ He's right. 90% of my hundreds of playthroughs have been a leisurely dungeon crawl around Amn followed by a Spellhold / Underdark / Elven City / Hell derby galloped at tremendous speed.

 

BG2 is appallingly designed --- it's cool by accident. I like it. But it is appallingly designed. It's like a twinkie --- only a madman would design one but they are strangely more-ish.

 

Although I only do Watcher's Keep after ToB starts.

 

Cheers

MC

[Wrath of Dagon]

"Once more we got Bio's crappy "visit 4 places to find 4 doohickeys" all purpose autopilot plot." you didn't seem to mind that approach with kotor.

Using that idea in one game is fine. Using it in every game since then - not so much.

in any event, the reason developers do such stuff (obsidian included) is to increase illusion o' openness and non-linearity. in a story-driven game you needs a beginning, middle and end... makes 4 interchangeable parts for the middle increases illusion o' player freedom. some yutz wanna imagine the possibility o' infinite branching possibilities into a game, but if you genuine thinks story is important (and bio obviously does) then making so that critical path is genuine malleable at multiple points is impractical. so you get illusion... is reason why obsidian and bio and any other developer o' story-driven crpgs does the same way. Gromnir can thinks of other options for developers, but they is all demanding considerable more resources... which makes such stuff prohibitive from a developer pov.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Like I said, all purpose autopilot. I know why they do it, but that doesn't mean that's the only way a story driven game can be done. Being able to go to their 4 places in any order doesn't do much for me either, I'd rather have a real plot for once.

[Starwars]

If you just look at it superficially, then sure it's go to get the 4 things. But a big difference in DA is that you can actually affect those 4 things, unlike KOTOR for example. They are also integrated in how things will turn out in the ending. Not saying I wouldn't want a change for upcoming games to something that feels a bit more... "natural" so to speak. But gathering alliances in DA felt far more integrated into the story and gameplay than just gathering the Star map things in KOTOR.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Not to me, it felt exactly the same. Anyway, Obsid already did allies in KOTOR 2. And now ME2 has done it. I see a long future of ally gathering for Bio.

 

Edit: Actually I liked the star maps better, because I really did want to see what that Star Forge thing was all about. Who were my allies I didn't care too much, presumably I'd still win. Sure, it would've been cool to have the werewolves fighting beside you, but I wasn't about to slaughter all the elves just for that.

Edited February 15, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gromnir]

Not to me, it felt exactly the same. Anyway, Obsid already did allies in KOTOR 2. And now ME2 has done it. I see a long future of ally gathering for Bio.

 

Edit: Actually I liked the star maps better, because I really did want to see what that Star Forge thing was all about. Who were my allies I didn't care too much, presumably I'd still win. Sure, it would've been cool to have the werewolves fighting beside you, but I wasn't about to slaughter all the elves just for that.

 

 

your blatant hypocrisy is... disturbing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

"but I just find BG2 more fun. I know, go figure. Maybe it's a D&D thing, that it doesn't take itself seriously, that it's hokey and all the rest of it."

 

WUT? BG2 took itself damn seriously, and it was all the better for yet. Yeah, it had joke characters; but so does DA. *shrug*

 

 

"Anyway, Obsid already did allies in KOTOR 2."

 

Nah. KOTOR2 was collecting the jedi.

 

 

 

Anyways, on to Awakening. BIO just released the FAQ. there';s some nice things going on, but others are WTFWTFWTWFBARBQWTF!!!!

Edited February 15, 2010 by Volourn

[mr insomniac]

(b) Now you've got my wargamer head on by making perfectly valid points about how you stymie the advance of an amorphous, leaderless horde living off the land with no other objective than destruction. Hmmm. Look at the battle of Ostagar clip. The Darkspawn use skirmishers, archers and ogres as arty support with boulders. They rely on emmissaries as their officers. They do have a rudimentary organisation. I don't know if they need food or water (I presume so) but it is a big army. Flood fields to slow them down, salt the earth to spoil food, reinforce key points and delay them, harass them with skirmishers --- the Crusader armies of the 12th Century were slow-moving and were constantly hampered by Saladin's light cavalry and mounted archers.

 

Okay, I gotcha, and yes all those tactics and ideas on a large scale - flooding fields, salting the earth, hampering supply lines, pitching like artillery against like - would be great fun... if I were playing a RTS. As far as DA goes, sorry, but do. not. want. When Bioware makes a RPG, I know I'm gonna get a good, or at least decent, story, and I'm gonna get characters that I mostly enjoy interacting with, and I'm gonna get some fun battles and locations. That's why I buy Bioware's games, and why I'll continue to buy them. Same goes for Obsidian. If I want that other stuff, I'll buy a different type of game.

 

Smaller scale maybe, the occasional skirmish using the different units of your army before the finale, just to show them off. The idea of Dalish elves and guerilla warfare against the darkspawn actually intrigues the hell out of me. Or maybe even "the great dwarven march" from Orzammar to Denerim. I could get into things like that, as long as they didn't become the game.

[Starwars]

Btw, I'm sure this was posted before but this review at the Codex paints a pretty good picture of the game I think. Some things I would've liked to see mentioned more in-depth (like the origins) but overall it's a good read with a good look into one of the bigger quests: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=195

 

Don't read if you don't want spoilers though.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Its quite fair.

 

Short version:

 

So, what do we get?

 

* A generic but well designed, well thought-through world;

* A generic threat that's merely a background; the game is more about you dealing with different factions than about you stopping the Blight;

* Very detailed character system with some flaws;

* Tactical combat wasted on filler encounters;

* Standard party members setup with all the banter and drama you can expect, but this time you can kill a lot more party members, which is a must-have feature in a Bioware game;

* Truly excellent quest choices and options sandwiched between a linear and not overly interesting beginning and an anticlimatic ending.

 

As one member of this fine establishment said:

 

"Really it seems to boil down to this: Dragon Age has undeniable flaws, some glaring, some less-so. To some, the truly brilliant moments easily outshine those flaws. To others, the brilliant moments aren't brilliant enough, or don't happen often enough, so the flaws stand-out more and bring the entire experience down. I think both perspectives are perfectly legitimate, and, like so many other things, really boil down to personal preference. And really, the "undeniable flaws with brilliant moments/features/etc." describes pretty much every great RPG I've ever played."

 

I agree with 90% written above, (and fall into the latter category of people)

 

Basically the game's greatest asset, more so then in any other previous RPG are C&C's and combat. Everything else has been done before and done better. Since choices are wasted on me, (if the setting/story/characters don't grab me), and the combat is brimming with filler - I fail to see the "brilliance".

 

*shrugs*

 

The combat might be fixed in the expansion though.

 

Entering deep roads now

Edited February 15, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[RPGmasterBoo]

"Once more we got Bio's crappy "visit 4 places to find 4 doohickeys" all purpose autopilot plot." you didn't seem to mind that approach with kotor.

 

Using that idea in one game is fine. Using it in every game since then - not so much.

 

Like I said, all purpose autopilot. I know why they do it, but that doesn't mean that's the only way a story driven game can be done. Being able to go to their 4 places in any order doesn't do much for me either, I'd rather have a real plot for once.

 

Amen brother.

[Monte Carlo]

Just read the Awakenings FAQ --- the 'Dead Warden' thing is OK by me (they simply say if you want to suspend disbelief and play that character then that's your call and they ain't gonna stop you) but both NPCs already leave me cold. And Oghren. Oghren? Honestly, he's the major NPC. I shake my head, he's probably the worst DA NPC.

 

And there's no romances

 

A mixed bag, but lots of new skills and talents and powaz too.

[entrerix]

i am currently very not interested in awakenings.

 

i really really liked DA, but so far this is looking more like the first nwn expansion (the bad one) and less like the underdark one (the gooder one)

Edited February 16, 2010 by entrerix

[Gorgon]

I dunno having slow face to face lesbian sex with Leilana, in the missionary position no less, and using the game engine. That was just... Bizzaro world. Whatever happened to fade to black. lol.

 

And ohh lest we forget the Monty Python moment. Ohh... no, she's going to sing, and there was no one there to interupt her.

 

Pretty funny the first time around, but the game engine was just not cut out to handle propper cutscenes.

Edited February 16, 2010 by Gorgon

[Gromnir]

Btw, I'm sure this was posted before but this review at the Codex paints a pretty good picture of the game I think. Some things I would've liked to see mentioned more in-depth (like the origins) but overall it's a good read with a good look into one of the bigger quests: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=195

 

Don't read if you don't want spoilers though.

 

am not having a problem with vinnie's review save that he is a bit of an idiot at times. he complains 'bout industry conventions, but he follows the review conventions 'don't he?

 

*shrug*

 

as with recent bioware games, da focuses a great deal o' developer and writer effort on character development. jnpc banter and stories and side-quests... critical path story in a bio crpg is frequent incidental. nevertheless, right or wrong, discuss characters not fit into one o' vinnie's pre-defined categories, so is hardly discussed. is scary that he don't seem to recognize that Plot does not equal Story... makes us a little wary o' his personal future efforts. am wondering if he played ps:t or motb... or any recent obsidian or bioware game.

 

"And Oghren. Oghren?"

 

haven't read the faq, but as much as we Loathe ohgren, we were hopeful to see him as a named returning jnpc for sequel or expansion. dwarf portions o' game were highlights, and have ohgren back is at least giving us hope for kal sharok or some other dwarven enclave. only thing better would be to have sten back, but the expansion does not seem like appropriate fodder for quinari.

 

"Amen brother."

 

see our response to wrath... works equal well. as mc notes, design o' bg2 were a bit o' a mess... and there were no way in hell we were gonna get bg2 scope for da. so, would you rather have had da force you down a single critical path sequence as did bg2? critical path were actual more linear than da... and we knows how you like to stay focused on critical path aspects. Gromnir is personally unimpressed with the non-sequential plot point approach, but compared to bg2 is an improvement. the difference is that bg2 had far more tangential and non-essential sub-quests for the player to "explore." however, if you do not such resources available...

 

so, kotor replicates nwn design (kotor were hardly original) and many bio, obsidian and indie developers has likewise adopted the habit o' making plot points non-sequential so as to increase illusion o' freedom. 'course, if you has an alternative that don't include bg2 scope we is happy to listen.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Maria Caliban]

But no, Duncan never considers this, he just stabs the man and shows you whatcha gonna end up like if you refuse.

 

Jory did draw his sword first and lunges first.

 

Greedo shot first!

[RPGmasterBoo]

I like the idea that I can circumvent the main plot for as long as I choose, but when I get down to it - its a linear ride to the end. It may not be logical but I find it convenient. I dont like choosing between separate main quest locations because by necessity they make the game seem smaller (because they cant be huge themselves). Each one ends up feeling too small and confined. The elvish camp is ten dudes around a fire. The mage tower has only four floors. The dwarven capital (wonderfully designed btw) is likewise small. But combine all of DA hubs into one mega city and the result is wow.

But to have that the plot would have to be constructed around it.

Since they wanted to give variety and a sense of epic with all the races and such, the world doesn't feel very large as a result. The locations are broken off and smallish.

 

I'll agree that DA, considering its plot could only work this way. But thats because the plot is constructed around that game design idea, which they introduced with NWN. I never liked it on NWN to start with and its not becoming any more appealing. The Witcher shows that you can in this day and age, still deliver a convincing and well designed city.

 

Also, with several hubs the last one usually ends up being a pushover because of the high level of characters.

 

I don't think its impossible to replicate BGII scope. You'd need a fixed isomertic camera which would erase the need for detail character models and such, and to cut back significantly on voice acting. Of course no one wants to do this because it would be a pure PC title, and not very handy for the consoles.

[Gromnir]

But no, Duncan never considers this, he just stabs the man and shows you whatcha gonna end up like if you refuse.

 

Jory did draw his sword first and lunges first.

 

Greedo shot first!

 

pre-edit, or after?

 

when Gromnir were eight years o' age we were given some good advice by our grandfather regarding fights. some o' the white kids in town would give us a hard time... beat us up if adults weren't around. grandpa told us that waiting for some other kid to take the first swing didn't make us honorable... made us stoopid. "Hit them before they can hit you, and keep hitting until somebody forces you to stop. The guy who lands the first blow in a fist fight typically wins, but even if you do not land the first blow make sure you hurt the other guy as much as you can. Winning isn't as important as making sure that they never want to fight you again. Hurt the other guy a little and chances are he will leave you alone in the future, regardless of whether you won or lost the fight." have found that grandpa's advice is appropriate for more than just pre-teens getting into scrapes behind the A&P.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[RPGmasterBoo]

Good advice, granpa knows his stuff.

[Maria Caliban]

Btw, I'm sure this was posted before but this review at the Codex paints a pretty good picture of the game I think. Some things I would've liked to see mentioned more in-depth (like the origins) but overall it's a good read with a good look into one of the bigger quests: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=195

 

Don't read if you don't want spoilers though.

 

The debate here seems to be 'is DA as good or better than BG 2?' Which isn't the same as 'is Dragon Age a good RPG?' As far as I know, even those who find obvious flaws in DA consider it a good RPG.

 

Besides, outside of Elder Scroll type open world games, Dragon Age is very long. It's the biggest BioWare game since BG 2, and one of the longest RPGs I've ever played. As such, I have a bit of sympathy as to why the developers didn't add more stuff.

 

Just read the Awakenings FAQ --- the 'Dead Warden' thing is OK by me (they simply say if you want to suspend disbelief and play that character then that's your call and they ain't gonna stop you)

 

I think playing as a dead PC is stupid, but that

[RPGmasterBoo]

The debate here seems to be 'is DA as good or better than BG 2?' Which isn't the same as 'is Dragon Age a good RPG?' As far as I know, even those who find obvious flaws in DA consider it a good RPG.

 

All of Bioware's games are good RPG's (even NWN, though that may be stretching it a little). That's never an issue.

 

Also the discussion is about comparisons in design choices and other in game stuff. If I read Gromnir right, we agreed ten pages ago that BGII is a better game - we're slaughtering each other over smaller stuff, what was done right/wrong in both games and what could be done better etc.

Edited February 16, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Volourn]

"All of Bioware's games are good RPG's (even NWN, though that may be stretching it a little). That's never an issue."

 

LMAO Nobody who reads your post will ever go away with that impression. It's hialrious you claim that. Have you even read your posts about ME, ME2, DA, and otehr BIO games sans BG series? LMAO

 

 

"Besides, outside of Elder Scroll type open world games, Dragon Age is very long. It's the biggest BioWare game since BG 2, and one of the longest RPGs I've ever played."

 

O RLY? DA is 58 hours. 10 hours more than ME2 (and ME1). BG2 is less than 100 hours (contrary to BIO and BG2 fanboys balony claims of it being 2 billion hours long, loolz). Yeah, the games are amongst the longest but that's because most games tend to be 30 hours or shorter. If you are lucky.

 

 

 

"I think playing as a dead PC is stupid, but that