Dragon Age discussion

[RPGmasterBoo]

But it is a fact that BGII meant a lot to a large number of people to accumulate so many good mods without developer support *shrugs*

[Gromnir]

am not sure if bg2 player options made the game feels less grindy than da.

 

 

 

And this is before I factor in the awesome modding around BG2 which, strangely, still hasn't happened for DA yet. And the IE is probably tougher to mod. Go figure.

 

Cheers

MC

 

is a good thing you don't factor in mods... 'cause it ain't relevant when comparing strengths and weakness of bg2 and da. is a bit like when some folks tells of the greatness of bg joinable npcs... as modded by somebody other than bioware.

 

*shrug*

 

regardless, keep in mind we speak o' combat grind. in combat a bg2 thief affords the players what kinda actual options once combat begins... anywhere near da options? chances are the da rogue has 3 or 10 (depending on level) combat related powhaz that he may use at any time... all of which is gonna be useful in some way, and that is in addition to use o' poison or traps... which is actual skills available to any class. compare to combat options for a 12th or 20th level thief in bg2... regardless of kits. choose weapon and try to get backstab position.

 

fighter? bg2 kits give some passive boosts and maybe a handful o' powahz which is typical only useful in some combat encounters. is kinda ironic that once the fighting begins, the bg2 fighter is one o' the least interesting characters to play... click on enemy and let your character hack away until the foe is dead. is fun to watch your kensai carve up enemies, but most of his bonuses is passive... save for kai ability which is usable 4 times per day. Gromnir probable uses flurry 4 times in a given da combat. kensai ain't particular fun 'less you dual-class with mage... so is genuinely the mage part that is actual having the options, not the kensai.

 

once the bg2 fighting begins and the grind starts, the combat characters is point and click... save that thieves has to position selves for a backstab.

 

and mage characters... in da we never run out of magic, is always another spell that can be cast. reduced to use sling? never happens in da.

 

options, once combat starts? is clear in favor o' da.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[RPGmasterBoo]

*sigh* options yes, fun - no.

 

At least not after the first hour of continuous combat against the exact same cultist/werewolf/skeleton and other DnD stock material.

 

Did I not illustrate how an entire main quest hub (Haven) is grind from the beginning up to the final boss battle? The entire hub. You fight cultists in the village. Then you fight cultists in the temple. Then you fight more cultists in the temple. Then you fight even more cultists in the caverns punctuated by an occasional dragonling/drake. After 2 hours of this you get to fight the big dragon and a half an hour non combat gameplay. (Edit: wait, there is more fighting with your mirror party)

 

Which raises a good question. Why after 6 year they couldnt come up with a single original monster? The darkspawn are just Orcs in disugise. Some even resemble the orcs from LotR. The rest are all DnD.

Edited February 14, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Monte Carlo]

And I was sure that they were going to include rust monsters. And they didn't, another dream dashed on the sharp, merciless shores of the Bioware design dept.

[Monte Carlo]

Grom, remember all the groovy magic items for serious BG2 combat micro-ing? This sword gives this bonus and I can D/W it with this axe against this monster to provide that effect... and so on. Armour, shields, potions, rings, amulets... the entire spam of Gygaxian magic there for you to find.

 

The magic items in DA are in the foothills of such old-skool greatness.

[Monte Carlo]

*sigh* options yes, fun - no. Which raises a good question. Why after 6 year they couldnt come up with a single original monster? The darkspawn are just Orcs in disugise. Some even resemble the orcs from LotR. The rest are all DnD.

 

Hmmm, I know revenants aren't exactly original, but the Dragon Age take on them --- undead uber-tanks with genuinely powerful and original attacks / tactics --- made them, for me, one of the highlight enemies of the game.

[Gromnir]

*sigh* options yes, fun - no.

 

At least not after the first hour of continuous combat against the exact same cultist/werewolf/skeleton and other DnD stock material.

 

Which raises a good question. Why after 6 year they couldnt come up with a single original monster? The darkspawn are just Orcs in disugise. Some even resemble the orcs from LotR. The rest are all DnD.

 

 

am gonna disagree 'bout the fun and options. YOU is the guy telling us that simply have six as opposed to four members in party is more fun 'cause of increased tactical options. *chuckle* well guess what? your da rogue has triple the options o' the bg2 rogue... regardless o' kits.

 

as we already admitted, da has fewer critters. is first game and has Many monsters, but compared to bg2, a game that used models from bg1, totsc, and iwd, da did not have the vast array o' critters and we concede that compared to bg2 this might increase feel o' grindy. as already discussed, da also had Loads more spells. have more spells does increase options... but also leads to many o' the bg2 balance issues. we already noted that hand-painted tile sets is more varied in bg2. fine. is 2010. we trade handpainted backgrounds for the advantages o' 3d. at this point does anybody genuine wish to go back to 2d? yeah, when nwn were first released we agreed that 2d were superior to what nwn achieved with 3d... but now, in 2010? *snort*

 

bad story? dunno. we thinks story were just fine... up to landsmeet. bg2 were schizophrenic. we thinks biowarians did a pretty good job, but they never seemed to be able to figure out if bhaalspawn or irenicus were focus o' the bg2 story, and as the bhaalspawn were necessarily a lame focus (as it had to be vague enough for a wide range of player styles) the main bg2 story suffered. bg2 story were still pretty good... even though the entire initial premise is weak: save imoen from clutches o' an evil wizard, why? da, on the other hand, is a story 'bout characters... which is a good thing. bio figured out, after some years, that what makes game story memorable is the characters... best villain and favorite character lists is ubiquitous for a reason. bg2 had some excellent characters (not limiting self to jnpcs). for the most part, the characters were better in da. problem we had were with the wtf moments and the lack o' a compelling villain for da. even so, if da felt grindy 'cause you didn't buy into the story then we can't really argue... is 100% opinion.

 

as for gaps between grind... sure, as noted already, bg2 were unique in its openness (non-linearity is a fallacious descriptor as the critical path, as is all story-driven crpgs, very linear) is unparalleled and unlikely to be replicated anytime soon. was there non-combat stuff to do in da? yeah, loads o' such stuff were available. am recalling that mc mentioned his frequent use o' the brothel, and Gromnir spent considerable time chatting up fellow party mates in camp; although we Loathe the gift aspect that were added to da. on the positive side, da didn't have as much o' the fluffy fed-ex nonsense that always manages to find its way into crpgs. find Dinglewert's lost dagger or Wilmaneras's necklace? who decided that such stuff makes a crpg better?

 

am not gonna convince boo. am noticing that his complaints is largely same as the ones he had Before he played da... based on feedback from others we s'pose. makes seem likes he went in with preconceptions and confirmed those preconceptions. *chuckle* am recalling when toee were first released and the codexians near universal applauded cain's efforts... 'cause they felt they had to? years later we gets a more honest assessment, but we has learned to never underestimate the impact o' preconceptions and initial bias.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Monte Carlo]

^ Nope, no brothel-crawling for this callsign. Well, maybe once or twice.

[Gromnir]

Grom, remember all the groovy magic items for serious BG2 combat micro-ing? This sword gives this bonus and I can D/W it with this axe against this monster to provide that effect... and so on. Armour, shields, potions, rings, amulets... the entire spam of Gygaxian magic there for you to find.

 

The magic items in DA are in the foothills of such old-skool greatness.

 

you ain't scoring points with that observation. is not difficult to show that character build o' a combat character in bg2 were largely irrelevant. how you equipped character were far more important in determining efficacy in combat. that is Not a good thing. the fact that da distanced itself from such nonsense is a good thing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

"The darkspawn are just Orcs in disugise."

 

DA ogres = darkspawn = d&d orcs.... WHAT!?!

 

Darkspawn have very little in common with D&D orcs.

 

 

 

"even though the entire initial premise is weak: save imoen from clutches o' an evil wizard, why?"

 

That wasn't the rpemise. The prenmise was to go after the guy who kidnapped, inpriosned, tortured, and did magical experiemtns on you. Imoen was unimportant unless you make her important.

 

 

"bg2 were unique in its openness"

 

No, it isn't. Tons of games are as openn if not mroe open than BG2. How does that make it unique?

 

 

"chuckle* am recalling when toee were first released and the codexians near universal applauded cain's efforts..."

 

Um, by and large, the Codex still loves TOEE.

[Gromnir]

go after irenicus 'cause he tortured you? is even less convincing. let him rot in spellhold, and if he ever gets out... well, we can always move to kanada.

 

as for bg2 openness... depends on what you mean. is some games, such as fallout3, that got a big map with near infinite encounters. bg2, on the other hand, had actual stuff worth doing. argue if you will, but scope is as yet unparalleled.

 

as for da ogres and orcs/darkspawn... the argument is not that they is d&d rip-offs, but rather that they is lotr rip-offs. is a valid arguemtn, but so what? da also has elves and dwarves. da setting were not trying for genuine original. heck, Gromnir cautioned 'em 'gainst complete original. biowarians saw fan reaction to ps:t setting. too alien... too unfamiliar... no dawrves or elves. fact that da uses lotr ogres and orcs ain't bad... save that the biowarians not realize that they gave their darkspawn a similar genesis as tolkien orcs. gaider honest thought he were adding a new twist... which is kinda funny.

 

and yeah, codexians, as a whole, is far more willing to criticize toee now than they were when it original were released.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[RangerSG]

Boo

 

BG2 had no "two hour grinds"-- do you recall Watcher's Keep? Which was nothing if not an endless dungeon crawl. See also Durgan's Tower in BG1. The long dungeon crawl is a staple of the RPG. You like it or you don't. I thought the Deep Roads was very effective. My PCs invariably look around it going..."I'm going to end up somewhere down here, aren't I?"

 

And the lore on the darkspawn ought to have been enough to convince a person they weren't D&D orcs...of course, let's be clear, D&D didn't invent orcs...or virtually any monster in the compendium. So saying this or that "copies" a D&D monster is nonsense. If you want to discuss roots of fantasy, let's be honest about where to look.

 

Monte,

 

It's way too early to judge the DA toolset. It took years for the IE modding community to get started. It took over a year for NWN's mod community to get serious. NWN2's took just as long (and still hasn't matched NWN1's, and probably never will). I'm not going to say DA will have a great toolset or won't. But talking about it, at this point, is nonsense. The heightmap system requires a serious investment in time. Similar to the increase in the learning curve from NWN1 to NWN2. Many of the NWN1 modders I've chatted with have said it's going to take a while to get familiar with what the toolset can do. So "wait and see" is the only answer there.

[Maria Caliban]

When it comes to modding, I doubt Dragon Age will ever meet or exceed Neverwinter Nights in having a large, active community. This isn't because Neverwinter Nights is more popular or a better game - it's BioWare's worst game in my opinoin - but the toolset is easy to work with. With NWN, I spent three hours going through a toutorial and ended up with:

1. Three new areas

2. A couple of NPCs, two of whom gave you a quest.

3. Two combat encounters.

4. Two questlines with appropriate journal entries.

 

It's a complete mod, albeit a simple one that would take all of ten minutes to play.

 

With Dragon Age, I've worked in the toolset doing tutorials for over eight hours and still have nothing.

[RPGmasterBoo]

am not gonna convince boo. am noticing that his complaints is largely same as the ones he had Before he played da... based on feedback from others we s'pose. makes seem likes he went in with preconceptions and confirmed those preconceptions. *chuckle* am recalling when toee were first released and the codexians near universal applauded cain's efforts... 'cause they felt they had to? years later we gets a more honest assessment, but we has learned to never underestimate the impact o' preconceptions and initial bias.

 

Didn't know much about DA before I started playing it. Only had one friends comment that he "too often felt like he was working, rather than playing" and that "the plot was generic". Didn't take it too seriously because he did like Mass Effect (which I didn't), so I though he had other criteria.

 

I'm sad to see he was right, or at least I feel the same way he does.

 

I hope you don't presume me so clueless that after having played so many RPG's I can't formulate my own opinion.

 

 

@RangerSG:

 

Grinding is a term used in video gaming to describe the process of engaging in repetitive and/or non-entertaining gameplay in order to gain access to other features within the game

 

That's exactly what going through DA's main quest hubs feels like (for me). I recall certain parts of Baldurs Gate 1 and Throne of Bhaal being like that, but never felt that way about any of the content in BGII. Watcher's keep was the most fun dungeon I've ever played. At the very least on the first playthrough the novelty didn't wear off. (though much of it hasnt worn off even today)

 

Dragon Age on the other hand feels stale and deja vu.

 

** Although the BG series is first time I encountered DnD, so I guess it wouldn't be as novel had I played the gold box games and other such titles.

 

I've nothing against dungeon crawling, but there are interesting dungeons and boring dungeons. So far, what I've seen in DA was boring, after reaching a certain point. EG: the entire second level in the ruins (brescillian forest) felt unnecessary, then, half the cultist temple could have been excluded...

 

Actually I'm not even arguing that the setup of DA's dungeons is boring, its just that should be at least 30% shorter.

[RPGmasterBoo]

"The darkspawn are just Orcs in disugise."

Darkspawn have very little in common with D&D orcs.

 

LotR orcs.

 

biowarians saw fan reaction to ps:t setting. too alien... too unfamiliar... no dawrves or elves.

 

Which fans? What's wrong with Torment's setting? I'd think the lack of elves and dwarves an advantage.

Edited February 14, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Gromnir]

biowarians saw fan reaction to ps:t setting. too alien... too unfamiliar... no dawrves or elves.

 

Which fans? What's wrong with Torment's setting? I'd think the lack of elves and dwarves an advantage.

 

 

*chuckle*

 

you is kidding, right? ps:t sales sucked. frequent complaint on ps:t boards were regarding lack o' familiar d&d races and disappointment with alien setting. fact that boo and Gromnir liked ps:t setting mean nothing if ps:t sales were bad. takes genuine dumb developer to ignore mistakes of past. if you honest believes that lack of elves and dwarves is a good thing, and you wanna criticize bio for using such stuff, then you is clearly arguing from a position o' ignorance. ps:t is Gromnir's favorite game... am not thinking it is the best crpg we ever played, but it is our favorite. even so, there is reasons it not get no sequel or expansion.

 

"I hope you don't presume me so clueless that after having played so many RPG's I can't formulate my own opinion. "

 

if you says so... am simply observing that the complaints you shared before playing is complaints you share now. would be silly to complete ignore the mirroring.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[RPGmasterBoo]

I wasn't around on PS:T boards. From what I gather the game sold 400,000 copies which wasn't so bad at the time. I quote this from some dev article I read ages ago.

I'm surprised that DA has such a hopelessly generic DnD type setting, but I don't consider it something to criticize the game about. Its okay. The LotR type plot "lets gather all the good races to battle the ancient evil" is what irritates me far more. That they couldnt come up with anything better is genuinely disappointing.

 

 

*The single serious complaint I had before playing was the inclusion of gay romances - as you remember.

 

Btw since you mentioned the main plot motivations sometime earlier lets compare (if you didn't then I apologise because I misread):

 

DA: you're recruited, forcibly or willingly into a policeman type role for the whole world.

Then you find out that they kill people who change their mind in cold blood.

Then you find out you're gonna live several decades less then you normally would because of the poison they make you drink when you joined.

WTF? Why? Who in their right mind wants that??

Why would I join this senseless cutthroat organization? The mafia is more lenient than that.

 

BGII: your childhood friend and companion is kidnapped by a powerful individual. you have to go after her. You're given three possible motivations:

1. to help a friend in need

2. to find out about your heritage, since he knows mora about it. This equates to power

3. pure revenge

4. a combination of above

 

I'm not saying its Shakespeare but helping a friend or desiring personal power is a much more belivable motivation. Its also much more down to earth.

 

At least Shepard signed up for his duty. The Warden is either drafted unwillingly or is misled about what its going to cost him.

 

My first desire was to kill Duncan for being such a bastard, not the darkspawn.

Edited February 14, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[RangerSG]

I wasn't around on PS:T boards. From what I gather the game sold 400,000 copies which wasn't so bad at the time. I quote this from some dev article I read ages ago.

I'm surprised that DA has such a hopelessly generic DnD type setting, but I don't consider it something to criticize the game about. Its okay. The LotR type plot "lets gather all the good races to battle the ancient evil" is what irritates me far more. That they couldnt come up with anything better is genuinely disappointing.

 

 

*The single serious complaint I had before playing was the inclusion of gay romances - as you remember.

 

And I'm tried of hearing how "Gathering the good races to battle ancient evil" was LotR's plot. It wasn't. "Take the Ring to Mount Doom to destroy the ancient enemy" was LotR's plot. The "good races" battles within the plot were a sum total of 3, and all humans. You only learned the other races fought to from the appendixes. Rewriting LotR's plot to make your argument only shows that you're watering all fantasy to the lowest common denominator--which you can do with any two pieces of literature and call them "clones." All literature has tropes. Whether they are used well or poorly is a different question. But expecting fantasy literature to not have a quest narrative is something like expecting wisdom literature to not be written in proverbial forms. It isn't going to happen.

 

And DA's plot owes a lot more to aSoIaF than any other fantasy work, to be perfectly honest. The competing political factions, the "larger evil" being masked most of the plot by worldly politics. It's pretty clear that Martin was where Gaider was doing his plot cribbing from. Good and bad on that score. If you like Martin, you probably like the main plot of DA. If you're burnt out on Martin, you're probably thinking the plot is running thin.

 

And if you're comparing it to LotR--sorry, you're cribbing from pre-game criticism that really ends up being, "I'm tired of fantasy role-playing." And if you are, then you bought the wrong GENRE. And no one should be blamed for that than yourself, since it claimed to be a fantasy RPG on the tin. The "LotR" comparisons are honestly paper-thin, and in the end pretty much end up at the point of where every fantasy setting comes into play.

 

And you thought Watcher's was the greatest dungeon ever. And I thought it was overlong, bloated, and only worth doing for the stat boosts and game-breaking gear you got gifted as part of the game. And your NPCs added next to nothing to the experience. Certainly less than Oghren and Shale do to the Deep Roads.

 

I loved BG2. But to say it didn't grind or its NPCs were so much better or such...erm...no. It was epic and huge and unique at the time. But there's a lot of nostalgia that goes into our view of that game. Not that nostalgia is bad. But it was hardly flawless.

 

And I'm sorry, I'm in the camp that PS:T never appealed to. It wasn't because it was a different setting. It was just too slow a pace. It took too long to get anywhere. Similar to SoU's problem, few people are going to care how awesome the end may or may not be if the beginning is a steaming pile of rubbish.

[Gromnir]

I wasn't around on PS:T boards. From what I gather the game sold 400,000 copies which wasn't so bad at the time. I quote this from some dev article I read ages ago.

I'm surprised that DA has such a hopelessly generic DnD type setting, but I don't consider it something to criticize the game about. Its okay. The LotR type plot "lets gather all the good races to battle the ancient evil" is what irritates me far more. That they couldnt come up with anything better is genuinely disappointing.

 

 

*The single serious complaint I had before playing was the inclusion of gay romances - as you remember.

 

 

actually, we has heard numbers for ps:t in excess of 600k... but that not matter. sales during first two quarters following release is what publishers care 'bout, and ps:t sales during first two quarters following release were not what interplay had hoped to see from a major release. sell a million copies once you package with soul calibur and price at less than $10 per unit? *snort* expansions and sequels is virtual free money. if you don't do it is likely 'cause sales did not merit.

 

as for plot... fantasy and sci-fi plot is almost invariably silly. is more than a few people who can criticize the highlander-esque bhaalspawn plots o' the bg games. biowarians beat on macbeth parallels in bg2 likes a drum, but virtual nobody got anyway... evil wizard goes mad with power and must be stopped 'lest unimaginable terribleness ensues. star wars became most popular movie franchise 'cause o' original plot? HA! is oldest story ever told... repackaged and put in space. heck, anime does reverse... lame recycled characters combined with wacky attempts at original plot = epic lame.

 

oh, and da gets points for the andraste stuff. dump the traditional fantasy gods and instead adopt a faith-based religion is a step in right direction.

 

once we hear folks talk of crpg plot we cannot help but begin to chuckle. plot is far less important than character. tolkien and guy kay and... nobody.

 

"I'm not saying its Shakespeare but helping a friend or desiring personal power is a much more belivable motivation. Its also much more down to earth."

 

more believable? am not sure on that score... seems similar. in da you got taint and darkspawn can sense you. a blight is coming... which means many darkspawn is coming and you and allister is now prime targets. am thinking Gromnir is probable pretty motivated to either fight or flee. no flee option... just as bg2 not give us an ignore option. in bg2 we can track down an uber-powerful wizard who is s'posed locked away in alcatraz. again, why exactly would we do so? he kicked our arse and the kiesters of a half dozen powerful wizards the last time we met. he is sharing a cell with imoen maybe? fine, hire a lawyer if you want to get her out... writ o' habeas corpus or somesuch, but we sure as heck ain't gonna break Into a wizards prison. as for our heritage? so what? we knows we is a child o' bhaal and eventually we is gonna have to higlander our way to demi/quasi godhood... or death. whoopie-ding on the big revelations from irenicus.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited February 15, 2010 by Gromnir

[RPGmasterBoo]

@Ranger SG

 

First of all the gathering of the good races was the smaller part of the LotR plot. Sure the ring was more important, but this was hardly unimportant.

 

Unlike Tolkien who basically created and completed the entire genre in one extremely well written book, those who followed were just pale shadows. So yes, I don't like Martin.

 

No, I'm not entirely tired of fantasy role playing *hint* look at sig *end hint*.

 

BGII uses a lot of tropes. On the flip side it has an intensely personal plot which in my book along with PS:T elevates it above everything else. It does use cliche's but it offers something different as well. You aren't after all saving anything, but on the road to becoming a god - which isn't a common thing in fantasy.

 

If PS:T doesnt appeal to you, then I could just as well say: "you love standard fantasy fodder, so much in fact you're willing to disregard the best video game narrative ever written". Because its too slow? Not enough flashy lights for you, what?

It turns out that the entire GENRE in your opinion is a collection of stupid, derivative, fodder and if I don't like that fodder I should just quit?

 

That would be fine if it were true. But its not. There are better things in the genre than the generic hell of Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, Temple of Elemental Evil, Diablo etc. DA is probably by far the best of all such generic titles, but that makes it no less generic.

 

@Gromnir: Its all silly yes, but at least BGII dared to be different.

Even Torment for what it was made little sense sometimes. How the hell did a concept such as Mortality all of a sudden become self aware and vindictive to boot. It couldn't. It was there because the game needed a villain and even then its not the most logical of villains.

Regardless Torment had many great ideas, and what it did it did well. Its unique and that's what makes it so good. BGII is less unique and more reliant on tropes, but its not a 100% cliche.

Almost everything released afterwards is.

Edited February 15, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Sand]

Torment, for the most part, is a good game but it is kind of like the War and Peace of CRPGs. It is a good read once in a great while but a steady diet of such wordiness can be boring. Great games have a balance between action and wordiness. Torment is not balanced in that regard. Very few games are. In my opinion Dragon Age is close, but not quite there. NWN2 was closer to that balance than Dragon Age, especially with the first expansion.

[Gromnir]

It does use cliche's but it offers something different as well. You aren't after all saving anything, but on the road to becoming a god - which isn't a common thing in fantasy.

 

uh huh. you see this as a strength of bg2?

 

okie dokie.

 

and again, Gromnir were one o' the folks that liked ps:t, but we ain't foolish enough to ignore sales and feedback. can get good writing and w/o planescape wackiness. set planescape in a more familiar setting with elves and dwarves and it sudden would have been bad? make ravel a more traditional babba-yagga witch and lady of pain an enigmatic angel/demon, but keep all the nameless one angst and navel-gazing. has you really lost ps:t essence in so doing?

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[RPGmasterBoo]

Torment is at the same time a great achievement and a bad game. It steps so far out of its form that it becomes an interactive novel, but its so good at it that few complaints are really valid.

 

Personally I think its as close as video games can get to art that isn't primarily of a visual kind. Torment really takes you to another world, which is a common promise but rarely delivered.

[RPGmasterBoo]

It does use cliche's but it offers something different as well. You aren't after all saving anything, but on the road to becoming a god - which isn't a common thing in fantasy.

 

uh huh. you see this as a strength of bg2?

 

okie dokie.

 

 

It boils down to this. I always role play an egoistical character that cares more about himself (and his immediate companions) than abstract notions such as saving the world. I can't identify with that sort of thing or any idea larger than the character I'm playing as. The character is always good towards others, but those that are "there and then". Vague concepts of common good don't interest him.

 

BGII allows me to do that. I find it superior because of it.

 

Torment allows me to do that as well.

 

When I role play I want it to revolve around me .

 

Petty? Perhaps, but everyone is entitled to his own role playing style. I think its much harder (and riskier) to pull off a personal plot. Torment did and look at how it ended up. Regardless if done well it scores major points with me.

That's all there is to it.

Edited February 15, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[RangerSG]

It does use cliche's but it offers something different as well. You aren't after all saving anything, but on the road to becoming a god - which isn't a common thing in fantasy.

 

uh huh. you see this as a strength of bg2?

 

okie dokie.

 

 

It boils down to this. I always role play an egoistical character that cares more about himself (and his immediate companions) than abstract notions such as saving the world. I can't identify with that sort of thing or any idea larger than the character I'm playing as. The character is always good towards others, but those that are "there and then". Vague concepts of common good don't interest him.

 

BGII allows me to do that. I find it superior because of it.

 

Torment allows me to do that as well.

 

When I role play I want it to revolve around me .

 

Petty? Perhaps, but everyone is entitled to his own role playing style. I think its much harder (and riskier) to pull off a personal plot. Torment did and look at how it ended up. Regardless if done well it scores major points with me.

That's all there is to it.

 

But as Gromnir said, in DA you *ought* to be motivated to stop the Blight. Even if you do consider the "run away" option, where are you going to go? 30 years later, you're going to have to fight them (when it's worse for you) or become one (epically bad). I'd say you have far superior personal motivation to do the plot in DA than you do being a selfish bastard in BG2. Imoen? So what. Irenicus? Let him rot in spellhold. Ironically, the kind of character you're describing fits the plot in DA better, from where I sit, than BG2. That was the problem playing evil in BG2, why the heck would I go to Spellhold when Irenicus already locked away in the best place for him? At least in DA, I know that I'm being an anti-hero because the alternative is worse.

 

And Tolkien didn't "start" fantasy literature either. The Quest narrative is far older than him. And even saying the "unite the good races" was a minor plot of LotR is making far too much of it. The movie made more of it than the books did. Gondor didn't need "uniting," it was being attacked. Actually, in the books, one could make the case that no one "united" other than Gondor or Rohan. There's a reason the "Last Alliance" ended the Second Age. As for the difference between a trope and cliche, well I think Jim Butcher said it best. "If it works, it's a trope. If it doesn't, it's a cliche." Boiled down, all literature uses tropes. Sometimes you avert them or subvert them to a degree. But they're always there. The only question is, "Did it work?" By and large, the tropes in DA do, better than they do in any RPG I've played since BG2.

 

I didn't like PS:T because I didn't think it worked as a game. I didn't buy the motivation for the plot. I didn't see the need for the quest. Hence, no motivation. It's fun to read the dialogue. But honestly, there's little motivation to play it. And as a point of fact, most of the sales were long after the game exited the timeframe of "on-market." Most of it was back-order by word of mouth from people who'd played BG2. And if you want "non-standard" fantasy, I love Kay, and Steven Erikson (who's about as non-standard as fantasy gets these days). In fact, the one MMO I'd ever be sold on would be a Malaz-verse setting. So it's not "wordiness" that turned me off on PS:T. It was pacing. There's a difference. A game has a different balance than a book. It goes with using a visual medium. That's what was forgotten in PS:T, and that's why it didn't become more than a cult-fave game. I love the Dresden Files. But if Jim Butcher tried to make an 800 page doorstopper with Harry, I think it would flop. Why? Because Dresden isn't "epic-fantasy" paced. It's "Adventure novel" paced. PS:T was set as an adventure, but paced as a novel. Thus it played for lots of people in a very turgid fashion.