Dragon Age, looking towards Inquisition

[Darth Rosenberg]

The praise Dragon Age II gets for its combat puzzles me, since it is the same as in Origins. The only real difference is that on the console versions you need to hammer a button in order to do basic attacks.

Not sure if it's been pointed out, but that's not the case. When the demo was released there was no auto-attack toggle, but come day1 it was thankfully back in.

As for DA:I? I've not heard or looked at news for it for months, and I'll try not to before it comes out. I loved both Origins and DAII, and have never once been let down by BioWare.

Everyone has their own take on how the series has been handled, but for me almost everything II changed was a positive (barring the combat design, as some depth/strategy was stripped from it). My canon Hawke was a rogueish female mage using the awesome default design, and Jo Wyatt's voicework helped make her one of my favourite PC's in any RPG. I'll be looking forward to Inquisition's voiced PC['s], but I doubt they'll be able to top FemHawke, for me.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I really enjoyed Dragon Age Origins..closest thing we got to Baldur's Gate II in a long time.

DA2 on the other hand was quite disappointing and the copy paste dungeons didn't help one bit.

One hit and one miss so they got a chance to redeem themselves with the third one. I'm looking forward to playing it, but it's not my first choice if I had to choose between the RPG's that come out this year.

 

[Amaror]

Considering how much utter shit Dragon Age 2 was it will take a lot of reviews and positive opinions from fans to get me to buy Inquisition.

Sadly it seems they are going with the same crappy over-the-top AWESOMEBUTTON combat like in Dragon Age 2, which is just boring as hell. I want to fell like i am in an epic medieval world, not some crappy japanese anime with giant swords.

Edit: Oh and i almost forgot that stupid dialogue wheel that takes away every meaningfull conversation that could be had in DAO, since you always just choose whichever option fits your morality.

 

[Augustine]

People say this, but why? The only reasons people ever give is because they move away from plodding, lifeless RPG playstyles to something that feels more real and impactful, and that they dumb down the "RPG mechanics" which they never want to quantify or explain.

It is simple. Dragon Age 2 was, to me, a joke. Specifically? Blatant recycling of assets ad nauseum. Enemies teleporting in from every side, eliminating most of tactical thought to combat. Ridiculous "major descision" in the end which amounts to nothing but the order in which you kill final bosses. Repetitiveness of it all, exasperated by unchanging scenery. Yes, it had its moments - but that makes it obvious that Bioware focused on a few areas, and then blatantly halfassed the rest.

ME3 was merely OK.
Time had proven that Bioware's claims and promises have little correlation with reality. Its a shame, really. But that's where we are.
Besides, refusal to take a company's on its word hardly can be called a drastic reaction.
It is a rational response from a consumer.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Time had proven that Bioware's claims and promises have little correlation with reality. Its a shame, really. But that's where we are.
Besides, refusal to take a company's on its word hardly can be called a drastic reaction.
It is a rational response from a consumer.

Subjectivity is as subjectivity does - I loved both DAII and ME3. But, re your quote: isn't it a bit silly to be listening to claims and promises of companies? Our response to a game should surely be based on the thing itself (I think the world of Pete Molyneux but I've never listened to anything he's said re his own games, pre release). What were you expecting of DAII?

 

[nevarran]

Me too. Love the DA series. I've enjoyed both games, the books, even the animation movie.
From what I've seen so far, the new game looks great.

And yes, Varic is the man

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

If the combat in DA 2 was not utter hack and slash BS I might have liked it....I prefer controlling my team as a group I can place where I want.... DA1 had more promise to it but was on the dull side still its a better game hands down flaws and all.

 

[Frostnatt]

I played every single Bioware RPG and expansion atleast two times. Dragon Age 1, probably three or four. Baldurs Gate, I lost count on how many times i played. Bought most of them day 1, or atleast within a week. I'm not even that mad at the Mass Effect 3 ending. It was bad, but i played many games and seen many movies with bad endings, 99 % of the ME series was still excellent. Neverwinter Nights had a bad main plot, but was still enjoyable.

There is only one game from Bioware that i never finished, and probably never will. Dragon Age 2... There where so many design flaws and the idiotic changes and "streamlining" of the combat system was just too much. I will be VERY carefull before i decide to buy DA3 or not.

 

[DEAD34345]

It took a good few attempts for me to get into Dragon Age: Origins, but when I finally did I adored it. Then, Dragon Age 2 happened, and playing it immediately after finishing the first game really helped make the experience all the more shocking. I can only say that those who enjoyed any aspect of that game are completely alien to me. I just don't get it. At all.

There was a time when I'd buy anything Bioware put out without hesitation, but that time is long gone. I can't even trust them to attempt to make a good game any more, both Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 were half-baked and thrown out the door. Now I just don't care about the company or its series, it's a great shame.

I might pick up Dragon Age 3 after a few months, if reviewers and players seem to think it is genuinely good. Maybe...

 

[Fdzzaigl]

I can address this. They've said this has made a return, and did a showcase of it briefly in one of their convention shows (I'm not sure which one because it's been a while and I was mostly just looking for gameplay videos).

That's cool. Dragon Age 2 really became a much better game for me when a community mod made that available again (though it made you overpowered).

 

[Augustine]

But, re your quote: isn't it a bit silly to be listening to claims and promises of companies? Our response to a game should surely be based on the thing itself (I think the world of Pete Molyneux but I've never listened to anything he's said re his own games, pre release). What were you expecting of DAII?

Silly? I am not yet so jaded so as to distrust indiscriminately. But trust must be earned.

I already explained my chief grievances with DA2. In general, I expected a standard of quality to be held MUCH higher considering the resources available to BW. Aside from visuals and certain amount of streamlining, sequel lowered this bar compared to the original.
It boggles my mind that there are people that don't see it.
There was a rather striking article from way back when, stressing the claim that Dragon Age Origins was a fluke, and why there will never be another one like it. This confused me back then. Now I see veracity of it.

 

[Xjin]

You're right, Origins wasn't over-the-top. It was below the bottom. If you practice actual melee combat, then you'd know that if people fought that slow in real life, they'd get killed almost immediately. There's realism and then there's making it simply plodding. Archery and dual-wielding were fairly properly paced, but they swing a greatsword like it weighs 30lbs, and a sword and board fighter swings their weapon as if their opponent isn't going to dodge or block at all. Like the most casual attack will strike.

Yes it was slow, but a good sword and shield combatant would be quite hard to follow (let alone animate) out side of just bog standard guard or hold move sets. Even then they slowed it down, but hey I don't expect much melee realism from WRPG. The two handed animation was poor all around outside of two of the special attacks. The old tri-bash is animated right but slowed down and lacking well animated opposing character reaction. The two handed critical strike move is a true to form zweihander heavy kill blow. Funny as it is shown only slightly slower than it should be if done by Sten. It dose lack the cross check/ Ricasso pummel bash that it uses to set up the kill blow. Sadly it lacks the body cleaving.


But on to what I was talking about! The way they showed the kill blows and move sets -even slowed down- were ungodly better that that anime splattered abortion that was DA:II. Swards were waved about like a meth addict were using it, two hand attacks were all fast power blows or anime swings that would dislocate your shoulder if they connected with anything of note or just plane tire you out/pull muscles after a few swings, and the staff attacks were poorly animated for what was shown. And the teleport blade run that makes 10 mobs explode in a Mortal Kombat like fountain of gibbs. Blah

 

[Trinab]

I always look at it story-wise.

Dragon Age 1 was rather generic; the standard, 'only you can stop the forces of evil/save the world,' plot. However I never got the impression that said plot was what Bioware's writers really wanted. I think they had it mainly because it was expected, and what they needed to get the sales and whatnot to justify the world-building they did.

Dragon Age 2 and its story, I think was closer to what they wanted. Something unique and different, and I respect Dragon Age 2 for attempting it. It's a more personal story, one man/woman's rise to power, and the sacrifices/challenges they had to do to get there.

What Bioware is (was?) attempting to make was a grand fantasy epic, filled with intrigue, no clear right and wrong, and complex Geo-political situations.

Looking at the grand scheme of the lore, the Blight of the first game is almost a historical footnote. It's end objective, (storywise,) was to get one guy on the throne and escalate tensions to their real conflict they had in mind, the mage/templar wars.

Dragon Age 2 was their introduction to this, and for that, I give them props. Unfortunately it suffered from hurried production, and the gameplay and story were weaker because of it. If it was delayed a year or two, it would have been a mind-blowing game in terms of story that we have not seen before in a video game.

I am interested in seeing what they will do with Inquisition, as I do think it is close to their grand vision from the start. I admit I am no longer a fan, or a person who pre-orders games. I'm almost a retired gamer. I am interested to see if they can pull this off more academically then anything. It has the potential for something grand, but I suspect it will not live up to it. I find most video game stories do best when the scope matches what the gameplay can deliver.

With Dragon Age, they are attempting epic fantasy novel level of scope and scale, and I've yet to see an RPG that can reproduce that satisfyingly. RPGs have always done best as singular personal stories. Baldur's Gate, Planescape, these are personal stories that happen to be set in a world, and may influence it at the end. Sort of a 'bottom-top' technique. I feel with Dragon Age they are attempting a 'top-bottom' and the story will suffer because they will have to dumb down elements to fit the RPG mold.

If they pull it off? Awesome. I'll be the first to endorse it. To experience the full epic fantasy narrative in a video game would be most pleasing.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

I am not yet so jaded so as to distrust indiscriminately. But trust must be earned.

I'm not sure I'd the call complete distrust of the games industry being jaded. More like 'quite sensible'. That aside, BioWare earned my trust with KotOR, and have kept it ever since.

In general, I expected a standard of quality to be held MUCH higher considering the resources available to BW. Aside from visuals and certain amount of streamlining, sequel lowered this bar compared to the original.

It was a rushjob, true, but - and this really isn't me being sarky - I do think it's the best rushjob I've ever played, and it's remarkable how good it turned out.

Cookie cutter locales and no gear customisation are probably the most obvious examples. Ditto the idea of Kirkwall over a decade not quite living up to the execution of said idea; adding a few vines and changing the position of the sun is a pathetic way to essentially mark the passage of time... I'm still surprised by how poorly they approached the city, in terms of just giving you the whole thing and barely branching its layout as the game developed.

Those things are indicative of either a lazy developer, or a rushed one.

And yet, where it mattered for me, DAII either matched Origins or improved upon it. DA:O's combat is a little deeper (DAII's use of enemy waves is very poor), but the more kinetic animations and the control scheme on 360 were much more engaging. I think both games nerfed classes: Origins rogues are finicky builds who are often useless on the battlefield. Ditto mages, who can be easier to build well, but are entirely dull in combat. II, meanwhile, overpowered rogues and completely broke warriors (also, the specificity of the other characters limits your tactical choices).

The Warden wasn't a character, he/she was just a cipher for the player. And that's fine for people who prefer that in their role-players, but for me Hawke made for a much more engaging narrative to experience, and allowed for more dramatic stagings of dialogue sequences.

I won't bang on about it, but whilst both games had excellent writing and characters, I preferred the more personal, less end-of-days (well, till the third act) narrative of FemHawke just trying to make her way in Kirkwall, as she gains power - sometimes intentionally, oftentimes not - and begins to rub shoulders with the stubborn oafs who are trying to run the city. It had one of BioWare's dumbest ever sequences as far as I'm concerned, but even that crappy plot development didn't stop it being one of the most satisfying narratives in any RPG I've played.

I'll remember Lels, Zev, Shale and co from Origins. But I'll remember 'my' participation as FemHawke in DAII more fondly, alongside Bella, Merrill, Varric an co.

As long as Inquisition doesn't drop the ball completely in its post-Skyrim enthusiasm for believing every game needs to be more open-world, I'll be chuffed so long as they provide a well written/performed lead PC, and a memorable cast.

 

[Plasticaprinae]

I am neutral or excited toward DA3 except for ONE THING. The damned conversation wheel. I like being able to read everything out and apply my imaginary voice to the character. I like being able to know what I'm saying instead of playing toward "diplomacy" or "Aggressive" because things aren't that black and white! Having myself -be- the character is fun, and having voiced player characters just takes me out of it. If they just want to clarify the tone behind each statement just say the emotion next to the dialogue option.

I felt that it was fine in mass effect since my femshep had the charisma and -mostly- did what I wanted her to do. But I viewed her as a different character and not as someone I roleplayed as.

 

[Augustine]

Spoiler

I am not yet so jaded so as to distrust indiscriminately. But trust must be earned.

I'm not sure I'd the call complete distrust of the games industry being jaded. More like 'quite sensible'. That aside, BioWare earned my trust with KotOR, and have kept it ever since.

In general, I expected a standard of quality to be held MUCH higher considering the resources available to BW. Aside from visuals and certain amount of streamlining, sequel lowered this bar compared to the original.

It was a rushjob, true, but - and this really isn't me being sarky - I do think it's the best rushjob I've ever played, and it's remarkable how good it turned out.

Cookie cutter locales and no gear customisation are probably the most obvious examples. Ditto the idea of Kirkwall over a decade not quite living up to the execution of said idea; adding a few vines and changing the position of the sun is a pathetic way to essentially mark the passage of time... I'm still surprised by how poorly they approached the city, in terms of just giving you the whole thing and barely branching its layout as the game developed.

Those things are indicative of either a lazy developer, or a rushed one.

And yet, where it mattered for me, DAII either matched Origins or improved upon it. DA:O's combat is a little deeper (DAII's use of enemy waves is very poor), but the more kinetic animations and the control scheme on 360 were much more engaging. I think both games nerfed classes: Origins rogues are finicky builds who are often useless on the battlefield. Ditto mages, who can be easier to build well, but are entirely dull in combat. II, meanwhile, overpowered rogues and completely broke warriors (also, the specificity of the other characters limits your tactical choices).

The Warden wasn't a character, he/she was just a cipher for the player. And that's fine for people who prefer that in their role-players, but for me Hawke made for a much more engaging narrative to experience, and allowed for more dramatic stagings of dialogue sequences.

I won't bang on about it, but whilst both games had excellent writing and characters, I preferred the more personal, less end-of-days (well, till the third act) narrative of FemHawke just trying to make her way in Kirkwall, as she gains power - sometimes intentionally, oftentimes not - and begins to rub shoulders with the stubborn oafs who are trying to run the city. It had one of BioWare's dumbest ever sequences as far as I'm concerned, but even that crappy plot development didn't stop it being one of the most satisfying narratives in any RPG I've played.

I'll remember Lels, Zev, Shale and co from Origins. But I'll remember 'my' participation as FemHawke in DAII more fondly, alongside Bella, Merrill, Varric an co.

As long as Inquisition doesn't drop the ball completely in its post-Skyrim enthusiasm for believing every game needs to be more open-world, I'll be chuffed so long as they provide a well written/performed lead PC, and a memorable cast.

I see the angle you are coming from, somewhat.
I suppose, the arbitrarily teleporting foes, coupled with endless recycling areas ever remained as painful reminders of the fact that I am playing a game, which killed my ability to immerse into one thing Bioware prides itself in - writing. Everything was a pointless, crude pantomime filler between story/dialogue gems. Though in the very climax of the story, even the final resolution of the conflict in the city was incredibly contrived, that left a lasting sour taste about the story as a whole.

 

[TT Kairen]

I am neutral or excited toward DA3 except for ONE THING. The damned conversation wheel. I like being able to read everything out and apply my imaginary voice to the character. I like being able to know what I'm saying instead of playing toward "diplomacy" or "Aggressive" because things aren't that black and white! Having myself -be- the character is fun, and having voiced player characters just takes me out of it. If they just want to clarify the tone behind each statement just say the emotion next to the dialogue option.

I feel like that is a personal preference. A silent protagonist actually removes me from the experience, since I tend to make a character personality before I begin playing and act that out, rather than trying to project myself onto it. Without voice, inflection, emotion, it just falls flat to me.

Then there was that they made skills largely pointless compared to just cover shooting.

Not everyone likes shooting and button mashing. Some of us miss when stats and decisions felt meaningful as in the first Mass Effect, and when our characters truly felt like our own and when tactics in battle mattered, like in Dragon Age: Origins. If we wanted to play a shooter, we would. An RPG is a different experience all together.

Blatant lies. There is no class where simply shooting is more effective than skillful use of powers. Choices of playstyle were taken over simple numbers increases, but to say the numbers meant nothing is just hyperbole. You cannot expect a real-time action game to have more relying on numbers than player input, unless the gameplay is absolute tripe. I can't even understand what you mean by this. Are you saying powers, tactics, and movement had no place in 2 or 3? That it was just cover-based shooting and nothing else? Because that is such an untrue statement it boggles my mind.

 

[thejboy88]

I liked both games a great deal, and I felt that they had some of the best characters and dialogue I've ever seen in video games in recent history.

As long as DAI can carry on that tradition, as well as show real consequences to the choices I made in the previous games, I'll be happy with it no matter what flaws it may have.

 

[Augustine]

Then there was that they made skills largely pointless compared to just cover shooting.

Not everyone likes shooting and button mashing. Some of us miss when stats and decisions felt meaningful as in the first Mass Effect, and when our characters truly felt like our own and when tactics in battle mattered, like in Dragon Age: Origins. If we wanted to play a shooter, we would. An RPG is a different experience all together.

Blatant lies. There is no class where simply shooting is more effective than skillful use of powers. Choices of playstyle were taken over simple numbers increases, but to say the numbers meant nothing is just hyperbole. You cannot expect a real-time action game to have more relying on numbers than player input, unless the gameplay is absolute tripe. I can't even understand what you mean by this. Are you saying powers, tactics, and movement had no place in 2 or 3? That it was just cover-based shooting and nothing else? Because that is such an untrue statement it boggles my mind.

Mcoffey has a point. Shift afrom ME1 to ME2/3 is quite obviously a shift in shooter/action direction. But exchanging hyporbolae is not a conversation and will lead nowhere. Unless that's the goal, of course.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Some of the party members were good like Varric and Marril, but out side a few inter party banter bits they were dull or just bad.

Compared to what?

Morrigan.. the free-spirited witch who hates religion.. except when confronted with a frothing maniac ranting about how Andraste has been reborn?

Leliana, whose one.. and only one.. defining characteristic is that she's religious. But I guess she's a rogue, so OMG original!

Alistair? The most shamefaced and blatant wooby character in all of gaming?

Zevran. Who has exactly the same character arc as Isabella, but with less detail or connection to the plot?

Let's face it.. None of the party members in Origins have anything like the amount of character development as those in Dragon Age 2. That's not a bad thing. There isn't nearly as much party dialogue in Origins. What there is is great, and it hints at great things. Oghren's story is incredibly fucking beautiful (until someone decided to bend that over and skip the lube because God-damn-it we need to rush out a shitty expansion pack).

There are many reasons to be disappointed with DA2, but if you were disappointed with the characters, then your standards might be a little off. Characters in DA2 were often less likeable, but that doesn't mean the same thing as bad.