Dragon Age : Origins - An utter disappointment ?

[Starke]

Blah blah plot and stuff.

My god, Bioware is ripping themselves off... again!

Okay, in fairness, that seems to be the plot of basically every Bioware game since... actually, pretty much all of them with the possible exception of Baldur's Gate (1 & 2) and MDK2.

Exactly! So it's kind of silly to try and say one has a superior plot over the other. Their over all game mechanics are different and they come from different genres, but their basic plot structure is pretty much the exact same thing. (Even though I have an embarrassing soft spot for the way Dragon Age was written. Stop looking at me like that, I know it's horribly written. It's just become a guilty pleasure.)

And I heatedly agree with everything else in your post, but don't feel like quoting it again.

Yeah, my comment to you was more snark than anything else. Though, at a game design level, my immediate response to the similarities between DAO and Mass Effect would be that it's the exact same go to points 1, 2, 3, and 4 in any order and solve all of the resident's problems to progress that Bioware's been using and abusing constantly for years. And like Kotor and NWN the plot coupons you collect are all functionally identical each time. (At least Mass Effect mixed that up a little... well... still "pieces to figure out what Saren is doing" but there is more variety.)

 

[Starke]

Can Bioware say the same?

Oh, they would say it if they got it into their head. They're especially good at spraying incoherent bullshit.

 

[Starke]

maybe it's not yo' "thang"

I say you play a bit more. You can't really judge the whole game until you finished it.

Well... no offense, but that's flat out bullshit. DAO is 100 hours long (give or take), so, while I haven't finished it I've certainly played enough of it to accurately judge it.

The irony here is in under an hour you can determine that a game isn't worth playing. Its if you're trying to determine that it IS worth playing where that's a legitimate argument.

I think DA:O (hey look, a surprised face), is one of those games that gets better over time, since it's very story driven (like a book).

My experience was that it got worse and more irritating as time went on.

I haven't finished it either, I was just trying to convince the OP to try it a bit more xD
Also I recall the OP asking us why was the game so praised by the critics (or maybe it was a rhetorical question).

Honestly, once you get into the DLCs and the expansion, Dragon Age started taking it on the chin. I'm still not sure how the console versions got the ratings they did, given the control scheme.

But I'm still standing my ground and say that the this particular game should only be judged after finishing the whole thing.
But that's my opinion.
(END ITZ DE OUNLI THYNG DAT MATURZZZ!!!!)
:'3

ORKZ IZ MADE FOR ROKIN!!!!

I'm more inclined to say, this game should only be judged after either finishing it, or after the player's utterly random bullshit quotient fills to the brim.

 

[Random Argument Man]

It was a good game. The story was okay. I never felt a true threat with the Darkspawns. I just thought the biggest threat was the population's stupidity.

That's probably my only nitpick. The lore was interesting however. I also can't hate "Dog". I want my own mabari wardog now.

 

[Victor Burgos]

I actually didn't care for it at first, but the dialog sunk me in and the gameplay reminded me of KotOR, one of my top games of all time. I didn't care much for the inventory system but that's a minor issue. Give it another go, it is worth it.

 

[Victor Burgos]

100 hours? only if you make more than two playthroughs. I finished it thoroughly twice and it was about 70-75 hours.

 

[ImprovizoR]

You have to play it on PC, and longer than just for a few hours. The game takes about 20-40 hours to complete depending on the difficulty and side missions you chose to take. There is so much to do in DA:O so playing for a few hours isn't enough to see that. I was a bit bored in the beginning as well. But I Bioware never disappointed me so I continued playing to see where it takes me. I finished it 3 times already and I have every piece of DLC, even Witch Hunt. The game is amazing. I chose to believe that console kids who never played a true RPG like Baldur's Gate for example or original Fallout, don't like this game.

 

[kannibus]

I'd say that Bioware didn't reuse a lot of the stuff they did for Mass Effect because they didn't want to have the game labelled as Mass Effect with elves.

Personally I felt it was a fun game. But then again, I also liked Deus Ex: Invisible War, Warrior Within and Red Alert 3. Maybe I'm just drawn to games that people consider bad?

 

[00slash00]

be forewarned, the following sentence will make me sound like a complete pussy....
i couldnt finish the game because the spiders scared me.

i got a good bit through it though and i didnt think it was bad but was still a little let down. when i first heard about the game, i was really really excited because i thought it would be a recreation of the old baldurs gate and planescape games. it was somewhat similar, but not quite what i was hoping for

 

[_Cake_]

I loved Dragon Age, mostly cause of the story and characters but I also love sandbox style RPGs as well.

To me the gameplay felt nothing like WOW and I disliked the mass effect conversation wheel. Especially with the good answer on top the neutral in the middle and bad on the bottom, then you have people just picking the top or bottom always cause they need the paragon/renegade points. I had no problems with the graphics, but that's not what makes or breaks a game for me.

woah, woah, sandbox? it felt very linear to me, I mean yes the beginnings and endings are different, but the core is the same. Sandbox RPG implies you can tackle every situation from any way, I never felt that freedom in DA

You can choose where/when you go, a lot of your companions, talk or fight your way through it, pick who you side with, who you romance, and your side quests... that's sandbox IMO. If you didn't enjoy the game like I did sorry.

You can't even get to your destination on your own, the map is just a series of click points. Invisible wall are all over the place in this game, you can't even fall off a small cliff. There were really only a few things you could do out of order, the rest was completely linear.

Want to grind so you can max out your characters? Not in this game. Want a place to store your overstock? It wasn't built into the game, guess you gotta buy some DLC.

Now, let's compare a real sandbox game, Oblivion.

You can move freely on the world map. There are no invisible walls and you can fall off any cliff or mountain. You can do alot of things in any order you like. Quest progression is linear though (ie, you have to kill an innocent, then kill the old man at the Inn of Ill Omen, etc...).

You can grind if you want to. In Oblivion grinding won't help you much but you can do it if you like. In Oblivion, there were storage chests everywhere.

Oblivion wasn't even all that great of a game but for a sandbox game, it blows DA out of the water.

Yeah but like Oblivion is the pinnacle of being able to interact with the surrounding objects and environment. Most games aren't that in depth, if your going to compare every game to that your never going to be happy. Although Dragon Age has more depth in the characters and story. Each game has it's own set of strong points, I own them both.

 

[NewYork_Comedian]

Different tastes man, what do you expect anyway going into the game then? Its standerd Western RPG to a fine, only with really good narrative and gameplay polished to a mirror shine.

What are other RPGs you've gotten into? If its stuff that Bethesda makes, stick to their games and not Biowares games.

Incidentally to anyone who wants to know, Bethesda and Bioware both offer very fun games that are unsimiler to each other [i.e. Bethesda focuses on the open world and atmosphere and Bioware is more linear and on the whole has better story {Bethesdas games still have decent stories though}]

 

[XIGBARx13]

Dragon Age was nowhere near the sandbox Oblivion was, but I personally enjoyed it. Enough to do 3 playthroughs as a warrior, rogue, and mage. But hey, if you didn't enjoy the game, not much you can do about it. Everyone has their own opinion.

 

[_Cake_]

I loved Dragon Age, mostly cause of the story and characters but I also love sandbox style RPGs as well.

To me the gameplay felt nothing like WOW and I disliked the mass effect conversation wheel. Especially with the good answer on top the neutral in the middle and bad on the bottom, then you have people just picking the top or bottom always cause they need the paragon/renegade points. I had no problems with the graphics, but that's not what makes or breaks a game for me.

woah, woah, sandbox? it felt very linear to me, I mean yes the beginnings and endings are different, but the core is the same. Sandbox RPG implies you can tackle every situation from any way, I never felt that freedom in DA

You can choose where/when you go, a lot of your companions, talk or fight your way through it, pick who you side with, who you romance, and your side quests... that's sandbox IMO. If you didn't enjoy the game like I did sorry.

What you describes sounds exactly like an RPG, not a sandbox game, there is a difference. In in an RPG you have choices, often exactly like what you described. In a sandbox, typically its an open world, and you have a set story and you have to explore the world and have complete freedom in where you can go. This is not the case with DA, hate to burst your bubble. You can pick the order, but the missions are always the same. You have different choices, but the outcome is defined. You can pick your characters, but you never have to explore to find them, they usually just fall in as the story progresses (there are a few exceptions to this, I understand that). There is no open world, it is all instanced. And as for the mention of side quests being optional, isn't that why they're called side-quests?

Same reply as last time.

I already told you how I see it. You already told me your side, you don't have to repeat yourself for the sake of nagging.

 

[_Cake_]

I loved Dragon Age, mostly cause of the story and characters but I also love sandbox style RPGs as well.

To me the gameplay felt nothing like WOW and I disliked the mass effect conversation wheel. Especially with the good answer on top the neutral in the middle and bad on the bottom, then you have people just picking the top or bottom always cause they need the paragon/renegade points. I had no problems with the graphics, but that's not what makes or breaks a game for me.

woah, woah, sandbox? it felt very linear to me, I mean yes the beginnings and endings are different, but the core is the same. Sandbox RPG implies you can tackle every situation from any way, I never felt that freedom in DA

You can choose where/when you go, a lot of your companions, talk or fight your way through it, pick who you side with, who you romance, and your side quests... that's sandbox IMO. If you didn't enjoy the game like I did sorry.

You can't even get to your destination on your own, the map is just a series of click points. Invisible wall are all over the place in this game, you can't even fall off a small cliff. There were really only a few things you could do out of order, the rest was completely linear.

Want to grind so you can max out your characters? Not in this game. Want a place to store your overstock? It wasn't built into the game, guess you gotta buy some DLC.

Now, let's compare a real sandbox game, Oblivion.

You can move freely on the world map. There are no invisible walls and you can fall off any cliff or mountain. You can do alot of things in any order you like. Quest progression is linear though (ie, you have to kill an innocent, then kill the old man at the Inn of Ill Omen, etc...).

You can grind if you want to. In Oblivion grinding won't help you much but you can do it if you like. In Oblivion, there were storage chests everywhere.

Oblivion wasn't even all that great of a game but for a sandbox game, it blows DA out of the water.

Yeah but like Oblivion is the pinnacle of being able to interact with the surrounding objects and environment. Most games aren't that in depth, if your going to compare every game to that your never going to be happy. Although Dragon Age has more depth in the characters and story. Each game has it's own set of strong points, I own them both.

Well, the characters in Dragon Age were more in depth but since they were still boring and talked too damn much, I'll choose Oblivion.

Hell, my favorite character, Duncan, died early on. I liked Lulu better in FFX.

Haha XD well I wish they talked more, heck I would go over specific bridges on purpose to start conversations when I saw them.

 

[Snowalker]

Same reply as last time.

I already told you how I see it. You already told me your side, you don't have to repeat yourself for the sake of nagging.

Alright, well, I guess I didn't make point clear. When judging genre, there is a bi of room for opinion but it is still mostly cut and dry. For instances, I can see how you would think DA could be sandbox because you can chose the order in which the story is told. However, there are many reasons why it isn't(which I've stated) its not simply a disagreeing opinion, is and issue of right and wrong. Now I understand where you are coming from, however, you have to understand that DA isn't true sandbox. Like for instance, I bet you think Fable in sandbox aswell? DA has some elements that are sandbox, but ultimately, its linear.

 

[Bat Vader]

Most people, myself included, think you're flat out wrong about the majority of that. I liked the game, and the only real point I see is older graphics. I will give you that, however graphics are the number one thing that most gamers are willing to sacrifice, if it means more strengths elsewhere. Personally, I liked it better then Mass Effect.

Well if I am wrong, then please explain why, rather then just claiming that my points are invalid.
On the point about graphics, I feel that the only people who are willing to sacrifice graphics to such a horrific level are cheap gamers. Such poor graphics does break the immersion of a game and begs the question why did you pay so much for something that is already dated.

Your opinion is that you did not like the game. That is not wrong at all.

I love Dragon Age: Origins. I think the story is excellent and to me the game-play is quite fun. It may be repetitive but I still found it fun. I don't care if the graphics seem dated. The story, good character development, and game-play of a game are more important to me than graphics will ever be. It seems a bit rude to call some gamers cheap just because they don't care about graphics all that much. Some gamers care about good graphics and some gamers don't. It is mainly just differences in opinions.

 

[Jimbo1212]

Most people, myself included, think you're flat out wrong about the majority of that. I liked the game, and the only real point I see is older graphics. I will give you that, however graphics are the number one thing that most gamers are willing to sacrifice, if it means more strengths elsewhere. Personally, I liked it better then Mass Effect.

Well if I am wrong, then please explain why, rather then just claiming that my points are invalid.
On the point about graphics, I feel that the only people who are willing to sacrifice graphics to such a horrific level are cheap gamers. Such poor graphics does break the immersion of a game and begs the question why did you pay so much for something that is already dated.

Your opinion is that you did not like the game. That is not wrong at all.

I love Dragon Age: Origins. I think the story is excellent and to me the game-play is quite fun. It may be repetitive but I still found it fun. I don't care if the graphics seem dated. The story, good character development, and game-play of a game are more important to me than graphics will ever be. It seems a bit rude to call some gamers cheap just because they don't care about graphics all that much. Some gamers care about good graphics and some gamers don't. It is mainly just differences in opinions.

The reason I call them cheap is because a person should appreciate every part of the game, from graphics, to the soundtrack, to the gameplay. For so many people to ignore graphics, which can make a game very immersive, I feel there has to be another reason at hand rather then " Graphics don't matter for computer games".
Also, why did you find the gameplay fun? Other people in this thread and myself found it boring and similar to WoW, or is that just the style of gameplay DA has to offer?

 

[jamesworkshop]

What? dragon age origins was not a disapointment, the graphics were not stellar but I found them more than acceptable of course having the much better PC version with its birds eye view takes away the need for high detail

 

[_Cake_]

FOR THE THIRD TIME I HAVE TOLD YOU MY OPINION. Buddy get over it and stop trying to convince me. I don't agree. Simple. Repeating yourself wont change that. BYE!

 

[faspxina]

I'm more inclined to say, this game should only be judged after either finishing it, or after the player's utterly random bullshit quotient fills to the brim.

xD ... what?