99 réponses à ce sujet

[Bryy_Miller]

So fantasy = no racism?

[hankmurphy]

george r.r. martin deals with complex "contemporary" issues in his novels and they are amazing examples of fantasy literature. tolkien wasnt creating anything entirely new when he envisioned middle-earth, but that certainly doesnt diminish the value of his work.

i dont think bioware was trying to reinvent the wheel so much as trying to recreate baldurs gate in their own fleshed-out universe with purrty graphics and updated ui. and who can blame them for wanting to continue to build on the amazing legacy they began with baldurs gate.

BG remains my favorite all-time game, but right now i am loving every minute of DA.

[JamesX]

I think the clickable cool down is actually from RTSes and not from MMO.

The 4 party system goes far back as Ultima 4 or FF1 - and that is in the 80s.

If you want to talk about truly original that is not possible. Just like some have argued there is no truly original thought.

All games today are based on the same formula if you dissection them enough. The point when talking about something is innovating, is not that if it is entirely new - but how does the repeated components work together.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Why do people keep forgetting the "Dark" in front of "Fantasy"?



For me dark = realism. In that sense, Dragon Age is realistic. And there is no such thing as a purely original fantasy. They all are inspired by real world events, cultures and folkhore. Indeed, elves, dwarves, magic are all human created myths before there was such a genre as fantasy.

[Theduke2]

The reddit community has educated me that there is "high fantasy" and "low fantasy" and sent me wikis with explanations, which cleared up a lot (no definition for "dark fantasy", though). After reading that, I obviously have a preference for high fantasy, which most games are based on. YMMV. I do wonder why DA:O went in the low direction though, and not the high.

[Lianaar]

I wouldn't give it 10/10, but I would give it 8/10 easily. I believe it is not about being trash or taking things personally, but more in the line of what you expect a game to be.

This is what I expect a good game to be, so in my criterias it falls in the good games. It didn't fit with your criterias (which aren't worse or better then mine, merely different) so for you it was boring and flat. Probably people who wrote the critics seek the things in a game I seek. I amused myself with NWN 2 but I stopped playing it in the 3rd act. It wasn't emotionally involving enough for me to go on.

I do presume that making games are way more professional now then it used to be. I presume marketing starts to play a role before the game starts to be made, such as finding a target group with enough purchase willingness and ability that makes the effort worthwile. There are people who fit that target group and people who don't. The goal of the game is to pull the strings of those who are in the target group. With all the additional content, not limited to the game you can see DA as a marketing campaign of its on for the now PnP games and novels too. After all it serves that purpose well.

To make it more clear why I fall in the target group, here are the things I valued in the game
- diversity
- replyability
- easy handle
- challenge (I am not drowning in resources, I have to allocate, think)
- force to make choices
- there -are- consequences which are not always apparent and can be good or bad
- humor and living environment
- characters with integrity, npcs can leave for ever if you mess up
- various outcomes depending on your actions
- touching elements
- details in the story (finding scouts after dalish agree to help, Earl sending his regards as his people patrol the roads when he is healed...)
- the feeling that my decisions make an impact, the game was not flowing OVER my head, but I was doing my own part to steer the flow
- it was very brave to skip the cliche happy ending

What I disliked
- some of the conversations could have been made by my PC instead of inter NPC
- thanking for something in the conversations closed the conversations
- some minor bugs
- the textures might be better at some parts, true.

Modifié par Lianaar, 16 novembre 2009 - 10:26 .

[Malkut]

Theduke2 wrote...

On it being Tolkien-esque: A horde of nameless creatures from god-knows-where is being led by a super evil entity going to overrun the world? That sounds pretty much like LOTR

This could apply to virtually any "battle-at-the-end-of-the-world" story, from Ragnarok to Armageddon.

if we're getting literate (or lit crit), completely squares with Tolkien's entire message of the evils of mass, mechanized, anonymous warfare against the individual.

That could apply to any story written about warfare at all since at least 1914.

The story of DA:O is not high myth, it has none of the traditional archtypes that shape Tolkien's work, it has few of the songs, poems, and language that Tolkien adored, and it shares only a few of it's major themes.  It has little to do with Tolkien's work, except on the most shallow levels.

You can't call Friday the 13th a ripoff of hitchcock's Psycho just because both of them have a serial killer.

Here's the wiki page for dark fantasy, by the way: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fantasy

Modifié par Malkut, 16 novembre 2009 - 10:30 .

[Poubo]

after seeing the "its like LOTR" i couldnt really agree with anything at all the OP said... thats like saying Russia is like America... because people live in both countries!!11oneone!

[Mesecina]

I surely don't know what the OP seeks in an RPG but seeing how he compares DA to NWN2 (which btw was not even made by Bioware) in a sense of NWN2 being superior (or at least that's the impression I got) I say the OP is a very bad troll or the OP knows next to nothing about RPGs (much like if I'd go rant on Modern Warfare forums admitedly never having played any of it because it's just not my cup of tea).



As for myself BG2+ToB have been the paragon of RPGs for a decade with nothing coming even close to those standards and now after having finished DA I actually think BG2 has finally fallen from that pedestal

[Nial Black-Knee]

IMO



There is alot to like in DA:O. There are some things I'm not all together pleased about. But I can't remember a game that I have played that I loved every single part of. ( Not even BG series) Someone alot smarter than I am once said "There are only four kinds of stories, and every story ever written is a variation of one ot those four." There is always going to be similar things in any story good or bad. Thats just the way it is. It's all about wether it's presented well or not. I think DA:O is presented well. I am engaged in the story and I like several of the characters. I frequently find myself laughing at how much of a caustic biotch Morrigan can be. I always stop whatever Im doing to listen to her picking on Alistair. Oghren has several good lines as well.



I think if your looking for the ultimate RPG? Then your doomed to always be disappointed. But DA:O has alot going for it. Is it a 10? Not in my opinion. But Id certainly give it an 8 maybe an 8.5.



P.S. I rarely pay too much attention to reviewers. Their bought and paid for.

[Theduke2]

Malkut: And, as far as I'm aware, in the lit crit community, Tolkien was among the first to introduce those ideas in a fantasy setting, and differed dramatically in his characterizations from Lewis. Consider the mechanized way in which Sauron's army is "bred" and marches off to fight (something I thought the films captured well). Pretty different from individual gods and giants fighting in Ragnarok, or heroes on both sides warring in the Illiad. But pretty similar to a blight of basically identical monsters led by a big bad archdemon out to wash over the land and crush humanity.



I guess I'm tired of the "tried but true" story a horde of nameless monsters is going to overrun the land unless the hero defeats the evil entity. It's probably why I gave up reading most fantasy a decade ago...I found it hard to top Tolkien and then the Thomas Covenant books. My favorite RPGs avoid the story: Fallout, Betrayal at Krondor, Crono Cross, etc. Glad it still works for you, man.

[InteruptZero]

I agree with some of your points Theduke2. I do not think DAO is revolutionary. Bascially its the same games Bioware has made before although technically superior to earlier works due to impovements in video and audio. The writing is inconsistent, Parts of the main story line can be seen in NWN 1/2 and BG 1/2. Although I will admit some of the side quest stories seemed fresh. What DAO has done here is freed Bioware from the D and D franchise license. Just as Mass Effect freed them from LucasArts. This is its real purpose. I find the game to be fun but its certainly being given to many "five stars" or "9 out of 10". Part of my problem with rating a game is do I compare it to some "ideal" model or do I compare it with what is out there. Comparing Dragon Age to most computer games one can see it is superior but comparing the game to its potential one can see that it fallls short. My first recommendation to Bioware is hire a professional writer or writers, some one with screenwriting and/or fanatsy experience. So to sum up it is not an original work, but 95% of computer games are not, so bottom line Masterpieces by definition are rare.

[BluesMan1956]

I say all the critics team up, form a software development company, and show the rest of us non-purists how it's done!



Off you go! Spit Spot! Don't come back until you have a beta to show us!

[Theduke2]

It's pretty funny that if I disagree with your view of the game, I'm either a) a troll or ignorant. Especially when I'm bringing up games that are 15+ years old.



Most people seem to want to debate the the details to somehow "prove me wrong". Go right ahead! You're just missing the boat, which is that I don't think there isn't anything really fresh or revolutionary about this game to warrant exceptional reviews. I'd agree with posters who have said that the pickings are just so slim that people are just happy for some--any!--high production quality RPG.



If a blight of darkspawn led by an archdemon washing over a land bears no trace of an echo of a dark force leading the armies of evil to overrun middle earth, where the ring/mcguffin is the main character, then good for you. I mean that; you have more options than I do for literature and gaming, because I have trouble generating interest in the SOS again and again.



It does seem like the answer to my original question is that I'm NOT the only one, that there are a couple of folks here who aren't as impressed with DA:O as the reviewers/metacritic rating would suggest.

[BluesMan1956]

[quote]Theduke2 wrote...

It's pretty funny that if I disagree with your view of the game, I'm either a) a troll or ignorant. Especially when I'm bringing up games that are 15+ years old.[/quote]
I hope you aren't referring to my post.  I was simply encouraging you to go do a better job than the developers.  I mean, it takes no effort to criticize.  To make a superior game, now THAT would be an accomplishment.

[quote]Most people seem to want to debate the the details to somehow "prove me wrong". [/quote]
I don't.  There is no point.  This is entirely subjective and your opinion does not affect my enjoyment of the game, just of this forum...


quote]there are a couple of folks here who aren't as impressed with DA:O as the reviewers/metacritic rating would suggest.
[/quote]
Only a couple?  As I have already stated.  It doesn't take any effort to criticize - creating something better, now THERE'S THE CHALLENGE.

Go to it!

[Kalfear]

I think your all being trolled people.



Im pretty sure this is Elikza (something like that) who made this exact same post (right down to the French hating) with almost exact same title (he likes critical consensus. his new words for the week obviously) under a different screen name!



Dont feed the troll is all I can say!

[Lianaar]

Theduke2 wrote...
It's pretty funny that if I disagree with your view of the game, I'm either a) a troll or ignorant. Especially when I'm bringing up games that are 15+ years old.

Only if you do not respond to the posts which don't do that. Tastes still differ. You'll find people who liked the game and who hated it. Most people could have told you that from point one. I do not believe there is a question  to some being displeased and some being pleased about the game. Unless you have a different goal then stating this?

[Malkut]

Theduke2 wrote...

I guess I'm tired of the "tried but true" story a horde of nameless monsters is going to overrun the land unless the hero defeats the evil entity

(. . . .)

My favorite RPGs avoid the story: Fallout

Really?  Because the last time I checked, Fallout was about defeating the Master before he creates a horde of nameless supermutants to overrun the land.

[Theduke2]

"What DAO has done here is freed Bioware from the D and D franchise license."

Thanks, InteruptZero. That makes incredible sense to me, and by itself justified creating a new universe. I've read that Turbine and Atari are at each others throats over their D&D game, so I can only imagine that Bioware has had issues with its IP. Like you say, though, I just wish they'd hire some more professional writers with screenwriting or fantasy experience, especially if you're going to build a universe from the ground up.



Maybe I'm just surprised it's being hailed, as you say, as a masterpiece, in the reviews I've read, and by many members of the community here. Because that was definitely not my experience, in the way that some other games have literally changed the way I thought about gaming. A Gears of War or Crono Cross is incredibly rare. We should venerate them, and, therefore, not allow a good but not great game to be paraded around as such.

[Lianaar]

Our point is, for -some- of us it was changing the way we think about gaming While I accept it didn't reach that effect for you, you could show the same courtesy by accepting that some people have a different opinion.

[Krenmu]

One thing I see happening...you aren't seeing the big picture...I haven't seen another RPG of this caliber with this much voice acting..Nor have I seen one that tells quite so gritty of a story at the same time..sure use the example of Fallout..but even it doesn't hold up to all criticisms.



The thing is...While many of the ideas aren't exactly revolutionary..I'll give you that..but It is a masterpiece in the fact that it did so many things right all at the same time...It also pushed the limits of the current genre of RPGs goes. The older RPGs were alot easier to deal with due to the story being text on a screen rather than someone actually talking..and the graphics have improved over the years, etc...You can't compare a game that tells a story to a game that does not, Many games just have pretty graphics..but very little in the way of gameplay.



So this game is very much groundbreaking, and revolutionary due to what I stated..It did so many things right that others fail at. And I don't understand your disgust at the game universe...Its quite good in my opinion. Sure it has real world aspects..but so does every game of this type.



I think your just looking for something to be wrong with the game..rather than seeing it for what it is.

[Jetfire99]

• Theduke2 wrote...

"What DAO has done here is freed Bioware from the D and D franchise license."
Thanks, InteruptZero. That makes incredible sense to me, and by itself justified creating a new universe. I've read that Turbine and Atari are at each others throats over their D&D game, so I can only imagine that Bioware has had issues with its IP. Like you say, though, I just wish they'd hire some more professional writers with screenwriting or fantasy experience, especially if you're going to build a universe from the ground up.

Maybe I'm just surprised it's being hailed, as you say, as a masterpiece, in the reviews I've read, and by many members of the community here. Because that was definitely not my experience, in the way that some other games have literally changed the way I thought about gaming. A Gears of War or Crono Cross is incredibly rare. We should venerate them, and, therefore, not allow a good but not great game to be paraded around as such.

Over all you had some good points and I think why it's so popular is due to the fact there's been so much bad games out there that a decent or better game gets people to go holy ****. I think the game's solid, fun it's got its flaws however one point I'd like to bring up.

Crono Cross sadly was a case of Excutive meddling in the way it was rolled out do fast and pretty much stomped over the plot of the previous game. It was a fun game but it shows what can happen. I hope I didn't come off too hostile though.

[Theduke2]

Markut: Give it up, man. Fallout was about that, but also about saving your vault by finding a water chip, and later in FO2, about a virus and a secret government group. There was no epic pitched battle; you could resolve most of it with speech and disguise if you chose to. It also occured in a post-apocalyptic world, which are rarely explored (yes, Wasteland was the predecessor, as someone mentioned), which made it a lot fresher for me ten years ago. And on, and on.



To BluesMan: Not directed at you,but the person above who said: "I surely don't know what the OP seeks in an RPG but seeing how he compares DA to NWN2 (which btw was not even made by Bioware) in a sense of NWN2 being superior (or at least that's the impression I got) I say the OP is a very bad troll or the OP knows next to nothing about RPGs (much like if I'd go rant on Modern Warfare forums admitedly never having played any of it because it's just not my cup of tea)." Although I don't really agree that the best use of my time is changing careers and becoming a game designer just to prove you wrong, which is what you seem to be suggesting. I think people can have discussions and criticize games without having to actually make them...heck, it seems to be a lucrative business for some people.



If more people could re-read the actual question I posed, rather than trying to nitpick on some detail of my own gameplay experience, that would be great. Although I do seem to already have an answer, that there is some review inflation happening here. Metacritic has this game as the 49th best PC game OF ALL TIME, and that seems high to quite a few people.

[GhoXen]

Dragon Age endured through you and finds itself totally puzzled by you.

[Zachriel]

Um, what the hell was so great about Gears of War? In that game, a horde of evil monsters from god knows where being led by some supreme evil being is trying to destroy the world and the heroes have to save it. Isn't that the very plot element you're criticizing DA for? And what did Gears of War offer that no other fps did before? A cover system? Yeah, FEAR did that too. Big deal.



You don't like DA, that's fine. A lot of people don't. I just think it's inconsistent that you bash DA for it's lack of innovation while hailing a game that itself did nothing original, and even uses the very same plot device you say you've seen so much you can't appreciate it anymore.



Now, I agree that the plot could have been more interesting if the threat you face in the game wasn't some evil force bent on destroying everything. The works of George R.R. Martin, which DA was supposedly influenced by very strongly, focus a lot more on the human conflict. A nation torn apart by civil war, families divided, lust, betrayal, greed, etc. There is some of that in DA, which is great, but there could have been more.



As for your critiques of the game's techinical aspect, you may have a point that they didn't do anything new or groundbreaking there. However, that didn't spoil my enjoyment of the game. Maybe I just haven't played enough games that use this system to be tired of it yet. Whatever the reason, I still found combat in DA to be pretty fun. It certainly feels far more intense than anything I experienced in NWN2.