99 réponses à ce sujet

[Krenmu]

Theduke, I think your in the minority here..as are those who criticize the game for being "Too dark".. Sure some people will hate the game..but you cannot cater to those people. You can't please everyone all the time nor is it reasonable to try. You like those other games so much more?..then why are you here raising a fuss over this one? You have an opinion..as do we all. Sure this game has its faults...I have yet to play a perfect video game..the closest I've ever come was Morrowind during its day. But thats beside the point.



Rather than seeing all the problems a game has..and comparing it point for point to games that do not have the voice acting..nor the graphics, or anything..seems pretty pointless. They cannot be compared accurately. Yet you seem hellbent on doing it.

[Malkut]

Theduke2 wrote...

Markut: Give it up, man. Fallout was about that, but also about saving your vault by finding a water chip,

Malkut.

And that's like saying that Super Mario Bros. was about the little timer at the top of the screen.

It also occured in a post-apocalyptic world

Which, coincidentally, was full of slavery, drug use, racism, prostitution, nameless hordes of monsters, and child murder, but they slapped a more attractive coat of paint on the setting, so you like it better.

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.

You really shouldn't have brought it up, because rosy-tinted nostalgia is a poor thing to compare modern works to.  You come across as someone who still compares every single RPG negatively to Final Fantasy VII because you were 14 when it came out and thought that Sephiroth was really cool.

[Theduke2]

I don't think I cited GoW in the context of its plot. If you're playing a FPS for story, you may be in the wrong genre. Well, I certainly don't play them for their story, anyhow, although I'm sure there's an outlier or two there, too. I'm not familiar with FEAR, but most folks, including reviewers, thought it was a big enough deal to laud GoW with accolades and make its #5 on Metacritic, although both were out in 2006. Now, cover systems are ubiquitious; even the new Star Wars MMO will supposedly have one, and most people will credit GoW.



I haven't read any RR Martin, but I may have to look into it. Like I said, the reddit community had to educate me on high versus low fantasy. It's not something I'm familiar with, and obviously a personal preference.



Again, people are saying, in general, they enjoyed it more than I did. Good for you all; I wish I did enjoy it more. I kept playing hoping it would improve, or the payoff at the end would make up for some shortcomings. But many of you also say that, yes, there wasn't much earthshattering happening here. Which goes back to my original thread question: Does your gameplay experience reflect what critics say? The answer seems to be no.

[Lianaar]

If we want to bring up bad things in the game I would call it the economics. Which is fine in a video game, but I am not sure about the table top version.



I mean.. darkspawn dagger? COME ON! You mean darkspawn smiths? Or humans paid by darkspawn to smith for them? Either they are mindless beasts who only know how to kill, then their weapons shouldn't be any special. I would have loved to see rusted daggers in their hands or thorn chair-leg or keg... or something. Anything they can grab while being thorn in their agony and attack. Also, what do they eat? Each other? How do they spawn? That aspect of the game I find lacking a bit.



But I don't want to get into criticising that part until I read the PnP version of rulebook which might have come up with some explanation. If the world is not able to provide for intelligent anti bosses then it does have a serious flaw.



However it is the flaw of the world and not the DA:Origins game itself.

[Krenmu]

Actually according to what most are saying..yes the gameplay does reflect what the critics say. You just seem to enjoy twisting facts to suit your needs..we can all do it..trust me, GoW wasn't the first to have a Cover system believe it or not..I know, its hard to believe..but yes..that was stolen..deal with it.



Every game builds on what came before..every single one. You really shouldn't be playing video games if your expectations are that every game must be radically different...every game will have similarities its a fact of life..but only a handful of games actually get it right..And that should be praised..instead your asking for a percieved perfection..You played these "Great" Games years ago..and now thing all games are less because they cannot compare to the ideal you have set in stone in your head..

[Lianaar]

As a matter of fact the conclusion was that some people hated it, some people enjoyed it. And that as it is a comparison of the currently available games it is understandable it got the critics it did. That is my reading. Not to mention that your 'polling' is very far from valuable or representative and can be used little or nothing as per statistics go. Soooo we can say that some in the 20 people who expressed their opinion from the customers of the game, who also browse and respond to forum threads in this place said they dislike the game. Uhm.. ok.



The test of the pudding as they say.. if there is a DA2, we can see the differences in the sales between the 1st and the 2nd which will prove or disprove what people thought of the value of the 1st one quite unquestionably.

[Krenmu]

Lianaar wrote...
 How do they spawn? That aspect of the game I find lacking a bit. 
 

This part at least has its own Codex entry in the game...here is a hint..Broodmother.

[Zachriel]

If more people could re-read the actual question I posed, rather than trying to nitpick on some detail of my own gameplay experience

Fair enough, I suppose. However, I think people are "nitpicking" your gameplay experience because you keep throwing out other titles and implying that were in some way superior to DA, without citing any details from those games that made them better.



I believe your original question was "Does DA deserve the praise it's getting?" A straight forward question, but I think there are different ways to approach it.



If you judge the game purely on it's technical merits, then yes it's fairly average and words like "groundbreaking" and "innovative" don't really apply.



The game isn't being called a masterpiece because it's going to revolutionize the gaming industry. It's being hailed for the creativity that went into it, and I'm not just talking about the story which does indeed draw upon other sources for inspiration. It's the world and the characters more than anything that stand out. Bioware has created a new world of their own and done a pretty good job fleshing it out with it's own history, religion, and cultures. The characters and the interactions between the characters and PC were also very well written. I'm not sure where your complaint that they seem "hollow" is coming from. The only characters I felt were lacking personality were Dog and Sten.



To summarize my thoughts, I'd give the game average marks on technical merit and the main story arc, but in my opinion the world Bioware has created and the interpersonal interactions with your party members are quite compelling. Perhaps "masterpiece" is too strong a word, but I still feel the game is worth of praise.

[Lianaar]

Krenmu wrote...
This part at least has its own Codex entry in the game...here is a hint..Broodmother.

I didn't find that yet, still there are controversion in the behavior of the dark spawn. It might have needed a bit more thinking. Of course the PnP Rule Book might prove me wrong in that field.

[Nyaore]

Lianaar wrote...

If we want to bring up bad things in the game I would call it the economics. Which is fine in a video game, but I am not sure about the table top version.

I mean.. darkspawn dagger? COME ON! You mean darkspawn smiths? Or humans paid by darkspawn to smith for them? Either they are mindless beasts who only know how to kill, then their weapons shouldn't be any special. I would have loved to see rusted daggers in their hands or thorn chair-leg or keg... or something. Anything they can grab while being thorn in their agony and attack. Also, what do they eat? Each other? How do they spawn? That aspect of the game I find lacking a bit.

But I don't want to get into criticising that part until I read the PnP version of rulebook which might have come up with some explanation. If the world is not able to provide for intelligent anti bosses then it does have a serious flaw.

However it is the flaw of the world and not the DA:Origins game itself.

Actually they do explain the spawning bit during your quest into the Deep Roads for the Dwarven portion of the main quest. Hint: The Brood Mother isn't there just to look pretty. Edit: Got beaten to it.

Modifié par Nyaore, 17 novembre 2009 - 12:13 .

[Krenmu]

Oh..and I do remember a Darkspawn Smith guy down in the deeproads too..so that explains that bit...apparently not all darkspawn are mindless drooling monsters.

[Lianaar]

Fair enough. I return to this once I got to that part of the lore and read the PnP book. Then my "complaints" might go away or be more well based. Currently I had the -feeling- that economically it doesn't fit.

[Thullon]

You should probably play the game for what it is instead of trying to get 9.5/10 imaginary enjoyment stars.



If you're so busy looking ahead for that next star then you're not really immersing yourself in the game or it's story. Immersing yourself in DA:O removes most of the issues you're having.

[Krenmu]

Also..One thing just came to mind..your actually setting up a very good game..to fail. You are actively looking for there to be something wrong..you are actively comparing it to other games..rather than sitting back, enjoying it for what it is..then after your done..make your decision.

[Theduke2]

Malkut: Still don't see why you continue to resort to the ad hominem or making baseless assumptions about who am I and what I enjoy. I don't even mentioned FF7, which probably isn't anywhere near my top 10 or... 50? I'd say FFT was probably my favorite game from that franchise. Yet I have shared with you games that I thought raised the bar. Most people posting, although they disagree with my analysis, do agree there isn't much innovation happening here. In any event, constantly picking at details makes you sound like a bored troll, not me, and someone incredibly desperate to be right or score points. I posted to see whether I was an outlier, or whether others felt the game was over-rated...literally, by critics. I've gotten a lot of thoughtful answers.



I also have incredible respect for more recent games like Fallout 3 and BioShock, not just oldies. I don't think this game is in that league, but good for you if you do.



The first two Fallouts are widely respected, not just by me. For some truly bizarre reason, it didn't seem like a stretch to have those elements (slavery, drug use, etc.) in a game about OUR world after a few bombs dropped, rather than a high fantasy world with elves and dwarfs and whatnot. Nor are those elements really rubbed in your face in FO, the way the plight of the Dalish or city elves is in DA:O. They're more background elements and don't scream: "look how edgy and morally ambigious my world is". That's how they struck me, anyhow...just too over the top when you talked to a servant or listen to Dalish history. Or how lyrium is used by the church to control the templars, who control the mages, blah blah. Whereas in Fallout, drugs were just what people resorted to in the hopeless post-apocalypse. One definitely seems more contrived to me.

[jones0901]

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, and 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. Which is exactly what is happening in the main plot of DA:O---

this is true....but its also present in almost every game/film/book that is epic, its an aspect of the genre.
you can do smaller stories like a fisher king quest/grail quest or the bhall spawn story line but since this is a video game, it is going to have to have hordes of endless enemies to fill the time between key moments. i think where people see it as groundbreaking is in how it can have such a large scope and maintain characters that contribute dialouge, personalities and choices the whole way through....fallout 3 is huge, and so are the elder scroll games, but they dont have characters that interact with you to the same extent...

also the combat does feel more epic than in BG or NWN, think about when you get to the anvil and you keep getting rushed by darkspawn in a tunnel. 
 
to conclude, what i feel alot of games have been missing after infinity engine games and until ME, DAO was size. DAO was the first to combine massive, fully detailed areas with personal choices that effect the world and allow a level of story custimization. In most games i disagree with the choices i make because its not exactly how i would make them, but DAO did the best job of allowing me to make choices that were at least close, and included choices that were somewhat out of my control (like allistar being immovable on killing Loghain)
that much freedom is a big step forward i think

[Saurel]

jones0901 wrote...


this is true....but its also present in almost every game/film/book that is epic, its an aspect of the genre.

I miss the days of Greek Tragedy....their epics didn't have to have that..

[Fudzie]

First, the game breaks for me the cardinal rule of fantasy: keep it
different! Instead, DA made a conscious decision to incorporate many
contemporary elements into their world: slavery, racism, castes, drug
use, and, of course, French people

Is it bad that I started chuckling at this?

[Maria Caliban]

No.

Fantasy is a genre. A genre merely is a set of conventions.

[Saurel]

Fudzie wrote...

First, the game breaks for me the cardinal rule of fantasy: keep it
different! Instead, DA made a conscious decision to incorporate many
contemporary elements into their world: slavery, racism, castes, drug
use, and, of course, French people

Is it bad that I started chuckling at this?

No I found that part kinda funny also

[Archfiend]

Fudzie wrote...

First, the game breaks for me the cardinal rule of fantasy: keep it
different! Instead, DA made a conscious decision to incorporate many
contemporary elements into their world: slavery, racism, castes, drug
use, and, of course, French people

Is it bad that I started chuckling at this?

nope chuckle away. i did.

[Saurel]

The "and,of course," part makes it class

[Zilod]

First, the game breaks for me the cardinal rule of fantasy: keep it
different! Instead, DA made a conscious decision to incorporate many
contemporary elements into their world: slavery, racism, castes, drug
use, and, of course, French people. This was really clever when Ultima
7 tried it 15+ years ago, but not so much today. And don't I play
fantasy games to become immersed in a world that is "fantastical", not
contemporary? Isn't the whole beauty of fantasy that you can do
whatever you like, be as creative as your imagination allows? If I want
to learn about the problems associated with social structures in India,
I'll go watch Frontline. Strip away these elements, and you're left
with an incredibly generic, Tolkien-esque universe. Yawn.

i cant disagree more, personally i found DAO very rich lorewise, lot of reference to things that happened or to the culture and lores of the area you explore... i think is quite evident that a lot of work was made, not just for the game setting, but for all the world and history around it

and i dont see why so many people define it a Tolkien-esque, the two worlds are actually quite different, even the "tones" of the narration is not that similar

also personally i dont dislike some references to the real world or to take some inspiration by some timeframes or real cultures, of course that have to be done in tastefull way to not make them look totally out of place and in dao i think it happens, also various references are probably kinda close in timeframe and not too near to our actual culture

i also like when some important themes are discussed in fantasy, of course it have to be not out of places but imo fantasy is not a genere for evasion... to see the cute elves throw fireballs to the ebil orcs... if all fantasy have to be like that (something that luckilly is not the case) then it will be an extremely flat and boring genere

[Teshronesh]

First something about the Darkspawn threat: The Blight is just a motivational factor, a bit like the reaper's in ME. Most of the game you don't fight directly against them but do tons of non oder only indirect-darkspawn related missions. Most of the story is about politics (Redcliffe), betrayal (origins etc) , social differences, civil war (Ferelden, Orzammar) and racial/cultural differences and resulting problems. LOTR has one main theme: Destroy the ring. Every action is directly related to the ring, besides some "sidequests" like Helm's Deep. Here it is: Stop the blight - and you won't even know for 95% of the game HOW to stop it.

If you take a look in the ingame codex you might recognize one of the reasons why DA is called a masterpiece. They created a consistend world with a history that dates back - in detail - for ~1000years.
The next reason is that none of the "AAA" titles had something similar to the party development in DA, at least not since BG2. Depending on your choices and on how you treat your party they might kill each other on sight, betray you, fall in love, hate each other because of jealousy and so on. Even the dog is - in my opinion - better designed than most npcs in the Witcher. I played it two times but it don't remember a single name - where on the other hand Jan Jansen, Edwin, Minsk and Boo! or Morrigan and Leliana are characters i will remember for a very long time.

The third point is, that I never played a game where my decisions could have such an enormous impact. The best example are the dwarves. There are four possible outcomes, depending on your choices regarding the anvil and the new king. This may influence the armys you gain in the end (Golems, Legion of the dead, normal dwarves) and can even result in the death of a party member - just because you chose the "greater good". In most rpgs it simply doesn't make a difference if you play "good" or "evil" or ruthless/morally. If you wanted to rob a poor person in Kotor, well, you just did and got a "+dark side" counter. You might try chosing the "personal gain" possibility at the urn of sacred ashes...but nearly your whole party might turn on you, depending on whom you bring.

One more point about the witcher: It has a great story - but it has only the dark aspect - where dragon age has small light moments, suchs as talks with Oghren (or him talking with Morrigan/Lelilana/DOG!), Sandal, and so on.

Those points mentioned above are the reason why dragonage is called groundbreaking.  The points alone are not unique - but their combination is.
If you really want to track the origin of the origin [...] of some of the story parts, well then you should probably read the Iliad or the Odyssey.

Modifié par Teshronesh, 17 novembre 2009 - 12:49 .