457 réponses à ce sujet

[Varenus Luckmann]

Oblivion is generic and simplistic crap. I could build an argument around that, but if it's not clear to the sea of Oblivion-worshipping retards yet, it will never be.

So of course Dragon Age is superior. It's not even hard to be superior to Oblivion.

[bluehaze013]

Oblivion was like an online MMO without other players it was a huge fail IMO too simplistic more like an FPS regards combat, no real strategy etc...very shallow game.



Dragon Age is a freakin masterpiece, I am actually dreading finishing this game because it is so good I know nothing else will ever compare until the next great Bioware RPG. Dragon Age is a true RPG in every sense of the word, great charcter development, npc's you actually get attached too, great story that really reels you in, actual strategy required in fights to win. Nice list of abilities for all the different character types...I could go on and on about this game...loving it to death.



Oblivion is not even in the same league as Dragon Age as far as RPG's are concerned.

[ModForFun]

Oblivions mods put DA to shame. I have hopes that a year or so from now this wont be true anymore but for the time being it is. Now on the other hand Vanilla Oblivion just plain sucks compared to just about anything.

[Dark83]

Vanilla Oblivion was a knee to the groin for their fanbase, in exchange for getting a Halo-like response and a large new market.



Seriously. Their fanbase was on the computer. They removed functionality for the sake of consoles, and then they literally lowered the quality to match the consoles. (As in screen resolution handling, and textures. The hardcore RPG nerd's 20 inch screen? Your CrazyXCrazy resolution is pointless, because your 10 line menu is still 10 lines, only now it's CrazyHuge. Your $4000 gaming rig is pointless, because they gave you the same crappy textures that the consoles got. At least DA:O has crappy textures because they screwed up, so they tried.)

[Damar Stiehl]

Oblivion mods never fixed the core game, which was flawed to the extreme. It has always been, and will always be, the blonde captain on the cheerleading team. Sure, she's easy on the eyes and you can dress her up in pretty clothes (or undress her), but she's about as shallow as they come.

[ModForFun]

Damar Stiehl wrote...

Oblivion mods never fixed the core game, which was flawed to the extreme. It has always been, and will always be, the blonde captain on the cheerleading team. Sure, she's easy on the eyes and you can dress her up in pretty clothes (or undress her), but she's about as shallow as they come.

The officail campaign for Oblivion does suck, I couldnt stomach it and so left it unfinnished in favor of playing modded oblivion. The first thing I did was to install the alternate start mod and then look for mods like FCOM, a bloody mess, any duke patrick mod, blood & mud, LTD's vampirism, return to underdark and a few beauty mods and what not and bam the end result was an oblivion that was suddenly fun to play and still is.

learning the toolset for DA  so I can figure out how to port my own mods however is eating up my spare time so Oblivions on hold untill madmoles unholy darkness mod is released

[Ratnix]

The day I got the game, and even now, more than a week later, I see DA:O as a watered down version of Oblivion.

I don't think it is a bad game. I just think it is less of the monster that Oblivion is. I have never made it through the entire game of Oblivion, simply because there is so much to do I get bored with it.

I haven't finished DA:O yet, I am in the process of going through all the origins before I finish my first character, but I see no problem getting through the game.

And I have noticed, no matter what I do, most of the time the dialogs all go the same way, even when I pick the off responses. I get steered to the same ending of the conversation. So once I have gotten past the origin part of the game, it is all just repeating the same old tired conversations over and over.



Like I said, it's not that I don't like the game. I do, and this will be the first game I have finished in years, but I don't think it is as good as Oblivion, just smaller.

[TileToad]

Dex1701 wrote...
*snip*
I agree that a straight, linear level scaling methodology is absolutely terrible and should never be considered in a open-world game, though.  Why?  Because it's really in-your-face and comes nowhere close to feeling organic.  The way Bethesda approached level scaling in Fallout 3 was much better than the trainwreck of a system they used in Oblivion.  Some areas scaled linearly, while others were tethered to a level range.  Most importantly, the first time you enter an area the level was locked so that if you came back later you'd feel more powerful.  Tethered areas could end up being challeging or fairly easy, but never so easy that the area was completely boring.

It's not a black or white issue.  Linear level scaling makes advancement feel pointless, but no level scaling can cause a game to become too static, predictable, and too easily power-gamed.  It's a delicate balance for sure, but I can't agree that all level scaling is always categorically bad.  Few things in something as complex as modern game design are that black and white.

I understand what you are saying but level scaling isn't just about character levels. It's a delicate combination of level, skills, and equipment. This means that sometimes you'd be able to win fights with a lower level than was perhaps intended. This might have been accomplished because you saved up some gold and bought superior armor/weapons (because the equipment in shops wouldn't be scaled). That is one of the things, IMO, that creates such great appeal to the RPG genre. All the different ways in which you can tackle certain problems. A way to progress through the game through your own creativity and smarts. Level scaling dumbs this part down to a; you can do anything anytime, regardless of tactics.

As for the grinding to get past certain areas, isn't that what the side quests used to be for?
Oblivion has side quests but, really, where is the motivation to actually do them if you can just steamroll right through the main quest?

[TheRealIncarnal]

I guess I just don't see what Oblivion and Dragon Age really have in common.



Oblivion is a single person controlled free-world sandbox RPG. Dragon Age: Origins is a party based path directed decision based RPG. They're so extremely different that I just don't see where they overlap beyond swords and magic.

[jkaymartin]

Dex1701 wrote...

jkaymartin wrote...
And for both Oblivion and Fallout 3, my husband and I like to play together - we developed a technique where one of us plays the mouse and one plays the keyboard. Although we work together extremely well, it does sometimes lead to situations where one of us has to ask "What the *#$% were you thinking?" and a reload

Ok, I'm fascinated by this.  How do you make that work? 

Quite well, in actuality. We'd played various games (Betrayal at Krondor, Baldur's Gate, others) that were pretty much "one person drives while the other kibitzes", and were pretty frustrated with that system. When we got Morrowind, we decided to split up the mouse/keyboard duties, and found that it came pretty naturally.

There's a lot of back-and-forth chat as we go along (and occasionally a "Turn right. No, *right*!"), but it's become second nature now. For instance in Oblivion, in the sewers under the jail, we were approaching a corner, and B. turned to face the wall, and I just instinctively sidled into the crossing. I call up the inventory interface, and he does the repairs. I do the quicksaves and he does the sword swings.

I guess we just think the same way, and having started gaming together playing pencil/paper D&D, we have the same history and experience that just meshes into sharing the responsibilities in CRPGs. We're currently running Fallout 3 together, but we also play other games independently. I guess it's just our version of MPB)

[Dex1701]

TileToad wrote...
All the different ways in which you can tackle certain problems. A way to progress through the game through your own creativity and smarts. Level scaling dumbs this part down to a; you can do anything anytime, regardless of tactics.

Eh, again, I think you're really over-simplifying how scaling can be done.  If we were talking about a straight-up constant, linear scale I'd agree with you 100%.  With no scaling at all in any areas of the game you're going to end up with uneven, patchy difficulty and loot value.  Much more disconcerting to me than running into areas that are too difficult is to find large chunks of content that would have been fun at a lower level, but are now easy to the point of being tedious because I've leveled past it.  You can absolutely create a scaling system that prevents things like that from happening without reducing difficulty...even to the point of having areas that still require an incredibly powerful character and player ingenuity while allowing others to scale in appropriate ways.

Certainly, different types of games benefit from different types/extents of scaling, and some not at all.  I'd argue that an effective (as well as judicious) use of scaling can positively affect the pacing and difficulty maintenance in a game if it can be done in a way that feels organic rather than patronizing.  It can also serve to make the game less predictable, which is a good thing.

TileToad wrote...
As for the grinding to get past certain areas, isn't that what the side quests used to be for?
Oblivion has side quests but, really, where is the motivation to actually do them if you can just steamroll right through the main quest?

I dunno...because you want to do them?  I have no problem with people that aren't completists and like to play a game for 30 hours and be done with it.  I personally like to savor as much content as possible as long as it doesn't get too repetitive, but not everybody likes to try to see everything.  I agree that games shouldn't be made to be obscenely easy to the detriment of more "serious" gamers, but there can be a balance.

jkaymartin wrote...
There's a lot of
back-and-forth chat as we go along (and occasionally a "Turn right. No,
*right*!"), but it's become second nature now. For instance in
Oblivion, in the sewers under the jail, we were approaching a corner,
and B. turned to face the wall, and I just instinctively sidled into
the crossing. I call up the inventory interface, and he does the
repairs. I do the quicksaves and he does the sword swings.

That's crazy!  I'll bet you guys kill at the 3-legged race.

Modifié par Dex1701, 04 décembre 2009 - 05:11 .

[Handmade]

I enjoy both, but I do prefer Oblivion. So many side stories, the character build was so fun. I don't get how people say the character build in DA is more expansive then the one in Oblivion. plus the expantions for Oblivion were both good, what do you get for DA some little quest for a golem and another little quest for pretty much nothing.

Anyway keep in mind Oblivion is a lot older, another question will be which is better TES VI or Dragon Age.

[Akka le Vil]

Dex1701 wrote...

The difference is that the way the two games flow isn't the same.  Because of the way you revisit areas so much in open-world games like Oblivion they need to be very careful about things like level scaling.  You have to admit that it's rather odd for the muggers in a certain area to gradually get more and more powerful to the point that they're godly...godly muggers.  In DA:O you move from area to area and clear them out, so you don't notice the level scaling as much.  Bethesda did a much better job in Fallout 3 by locking and tethering the level scaling.  In Oblivion is was just ridiculous and made advancement in the game feel like a treadmill.  In DA:O it's not noticeable because you don't see the same enemies getting more and more godly as your character does.  Don't get me started on the loot scaling in Oblivion, though...to me that was the worst aspect of the entire game.

Maybe people are blind or have no ability to perceive, but the level scaling in DAO just jumped in my face, and I noticed HARD how the relative power of the foes was always EXACTLY THE SAME. It's even more noticeable if you restart another game, and realize even more than going from high level to level 1 doesn't change the relative power either.

TileToad wrote...

I dare you to try to make an RPG with exploration and freedom without level scaling.  Without any level scaling at all players are forced to complete areas in a certain order, and people will definitely complain about that....a lot.  It's a tradeoff that we have to live with until someone comes up with a better way to handle it.

Usual PoS that I'll enjoy debuking for the 65745432145778574654 times with the same single wors : Fallout.

[Akka le Vil]

Dex1701 wrote...

feroxthegreywarden wrote...
as for level scaling.. its ALWAYs a bad idea in every game.. period.

I have to disagree with this.

Well, you're wrong. Don't feel bad about this. It happens

Think in more detail about how games are designed, and keep in mind that level scaling can be a more complex algorithm...it doesn't have to be a simple linear progression.

Irrelevant. Level scaling is a flawed CONCEPT, so you can implement it however you like, it's still bad.

[Skye Kross]

Handmade wrote...

I enjoy both, but I do prefer Oblivion. So many side stories, the character build was so fun. I don't get how people say the character build in DA is more expansive then the one in Oblivion. plus the expantions for Oblivion were both good, what do you get for DA some little quest for a golem and another little quest for pretty much nothing.

Anyway keep in mind Oblivion is a lot older, another question will be which is better TES VI or Dragon Age.

still dragon age IMO. just look at the level up system. look how ugly that is. my character in oblivion quickly level up and only gained 1 str 2 speed 2 agility or less coz my class skills are being used too frequently.
class skills are atheltics, heal (i forgot the name) swords, acrobat bla bla. my everyday movement causes me to level up

[magor1988x]

I'm going TL;DR it all here.



I've played both DA:O and ES:O (All the xpacs etc etc).... I've also played Mass Efffect, KOTOR, Baldurs Gate II, NWN, and Morrowind and Fallout 3.



That's my background with both development companies (Basically I've played their highlight real of great games minus a couple).



ESIV: Oblivion succeeded in bringing together a vast world with a varied interesting combat system and an excellent level of depth and replay ability.



Allowing the player to move through their massive world was an unparalleled achievement. Tamriel is gorgeous and massive.



There is however, a lot less in the way of choice, and moral quandaries then in a Bioware game. The character has less of a visible personality because he lacks long term characters which he/she can influence or interact with.



That's the strength of a Bioware game: KOTOR, ME, and most especially DA:O (And probably ME2) have massive story and character interactions and nearly every quest has some game altering decision (It can be very small, but it's there). Often times its difficult to see how the decisions will weave together until the end.



Oblivion beats DA:O in world design, flexibility, and freedom. The player can go anywhere, do anything, at any time. It had hundreds of hours of playtime (Especially with the strong mod community). I had a character in which I'd put in 200+ hours of game time just fooling around with mods and dungeon crawls.



I've played ME and KOTOR probably a 10+ times... That doesn't include the other Bioware or Bethesda games I've played.



In the end it will come down to the mod community of DA:O and Bioware's ability to release consistent DLC. If Bioware releases content every 3 months or so, and the mod community releases its own interesting content, DA:O can become the massive RPG success Oblivion has been.



I wish Fereldan was designed a bit more like Tamriel for travel and exploration, but I'm happy with the way DA:O turned out. I plan on playing the heck out of it for now.

[Akka le Vil]

Kaosgirl wrote...

I admit that I haven't.  If they really are  "Oblivion done better" as they've been portrayed as, then I'm torn between regretting having missed them and being thankful my enjoyment of Oblivion wasn't ruined by comparison to them.

Daggerfall was the ultimate "sandbox" game, and was abolutely revolutionnary at the time (it was predating Fallout IIRC, and was absolutely so goddam HUGE that you would need to invent a new word to describe it). But it had the "Bethesda problem" at the power nine thousand - everything was always the same everywhere, and it was so riddled with bugs. I wouldn't tell you to play it now.

Morrowind, on the other hand... It was "Oblivion done right". The graphics were quite very good for the time (and many mods improved them tenfold), the world was very big, quite varied, and for once, despite the "Bethesda problems", the scenario was actually good, and felt falling into place nicely - it was LOGICAL to take you time between steps in the MQ, unlike Oblivion where you just feel you're absurdly f*cking around all the while the world is crumbling around you and nothing in the MQ make you think you shoudl do anything but rushing to the next step.
I would definitely advise you to give Morrowind a try. It's worth it if you can look beyond the dated graphics -which are still quite good, just not in the same league as what is done today.

[Tonya777]

I don't know , they are both amongst the greatest video games ever to exist imo



While Dragon Age seems to have better replay value , Oblivion was just SOOOOOOOOOO much fun as a thief/assassin type character , actually sneaking around actually stealing things actually sniping people off , the way you could attack any character in the game oh man its awesome



I say Dragon Age = Oblivion , they both get a perfect 10/10 from me

[TileToad]

Dex1701 wrote...
Eh, again, I think you're really over-simplifying how scaling can be done.  If we were talking about a straight-up constant, linear scale I'd agree with you 100%.  With no scaling at all in any areas of the game you're going to end up with uneven, patchy difficulty and loot value.  Much more disconcerting to me than running into areas that are too difficult is to find large chunks of content that would have been fun at a lower level, but are now easy to the point of being tedious because I've leveled past it.  You can absolutely create a scaling system that prevents things like that from happening without reducing difficulty...even to the point of having areas that still require an incredibly powerful character and player ingenuity while allowing others to scale in appropriate ways.

Certainly, different types of games benefit from different types/extents of scaling, and some not at all.  I'd argue that an effective (as well as judicious) use of scaling can positively affect the pacing and difficulty maintenance in a game if it can be done in a way that feels organic rather than patronizing.  It can also serve to make the game less predictable, which is a good thing.

Although I wouldn't want to argue that partial, none obvious, creature scaling might perhaps enhance the replayability somewhat by making certain parts of the game less predictable, equipment scaling (shops in particular) should always be done through monetary means, IMO.

I also feel that the chunks of content, that you say, aren't interesting anymore because you leveled past them, is equally, if not more present in these scaled RPG's. Many a time I open chests and feel that the content I find in there isn't that interesting since I already own something very similar. Seriously, I rather be surprised by a find, whether it be worthless (which I will then sell for gold.. getting me a bit closer to that unscaled equipment I saw at some local shop), or uber awesome/unique.

I dunno...because you want to do them?  I have no problem with people that aren't completists and like to play a game for 30 hours and be done with it.  I personally like to savor as much content as possible as long as it doesn't get too repetitive, but not everybody likes to try to see everything.  I agree that games shouldn't be made to be obscenely easy to the detriment of more "serious" gamers, but there can be a balance.

Yes, a fine sentiment for sure, but isn't it way more fun to do something for an actual purpose other than just for completions sake? Personally I feel it's more of a chore to do side quests, in these scaled RPG's, since one doesn't gain anything from them. I feel that people do them because the developers put them there and you feel obligated to check them out so you get your moneys worth. That's my take on it, at least.

Modifié par TileToad, 04 décembre 2009 - 09:18 .

[Sam -stone- serious]

Sidney wrote...


This "freedom" is usually just silly - you can't just go psycho and kill everyone?  It is like listening to people gripe about not being able to go into every house and pilfer the silverware and cups like you can in Oblivion. Those things don't add one lick to the game experience. Same as the wandering around the empty space between villages in Morrowwind wasn't any fun after the first time you did it. Think about the "real" world you live in where in the course of playing your role you don't go into every random house in town. You have certain "plot" places in your daily life that you go as well and most of the people and places around you are just background noise.

Why is such freedom is silly? Whos call is this? If you find such freedom silly then you have the choice of NOT  indulging in it and go about your bussiness as you like. Me on the other hand want to have this choice because it strenghens my possition into the game world. Hurray i am a big bad thief / archer so i am bound to steal a lot of stuff and have to deal with the law and such. I  am also "accidentaly"  going to place a few arrows in someone who accuses me for "no reason" where and when i choose. Do i have the choice to do such in DAO?  No i dont. Do you have the choice to neglect such "silly freedom" in Oblivion?  Yes you can.

Why take this kind of freedom away from me? Why "reduce" the effectiveness,  cunning and potency of a thief / rogue / whatever in such a sterile world? As much sterile as the Oblivion world is (without mods) its still more fun and more involving that what DAO  offers. Why? Because it does not "restrict" me in any way. EVERYTHING  IS  POSSIBLE in oblivions game world while in DAO  its like i have a hidden spirit holding my hand and not letting me do what i want. Is it not what such games are all about? 

P.S. What is buffling me however is certain people who snob with a vengeance Japan RPGs because they are "all story and no freedom" and now those same people go about and lap up Dragon Age which IS  a J-RPG (design wise) in western clothing. Irony? Hypocricy? Fanboyism? Snobs? I dont know what of these is the correct term to call them by.

[miltos33]

I like both Bioware and Bethesda but I know that their styles are distinct and therefore I also know what to expect from them. I spent last month playing Dragon Age and I really enjoyed every moment as I advanced through the story until it comes to an end. I am now looking forward to Mass Effect 2 and I expect something similar until the story also comes to an end. In the mean time, I am going back to live in the world of Fallout 3, where there is still so many things to do despite the fact that I spent the best part of the year playing it, and where I can be anyone, be anywhere, and do anything. Bioware are hands down the best developers when it comes to traditional rpgs and their games are definitely good value for money, but Bethesda have something unique in their hands with the way they design their own games.

Modifié par miltos33, 04 décembre 2009 - 12:26 .

[Axterix]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

P.S. What is buffling me however is certain people who snob with a vengeance Japan RPGs because they are "all story and no freedom" and now those same people go about and lap up Dragon Age which IS  a J-RPG (design wise) in western clothing. Irony? Hypocricy? Fanboyism? Snobs? I dont know what of these is the correct term to call them by.

Dragon Age is pretty much your typical western RPG, not sure where you are getting that it is a JRPG design-wise.

The party isn't mostly teenagers, especially emo teenagers.  There's no 3 minute long summon attacks.  Combat has been simplified a bit for console reasons, but still doesn't feel like a JRPG, no action bars, this guy goes, then this guy, with the same old status effects you find in every JRPG.  And you can make choices that alter a few things.

Definitely western, not J.

Don't take those comments on JRPGs as meaning I don't like them, I play my share of them and enjoy them.  Except for the 3 minute long summons and the "..." conversations, the former needs to be skippable, the latter just needs to be removed

Anyway, as to DA or Oblivion, definitely DA for me.  Oblivion always tended to bore me and I hated the in the box leveling system.  Plus I prefer a party over a single character.

Modifié par Axterix, 04 décembre 2009 - 01:26 .

[Sylixe]

crashxdjp wrote...

Now, I have played through Oblivion a few times on both PC and Console version. And after playing Dragon Age for about a week I gotta say that Dragon Age is a better game overall.

The only thing Oblvion was better about was the freedom and how you could go anywhere and do anything. But, after a while you noticed that the monsters were the same, all the caves and forts were all the same. Plus the "leveling with you" system was flawed in my opinion.

Dragon Age's replayability is better, the gameplay is more challenging (not just hack and slash) and overall is a better game.

What do you guys think?

A more appropriate comparison would be Moorwind > Oblivion.  DAO is a completely different game from those games.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Axterix wrote...

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

P.S. What is buffling me however is certain people who snob with a vengeance Japan RPGs because they are "all story and no freedom" and now those same people go about and lap up Dragon Age which IS  a J-RPG (design wise) in western clothing. Irony? Hypocricy? Fanboyism? Snobs? I dont know what of these is the correct term to call them by.

Dragon Age is pretty much your typical western RPG, not sure where you are getting that it is a JRPG design-wise.

The party isn't mostly teenagers, especially emo teenagers.  There's no 3 minute long summon attacks.  Combat has been simplified a bit for console reasons, but still doesn't feel like a JRPG, no action bars, this guy goes, then this guy, with the same old status effects you find in every JRPG.  And you can make choices that alter a few things.

Definitely western, not J.

Don't take those comments on JRPGs as meaning I don't like them, I play my share of them and enjoy them.  Except for the 3 minute long summons and the "..." conversations, the former needs to be skippable, the latter just needs to be removed

Anyway, as to DA or Oblivion, definitely DA for me.  Oblivion always tended to bore me and I hated the in the box leveling system.  Plus I prefer a party over a single character.

You should understand when i say that DAO  is -design- wise a J-type RPG. It has limited "freedom" (doesnt really have any), its story driven mostly and you really have no power to change much other than what is pre-determined for you to change. Look at some western RPGs.

- Fallout series
- Baldurs Gate series
- Neverwinter Nights series
- Drakensag
- Witcher
- Vampire Bloodlines

Just a few popular western RPGs. What do those games have in common? Right, freedom and open ended gameplay and world interactivity. 3 things that DAO  majorly lack and are the things that arguably J-RPGs routinely dont have in favour of better presentation and book-like story progression much like what DAO  offers.

Thats why DAO  is a western RPG  with Japan gameplay and design mechanics hence why the "clothing" is different. If i went and converted the visuals and ONLY the visuals of DAO  into an Asian setting i reckon nobody would understand that it was made from a western developer except maybe the simplified combat and lack of awesome spell and creature effects.

[Jonfon_ire]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

Axterix wrote...

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

P.S. What is buffling me however is certain people who snob with a vengeance Japan RPGs because they are "all story and no freedom" and now those same people go about and lap up Dragon Age which IS  a J-RPG (design wise) in western clothing. Irony? Hypocricy? Fanboyism? Snobs? I dont know what of these is the correct term to call them by.

Dragon Age is pretty much your typical western RPG, not sure where you are getting that it is a JRPG design-wise.

The party isn't mostly teenagers, especially emo teenagers.  There's no 3 minute long summon attacks.  Combat has been simplified a bit for console reasons, but still doesn't feel like a JRPG, no action bars, this guy goes, then this guy, with the same old status effects you find in every JRPG.  And you can make choices that alter a few things.

Definitely western, not J.

Don't take those comments on JRPGs as meaning I don't like them, I play my share of them and enjoy them.  Except for the 3 minute long summons and the "..." conversations, the former needs to be skippable, the latter just needs to be removed

Anyway, as to DA or Oblivion, definitely DA for me.  Oblivion always tended to bore me and I hated the in the box leveling system.  Plus I prefer a party over a single character.

You should understand when i say that DAO  is -design- wise a J-type RPG. It has limited "freedom" (doesnt really have any), its story driven mostly and you really have no power to change much other than what is pre-determined for you to change. Look at some western RPGs.

- Fallout series
- Baldurs Gate series
- Neverwinter Nights series
- Drakensag
- Witcher
- Vampire Bloodlines

Just a few popular western RPGs. What do those games have in common? Right, freedom and open ended gameplay and world interactivity. 3 things that DAO  majorly lack and are the things that arguably J-RPGs routinely dont have in favour of better presentation and book-like story progression much like what DAO  offers.

Thats why DAO  is a western RPG  with Japan gameplay and design mechanics hence why the "clothing" is different. If i went and converted the visuals and ONLY the visuals of DAO  into an Asian setting i reckon nobody would understand that it was made from a western developer except maybe the simplified combat and lack of awesome spell and creature effects. 

Wait, what? DA:O is almost identical in terms of layout and structure to Baldurs Gate, NWN, The Witcher and Vampire Bloodlines (they're the ones on your list I've played personally). All of them use the same ideas as DA:O in terms of non-sandbox RPGs with the ability to run multiple quests at the same time with a series of interconnected areas which need to be individually loaded.