Aller au contenu

Photo

Dragon Age Origins: A Game ahead of it's Time?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
89 réponses à ce sujet

#1
RogueWriter3201

RogueWriter3201
  • Members
  • 1 276 messages
Firstly, allow me to make something clear. I love and adore DA:O. I think it is a well crafted Epic and attains as many victories as it does defeats in it's implementation of Story, Characters, Settings, etc.

However...

One must take notice of certain things which have come to light in recent weeks, the foremost being the difficulties and set-backs in regards to Dragon Age and many associated features and add-ons. The issue at the heart of my question is simply, "Did Dragon Age release at the wrong time, in the wrong way, and did it focus upon the wrong tech medium?"

Allow me to clarify further. 

We have Mass Effect. A console title that despite garnering 'some' negative attention from right wing pundits for so called 'inappropriate' content, became a massive success and exceded most if not all expectations. Now, on the near horizon, we have Mass Effect 2, a title which has taken all the success and lessons learned from ME1 and added to or improved upon them. Also, much as it's predecessor, it is a title which was designed as a child of the console generation, though a port to PC is obvious. Another observation in regards to the Mass Effect IP is a consistant lack of critical, or at the least frustrating, problems with development time and implementation. Simply put, aside from a somewhat lack-luster piece of DLC -i.e. Pinicle Station- Mass Effect has come and gone and come again with little to no amount of confusion or difficulty. Not to say that there has been none of these things, but what has come about has been little to nothing or handled quickly. Sadly, this brings us to Dragon Age. In the time we have had with Bioware's new IP there has been excessive delays, confusion regarding multiple topics including level of maturity, content, genre, and implementation. Originally slated as a PC "only" IP, that statement was latter recinded and the efforts begun to port the game to consoles. First one console, than others. To say that 'many' last minute choices were made in regards to what and how Dragon Age would be brought to the people would be an understatement. And this brings us back around to my primary inquiry. From what we have witnessed in regards to how Mass Effect has been handled and how Dragon Age has been handled, I find myself wondering, and I pose these questions to you in the forums:

"Would it have been a better choice to not only release Dragon Age in the same manner as Mass Effect, i.e. make it a Console focused IP with options to port to PC later?"  

"Would it have been a better choice to take everything learned from the Mass Effect trilogy, it's victories and short-cummings, wait until said trilogy was completed and then utilize all knowledge and resources to not only modernize the look and game-play of Dragon Age but also the manner in which it would be developed and released?" 

To sum everything up, to me -in my own opinon and mine alone- Dragon Age suffered. From what? Being intented for the PC first for the sake of Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights nostalgia, in a time when PC gaming is becomming too expensive to maintain and enjoy and is taking a fairly noticable back seat to the console generation. It has suffered from poor marketing, i.e. How far and how dark should we take Dragon Age? Let's show blood and gore, but not nudity. Let's show emotionaly impactful moments like the rape of a loved one, but let's not give any clear indication of it except through later dialogue. Etc, etc. And, it has suffered because the amount of work and time that should have gone into making Dragon Age into everything that Mass Effect has become was not used as effectively as it could have been had this title been maintained in pre-production until after the completetion of the ME Saga. I understand that Bioware has mutlple teams and production facilties, but in this day and age, when an interactive gaming experiecne can take as much time and resouces to develope as say a major Blockbuster film, allocation of people, time, and money is key. Frankly, I feel these things slipped through the cracks. Now, is the point of all this to blame any single party or person? No. I love Bioware. I love the Doctors, Chris and all the massive brains behind the scenes. However, no one is perfect. Mistakes can be made, and all we can hope is that we learn from them. 

And now, I pass this thread on to you. I only ask that we try to maintain a level of maturity and open mindedness. I do not expect this thread to be open long, as mine never are. But, I would hate to see it become locked because people could not maintain conversations for more than a few hours or a day. Lastly, let me point out that these views are mine and mine alone. If others share them, so be it. Simply, my Arashok had a question, and this is my pursuit of the answer.
;)


#2
Valmy

Valmy
  • Members
  • 3 735 messages
Yeah I don't get how PCs are that much more expensive than Consoles. Consoles are not cheap and their games are not cheap and people often buy more than one. I have one PC I can easily play any game that is out and I can do other things with it than just play games....things I would probably need to buy a PC for anyway. Man PC stuff is just dirt cheap these days.

While I certainly like Mass Effect I guess I fail to see how it is the shining example of everything Dragon Age should have been.  I somehow am glad I did not have to roam endlessly around Ferelden looking for metal deposits.

Modifié par Valmy, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:35 .


#3
Bibdy

Bibdy
  • Members
  • 1 455 messages
What, they should just let the DLC and Toolset stuff slide for now and let someone else do it? Screw that. There's always hiccups with new technology. I'm a very patient person and I'm not really that fussed about delays, because, well what's the alternative? Kick up a stink and throw chairs at the wall when something doesn't go my way? Impatience is nothing short of a sign of inexperience. **** happens. Deal with it.

I'd rather they were pioneers and we can play with such awesome stuff like the Toolset and a DLC service now, than wait 5 years for it to be perfected.

Modifié par Bibdy, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:48 .


#4
DariusTrue

DariusTrue
  • Members
  • 34 messages
In my opinion the consolification of games has really made a lot of titles suffer immensely in their port to the PC. Mass Effect's controls, for instance, ended up feeling clumsy in their port to the PC. I don't know what would've happened to a port from consoles to PCs for Dragon Age, but I don't imagine it would've been much different from Mass Effect's dilution. Console gamers are often a completely different breed of gamer to PC gamers, so in that respect I feel Bioware did the right thing in giving attention to that they're different platforms that should be equally respected, not just port and grab.



I don't see how it was a marketing shortfall for them to advertise its' tasteful use of sexuality and gore, and not create (as I understand your dissapointment) a more graphic rape scene in the city elf origin. If they'd made it any more 'adult' I'm sure they'd have greater censorship disputes (as if there weren't enough already!) *see Australia.



I tend to agree with Valmy in that I don't think that Mass Effect is a "shining example" of what Dragon Age should've been, other than the cinematic dialogue, the games look and feel completely different, so no, they shouldn't have waited.



To sum up my feelings: I really feel that consolification of games is leading to a cheapening of the quality of games were getting... just because something's less expensive doesn't mean we should only develop for it.

#5
BeljoraDien

BeljoraDien
  • Members
  • 508 messages
With the exception of the Wii, I haven't seen a reason to buy the 'new age' consoles. I love PC games, so I personally hope they keep that as a main focus.



This is just about the oddest opinion I could have, but I wonder if we're looking at Bioware's screw ups the wrong way. Look at all the gaming companies like Squaresoft and Tri-Ace(Star Ocean/Valkyrie Profile) that used to make great games until they got too 'professional'. And countless small obscure companies that pop out one game better than any 'big' company then disappear from the face of the Earth. It seems like the better a company gets at PR and marketing, the worse they get at developing games.

...And you have to admit this is some bad PR.

When I heard Bioware was making another fantasy-based game I never thought it'd come close to living up to Baldur's Gate, but it did... come close.



...

...

...did you just type "short-cummings"?

#6
imukka

imukka
  • Members
  • 47 messages
More like opposite way

seriously drop your fanboy goggles

#7
DariusTrue

DariusTrue
  • Members
  • 34 messages

imukka wrote...

More like opposite way

Is that like walking backwards? :huh:

#8
Grommash94

Grommash94
  • Members
  • 927 messages
I disagree that DA suffered tbh. It seems to be quite a popular game.

#9
bjdbwea

bjdbwea
  • Members
  • 3 251 messages

glenboy24 wrote...

"Would it have been a better choice to take everything learned from the Mass Effect trilogy, it's victories and short-cummings, wait until said trilogy was completed and then utilize all knowledge and resources to not only modernize the look and game-play of Dragon Age but also the manner in which it would be developed and released?"


Not at all. And that answers the question in the title as well. ME is one of my two favourite games of all time, BG 2 being the second one. But that doesn't mean DA should play like ME. It should play like BG 2, after all it was more or less advertised to be a successor. Unfortunately, it really didn't turn out to be.

As far as platforms are concerned: The need to make the game run on console hardware and sell it to the console audience is precisely one of the main reasons why the game couldn't be much closer to the BG 2 gaming experience.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice: PC gaming being more expensive than console gaming has for a long time been mostly a myth, but in recent years it's simply become completely and demonstrable false.

#10
Grossbard

Grossbard
  • Members
  • 56 messages
When you italicize your entire post it gets hard to read

#11
ToJKa1

ToJKa1
  • Members
  • 1 246 messages
I honestly don't see Dragon Age as a console game, and Mass Effect 3 won't be seen for 3 years propably, it would've been stupid for BioWare to finish it before releasing Dragon Age. BioWare is a large company, they are currenty working on new Dragon Ago content and the Star Wars MMO, propably also doing finalising on ME2 or pre-production work for ME3, i doubt they have an employee shortage.



As for Dragon Age itself, it's a bit rough around the edges, but no doubt the best game i bought last year. As for the delay of RtO, stuff happens in software deveploment, especially if you're adding new stuff to an existing program.

#12
Timurlane

Timurlane
  • Members
  • 72 messages
Did you seriously offer up consolitis as a cure for what ails DA:O?

Consolitis is the commonly known disease of the games industry, not the cure.



Companies turn to consoles for one reason and one reason only - Money. The bottom line.

It's a verifiable fact that console players will pay more to receive less. Why bother creating a good game or even a great game for PC that you can sell for $50 when console users will drop $70 for the same game with significantly less features? Not to mention the inability for console users to pirate games.

Seriously anybody who has been following the industry for the past couple decades knows without a shade of doubt that the quality of games is going down for 2 very good reason, neither of which you can blame the game dev companies for. 1 - piracy. People steal their ****, it lowers profits and embitters them against PC. 2- consolitis. companies like microsoft will buy the exclusive rights to a good PC game to force it onto their console creating market share not only for their console unit itself, but also for all the IPs (intellectual property) that they buy ensuring a big market for their crap in the future.



To conclude - if anything, DA:O is a game which should have been PC exclusive but was put on the consoles for the damned good reason of money money money. I can't imagine how slow I would be setting up party abilities on a console, not to mention how unbearably terrible everything would look (I've got it all maxed settings on PC and it's gorgeous). Perhaps one day I'll go back to playing consoles, but I like many others have seen the light by playing the same game (GTA3) on my console and then subsequently on my PC. The idea of ever touching the hideous and controller-defunct console version of the game is so misguided that it hurts to even consider.

#13
DariusTrue

DariusTrue
  • Members
  • 34 messages

Timurlane wrote...

Did you seriously offer up consolitis as a cure for what ails DA:O?
Consolitis is the commonly known disease of the games industry, not the cure.

Companies turn to consoles for one reason and one reason only - Money. The bottom line.
It's a verifiable fact that console players will pay more to receive less. Why bother creating a good game or even a great game for PC that you can sell for $50 when console users will drop $70 for the same game with significantly less features? Not to mention the inability for console users to pirate games.
Seriously anybody who has been following the industry for the past couple decades knows without a shade of doubt that the quality of games is going down for 2 very good reason, neither of which you can blame the game dev companies for. 1 - piracy. People steal their ****, it lowers profits and embitters them against PC. 2- consolitis. companies like microsoft will buy the exclusive rights to a good PC game to force it onto their console creating market share not only for their console unit itself, but also for all the IPs (intellectual property) that they buy ensuring a big market for their crap in the future.

To conclude - if anything, DA:O is a game which should have been PC exclusive but was put on the consoles for the damned good reason of money money money. I can't imagine how slow I would be setting up party abilities on a console, not to mention how unbearably terrible everything would look (I've got it all maxed settings on PC and it's gorgeous). Perhaps one day I'll go back to playing consoles, but I like many others have seen the light by playing the same game (GTA3) on my console and then subsequently on my PC. The idea of ever touching the hideous and controller-defunct console version of the game is so misguided that it hurts to even consider.


Amen to that!

#14
Cadaver Lord

Cadaver Lord
  • Members
  • 38 messages

DariusTrue wrote...

To sum up my feelings: I really feel that consolification of games is leading to a cheapening of the quality of games were getting... just because something's less expensive doesn't mean we should only develop for it.


Read my mind.

#15
Coastwatcher

Coastwatcher
  • Members
  • 54 messages
"Would it have been a better choice to not only release Dragon Age in the same manner as Mass Effect, i.e. make it a Console focused IP with options to port to PC later?"  

Some have criticized Oblivion and Fallout 3 exactly for this. That it was console driven first, then PC was an afterthought. So you have pros and cons for making it that way too.

#16
Viglin

Viglin
  • Members
  • 836 messages

Timurlane wrote...

Did you seriously offer up consolitis as a cure for what ails DA:O?
Consolitis is the commonly known disease of the games industry, not the cure.

Companies turn to consoles for one reason and one reason only - Money. The bottom line.
It's a verifiable fact that console players will pay more to receive less. Why bother creating a good game or even a great game for PC that you can sell for $50 when console users will drop $70 for the same game with significantly less features? Not to mention the inability for console users to pirate games.
Seriously anybody who has been following the industry for the past couple decades knows without a shade of doubt that the quality of games is going down for 2 very good reason, neither of which you can blame the game dev companies for. 1 - piracy. People steal their ****, it lowers profits and embitters them against PC. 2- consolitis. companies like microsoft will buy the exclusive rights to a good PC game to force it onto their console creating market share not only for their console unit itself, but also for all the IPs (intellectual property) that they buy ensuring a big market for their crap in the future.

To conclude - if anything, DA:O is a game which should have been PC exclusive but was put on the consoles for the damned good reason of money money money. I can't imagine how slow I would be setting up party abilities on a console, not to mention how unbearably terrible everything would look (I've got it all maxed settings on PC and it's gorgeous). Perhaps one day I'll go back to playing consoles, but I like many others have seen the light by playing the same game (GTA3) on my console and then subsequently on my PC. The idea of ever touching the hideous and controller-defunct console version of the game is so misguided that it hurts to even consider.


This made me grin...since l started playing games on the Pc with Pool of Raidance over 20 years ago...and l havent touched my Pc for gaming since l got my ps3 2 years ago.
And if l was a Pc game developer, and read that...ld ask myself what l was doing wrong...or what was the console doing right.

And no, lm no "fpser" or whatever useless label someone wants to use...l just prefer it.

Each to their own.

Modifié par Viglin, 06 janvier 2010 - 09:01 .


#17
Viglin

Viglin
  • Members
  • 836 messages

Valmy wrote...

Yeah I don't get how PCs are that much more expensive than Consoles. Consoles are not cheap and their games are not cheap and people often buy more than one. I have one PC I can easily play any game that is out and I can do other things with it than just play games....things I would probably need to buy a PC for anyway. Man PC stuff is just dirt cheap these days.

While I certainly like Mass Effect I guess I fail to see how it is the shining example of everything Dragon Age should have been.  I somehow am glad I did not have to roam endlessly around Ferelden looking for metal deposits.


Both the new Ps3 and Xbox and l think the WI goes for 300, most games 40-60.

My pc, which is maybe 2 years old...couldnt even run the DAO Character Creator.
How much would a pc cost to run DAO?

#18
nmal015

nmal015
  • Members
  • 64 messages
Not much at all, my computer was over 2 years old when i bought dragon age(have upgraded it over the last couple of weeks) and it ran fine although on relatively low-medium graphics settings.



I just had a dual core 2.4, 2 gigs of 800 ram and an 8600 gt. I imagine all these parts could be found for fairly cheaps these days.

#19
bjdbwea

bjdbwea
  • Members
  • 3 251 messages

Viglin wrote...

Both the new Ps3 and Xbox and l think the WI goes for 300, most games 40-60.

My pc, which is maybe 2 years old...couldnt even run the DAO Character Creator.
How much would a pc cost to run DAO?


It is impossible that a PC built 2 years ago as a then-decent gaming PC would not run the character creator as well as the game itself. DA has pretty moderate hardware requirements. Conclusion: The problem sat in front of the monitor more likely.

And: Even a much older PC could be upgraded to run DA and most current games decently for less than $ 300. You could even build a complete PC for $ 300 that can run DA.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 06 janvier 2010 - 09:16 .


#20
Viglin

Viglin
  • Members
  • 836 messages

bjdbwea wrote...

Viglin wrote...

Both the new Ps3 and Xbox and l think the WI goes for 300, most games 40-60.

My pc, which is maybe 2 years old...couldnt even run the DAO Character Creator.
How much would a pc cost to run DAO?


It is impossible that a PC built 2 years ago as a then-decent gaming PC would not run the character creator as well as the game itself. DA has pretty moderate hardware requirements. Conclusion: The problem sat in front of the monitor more likely.

And: Even a much older PC could be upgraded to run DA and most current games decently for less than $ 300. You could even build a complete PC for $ 300 that can run DA.


Love these kind of responses...even thou l already stated lve been Pc gaming for OVER 20 Years...which l can assume is older then most of the average forum members. I also know that theres no "any key"[10 points to the person who gets this reference]

And why would l want to update something l already own for another few hundred...when l can run it, no update needed, right now on my console?

And thats what game developers need to look at, and lm sure they do.

#21
4bs.zer0

4bs.zer0
  • Members
  • 60 messages
I have a 2 year old system - Quad Core @ 2.4GHz, 4GB ram, 8800GT. To my great surprise, I can run Dragon Age on max settings at 1680x1050 resolution with absolutely no problem.



I prefer to play on my PC, but I really have nothing against consoles. I just personally hate to play games with my thumbs :-)



Someone mentioned PC vs Console costs...

Well, PC (the kind you can play your games with) is certainly more expensive then any console. 3-4 times more expensive.

#22
Viglin

Viglin
  • Members
  • 836 messages

nmal015 wrote...

Not much at all, my computer was over 2 years old when i bought dragon age(have upgraded it over the last couple of weeks) and it ran fine although on relatively low-medium graphics settings.

I just had a dual core 2.4, 2 gigs of 800 ram and an 8600 gt. I imagine all these parts could be found for fairly cheaps these days.


Now this is a useful post, thanks, l may just consider it next time:)

#23
HolyRomanCousinConsort

HolyRomanCousinConsort
  • Members
  • 88 messages

bjdbwea wrote...

Viglin wrote...

Both the new Ps3 and Xbox and l think the WI goes for 300, most games 40-60.

My pc, which is maybe 2 years old...couldnt even run the DAO Character Creator.
How much would a pc cost to run DAO?


It is impossible that a PC built 2 years ago as a then-decent gaming PC would not run the character creator as well as the game itself. DA has pretty moderate hardware requirements. Conclusion: The problem sat in front of the monitor more likely.

And: Even a much older PC could be upgraded to run DA and most current games decently for less than $ 300. You could even build a complete PC for $ 300 that can run DA.


It's possible that a PC built 2 years ago has integrated video that cannot run the game. There are people who work in non-computer fields that enjoy gaming but don't care about keeping up with the latest hardware news. In fact, I bet most of Dragon Age's player base would fall into this category.

#24
HolyRomanCousinConsort

HolyRomanCousinConsort
  • Members
  • 88 messages
Viglin, if you PM Gorath Alpha with your computer info like processor, RAM, etc, he can most likely recommend a video card for your PC that will probably cost like 60 dollars, then you can play DA on it. A 2 year old PC is relatively young, just add some silicone to it and it's gonna be hot again ;)

#25
Dubidox

Dubidox
  • Members
  • 88 messages

Not to mention the inability for console users to pirate games.


I agree with your post on the whole, but I've seen this mentioned a few times on the boards and it's just wrong.

People have been pirating console games since PS1, and I know you can quite easily pirate 360 games.  Not so sure about PS3 but I doubt it's an exception.

I agree about really not enjoying console games though.  I don't know how people play shooters or god forbid RTS games with a controller...:huh: