Dragon Age: Origins is overrated. I am fine with the graphics. After playing it for a dozen hours or so, I came to the conclusion that the majority of its appeal is that story, stat building, and character customization. There is indeed character customization and stat building, but the actual combat in which those traits are used is quite automated. Dialogue between characters is decent and the relationship system is interesting, but those are not enough reasons to call it the best role-playing game of the year it was released.
The ability to make many spoken decisions in that game is probably why it is regarded well as a role-playing game. However, that is not enough for me. Demon Souls is a more interesting experience partially be it has different ideas about Middle earth-like settings. In comparison, Dragon Age: Origins has the same races as usual. Those are human, dwarf, elf, and ogre.
@pupp3t_mast3r said:
I think as a rule of thumb any game that's had more than three sequels to it. Usually after the third it's just the game developers tweaking an existing game-play system for an extra payday.
That is not a rule I use for anything. In regards to video games, each Street Fighter is different enough to be a different game and each version of a numbered entry such as Street Fighter IV and Super Street Fighter IV is almost a new game because of all the new characters, moves, and rebalancing done. Fighting games are like that. Each numbered Final Fantasy game is distinct from all of the other main games. There is Final Fantasy XIII and then XIII-2, but those are very different from XII, XI, and so on. The Metal Gear Solid series has plenty of new content with each new addition and it is a standard of excellence in the gaming industry. Actually, all the games I mentioned by name are and they have at least four other games with them as part of the same respective series which are at least more than one you limited good sequels to.
Log in to comment