[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Mr_BillGates"]
Let's not pretend the first Dragon Age was any good. It was more of an offline MMORPG with campaign quality. The combat was point and click. PAUSE. Repeat. LAME.
Desmonic
Yeah it was...... It was also a ripoff of FFXII's far superior combat system. DAO is extremely overrated, both its gameplay and its narrative were lacking. And it was easily the most generic game Bioware has created. It checks all the boxes instead of adding new boxes. Nothing was unique in the game. And this is what DAO fanboys simply do not understand, and this is why Bioware does not want to rehash DAO. And the console versions of DAO are horrible.It may have been generic, but you know why it's so damn popular? It has FUN and WELL BALANCED gameplay. The number one "box" to check in any RPG. A game does not have to be unique to be great. It needs to execute what it does, well. That wasn't the only reason though...
The party characters were better, the game design (level, battle and world design) was better and the extremely funny thing is that as generic as the game was, the plot was actually better.
Sure you had your regular "Oh noes! Monster/bad guy/mythical beast/[insert enemy] invasion! Only you[the player] can gather a party and save the world, etc, etc!" (then again that's what most rpg's consist of anyway)... however you also had a cleverly built lore and "overworld" history right from the first game.
In many, many moments you are alluded to the Qunari and how dangerous they can be if they decide to invade; how the mages wish freedom while the templars, ordered by the chantry, unjustly (or not) force them to seclusion and even in DA:O you start seeing signs that a "civil war" for the mages freedom might happen not too far into the future; how the Darkspawn ArchDemons (while pretty generic) and "special leaders" (the Architect and the Mother for example, which are not so generic by comparison) are crucial to understand exactly what happened to the "Black City" in the Veil, which in turn will lead to understand why the Chantry chose to "imprison" mages in such a way and even what is happening in the 3rd game (I feel this should be disclosed in DA:I, since it makes sense in what's happening at that point in time); how Flemeth is more than a simple NPC, especially if you romance Morrigan, etc.
Point being, DA:O did an exceptional job of setting up all these plot points without shoving them in your face in order for the following games to pick and develop even further. And while I give DA2 props for continuing the Mage Freedom plot point I feel that it was not fleshed out properly and took too many turns away from the "setting" of the first game, almost alienating fans of the original in a way. They felt almost like different games from different franchises in a way. To me it seems that all the plot points I mentioned above are connected and needed to understand the whole picture, and while I don't think they should all be explored at the same time they should have been given some updates during the course of DA2, you know some tidbits here and there so you could get a few more clues to the puzzle.
DA:O did all that while managing to still be a damn fun and consistent RPG, a thing in which DA2 failed considerably (they did improve with the DLC's however, especially with Legacy. Mark of the Assassin felt a bit too much like a "side-quest" per say). That's why people like it far more than the mess that was DA2.
Never said DA2 doesn't have its problems. It was undercooked while DAO was overcooked.Well balanced, are you kidding me? The mage in DAO is OP and she is so OP that Bioware in the expansion crudely tried to balance the other two classes. Hell, parts of the Rogue were OP as well. The game is not well balanced at all. Some skills are OP as hell, while others are useless. Hell, DA2 has a more balanced combat system than DAO and that's not saying much.
The problem with DAO is its so busy with the exposition and world building, the central PLOT was lacking. Its the same story in ME2. Why are the four major mid quests so divorced from the main plot with only a plot coupon to earn by doing them? And why does no party character truly matter outside Alistair (or Loghain if you want to count him)? The problem with the game is that the side stories are poorly integrated with the plot, and so were the characters. And really, the Darkspawn are absolutely yawn worthy, as are the Grey Wardens, who are basically a Bioware recycle of their past tropes. Which is another problem, DAO is heavily recycled from past Bioware plots and so are the characters, without enough divergence.
Oh and DA2's characters are better, at least we have them particpate in the plot and have in depth character quests, unlike in Origins where its talk to them three times and do a favor, and boom, development done. DAO characters are a bunch of talking codex entires who tell about their development, instead of showing it.
Log in to comment