The Dragon Age World /Storyline Lame, Cliche or Good?

Ok so Dragon Age 1 & 2 as a whole was a disappointment for me. The graphics were bad as well the gameplay and for me the story and world wern't that great either. Believe it or not they hired profesional writers to make this world and are resposible for the Dragon Age books, but the books arn't exactly flying off the shelves and the few people I've come across that have bought them say they're a bit out there and not that good. IMO I think they need to hire some new writers and get rid of some of the old ones to say the least.

I consider them uninspired.

I liked Origins' story for what it was, but it was an incredibly cliche, generic fantasy story. But that's generic stories are kind of Bioware's thing.

All of the above. The overall story is cliche, but the main characters are good, and it's got some lame moments and lame voice acting. Overall great game though.

It's very cliche, but still enjoyable.

The first one is very generic, the second one is great.

Origins' was cliche, but it was very well written.

Dragon Age 2 was just bad.

Generic version of Lord of the Rings.

Origins' was cliche, but it was very well written.

Dragon Age 2 was just bad.

BigBoss154

I sorely agree, Origins took a very very generic/cliched plot and wrote it expertly. DA2 was just something else...

Origins was very predictable high fantasy without much original flair behind it, however the focus elsewhere than on the 'evil growing horde' played to the writers and game worlds strengths.

DA2 on the other hand attempted a more original premises, only it is so terribly written and inconsistent at times it's unbelievable.

Also the books are between ok and eh. I've skimmed through a couple at the recommendation of a friend who's a fan, and they're nothing impressive, pretty shlock fantasy - the romance is hilarious in it, but they lend themselves better to stronger characterization and exploring the world than the games do. Things like the stronger fleshing out of Loghains character was geuinely interesting.

It's just nothing remarkable really, aside from their characters who genuinely do stand out.

[QUOTE="BigBoss154"]

Origins' was cliche, but it was very well written.

Dragon Age 2 was just bad.

Mythomniac

I sorely agree, Origins took a very very generic/cliched plot and wrote it expertly.

I like the Dragon Age story. It is really interesting. Maybe a little cliche' but not anywhere near the extent of some other games.

I like Dragon Age's world, its a bit generic, but it still has its own cool and original ideas.

[QUOTE="BigBoss154"]

Origins' was cliche, but it was very well written.

Dragon Age 2 was just bad.

Mythomniac

I sorely agree, Origins took a very very generic/cliched plot and wrote it expertly. DA2 was just something else...

Origins was very predictable high fantasy without much original flair behind it, however the focus elsewhere than on the 'evil growing horde' played to the writers and game worlds strengths.

DA2 on the other hand attempted a more original premises, only it is so terribly written and inconsistent at times it's unbelievable.

Also the books are between ok and eh. I've skimmed through a couple at the recommendation of a friend who's a fan, and they're nothing impressive, pretty shlock fantasy - the romance is hilarious in it, but they lend themselves better to stronger characterization and exploring the world than the games do. Things like the stronger fleshing out of Loghains character was geuinely interesting.

It's just nothing remarkable really, aside from their characters who genuinely do stand out.

skrat_01

[QUOTE="Mythomniac"]

[QUOTE="BigBoss154"]

Origins' was cliche, but it was very well written.

Dragon Age 2 was just bad.

Shielder7

I sorely agree, Origins took a very very generic/cliched plot and wrote it expertly.

Its hard to find a Fantasy setting I don't have some knowlege of, and the setting is the only redeeming feature of Dragon Age.

[QUOTE="Shielder7"]

[QUOTE="Mythomniac"]

I sorely agree, Origins took a very very generic/cliched plot and wrote it expertly.texasgoldrush

It's unoriginal for the most part, but still very enjoyable. I'm a fan of it, myself.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Shielder7"] Take out that last part and I might agree with you I didn't find the writing in DAO it be good at all.

Shielder7

[QUOTE="Shielder7"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] agreed...and I am a huge Bioware fan....DAO has got to be their worst story other than Neverwinter Nights.redstormrisen

It's cliche sure, but they use a ton of depth in evolving the backstory and there's plenty of good voice acting and production value. It's kind of like half-life 2 in a vague way. Good storytelling selling an otherwise weak story.

Incredibly cheesy and cliche. If you want a good story go read A Song of Ice and Fire.

I liked the first game. I thought it was good.

I just don't like fantasy completely so I'm kind of biased but I didn't think DAO's story was much better or worse than other fantasy games this gen.

On the surface the first is cliche, but once you go into the backstory there is more to it (this means reading all the codex stuff). The premise of the second is interesting and there were some good deas there, it's just that everything was poorly implemented

On the surface the first is cliche, but once you go into the backstory there is more to it (this means reading all the codex stuff). The premise of the second is interesting and there were some good deas there, it's just that everything was poorly implemented

CushVA

[QUOTE="Shielder7"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] agreed...and I am a huge Bioware fan....DAO has got to be their worst story other than Neverwinter Nights.redstormrisen

Just about every fantasy setting spellcasters ae something to be feared and Dragon Age is no where near Forgotten Realms content or distinguishing features. In fact Dragon Age has hardly any distinguishing features they just rip off Tolkien, Forgotten Realms and a buch of other settings.

It's drivel of the worst order.

Alternately dull, formlessly similar to other works, and mind numbingly protracted, it is a refuse heap of borrowed ideas expressed poorly.

Had I the option, I would purge utterly the very experience of Dragon Age from my memory, and no doubt gain by that measure a fresh appreciation for flowers, and walks along the river-side, as well as any number of waylaid brain cells lost in such portion as to shame huffing gasoline.

It's drivel of the worst order.

Alternately dull, formlessly similar to other works, and mind numbingly protracted, it is a refuse heap of borrowed ideas expressed poorly.

Had I the option, I would purge utterly the very experience of Dragon Age from my memory, and no doubt gain by that measure a fresh appreciation for flowers, and walks along the river-side, as well as any number of waylaid brain cells lost in such portion as to shame huffing gasoline.

jethrovegas

Origins is poorly written generic tripe. I didn't play the sequel since I know better, but I imagine it's the same, if not worse going off of the demo.

Slashkice

[QUOTE="redstormrisen"][QUOTE="Shielder7"] Yeah, but Neverwinter Nights had multiplayer and the expansion packs had ok storys. Dragon Age has Cliches toped off with lameness

Shielder7

Just about every fantasy setting spellcasters ae something to be feared and Dragon Age is no where near Forgotten Realms content or distinguishing features. In fact Dragon Age has hardly any distinguishing features they just rip off Tolkien, Forgotten Realms and a buch of other settings.

[QUOTE="CushVA"]

On the surface the first is cliche, but once you go into the backstory there is more to it (this means reading all the codex stuff). The premise of the second is interesting and there were some good deas there, it's just that everything was poorly implemented

texasgoldrush

It's not that it's bad, but it certainly isn't great either. I vastly prefer Mass Effect and the Witcher.

Better than most games.

Bioware TELLS stories very well and ultimately the presentation is what really matters. The actual plots are extremely generic and cliche (especially Dragon Age) and in the end, very mediocre (well except for KOTOR).

Avatar isn't the highest grossing movie of all time 'cos of it's story. It's because it had a great director that presented that story very well.

Bioware TELLS stories very well and ultimately the presentation is what really matters. The actual plots are extremely generic and cliche (especially Dragon Age) and in the end, very mediocre (well except for KOTOR).

Avatar isn't the highest grossing movie of all time 'cos of it's story. It's because it had a great director that presented that story very well.

Darth_Kane

Advatar truly is the most overrated movie of the decade.

Advatar did well because of the eye candy period.

Shielder7

This is so wrong. To bill Avatar as pure "eye-candy" is an insult to the amount of work they put in formulating and designing such a cohesive and impressive world/flora/fauna.

[QUOTE="Shielder7"]

Advatar did well because of the eye candy period.

psn8214

This is so wrong. To bill Avatar as pure "eye-candy" is an insult to the amount of work they put in formulating and designing such a cohesive and impressive world/flora/fauna.

Avatar it's self is an insult to every "Good" movie ever made. Ilke I said Advatar is nothing more than a "Dances with Wolves" Rip-Off with stupid Blue Aliens, except instead of an intresting script, drama and compelling story they traded it in for special effects and 3D. Calling Advatar a good movie is like calling Starwars Episode 2 a good movie.Shielder7

You keep telling yourself that bud.

[QUOTE="Shielder7"] Avatar it's self is an insult to every "Good" movie ever made. Ilke I said Advatar is nothing more than a "Dances with Wolves" Rip-Off with stupid Blue Aliens, except instead of an intresting script, drama and compelling story they traded it in for special effects and 3D. Calling Advatar a good movie is like calling Starwars Episode 2 a good movie.psn8214

You keep telling yourself that bud.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

Origins was very predictable high fantasy without much original flair behind it, however the focus elsewhere than on the 'evil growing horde' played to the writers and game worlds strengths.

DA2 on the other hand attempted a more original premises, only it is so terribly written and inconsistent at times it's unbelievable.

Also the books are between ok and eh. I've skimmed through a couple at the recommendation of a friend who's a fan, and they're nothing impressive, pretty shlock fantasy - the romance is hilarious in it, but they lend themselves better to stronger characterization and exploring the world than the games do. Things like the stronger fleshing out of Loghains character was geuinely interesting.

It's just nothing remarkable really, aside from their characters who genuinely do stand out.

texasgoldrush

Problem is those faults in DA2 aren't quibbles that appear, they become glaring in their quantity, and it miss steps at the start with a horrible opening (post inventive 'inconsistent storytellers technique'), and hits and misses throughout the game - the second act being the strongest by far.

It's not just that one problem class conflicting with character and plot there's a sum of them, and that really boils down to the games entire development; I'm surprised they still managed to pull off a strong supporting cast in light of it all.