Dragon Age 2 - Gone Gold!

Zloth said:

As opposed to the folks around here who automatically give big name games a low score? At least PC Gamer has actually SEEN the game. (And yes, they do slam big name games. It doesn't happen much but that's what we should expect. The big money spent on big name games actually does get used to improve the game, you know.)

Click to expand...

The objections that people have stated here might not based on actual game play, but they are informed by the (presumably correct) info bits dribbled out by Bioware itself. The things that I objected to are stated changes (not guesswork) over the way DA:O played . What I was hoping for was DA:O++ - which seemed quite reasonable for a sequel. I have said before that I think many of their design decisions were taken to allow rapid turnaround on DA2. i.e more about expediency than and true desire to move the genre forward with "unique" story telling. A moments thought will see this - pretty much everything related to "streamlining" guarantees/facilitates rapid turnaround (I include in this re-use of game assets, enemies/themes like the tedious darkspawn etc etc). As I said because there are simply not that many RPGs around, I'll probably end up buying it regardless - the one thing do commend them on is releasing a demo.

Oh, an the fact that PC Gamer have seen the game counts for little - Bioware pretty much gets a free pass, at least in all the mainstream print magazines I have seen here.

The Witcher did have good writing, but remember too that it was based on a series of books that were already written. The sex parts were stupid and tacked-on and not well done at all in my opinion.

I played NWN2 for a while and liked it, but ultimately I put it away because it was so technically annoying to play.

I never tried Fallout 1 or 2 so I don't have an opinion there... but that's going back like ten years, isn't it?

DArtagnan said:

Not that I think Bioware writing is bad - but it is shock full of clichés.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and that`s why I called it `tired` in the first place. If it was my first-or-even-fourth Bioware game I`d probably enjoy it.

I also liked that they put stats on relations - so it actually was sort of meaningful, a mini-game of sorts. But, it`s a chop chop time for that too I hear

Ovenall said:

The Witcher did have good writing, but remember too that it was based on a series of books that were already written. The sex parts were stupid and tacked-on and not well done at all in my opinion....

Click to expand...

It's just a part, borrow the background and some general key idea. The story was original and many characters too and the writing itself as far I know wasn't made by the author of the books. But as he helped the game building perhaps he provided more concrete writing help than what we have heard or what was officially explained.

For the sex part, it's just smiles, a detail and in no way with a goal to achieve something erotic or pornographic.

Otherwise yes, Obsidian shown good things from writing point of view in some RPG like Mask of The Betrayer.

Ovenall said:

The Witcher did have good writing, but remember too that it was based on a series of books that were already written.

Click to expand...

The story in The Witcher was completely independent from the books.


*Edit* Dasale beat me to the punch.

Ovenall said:

I keep hearing the complaint about tired Bioware writing and story. Who does writing and story better than Bioware?

Click to expand...

Obsidian and CDProjekt as far as recent examples go.

The general problem with Bioware´s writing is that its quantity isn´t justified by quality - their games contain a lot of it and huge chunk is of mundane or clichéd variety without enough inspired moments to compensate for it.
But by no means I think it´s bad (as far as writing in computer games goes).
I rarely find something offensively retarded and sometimes they do come up with really good stuff, like Mordin in Mass Effect 2.
Thinking about it, certain attempts at "deep" moments in Obsidian games tend to annoy me more than anything Bioware, like Caesar´s Hegelian bullshitting in New Vegas.

To return back to the quality/quantity thingie, I really liked writing in Dragon Knight Saga for example. It wasn´t technically great and the main story was certainly nothing to call home about, but majority of it simply oozed enthusiasm on writers´ side and even in its brevity it managed to sport host of memorable characters and moments.
And that´s another thing - Bioware´s writing often feels routine, without much enthusiasm behind it.

DArtagnan said:

Pirahna Bytes

Click to expand...

As of now, I disagree.
Gothic 3 was all around weak in this department and while Risen had generally quite good dialogues, the amount of memorable characters was close to zero and its main story was incredibly shallow and undercooked. I certainly hope PB will improve this in Risen 2.

Well, to be fair, the worlds of Mass Effect and Dragon Age are entirely unique, with new geography, races, and histories. *EDIT: I understand that you can substitute "darkspawn" for "ogres" and "goblins," but the way they're created, what they do, and so on are fairly unique.* So there's something to be said about that. Besides, when has sci-fi been truly original? Has it really changed all that much since "The Odyssey?" We could go on and on, and get really ridiculous, I'm sure.

For me, it's never been about how convoluted the character specialization can get, or how tactical the combat is. I want an emotionally compelling story that takes place in an engaging world, with companions that seem like real people, and not just surrogates for the stuff that my character can't do. Bioware used to be so much better at the story, and the characters, and I just think that somewhere along the way, they lost that focus while they were busy with making everything prettier and adding some PG-13 cutscenes. Sure, the plot and dialogue are hackneyed and worn, but isn't it all, nowadays? Sure beats Geralt busting out, "Abso-fuckin'-lutely" outta nowhere. Talk about a buzzkill…

As of now, I disagree.
Gothic 3 was all around weak in this department and while Risen had generally quite good dialogues, the amount of memorable characters was close to zero and its main story was incredibly shallow and undercooked. I certainly hope PB will improve this in Risen 2.

Click to expand...

Well, it's based primarily on Gothic 1 and Gothic 2.

But it's mostly about my preference for "natural and plausible" characters and motivations.

I'm not really big on being THE superhero out to save the universe with endless heroic deeds.

Not without some kind of believable underpinning, anyway.

DArtagnan said:

Well, it's based primarily on Gothic 1 and Gothic 2.

But it's mostly about my preference for "natural and plausible" characters and motivations.

I'm not really big on being THE superhero out to save the universe with endless heroic deeds.

Not without some kind of believable underpinning, anyway.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and I LOVE being the superhero. The everyman character only appeals to me for so long. If I'm supposed to wade through armies of bad guys on my way to complete whatever task I've been set on, I want the world to know how much of a badass I am.

DArtagnan said:

Well, it's based primarily on Gothic 1 and Gothic 2.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I suspected so (and in such case I´d agree), just wanted to point out that lately PB´s writing hasn´t been so hot in my opinion.

DArtagnan said:

But it's mostly about my preference for "natural and plausible" characters and motivations.

Click to expand...

That´s generally my preference too, but, well, some games convey this better than the others (no shit ) and it shouldn´t result in them being devoid of memorable characters/moments (which for me was Gothic 3´s and largely also Risen´s case).

DeepO said:

Yeah, I suspected so (and in such case I´d agree), just wanted to point out that lately PB´s writing hasn´t been so hot in my opinion.


That´s generally my preference too, but, well, some games convey this better than the others (no shit ) and it shouldn´t result in such game being devoid of memorable characters/moments (which for me was Gothic 3´s and largely also Risen´s case).

Click to expand...

We agree on Gothic 3 - which was pretty bland and boring.

I can hardly remember Risen's writing - so that's not exactly a good sign

Ovenall said:

I never tried Fallout 1 or 2 so I don't have an opinion there… but that's going back like ten years, isn't it?

Click to expand...

If you're a fan of writing and story within cRPGS, you really owe it to yourself to check out the first two Fallout games. Whilst they don't rival Bioware for quantity, there is a biting ascerbic wit to the prose style which is very entertaining to read. They also happen to be brilliant role-playing games to boot…

Let's go back even further. I'd put Origin up there on the list of rival developers with Bioware when it comes to quality writing, particularly in Ultima VII+Serpent Isle, both of the Underworlds and conceptually, Ultima IV. Even if its writing may seem minimalistic and disjointed to some today, it still rates very highly with me.

I'll let someone else rhapsodise over Bloodlines, but needless to say I think Troika also deserves a mention.

Regarding Piranha Bytes writing:
Michael Hoge has the view that in the past cRPG dialogue and writing had a stilted quality to it (as stated on the Making of DVD for Gothic 3). This idea generally informs their writing style and is very evident from Gothic 3-Risen, with the latter having a much more minimalistic style. I think the UK voice-actors enabled a more straight forward/naturalistic tone in Risen, but I do miss the dry sarcasm of the nameless hero from the Gothics.

It's a bit too early to be putting CDproject up with the Bioware Juggernaut at this point (quantity wise) but I guess we'll know more where they stand after the Witcher 2 finally comes out. I thought the Witcher was a reasonable first effort writing wise, with only the odd occasional shift in tone. I loved chapter 2 especially.

Couchpotato said:

Ultimately, folks, an "RPG" is what BioWare says it is. Such is their grip on the genre, a grip that's been made so strong by the overwhelming approval of the majority audience.

Click to expand...

This is from another site called actiontrip and I agree with his post. ME2 set the new trend and were stuck with it.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree - I think this guy is right.

I'd only modify it so that Bioware & Blizzard are in one boat.

Two firms are defining and dictating what an "RPG" is. And their followers are in the thousands …

Alrik Fassbauer said:

Two firms are defining and dictating what an "RPG" is. And their followers are in the thousands …

Click to expand...

It`s bad - but it`s not as bad as it seems.First of all it`s waaay cooler to be `the underground` again ;P

I also believe there`ll eventually come a backlash - maybe in few years, but still. Reboots & going-back-to-the-roots type of thing. Independents might mature and grow, especially if AOD/Dead State succeed, and Europe might have some tricks up it`s sleeve - what with huge WiedzminaWitcher`s 2 success

And perhaps it`s also good time to review your misapprehensions against jRpgs. We have no "decline" here, are forgiving & always recruiting

DArtagnan said:

Well, it's based primarily on Gothic 1 and Gothic 2.

But it's mostly about my preference for "natural and plausible" characters and motivations.

I'm not really big on being THE superhero out to save the universe with endless heroic deeds.

Not without some kind of believable underpinning, anyway.

Click to expand...

Well, you probably meant Gothic 1 only because in Gothic 2 you are in fact being told within the first two minutes of the game that you are THE superhero out to save the universe with endless heroic deeds, namely by finding the eye of Innos and by kicking some dragon ass .

Hmmm… Despite being a *huge* fan of Piranha Bytes, and especially Gothic 1&2, I never thought writing was their strongest point. Not saying it wasn't "good", because it was. Just not among the very best imo.

Pessimeister said:

I'll let someone else rhapsodise over Bloodlines, but needless to say I think Troika also deserves a mention.

Click to expand...

Definitely… Some of the dialogue in VtM:B stayed with me long after I had finished playing. I can't say that about very many games.

Ovenall said:

I keep hearing the complaint about tired Bioware writing and story. Who does writing and story better than Bioware?

I don't get it. I've played lots of rpgs, but I've also missed many of them. Yes, Bioware has clichés in their games and some stuff gets to be a pattern. But all crpgs are pretty much vamping on clichés.

Can someone tell me who they think does better writing than Bioware? I'd like to hear opinions on this. Bioware is far from perfect, but IMO they are the best out there.

Click to expand...

I think BioWare is capable of brilliant writing and I certainly think they take writing more seriously than most game developers. However, as you point out, they like cliches. They like cliches. I believe they have rules that require certain archetypes because it's successful from a business point of view - the mainstream audience likes s certain degree of familiarity. For me, both Obsidian and Troika are/were create characters they like first and foremost - probably to their detriment.

Though I will say I thought some of the characters in DA:O and ME2 were some of the best they've done and showed more variation.

Side note: not Piranha Bytes, I'm afraid. Competent but not great writing. World-building is their strength.

The whole "Dragon Effect" think is a huge exaggeration though, let's be honest. If you watch combat gameplay the game plays pretty much just like the original Dragon Age, just faster and probably easier on normal mode. It's not suddenly a shooter or hack n' slash game, even if they made it look more like one.

The real change made was to a more Mass Effect style dialogue and character system, which as I said I think suits their style more and I stand by that statement. If Fallout: New Vegas did that I would be freaking LIVID, but a Bioware game? Makes sense.

The actiontrip guy doesn't know what he's talking about, at least sales wise. Quite apart from Bioware themselves saying that DAO has been their most successful game the figures from EA are pretty comprehensive by suggesting that DAO had sold a million more copies than ME2 at equivalent points in release. The EA quarterly report 3 months after ME2's release lists ME2 as having sold 1.6 million copies (including downloads) out of 2 million sold in; DAO sold in 2.7 million copies originally and then 3 months later had an extra 500k run added. Plus of course most successful means DAO must have more than 3 million sales...

I've always felt that Bioware's strengths with RPGs could be summed up with two words: scale and polish. I mean, BG2 is a perfect example. It is a very long game filled to the brim with high-quality content and, even today, is one of the most enjoyable and playable cRPGs on the market. As they've grown, and been subsumed by EA, they've kept the polish but are fast doing away with scale.
From a writing standpoint, they've always seemed to go for a workmanlike approach, using fairly standard (cliche'd) themes and characters and dialogue that is always more than a little on the "safe" side. As others have said, I believe this is largely intentional, as they do not wish to be edgy.
Bioware, for example, could never pull off a game like Vampire Bloodlines, nor would they want to. It's just not their style.
Similarly, Bioware could never have developed a game like Planescape, which for my money has the best writing in any cRPG to date. However, KOTOR and Mass Effect have made a lot more $$ than Vampire and Planescape and so, those companies went out of business, while Bioware grows and grows… If the yardstick for success is popularity, Bioware wins. If the yardstick is originality in story, character, and dialogue, Bioware loses to others in the market by a substantial margin.