Originally Posted by tomasp3n
I'm with Evilmanagedcare and SirJames, I really really wanted to like DA:O and played it all the way through, but I never even considered a replay because I never found it fun. The loot system might have been one reason (I hear what you're saying there Maylander, but I never felt the same satisfaction as I did when I got unique artifacts in The Infinity games, maybe there was too MUCH loot in DA:O?), but the major one was that character building felt boring, and combat felt more like a MMO than a successor to Baldurs Gate. I never even tried DA2. I voted "depends on the reviews", because if people here whom I know tend to like the same games as me like it, I might give it a spin.

Right, but you've pinpointed several other reasons for not enjoying it. That's personal preference. Claiming that the loot system is simple is just not true, because it just isn't simple. It's among the most complex in any modern RPG, as there are loads of factors to take into consideration:

Attributes:
- Strength
- Dexterity
- Willpower
- Magic
- Cunning
- Constitution

Then there's a bunch of stats:
- Armor
- Defense
- Mana
- Stamina
- Health
- Critical hit chance
- Regeneration (mana, stamina or health)
- Elemental resistances (fire, frost, etc)
- Physical resistance (used for checks against stuns, knockdowns)
- Mental resistance (used against spells)
- Spellpower
- Hit chance
- Armor penetration
- A bunch of special effects (increase Blood Magic etc)

On top of that, each gear setup has to take into consideration a mix of things like bows using strength modifiers in addition to dexterity for hitting a target, stamina usage vs heavier armor based on how many and which abilities you want to use.

The list goes on and on. Creating a full set of gear for any kind of character on Hard or especially Nightmare is anything but "simple". It blows Baldur's Gate completely out of the water, where you can simply equip the heaviest armor available to your class (or lightest of the two classes if it's a multi or dual class).

@Maylander

Not trying to get you to hate DA, but here are some reasons besides loot that I was very disappointed in DA such that I will not play any of the titles beyond Origins. It gives me no pleasure to point out its shortcomings given how eagerly I awaited its release so long ago:

Admittedly it has been a long time since I played DA:O, but I don't recall many unique items like in the IE games. Furthermore, didn't it embrace a loot system like Diablo where items had a score of randomly generated stats-- so who knows if anything was ever useful?

But I definitely remember being disappointed there were no unique enemies. That is, foes were named by type only-- even the bosses. Sure it isn't a game breaker, but I enjoyed the uniquely named NPCs in the IE games-- it gave encounters flavor. IIRC in DA:O even the final boss had some generic name like 'Arch Demon' or something boring like that which really rubbed me the wrong way. The enemy nomenclature wasn't the sole reason for my dismay, it was a combination of issues: generic loot, generic enemies, and environments with little variation in appearances (i.e. generic environments). These were problems for a title that was touted as a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate.

Where is the "I don't buy EA games" option ?

Originally Posted by EvilManagedCare
@Maylander

Not trying to get you to hate DA, but here are some reasons besides loot that I was very disappointed in DA such that I will not play any of the titles beyond Origins. It gives me no pleasure to point out its shortcomings given how eagerly I awaited its release so long ago:

Then you should be accurate when pointing them out. I'm actually playing it right now, so it's very easy for me to just dismantle these arguments as they keep coming.

Originally Posted by EvilManagedCare
Admittedly it has been a long time since I played DA:O, but I don't recall many unique items like in the IE games. Furthermore, didn't it embrace a loot system like Diablo where items had a score of randomly generated stats— so who knows if anything was ever useful?

Loads of unique items, all with specific stats and all of them hand placed. It's nothing like Diablo at all.

Originally Posted by EvilManagedCare
But I definitely remember being disappointed there were no unique enemies. That is, foes were named by type only— even the bosses. Sure it isn't a game breaker, but I enjoyed the uniquely named NPCs in the IE games— it gave encounters flavor. IIRC in DA:O even the final boss had some generic name like 'Arch Demon' or something boring like that which really rubbed me the wrong way. The enemy nomenclature wasn't the sole reason for my dismay, it was a combination of issues: generic loot, generic enemies, and environments with little variation in appearances (i.e. generic environments). These were problems for a title that was touted as a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate.

Wrong again. Yes, the Archdemon has a rather generic name, but the most visible and present villain is Loghain in addition to someone who depends on origin story (Arl Howe for Human Noble, your brother Bhelen for Dwarf Noble etc). These are the personal villains and they're more much present in the overall story. Also, there are loads of unique bosses and enemies, it's just the Darkspawn that are generic.

And yes, the Darkspawn are overall far too generic. I found that aspect quite dull and uninspired. It was improved upon in Awakening, but even there it was all a bit meh.

I prefer the politics between Teyrn Loghain and Arl Eamon, as well as the politics of the dwarven court (Harrowmount VS Prince Bhelen Aeducan in a fight for the throne). These power struggles were much more interesting than the Blight.

Edit:
I'm not trying to change how you feel about the game overall. That's a matter of personal preference. However, claiming that the loot system is generic or simple and that certain characters and bosses don't exist is factually wrong, which is all I'm saying.

The politics part is absolutely my fondest memory of the game, can't argue there. Writing was in general pretty good also. But I got the feeling that I rushed through gameplay in order to get to the next storypoint, and that's not how I want to behave when playing a game… ��

I don't remember too much about DA:O's loot, so it couldn't have been too terrible… or all that good either. What really wore me down and discouraged any thoughts of ever touching that game again, however, was the generic enemy. I just didn't care at all in the end.

It's a bit funny how mixed the feelings are towards DA: O considering the feelings back when it was released:
http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article…146&ref=2&id=1

It won by a landslide, both among the editors and forum members.

I've never hidden my discontent for what might've been. I followed the title for years prior to release and was treated to a generic borefest with cliche bioware writing. I subsequently put my faith in DA:2 to flesh out and take advantage of the world that DA:O built but failed to do much of anything with. And such hopes for DA:2 turned out wonderfully indeed.

DA:O got such high praise at the time because it was one of the only AAA, party-based RPGs released in years, not necessarily because its content was sublime. At least that's my opinion.

I added two more options that were requested. So happy voting to you all.

Originally Posted by Drithius;
DA:O got such high praise at the time because it was one of the only AAA, party-based RPGs released in years, not necessarily because its content was sublime. At least that's my opinion.

^this. Plus it was fun.

I'm pretty sure I didn't vote for it. But seeing the other on the top ten I'm not sure what I could have chosen instead. Probably Risen or Armored princess. I might be more harsh on DA:O than it deserves, but I would say that except Fallout 3 I've never been so psyched to get my hands on a game. With high expectations you get high demands, and DA:O didn't fulfil mine.

Let's be honest, 2009 wasn't exactly a blockbuster year for RPGs.

As far as DA:O is concerned, I don't remember the loot system being particularly good or bad, but the game lacked variety in a big way. You fight wave after wave of Darkspawn, and there's only 3 or 4 archtypes. Besides that, there are only giant spiders, werewolves, and a few other unmemorable creatures.

A varied bestiary is important to me in an RPG, and DA doesn't touch games like BG or IWD in that category.

Already pre-ordered too

I agree that loot was mostly complete shit in DA:O. The tiny handful of interesting items are bought in shops from merchants. Nearly everything you find is dreadful rubbish or barely useful crafting components. The enchant runes were useful enough, though.

The armor sets you found were dull - and there was a distinct lack of interesting unique properties, like haste, stun and so on. The mechanics are generic - and even the best items were limited to +stats or +crit, stuff like that. Not much in the way of game-changers or sexy loot.

Worst of all is the inventory limit combined with the "junk" loot.

I remember making sure my character could open all the chests and being disappointed nearly every single time I opened one. I shudder at how bad loot was in that game.

BG, NWN (Lord of Terror campaign gets special mention) and Gothic are all superior here - especially BG.

Of course, none of those approach the best systems - where I would include Diablo 3 post-patches, Hellgate London and Diablo 2.

Also, it's not necessarily about the amount of stats - but about making exploration worthwhile - and making stats matter. It's no good having the interesting items placed in shops - or crafted through some unique quest line.

You need to make sure it's worthwhile to go out of your way to open chests and what not. That's where DA:O largely failed completely.

Not just because of loot, though, but because of the Bioware sickness of having most areas be extremely predictable in terms of explorable areas and almost no secrets.

The Mass Effect games are even worse here.

Pre-ordered. I only have one game in my current queue right now, DDOS. Project Eternity got moved to next year. Not sure when Witcher 3 is coming out but plan on that as well. So at the moment no real back log and it looks fun.

Steam sale'd

as long as they keep looting to a minimum and questing to a maximum (i've no quarrels with stealing someone's sword during a quest, but to just randomly having to "find" serious weapons and other stuff always bums me out.
But I'm not playing it on origin, that's for sure, so probably that will be not at all.

Originally Posted by redman5427
Steam sale'd

EA game so the game's not even sold on Steam .

Will you be playing DA:I in November?

Yes, November 2016, when the game will be like $5.

Assuming, of course better games are not around (D:OS 2, Torment, ???, who knows, maybe, just maybe, even Age of Decadence… no, who I am kidding, AoD will be completed in 2020…).

I actually never pre-order any games for three reasons:

1) My backlog is as long as "War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy.

2) I'm usually too cheap to buy games at full price (there's some exceptions such as The Witcher or various Kickstarter projects).

and most importantly:

3) I believe that pre-ordering games gives publishers and developers less of a reason to actually create a relatively bug-free and feature-complete game since they are less dependent on good reviews and word of mouth. Day-1 DLCs and exclusive armors/weapons are also shenanigans related to that issue.

So while I can certainly understand that some people just want to have a game in their hands as early as possible and enjoy to pre-order certain titles and their extra goodies, I also think that if everyone would hold off on a purchase for a couple of days to wait for reviews to come in it would improve the quality of games.