GameBanshee Forums

Thanks DW, and everyone else. I've vented, cursed, and am trying to get through it without using the guide. Part of my problem was getting lured into the right-click-does-everything approach of the game. It didn't occur to me until this morning that I should try left clicking on the fade map!!!

I still don't like it one bit, really immersion breaking, in as much as I think I should be dead. The demon overcame the party, we failed, end of. Sucky game design, but apart from the Redcliff glitch (no mage in the party, but it seemed to think the fight-the-demon-in-the-Fade option was available*) this is the first time that's hit me.

Had I not been reassured that this is the only puzzle of the type in the game I wouldn't have gone back though.

* I am right that apart from the nightmare only a mage can enter the fade and fight the demon aren't I?

@Galraen,
The *only* other puzzle I can think of in the main game (I haven't played the expansion so can't comment) occurs in the section where you cure the Arl, and that isn't a huge, inescapable puzzle like the Fade is, it's more just a head-scratching exercise. You aren't trapped there or anything though, and it can be fairly quick.

Yes, normally only mages can enter the Fade.

dragon wench wrote:Would you believe that the Fade actually brought out my real life claustrophobia the first time I entered?

I had a "tinge" of that feeling as well, though it wasn't as intimidating - perhaps because of the Origin I started with (..Mage).

I also felt a sense of "urgency" I didn't have in the Circle Tower (..though this was only with the The Burning Tower, The Mage Asunder, and The Templar's Nightmare).

I figure if the game is making you feel something, then it's doing something right.

dragon wench wrote:@Galraen,
The *only* other puzzle I can think of in the main game (I haven't played the expansion so can't comment) occurs in the section where you cure the Arl, and that isn't a huge, inescapable puzzle like the Fade is, it's more just a head-scratching exercise. You aren't trapped there or anything though, and it can be fairly quick.

Yes, normally only mages can enter the Fade.

Yes the floor puzzle is a "must cheat", but thankfully it can be done quickly.

The story-writers screwed-up on who and when you can enter the Fade. The whole Circle Tower thing is where they couldn't adhere to their own rules. Ergo:

1. Your character can be a Dwarf.
2. Dwarfs have neither magical ability (conscious entrance) nor can dream (unconscious entrance), and thus cannot enter the Fade.
3. Your Dwarf character never-the-less enters the Fade in the Circle Tower - and he or she is NOT physically in the Fade, but rather entered there via the typical unconscious state (..having been put to sleep by the Sloth demon).

Scottg wrote: I actually *liked* that section of the game. ..well, not the Templar's Nightmare (though even that wasn't difficult to figure out).

To me, I neither liked it nor hated it. Just found it tedious and slightly irritating thanks to it's intentionally long corridors. Then again, I feel the same pretty much for most areas in the game (indoors and outdoors alike).

Scottg wrote:The shape-shifting capability reminded me of Shadowrun (or Shadowshift or something like that.. from the 90's).

I also remember seeing this in one X360 title called Kameo: Elements of power together with some games and cartoons (e.g. Ben 10?).

I'll sign off from this thread by saying that apart from the irritating fade sequence in the Mage's Circle quest, I'm enjoying this game. I've still a long way to go, but right now it's definitely in the running for the RPG of the decade for me, still behind Arcanum and Wizardry 8 at the moment though.

galraen wrote: ..still behind Arcanum and Wizardry 8 at the moment though.

I never did finish Arcanum, but definitely Wizardry 8. (..with the exception of voice acting and cut scene scripting, Dragon Age isn't as good as Wizardry 8.) Heck, in many respects it isn't as good as Dungeon Lords CE.

Briefly signing in again!

Just playing the Human Noble origin nd I'm blown away by how lame it makes the game look.

Spoiler:

Spoiler

So my parents have just been murdered, my brother may well be dead too. I barely escaped with my life, no thanks to Duncan who was conspicuously absent through all the fighting, and who now wants to shanghai me into his organisation, and I have no way to avoid it.

Bad, very bad, game design IMHO. Some of the other origins that were thinly disguised traps were bad enough, this one is outrageous. Any chances of the game being a candidate for game of the decade have vanished, right now it wouldn't make top ten. An RPG should allow you to role play your character, forcing you to abandon role playing in order to jump through hoops is a definite no no in my books.

Hello, everyone. First post here (been lurking around for some time though).

Although I had been fed all the hype surrounding Dragon Age during at least the last 10 months leading to its release, I can't say I am actually disappointed by it. It certainly didn't break any new boundaries as a game but I still found it to be an extremely worthy addition to the genre (or even sub-genre of fantasy RPGs) and it introduced a whole new role-playing setting for stories to grow into (and for Bioware to milk, of course).

I specifically enjoyed the elements of Bioware's tried and true formula like complex followers' personalities, volumes of dialogue and lore and addictive gameplay. I especially loved the supporting characters, who were also voiced beautifully by the actors, as were all the people you meet in Origins (with the exception of a handfull of slightly dull characters maybe, like Annora). Of course I understand those who are not thrilled by script-driven RPGs are certainly not going to find much to love in this game but the same goes for people like me who find endless exploration and unlimited character development boring in games like Oblivion or Risen.

Still, there are things that could be a lot better with Dragon Age, most of which were mentioned here already. I agree that the gift feature was a nice touch both as a novelty and as a side gameplay mechanic, but it can be so easily exploited, it ends up being completely unrealistic and, eventually, a drag. Also, I think the majority of headgear in the game is incredibly lame from an aesthetic standpoint, especially if you are not a warrior. In general, the itemisation of the game needs improvement, in my opinion, but at least what's there is (mostly) nice-looking.

I found the Fade to be a very intriguing part of the game the first time around. The design, the gameplay twist, the backstory, even the tasty rewards for searching every nook and cranny, really worked for me and it resonated in my mind for a long time after I finished it. Still, the fact that the challenge it poses is not directly linked to your character's level, makes me reluctant to revisit during my second playthrough since I now want to get things over faster (and I do for the most part since I already know what to expect and can take more advantage of my party's abilities). In fact I have completed all other treaties and put the game aside for some time trying to get some distance from my first visit in the Fade in the hope that this will renew my interest in experiencing it for a second time. Hasn't worked yet.

These are all minor qualms, though, for my biggest one is the game's failure to deliver a much more powerful dramatic effect during the main story, in regards to your main enemy, the archdemon. As if it's not bad enough that the Darkspawn are mindless monsters puproselessly stomping on everything that gets in their way, their "leader" is just a bigger, tougher version of them, totally unaware of who you are, why your paths have crossed and how to defeat you by exploiting potential weaknesses. All he stands for is sheer, brutal, negative energy. Thankfully, most of the game is spent facing more cunning enemies with more plausible agentas and certainly more intriguing personalitites (like a certain "betrayer"and some cool demons, among others) but that doesn't change the fact that the story just fails to build emotional momentum leading up to the big fight with the Archdemon (who, by the way, is trashing

Spoiler

Denerim

for no obvious reason, except that he can and he is a big meanie). From what I gather this issue is somewhat mended in the expansion which I haven't yet played, but it was certainly the biggest complaint I had from "Origins".

So, disappointed? Nah.
Demanding a more complex and polished experience from the sequel? Definitely.

I now feel obliged to post in this thread again. As I've worked my way through this game I've become more and more disappointed, now to the point of disgust!

Being quite content with my party, PC (Rogue/Assassin/Duelist), Leliana (Bard/Ranger), Aistair (Templar/Cjampion) and Wynne (never bothered with a second class) I didn't take the Alcoholic Dwarf on the Branka quest. I fought my way through to the Anvil of the Void only to be forced at the last moment to dump one of my companions to take on the Dwarven bum who suddenly miraculously appeared!!! This sort of garbage I would never have expected of Bioware, but I guess that's the whole point. It isn't Bioware any more!

I've been gnashing my teeth more and more over such things at the forced conversation cheats, the sort of cheap shot garbage I expect from the likes of Obsidian, sad that a once great company has sunk to such depths. This is the final straw.

Anyone want a second hand copy of an awful game?

galraen wrote:<snip>This sort of garbage I would never have expected of Bioware, but I guess that's the whole point. It isn't Bioware any more!
<snip>

They did something similar right back to BG1 and in KOTOR and .... well - in forcing various NPCs on your. It seems Bioware have never been Bioware.

True KOTOR did have some seriously annoying aspects, the worst being on the Leviathan where the bimbo and Carth are forced on you, made worse by the bimbo intervening to save Malak's life. So fair comment, Bioware have been on the slide for some time, it can't all be blamed on Electronic Arts. I can't recall any such incident off hand with BG1 but it's been a while, or in BG2 for that matter.

I can't recall any situations in those games where you are forced into an ambush by a forced conversation, but again memory may be at fault, it certainly didn't happen with the incredible frequency that it does in this game though.

The other seriously annoying aspect of this game is the redundancy of most dialog. You are constantly being bombarded with fake options that turn out to be no options at all. You are allowed to say no, but then told you have no choice, so why go through the pretence of giving the player a choice at all? After a while one just keeps hitting escape and 1 in rapid succession just to get through the meaningless garbage. Only once did I have to go back to a prior save because Esc+1 wound up with an outcome that was actually different/bad!!

So what we have here is a game built on an antique (in computer terms) engine, it's not significantly different from the engine used in KOTOR and NWN. A poorly though out storyline, little to no genuine alternative outcomes, there may be an illusion of openness, but that's all it is, an illusion. The game drew me in for a while, until I couldn't ignore the fact that it was all an illusion, that the game is a puppet show, and the player is the puppet.

galraen wrote:<snip>
So what we have here is a game built on an antique (in computer terms) engine, it's not significantly different from the engine used in KOTOR and NWN. A poorly though out storyline, little to no genuine alternative outcomes, there may be an illusion of openness, but that's all it is, an illusion. The game drew me in for a while, until I couldn't ignore the fact that it was all an illusion, that the game is a puppet show, and the player is the puppet.

Well, the story line in BG weren't much better. The "dead" god son of thousands bla bla bla, save the world story. KOTOR similar type story. NwN was often also berated for the story it hold. In my opinion ME1 and ME2 stories aren't that much different either.
The choices in those games were also pretty much non-existing aka an illusion of choice. Which is what most linear games present. The illusion.

It just seems very much like nostalgia talking here because when viewing the games in succession and equally critical - the trend is very much the same throughout the games. It is just many people hail BG2 as the best RPG (and it was good), but at the core it was not much different then these new games.
It is fine that people dislike games, not every game is to the taste of every person. My dislikes are Morrowind/Duh'Blivion and Fallout 3 for example.
However, it just seems to me many of the objections also existed in BG1 and right through all the Bioware games I've played which then makes the argument "Bioware isn't Bioware anymore" that much stranger.

galraen wrote:The game drew me in for a while, until I couldn't ignore the fact that it was all an illusion, that the game is a puppet show, and the player is the puppet.

I think that can be said for any game in existence...
Indeed, I think it applies to any entertainment medium in existence. In literary fiction we have the term "literary device"... for good reason.

As to forcing Ogren on you. I do recall the first time that happened to me, I was miffed because Alistair is a much better warrior. However, with my second character, knowing it was coming, I actually went through the Deep Roads first, picked up Ogren and respecced him a bit. I ended up enjoying his company quite a lot; many people dislike him, but I find there's something a bit deeper going on... a guy who deals with his past by burying it in drink and (oft) lewd humour. Every so often, the mask slips off and the pain shows through.

I see this as part of the narrative.
The thing to remember here is that despite the mess that his relationship with Branka became... she's still his wife, and he still loves her; this is made obvious. Of course, he *needs* to be there... even more so because so much between them remains unresolved. In my view there is something very human and very real portrayed here.

But, these things are obviously subjective. If it's not to your tastes, then that is clearly your decision. I recently tried to give Oblivion yet another chance, and even loaded with all the mods I could.. it still (amongst other things) lacks a sense of narrative, something I prefer in my games, so I understand your irritation with a product you've tried to like and ultimately you just can't get into it. I more enjoyed the technical challenge of getting the various third party utilities working properly than Oblivion itself. Last night I gave up trying to enjoy it, and made another Dragon Age character.

To be fair, and it's a new day now, so cooled off a tad, the Ogren thing was just the final straw. If that was the only annoyance in the game I doubt I'd have even commented on it much. The real annoyance, and what set me up for the explosion was the far too common forced conversation cheat. I just got fed up to the teeth with trying to do my thing with the rogue, keep the main party in reserve a safe distance back, sneak in, dismantle traps , zap the mage etc.. Only to be constantly not only forced into the open, but with the party all around me and surrounded by enemies. I was still fuming about the whole Jarvia BS encounter, when the Ogren thing happened. I hate it when members of my party get 'killed', especially my character's girlfriend Leliana. The fact that Wynne has the spell which dispels injuries (except her own!), is beside the point. Especially when 'cheated' into a situation where she can't use Storm of the Century!

I entirely see what you are saying, particularly because a stealthy rogue is my favoured class. But, I think I know why Bioware opted to implement that particular device. Let's face it, being able to exploit enemy situations in BG2 was often very cheesy for precisely that ability.

For example, I recall being able to lay traps before the final battle with Irenicus... and that made the entire thing ridiculously simple. OK, not the same thing as dismantle, but if you can dismantle traps undetected than you can also set them, something I imagine the devs were trying to avoid.

Hmmm... I think what some people tend to forget is that there are 2 basic types of CRPGs.

On one end of the scale, you have the Sandbox Games. Origin's Ultimas, Bethesda's Elder Scrolls (despite the bugs, Daggerfall was best at this) are both Prime examples.

On the other end of the scale, you have the Storybook. Dragon Age: Origins and Neverwinter Nights 2 (sans Storm of Zehir) especially are types of this.

NWN2 was SLAMMED hard on the Bioware forums, and yet, with SoZ, there were people trying to play with the KC.....

I enjoy both sides of the scale. The Sandbox "Do what you want, when you want, within the engine's limitations" is always fun (especially with good mods, and doubly for Total Conversions), and I have ever been a sucker for a good story.

And that is what Dragon Age: Origins and Awakening are. Good Stories.

Why I didn't like Dragon Age:Origins as a BG fan

Not in any particular order, and am posting this from memory. It's been a while since I played DAO (only once), and I've been letting it sink in more especially since a couple other friends played it more recently and we've been talking about comparisons.

1) Railroady. The BG franchise is more sandboxy than DAO. People like me who enjoy more freedom in exploration will find DAO constricting and not terribly creative in terms of travel opportunities, immersing more about the world, etc. BGI allowed more random exploration than BGII, though I can understand why this setup would be confusing to some people (side-tracked by quests) who are trying to stick with the main storyline.

2) Cut-scenes: Fully voiced and animated cut-scenes reduced the overall amount of content they can fit onto the game disc, IMO. Text content is much cheaper to produce and you can end up stuffing a whole lot more into quests, dialogues, and lore. Others have mentioned this, and I totally agree.

3) While DAO NPCs are better "written" (only because they get a lot more voice acting so they feel more "alive," perhaps), that development seems to have gutted your own PC's dialogue options. DAO's dialogue options were all much shorter than BG's.

4) Scoreboard and bribery-based romance system: The number-based scoring and bribery mechanisms underlying the DAO romances, no matter how well-written the romances actually are, pissed me off to no end. Of course, BGII's basic romance system is number-based too, but it's black box and you don't see flashing numbers on your screen. The idea that you can do a quest that lowers your reputation/anger party mmebers and then BUY BACK PERSONAL FAVOR by giving a gift is particularly grating as well. The entire romance scheme in DAO screams "crutch for horny boys"! FFS.

5) To me, tactical combat in BG was actually tactical while DAO is a scythe through a zombie army. The problem I had with DAO's combat is that there are exactly three combat types in terms of enemy, all humanoid with no particular special abilities: melee, archer, and there's an offensive mage-like caster thing. In terms of special skills for each of these basic enemy classes, you'll see a few stuns and roots and stealth and such, but this variety is nowhere near having to maneuver your party against another party of mage-cleric-druid-fighter-thief-etc. with a much larger array of spell and skill options--never MIND the huge BG bestiary. The MMO-style LOS pulling was a plus for me, but that's all that really stood out in practice, that I can remember. Now, allowing any DAO party member to learn skills like poisons and traps was a nice touch for more tactical flexibility, granted... but the lack of tactically challenging enemies besides bigger/stronger/more things doesn't require players to figure that out. DAO combat, for me, was just masses and masses of the same enemy types. Armies. LotR style, I guess. That's impressive from a distance but annoying close-up when you're just mowing the lawn.

6) Side quests are just really short in DAO. "Side quests" in BGII were mostly involved complex chains that spanned multiple levels/maps and whatnot. I hate the MMO-style "I HAVE A QUEST" business, though I suppose that works for the DLC mechanism. I loved finding new things in BG-style games by accident on multiple playthroughs. The "quantity vs quality" comments about DAO in this aspect ring true for me.

7) Lore. While DAO's lore is just as interesting as BG's lore (not as much breadth, though), I really hated the interface when reading those lore bits in DAO. Just after picking up or viewing something like a statue, something will pop up on the screen and disappear a couple seconds later, forcing me to dig around in that idiotic interface--forgot what it's called. It was very clunky and kind of immersion-breaking to me, unlike finding a bunch of books in someone's library in BGI/BGII and just reading them like that. And relying on my own memory.

8) Expectation. This is my own fault; I'm basically angry at myself for falling for the marketing blitz around DAO--normally I'm not this gullible at all. But DAO's connection to Baldur's Gate was being used as a neon sign to beat up the target audience, so...meh. If I had gone into DAO with zero expectations in comparison to the oldies, then it would've fared better in my eyes, I guess.


Aspects about DAO I liked, mostly:

1) Moral quandary quests: These were generally well-done if a bit ham-fisted sometimes. I'm thinking about particular NPC-related quests, that is, where your dialogue choices had major effects; of course, BGII certainly had stuff like that. I don't remember DAO side quests much at all, though.

2) Actual spell/skill leveling system is interesting; it does allow for a whole lot more customization than the D&D 2 system, if we're talking about direct comparisons. As for D&D 3 with multiclassing and feats and whatever, I don't know.

3) Graphics? I guess so. But I honestly don't give a goat's butt about 3D engines and whatever, considering how much I laud PS:T and BGII (for different reasons).

4) Inventory system. I love this. Good job with that in DAO. I wouldn't mind this in all my games.


There are probably several other smaller points I'm forgetting, but whatever...

I'm still amazed how many people actually play and applaud the console version on more general forums, missing the strategic top down view kills 80% of the game's depth in gameplay. Even saying the PC version is superior will get you flamed and marked up as a PC fanboy.

This does not bode well for DAII, seems we are a minority.

I didn't particularly mind DA:O as a game. It was a pretty straightforward RPG, much what I expected. However, I really enjoyed the conversation and story options. I would gladly sacrifice an amazing combat or questing experience for good conversation, an interesting story, and well-build character backgrounds. This game provided all three. I can't particularly say those elements hold replay value, but I enjoyed all of the starting areas and developing classes had several different directions depending on your play style. It may not have been the best, but it was a fun RPG experience.
You, sir, just have your expectation bar raised too high.