Dragon Age: Origins

[Kadayi]

This is a fabulous analogy.

It's true though. Pretty much every reviewer blew their load over GTA IV, and personally although from a technical standpoint I thought it was an impressive game in terms of world, I didn't think that made up for a written on the back of a cereal packet plot, diabolically bad stereotypes and overall inconsistency of narrative. Barely 10 minutes in and its clear as day from her 'questioning' that your first 'date' is clearly a fed or working for the feds, and that your Cousin has dead meat written all over him. It was just GTA 3 in a better skin, without the consistency of character of GTA3:VC and no depth to it.

I happened to hear the PC Gamer UK podcast last night as well. Is that the same John Walker who wrote for RPS about how his response to Dragon Age at E3 was that it looked 'AWFUL' and 'pathetic'?? I'm going to keep an eye out for PCG around here because I want to see if he explains how his opinion has revolved so drastically. Sadly the podcast was light on detail, containing so much unbridled gushing that I thought it might be just a very coincidental namesake. The John Walker in the podcast also made some highly twattish assertions that made me want to punch him in the face, so I'm even less inclined to think his taste would coincide with my own. It would be nice to see an overwhelmingly positive review from someone who professes to approach DA from my own perspective - that of being a victim of the 'BG successor' hype, only to be very underwhelmed by everything I've seen - because then I might be playing this for Christmas. However, at this stage I'm not sure if there's enough eloquence or earnestness in the world to convince me to look beyond the bargain bin for it.

Dude trust me I've read Johns review a couple of times now and I'm honestly struggling to find out what makes DA: O the 'RPG of the decade'. The review seems to be all about how complex the world is in terms of history and how many different character origins you can have, and how chatty the NPCs are, but personally I'm thinking I honestly don't give a shit about that stuff if its the same sort of derivative broad brush High fantasy that has been done to death a hundred times already. Part of me wants to play this, but another part isn't sure I can take the potential skin crawlingly bad hokey fantasy spiel it's comprised of.

That the girl in the chainmail Bikini is eloquent and responsive and has a fully fleshed out character, doesn't get over the fact that she's still dressed in a goddamn chainmail bikini, and quite frankly I'd be embarrassed to be seen buying the game off a shop shelf in that respect.

 

[DeusExMachina]

....GTAIV is a great game. Especially its characters and story.


But different strokes.

 

[Krynn72]

I'm thinking I honestly don't give a shit about that stuff if its the same sort of derivative broad brush High fantasy that has been done to death a hundred times already. Part of me wants to play this, but another part isn't sure I can take the potential skin crawlingly bad hokey fantasy spiel it's comprised of.

George R.R. Martin was an inspiration in the story, so it better be damn good.

 

[CptStern]

pretty sure game review "exclusives" have clauses in their contracts that stipulate they cant give out certain information. this is really apparent after release day when detailed reviews start to surface. plus it;'s a magazien review; they pretty much softball reviews as a general practice. you cant clarify your point in a magazine after the fact like you can online

I'm willing to bet reviews after release day will echo PC Gamer's review but with far more detail and with more of a critical eye

 

[VictimOfScience]

I'm willing to bet reviews after release day will echo PC Gamer's review but with far more detail and with more of a critical eye

I imagine you are right, but all of this matters little to the likes of me who will be buying this game at midnight if they have a midnight release anywhere near me. :thumbs:

 

[jimbo118]

I want a decent console review tbh. Particularly if it's been 'dumbed-down'

 

[Krynn72]

I want a decent console review tbh. Particularly if it's been 'dumbed-down'

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=162115

Watch both videos and you can see exactly what they changed. Its kinda dumbed down in terms of the hotbar since you need to use controller buttons rather than mouse clicks, but other than that, it all looks very well designed and not much worse than the PC version.

 

[Eejit]

The combat is allegedly ass achingly hard at times even on easy, which doesn't really scream 94% game to me.

Eh, different strokes. As long as the difficulty isn't down to something like bad interface that's a positive for me.
More Kangaxx please.

 

[Letters]

Not the first time recently I've seen someone using Kangaxx as an example of a hard boss... and I really don't get it. That's the Lich in the sewer right? I don't remember ever having any problem with that guy.

Now some of the Throne of Bhaal bosses like Abizigal the freaking invisible dragon and the very last fight... THOSE are hard! I can't imagine anything in DA will surpass those in difficulty...and really if there is, that's a problem.

 

[Eejit]

Kangaxx isn't in the sewer, he's in a house in the Docks iirc. I think Shade Lich is the one in the sewer.

Obviously the ToB fights are tougher, but Kangaxx is the single toughest enemy in SoA - though Twisted Rune is probably a harder fight overall. Of course, most fights can be cheesed if you're into that.

 

[Blackthorn]

Wisdoms.

I've been discussing with my friend for days way I am simply not excited for this game, despite being a true fan of RPGs. I was gonna come here and vent, but Kadayi has already said everything I have to say.

Dragon Age can come back when it does something truly new and exciting enough to warrant me sinking 100+ hours into a single game.

 

[Paulaner]

Dragon Age can come back when it does something truly new and exciting enough to warrant me sinking 100+ hours into a single game.

Did you already play it? wow

 

[Blackthorn]

No, I haven't. But I bought the Witcher after knowing very little about it, because what little I encountered immediately captivated me. Dragon Age, however, I have followed for well over a year, I have watched every video, seen every screenshot and read every article available to me and I have tried ever so desperately to like this game, yet still has failed to excite me.

I am sure for what it is, it be the very best of its kind. But quite simply, what it is is so tired to me now that I cannot bring myself to have any anticipation for it. If you've been playing the same type of game for countless years, no matter how polished the genre becomes, without reinvention it will inevitably become stale for you.

Edit: And I didn't even mention the insulting and embarrassing marketing this game has seen. As with the "chainmail bikini" example Kadayi used, it disgusts me to see the marketing cater to the sort of stereotypical nerd-fantasies that have stifled the genre with cliches and what is outright sexism in many cases.

 

[Kadayi]

I've been discussing with my friend for days way I am simply not excited for this game, despite being a true fan of RPGs. I was gonna come here and vent, but Kadayi has already said everything I have to say.

Dragon Age can come back when it does something truly new and exciting enough to warrant me sinking 100+ hours into a single game.

That's very kind of you to say.

 

[Paulaner]

About the chainmail bikini, come on, there are hundreds of entertainment products leveraging on sex appeal. Beautiful ladies are everywhere, in games, movies, music and so on. Even the morality-oriented Star Trek had chicks to gain some audience. Le'ts keep sexual morality out of games.

 

[Gargantou]

Once again, those talking about Difficulty settings, PC's Normal setting is apparently Console's Hard setting, this according to a post at the official BW boards.

Not sure how true it is though, but it doesn't sound unreasonable, what I hope is that there is a difficulty setting that gives no advantage to either the player or the enemy, seeing as the difficulty level mainly governs how intelligent the AI is, and how much friendly and enemy damage do, I hope for a difficulty setting ala NWN2 where I can have friendly fire AND enemy damage be 100%, no advantage over one another.

 

[Eejit]

No, I haven't. But I bought the Witcher after knowing very little about it, because what little I encountered immediately captivated me.


it disgusts me to see the marketing cater to the sort of stereotypical nerd-fantasies that have stifled the genre with cliches and what is outright sexism in many cases.

Yeah the Witcher really is incredibly sexist, it disgusts me too.

 

[Gargantou]

Yeah the Witcher really is incredibly sexist, it disgusts me too.

Err well, let's face it, Medieval society was generally very sexist, so why should the setting in the game be any different?

Heck we live in a modern society which is still very sexist, I can go out here on the streets of Stockholm and not at all have a hard time being pampered with posters of half-naked chicks in underwear ads, as well as prostitutes at certain streets.

IMO the sexism in The Witcher is no worse than say the sexism in Mass Effect.

 

[Eejit]

I found the double standard rather hilarious, "Witcher is awesome but one reason I don't like Dragon Age is sexism in the trailers!!"

I'd disagree about the sexism in the Witcher being no worse than most other games, it's more misogynistic than the vast majority.

 

[Gargantou]

I found the double standard rather hilarious, "Witcher is awesome but one reason I don't like Dragon Age is sexism in the trailers!!"

I'd disagree about the sexism in the Witcher being no worse than most other games, it's more misogynistic than the vast majority.

Perhaps that's because the source material of which the Witcher is based, the novels and the series, feature a society which is very sexistic as a whole.

Would people they rather ignored the source-material and simply appeased the masses by making it less sexist?

My point is, the Witcher is not sexist simply because the devs want it, it's because the source material of which the game is based off is set in a FICTIONAL SOCIETY which is very SEXIST, much like most of medieval Europe was, where women was seen as little more than objects that belonged to man and existed to appease mans needs and take care of his offspring.

 

[Eejit]

Yes, clearly collecting 'cards' showing topless women is a necessary part of gameplay given the universe it's set in, no way could that have been left out.
It's not like the Witcher devs included everything from the setting, it's seen as darker and more realistic than other high fantasy because the gnomes, halflings, elves and the like which exist in the universe were almost entirely absent in the game. Ignoring the source material in order for market appeal, good grief.

No, the rampant sexism was included imo simply because titties would help it sell to some RPG fans.

 

[Paulaner]

No, the rampant sexism was included imo simply because titties would help it sell to some RPG fans.

Totally agreed, and this is true for Witcher, Mass Effect, Dragon Age and so on. I don't see much of an issue here.
Plus, talking about the lady in Dragon Age, the character acts and talks like a rebellious woman, and we all know that beautiful women love to tease and show what they've got. Just to say that the chainmail bikini is totally in character, in my opinion.

 

[Mirage]

If Bioware hadn't compelled me with Jade Empire, I probably wouldn't be looking at DA right now. I'm not going to defend that statement objectively, but I enjoyed it, the story/music especially. I like story-driven games. My taste in games might not even be remotely logical, I don't really care. I just hope the combat isn't too hard.

 

[Gargantou]

Yes, clearly collecting 'cards' showing topless women is a necessary part of gameplay given the universe it's set in, no way could that have been left out.
It's not like the Witcher devs included everything from the setting, it's seen as darker and more realistic than other high fantasy because the gnomes, halflings, elves and the like which exist in the universe were almost entirely absent in the game. Ignoring the source material in order for market appeal, good grief.

No, the rampant sexism was included imo simply because titties would help it sell to some RPG fans.

1. You got me there, the cards were a useless feature.

2. Err, gnomes, elves etc were far from almost entirely absent, did you even play The Witcher? The racial conflict between Elves and Humans is one of the central parts of the storyline. The game also features city slums that are populated only by Dwarves and Elves, whom are considered second-rate citizens.

3. Have you even read any off the two The Witcher books that were published in English(Before the game was even available or in development)? If not, you should, you'll realize the game is very true to it's source material.

4. Have you even played The Witcher?

 

[Eejit]

Well elves I'll give you. Gnomes and Halflings though are present in the universe but absent from the game.

I've played some of the game (my ex-flatmate had it), didn't read the books. It didn't interest me enough to do so and frankly the misogyny I saw was so far beyond even the rest of the genre it put me off.

 

[Kadayi]

Yeah the Witcher really is incredibly sexist, it disgusts me too.

I've played some of the game (my ex-flatmate had it), didn't read the books. It didn't interest me enough to do so and frankly the misogyny I saw was so far beyond even the rest of the genre it put me off.

I'm sorry but The Witcher is neither misogynistic (woman hating), or is it sexist. The game contains a surprising number of strong female characters and the women are not submissive or mistreated, in fact the in game Storyline was written by a woman. It's piss poor games 'Journalists' like Yatzee & Alec Meer who've promoted these off base ideas, but its quite clear they never bothered doing more than judging the game by the opening level.

 

[Eejit]

Oh well as long as it has some strong female characters the excessive objectification of women is fine and dandy. Misogyny is hatred or contempt of women, such as the contempt shown by collecting cards displaying your 'conquests' half-naked.

 

[Kadayi]

Oh well as long as it has some strong female characters the excessive objectification of women is fine and dandy. Misogyny is hatred or contempt of women, such as the contempt shown by collecting cards displaying your 'conquests' half-naked.

I agree the cards are objectionable, but there exists no necessity to 'collect' them. Nor is there any reward for doing so. You don't gain any experience, or levels or achievements (unlike Mass Effect). As for the objectification of women, by virtue of what we are as living organisms, we can't be anything more than objects. To argue otherwise is the height of stupidity. Your 'personality' is not separate to your physical being, it's just a bunch of chemical reactions. There are no souls. Truth of the matter is the only female I can recall who was fully naked in the Witcher was a wood nymph, which kind of went with the territory, the rest were all fully dressed and none were sporting the kind of revealing out door wear the women in Dragon Age are sporting.

The Witcher is not the Polish Equivalent of Rape Play I'm afraid.

Sure there is sex in it, but if your rationale for Misogynistic/Sexist is 'there's Sex' then the Sims series is surely the height of Misogyny no?

 

[Absinthe]

So...

The Witcher does it: Cool.

Dragon Age does it: Lame and tired.

I've not played either game, so I admit to being ignorant of the detailed sexual intricacies of their respective settings. But it does seem like a double standard. It's not like I've seen anything in DA so far that's utterly appalling.

 

[CptStern]

Oh well as long as it has some strong female characters the excessive objectification of women is fine and dandy. Misogyny is hatred or contempt of women, such as the contempt shown by collecting cards displaying your 'conquests' half-naked.

if you play as a female do you get cards featuring half naked men? also you can have gay relationships ..would the half naked guys on the cards be powder puffs?

so 4 distinct set of cards for 4 distinct possible romantic liasons:

 

[Kadayi]

So...

The Witcher does it: Cool.

Dragon Age does it: Lame and tired.

I've not played either game, so I admit to being ignorant of the detailed sexual intricacies of their respective settings. But it does seem like a double standard. It's not like I've seen anything in DA so far that's utterly appalling.

What seems and what is, are entirely different things. As RPGs go I really recommend The Witcher. Play it through fully and you'll appreciate why there is a distinction, in the way it handles things.

 

[Blackthorn]

The Witcher does it: Cool.

Dragon Age does it: Lame and tired.

The Witcher does not do what Dragon Age does and that was the very basis of my statement. I found the Witcher interesting because it avoided, or took a unique angle on, all the "lame and tired" cliches that Dragon Age is rife with.

As for the sexism debate, I can't possibly see how anyone could consider, cards aside, the Witcher a sexist game. As said before, the misogyny present in the setting itself was there because it was realistic. But the female characters themselves were independent and given personalities beyond "I'm a sassy warrior babe not afraid to flash her tits", which is a type of person that simply would not exist. Saying that loads of games do it so there's nothing to get offended by simply doesn't cut it. And the Witcher, despite ridiculous claims that it makes the same mistakes Dragon Age does, shows how to incorporate realistic female characters into the game properly. It even has "a rebellious woman" who "loves to tease", yet the character is portrayed as such without her having to wear ridiculously revealing clothes for us to know this.

Another example: Geralt can find himself looking after a child with Shani in the Witcher. Her primary interests during this part of the story are whether the child is happy, whether Geralt is providing the proper attention to him and whether the life of a Witcher can coexist with a relationship with her. So yes, you can sleep with her, but that is what men and women do, but the relationship with the character extends far beyond a single, exploitative act.

 

[Warbie]

The Witcher does have bloody awful combat, though. Something like that will pull me out of a game more than flashing a few boobs for the sake of it. I was particularly excited about the now cancelled console version because the developers promised a completely reworked combat system, but it looks like we'll have to wait for no. 2 now.

I suspect that once you get into Dragon Age, collecting loot, saving kingdoms, and slaying beasties, that memories of BG will come flooding back. Having said that, I just cancelled my pre-order due to no co-op! Was this a well kept secret, or have I been living under a rock? I just don't have time in my life for an 80 hr single player game

 

[CptStern]

it was never mentioned there'd be co-op. in fact I cant think of a similiar game that has co-op. what made you think it was co-op?

 

[Warbie]

Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights etc.

 

[Paulaner]

What's bothering me is that someone is talking like he knows the characters and the story of Dragon Age in advance. Don't jump to conclusions. You simply cannot say "The Witcher does not do what Dragon Age does", because Dragon Age is not out yet.
As for my personal opinion, I consider Witcher an action-rpg and I simply cannot stand its awful combat system. I liked the opening but I got pissed off and quit the game, with or without boobs

 

[Blackthorn]

What's bothering me is that someone is talking like he knows the characters and the story of Dragon Age in advance. Don't jump to conclusions. You simply cannot say "The Witcher does not do what Dragon Age does", because Dragon Age is not out yet.
As for my personal opinion, I consider Witcher an action-rpg and I simply cannot stand its awful combat system. I liked the opening but I got pissed off and quit the game, with or without boobs

Well I do hope the game surprises me, I really do. And I have no doubt the actual gameplay of Dragon Age will be better than the Witcher's. But for me an essential part of the RPG experience is a gripping storyline and setting, and from the extensive reading I've done on Dragon Age, and from what they're presenting the game as, neither story nor setting compel me to play it.

 

[Kadayi]

The Witcher does not do what Dragon Age does and that was the very basis of my statement. I found the Witcher interesting because it avoided, or took a unique angle on, all the "lame and tired" cliches that Dragon Age is rife with.

As for the sexism debate, I can't possibly see how anyone could consider, cards aside, the Witcher a sexist game. As said before, the misogyny present in the setting itself was there because it was realistic. But the female characters themselves were independent and given personalities beyond "I'm a sassy warrior babe not afraid to flash her tits", which is a type of person that simply would not exist. Saying that loads of games do it so there's nothing to get offended by simply doesn't cut it. And the Witcher, despite ridiculous claims that it makes the same mistakes Dragon Age does, shows how to incorporate realistic female characters into the game properly. It even has "a rebellious woman" who "loves to tease", yet the character is portrayed as such without her having to wear ridiculously revealing clothes for us to know this.

Another example: Geralt can find himself looking after a child with Shani in the Witcher. Her primary interests during this part of the story are whether the child is happy, whether Geralt is providing the proper attention to him and whether the life of a Witcher can coexist with a relationship with her. So yes, you can sleep with her, but that is what men and women do, but the relationship with the character extends far beyond a single, exploitative act.

Exactly. I thought the Witcher threw up interesting questions. The guy


I found the whole do you sleep with Liana or Ashley thing pretty contrived in Mass Effect (not helped by the Bioware Drs insistence to 'push' it in their preview videos, in the great tradition of spoiling their own games) . In the Witcher the whole relationship thing and the decisions you make regarding Shani or Triss are far more reaching.

 

[Eejit]

I agree the cards are objectionable, but there exists no necessity to 'collect' them. Nor is there any reward for doing so. You don't gain any experience, or levels or achievements (unlike Mass Effect).

The decision to include them as an option is what I object to. You don't need to be rewarded for it to be revolting. Red Studio will be getting no money for me.

As for the objectification of women, by virtue of what we are as living organisms, we can't be anything more than objects. To argue otherwise is the height of stupidity. Your 'personality' is not separate to your physical being, it's just a bunch of chemical reactions. There are no souls.

/sigh
I was talking about sexual objectification.
Also, your point is redundant. We're all things made of things that do stuff. That doesn't mean we should treat each other or think of each other as cabbages or a meaningless collection of subatomic particles.

The Witcher is not the Polish Equivalent of Rape Play I'm afraid.

Sure there is sex in it, but if your rationale for Misogynistic/Sexist is 'there's Sex' then the Sims series is surely the height of Misogyny no?

Are you trying to put words in my mouth? Where did I ever indicate that that was my rationale?

 

[CptStern]

Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights etc.

the pc versions had co-op? I did not know that