Is Dragon Age worth the hype?

Remove all ads!

To me the graphics look a bit outdated already; at least they are behind what Unreal engine 3 can produce. Maybe the Eclipse engine is already a bit old because of all these years spent developing the game. But it looks good enough though.

 

Ragusa, I hate you now. And Beren, too.

Also, the Devs have said there will be (is?) a toggle for the gore level, so I'm guessing you can turn that off if you want. It's probably burried somewhere in the game system you carelessly fondled... *ahem* didn't have a chance to disect, Ragusa.

 

I think so.

Oh, and now some well deserved gloating for getting my hands on it so early ...

 

Does it have modified dice in its blood?

 

I think the game seems too bloody and gory. I'm not against blood and gore, but I hate it when they're exaggerated (and the explanation given is weak). I hope it's not. Everything else seems promising, and one character is even my namesake.

Finally had enough playing MotB. Thought that should've been their first game instead (the story was great up until you get to the dead city). MotB was a huge step from the OC, but still lacked further refinement (Vampire monks? WTH where they thinking!? Limited rest? Gawd. Result of such imbalances: Warrior-players claim have the game is too easy. Casters would very much disagree). And so they made SoZ... Personally, at that point I felt like playing an MMO all over again where new stuff kept getting added while the old stuff (and their corresponding shortcomings) continued to rot the game from within. Gradually lost interest and left SoZ halfway through (I've lost too many hours of my life to have to go through that particular MMO feeling all over again).

BG2 had its own style, and it did well to capitalize on that (same for the Final Fantasy games). NWN and NWN2 had too much of the MMO feel into them (which they should have avoided at all cost IMO. If I wanted to go PvP or play a game that's not story-driven or that doesn't capitalize on the dialogue as something that allows skills to reach 30-40+ ranks should, I would be playing WoW/Aion/DotA or a proper hack n slash or something. D&D games were supposed to be different, and games like BG2 brought that uniqueness to a whole new level).

I have absolutely no idea how they expect to make DA:Origins a successor to BG2, but if it's a game with good story, good gameplay, good graphics and it doesn't venture into the realm of MMO's (among other "realms"), then it's good enough. I enjoyed the Witcher because it managed to do that to some extent. Some of the gameplay also looks promising - I still have no idea how the class system is supposed to work, but I hope it's more versatile than 1) knight with shield 2)knight with two hand sword 3) ranged knight... I like casters.

Personally, so far the only successor to BG2 I've actually seen is D3 - a potential hack-n-slash game. But it already has the gameplay (falling walls... extremely reactive environment, all down to the very last bit of frayed cloth fluttering in the wind... and the character/creature actions/expressions/movement are excellent). All it lacks is a good story - and yet Blizzard has been getting much better at telling stories these days.

 

Laudably, I just pre-ordered Dragon Age, through SP

 

As I said, the Devs have talked about a gore toggle, so that's probably avoidable. I know I don't want my characters constantly bathing in the entrails of their enemies. Well, Dog maybe, but not me.

They're calling DA the "spiritual successor" indicating that it has the same "spirit" as BG2 did. How exactly they define the "spirit" of BG2 is a topic of much debate, but it seems to have: full party control, romances and NPC banter, deep story, tactical battles, and character customability. That sounds pretty promising to me. Add fully turn-based battles and maybe a larger possible party and I'd be in heaven. Unfortunately, combat is real-time (with a pause option in which you can give orders and such, think BG but without the underlying turn and round mechanism) and individual spells/skills have a cooldown period.

As for classes, there are three base classes: Warrior, Rogue, and Mage. The Warrior can cover any type of warrior you mentioned and more: sword&board, Two-handed, dual-wielding, or ranged. They kill things. The Rogue is a bit more complex. They're billed as a 'skill-user' class, but it looks like you can build them as archer, dual-wielder, back-stabber, traps&poisons, and the like, as well as sword&board and Two-handers if you work at it. Mages are, well, mages. They cast spells to blow stuff up. They use MP instead of the stupid D&D spells per day, though, and MP recharges, if slowly.

As you advance, you can also gain 'specializations' for each of those classes. There are four possible specializations per class and it looks like you'll ultimately be able to take two of them. These specializations aren't so much new classes or kits as a class addon. They have no downsides as far as we can tell (though a few may have plot and NPC consequences), and basically just let your character learn some new abilities, usually in line with their main class, though sometimes branching out substantially.

Hope that helps!

 

At this point only reviews from established and trusted magazine or sites can answer those questions. I took the leap of faith and pre-ordered a hardcopy collectors edition at gamemania. The only dutch store I could find that has one.

It looks like a very un-baldurs gate game, but some previews mention that it do has the guts it need.

 

I have a distinct feeling, without having played it long enough to find out, that you'll eventually will be driven away from your home and find yourself on your own with your entourage - pretty much like your main char with Imoen in BG, with some adjustments. That said, that's my hunch; I can't confirm that. I'm curious on whether I'll be right

 

From what I've seen of the Origins, most of them do look like they follow that pattern, yes.

 

That's an oxymoron don't you think?

 

Especially considering some of the mistakes those magazines have made about Dragon Age so far. There's more than one time that someone has linked to one of them on the forums and David Gaider has come on and said, "I can't even tell you just how wrong that article is!"

 

True for a lot of sites and magazines.

There is one however that I trust. A magazine called PCGameplay. I subscribe to the Belgian/Dutch version, and those people have not steered me wrong. They watch Bioware closely and are pleased so far.

I believe gamebanshee had a good in dept article also.

It will be a great game, but it will not be the spiritual successor to BG2. For that you need the D20 and its pals.

 

I got some feedback from Amazon:
Previous estimated arrival date: November 09, 2009 - November 10, 2009
New estimated arrival date: October 26, 2009 - October 27, 2009

 

Merlanni, I honestly have to say I'm happy to see the d20 system go. It's great for PnP, but it doesn't really translate to the PC that well. The Infinity Engine was, at best, clunky and uncomfortable. I'm looking forward to a more fluid, in-depth system. Basically, I don't really think d20 was so much a part of the Spirit of BG2 as it was a horrendous, cancerous growth ready to be violently excised.

 

Blasphemy!

 

Ordering one angry mob with extra pitchforks.

 

It was.

That too.

 

Well, I'm glad someone agreed with me.

Let me put it this way: were all d20 games as glorious as BG2? I've played a lot of RPGs in my time, and the things that all the best of them have in common is not the rules system. I've seen everything from d20 and SPECIAL to Final Fantasy be great. The things that makes them the best are the characters, the world, and the tactics.