Confession time... Why I didn't like Dragon's Age.

A good role playing game is all about the story. This makes or breaks a game. If you have a great story, the graphics and mechanics are all secondary. If your story is terrible, then it doesn't matter how good the game looks.

Dragon's Age, for me, was almost comical with how cliche' it was.

I could call out every ounce of the plot at all times with almost all of the characters. The dwarf was a drunk who liked to fight who was banished from his kingdom. The seductive elf assassin would betray you at some point, but you could take him back. I just didn't see anything that tried anything new with this game. If you have to say anything otherwise, I would love to hear it.

 

Not sure what you're talking about, I also started as a dwarf and he was my first character, but by how events were going I had no idea he would end up getting banished and betrayed by his smaller brother.

 

Yes it has it's flaws but DA Origins has an incredibly complex story and to fully understand the DA universe you must read all the books released. For me the first DA was an eye-opener on how an RPG should be and after it all the new games I played were a bit superficial.

 

I thought the game was enjoyable it had it's series moments and it's funny moments I guess it depends on type of gamer you are.

 

I liked the story of in DA:O, especially the starter stories. The political backstabbing in the dwarf back story was great in my opinion.

The thing that killed DA:O for me was the combat system. I didnt really enjoy it at all.

 

Dragon Age was just horrible to me. The story was severely lacking and I just couldn't take it serious. Then you add the fact that the combat system was horrendous and you have a disappointment.

 

I think DA:O was pretty fun: the combat system is very challenging, although many people seem to dislike it; the story is deep, the lore is rich and interesting and I found the random dialogues between the main characters to be quite amusing. DA 2, on the other hand, was a complete disappointment.

 

Yeah, I didn't find the story to be as bad but I didn't like the combat. I played on 360, the combat system looked like it was only good if I were playing the PC version or something.

 

That's because it's meant to play on the computer. The combat is based on point and click, the controls like any other RPGs of this type optimised for keyboard and mouse. Dragon Age II had better streamlined controls for consoles but it was disappointing.

 

Yeah, that's what I mean, but I didn't really love the story enough to want to get the PC version and replay it.

Also, yeah, I've heard DAII was disappointing, and the whole "Hamburger Helper" thing... haha...

 

I agree that Dragon Age's story wasn't very innovative or original. However, I think it did what it did do extremely well. It used cliche material but it pulled it off with excellence. I got very involved with the story and characters even though I knew what was going to happen as well. The companions were likeable and I just overall loved the game. Hopefully Dragon Age 3 will live up to the glory of the first.

 

I didn't really play the game for the story. I liked the graphics and the possibilities. I can agree the story was cliché. I think the story is something a lot of developers neglect. It's something they do last because they think it's easy. But for an RPG, the story is a very large part of the game.

 

I would defiantly give it another try you might like it now I know that some games at 1st I didn't like and I had to not play and then try the game again you will be surprised a game that comes to mind for me was I at 1st I didn't like the 1st Monster Hunter game it was hard, the beginning was slow and boring, and the controls were strange then one day I tried the game again and got addicted to playing online.

 

I actually liked the story in the game, even if it's a bit cliche, but a lot of RPG's are like that. However, I played the game for the game mechanics and because it was actually fun. The story was a bonus.

 

The story was the best part of Dragon Age Origins. I don't care if certain parts are "cliche" as long as they fit in with the story and enhance it. In this instance it certainly did that. It was a complex story with several unexpected twists along the way. Above all, the story was crafted well enough to create an immersive world and game.

Don't tell me you caught every single twist in that story, there were some really great ones. Zathrian being the creator of the curse. Alistair being the king's half brother. Conner being the cause of the undead in Redcliffe.

 

I wasn't huge on Dragon Age, as I wasn't particularly big on Mass Effect either, and Dragon Age is just medieval Mass Effect. However, I do enjoy both series. Not as much as I love Elder Scrolls, Fallout, etc.

 

Of course it wasn't that original, but most games like that are not. You usually know what is going to happen because game developers pull off other games. The Dwarf is a Dwarf and as we know Dwarves like to drink. It is just how it was played out. I think DA games were fun and exciting. You have to like those kinds of games to enjoy them though.

 

I actually didn't mind how cliche it was, I felt like even though the plot and character elements weren't super unique, they were well done enough that it was still a lot of fun, and didn't take too much away from the game

 

I liked the story. They built a world where I enjoyed exploring. Maybe characters are that way because that's what we expect o them. A dwarf is always going to act like a dwarf, and an elf an elf they never go to far off what we already know about them.

 

I really don't know where it let me down. I've been thinking for the longest time trying to figure it out. I guess it just didn't feel right? I enjoyed most of the game though. Story, combat, it was all great.