Op Ed

Greywardens.com - Is Dragon Age II the End of BioWare as a Traditional RPG Creator?
Teasing me with something as open and infinitely superior in its complexity as was Dragon Age: Origins, only to follow up with something that is simply NOT in the same style or genre, is completely and utterly unfair. As a gamer and a fan, I care how much profit BioWare makes only insofar as it keeps them afloat to continue making more cool stuff that I like. Selfish, but true of most gamers. I don’t want to see things get blanded away from the features and elements that made BioWare my favourite game maker. While I understand their need to grow and expand, on an intellectual level, I am thoroughly disheartened at this turn of events.

View : : :
9.
 
Re: Op Ed
Jul 11, 2010, 15:03
9.
Re: Op Ed Jul 11, 2010, 15:03
Jul 11, 2010, 15:03
 
Am I missing something? Since when was Dragon Age "open and infinitely superior in complexity"? As soon as you finished the Origin tale the game was as linear as anything else, with a load of fake choices with no consequences chucked in to disguise the fact. It had the shitty pause-flail-pause combat that Bioware's so fond of, neither as strategic as proper turn based nor as fun and fluid as proper real time combat.

RPG's are my favourite genre and have been since I started gaming way back with Ultima VII and Underworld, but Dragon Age was mediocrity incarnate. I'm quite happy to play one character through a properly built branching storyline than suffer faux-choice syndrome so that I can choose which variety of arse I see running around for 40 hours.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
4.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
5.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
7.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
   Re: Op Ed
6.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
15.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
2.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
3.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
8.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
 9.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
 Re: Op Ed
10.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
11.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
12.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
13.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
14.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
16.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
17.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
18.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
19.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
   Re: Op Ed
20.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
    Re: Op Ed
21.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
     Re: Op Ed
22.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
      Re: Op Ed
23.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
       Re: Op Ed
24.
Jul 11, 2010Jul 11 2010
      Re: Op Ed
33.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
      Re: Op Ed
29.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
     Re: Op Ed
32.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
     Re: Op Ed
36.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
      Re: Op Ed
37.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
       Re: Op Ed
39.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
       Re: Op Ed
40.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
        Re: Op Ed
42.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
         Re: Op Ed
51.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
          Re: Op Ed
43.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
         Re: Op Ed
44.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
          Re: Op Ed
45.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
           Re: Op Ed
46.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
            Re: Op Ed
47.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
            Re: Op Ed
48.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
             Re: Op Ed
50.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
              Re: Op Ed
52.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
               Re: Op Ed
53.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
                Re: Op Ed
56.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
                 Re: Op Ed
57.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
                  Re: Op Ed
54.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
      Re: Op Ed
55.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
       Re: Op Ed
25.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
26.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
27.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
28.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
30.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
38.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
31.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
34.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
35.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
41.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
49.
Jul 12, 2010Jul 12 2010
58.
Jul 13, 2010Jul 13 2010
59.
Jul 14, 2010Jul 14 2010