Review Vault Dweller reviews Dragon Age

[Black]

I can't say anything bad about BG writing.

But can you say anything good about it?

 

[Emotional Vampire]

I'M SORRY THAT YOU FEEL THIS WAY, OLD MAN.

 

[Lockkaliber]

YOU'RE A FOOL IF YOU BELIEVE I WOULD TRUST YOUR BENEVOLENCE. STEP ASIDE AND YOU AND YOUR LACKEYS WILL BE UNHURT.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And what about wizardry or even DnD games?! DA:O being the spiritual successor of BG2 really fails here.

How so? 2E DnD gives you the min number of options. You pick a class and then you get automatic bonuses to THAC0 and saves when you level up, where choosing new spells is the highlight of the leveling up experience. BG2 tried to fix the boredom with the class kits, but it wasn't much and can hardly be compared to the DA system.

You keep comparing DA:O with action RPG.

Pardon?

Do you regard as one?

Certainly not.

As for calling FO character system "pretty weak", I must take it as a trolling attempt.

Nope. I honestly believe that it was a weak system, but you're more than welcome to prove me wrong.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It does put you in a disadvantageous position.

Looked the same as any other fight to me.

I think we've been over this before. I don't buy the unlikelihood of travelling to the Circle and back not being an issue when there's a demon upstairs who already killed and resurrected the castle inhabitants once. Heck, she can turn statues to life, why are we supposed to pretend it makes sense for you to be able to pick your nose and take your sweet time rounding up the Mages so you can mind-enema the kid?

I see it as a good choice that should have been developed more. If you don't have the blood mage with you, you don't have any other choice, do you? Same goes for not willing to sacrifice the mother.

The shit with the demon was going for days. What's one more day? Why is it suddenly such a big deal? You've defeated his minions once before. Whatever the demon can create in a day won't be much of a treat, especially since you're bringing the top mages with you.

 

[Secretninja]

Just because the action is incredibly boring and repetitive does not disqualify it from being an action rpg.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Like I said the game gives you plenty of tactical options and with a bit of thought and planning, you can mow through everything the game throws at you.

And what options are they? Warriors and rogues can disable an enemy for a couple of seconds and manage aggro (what the hell is aggro doing in a single player RPG, anyway?), but you need a mage if you want real crowd control options. Then there are archers who can turn the life of a mage-less party into a living hell.

I played a "two-handed" warrior on my first playthrough. Two-Handed Sweep was an excellent crowd control talent:

"The character swings a two-handed weapon through enemies in a vicious arc, dealing normal damage to those it hits and knocking them down unless they pass a physical resistance check. "

Pommel strike is a great talent to knock a tough melee opponent down, kill the supporting archers/mages, and then finish of the first guy. Critical strike works well to bring someone's health down or kill if the HPs are low. Indomitable is a good talent that lets you stay and fight when everyone else is falling down.

Zevran is a killing machine, as someone said. Alistair sucks at first, but once you get Shield Mastery, which gives him bonuses to 7 skills: Shield Bash, Shield Pummel, Assault, Overpower, Shield Defense, Shield Wall, Shield Cover, he becomes very, very useful.

Shale was always in my party. His talents were very effective: auras, crowd control, high damage.

Wynne is a healer, something that I didn't really need. My rogue had several points in stealing and herbalism, which allowed me to buy and brew a lot of healing potions. Sure, I could give her more useful spells like hexes, Paralysis or the sleep line, but she wouldn't feel like, well, Wynne then. Glyphs and Grease are nice, but they alone don't quite cut it.

Don't quite cut what? Glyphs are insanely powerful if used right.

Glyph of Repulsion + Fireball = best crowd control combo in the game.
Glyph of Paralysis + Glyph of Repulsion = An instant, large radius, long duration paralysis effect.

Shale, Oghren and Leliana are three companions that I could tolerate. Unfortunately, a party of two warriors and two rogues isn't particularly effective in combat.

You're mistaken.

That's what I eventually did, but that's bullshit, isn't it? Party members are the ones who complement my character, not the other way around.

Depends on a game. In a dungeon crawler where party members are silent drones, usually created by you, their role is to handle certain tasks. Nothing else. In a story-driven game the party members have personalities, which a) may rub you the wrong way, like I said, and b) may create conflicts and disagreements. For example, destroying the ashes will create a conflict and cost you 2 party members you may have counted on.

 

[Silellak]

Just because the action is incredibly boring and repetitive does not disqualify it from being an action rpg.

I've always defined an action RPG as an RPG where the player's twitch-skill matters as much, or more than, the character's skill - Diablo, Torchlight, Bloodlines, the Witcher, Mass Effect, etc. Your character's attacks can never "miss" in these games unless you, the player, missed the target - with the obvious exception of something like a ranged attack in Bloodlines, where there's a targeting reticle with a size determined by the character's skill. More importantly, the character doesn't attack more than once unless you give them the command more than once - be it through clicking, holding the mouse button down, jamming a hotkey - whatever.

Given this definition, I fail to see how Dragon Age qualifies as an action RPG. Is there another accepted definition of "action RPG" that I'm unaware of?

 

[Kashrlyyk]

...
The shit with the demon was going for days. What's one more day? Why is it suddenly such a big deal? You've defeated his minions once before. Whatever the demon can create in a day won't be much of a treat, especially since you're bringing the top mages with you.

Doesn't the demon know that you are trying to get help from the CIrcle Mages? Because that should affect his behaviour and then a day can be a big deal.

 

[Volourn]

"2E DnD gives you the min number of options. You pick a class and then you get automatic bonuses to THAC0 and saves when you level up, where choosing new spells is the highlight of the leveling up experience."

Don't blame 2E. That's BG's version of dumbing down. 2E had *both* secondary skills, and proficiencies aka its version of non combat skillz.



"I see it as a good choice that should have been developed more."

BINGO. We have a winna here!


"Doesn't the demon know that you are trying to get help from the CIrcle Mages? Because that should affect his behaviour and then a day can be a big deal."

Not sure. It depends on its magic. I think the demopn child (who is technically a her) runs away upstairs before you discuss the mages or whatnot. THAT said, consideirng how much control and influence the demon has on the castle at that time, you'd think'd she at least overhear about it while you are gone...

 

[Twinkle]

Nope. I honestly believe that it was a weak system, but you're more than welcome to prove me wrong.

Compared to what?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Compared to Arcanum or DnD or Jagged Alliance 2 or Das Schwarze Auge or even the Witcher.

SPECIAL is very, very simple. 7 stats, 18 skills, unbalanced traits and perks. Plenty of useless skills, plenty of useless traits and perks. No combat rules. Armor Class that doesn't belong there. Etc.

There were reasons why Sawyer tried to change a lot of things in BIS' Fallout 3.

 

[Melcar]

The rage grows in me.

 

[Gragt]

It's a survival horror, tho', genre-wise. Pathologic might've inched into consideration with its scant RPG elements, but probably not, The Void is not up for awards on GameBanshee.

Yeah, I know it's the wrong genre, I mostly mentionned The Void as exemple of a game that tries to push video games to a higher step when it comes to storytelling. Slight nitpicking: The Void is more about survival than horror; the Brothers represent the stuff of nightmares without trying to be scary.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not expressing an elitist opinion that BioWare's mode of storytelling is "wrong" and all games should be super-intelligent like Pathologic, or even that games like Pathologic should be put on a higher shelf for that intelligence than BioWare.

Not that it would happen but I do not really see it as a bad thing if more games tried to aim higher. I do not even mind people liking Bioware's storytelling — I occasionaly enjoy it myself — but seeing it praised for what it isn't is midly irritating. As a side-note, even if your comment is neutral about it, there is nothing wrong about elitism; despite what they say, most people actually are elitists.

I'm saying BioWare's own grasp on storytelling is slipping, and rather than becoming better with the years, they're becoming worse.

That's a bit of a surprise but then again it makes sense now that you mention it. It it's true that while BG2 improved over BG1 — it's mostly pulp but sortof the good kind, and it had some amusing banters and a cool villain — NWN has a dull disapointing story, HotU is decently entertaining but without any strong character, KotOR tries too much to tell a serious tale in the SW universe but is mostly puerile, and JE follows the same road as KotOR but does even worse. I haven't yet played Mass Effect or Dragon Age but I'll see for myself whenever I do.

But even if they do get worse, most people won't be able to/won't want to see it, and journalists will keep praising them.

 

[Volourn]

Anyone who thinks KOTOR is better than JE in any fuckin' way is fuckin' retarded.

 

[Gragt]

Hm, Star Wars vs Theme Park China: which is better and why?

 

[Twinkle]

Arcanum

Ha-ha-harm. ARC's system while being more feature-rich is even less balanced.

Jagged Alliance 2

Yes. But hardly the same type of game as FO1-2.

DnD and Das Schwarze Auge

Are we talking about tabletop or computer game implementations?

The Witcher

???

SPECIAL is very, very simple. 7 stats, 18 skills, unbalanced traits and perks. Plenty of useless skills, plenty of useless traits and perks. No combat rules. Armor Class that doesn't belong there. Etc.

Stats affect non-combat gameplay more than in your average RPG. Low CHA and Low INT chars will have different experience compared to smart and charismatic ones etc.

AC in FO is pure idiocy, yes.

Traits are badly implemented as most of them just unneccessary gimp your char.

Perks are cool if unbalanced.

About skills (more content rich FO2):

We have 6 combat skills:

- Small guns - win option: useful both at the start and near the end.
- Big Guns - less useful than it seems, but has some merits.
- Energy weapons - second best option.
- Unarmed. Not very useful compared to the three above, but still viable if you are playing Bruce Lee type of character. + required for some quests.
- Melee Weapons - viable and easy way to complete the game with certain perks.
- Throwing - that's a definitely useless shit.

12 non-combat skills:

- First Aid. Somewhat useful.
- Doctor. Definitely useful.
- Sneak - shit IMO.
- Lockpick - yes, especially in the early game.
- Traps - same as above.
- Steal - not worth it.
- Repair - useful.
- Science - useful.
- Speech - definitely useful.
- Barter - somewhat useful.
- Gambling - not so much.
- Outdoorsman - somewhat useful as it allows to skip too easy/too hard encounters.

Totally useless skills hardly come in "lots".

It's simplistic and far from perfect but it offers much more flexibility in developing your char than most of the videogame-oriented systems out there.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Ha-ha-harm. ARC's system while being more feature-rich is even less balanced.

It's hard to say whether it's more or less balanced when Arcanum's system dwarfs Fallout in terms of complexity.

Yes. But [JA2 is] hardly the same type of game as FO1-2.

We're talking about character systems here.

Are we talking about tabletop or computer game implementations?

Computer. For DSA my champion is Realms of Arkania.

Stats affect non-combat gameplay more than in your average RPG. Low CHA and Low INT chars will have different experience compared to smart and charismatic ones etc.

It has nothing to do with the system. What you're talking about is the overall game design, which is superb in Fallout. I'm talking about the character system only. Surely you realize that just because a game has Charisma, it doesn't magically make it useful?

12 non-combat skills:

- First Aid. Somewhat useful.
- Doctor. Definitely useful.
- Sneak - shit IMO.
- Lockpick - yes, especially in the early game.
- Traps - same as above.
- Steal - not worth it.
- Repair - useful.
- Science - useful.
- Speech - definitely useful.
- Barter - somewhat useful.
- Gambling - not so much.
- Outdoorsman - somewhat useful as it allows to skip too easy/too hard encounters.

Totally useless skills hardly come in "lots".

Let's take another look then:

"- First Aid. Somewhat useful, - Doctor. Definitely useful."

I played Fallout a million times. Never put a single point in First Aid. First, we have 2 skills doing the same things and both are available from the start (i.e. you don't need to reach 50 points in First Aid to unlock Doctor), so why would you invest in FA? Second, the stimpacks are plentiful, so wasting points on medical skills seems pointless. If stimpacks had side effects, then yes, Doctor would have been a real handy skill to have. Otherwise, both are useless.

Fallout 2 tried to make it useful by offering you the implants, but overall it felt like a trade - cool implants for 75 skill point (that just happen to go in Doctor).

Overall, the rules (that would have been a part of the character system) that could have made Medical skills useful are missing, which is why I consider the skills useless.

"- Traps - same as above."
Don't recall it being useful. There wasn't much to disarm in the game (although that's more of a design issue). As it was, however, the skill was useless.

"- Barter - somewhat useful."
How so? You always get more junk than you know what to do with. Fallout certainly wasn't a game where ammo cost a fortune and you need to count every bullet. In Fallout 2 I had a weapon warehouse in the trunk of my car. In Arcanum high Trading gives you access to things that weren't for sale. Now that's good design.

"- Outdoorsman - somewhat useful as it allows to skip too easy/too hard encounters."
Useful enough to waste points on it? Too easy - a couple of bursts and it's over. Too hard - worth a shot to get some better gear. I cant imagine why would someone put 50 points into Outdoorsman to avoid hard encounters when putting 50 points on top of what you have in a weapon skill will make all encounters easy.

 

[Twinkle]

Computer. For DSA my champion is Realms of Arkania

OK, I agree on that one.

Doctor would have been a real handy skill to have.

Broken limbs. An alternative to save-load.

Useful enough to waste points on it?

Books were enough to raise it to acceptable level.

What you're talking about is the overall game design, which is superb in Fallout.

That may be the case. However, broken character system wouldn't have allowed so much different and satisfactory (in various ways) playstyles.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I've never said it was broken. As for the different play styles, it was the brilliant design of the game and quests, not the character system.

I'm sure you'd agree that it's possible to cut SPECIAL down to 4 stats: Strength, Agility, Intelligence, Charisma, and 5 skills: guns, melee, mechanical, speech, steal and it would work flawlessly with the design of the game, without anyone even noticing the difference.

 

[Silellak]

I've never said it was broken. As for the different play styles, it was the brilliant design of the game and quests, not the character system.

I'm sure you'd agree that it's possible to cut SPECIAL down to 4 stats: Strength, Agility, Intelligence, Charisma, and 5 skills: guns, melee, mechanical, speech, steal and it would work flawlessly with the design of the game, without anyone even noticing the difference.

It seems like Stealth would be a better choice than Steal. Steal can logically fall into a subset of Stealth, but not vice-versa, and "Stealth Boy" is supposed to be one of the primary "Fallout character archetypes", correct?

 

[Jim Cojones]

I'm sure you'd agree that it's possible to cut SPECIAL down to 4 stats: Strength, Agility, Intelligence, Charisma, [...] and it would work flawlessly with the design of the game, without anyone even noticing the difference.

It would make huge difference. Every stat you proposed to cut off has something interesting to offer. Both luck and endurance have enormous impact on your choice of perks and combining their bonuses with the bonuses from perks. You can pump your luck close to the max and score so many criticals that you won't need endurance. Or alternatively, you can create a character with pool of hp so big, so he will be able to fight longer and win without high damage criticals. Perception makes ranged and unarmed builds differ.

Anyway, what's so appealing in "balanced" systems where every skill is as important as any other? Existence of skills, traits and perks that may seem useful but in reality are not, force you to analyse your choices more carefully. Makes character creation a game on its own, especially with a system like in Fallout that ties stats with available perks.

No, sweetie. BG barely had any writing.

Baldur's Gate has quite of lot of text - about half the size of dialogues that Planescape Torment has. It doesn't have any outstanding pieces so that can explain why one can not remember much of it. It has some moments when NPCs throw walls of text on you without saying anything important but it's not as bad as f.e. NWN. There are also some really bad attempts on humour, especially at the beginning (which also suffers because of NPCs talking about the UI). And the PCs good and evil responses are amongst the worst in history of Bioware, competing with Fallout 3 [intelligence] quotes in category "the most inane PC dialogues in the history of RPGs".

 

[Emotional Vampire]

Only the "Teachers" talk about UI and stuff. Don't talk to guys in green.

Don't remember any inane dialogue options.

 

[KalosKagathos]

snip

Thanks for the tips. Looks like I just took crappy abilities and/or misused useful ones. Will give the game another go.

 

[Ogg]

I'm sure you'd agree that it's possible to cut SPECIAL down to 4 stats: Strength, Agility, Intelligence, Charisma, and 5 skills: guns, melee, mechanical, speech, steal and it would work flawlessly with the design of the game, without anyone even noticing the difference.

I'm sure you'll love ME2 or AP character system.