we've moved on from Baldur's Gate."

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/dragon-age-inquisition-the-baldurs-gate-legacy-and/1100-6421016/

Just want to leave this article here. For a while now I have felt that Bioware seem to lack the ability to make an engaging RPG since Dragon Age Origins and after the awful DA 2 and ME3 (even ME2 in some respects) Bioware just seem to want to appeal to the "masses".

Divinity Original Sin has been on the top sellers on Steam for over a month and the same goes for GOG.com but Bioware seems to think people don't want that anymore? And they also want Dragon Age to be mentioned in the same breath as Skyrim, a game that I feel is the weakest in the main series and alot of other Elder Scrolls player seem to think so also.

Bioware were one of my favourite developers back in the day but its sad to see them just be completely incapable to make a decent RPG anymore.

I'm not sure what to think of the article, as I own DA:O on my Steam account and I really didn't think it was worthy of high praise, although it is a good game and I still enjoyed it. I may even go back to it sometime in the future. As far as having ''moved on'' from the NWN format, I honestly think that with today's technical advancements and continued refinement, there is still plenty of work that can be done with this format/style and that the true depths of this type of RPG just haven't been fully explored yet, we still have a long way to go, though D:OS has made quite a jump towards seeing what we can do today. And there is still a lot more to come of it, hopefully!

I honestly didn't even think DA:O was very impressive. Given that it was advertised as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate, it didn't really meet my expectations.

I thoroughly enjoyed DA:O, it wasn't as good as BG but compared to what they have released recently I just cant see us getting the old Bioware back. The game looks better than DA:2 but suppose that isnt a hard thing to do.

It's not necessarily that they even think people don't want it anymore, but they think that not enough people want it. And for their purposes, they're right. Larian is obviously making great profits off D:OS, but they're a 40-person company. EA has 10,000 employees, these kind of profits aren't worth their time. They're targetting the mass market, the unwashed masses (aka: console players). If you're looking for the D:OS kind of RPGs, there's no point in even paying attention to BioWare anymore.

I think this is some very silly commentary from the Bioware guy. I've seen a lot of silly commentary though recently vis a vis this DA vs Witcher vs Baldur's Gate style rpg's and I just can't get with any of it.

For me there are different types of games for whatever mood I am in. I love Divinity:OS and I also enjoyed Skyrim and DA II has it's charms even if I like it less than the aforesaid. I don't see why I can't have both? I mean a hardcore rpg for when I am in that mood and some big eye candy like Skyrim for when I want that sort of thing (and sometimes I do). I don't get this "it has to be one or the other" sort of thing.

But that guy from Bioware is talking out his ass. By now, of course, he and his company have noted the success of D:OS and can see that there is still an audience for this kind of game.

Well I wouldn't say console players are the issue, I have had this debate a number of times but I don't want to go into it but yes games like D:OS are normally associated with the PC. No doubt that the Bioware/EA overhead is a lot greater than Larian and maybe that needs changed. Either way its too late now and I will check out DA:I because I am a glutton for punishment and Bioware meant a lot to me back in the day that I just cant seem to help myself but I will probably buy it second hand on the Xbox One.

Ah well like I said the old Bioware is gone so I suppose there is no point on getting worked up over Biowares current course in terms of game development.

BioWare is the Metallica of video games, you know they sold out long ago but you still feel obligated to buy and play their new releases because once upon a time they were pretty great.

Hmm...perhaps going OT for this forum but the article was worth a few chuckles. The presumption that Dragon Age (with a dumbed down RPG system, inflexible camera, simplified lighting model) is an "advance" on Neverwinter Nights seems to indicate Bioware's desire to rewrite history. And this gem:

"He says the game's crafting system is the deepest BioWare has ever created. You don't just craft individual items from raw materials, but actually create different parts of the final product and then combine them..."

suggests they've forgotten how crafting started fairly complex in NWN2 and was rapidly simplified in the expansions (presumably in response to feedback). I'm guessing that Inquisition will be principally a match-the-ingredients crafting puzzle game (with lots of special ingredients only available as extra paid content/DLC) with a bland, uninspiring 3D adventure tacked on.

Given Gamespot's criteria ("I can see this is Dragon Age. The evergreens are tall and rigid, and their olive-hued needles are duller than those you would see in many other fantasy games") I've not got any expectations for DA3, but then I've boycotted EA/Bioware for a few years over their DRM policy (mandatory online activation) and not bought anything since the original DA Awakenings expansion. Like the OP, I consider Bioware long gone and am far more interested in what Obsidian might achieve with Pillars of Eternity.

This. As long as there are a variety of RPGs out there, why complain? If someone doesn't like BioWare's RPGs then don't play them, play D:OS or the Witcher or whatever floats your boat. There is no need to rip an RPG or an RPG-producing company because they don't make an RPG the way you want it made. There are, thankfully, many choices to choose from. Choose yours and be happy.

" I consider Bioware long gone and am far more interested in what Obsidian might achieve with Pillars of Eternity."

Exactly! I was in work and I was debating with a friend about Bioware and I was saying they are a shadow of their former self and he was accusing me of not moving on with the times. So the argument went on and he goes "look we can both agree that we'd love a KOTOR 3" and I said "yes but not done by Bioware".

Bioware were once my favourite developer back in the day but the thought of Bioware working on another KOTOR game literally makes clench my fist because I REALLY loved KOTOR and even KOTOR2 but after the terrible SWTOR (admittedly I'm not into MMOs) and their current track of games I wouldnt want them to ruin something like KOTOR.

I would love Obsidian to work on another KOTOR but actually finish it this time, because it was a great game too.

Yet another game, alongside D:OS, that has the potential of showing what can still be done with isometric view RPGs. I'm really looking forward to PoE.

I agree with them. I tried to play this game, I tried to like it, but instead of a fun and engaging game, I found a tedious and dull game that just didn't engage me. It has some good elements and some good points, but for the most part I had to force myself to continue on with it. Not so for DA:O. From the moments I started it, to the moment I finished it I was engaged and had a good gaming experience.

DA:O wasn't too bad of a game IMO, but it's no D:OS. Its main downside is that realtime-with-pause-combat just blows.

It's after DA:O that BioWare really went downhill.

To each their own, and your opinion on how you feel about the games is valid.

But for Bioware to basically deny the fact that there is a large amount of game players out there who have been aching for a game like BG2 or NWN speaks volumes to the fact that they have lost touch with a large base of their fans.

D:OS is not perfect, by any means, but it has filled a role in the gaming community that has been absent for a long, long time. If executives at Bioware can't see that people still want games like this (I think Kickstarter has done a good job of proving this, with this, Pillars of Eternity, and the new Torment game all getting absolutely huge backer numbers... well, I don't know what else could bring Bioware back to their old fans, because they are lost.

KOTOR2 was developed by Obsidian, not Bioware =)

Judging by what he said in his post, he knows that.

I'm not sure why you can only like one or the other. I'm really enjoying Divinity: Original Sin. It's a great game, but I also like the Dragon Age games. DA:O was very good, DA2 was kinda meh, but had an ok story. I'm looking forward to Inquisition, hoping it's learned for the mistakes of it's predecessors. I'm also really looking forward to Pillars of Eternity, Torment, and even just threw 20 bucks at the Kickstarter for After Reset.

Different games fill different spots for me. Bioware games are the giant summer popcorn movies. They have to have mass market appeal to make enough money to pay for their massive production cost. That doesn't inherently make them bad. Besides, other then the huge stumble at the end of ME3, I feel they usually tell a reasonably good story. Divnity is the lower budget Indie Sci Fi movie that hopefully becomes a huge hit, like Star Wars was once upon a time (for those of us who remember when Episode IV first came out.)

The problem with the RPG's like Skyrim, Dragon Age and Mass Effect is not that they are bad RPG's, it's that they are 90% flashy and only 10% substance. Doesn't mean I don't like playing them, but for me games like BG2 and NWN fill a certain mood that NO rpg of the newer kind can even approach.

D:OS certainly does not compare well to BG2 but it never wanted to do that either. In itself it's a decent game. One that might have benefited from more focused writing but that's how Larian rolls.

This article is also directly countered by the big 3, Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2, Torment 2 that are coming. These games are made on-demand which is fantastic, because it proves, there is indeed demand for the "older style" RPG's. Whether they are good or not we'll see when they release. But fact is that gamers are not all over BG2 / NWN

IN the end, more RPG is ALWAYS better imo.

Equally I don't understand why it's a binary choice in the eyes of Bioware/Gamespot. I like BG2, no I adore it. Same for NWN with modules. BUt I also liked Mass Effect and Dragon Age Origins, I like good games first, good RPG's second.

Yeah I know that:

"I would love Obsidian to work on another KOTOR but actually finish it this time, because it was a great game too."

This is it I suppose. Those kind of RPGs peaked in the late 90s/early 2000s, maybe its because they had such an impact on me because i was so young it has "ruined" in regards to modern RPGs and I find it hard to be satisfied with modern RPGS. Though I did REALLY enjoy Mass Effect 1 and was hoping they would expand upon the RPG elements but ultimately they focused more on the shooting and we got 1 good-average game then an honestly terrible game.

I am looking forward to Wasteland 2 because, again, I didnt care much for Fall Out 3. I enjoyed FO3 but I loved the original 2 games and knew of original Wasteland but never played it, so wasteland 2 looks to be the spiritual successor to original fallouts, with obvious reason.

I will still end up getting DA:I because it cant be worse than DA:2.

Speak for yourself. I prefer real time pause combat and Dragon Age: Origins was the perfect blend of modern with old school RPG features. DA2 and ME3 weren't good though. ME2 was great as far as action-RPG's are concerned.

People are making too many judgements on Inquisition though which isn't released. Most of all, it's not a traditional-RPG but an ACTION-RPG. Bioware no longer develop CRPG's but action-RPG's and there's a clear difference.



LOL? Dragon Age and Mass Effect are nothing like Skyrim. Skyrim is bland, empty and your character's dialogue is lacking. In Dragon Age and Mass Effect, dialogue is the key focus outside of combat. In Mass Effect 1 you can literally spend hours conversing with people and the same goes for Origins where you can forge a personality with the dialogue system (hell, you can still do that in DA2).

Even the later titles in these series (DA2 and ME3) resemble older RPG's more than Skyrim because your choices have consequences in the plot even if they don't matter much in the end. Skyrim's just a sandbox RPG that's linear when it comes to quests and the main plot. Everything you do in Skyrim has no consequence and role-playing is meaningless. Dragon Age and Mass Effect are more direct RPG's (with Origins being a traditional RPG as opposed to its sequel which delved into action-RPG territory and dumbed down features).

Ehm yeah... I was not comparing Skyrim to Mass Effect or DA:O ;p

EA may have 10,000 employees, but EA has never produced a single game that took 10,000 people to produce...;) Lol! If EA ever tried to put that many people on a game it would never get finished, and if it did get finished it would most likely be terrible...:D

The "mass market" is usually not what EA thinks it is, and that has been proven time and again. The great thing about software is that once you have assembled enough people to make a decent game, it really doesn't matter if you add 1,000 more or 10,000 more people--indeed, all that would do is serve to make things much, much worse.

EA executives have made comments in the recent past concerning consoles that are so stupid and so wrong it's difficult to believe the people who made those statements have jobs in the industry. They also fib quite vociferously when they want, such as the massive fibbing they did surrounding the release of SIM City.

If ever there is a company Larian should not emulate, it would be EA, imo.

Edit: wanted to add that I rather liked DA:O...thought it was very refreshing at the time, in fact. DAII looked and sounded so different and so poor that I never bought it and never will. I await DAIII with hope, but skepticism, nonetheless. If there's a way to mess up something, EA will find it and then spend $30M telling folks how wonderful it should have been....;)

Not smart--great games sell themselves, pretty much. "Too many Chiefs, too few Indians" is as true today as it ever was.

For heaven's sake, why do this?

If you found DA2 a disappointment, then at the very least hold off on DA3 until you've seen proper reviews (i.e. not Gamespot...) indicating an improvement. Buying titles on the basis of "it can only get better" just encourages poor publishers to continue being incompetent, rather than allowing them to go bust and make room for newer, more innovative competition.

What EA fails to understand is that the world has moved past bad games, not past game archetypes.

It's big publishers that are trying to pigeon-hole games in archetypes, so that their MBA executives can make spreadsheets that add up to a nice, tidy, bottom line. Thus, in the case of EA, we have the butchering of DA:O into the "button-mashing-aka-visceral-combat" DAII, or "the let's-cash-out-of-the-franchise-and-move-on" MEIII.

Well, with tools such as Kickstarter and even Steam's "Early Access", the world has moved past that. The games we play don't have to be pigeonholed into "cRPGs" or "aRPGs" or "fast-paced" or "linear" or "open world" or "console-ports". Developers can make the game they want, the way they want it. And guess what, more often than not, the outcome is pretty astounding. What "mainstream" publisher would have picked up "Don't Starve" ? Or "Banished" ? Or D:OS for that matter. The video on Torment's webpage is pretty representative or that corporate mentality.

Frankly, I can't wait for Wastelands 2, Pillars of Eternity and Torment: Tides of Numenera. Not because they are "classic cRPGs", but because they are made with making the game good in mind not whether they can fit the "c/aRPG" or "console compatible" or "fast paced" pigeonhole in mind.

It's not a matter of budget. Just look at big publishers that develop their own games like Bethesda and CD Projekt. Maybe they are not for everyone, but TES series or the Witcher are solid games and classics in their own right.

Yes, the world has moved on and it was about time if you ask me.

its going to be bought pre-owned on the XBO. I havnt pre-ordered or anything I am just more frustrated at Bioware but its clear that they wont be going back to the old kind of cRPGs. I am cautiously optimistic about the game but I think it will be average at best.

Puting Mass Effect, skyrim and Dragon Age on the same sentence and comparing them is just wrong. Even tough they are labeled as "RPGs", they are so diferent it's not even worth trying to compare them in any way.


RPG is just way too broad of a therm. I wish people would stop using that label witout context or witout a sub-genre right next to it. Makes no sense.

ME3 is a great game. Skyrim is a great game. D:OS is a great game, Dragon Age Origins is a great game.
Diablo 3 is also a great game. All "RPGs" (i guess) but completely diferent, but all great.

There is no shame to someone who enjoyed the complexity of D:OS to also say they liked the cinematic experience of ME3 or the brainless action of Diablo 3. They are completely diferent experiences, i loved them all at diferent times.


Somedays i play D:OS for 10 hours straight. Somedays i can't touch it because i feel in a diferent mood and i want diablo3 to have some fun just killing stuff. All fun.

Frankly, I like both new school RPGs (ME, Skyrim, or DA) and old school RPGs (BG, Fallout 1&2, PT).

Running campaign on Kickstarter right now myself and being log time DM of NWN PWs, I can tell that I really miss NWN and BG roleplay of the past day. And such games like Divinity or Avernum: Escape From the Pit (recommend you to play, btw) always brings nostalgia breeze...

I know that that genre of old school RPGs is not relatively enough for the large developers/publishers - but that is indie exists for

Sneaky pitch Looks very interesting though, love the desolate feel from the landscape and that the camera looks to be rotatable 360 degrees.

I was very interested in DA:I, but the more I see and hear about the game the less and less interested I am in it. I had a lot of hope after the Dragon Age 2 fiasco, but it was naiv of me to think that Bioware would actually try to completely fix what they broke.

BioWare should also stop pandering to those weirdos on their forums too. They are fucking their games up even by listening to them.


No, no it doesn't. RTwP is awesome, as is TB.

What weirdos, what are they saying? I never go on the Bioware forums because I am sure its full of man children.

They want to have their PCs be able to have sex with anything that moves in Bioware's games.

Sounds about right for the newer wave of Bioware fans.

Trust me if DA:I turns out to be a half-decent game or better than it's predecessor no one will care about the itchy-pants stuff. The only reason it's a giant target now is because DA II wasn't really a fantastic game or at least not what older fans were hoping for so it's easy to claim Bioware are focusing on their fans that want more romance/lifestyle options.

But even if that is the case there's nothing terribly wrong with that. Some people will always want more combat/puzzles/and action while others will want more story, character involvements etc and there's nothing wrong with either. Now a truly great rpg would give us all of those so everyone would get what they want. Still waiting on that one myself.

Let's give Bioware a chance with Inquisition. It looks like it might be a solid game. They've brought the isometric camera back too.

Where do I cosign? Honestly I get tired of people bashing or downing a company because they didn't want to follow a specific set up they did in the past. I remember people was down talking dragon commander because it was made how it is now instead of just another rpg.

I feel the same way and yet I think what Bioware is saying, is that they are going where the money is -- the newer generation of gamers/game enthusiasts.

It is such a vocal group too. I go on one forum and they bash D:OS or another and they bash Baldur's Gate and so on.

It's not a normal sharing of opinions and preferences. Not new on forums, but you would think RPGers are more similar given the limited choices.

Anyway, apparently, the bigger developers are less in-tune with the silent majority which I have strong hunch may enjoy a multitude of games, both old and new -- and if we're not the majority there is at least a plurality they should pay attention to.

I am looking even less forward to Inquisitions now. Bioware still lost it, if this is the face of it.

People hate Bioware because of a variety of factors.

1 - the Mass Effect 3 debacle. Bioware sold that series on the premise that "you make important choices which affect future games - you determine the outcome of your story". What they delivered was a series which turned from a crunchy rpg into a shooter, and ended with a choice between three different colors of unsatisfying.
2 - the perversion of their own IP. Knights of the Old republic started as a solid rpg. Obsidian followed it up with an extremely well written and thought provoking sequel. Lots of people wanted a Kotor3. Instead they got a terrible mmo which went free to play a couple months after it released. Dragon Age: Origins was advertised as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. Well it wasn't that good, but it was still a pretty good knockoff. Dragon Age 2 completely abandoned those roots, and was widely considered an awful sequel. Lest we forget, Dragon Age 2's producer at Bioware literally explained that they were targeting the Call of Duty audience.
3 - the superiority complex. Not only has Bioware disappointed many of their former fans, but they are trying to convince us that those fans are idiots for being disappointed. Didn't like the ending for Mass Effect 3? You're just entitled, you can't appreciate the author's message. Didn't like Dragon Age 2? Well too bad, because Neverwinter Nights' formula is outdated, nobody likes that any more, you're just old fashioned and have nostalgia.

Instead of just giving fans what they want, Bioware is now making games that they think might sell better than their past titles. Dragon Age: Origins is a great and critically acclaimed game, it of course has some flaws, but it sold like 6 to 8 million copies. I personally had a blast playing it.

Could Bioware have ever reached the esteemed mark of 20 million sold copies if they would have simply continued down the beaten path? Probably, but then came EA. I don't think that DA:I will come even close to selling 6 to 8 million copies, especially not after the DA2 and ME3 fiascos.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is not visually appealing, the combat seems to simply consist of attack spamming (button mashing) with little to no tactics and the inventory (possibly even more) is suffering from very extreme consolitis. It is just another game for the bargain bin if you ask me.
Maybe it isn't a bad game, but they are certainly putting a lot of effort into making it look that way.

/rant

Note: I have never played a role-play/adventure focused rpg until Divinity, thus consider this either an outsider's perspective or utter bullshit.



While it is easy to blame CoD/consoles/whatever, I feel that there is an almost universal attitude in gaming, across all genres (excluding adventure focused rpgs obviously) and platforms to disregard the features that are important to adventure focused rpgs.
Features like interesting crafting, characters, locations, dialog. Generally, the stuff that makes a world and it worth adventuring in.

While it is true that in other genres these are not as important, many would scoff at the idea that a game of any genre can be both good and be focused on it's roleplaying aspects.

It somehow stems from the idea that in a game, you need a weapon and the focus needs to be exacting violence with said weapon for it to be considered a legitimate game.
It is the same reason why combat-less games like Journey and to some extent Portal get called "hipster bullshit"
It is the same reason why games that have some combat but do not live or die based on it, like the original Mass Effect get pushed in the other direction in their sequels. Its because in a game with guns, the expectation is the focus should be on the guns and shooting and not the people you meet and converse with, otherwise it wouldn't be a "real game".

I wouldn't necessarily agree.
There are genres of hardcore games which don't emphasize violence and weapons. Grand strategy and 4X games (like Crusader Kings and Civilization) typically stress the fact that violence is only one tool out of many, and usually not the best tool. Construction games, like Dwarf Fortress, Sim City, and Kerbal Space Program put less emphasis on destruction, and more on construction.

I think people call certain games "hipster bullshit" because they think those games are trying to be different only for the sake of being different, taking themselves too seriously, and/or are written pretentiously. Sometimes people are right, sometimes people are wrong. I've never heard anyone call Portal 'hipster bullshit'.

I think that Mass Effect was turned more and more into a shooter because shooters are what sell, nowadays. Its hardcore rpg components were toned down because the average casual gamer doesn't really care how many newtons of force their telepath character can exert with a "force push" ability, or want to sift configure dozens of equipment options, for 4 different characters.

EA struggles to make profit at all. And that is because they aim each year for blockbusters. Some year they have enough successful blockbusters and in some others 2 million sales of their game was 'poor' sales and they have a net loss.

Literally nothing would stop EA to have a few small studios to publish some AA instead AAA games. They can be quite profitable as well, start franchises and are much less risky than taking 250 million dollars and trying to produce a blockbuster that must sale at least 5 million copies to be profitable. Everyone else is doing that anyway several times per year already, the competition on that market is hard too. ;-)
Well actually EA is doing a lot of AA games even, but they are nearly all licenced games and furthermore there seems to be no creative freedom involved for the studios that are contracted to develop them.

Dragon Age Origins sold more like 5 million copies, not 6 to 8.

Those sales figures only include physical copies, the total amount including digital sales is higher.

"I think that Mass Effect was turned more and more into a shooter because shooters are what sell, nowadays."

Exactly, I wouldnt of called Mass Effect 1 "hardcore" RPG but it was definitely the only game in the series that closely resembled what an RPG "traditionally" is. I remember getting Mass Effect 2 and sitting back and going "where is the RPG in my RPG?". And then Mass Effect 3 came along and made it even worse with its boring characters, poor writing, uninteresting world design and bland gameplay. Cant wait to see the Asari homeworld? Its brown and grey with chest high walls, cant wait to see earth ? Sorry Brown and grey.

I loved the first Mass Effect and really hoped they would expand on the RPG elements, expand the "tank" missions when you were on a surface and just introduce more interesting characters, worlds, stories & converstations but the series just turned into a poor mans Gears of War.

Dont get me wrong I like to play the odd shooter, in fact I am very fond of old 90s shooters like Duke 3D, Shadow Warrior and Arena shooters like Unreal and Quake so I am not going to sit here and say I dont like a bit of mindless violence but If i wanted my game to play like COD or Gears I will play those games its that simple.

People always say they want KOTOR 3 but with this modern Bioware I wouldnt want them anywhere near KOTOR, I'd rather Obsidian work on it again if they could but finish the game this time!

I think it looks very good. The series is well on it's way to a more Skyrim'ish path and to be honest as much as most like Skyrim, there are many flaws in the vanilla non-modded version, that I can see many improvements to DA:I over stock Skyrim, which would take mods to do (waiting for them) and things that aren't available in mods. It's a huge open world game, really very little relation other than fantasy theme to D:OS.

Now surprising since Skyrim sold bukoo.

Well if you ask me Skyrim is the weakest in the Elder Scrolls series, as in the main numbered games, and you would have a good number of Elder Scrolls fans saying the same thing. Now I have been playing Elder Scrolls since Daggerfall and its possibly my favourite cRPG of all time but I did enjoy Skyrim for the most part but compared to even Oblivion I thought it wasn't as good.

So if Biowares ambition for DA:I is to be like Skyrim they haven't really set themselves a very high goal.

Aw, you guys are making me feel all sad and nostalgic. I too was a big fan of Bioware back in the days I considered to be the golden age of RPG's. I love D: OS and think its an incredible achievement. Someone mentioned about the size of the company. I think that is a factor in todays world. Yesteryear when gaming was in its infancy the companies were of a smaller size yet achieved some amazing things.

Sadly these days, what with all the various mobile devices and consoles, gaming has become a big industry focused much more on profit than the player. I think thats why a lot of us now look to the Indies for what we have been missing. We should support them whenever we can as without them it would all just be bloated mainstream companies running the show. Its sad what became of Bioware and all the other popular names that have gone the same way.

Dragon Age Cisquisition is very far from being open world. Did you not watch any of the demos, it's a re-tread of Dragon Age 2, corridor forests and all.

I really can't tell much from them since they're clearly set up for whoever journo they're showing it off too or carefully choreographed as most marketing is. Whether one can run about off the trail or ignore the main quest for stretches will be key for me. I do admit that the above will be key for it to qualify as "open world" for me but I can't really tell a damn thing from the demos and I am especially frustrated by them in that they only have shown the console UI so far and I could give two craps about how that looks or works.

As for "Cisquisition" that's clever and a fair criticism but then it's also a fair criticism of most games or most things in pop culture.

DA:I is very far from "open world" because Bioware can hardly grasp what "open world" means. They think open world means that you can walk outside the graphics of the road.

Open world means that you can explore not just the graphics but also interact with everything in the world no matter what your progress in the main story is. In fact, under perfect conditions you should be able to complete every quest in the game at your own pace, discovering the world on your own agenda without even having a "main quest". But more importantly, open world implies that the world is filled with self contained, autonomous story lines, unto which the players stumble while exploring on their own and which ideally, organically guide them through the main story as well. Without those, there's no reason to explore, other than admire some graphics on digital trees or at best, find an easter egg. Morrowind was excellent at that, even Skyrim was pretty good at it, up to a point.

Bioware, on the other hand, never produced such a game. They made up for it with excellent writing, tight storyline, strong characters, engaging gameplay and solid mechanics. Something they threw out of the window with ME2 and DAII, because the only thing that goes through the management's head is "button-mashing-console-driven" bottom line.

Personally I love story driven, linear RPGs such as BG, The Witcher or DA:O as much as open world ones such as Morrowind or Skyrim. But I have no hopes for DA:I, I really doubt Bioware has had a revelation with it.

Well I wouldn't say "button-mashing-console-driven" because Morrowind was on the original Xbox and console has nothing really to do with these games being watered down if you ask me because that kind of mindset is also on PC. Other than that I agree with what you're saying.

You are right, I might have been a bit too dramatic with that. That kind of mentality as you say exists also in PC-land, but I do think it's because large publishers are actually trying to mimic the console market - or it's just downright easier to make such games.

Actually, I was pretty psyched when games like DA:O or ME were also designed for consoles, I was hoping that they would show the publishers that this kind of game actually was viable and had a future in consoles. And indeed, they were huge hits. But instead of changing the landscape of games in consoles, Bioware decided to strip features in the sequels so that they were more in line with the landscape itself. Less dialogue - or at least meaningless enough so that you can skip it, repetitious but fancy action sequences, good writing wasted on meaningless plots with no real choices, shallow but easy to swallow characters, instant gratification throughout the game, less strategy more "visceral" action, butchering of the interface to the point that inventory (in an RPG of all games) is meaningless, etc etc.

And I don't think it's a sign of the times either. Red Projekt and Bethesda, cater to the consoles as well, but they didn't water down their frachises - or at least they tried their best not to. Bioware on the other hand just took advantage of the loyal fanbase DA:O and ME has created, which is my main grivance with this company tbh.

I agree other than the Bethesda part I think Skyrim is pretty watered down and thats another series I worry about for its future.

Its what sells now a days so thats why they do it which is a shame. Like I said in an earlier post if I wanted to play a game like COD or Gears or whatever I will play THOSE games, I play an RPG to get an RPG experience not to get a watered down shooter the likes of the last 2 Mass Effect games.

People have different tastes and what is so wrong about wanting to have different play styles instead of constantly trying to blur the lines so you dont alienate people who probably wont play the game anyway! Why cant companies like Bioware see this? Hell I'd be tempted to put Bethesda in the same category as Bioware with the way things are going with them.

It's beloved. Certainly we can find someone on the internet that doesn't like it. But in general a home run for Open World RPG's.

I loved the hell out of it. What I really liked was I could run around all over the place and ignore saving that whole world as long as possible or I could fork it's inhabitants over if I chose.

I don't think DA:I is going to be like that as I've heard you'll have to clear areas and complete tasks in order to open other areas up but I've also heard Witcher 3 will be like this. The one thing that gives me some hope about DA:I is that I did read one of the developers saying that after you completed quests you'd be able to run around in areas and have fights and do things unrelated to the main quest or keep playing after you'd finished that. Now that I do like to hear. It's one of the small disappointments about D:OS in that when it ends, baby, it ends! But since it wasn't billed as "open world" you can't get too broken-hearted about that.

Really? I wouldn't go that far but I did still enjoy the game. Daggerfall has got to be my favourite of the series.

Daggerfall was my introduction to the Elder Scrolls series. I remember playing just the demo back in the day, and I was blown away by being able to actually walk from one town to the next, without loading zones. It was an impressive feat for it's time. And anyone who ever played it has to remember this.

Yeah I love it, such a fantastic RPG. The stuff you could do was amazing for its time you could own multiple houses, you could own a horse, a carriage to go with the horse, a pirate ship, you could bank, the amount of guilds, etc still to this day I play the game and the scale of the game is amazing for '96. Granted most of it was randomly generated but I don't think we will ever get that level of depth with an Elder Scrolls again, Bethesda don't seem willing to do it and it feels a lot of people don't want that kind of complexity in an Elder Scrolls any more.

I enjoyed Skyrim for what it was but like I said earlier I fear for the future of the series and the usual thing that people always say to me is "if you want it like the older games just mod it" that statement really annoys me. Its like if I go to McDonald's and ask for a burger but they hand me a plate of minced meat and expect me to cook it!

DO:S still doesn't compete with Bioware's games, financially. Game quality you could argue but I honestly don't think it holds a candle to ME2/3 or Dragon Age: Origins and Inquisition will probably be the same story.

EA is your typical large publisher that wants to target the largest demographic group(s) they can for low risk. You're not going to see them go after nostalgic older gamers. That doesn't mean Bioware can't put out good RPGs, but they're not going to go for a more niche style.

Whether you agree with EA/Bioware's approach or not, Bioware fans should just be aware being under EA comes with certain changes. All game companies want to make money of course, but there are different levels of sacrifices they make when it comes to artistic integrity or creative freedoms. EA clearly does not care about those things, and while Bioware probably still does they're going to be somewhat limited by EA.

However, to be fair, having more resources/bigger budgets allows them some other advantages that are considerable. The Mass Effect games you could really feel the difference that big budget made - even if it wasn't used as well as possible the polish and smooth feeling combat was something few games match.

DA2 was a disgrace, an obvious rushed cash grab, but ME3 wasn't that bad, other than the stupid ending any DLC debacles. Still the best combat system Bioware has ever pulled off in any game. Their old DnD based games were good too, but in a different way and not very original.

Mass Effect 1 was made before Bioware merged with EA (and Dragon Age Origins was only a few months from release).

A self-owned developer can find whatever balance between profitability and artistic quality it likes (as long as it stays in business, obviously).

It could be said that EA and other large publishers don't care about quality, but it's actually more accurate to say that they CAN'T care about it.

They answer to their investors who want the biggest margins possible and don't (usually) care about artistic quality, especially if it comes at the expense of better profits. Likewise, risks - such as trying new things or innovating on existing genres - are to be avoided at all costs, because investors don't want the company to be gambling with their money. And when it comes down to it, investors tend to get antsy about anything other than big projects with big returns because small projects that return a small profit still tend to drive share prices down, and you know how well investors take to that.

While yes, EA has also undertaken a number of boneheaded policies that have made things worse than they have to be, they - and every other big publisher - can't really escape that underlying problem no matter how well intentioned they might actually be. This isn't limited to the computer game market either; it affects tabletop games (including tabletop RPGs) just as much.

I'm trying to leave my personal thoughts out of it and going in general gaming base. Most would say Daggerwhat as that game is super old now. But it also wasn't a comparison between any game, other than Skyrim is beloved, meaning there are a lot of happy players of that game.

For a couple other responses about DA:I not being open-world, I will go back and catch some movies I may have missed. It looked fairly open to me, one mentioned maybe closer to Witcher than Skyrim, perhaps. Witcher another beloved series so that is high praise still. The deal with me is this is a much more open game than any Bioware game prior and I'm excited to see what they do with a world class engine vs one that was behind the curve. I'm not holding this game to be some type of turn-based phenom, that said it can be paused into a TB game where even Skyrim or Witcher cannot do that at all.

D:OS and DA:I to me are very different. I am seeing it more in the Skyrim/Witcher/Risen area, it will have great production values, it does have the AI scripting which if one uses it, to me it is great and no other game has that. I don't get that caught up in game names and treat each individually for the most part. That I do surrender perhaps is against the grain, people really do get hung up on names. I wasn't a large fan of DA:O, it was shallow for a TB style game for me and I hated the constant loads, lost tons of immersion and had no sense of adventure.

Hmm? DA:O wasn't TB, it was RT/P.

Exactly people will say "Daggerwhat". It still doesn't give my comment any less legitimacy since people don't know any better. In comparison to the earlier games in the series I think, and still stand by the statement, that the game has an identity issue.

The whole subject matter is really just my disappointment with Bioware really. Maybe DA:I will be a good game but if they want the game to be "like Skyrim" then I will play Skyrim.

I dont see why Bioware has to aim fairly low and why they aren't confident enough to set their own path.

I know, but if you paused at every action which many pc gamers enjoyed, it was pseudo turn based, which I am referring. It sucks that I have to type sentence after sentence to describe the style clearly, but in general if you used pause a lot one was going for that pseudo turn base gameplay which I refer to.

To me it was a huge win when D:OS stated it would be true turn, I actually look down largely on pause based gaming, it is a master of none choice. D:OS is way deeper vs any Dragon Age game when it comes to stopping/tb action. I thought DA:O was perhaps an ok first attempt less the horrid engine, but no where as grand as many hoist it.

Ok I'll give you that you like DF better than Skyrim, that doesn't change that Skyrim is a beloved game and that is all that I referenced in my point.

Of course Obsidian didn't just make KOTOR2 but also NWN2, so yeah... it doesn't apply to BioWare.

Personally, I can't care less for DA:I. It's dead to me... I'll see what happens, but I seriously don't pay attention to it. Release date? I don't know.
So many good RPG series are going to waste.
The Witcher was good. Twitcher was starting to get somewhat dubious... and now they want to make it open-world too? TW3 is now dead to me as well.
So little remains, just the Kickstarter games. And I have little faith in InXile so that scraps Wasteland 2 and Torment (till they prove they can actually make them proper).

True, I didn't have faith in D:OS either (turnbased? Co-op gameplay?) but of course it blew me out of the water, so we'll just see if any of those other games also surprise me by actually being really good despite my fears.
The only one I really look forward to is Pillars of Eternity... and sadly it seems Obsidian got into rough times as it's working on 2 MMO's (the horror, the horror) aside .
Dark times for RPG lovers, but hopefully soon there will be plenty of light to brighten it up...