Originally Posted by Try2Handing
Originally Posted by Uncle Lester
I would argue DA:O's lore was actually fine, maybe not "top 3 fantasy game lore", but solid, with some potential and nice ideas. It was the first game in the series that laid the foundations. The later games just didn't build on it, instead reusing the same themes, plots and lore hooks or, worse, changing the lore and tone of the series. I groaned when I saw that DA:I is AGAIN about mages vs templars. Come on. DAII had it, but at least it was relatively short and focused. (I liked red lyrium though.)
The thing about DA lore is that it is so... narrow. What I mean is, it's always either "templar / mages", "mages are dangerous", "chantry", "maker this maker that". That's really about it. No one ever talks about anything else. You can't talk to anyone for more than 2 lines without them mentioning either "mage", "maker", "Andraste". It gets boring talking to anyone pretty soon, tbh.

I know what you mean, but I stand by my point that it's the problem of DAII and DA:I. In DA:O, you had, besides mages and Chantry (admittedly an overused dull rip-off of the Catholic church), different societies with all their problems, different faiths, little lore pieces, mentions of distant lands... Orzammar, on the brink of collapse, with both isolationism and cosmopolitanism being potential reasons for its end. Dwarven Paragons, which are an interesting take on ancestor worship (kind of). Elves having basically three societies (city, mage, Dalish) and all that follows. Dragon cults. Some nice teases and world mysteries (which mostly lead nowhere in the sequels, but that's besides the point). All the little stories of places you visit. Finally, Darkspawn, which are basically a bunch of cliches thrown together and made into something slightly different and interesting. It was a world I actually wanted to explore and get to know better. Templars vs mages was, iirc, mostly present just in the mage tower questline and only overstayed its welcome in the sequels.