Dragon Age: Origins - The Baldur's Gate Successor?

I still think it'd be very hard to create a game that will do BG2 right as a spiritual successor. The game was great, but nowhere near the atmosphere of BG2. But that's got to do with nostalgia, perhaps.

In a way, it is, for the simple reason that there's nothing better now.

And woe to the one that has not played the game yet!

 

I voted yes. It's probably as close as we're going to get in the foreseeable future, and the closest we've come since. A good, party based CRPG with an immersive story, fun party combinations to experiment with, and a large world to explore.

This isn't to say that it will ever top BG/BG2 as my all time favorite CRPG, because that it has not done.

 

I think it surpasses BG1 easilly. But its far off from BG2, mostly due to the lack of replay value, i think. Still...they are deffinatly on the right track. Actually I think Mass Effect is closer to being a BG successor, than Dragon age.

 

I voted to some extent.

I stand by my initial impressions that it feels more like a fantasy KotOR than a BG successor. Not that this is a bad thing.

Dragon Age is definitely the best RPG experience I've had in a long while (since KotOR in fact, the only other one that came close is Oblivion but it felt like a step backwards from Morrowind at times). But I'm just not sure about its replay value. My first playthrough lasted for 50 hours, which is extremely long by today's standards, and I do see myself going through another time, but it just doesn't have the same lasting appeal the BG series has. Or even Icewind Dale in fact. The character system just feels too simple, more what I'd expect from an action-RPG.

Considering how NWN turned out, I also have high expectations for the toolset, but so far it doesn't seem to have the same kind of dedicated community. People are making Oblivion-like mods that add bells and whistles to the core game instead of making modules, and a story-based game like DA doesn't benefit that much from these small mods in my opinion.

In a way, I feel like Dragon Age could have done more. It doesn't quite feel like a new generation of RPGs. The area-by-area approach preached by BioWare has many advantages over Bethesda's sandbox model, but then again I think that persistant and seamless virtual worlds are the future. As much as I've enjoyed the "area" style in the past, I can't help but feel like it's a bit dated now. Since DA has been in the making for so long I guess there are things they couldn't just change.

Great game anyway. 2009's best by far in my book.

 

Hmm... well, I think I have to agree with Ray Muzyka here. Spiritual successor it is. But is it a better game? Probably not...

 

Spiritual successor definitely. It has much the same feel and vibe. Especially the rich supporting cast with their own personalities and interjections. The main difference is the lack of the D&D ruleset, which I'm broadly in favour of. I would have preferred though if more information was given so you could work out what exactly spells or abilities would do. Also, there probably isn't as much scope for different or zany characters.

I don't think it's as good as BG. I've a load of little quibbles that I really think should have been fixed in playtesting. Also, the limit of four characters and camera problems seem issues brought in from the console version. There's a few areas where DA copies BG but I feel it could have learned from console RPGs. Who actually finds inventory management fun? Why not just let people carry everything. And it's annoying to bring along a character just to open some doors and locks.

 

Job security for rogues? It's a conspiracy set forth by the rogue job union, I'm sure of it.

I have high hopes for Dragon Age 2. With the IP now built and the game engine in place, I'm hopeful that the next game will be primarily about the content, the story, the characters, etc. It would be great if DA2 could be to DA:O what BG2 is to Baldur's Gate, that is, better.

 

I was thinking the same after playing Mass Effect 2, which just came out. I liked the first one, but it did have several problems. I'm not far in ME2, but so far I find it to be a much better game. They really went back the drawing board and fixed stuff on many levels.

 

Darth, should I feel special that one of your 53 posts on these boards in the last 8 years was a reply to one my posts?


Note (posted 1 day later): I'm not actually expecting a reply from Darth, as that would surely put him over his posting limit for the year!

 

And the year is so early, I'll really have to be careful from now on

Nah seriously, I just don't visit the forums very often. When I do end up posting, I check back the topics I posted in for a few days. Then I go back to my cave and hibernate for the rest of the year.

 

Hi everyone! - hope you all are doing well!

I voted yes, because it seemed very BGish to me. At times, during the game, I just had to stop and smile, as the association was so apparent. Love the game.

 

Did anyone run into Edwina the barmaid? Thought that one was a nice refference to BG2.

 

Dragon Age is unique. Great graphics and its own world in a non D&D world. I dont think any game can match up to Baldurs Gate or Planescape for that matter. Just wandering through the Underdark in Baldurs Gate 2 had me mystified for hours, but the whole series was masterfully created and with intelligent adverseries at the end of each game with their own personalities. I think Dragon Age has the looks but Baldurs Gate has the most epic story and branched side quests I know for any RPG. Baldurs Gate is definitely still the better game for me.

 

Only in the sense it's made by BioWare. In terms of how it plays, it's closer to Dungeon Siege III than Baldur's Gate III. Although I do like the Origin stories, I feel that the Fantasy genre has become very tired and cliched in the wake of Lord of the Rings. BioWare did far better work with Jade Empire and Mass Effect (ignoring EA's DRM, play it on the X360), as both had combat systems where you felt actually in control, rather than a mere spectator. Baldur's Gate was more freeform, more about exploration and strategy, whereas DA:O feels like someone let Michael Bay direct a cheap LotR remake.

 

mmh yes and no..

..baldurs gate 2 made one quite a lot more involved in hating/pursuing the villian, ..the "only you can end the great evil lord" storyline..although well executed is imho still a pretty dumb fantasy

npcs... mmh pretty even but Dragon Age wins easily in the technical and a bit less easy in the personalities... Morrigan & Alistair are one funny matchup, Zevrans accent XD.. I just found it odd that I can for example let half of my partymembers sit in camp the whole campaign.. and do.. nothing?

graphics..phew... I don't really care.. the DA animations & ((female) leather) armors bugged me a little but the environments were awesome... but can it be that there are no bridges in DA..in other words every map is perfectly "flatable",.. so why 3D ?

combat... oh god why ... soo many many absolutely anavoidable darkspawn... dragon ages combat is simply "balanced".. with which I mean it is everywhere the same... no 1 fireball ko hobgoblins troup with oooh-****-many-claygolems behind the next door, that was what made baldurs gate (2) imho pretty fun -it was unbalanced-.

 

I'll have to agree a bit here. Despite all of BioWare's talk about "dark" fantasy, it still feels pretty bland. The whole Darkspawn business was seriously downplayed, and despite the fancy backstory they're all portrayed as your average mindless orcs. For a game, I think I prefer the D&D settings like Forgotten Realms, since they don't take themselves too seriously and there's a lot of room for freedom and imagination.

Frankly, I think the only fantasy setting that successfully demarcated itself from Lord of the Rings is Warcraft, starting with Warcraft III in 2002. Warcraft I and II were Tolkien to the core, but Blizzard took a few sharp turns since then which results in a very unique and rich setting, which most WoW players unfortunately don't care about.

 

You can't blame it on DA. Unless you're specifically talking about the movies (which IMO were deeply flawed by a very erroneous interpretation of the material). It's pretty safe to assume that most fantasy RPG settings owe a lot to Tolkien's books.

Morrowind felt different although if someone tried hard enough I'm pretty sure they'd find some similarities.

IMO DAO is a rather good successor to the BG series. It's different but that is not a surprise as complete voice acting and numerous cutscenes are to be expected nowadays. The main flaw is the scale. BG felt so much larger in so many ways. But still as the first game in a new series DAO is a very entertaining and engrossing game.

 

I felt almost exactly the same about DA:O as I did for BG1. So if it (ever) becomes a series, probably yes.
But I wouldn't compare it to BG2 just yet. It wouldn't last long.

 

ide agree da is on par with bg:1 for me and not up to bg2 standards but im sure they will get there with the sequel but we will see when the time comes.