Skip to content

Why dragon age is like an MMO

WorgWorg Member Posts: 170
Now, this is a response to someone who said in another thread that "Dragon age is nothing like an MMO" and I didn't much care to go off topic in the original thread.

Dragon age ----------------------------------------- World of Warcraft
-Third person view ------------------------------------Third person view
-Natural/fast health regeneration outside of combat ---------ditto
-Combat is basically nothing but a button mash of ----------same here
the abilities that you got at level up through a skill tree
-A mana system---------------------------------------mana system
-Few spells to throw around-----------------------------few spells to throw around
-Your stats increase every level and make you stronger-------ditto

Now of course this game had an okay story and lots of options. but really, this seems to be a game targeted at MMO players and hyped towards old rpg players.

I would go so far as to say that this is D&D 4 of crpg's.

Any game can have a good story, but the gameplay was ridiculously bad. I remember being a rogue character and pressing the same combo 1,2,3,4 for every god damned enemy.
«1

Comments

  • RazorRazor Member Posts: 436
    edited July 2012
    No, it certanly has some MMO influences but I wouldnt say its a wow <- bad
    I liked it even if some characters are.. not the most likable
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    edited July 2012
    You basically just described every RPG that isn't based on D&D.
  • WorgWorg Member Posts: 170
    Perhaps, but the overall feeling of playing both games are the same. Tedious and repetive. Features of a game that should not be mimicked.
  • WinnickWinnick Member Posts: 8
    edited July 2012
    The biggest similarity between the two is in my opinion all the cool-down abilities. each and every character has 17 abilities you have to activate during combat and wait for them to cool down - imho so annoying.

    In that I agree that DA is too much like WoW - but that does not turn it into an MMO
  • LediathLediath Member Posts: 125
    edited July 2012
    Why BGEE is like WoW : Cataclysm

    Both have graphical improvements over original
    Both have extra content
    Both have multiplayer
    Both are RPGs
    Both are fantasy based
    Both have "real time" turn based combat
    Both have linear progression

    /sarcasm
    oh god I just fed a troll :/

    can we please get a lock on this thread, it has nothing to do with BGEE...
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 2,072

    -Your stats increase every level and make you stronger-------ditto
    As irrelevant to being an MMO the other examples was, this is the most glaringly silly. Baldur's Gate also has "stats that increase every level and make you stronger". Every RPG has "stats that increase every level and make you stronger". That is the point of levels and levelling up, game mechanics which represent how the character gets stronger. Sure, BG may not be increasing your Base Attributes, which is probably what you referred to, but it does raise stats - HP, Lore, AC, THAC0, Number of Spell Slots, Number of Attacks, Thieving Skills etc, all of those are stats. And they increase every level.
  • RyknRykn Member Posts: 30

    You basically just described every RPG that isn't based on D&D.

    Neverwinter nights 1 and 2 can be described this way as well. I'm unsure about the new rules. I'm staying firmly in 3.5 thank you.

  • MoomintrollMoomintroll Member Posts: 1,498
    You are really comparing Dragon age with WoW, rather than MMOs in general. Most MMOs that I'm aware of are RPGs, but like any CRPG you can pretty much ignore the RP part if it doesn't interest you, so what is it about MMOs that is undesirable in an RPG?

    For instance, Wow has a brilliant combat system (by the way, I HATE WoW), which cannot be described as button mashing unless you trying to be expertly bad at it, though I think maybe you talking about the repetition you can get into. The combat relies on party co-operation which is really what you want out of an RPG, especially multiplayer which is where, afterall RPGs come from. I don't think people are so keen on the adoption of the WoW-esque archetypal classes; taunting tank, DPS, healer, and perhaps crowd control as it is rather formulaic, tired, and repetitive.

    Things that are fundamental to WoW that I would see as uncomfortable in a dedicated RPG would be things like; Facilitation of power gaming, lack of any overall narrative linking the many quests together, get me ten kobold ears- type quests, the online disinhibition effect. I'm sure there must be many more.. and I don't know if any of those apply to Dragon Age.

    I've always thought there's something to be said for a game where you pretty much start out with what you have at the end, you get the odd better gun or whatever, you just have to get better at playing or give up.
    I suppose this is gaining actual vs artificial xp, levelling for new skills should make the game more interesting, not merely equip you for scaled enemies.

  • raywindraywind Member Posts: 289
    they aint the same i liked DA:O but only mmorpg i can think of playing is ultima online other mmorpgs are jst like described above
  • TalvraeTalvrae Member Posts: 315
    @AndrewRogue Exactelly Sir
    In any case i'm the person the OP is refering too who said that DRagon age have nothing to do with a MMO...
    Most MMO (not all like for exemple Dungeons & Dragons Online) are uge worlds that take a long time to explore and travel into... DA have small maps that we travel into trought fast travel mechanics, much like Baldur's Gate 2 in fact...
    That's just to point oout another difference that come to mind
  • ZafiroZafiro Member Posts: 436
    edited July 2012
    I don't know about WoW now, but it used to be grand back in TBC, I even played it in WoTLK and been disspointed by it, but played it for a while.

    The number of the spells in WoW used to be enough for a multiplayer game.
    Tons of games have mana systems.
    Every games makes you stronger as you level up.
    Finally, combat in WoW never used to be a button mash for some including myself, takes dedication to heal battlegrounds with a numbers of players between 10 and 40, and fight off dmg dealers of your back, and level engineering and alchemy on the same toon for the goodies.
    My apologies if this sounds like a rant, by the way, what are we talking about?
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    Thank you so much.

    Though I actually don't agree with a lot of the points in the OP, my biggest criticism of DA:O was that its combat system seemed very WoW-ish, in the sense that it revolved around combining Tank, DPS and Healer in whatever worked best for the situation.

    This works great for WoW. It's utterly fantastic for it. It means that you can jump into a dungeon with a bunch of strangers you've never met and instantly be clear on what everyone's role is and how they'll be achieving it.

    But in a single player RPG? I want more. I want more options for strategy and tactics, a larger variety of roles, etc.

    I actually had a lot of trouble with DA:O at first because the concept of having a fighter whose entire purpose was to just sit there and soak up damage was so completely alien to me.

    Imagine fitting Baldur's Gate into such a context. You create a Fighter/Cleric. Is it a tank? Melee DPS? Healer? AHHHHH I DON'T KNOW! Then you've got the Thief. It doesn't fit ANY of those roles and yet it's still an essential class. Then you've got just a straight Fighter. Tank AND DPS, suckaz!


    Note that I have DA:O on the 360, so the PC version may be more strategic.
  • oldsch00loldsch00l Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 192
    edited July 2012
    I think if you play DA:O in normal you can storm it WoW style. But if you push the difficulty scale you really have to think before venturing forth. Like AndrewRogue alluded to, you could easily get wiped out by a simple encounter if you just dive into combat.

    Plus the different classes are more versatile than they look. Ok it's not D&D level maybe but since you can't have all the skills, you have to choose and end up with different roles/styles.
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    edited July 2012
    It's not just not-D&D level, though. It's not up to the same level as any oldschool CRPG. Doesn't matter if it's a D&D game, Fallout (and its little brother Arcanum), Might & Magic, TES, or even Ultima - we're seeing some super-streamlined class development and levelling in more modern RPGs.

    At the risk of getting slammed, I would even say WoW is more in-depth in this way than DA:O. Three races, three classes? That was fair for a huge game where they were creating their own new world, but then for the sequel they're just like "No, I feel like that was too much selection, you know? Let's just have one race and three classes. But now people say your last name in dialogue!"
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    Nah, Skyrim preserved the complexity, though it is still a twitch based 3d action rpg. It has no party, though. I was really disappointed by DA's shallowness. It is a console game.
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    Heh, make a character in Daggerfall, then tell me Skyrim preserved the complexity, lol.

    Good game, though.
  • IchigoRXCIchigoRXC Member Posts: 1,001
    I liked the spell combinations in Dragon age, though I would have liked more. That is all. Oh an the banter between Morrigan and Alistair was brilliant.
  • paulsifer42paulsifer42 Member Posts: 267

    Nah, Skyrim preserved the complexity, though it is still a twitch based 3d action rpg. It has no party, though. I was really disappointed by DA's shallowness. It is a console game.

    I debated on if I should comment on this or not, but do you really need to slip in the backhand to consoles? As a primarily console gamer, I sense an arrogance in the PC gaming world, as if, somehow, they have a corner on the market of great games. Not all games on console are Call of Battlefield.

  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862

    Nah, Skyrim preserved the complexity, though it is still a twitch based 3d action rpg. It has no party, though. I was really disappointed by DA's shallowness. It is a console game.

    I debated on if I should comment on this or not, but do you really need to slip in the backhand to consoles? As a primarily console gamer, I sense an arrogance in the PC gaming world, as if, somehow, they have a corner on the market of great games. Not all games on console are Call of Battlefield.
    Well, some consider the simplified design a merit. If you are a console gamer, you actually must be happy, because there are troves of games built for the console. DA is simple because during the years, Bioware tried to please the masses (that are playing console) instead of catering to a niche market, that is oldschool crpg. Calling the console simplified is not a "backhand", it is the truth. Most developers stopped creating games i like, because the masses got console, not a PC, and the money is there. I'm really amazed that Trent and his company sees fantasy in this oldschool game, which is still my favorite.
  • paulsifer42paulsifer42 Member Posts: 267
    edited July 2012
    @Avenger_teambg
    I dunno, maybe I'm reading into something that isn't there, but PCers seem pretty condescending in their comments, as though games on PCs are superior to console games, not just different. You may be the exception.

    To be fair though, I do see how games are often simplified, but like you said, that tends to be better for me. I want a good story and experience, not so much a grueling, tactical challenge. I really didn't find BG to be all that challenging though. Great story and experience, but I would say that Fallout 3 also has a great story and experience, and it was built for consoles.

    Edit: I just found a great quote on these forums to show what I'm talking about: This argument goes further than just the UI. Most games in general in the last 10 years have been dumbed down to the point of ridiculousness in order to cater to the casual console gamer market. Look at Dragon Age and Skyrim.. Much newer than Baldur's Gate.. Much worse than Baldur's Gate.
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    edited July 2012

    Heh, make a character in Daggerfall, then tell me Skyrim preserved the complexity, lol.
    Good game, though.

    Well, i didn't see that one. I started playing the second in row, Morrowind. And though Oblivion was kinda "simple", Skyrim improved quality and complexity again.

    Compared to Bioware (or licensed) games, they didn't change so much. Bioware, changed, but they rather just sunk steadily. Though, one of the Aurora engine games I liked - Mask of the Betrayer was actually pretty good, I'm afraid i will never play anything Bioware, and that is a pity.
  • TalvraeTalvrae Member Posts: 315
    Mask of the betrayer was made by Obsidian
  • RunarielRunariel Member Posts: 13
    I kind of feel I have to defend DA here - it had some flaws, but was very enjoyable to play and was well plotted. The Origins stories were all very good and it was the first RPG I played in which it was fun to play a female dwarf - after playing a bearded one in BG for years. DA is nothing like WoW except for some gameplay aspects, and those were not at all what made WOW so annoying. DA had some very touching moments, epic boss fights (at least the first time you do them) and told a great story - so I still have high hopes that DA3 could be great again.
  • SamielSamiel Member Posts: 156
    The single biggest thing that bugs me about Dragon Age's comabt is that it borrows threat generation from MMO design. In Baldur's Gate you have to use tactics and positioning to ensure your mages and ranged combatants stay out of harms way. Abstracting that to tapping a button to make something hit you, is a conceit of MMO's that exist because online it is not always possible to give each toon a physical presence in the world.

    I appreciate why it's there, but it has no buisness being in Dragon Age as it's a single player game. One of the reasons I LOVED the fights in infinity engine games, is I'm always thinking about where I'm fighting, where potential choke points are, and how I can best control the ebb and flow of a combat to my party's advantage. Dragon Age didn't give you enough characters to control to replicate this aspect of BG, and relied on MMO style threat generation to compensate.
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    edited July 2012
    Talvrae said:

    Mask of the betrayer was made by Obsidian

    Licensed Aurora engine made by BioWare. Actually, i forgot the Witcher series. The first was better there too :)
  • NWN_babaYagaNWN_babaYaga Member Posts: 732
    edited July 2012
    In MMO´s something AWESOME must happen if you smash the buttons, and so said the guy in a gamespot interview who is responsible for DA2... what was his name?

    Admittedly I never played DAO it looked and feeled decent in the LP I watched.
  • SamielSamiel Member Posts: 156
    Don't get me wrong I enjoyed Dragon Age Origin's story, and characters. I finished it after all, but as a true spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate I believe it failed. It just didn't have that x factor BG has.
  • RunarielRunariel Member Posts: 13
    I don't really think of it as a sucessor, and I agree that the rigid tank-healer-damagedealer-roles made some of the fights a bit repetitive and ultimately boring. However, I really appreciated the long, in-depth dialogues it had and where it went with elves and dwarves. What I truly missed from Baldur's Gate was the beautiful outdoors worlds, the variety of monsters, items and possible party members. But as for story, game design and character interaction, I don't think I've seen much since BG2 that compares to Dragon Age in that respect.
Sign In or Register to comment.