Mark said,

Not having played either Dragon Age game, I can’t comment on this particular issue. However, in the larger debate, it seems that there are a lot of gamers who see the word “accessible” and assume that the person saying it is making the video game equivalent of Dora The Explorer.

I’m not sure what “consolized” means either, but if, as I suspect, it means “made more like a console game,” then to consolize a game can’t possibly pose a threat to its fundamental RPG-ness, or else all the great console RPGs I remember enjoying didn’t happen.

Speaking as an RPG lover, if I were in the producer’s chair, trying to find ways to make my genre more economical would be one of my first priorities.

Craig said,

Bioware games are about story. The gameplay and that does include the RPG elements are secondary to the story. Every Bioware game since Baldur’s gate has reduced the amount of character choice and increased the interaction of the story. DA2 took a hammer to the character, while not increasing the complexity of the story much.

This might have thrown some people off, but it was still a standard Bioware game. You follow the story, make a few choices that give you the illusion of freedom, and end up at the same ending (with minor variations). If you like that sort of thing, you’ll probably enjoy Dragon Age 2, if you don’t, you won’t. The world building and storyline of both Dragon Ages is light years ahead of anyone else (with the exception of Obsidian, but they have their own problems).

With EA owning Bioware, I would be shocked to see a return to Baldur’s Gate level character choices, but I also don’t see a move away from the Bioware standard story level choices. It is a tradeoff you make in every game.

Mark said,

Yeah, I see that. Maintaining the appropriate baby:bathwater ratio is a concern. I don’t think big-budget RPGs are going away any time soon, though; Bethesda-flavored examples have been such a hit that elements of them are even starting to show up in blue-blooded action games like Rage, and Obsidian is still carrying the Black Isle torch. The trouble is that, in large part, modern RPGs don’t really look much like RPGs.

Despite consolization, consoles themselves are just emerging from an RPG drought as Japanese publishers migrated to handhelds. From 2008 to 2010 we’re looking at four of note that weren’t also on PC, compared with four expected for 2011 alone. Still, I don’t think indies have to worry about the genre being estranged from mainstream tastes, since RPGs are, if anything, overrepresented in the tallies of the biggest handheld games of the past five years and their attendant imitators.

LateWhiteRabbit said,

Dragon Age 2 wasn’t/isn’t a bad game, not by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a pale shadow compared to the original.

The problem, as I see it, is that EA bought Bioware and demanded a money-cash-cow in just ONE year. DA was the franchise to do it with.

Bioware already had the world mapped out and was working on DLC for DA 1, so to EA it must have seemed fairly straight-forward to say: “Stop anymore DLC, just make a sequel.”

DA 2 hamstringed RPG players by doing a couple of things:

First, while much of the fun of DA 1 was making different characters of different races and backgrounds and experiencing their unique “Origins” and seeing all the differences that caused in multiple areas of the game, in DA 2, you only get to pick your class and gender – you are a human named Hawke and have the same origin no matter what each time.

Bioware essentially made DA more like Mass Effect – everyone plays the same character, only your choices in the story can be different.

Second, what content there was available was good, but there wasn’t enough of it. In DA 1 players roamed an entire nation in whatever order they wished with large cities, unique locations, etc. In DA 2, events are linear and you are stuck in ONE city for the entire time. There are multiple quests, but they are all in the SAME AREAS. You visit each location a dozen times for things that were mysteriously not there the first gazillion times you were sent to that location. Even worse is when you get to go somewhere new, only to be beat over the head with deja’vu since the same 4 environment tilesets are used ad nauseum. Often you would find yourself in identical rooms in two separate areas. Identical. The first time it happened I assumed I had been magically warped or transported to the old room. Nope. They just expected me not to notice I guess.

Worse is that the whole first big chunk of the game is building money to go on an “important expedition” to “make more money”. You do fetch quests to earn 50 gold, then do the expedition and (NON-SPOILER) the expedition does next to nothing to advance the story or plot. You double your gold, maybe. Which you have nothing to spend it on. Potentially you can make a decision which introduces some personal wangst for the main character, but even then, it has nothing to do with the story except as an aside. And if you DON’T make the “wrong” decision? NOTHING at all happens.

The “story” itself is disjointed, skipping around to seemingly unconnected events years apart, with only your character remaining a constant. It feels like Bioware stitched a half dozen or so DLC expansions together with glue and duct tape.

Enemies appear in non-realistic ways, literally appearing out of thin air in front of you. Every fight also has several distinct “waves”. Kill all the enemies – next wave teleports in – repeat. Repeat again. You win the fight. Enemies design is strictly quantity over quality here. Instead of tough, unique enemies, they try and wear you down with hordes of grunts.

Things Bioware did right:

The weapon, race, and lore design is all better – much more polished and unique this time around. Everything is visually distinct and eye catching in terms of NPCs and general design.

I liked the faster fights and more visceral combat, but then again, I never played DA for the tactical fights. In Origins I just wanted fights over with as quickly as possible so I could get on with the next cool story arc or dialogue scene. This will be a negative for some people, but anything to speed up combat and get me out of it again in DA I consider a plus. It is a distraction for me and not the reason I play.

In summary, DA 2 is so bitterly disappointing because in most aspects it feels like it should have been DA 1, and DA 1 should have been 2. It is a sequel with less features and scope and more clumsy storytelling. It would have made the best DLC ever. As a numbered continuation in the franchise it is a crushing disappointment.

@Andy_Panthro

I agreed Bioware’s change to inventory from ME 1 to ME 2. The problem (besides the clumsy interface from Hell) with the inventory in ME 1 was that there was ALWAYS a “best choice” regarding weapons. So why not just do what ME 2 did and auto-equip the best equipment and ditch the rest? Why make me take the time to swap out Gun+1 for Gun+2 on everybody? If they aren’t going to make unique and interesting choices regarding weapons with varied advantages and drawbacks, the inventory system as it was in ME 1 just becomes a time wasting element for the sake of “RPG tradition”.

jzoeller said,

@Calibrator

The thought has crossed my mind several times to offer DarkLight Dungeon Eternity to the Humble Indie Bundle down the road for that very reason.

Not sure how receptive they would be…

Maklak said,

I haven’t played DA, but I Bioware games havent changed much (for the better anyway) since KOTOR, so I know what they’re like. I also enjoyed Neverwinter.

Well, it they said up-front “This is going to be an action RPG, we are going to appeal to wide target audience. We also simplified and streamlined some things, that are often frustraiting in an RPG”, it wouldn’t be so aggravating.

What they do is create hype for a year, talk about their great vision, how the game is “light years” ahead (how is that even supposed to work?) of their competition. Story is going to be non-linear, and choices are going to matter, wold is going to be big, open, living and breathing. At release they get a lot of 9/10 in reviews, with everyone praising them, and the game turns out to be lacking in many areas. There is graphisc, and voice acting, some jokes ane interesting story, but “non-linearity” is but an illusion. Choices matter to some degree, and there are variotions in ending, but not much. Worse yet, you end up farming light or dark side points rather than make resonable decissions. Openness and liveness of the world are faked to some degree by scripted events, but it’s easy to see through that illusion.

I recently watched Let’s Plays of both ME1 and ME2, and enjoyed part 1 a lot more. MAKO might have bad controls, but at least you get freedom of movement for once. Granted, there is nothing there, other than empty planets with palette swap, but you still get still some mobility rather than a narrow canyon. Getting missions from teammates in ME1 was a fun idea, but went to overkill in ME2. You get 1 mission to recruit a teammate and another for loyalty. That’s half of story-relevant missions and quarter of total number of missions. I kinda liked the joke at game store in ME that went something like: “They don’t make old school RPGs these days. Now its all about big choices and action. I miss the old days, when you had to remember to eat and it took 5 hours real time to get somewhere”. At first I thought “Damn straight”, but then smiled at how they completly missed the point on purpose.

I’d happily settle for no/partial voice acting (and text only localisations) and Oblivion-like graphics. At the moment it is more than good enough for me.

To me the big disappointment of the year was Witcher 2. Witcher 1 was pretty good, but had clunky controls. They managed to make controls in second part much worse, because they made the game for a console. It also feels much more claustrophobic. There are no big open areas, probably because consoles can’t keep up with making graphics pretty. I also have to steal and hoard crap like thread, oil, iron ore, leather, and cloth and recipes to make things, because I need them to get good stuff from craftsmen. They should have their own common materials. In part 1 there were only 3 (5, but you get up to 3) armor sets in entire game, and best sword was twice as good as common sword. This is how it is meant to be for Witchers (traveling monster hunters, mutated with alchemy for better reflexes) who get their equipment from Kaer Morhen, and don’t upgrade often, if at all. Now eqipment matters a lot more. I also never know, if I’m going to need “nekker’s teeth” after moving to next area, so I end up carrying a lot of crap around. It witcher 1 I had a chest stored at tavern for that. Mobility hasn’t improved from part 1. I’m still blocked by root or some crap in my way, that I shouldn’t even notice and can’t even jump. They also added QTE to Witcher 2. I hate them.
There are some improvements, like graphics, but for first few hours of gameplay I felt betrayed. I mostly got over it by now, but I still disagree with all the positive reviews. Consoles kill games, I guess.

I’ve also recently seen some Let’s Plays of Legend of Zelda games and was amazed. It’s like a cross between RPG and plaformer spiced with mini-games. It’s better than a lot of PC stuff.

WhineAboutGames said,

Making Spiky play through Torment fills me with inadequacy. My overly complicated game isn’t nearly THAT complicated! 🙂

BellosTheMighty said,

Three points:

One: In fairness to Laidlaw, and as the comments here seem to suggest, nobody is quite clear on what “consolized” means. The only thing anyone seems to agree on is that it is a Bad Thing. Being a console gamer myself, I find this rather insulting.

Two: BioWare haters have no credibility. They rant and rave about how BW isn’t doing their job because they’re not giving their customers what they want, but then as soon as the game is out they jump in with the crowd and head straight to GameStop to make it a best-seller. That’s bullshit. Another interpretation is that the people who buy the games are a different group from the people who’re always telling them they’re doing it wrong. But if that’s the case, why exactly do you expect them to cater to a group that keeps complaining over one who actually appreciates what they have to sell? That’s just as much bullshit. The whole rigmarole starts to look like a Shortpacked! strip before long…

Three: Understand, BioWare never set out to make RPGs. They’ve always wanted to make games that told stories, and to this point the RPG was the best way for them to do it. But recently they seem to feel confined creatively, which is why they’re deviating from formula so much; they’re trying to move beyond the limitations of the genre. And you know what? This is a good thing. Haters may want them to play conservatively, to stay in the same place and keep putting out the same games year after year. But artistic innovation is driven by people who can’t produce the art they want to within the standards of existing genres or movements. In a sense, BioWare is one of the most indie RPG studios out there, because they’re pushing the boundaries of what an RPG is. They’re taking a lot of people out of their comfort zone, yes. But before you call that a bad thing, think for a minute what the genre would be like today if Ultima IV had been another game about dungeon-delving to defeat some big bad evil guy. Or Fallout had been essentially Diablo with guns.

Rampant Coyote said,

Fixed, no worries.

And consolization is a style thing for me, not a qualitative difference.

And really, Bioware started out to make medical software. Thus the name. Games were a deviation that became their “thing.”

Maklak said,

@BellosTheMighty
1) “Consolized” means made with console, and its controller in mind, but ported to PC without adjusting much. There is just so much more you can do with keyboard and mouse than with 4 arrows and a few buttons. Complex and usable interfaces get replaced by some clunky contraptions. Aiming with mouse gets replaced by autoaim. Big open spaces are apparently too much for console hardware to handle. I don’t really mind being insulting to console gamers. I’m still too pissed at Witcher 2, and I find complains of consolisation valid, and corporate hype and spin bullshit.

2) Yes they do. They only fault is beliving the hype rather than wait a few months for reviews, patches and walkthroughs. They feel cheated, when they see a potentially good game gone wrong. They ask themselves questions, like “How could they fuck this up? How can they blame us for not liking it, and keep telling us bullshit about how great their game is?” It gets worse. Bioware says they take fan comments into account, but apparently mostly by cutting stuff out in sequels.

Creativity itself is a good thing, but it has side effect of often going wrong. They made some good games, but now they seem to be pushing boundaries of what an RPG is not.

Maklak said,

One more thing. I belive much of this hatedom is due to something similar to bias or “black triangle effect”. I’ll use an analogy. When you walk into an otherwise clean room, but with a few piles of trash here and there, you don’t think of that room as being clean, but focus on the trash. Some things just stick out despite others being well done. Playing an otherwise really good game with a few things, that are annoying, inconsistent or just silly inspires anger. Playing an all-around OK to pretty good game, like Eschalon does not.

Calibrator said,

I have no problem with PC-only gamers favoring a mouse over a gamepad. I like first-person shooters with a mouse better, too.
However, a modern console gamepad has more than “4 arrows and a few buttons”. This is perhaps one reason, why a modern console sits right beside my big-ass TV.
I also have a big-ass PC and guess what: PC and PS3 do actually get along very well. No shouting, no living room wars about who plays with me…

I also find it funny that some guys claim to actually know what a company wants and does not want.
The only things that speak for a company are their products and these you can judge – anything else is just speculation, unless you happen to be their CEO, CFO or perhaps employee #1.
Fanboyism however large doesn’t transcend into insight, you know?

Calling Bioware an indie company is downright ridiculous – they are an EA label with questionable freedom of decision. They produce what are commonly called triple-A titles and they apparently have the resources to throw around to do just that.
This isn’t automatically a bad thing. In fact most companies would want to have that kind of money – but they would also – like Bioware – have to produce results.

If Bioware or their EA producers decide to change their business plan and produce games that are more accessible and widen the audience then learn to live with that and either buy their games or don’t. Vote with your wallet!

Anonymous said,

To BellosTheMighty aka Bioware apologist:

#1: No, consolized is a very clear term. It refers to PC games that were just designed with consoles in mind. This results in PC games suffering from stupid console problems. Like: consoles can’t handle large amounts of enemies, so enemies take turns and spawn in silly waves. Next: Consoles have no tactical camera because zoomed out camera is too much processing. Next: Really bad controls ’cause your keyboard and mouse aren’t a gamepad and joystick.

#2: Are you a retard? “A) If you buy it your opinion doesnt count because you already supported them and B) if you don’t buy it your opinion doesn’t count because you’re not supporting them.” So… your argument is just “fingers in ears lalala your opinion doesn’t count.” No, if they bought it their complaints count because clearly they’re not going to be doing much of that buying thing in the future. You are a dumbass if you believe people who bought their games and hate what they’re doing will buy more of them. Some will, but most won’t. Obviously their opinions count. Second, the complainers who didn’t buy their games can still have valid feedback and still tend to be RPG gamers and therefore in Bioware’s target audience. Ergo, ignoring /their/ complaints is a missed opportunity to expand sales without compromising the quality of being an RPG. (But I hear Bioware’s new target audience is “the person who doesn’t like RPG mechanics” and I’m sure Bioware will manage to make a great RPG game designed for folks who dislike RPGs, as opposed to pissing off both camps at once by giving neither what they want and producing shit that’s not quite much of anything.)

#3: BULL$#@%. Bioware’s stories are way formulaic and yeah they do hire dedicated writers – but their writers have issues. Part of it I’m sure is they heard “masters of storytelling” too often and decided to toss their editors out of the window because they’re such fucking geniuses now that any shit they produce must be brilliant art. As opposed to still shit that needs fixing. Critics might have agreed with them, but apparently us customers can speak for ourselves. And these days they’re not trying to tell stories as much as they are trying to make Awesome™ games and build big bucks by trying to grow the audience as much as possible. If you don’t believe me, here is the EA boss’s direct words on his goals for Mass Effect 3: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-10-why-mass-effect-3-supports-kinect Have some quotes: “Grow the audience and make it more accessible” – “Mass Effect has a fairly complicated combat system. You’ve got story and choice. For some fans that don’t buy 12 games a year and maybe buy two or three, some of those things can be intimidating.” – “With spiralling development costs, Gibeau explained, publishers can no longer afford to sell one million copies – the sales benchmark previously thought to indicate success.”

And if you just want to tell a good story, it’s usually the Adventure genre you want: Myst, Day of the Tentacle, Grim Fandango, etc. Heck, even Heavy Rain did well with its Hollywood plot by being an Adventure game. No, the appeal of making an RPG game isn’t just telling a story – it’s making an RPG.

Kyle said,

Hey, I didn’t read all the comments, so I’m not sure if this was mentioned… I agree with you whole-heartedly about the dying RPG genre, and my fear is that the market will eventually become an even-split between Action-“RPG” games and MMOs, but… I recently (and it was long overdue, too) picked up the new Golden Sun game. It instantly awoke all sorts of old-RPG-nostalgia within me, and it gives me hope for the RPG genre in the future.

xenovore said,

Once EA acquired Bioware, it was pretty obvious what would happen — is anyone really that surprised that Bioware’s stuff has become dumbed-down, consolized crap?

Regarding the word “consolized”: The typical usage would imply that the game in question somehow started out as a great, feature-rich, PC-friendly implementation, and it was only later in the dev cycle that the features and interface usability were reduced for the console implementation.

Although this does happen on (increasingly) rare occasions, in actuality the “consolized” game was specced out for the consoles from the very beginning, and then just dropped on the PC with little-to-no regard to the PC’s superior rendering, computation, memory, and input control capabilities. (Not to mention customization.)

What we should be saying is that a particular game has not been adequately “PC-ized”.