this is an excellent read and well worth your time.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/116/1168985p1.html
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/116/1168985p1.html
Dragon Age II and the Decline of the Old-school RPG
Evolution or devolution? We examine the RPG genre's move away from its roots, and its cross pollination with other genres.
Australia, May 20, 2011
by Nathaniel Crouch
IGN AU
Playing Dragon Age II for the first time was an eye-opening experience. I'm a big proponent of not spoiling anything to do with the games that I'm excited about – I couldn't, for instance, tell you a single thing about Portal 2 leading up to its release last month. The less I know about a game before I play it, the better the surprise when I finally get my greasy mitts on it for the first time.
It's therefore easy to understand the shock I experienced the first time I placed Dragon Age II into my Xbox 360. Dragon Age II is a jarringly different game to that of its predecessor, both mechanically and thematically. It is not an unenjoyable experience for the most part, but is alarmingly different from that of its forefather. If Dragon Age II had been the first entry of a new series, I would have praised its strong combat system, wonderful cast of characters and Mass Effect-style conversation wheel, however, it was not. Dragon Age II was a sequel to a title that specifically sold itself on its classic RPG bloodline, and for me its deviation from this path was an ultimately disappointing realisation.
I generally prefer my art to be a little more naked, but this is pretty stylish.
Back in the halcyon days of 2008, just prior to the launch of Dragon Age: Origins, Bioware was quick to tout the impressive lineage the title was succeeding, and its continuance of the classic PC RPG. Upon release, it was clear that the game was not without fault; combining an unrelenting level of difficulty, dense storytelling and old-fashioned conversation system, living up to the tropes of its lineage. In the end, it was the parts of the game that I found so challenging that I adored. Whilst the game was far from perfect, its imperfections were what gave it beauty. It was like Billie Piper – adorable for its faults, beautiful for its mistakes.
This is what makes Dragon Age II such a mystifying game. By conventional wisdom, it is a vastly improved sequel – gameplay is far more fluid and dynamic, conversations are much more in-depth and the plotline is intriguing and engaging. But somehow by fixing the "problems" of the first title, Bioware removed the soul and the heritage of the Dragon Age namesake, making it nothing more than another middling RPG. Without the features that made Dragon Age: Origins so unique, the title felt featureless in a cluttered, yet dying genre.
Bioware removed the soul and the heritage of Dragon Age, making it nothing more than another middling RPG.
What's most disappointing is that it is perfectly clear why the decision was made to make the changes. As development costs skyrocket and the aggregate prices of video games remains constant, developers and publishers are forced to walk the line between art and profiteering that the film industry has been doing for years. Unlike the film industry, however, there is no economically feasible way to make an "indie" 120-hour dungeon crawler. Creating a video game is an extraordinarily expensive business venture, so expanding the potential market appeal of a single title is an important investment. Sure, Dragon Age: Origins might have remained true to the spirit of the traditional RPG, but at what cost? While it was a wonderful case of nostalgia, my enjoyment must have come at the cost of huge segments of the market.
According to an Xbox 360 achievement aggregator, only an estimated 52% of players received the achievement for witnessing the end of the game; whilst as many as 10% of total players earned fewer than five achievements. Whilst these statistics are fairly vague, they are representative of the hardcore audience. With such low completion numbers and a sharp loss of players early in the game, it implies a systematic problem exists within its core design. Further, these statistics were from a website for core gamers, dedicated to obtaining as many achievements as possible. If even the hardcore market was turning off in the early stages, something must have been fundamentally wrong. You can't fault EA for getting cold feet and pulling back from the RPG influences.
Dragons it promised and dragons it delivered. BAM!
Nowadays, it seems that gaming is experiencing somewhat of a RPG renaissance. The infamous addition of the perk system to Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare's competitive multiplayer came as a great surprise and, ultimately, a welcome addition. The ability to level up and unlock better, stronger gear was a critically-praised decision that won the admiration of gamers and critics alike. It enticed players away from the Halos and Gears of Wars that inhabited the gaming world back to Call of Duty, paving the way for it to become the biggest franchise in the world.
Following its success, the classic saying, "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" was never truer. All of a sudden the floodgates were opened and every man and his dog were racing to add RPG elements to their titles. Racers (Blur, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit), re-imagined classics (Hard Corps: Uprising) – hell, even the franchises Call of Duty 4 usurped (Halo: Reach, Gears of War 3) rushed to implement the classic ideals of the RPG genre.
At the same time, however, traditional RPGs (Final Fantasy XIII and Alpha Protocol) were subject to critical scorn and divisive sales figures. It seemed that players wanted the elements of the genre, but not the games themselves. As it stands, on average the only games that achieved critical and commercial acclaim within the genre were those that diluted the classical role-playing elements to incredible extremes, such as Mass Effect 2. This is not a bad thing, as Mass Effect 2 is still arguably the greatest game of its generation. It is simply representative of a shift in the industry and consumer tastes.
Somewhere during the two-year regeneration of Shepard between the first and second titles, the Mass Effect universe gave up on item-carrying and huge skill-trees in favour of simplified, dynamic levelling and looting. By reducing the choice players had in regards to levelling or loot selection, BioWare was able to create a more cohesive and uniform storyline for all players. While this shift worked for Mass Effect, it rang hollow when applied to Dragon Age II. After being sold as the modern re-imagining of the classic PC games of yore, its 180-degree refocus away from the elements that made it so special in the first case made the game feel empty and cold by comparison.
What worked for Shepard wasn't as neat a fit for the Hero of Ferelden.
So what's the final death toll? As it stands currently, it seems that consumers emerge from Dragon Age II as the ultimate winners. Even with its changes to gameplay and presentation, Dragon Age II is a great game worthy of your time. Further, with RPG elements being used in more and more titles, it seems that an evolution of sorts has been undertaken. The RPG is not self sufficient anymore. It serves as a complementary offering in tandem with another genre – the sauce upon a dish, as opposed to the meal itself.
And so, with a heavy heart, it appears we should say goodbye to the RPG genre of old. It's sad to see it go, but its impact is something that will permeate throughout gaming for the rest of eternity, and we can celebrate its rebirth as the ultimate add-on.
Nathaniel Crouch is a freelance writer based in Canberra, Australia. That's our capital city, you know. No, I'm not surprised you haven't heard of it.
