Blizzard's Chris Metzen retires at ripe age of 42

[Scipio]

He'll do something else just like the Doctors of Bioware are doing now.

Aren't they brewing craft beer or something now?

Yes, I think so.

Basically a hobby. They are no longer feeling pain. The pain of dealing with Bioware's toxic and psychotic fanbase anyway. I know the rather over-the-top response to Dragon Age II killed their enthusiasm.

To be fair, it is shitty.

[Oexmelin]

I know there were many disappointing things with DA2 (esp. gameplay-wise), but I, for one, appreciated what Valmy despised: I liked the fact that, for once, events were unfolding without you being the prime mover and shaker, or the main reason for all plans to be thwarted in one climactic battle. The quintessential climatic battle is often announced super early in the beginning of any RPG - i.e., you know where you are going - and everything else feels contrived. At least, this time around, you could see in germ the conflict, and it involved much bigger stakes than you. It gave depth to that world. Too often RPG stories try to mix the epic with the political - and that doesn't work very well.

[garbon]

I know there were many disappointing things with DA2 (esp. gameplay-wise), but I, for one, appreciated what Valmy despised: I liked the fact that, for once, events were unfolding without you being the prime mover and shaker, or the main reason for all plans to be thwarted in one climactic battle. The quintessential climatic battle is often announced super early in the beginning of any RPG - i.e., you know where you are going - and everything else feels contrived. At least, this time around, you could see in germ the conflict, and it involved much bigger stakes than you. It gave depth to that world. Too often RPG stories try to mix the epic with the political - and that doesn't work very well.

I think that's very fair. I think the large problems for me were indeed in gameplay. Okay to have a smaller scope but that doesn't mean I wanted to get the same scenery constantly recycled.

[Valmy]

I know there were many disappointing things with DA2 (esp. gameplay-wise), but I, for one, appreciated what Valmy despised: I liked the fact that, for once, events were unfolding without you being the prime mover and shaker, or the main reason for all plans to be thwarted in one climactic battle. The quintessential climatic battle is often announced super early in the beginning of any RPG - i.e., you know where you are going - and everything else feels contrived. At least, this time around, you could see in germ the conflict, and it involved much bigger stakes than you. It gave depth to that world. Too often RPG stories try to mix the epic with the political - and that doesn't work very well.

'Despised' is a bit of a strong word. I thought it did straight jacket you from doing what seemed logical to do and instead forced you to just sit around and be reactive. But I certainly enjoyed the game. I thought it was just as good as Inquisition, even if both games had radically different (And often contradicting) strengths and weaknesses.

Ironically I thought the thing you didn't like much, the gameplay, was its strongest point. DA2 was many things but it was always challenging and fun.

[Oexmelin]

'Despised' is a bit of a strong word. I thought it did straight jacket you from doing what seemed logical to do and instead forced you to just sit around and be reactive. But I certainly enjoyed the game. I thought it was just as good as Inquisition, even if both games had radically different (And often contradicting) strengths and weaknesses.

Well, to be fair, I used to word mostly to incite you to comment...     I am really interested in how narratives are built in video games, and I thought you had quite perceptive comments about it in DA (and in your AARs in general) that helped me think about the epic, the political, and the material.

I actually like a bit of straightjacketing in RPG. This is what I meant by the difference between the epic and the political. Epic characters don't care about the political. It is in their nature to transgress the rules of their world - sometimes for good, sometimes for evil. But many contemporary writers prefer a world of grayish morality, much more political, with twists and turns, and ambiguous characters. This is decidedly not epic, unless the ambiguity stems from the foreigness of the protagonists' moral compass (i.e., Odysseus, Beowulf, the Knights of the Round Table all do things which most of us would not qualify as epic, honorable, or chivalrous).

In providing stories that are political, RPG should hint at what makes things political: a larger society, things happening without the player, and upon which the player, his friends, allies and enemies, should attempt to grasp, or influence, or simply react to. In DA2, I liked the fact that there wasn't one over-arching conspiracy by some shadowy nefarious force (à la Baldur's Gate), but a flurry of little situations, some engineered by some groups, other by other groups, with unforeseen repercussions. Your later enemies reacted to what other people had done earlier - unconnected if not by the simple reality that they lived in the same community. This made much more sense to me than so many other fantasy settings which look like North American suburbia  of disconnected neighbors transposed in faux 15th century. (complete with zoning laws: a "rich" neighborhood?, really?)

Similarly, I think railroading can be very profitable in some ways, especially if a game setting needs to enforce a foreign, or exotic morality upon the player, to better underline the difference of that world. When I was a kid, one of the "Chose your own adventure" series I preferred was one where some of the characters could not contemplate certain courses of action - because they would be dishonorable - charging into an obvious trap, because that's what had to be done. For instance, I like how the protagonist of LA Noire got blinded by the ambient racism of LA and that you, the player, could better see what he couldn't or wouldn't.

[celedhring]

I actually appreciated DA2 aim of building a tapestry of sorts of a bustling and contradictory micro-society that ultimately breaks down while you fruitlessly try to plug the holes of it. It just wasn't a fun game to play; hell, combat segments and dungeons felt like a chore to go through. But I thought story-wise it was ambitious, and I had no problem with their choices in that department, railroading or not. I don't give a damn about railroading if the scenery the tracks go through is engaging enough.

[Valmy]

Well one particular part that annoyed me was that there was a group of Templars I wanted to support and at every opportunity vocalized my support for them. Yet they eventually moved against me because they thought I actually supported the other faction.

I get what you are saying I just thought the way it was done in DA2 was frustrating. But that was hardly the only problem with the game. Naturally Inquisition went waaaay too far in the other direction.

[Valmy]

I actually appreciated DA2 aim of building a tapestry of sorts of a bustling and contradictory micro-society that ultimately breaks down while you fruitlessly try to plug the holes of it. It just wasn't a fun game to play; hell, combat segments and dungeons felt like a chore to go through. But I thought story-wise it was ambitious, and I had no problem with their choices in that department, railroading or not. I don't give a damn about railroading if the scenery the tracks go through is engaging enough.

Damn if you thought DA2's combat was a chore I hate to think of what you thought about Inquistion. I thought DA2 had some of the best fights in the series.

My problem with the story is damn there was shitload of opportunities to allow you to make choices and have it make a big difference. I mean with those time skips you might make a decision in Act I that might make a huge change in Act II that might make you want to play it over and over to see all the cool things you could do. But that was not the case. Bummer.

[crazy canuck]

hopefully he's gone for good

Why the hate?

[celedhring]

I actually appreciated DA2 aim of building a tapestry of sorts of a bustling and contradictory micro-society that ultimately breaks down while you fruitlessly try to plug the holes of it. It just wasn't a fun game to play; hell, combat segments and dungeons felt like a chore to go through. But I thought story-wise it was ambitious, and I had no problem with their choices in that department, railroading or not. I don't give a damn about railroading if the scenery the tracks go through is engaging enough.

Damn if you thought DA2's combat was a chore I hate to think of what you thought about Inquistion. I thought DA2 had some of the best fights in the series.

My problem with the story is damn there was shitload of opportunities to allow you to make choices and have it make a big difference. I mean with those time skips you might make a decision in Act I that might make a huge change in Act II that might make you want to play it over and over to see all the cool things you could do. But that was not the case. Bummer.

Haven't played Inquisition yet... Want to get a new rig first.

[Valmy]

Why play when you can just read my AAR? 

[Scipio]

Did not like the DA2 combat and customization. Liked most of the rest of it. Merrill sucks.

[Valmy]

Did not like the DA2 combat and customization. Liked most of the rest of it. Merrill sucks.

I liked the combat because in the other DAs it is pretty straightforward and boring 99% of the time. Well ok boring is a little strong but it was straightforward.

In DA2 there were always unpredictable and weird tactical situations as adds would just keep pouring in. Kept it fresh and fun. The big fights tended to have phases with different tactics needed for each phase which was very nice and refreshing as well.

I understand the customization but I thought it was more than made up by the fact that each character had unique skills so having Sebastian or Varric in your group was actually different rather than just plug and play ranged rogues.

Agree on Merrill

[Valmy]

hopefully he's gone for good

Why the hate?

Maybe LaCroix just really hates Starcraft.

[KRonn]

Good for him, but like others I'm also thinking that in a few years he'll be getting back into something. He's too creative and enjoys what he does to be out for good at such a young age.