This Forum has been archived

Visit Discussions
Forums: Index > Game Discussion > Designers lack of creativity
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2716 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

Monsters like undead, spiders and dragons are in my opinion the least creative creatures of the game. I wish more original creatures.

Fahion makes my eyes bleed. Colours of armors, robes and noble cloths are limited to basic colors, symbols are so simple. Achievement trophies in DA2 look like drawn by todlers. Many "unique" items share same model with standard items.

Lack of creativity and imagination of designers makes me dislike franchise even more.

Do you also complain on so limited creativity? (talk) 07:56, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

Undead are fine I think, the fact that they are demon posessed corpses is cool. However spiders... They could really have came up with something else. In the Deep roads, there could have been some mole like creature, and/or worms. Dragons are OK, i guess.

About fashion, well, if there is something utterly ridiculous in the game, then that is mage clothing. The caps are jokes, they look like something you'd wear to make your enemies die in laughing. Many robes reveal too much, like they were erotic roleplay stuff, not something you'd wear in to battle. (There are good ones though, but most is meh). I'd expect some leather or very light metal padding on mage robes, not bare thighgs, and decolletage deep as the ocean. And why the feather pauldrons? They smell nice while burning next to your face, sure. Armor is Okay, I loved the Legion os the Dead armor's look a lot. The simplicity of symbols is good in my opinion. Small things with a great meaning, they somehow have a feeling to them. I never cared for achievement throphies, because you only see them for like 4-5 seconds. (talk) 11:10, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

I feel you, but weird unique things do not sell well, and this is EA. Dorquemada (talk) 12:32, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you... mage robes were defiantly the worst! All you do is wear robes and they look really bad and ugly. It's kinda like, "Oh hey, I'm an apostate and am wearing robes with a huge stick on my back. Ya, they'll never know I'm an apostate!" and I'm just kinda like "wow"... Plus, a lot of the armor (mostly rogue/mage) looked EXACTLY THE SAME, just different names. The champion armor looks awesome but I feel like they just focused on it. Now enemies, I think some were badly designed. For example, the darkspawn. I HATED the way they looked. They looked less scary and less deadly. They reminded me of a barbie doll with no hair. -- (talk) 15:31, April 13, 2013 (UTC)

We've been over this before, Dragon Age II was rushed in all areas: Design, gameplay, programming, everything but the writing and voiceovers by my count. Kirkwall was pretty bland, but I blame EA for demanding blockbuster sequels within two years of the original. I don't they understand (or care, yeah I'm going with that) that Bioware isn't Activision; you can't just draw new maps while reusing most of the old stuff, and churn out a new sausage link every year like you can with CoD. Not to mention it's been forever since they personally developed something, they probably still think games take up 64k and can be made in three months with a dozen crew. RShepard227 (talk) 02:19, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the art side of Dragon Age is inadequate to the depth of written part of the series. THe devil is in the details. The games could realy use more polishing to make the game seem less like copy and paste. A lot of the lore has no coverage in game. Zevran is this foreign assassin and he wears crappy generic armour, Branka is the only living Paragon and she's got the regular dwarven armour on, Bhelen is a Prince and also has a crappy armour, the cities seem empty, every templar wears the same armour (even uniforms in the army are personalised by every soldier) and so on. That's why I love PC version of DAO, with mods such as Improved Atmosphere and Dragon Age Reimagined it's a totally new game - people walk around instead of just standing about, wear different colours on their clothes, soldiers and mages off duty wear regular clothes, people who are physically hurt in the story actually show signs of pain, and so much more. Henio0 (talk) 07:13, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

It says something not very flattering about the state of the industry and the quality of products they produce when a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs can comprehensively outdo them when given the right tools. The same thing happened with Skyrim; out of the box, it's a pretty bland, uninteresting game, but when the modders get hold of it and get creative, it blossoms into something much greater than what it was. It's why DAO on PC is miles better than any console version. It's also why DAI not having a toolset (if true) will be a tragedy for the game and the fan community. So much potential denied.--Darkly Tranquil (talk) 14:33, April 14, 2013 (UTC)
On the other hand, reliance on a toolset only furthers this downward spiral. It's bad enough that having an Internet connection is expected enough to download patches (I live in the tri-state area of America, so I'm not exactly out in the sticks, but good Internet still isn't guaranteed), meaning they can rush development and let the players deal with bugs until they get it sorted out a month later. Having a readily available toolset, whether it's PC or even becomes an option for consoles down the road, might encourage them to not even do this, and have each player patch his own copy on his time. A game shouldn't be made in such a way that it requires piecing together and performing surgery to play as intended. RShepard227 (talk) 15:51, April 14, 2013 (UTC)
It certainly can be if the designers use it as an excuse to do a half assed job making the game in the first place and expect the modders to fix it. But if the game is well made in the first instance and the option of player-made content is also available, it unlocks so much more potential for replayability and makes the overall game better (just look at the Sir Gilmore mod for DA:O). On balance, I still think that making the game open to the modding community is more beneficial in the long run, even at the risk of the original designers cutting some corners.--Darkly Tranquil (talk) 17:22, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

They better reinstall eye movement. The psycho stillness of the DA2 eyes was disturbing. The glassy colors wouldn't have been so bad, if the damnable things shifted like they do in DAO. Hair movement would be cool too; having long loose hair makes for dramatically different states of well-being, hair doesn't stay aligned with the skull like a helmet; just once, I'd like to see blood soaked hair splapped across the face with attribute penalties, because sure as shit, players, just like actual warriors, will be quickly modifying their character's hair to accommodate the activities expected of them, 9/10 will start looking like Jory. Shadizar666 (Ruck Rules) 00:27, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

Going back to the OP, I'm not sure I want a bunch of made-up weird creatures running around. I mean look how badly Ghasts got panned. After 40 years of D&D, there just isn't a lot of monsters that haven't been seen before. Personally I have a soft spot for the spiders because when they dropped down during the mage origins and startled the s*** out of me, that's when I knew I was going to like this new game! (talk) 03:16, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

One example of a global problem with videogame development these days. How many unique environments, creatures etc. we see? Practically none, the overwhelming majority of them are re-hashed old ones.

Think of it, technological capabilities have developed, but people's minds capabilities stayed the same. Each notable shooter features, say, New York City, but it's the same New York City and each and every fantasy features elves in a form of thin humans with pointy ears, but it's, again, S.S.D.D. OP, you should praise DA2 instead of bashing it, because DA2 violated the "canon" rules - elves are thin humans with pointy ears, but also they are ugly as hell XD

You know, the last RPG I can remember with really unique environments and creatures was Morrowind, more than a decade ago. -Algol- (talk) 08:38, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Morrowind changed the rules of the industry. As a TES lore buff I can confidently say that Skyrim depicted only a small fraction of the uniqueness of the cultural and metaphysical lore of Nirn. I mean the Aurbis (universe) is literally the dream of a comatose schizophenic god with disassociative identity disorder trying to understand itself by subgradiation. When this is the origin of your universe expect the setting to look like an acid trip a la Morrowind. This is the weirdness DA is lacking. But DA specifically outshines TES when it comes to politics and intrigue. - Soulofshezarr (talk) 11:34, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

That's more of a design philosophy. Bethesda RPGs offer blank slates, more wiggle room for headcanon, but the ability to personalise your character is fairly limited. BioWare RPGs are more limited- small maps/traveling areas, less characters- but they're much, much more personal. I like 'em both, personally, but they definitely offer different things. Landers Edge (talk) 05:48, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
Since we're on the topic, I just got into Skyrim and I gotta say I prefer Bioware's version of character interactions, i.e.) less is more. Some of the followers, like the three main Companions, are great, but I've just gotten up to Whiterun and can name on two hands the number of completely uninspiring followers and allies, or those who are only good for the local dungeon. I think TES could benefit from having fewer followers (about the size of the typical Bioware merry band, maybe twice that at most) who are more in-depth, and in doing so make the perfect RPG. RShepard227 (talk) 03:34, April 20, 2013 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I really don't care when mobs look more or less the same, but lowbie baddies are baddies to me. I do wonder what the the mage clothing designers were huffing at the time. It seems like, in Origins, your options are a) granny robes b) hello hooker outfits or c) go arcane warrior, at least if you were being practical.

I was honestly disappointed that you couldn't customise your stuff even just a little, like you could do with shield heraldry in Awakenings. Given that it's at least somewhat possible in Origins with a mod, the idea of at least being able to choose colours would have been awesome. I understand the practicality of not having six billion designs to choose from, but choosing how to wear our clothing would have been nice.Landers Edge (talk) 05:48, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

I admit, the lack of creativity brings out the familiar. However, the familiar can be easily identified: that looks like a bandit, a dragon, and so on. I do want those "what the hell is that" moments like when I first saw a Vateral (I think that's how you spell it). But, it is nice to not think so hard whether to use ice or fire against a familiar enemy. As for fashion, I like it practical and logical. I'd rather go into battle in steel plate rather in gold plate. Gold is heavier but softer than steel.--KCMueller (talk) 21:47, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Hang on a second. With all the monsters and creatures already conceptualized everywhere else; drakspawn, qunari, blood mages, and a matriarchal religion isn't being creative? What constitutes creativity? If the world is full of cars, the Prius isn't creative? If there are artificial limbs available, does that mean making an articulated hand isn't being creative? If cloth exists, does that mean kevlar isn't creative? I don't get it. Shadizar666 (Ruck Rules) 01:30, April 20, 2013 (UTC)

I think Darkspawn Where pretty creative...--Dragon Ager (talk) 06:10, April 21, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.