Regarding footnote (7), I think the most common inspiration for oppression of 'mages' in modern fantasy is the totalitarian distrust and purge of the 'intelligentsia' class exemplified in [at least the popular western conception of] the Communist revolutions. A group of people selected, and then self-selected for greater knowledge of, and control over, the world around them, who are then imagined to be tainted by that very power and exclusive, insular community, a suggestion that is encouraged by those whose authority would be, if not directly challenged, then potentially undermined, by that class. In both cases, a careful and dangerous balance must be struck to keep the very useful and talented around, but reminded firmly that they will face brutal repercussions for any affront to their less naturally gifted benefactors.
It's good to read a cogent and earnest reflection on DA:O - I couldn't get into it when I finally gave it a shot, years after its impact had waned. I think Knights of the Old Republic soured me too much on that 'modern' period of RPG and Bioware in particular. But I know it couldn't be terrible, because it seemed to have genuinely been a significant RPG for a lot of people who don't otherwise have miserable taste. But it's hard to really pick up on why Origins was worthwhile when most series fans seem to be more interested in complaining increasingly bitterly about each successive sequel.
Thanks for reading! That's an interesting comparison and does make quite a bit of sense, particularly in the context of the first game, in which the mage Circle is very much organised like a school or university, with its own internal ideological factions and squabbles, and its leadership have a certain amount of power and prestige, albeit within certain strictures. In the second game, on the other hand, the Circle depicted has more in common with a historical lunatic asylum.
I think the thing with Origins was that it arrived at just the right time - it wasn't that long after The Lord of the Rings movies, and its visuals, music and cutscenes evoked the same sense of scale and grandeur, with battle scenes particularly being very very reminiscent of LOTR, which was very ambitious but which Bioware pulled off beautifully. It also anticipated the appetite for darker, more grounded fantasy that would launch Game of Thrones to success soon after, and the writers did specifically mention GRRM as an inspiration in a documentary, although GRRM wasn't quite a household name before the TV series. It's also very funny and down to earth, and it has a very complete and satisfying story.
Probably, the worst thing about it is the gameplay, which is placeholder at best, but gets you from A to B.
I played Origins when it first came out and bounced off it after about 5 hours (past the origins, I think I played all of them) but early in the main game.
I think everything you said was true, amazing immersive story telling, stellar worldbuilding, and a politics that felt real.
But the combat felt very “press a to continue watching a movie.”
My struggle with narrative games has always been that the very best narrative games are generally worse then the average novel. The gameplay has to be there too, and that often gets in the way of the narrative.
I completely agree that the combat in Origins is the worst bit, honestly none of the DA games have had great combat but I find Origins especially tiresome, because it's a) slow, and b) actually quite hard (or maybe I'm just terrible at it).
I kind of agree with what you say about narrative games, although I would add that a good RPG can make you identify with the protagonist more than you necessarily would with the protagonist of a novel, and they can also make you feel more invested by giving you meaningful choices and different outcomes depending on your actions, i.e. offering an interactive narrative.
I think your point about identifying with protagonists is directionally accurate, but I’m not sure how meaningful a lot of the choices actually are, because I know from experience that if I think I’ve made a wrong choice I load the game and make different ones until I’ve optimized it, and I suspect that many play the same way.
As a hypothetical example, say one set of choices gives you the only chance to get a super awesome sword, and the other doesn’t, the dynamics of games set a path, getting the sword is better.
I know it’s possible for more nuance, but in my experience game choices are closer to my example then not.
I haven't played Dragon Age (I don't play videogames in general) but I have seen lots of criticisms online for the new game, and it's interesting to see why people hold the previous entries in such high regard. Origins sounds like a very compelling fantasy story, it reminds me more of the Witcher than A Song of Ice and Fire, specially because of how the elves are treated
There is definitely a lot of Witcher overlap, honestly the Witcher games feel more like sequels to Origins than the most recent one does. The Grey Wardens are also very witcher-esque (although also definitely influenced by the Night's Watch).
Regarding footnote (7), I think the most common inspiration for oppression of 'mages' in modern fantasy is the totalitarian distrust and purge of the 'intelligentsia' class exemplified in [at least the popular western conception of] the Communist revolutions. A group of people selected, and then self-selected for greater knowledge of, and control over, the world around them, who are then imagined to be tainted by that very power and exclusive, insular community, a suggestion that is encouraged by those whose authority would be, if not directly challenged, then potentially undermined, by that class. In both cases, a careful and dangerous balance must be struck to keep the very useful and talented around, but reminded firmly that they will face brutal repercussions for any affront to their less naturally gifted benefactors.
It's good to read a cogent and earnest reflection on DA:O - I couldn't get into it when I finally gave it a shot, years after its impact had waned. I think Knights of the Old Republic soured me too much on that 'modern' period of RPG and Bioware in particular. But I know it couldn't be terrible, because it seemed to have genuinely been a significant RPG for a lot of people who don't otherwise have miserable taste. But it's hard to really pick up on why Origins was worthwhile when most series fans seem to be more interested in complaining increasingly bitterly about each successive sequel.
Thanks for reading! That's an interesting comparison and does make quite a bit of sense, particularly in the context of the first game, in which the mage Circle is very much organised like a school or university, with its own internal ideological factions and squabbles, and its leadership have a certain amount of power and prestige, albeit within certain strictures. In the second game, on the other hand, the Circle depicted has more in common with a historical lunatic asylum.
I think the thing with Origins was that it arrived at just the right time - it wasn't that long after The Lord of the Rings movies, and its visuals, music and cutscenes evoked the same sense of scale and grandeur, with battle scenes particularly being very very reminiscent of LOTR, which was very ambitious but which Bioware pulled off beautifully. It also anticipated the appetite for darker, more grounded fantasy that would launch Game of Thrones to success soon after, and the writers did specifically mention GRRM as an inspiration in a documentary, although GRRM wasn't quite a household name before the TV series. It's also very funny and down to earth, and it has a very complete and satisfying story.
Probably, the worst thing about it is the gameplay, which is placeholder at best, but gets you from A to B.
For me, the most memorable aspect of Alaistar is my female PC trying to figure out how to let him down gently
I played Origins when it first came out and bounced off it after about 5 hours (past the origins, I think I played all of them) but early in the main game.
I think everything you said was true, amazing immersive story telling, stellar worldbuilding, and a politics that felt real.
But the combat felt very “press a to continue watching a movie.”
My struggle with narrative games has always been that the very best narrative games are generally worse then the average novel. The gameplay has to be there too, and that often gets in the way of the narrative.
Thank you for sharing your thoughtful piece
Thank you so much for reading!
I completely agree that the combat in Origins is the worst bit, honestly none of the DA games have had great combat but I find Origins especially tiresome, because it's a) slow, and b) actually quite hard (or maybe I'm just terrible at it).
I kind of agree with what you say about narrative games, although I would add that a good RPG can make you identify with the protagonist more than you necessarily would with the protagonist of a novel, and they can also make you feel more invested by giving you meaningful choices and different outcomes depending on your actions, i.e. offering an interactive narrative.
I think your point about identifying with protagonists is directionally accurate, but I’m not sure how meaningful a lot of the choices actually are, because I know from experience that if I think I’ve made a wrong choice I load the game and make different ones until I’ve optimized it, and I suspect that many play the same way.
As a hypothetical example, say one set of choices gives you the only chance to get a super awesome sword, and the other doesn’t, the dynamics of games set a path, getting the sword is better.
I know it’s possible for more nuance, but in my experience game choices are closer to my example then not.
I haven't played Dragon Age (I don't play videogames in general) but I have seen lots of criticisms online for the new game, and it's interesting to see why people hold the previous entries in such high regard. Origins sounds like a very compelling fantasy story, it reminds me more of the Witcher than A Song of Ice and Fire, specially because of how the elves are treated
There is definitely a lot of Witcher overlap, honestly the Witcher games feel more like sequels to Origins than the most recent one does. The Grey Wardens are also very witcher-esque (although also definitely influenced by the Night's Watch).