Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well, I find myself in the need once again of a good roleplay game on either PS3 or PC, preferably PS3.

Does Dakka know of any good ones? I've heard stuff about Skyrim: Elder scrolls, dragon age etc. but I don't know what to think of them.

Anyone have any suggestions?

I thoroughly loved Dragon Age: Origins. Loved the sequel too, but I would recommend playing Origins first. Also, go for the PC option, if you do go for it. I found it looked and handled better.

Well, what other RPGs do you enjoy? That'll make it easier to recommend something.

Oh, and Dragon Age 2 is absolutely awful.

Well to be honest, I've never played any of the famous top notch role play games. I am looking for something really RPG. Character cutomization, side quests, personal equipment... the lot. So really a rather hard core RPG.

Does anyone know anything about Demon Souls?

Demon's Souls is amazing, but incredibly difficult. It's more of an action RPG hybrid than a pure RPG, but it still holds some of the most important RPG aspects. The online portion of the game is genius, and integrates seamlessly into the offline portion. Even though I'd consider it one of the best games for the PS3, it's definitely not for the more casual gamer, as it requires a lot of dedication and perserverance.

If you're looking for strong narrative and character interaction, I'd say go for Dragon Age: Origins or Mass Effect. Bioware are fantastic when EA aren't making them rush their games (which is why DA2 is rubbish).

Elder Scrolls games have pretty weak, forgettable stories and no character development, but they're much more hands-on in how you control your character. The open world environment allows you to just do whatever the hell you want, and that's a major selling point of the series. Like Bioware, Bethesda have a sci fi alternative in Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

DA2 is far from "rubbish".

It's simply "not the same" as DAO. Which leads to people crying foul.

It's not "simply" because it's different to Origins.

- It was clearly rushed or very, very lazily put together (likely the former, as Bioware have/had a good reputation). They reuse the same dungeon and manor map over and over throughout the game, only blocking off certain passages and moving a couple of items around. This is in 2011. And a triple A game.

- There is no clear antagonist, which is probably the key ingredient in any story, especially one which centres around battles. I got to Act 3 and still had no idea what the main plot was. I then retired from the game, realising there isn't one.

- The characters aren't particularly likeable. I found myself wanting them all to die.

- You're not able to customise the appearance (that being, change the attire) of the other party members. Whilst that primarily sounds like a very minor point, it does lead to the player accepting them as "just some guys who follow me around" rather than people you've taken the time to craft into comrades that fit into your personal strategy. It's more comparable to Left 4 Dead, in this respect.

- And finally, if you happen to be a PC gamer, the streamlined nature (ie. dumbing down) can be hugely off-putting.


If this had been my first venture into the Dragon Age franchise, I certainly wouldn't revisit.

Please show me what was 'rushed' about it.

The "they reuse the same dungeon and manor map over and over throughout the game" thing is no different than DAO using the same cliff face over and over again when you get ambushed, the same castle courtyard, etc.

If you "got to Act 3", you'd know exactly who/what the main plot was.

It's pretty much spelled out for you after the Idol.

A small area for an ambush is much different to an entire quest taking place on a map you've trudged through numerous times before. With the game already having less locations (and overall features) than its predecessor, there's no excuse for reusing what little content the game has.

...Well, there is an excuse. And that is, the game was rushed. An epic RPG coming out so shortly after the first installment? The lack of content? The simplified mechanics? Actually, don't take my word for - here's an interview with someone who actually worked on the game:

http://uk.music.ign.com/articles/115/1154594p1.html

EA really wanted to capitalize on the success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released now.

We'll have to agree to disagree, because quite frankly I thought DA2 was better than the first.

two of my most favourite RPGs for both are elder scrolls IV oblivion and fall out new vegas
both of them have hundreds of quests, don't have to do the main story straight away
specializing and factions.

Hmm, thanks for all your replies. I know about Fallout and Mass Effect, but I was going for the more traditional style RPG.

As for DA2 and DAO, I guess I'll look into those and decide for myself.

Elder Scrolls skyrim isn't out yet, so I'll see about that later.

I think I'll settle for Demons Souls right now. Thanks for your replies everyone.

Fallout 3 (and its ~5 expansions) and Fallout New Vegas. Definitely.

Fallout 3 and New Vegas are some of the greatest current RPG's, "they do have excellent character cutomization, side quests, personal equipment... the lot" like you mentioned. There's tons of freedom and I feel they fix

most of the problems I had with other bethesda games, plus the retro-futuristic post-apocalyptic setting is a fresh change from all those fantasy RPG's. If you get New Vegas make sure it's patched because when it was

first released it was pretty buggy. Also Fallout 3 is different from other RPG's because it combines sandbox RPG and FPS elements together. You might want to try Fallout 1 and 2 as well but they're quit a bit different

from the 3rd game because they're turn-based and made by a different developer

Fallout New Vegas was the most buggy game of the year. It won an award for it.

Also I recommend PC for RPG's because you can get mods that increase the games content, plus you can up the graphics just make sure your rig can handle it though or you might be better off getting a console also

the fallout games PS3 port sucks.

I'd go for Morrowind. Morrowind also has few graphic mods for it so you can make it look rather nice compared to more modern RPGs like Oblivion and Fallout New Vegas. DA2 and ME2 are hardly RPGs and especially DA2 sucks (unless you are really horny and want to have sex with everything).

Yeah that's one thing about RPG's I never got, every female has super-model bodies.

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah that's one thing about RPG's I never got, every female has super-model bodies.

Fat people don't survive RPGs. Fact.


edit: And dang dude, why would you ever want that?

Darkvoidof40k wrote:Fallout New Vegas was the most buggy game of the year. It won an award for it.

Every Bethesda game is riddled with bugs on release. I wouldn't dare guess the number of times I got CTDs when Morrowind first came out.

Darkvoidof40k wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah that's one thing about RPG's I never got, every female has super-model bodies.

Fat people don't survive RPGs. Fact.


edit: And dang dude, why would you ever want that?

I don't mind attractive women and RPG's but adding a few more ugly or normal looking people can go a long way in making your game more realistic.

Cheesecat wrote:

Darkvoidof40k wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah that's one thing about RPG's I never got, every female has super-model bodies.

Fat people don't survive RPGs. Fact.


edit: And dang dude, why would you ever want that?

I don't mind attractive women and RPG's but adding a few more ugly or normal looking people can go a long way in making your game more realistic.

"Dang, she ugleh!"

Hm. I can see the comical appeal in that idea. Bring it on!

I loved DA:O but I did not enjoy DA2. Some reasons are that DA2 basically declined in every aspect of the game except for effect "flashiness" and action. These are nice things to add, but the story is shorter and less engaging, all the other graphics (besides special effects) are much much worse, the areas are even more linear and bland and you cant customize your character half as much as in the original. I am not saying it is a bad game, but if you are looking for an engaging and long RPG that really feels like you are being put into the role of your character, then DA2 is not it, the first one is.

Also, as far as suggesting an excellent RPG, I would have to point you towards Dungeon siege. I love that game, and my friends love that game which makes it awesome because it has a fantastic multiplayer co-op. Now, I have probably poured over 400hrs in DS2 and the expansion and I still find a massive urge to play it. The game has extensive depth, good character development (not great but good). The system is similar to TES just with much less options. It is the kind of game that you can just sink yourself into and not want to come back up for air. The big downside I have found is that the game had poor graphics and the second one...still has bad graphics. However, I noticed that a third is coming out next month (I think) on steam and from what I can tell, the graphics and effects are getting a massive overhaul. If I were you, I would keep your eye out for that game as it is a very ideal RPG with great multiplayer elements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

illuknisaa wrote:I'd go for Morrowind. Morrowind also has few graphic mods for it so you can make it look rather nice compared to more modern RPGs like Oblivion and Fallout New Vegas. DA2 and ME2 are hardly RPGs and especially DA2 sucks (unless you are really horny and want to have sex with everything).

Oblivion and fallout 3 have TONS of mods, just Metric S**IT Tonnes of them. after I beat oblivion for the third time, I went out to see if there were some mods for it that I could get, and I was blown away by the amount of awesome freakin mods that are out there. Horse armor, mounted combat, combat actions, thousands of new spells, tomes, new classes, new races! more gore, millions of weapon and armor models, custom weapon and armor skills. The list just goes on and on, and it is so easy to work the mods. That was one of the best parts of oblivion for me.

Kanluwen wrote:We'll have to agree to disagree, because quite frankly I thought DA2 was better than the first.

Indeed.

I have to agree with everything about the PC versions of certain RPGs to the PS3 and even 360 versions.

The PC has more content for DLC and the console command can get you out of some glitches.

If you do decide to get Elder Scrolls: Oblivion on the PS3 don't get the game of the year edition. There's a huge glitch with the Vampire Cure quest that causes it to be impossible to complete. If you get it on the PC there's some DLC you can get that comes with the cure and a nice little lair.

The console versions are good for some days of gameplay, but the PC versions go further with mods and the like.

If you want a great RPG go with any and all Baldures Gate games, the Icewind Dale trilogy, Neverwinter Nights or Dungeon Seige (the first one, i disliked the 2nd to put it lightly)

Unless you are running emulators, it is console hands down.

Fallout 2.

Literally over a hundred side quests, Modding can bring in over 400 side quests and another full map of land. (so basically from East side of USA to West side of USA.) About 50 unique weapons with their unique animation (I never get tired of watching the powerfist unique kill) and about a week of main questing (done right).

Oh, and if you do it fast, you can do it in 3 days of game time.

Content Josho wrote:
Dragon Age 2:
- There is no clear antagonist, which is probably the key ingredient in any story, especially one which centres around battles. I got to Act 3 and still had no idea what the main plot was. I then retired from the game, realising there isn't one.

I hate to break it to you, but there wasn't meant to be one, most decent RPGs do this now, so you have proper choices, not 'blatantly good' or 'blatantly evil'. You have to use your personal opinion and actually listen to people's reasons. If you got to Act 3 and still had no idea what the main plot was then I don't know what happened but you obviously weren't listening in cutscenes or something. And so, you gave up the game due to your ignorance.

The only reason people say this is rushed is because the RPG levels aren't as deep as Dragon Age: Origins. Well, this way they can sell to a larger audience and compared to most, the RPG levels are still pretty deep (which I prefer before anyone says I'm a philistine for wanting 'dumbed down' games).

Oh yeah, and with that quote you found, it can be interpreted in different ways, first there's yours of they said they were pushed to release the game so it muct be rushed, or there's: they were pushed to get a quicker release date but it wasn't rushed, they just did the work as they normally would as they're one of the most successful RPG studios and know not to rush a game even if being pushed by EA because what's EA gonna do? Close them down?