Crouching Protocol, Hidden Dragon - Dragon Age 2 impressions

Hi again. As a followup to my previous article, I've now decided to tackle something more meaty and with actual content. I had quite a few things to say about Dragon Age 2 after completing it, but since frags' own review covers most of it, I'll instead focus on just expanding on it

A lot of people will look at Dragon Age 2 and think “It's Mass Effect 2 with magic and swords” and they'd be half right. Yes, a lot of it is inspired by Bioware's previous offering which ventured far from RPG land with great success. The dialogue wheel, the camera and fixed protagonist are all direct descendants of that game.

While I was playing Dragon Age 2, I kept drawing parallels with Mass Effect 2 and other games of its ilk, trying to see which did it better. Dialogue wheel's a lot better in this one compared to Mass Effect as it's more organic, combat feels like a more kinetically charged version of Knights of the Old Republic and Bioware still makes the best voice overs in the industry.

There was one game though, that I kept comparing it to, which was Alpha Protocol. Alpha Protocol was Obsidian Entertainment's attempt at making a “spy RPG” with mixed results. It didn't look very good, had dodgy controls and the AI was braindead. In spite of all that, it was brilliant.

The more I played Dragon Age 2, the less I compared it to Mass Effect and more to Alpha Protocol. At first, I didn't notice it, but as I played on, I started to feel that Bioware had either been inspired or borrowed heavily from their “indie” counterpart (Because they're not directly under any publisher).

Alpha Protocol did it first

Alpha Protocol was a game about choice and I don't mean simple “Drown puppies or rescue the princess” good/evil choices but real choices where there's no good choices, but various degrees of losses. Obsidian themselves has said that the game doesn't have any bad choices, just different results and consequences. That being said, the actual core missions were actually quite rigid. Yes, you could choose how it plays out, but ultimately it doesn't affect the bigger picture.

So, what's this got to do with Dragon Age 2? Answer: They both employ the same philosophy with side quests which is to make them tie-in or be related to the main story, but with different executions.

Dragon Age 2 has a LOT of side quests. Not just cookie-cutter side quests either as almost all of them have full scripts and cutscenes for our benefit. That's not the remarkable bit though. The pudding is the fact that a vast majority of these side quests are somehow related or tied in with the main story. For instance, if you helped a boy in the first act, you may encounter him later in the second act and he may have a role in the final act. The best part about this is the realisation that every little thing that you did before somehow has an impact or at least could effect an event in the final act.

Seriously, if I was asked at that exact moment I had that realisation, I'd probably give Dragon Age 2 full marks for everything. The euphoria would've blinded me from all its shortcomings and for the next day or so, I would've felt like I'd played the Citizen Kane of video games.

That's the thing though; It only lasted a day. After the emotions died down (Or when you start your inevitable second playthrough), the left side of my brain started to crunch the numbers and then all the cracks start to appear. You realise that the combat is quite bad, the camera is not just bad but downright antagonistic and most disappointingly, a lot of the “choices” that you were given weren't actually choices and the pivotal events that you thought were a result of your actions in a prior side quest were superficial as the event would probably play out in the same way, just without your input.

However, that same feeling of joy and wonderment lasted a whole month and two playthroughs with Alpha Protocol.

Alpha Protocol has roughly the same style as Dragon Age 2; You've got 3 core missions that you need to complete, each mission comes with a bunch of side missions that will alter how the core mission plays out. Some will be beneficial to your cause while others just offer you different options in resolving the larger task at hand. You could enlist terrorists, destroy rival organizations, kill off potential allies or recruit mob bosses. The options were quite varied and were pretty small scale.

Anyway, to illustrate my point of how these “enlightenment” moments happened, I'll have to go into spoiler territory here, so be warned.

"It was at this point where I wanted to just stand up and give a standing ovation to my laptop. Bravo Bioware, bravo!"

SPOILERS!
The magical moment in Dragon Age 2 was when it was revealed that Anders destroyed the Chantry. It was especially momentous for me as *I* was the one that helped him do it. At the time, Anders was begging for my help to try and find a way to help him separate from Justice, a spirit from the Fade he had merged with prior to the game. He asked for ingredients for this mysterious potion that would do the deed and I helped him gather them rather quickly. I was so focused on “healing” Anders that I was willing to do anything, despite him telling me of some unknown horrible consequences.

So, when the Chantry went up in a giant beam of light, I wasn't just in shock (Because I wasn't expecting it), I felt betrayed. I felt used and I felt like I'd been lied to. I wanted to kill Anders, but at the same time I did not as he was my love interest in my game (Which opens up more involving dialogue). I did not “love” him, but at the same time I did care for him.

It was at this point where I wanted to just stand up and give a standing ovation to my laptop. Bravo Bioware, bravo! You've managed to elicit a genuine set of emotions from me and that's a sterling achievement for an RPG. Some developers spend an eternity trying to create characters and narratives that can make their players connect with them and some get it on a fluke (Portal's Weighted Companion Cube). It's this combination of narrative style, use of side quest and character writing that gets the job done.

The effect was lessened though once I figured out that Anders would've destroyed the Chantry regardless of my actions, but the initial effect still stands strong in my memory and for that, Dragon Age 2 will have a place in my personal Hall of Fame.
END SPOILERS

Save the terrorist,
save the world?

For Alpha Protocol though, it's a bit different. The realisation didn't come to me in my first playthrough. It was only on my second playthrough as an incompetent evil agent did I get it.

In my first playthrough, I was trying to be a good guy while still fumbling around with different factions. I had resolved most of the main missions with a positive outcome and had enlisted a nice crew of allies for myself. In the end, I shot rockets up my former employer's ass as I rode off into the sunset with my girl. Second playthrough goes similarly except that I purposely decide to literally “shoot first, never ask”. This style actually closes off large areas of the game as you miss out key plot points because you chose to eliminate your adversaries without giving them a chance (Kudos to Obsidian for this). Nothing drastically different... up until the end.

Quick interjection, let me explain how the story in Alpha Protocol works: You're a rogue agent, who was betrayed by your corrupt agency.So, you could stick it to your former employers, be the white knight and save the day or join forces with your evil organization to make them more evil.. Seems easy enough and was well within the perceived boundaries the game conveys.

Back to my second playthrough, I was aiming to join the bad guys and see how it played out. So, I do that, do a lot of evil things such as killing off old allies, destroying evidence, etc. The kicker though, is when I confronted the big bad right at the end. There was a dialogue option whereby, instead of joining with him, I opt to become the big bad myself. Curious, I choose it and then, every ally I've got in my corner, every deal I've brokered for myself, and every action I've ever done would be recited as proof of how awesome I'd be as a super big bad myself.

Soulpatch: 31% more evil

This almost brought me to tears. I was amazed and speechless. I had never expected this seeing as the whole game downplays your role so much that you feel like a useless cog in a single-minded political machine. I mean, I don't particularly like being evil in games because it often feels too much like extreme evil rather than just being slightly nasty, but this one... this one was sublime. It made sense, it was epic and it really made you feel like a badass. All the Renegade Shepards and Evil Hawkes of the world, can never compare to this feeling of turning your pawn into a king. And it's all the result of the choices I made and not just a simple binary option.


Thus, these two games basically use side missions to the effect of adding or affecting content in the main story but with varying executions. Dragon Age 2's style makes you feel like you're the catalyst for the events that happened, even though at the time, it felt like you were just helping some poor sod out. It makes side missions feel like they have more meaning and the way Bioware ties them up in the final act deserves credit, despite the fact that a second playthrough destroys that image.


That being said, Alpha Protocol did it better. Side missions didn't just aid main missions, they added extra options for you in the long run and it was always because of your actions and choices that determined it.

That guy's just asking for it

I can't say for sure that Alpha Protocol was the pioneer behind this style (Fallout, with it's description of cities you've visited in the finale come close), but it's possibly one of the few RPGs left that aspire to do anything this grand.

Therefore, looking back, I don't think Mass Effect should be used as the yardstick for Dragon Age 2, but rather Alpha Protocol. Hell, it wasn't just the side mission usage but other stuff as well. The “Tale in a tale” method of storytelling was also used in Alpha Protocol but more effectively (The narrative was dynamic and not as rigid) and the idea of having a friendship/rivalry relationship that would offer different skills system was also present in Alpha Protocol (Also executed better than DA2 as you had a broader range of characters). Both have pretty run of the mill combat and have a fixed protagonist.

And thus, to me, Dragon Age 2 is a good game because it reminds me of Alpha Protocol. Neither are perfect, but they at least try to innovate and at least try to maintain the non-linear RPG style that have all but disappeared in most modern RPGs (Exceptions are the Witcher and possibly the Bethesda games). I would highly recommend you give Alpha Protocol a shot if you haven't already. The combat is rubbish at the start, the mini-games are stupid and the controls are very console-like, but it's got plenty of ambition and is full of options, both in terms of narrative and gameplay (Tom Chick called it the follow up to the promise of Deus Ex).

PS. In the playthrough above, I was playing a male Hawke, and I'm not gay, so despite the awkwardness of dialogue, I actually could still connect with him, which speaks a lot about Bioware's writing abilities or that I'm a soppy sod.