Dragon's of Amalur: Dogma-ing (part one)

So, I note that a recent post said I'd try and write more.  I also note that I had to dust off my keyboard before settling down to write this.  Hmm.  3/10 Bell, must try harder.  Anyway, moving on.

A Tale of Two RPGs

Left: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning  Right: Dragon's Dogma

It's a good time to be a fan of open world RPGs.  Last winter we had the all conquering Skyrim, spring gave us the cumbersomely titled and ill-fated Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning from Big Huge Games while just this month Capcom have weighed in with Dragon's Dogma.  All three are worth a play, but the latter two are what I'm going to talk about here because they are remarkably similar, completely different and, ultimately, not quite successful, for me at least.

What A Wonderful (Open) World

When it comes to RPGs, the world is key.  Players are going to be cast adrift in a new land and a great deal of the fun to be had in these games comes from seeing fantastical sights, learning about new myths and meeting new peoples and creatures before killing them and taking their stuff. Both KoA:R and Dragon's Dogma take something of a kitchen sink approach to their world building, incorporating a real hodgepodge of elements from pre-existing sources.  KoA:R (which I can't help but pronounce "cor") has boggarts, giant spiders, kobalds (the poor man's goblin), bandits, slightly flouncy elves, very flouncy and immortal fae, mechanically minded gnomes with "Scottish" accents and magic items by the bucket load.  Dragon's Dogma in contrast has goblins, wolves, harpies, bandits, chimeras, hydra and, of course, dragons.  And magic items by the bucket load.  As is common, they're all jumbled together in each game, leading one to wonder why the goblins don't kill the wolves and just who all these bandits prey on when they're not trying to kill heavily armed PCs.

A bandit, choosing badly.

That said, both games have interesting aspects to their worlds.  KoA:R has fate.  Predictable, utterly inescapable fate.  It is quite possible to have one's fate read in the world of Amalur and then never be able to avoid what you know is coming.  (Or at least it was, until the PC came along.)  In fairness to KoA:R, the game takes this concept and runs with it.  Fateweavers (fortune tellers) are often broken souls, ground down by years of predicting death and dismay.  The immortal fae are bound by their own fates to endlessly repeat stories of their kind in a sort of living mythic cycle.  Only the coming of the PC, risen from the dead and unbound from the tapestry of fate, allows free choice to enter the world.  Only interaction with the PC can knock the fate train off the rails.

The PC's lack of binding to fate plays a significant part in KoA:R's class system, allowing the PC to specialise in one of the three classic paths of fighter, thief or mage, or to dabble in two or even all three as they wish.  Further, the PC can re-spec at any point for a nominal fee, meaning that you're never locked into one career.  Bored of swordplay?  Found a really sweet staff?  No problem, just become a mage.  It's a slick, user friendly system that makes sense given the world.

Dragon's Dogma has a very different twist in the shape of pawns - demi-humans from the "rift", human in appearance but apparently lacking free will.  Slightly bland and distinctly untrusted, the pawns hold allegiance to only the PC as the Arisen, a chosen one raised from the dead.  (Hang on, "raised from the dead"?  Wasn't that KoA:R's schtick?  Why yes, yes it was.  Both games feature dead-but-I-got-better protagonists.  It's like Armageddon  and Deep Impact all over again.)  The pawns of Dragon's Dogma not only accompany the PC on adventures, but they make up a significant amount of the NPCs in the world.  What's more, each one of these pawns was created by another gamer somewhere in the world, letting you see how other players have taken advantage of the (remarkably in-depth) character creator.

Seriously, what is it with these people?  How can four heavily armed
killers be a good choice of victims?

"So what's the problem?", I hear the imaginary readers in my head cry.  "We've got some generic elements, some novel ones and it sounds like the novel outweighs the dull."  Well yes, it does doesn't it?  In terms of lore, it does.  If these were novels we were talking about, I reckon they'd be interesting enough to catch my eye.  But they're not books, they're games and that means any novelty has to carry through into gameplay.  It doesn't matter if you're playing in the most amazing world ever if that play doesn't fit and it's here that both games founder.

KoA:R suffers because of a dreadful decision about controls.  For reasons undoubtedly due to console controllers you can only have three skills mapped for use at any one time.  Three.  Three!  In a game where it is quite possible to have every single skill available to fighter, thief and mage at the same time.  This is a criminal waste of the game's interesting, innovative skill system.  Where players should be encouraged to mix and match, the control scheme pushes you into tightly focussed specialisation.  Worse still, because the best skills are locked behind investment in the class, it encourages focussed specialisation in a single class.  This one choice completely undercuts the entire point of the skill system.

Dragon's Dogma's failure is rather more subtle.  Pawns are support NPCs and, as such, are less noticeable than the main PC, but, once you start to look, there's really no depth at all to them.  Presumably because of AI restrictions pawns can only level up as fighters, thieves, mages or their advanced versions (in each case a more damage focussed version of the base class) while being denied entry to the more interesting hybrid classes.  On top of this, the game is balanced to require one of each basic archetype in the group.  Ultimately your pawns will be a fighter of some form, an agile rogue of some form and a mage of some form.  All that choice, all that variety, and all you end up doing is picking the prettiest face.  Players have no way of teaching pawns tactics, or encouraging certain behaviours except at the most general level.  A world of creativity and it comes to nothing but a fashion contest.  It's a massive waste.

Join us next time for another thrilling bit of waffle on these two destined to be forgotten games!