Are video games following the same path that art visually did?

When I first started my path as an artist I usually attribute the beginning to when I was a small child and my grandmother and I would sit and she and I would draw Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles together. It feels a little ironic in hindsight to discover that each one of the turtles is named after a famous Renaissance artist. Much later in my life when learning comprehensively about the history of art, and having been a gamer for basically my entire life, I couldn’t help but draw a connection to the paths visual art has taken in the past and the way video games have been transcending.

Over time painting has evolved from huge images on the inside of cave walls to huge paintings on the ceilings of chapels. One thing has always remained the same. Paintings are about how to create information for the audience to decipher that are rendered on a two-dimensional surface.

I want to give you a brief history…or the evolution of art as mankind advanced throughout time. Excuse the lack of thoroughness of my history here because I am squeezing-in about 12,000 years in roughly ten examples. The similarities to the way gaming visuals and painting have evolved in a paralleled way are uncanny.

Two-dimensional images, even in the beginning, always have had the same idea behind them as they will when they transform into masterpieces and that is the idea behind what the art world calls an Icon. An icon is something that tries to look like or mimic the appearance of the real thing. As you can see back in 10,000 BCE the cave painting tried to look like the actual thing they were depicting, but there is absolutely no confusing that image for the real thing.

Later, we started to capture form and movement better. We also started using environments to strengthen the illusion of reality. Over all though, the figures still seemed very flat and their movements were stiff and not lifelike.

Next came the dabbling of trying to combine fantasy and real life. Not only using visual images to display information but also almost capturing something that was more real-to-life while simultaneously being fantastical and construed reality. Something though…is still far off from the full immersion of a real illusion through visuals.

Then it came, the Renaissance. The early Renaissance started to “nail” the human figure; not just through form and shape but also through body language and composure of natural human behaviors and poses.

Toward the finishing years of the Renaissance artists were to a new level of rendering realism. If you have played “Assassin’s Creed II” or don’t live under a rock you know this image of “Mona Lisa” and its artist (one of the Ninja Turtles himself) Leonardo Da Vinci. Using a technique never applied before to render skin Da Vinci made one of the most realistic and memorable works that would influence other paintings, film, and literature for hundreds of years to come.

One artist who is much less infamous from the ending years of the Renaissance, but was a master of lighting and shadow was Caravaggio. This would also be what was one of the biggest turning-points for realism in gaming. One of the biggest factors for gaming this “console generation” has been the incorporation of astounding light and cast-shadow that was implemented in such a way that it truly began the actual illusion of realism in video games with real-time light and shadow.

Are we there? What is there? There is the ability to flawlessly render people, cats, dogs, guns, flowers, vases, water, drywall, etc…realistically on a two-dimensional surface (your flat television) that creates the illusion of three-dimensions.

If we aren’t there already then video games are only a handful of years away from reaching the apex of realism. More game developers seem to strive for this apex of realism than developers that do not. Sure we may continue to enhance more “lifelike” behaviors, but as far as the ability to create the illusion of rendering something realistically on a two-dimensional medium…I would have to say we are extremely close if not there. After reaching the apex of realism in the art world only a short time passed while realism was the mainstay standard of expectations for mediums.

Then BAM (maybe even a whamsmackaroo, I don’t know for certain)…it happened. The invention of the camera in the mid-eighteen hundreds turned the art-world on its side. After ten-plus millennia of striving for the perfect ability to render realism someone made a little box that could do what might possibly take an artist weeks, months, or years and deliver it in several hours. A comparison that could be seen as a similar relationship between the way the camera impacted art could be seen with the invention of the 3-D mesh generation from optical cameras (3DMGOC) in relation to video games.

This system maps and takes record of every wrinkle and facial nuance that the person goes through. Though it is not perfected yet it was only 100+ years ago that pictures were only in black-and-white and took hours to go through the developing process. Meaning, that 3DMGOC is only going to get better at its job. Just think of when developers start to put actors into full Hollywood budgeted prosthetics and make-up.

Imagine this guy in your video game wrinkle for wrinkle, tone for tone, and gingivitis for gingivitis.

The ability of the camera brought about many questions for art. What is the point of realism? What is the value of realism? Most importantly was pondered…

…where do we go from here?

Is this where the parallels between the history of visual art and video games stop? Are we at the so-called “invention of the camera” in relativity to the video gaming world? With the invention of 3DMGOC one might possibly think so. Or will video games refold back on themselves the way art did? Possibly…has it already happened? Here is a brief summary of what happened to art after the invention of the camera.

Basically, as time went on art grew further and further from realism to create not just something that was different than what photography could produce but also in the evolution of theory and thought behind it.

First was impressionism. Figures and surroundings were beginning to become less defined again.

Next came post-impressionism. Post-Impressionism asked the audience to use their imagination from real life past experiences to invoke an aesthetic response and connection to the work.

Then Abstraction was born. Not completely void of subjectivity abstraction tried to create an aesthetic responses through simple use of familiar subjectivity while simultaneously render with composition and the fundamentals of art in mind.

Then after Abstraction came Abstract. Completely void of subjectivity abstract art asked the audience to draw a connection to it through pure aesthetics and not confuse whether they loved it or not based off of what the image is “of”. Also abstract expressionism would become known for its deep use of “index”. Index in the art world is something that holds a physical record or existential bond to the work. When you think index think CSI. It is your physical record left behind. Abstract expressionism was about recording the painter’s movements through space and time at that particular moment while they walked across their canvas and dripped and flailed paint around the room.

This is where art folded back on itself again. After a famous writing by the art philosopher Danto in 1963 the art world would again change completely. Danto titled his work “The End of Art” which of course what he really meant and was calling for was the loss of “isms” and to say that “there is no this or that to define art”. Basically, he wanted anything to go, no classifications and no genres to segment given periods of time.

So again, after nearly one hundred years of trying to prefect pure aesthetics and move away from realism it happened. The painter Chuck Close made a ten-foot-high portrait of himself in the exact opposite vein of abstract art. He went with “hyper realism” in which there is only subjectivity and realism to draw from.

Where are video games then? Are we at the “invention of the photograph” with the newly integrated 3DMGOC for gaming? Have video games not reached the apex of realism the Renaissance did? Or have video games blast-through the stipulations of visual apex so quickly that it was barely noticeable and we are now already in the realm of Danto’s “anything goes world”? Regardless, it is already an amazing feat that video games seem to have sped through what took mankind nearly twelve thousand years in a mere sixty some-odd years’ worth of visual evolution in gaming.

Where do you think games are?

This is the main character i made for a Xbox indie game i am working on with several other people. His name is Luu'Rek. Hope you like it.
 
 

We're six months deep and the year still has a lot of gaming potential left in it. With half of 2011's previously highly anticipated games now in our hands like; Mortal Kombat, Portal 2, Crysis 2, L.A. Noire, Dragon Age 2, and The Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings we can't help but wait in wonderment and anticipation to whether these upocming titles will feed our hunger for amazing gaming or leave a sour taste in our mouths. I can think of at least eleven games that many people continue looking forward to with half of 2011 still to come.

inFamous 2

One of the greatest superhero tales is back. Enhancements in destructible environments are going to make those electric tornados more fun than ever to spew from Cole's hands. Most of the same team that created the first game had their hand in making this sequel and they proudly state that they now know how to get more out of the PS3's microprocessors. inFamous 2 is looking to be a hopefully fantastic addition to an already powerful game. (June 7)

Deus Ex: Human Revolution

This franchise augmented its way into our hearts back in 2000 with the release of Deus Ex. This cyberpunk action-RPG looks to dazzle with drop-ins and drop-outs of first-person and third-person combat situations by means of stellar graphics and gameplay. Eidos raised some eyebrows eleven years ago on the PC and now Deus Ex is hitting PS3 and XBOX as well. (August 23)

Gears of War 3

Epic Games concludes their smash-hit XBOX exclusive series. The PvP beta is in people's living rooms and the whispers of anticipation evolved from soft hopeful words into a roar as pre-orders for this third-person sci-fi cover shooter reaches over 1.3 million. (September 30)

Batman: Arkham City

Out of the frying pan and into the city. Batman leaves Arkham Asylum and ventures into the moody and dark streets of Arkham. Known for excellent combat, deductive detective work, and stealthy adventuring Batman promises to rid the streets of Joker's cronies once again. (October 18 )

Dark Souls

Dark Souls is the awaited spiritual successor to the PS3 exclusive Action-RPG Demon's Souls. Demon's Souls is known for not only being unforgiving and "never holding the player's hand", but also for downright slapping their hand away. If the predecessor of Dark Souls were a nursery rhyme its moral of the story would have to be "try, try again". Dark Souls leaves linearity behind as the world opens up to a more free roaming format and again From Software threatens players with a returning "spicy but edible" difficulty on the XBOX 360 in addition to the PS3. (October)

Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception

Naughty Dog's PS3 exclusive makes their action adventure cover-shooter a trilogy. Nathan traverses spectacular environments leaving behind the ice covered tundra and heads into the terrains of sandy heat in a riveting game known for storytelling and execution that rival movie scripts. I can undoubtedly say that Nathan Drake will most likely be taking the player to a wonderful location that is…un…charted? (November 1)

The Elders Scrolls: Skyrim

The next addition to the storied franchise of The Elder Scrolls series hits shelves on the eleventh day of the eleventh month in the eleventh year of this millennium. It would seem the RPG gods have really aligned the stars for this game's release date. The Elder Scrolls sank its teeth into this generation of gaming with the widely popular Oblivion and even as far back as Morrowind or Daggerfall this RPG's definative franchise has been known for its massive innovations and free roaming a world with vast amounts of content for the player to take part in. Sword and sorcery combine to slay dragons this time around and every fan wants to try their hand at it. (November 11)

The Lord of the Rings: War in the North

Lord of the Rings has captured the hearts and imaginations of fantasy lovers for decades now. The untold story of warriors not depicted in the movies opens a new chapter in the epic tale of the Tolkien universe of Middle-Earth. From the makers of beloved action-RPG "Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance" comes Snowblind Studios' long awaited return to the genre that made them famous. (Q3 2011)

Forza Motorsport 4

To date Gamespot has given every Forza Motorsport game a 9 out of 10 or higher. Microsoft's exclusive racing franchise returns to the XBOX 360 and this time around supports an optional Kinect motion-sensing system. This racer has shown superb excellence in the past and there is no reason to suspect Forza from slowing down anytime soon. (TBA 2011)

Star Wars: The Old Republic

Star Wars: The Old Republic is BioWare and LucasArts' upcoming Massive Multi-player Online game exclusively for the PC. BioWare has a reputation for making fantastic RPGs and some titles that were specifically Star Wars themed Role-playing games in particular. Fans of internet gaming communities and a story that takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away have itchy blaster fingers and light sabers ready to unsheathe to handle this stellar sci-fi online RPG. (TBA 2011)

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword

What is there to say? Shigeru Miyamoto has innovated the face of gaming multiple times with his revolutionary game concepts and characters. Zelda is one of those examples with Shigeru's vision that follows the adventures of a green suited elf named Link which always promises a wonderful sword swinging time for adventurers of all ages on the Nintendo Wii. (TBA 2011)

Mass Effect 3 - POSTPONED until 2012

Yes, Mass Effect was once a much anticipated game of 2011. Other contenders for RPG of the year can wipe their brow and know that one less title will have a chance at the award. We will have to wait until next year to see BioWare's conclusion to their sci-fi trilogy. 2012 is the year that we will discover what the Reapers have in store for the inhabitance of the Milky Way Galaxy.

Not confirmed but conceivable for 2011

These are the games that the world over is just waiting on the edge of their seats to hear an official release date and have a reasonable probability of falling into a 2011 release.

Guild Wars 2

ArenaNet's fantasy online role-playing game has been in the works for some time now. In a genre that says "make'em pay more…every month" ArenaNet says "NO" and waves the subscription fees that an industry has tried to make a standard convention. Over five million fans of the original are waiting in anticipation for this innovative online experience that is moving out of "instanced zones" and moving into a free roaming mythic world.

Diablo III

Blizzard's extremely successful franchise is making a third attempt to wow players with an action RPG for the PC that is focused on your chosen character and their carnage-filled path to slew the devil. Diablo first hit the scene in 1996 and was followed by the raging success of Diablo II in 2000. Battle.net is still hosting an online community to this day for Diablo and is still very popular eleven years into the future. Fans want the next installment…and they want it bad.

The Last Guardian

From the developer Fumito Ueda of the critically acclaimed ICO and Shadow of the Colossus comes the next auspicious installment to their repertoire, The Last Guardian. Known for artistic poise and finesse The Last Guardian appears no different with beautiful looking art and level design.

With six months still remaining what are the games that you are anticipating for 2011?

-SPOILER ALERT-

Read no further if you have not played Dragon Age and plan to because I am going to talk about the stories of the franchise and don't want to ruin the story for you, but also because I doubt you will have the slightest clue as to what I am talking about if you have not played them. I am putting aside fighting, charater building, and battle mechanics for each game and only discussing story.

What Dragon Age II has done can obviously never be undone. I am going to talk about story faults and add suggestions that are simple that could have helped the narrative not be so obfuscated in the second installment of the Dragon Age saga.

When I think of Dragon Age II I think of the story as being broken up into three chapters and the chapter's conclusions. For example, when I refer to Chapter 1 I would be referring to its conclusion which is the introduction to "the Dwarven Artifact" and a means to buy the Hawke family's foreclosed heirloom estate in Kirkwall.

Chapter 2 is really just an introduction into the cultural nuances and conflict with the Qun that are residing in Kirkwall. Also, the conclusion of Chapter 2 is really about the Champion killing the Arishok and the Arishok killing the Viscount which gives the Champion fame and somewhat of a political standing.

Chapter 3's conclusion is the start of a "civil war" between the already unstable relationship of the Templars and Mages.

That is Dragon Age II's story "in a nutshell". I'm not trying to belittle the story; I am just trying to give insight on my perspective to how I view it. I can easily over simplify DA: Origins aswell…Blight…get help…choose a new monarch…Archdemon. That is not what this is about.

Dragon Age: Origin's epic is almost Shakespearian in nature. Witches, kings, backstabbery, love lust, and events of the utmost political, ethical, and moral stature are addressed in Origins. Macbeth comes to mind. Your quest in Origins seems objectively paramount and has focus, and is subjectively enthralling at the same time feeling not too linear. The subjectivity of the story was fairly simple to grasp…how far are you willing to go to save this nation of Ferelden? So why did Dragon Age II fall flat? I have heard arguments that DA2 lacked a central villain which, in turn, made it lack a sense of drive and focus. I have also heard that the city of Kirkwall itself was the real antagonist and that political and moral decisions were the "evil characters" in the story. So, Let us get down to business.

Firstly, in Dragon Age II the introduction of your so-called "hero" is an awful display of heroism indeed. The introduction of Hawke is the cowardly act of feeling Loathering when he is obviously powerful enough to kill an ogre at the mere amateur level of 3. Instead of using his powers to help his nation, like the Hero of Ferelden, the Champion flees with no real backstory. In Dragon Age: Origins the game built-up to the ogre encounter and the ogre was a formidable boss fight with three other companions, all of these companions were at the more developed level of 5+, and you had a load of consumables at your disposal. The ogre was by itself in a large room and proved to be a considerably difficult challenge to overcome. In turn, if Hawke can effortlessly destroy an ogre, the preverbal "big dog" of the blight, and simultaneously dispose of additional waves of Dark Spawn with only 2 companions that range from level 2-3, with next-to-no consumables, and a total fighting experience of four prior Dark Spawn encounters. One can assume that Hawke is undoubtedly the superior combatant in comparison to the "Hero of Ferelden" whom sacked the Archdemon Urthemiel and would have unlikely seen victory put in the same situation and circumstances with the ogre. Yet the champion flees. Then why do a much vaster number of people agree that the "Hero of Ferelden" (HoF) was the superior protagonist in comparison to the Champion of Kirkwall? It is because the epic in which the HoF's story takes place is simply a greater tale with a satisfyingly grand closing and the HoF never displayed all of these weaknesses. The Hero of Ferelden met challenges head on. Regardless of whether or not you started in the circle of magi or as a noble dwarf prince your character never seems to flee, without just cause, from the very beginning of your tale. Sure, in some circumstances, your HoF leaves behind their previous life, but the story gave perspective on why. Also, instead of running from the Blight the HoF runs to it.

A point to discuss then is "why would the writer of DA2 start the game there?" with Hawke fleeing and the story leaves their departure ambiguously open. Your character's start is quite literally the foundation of their…well, character. Yes, it is an attention grabber and starts with combat which is a fairly good feature from a storytelling and videogame stand point to begin with. Also I did enjoy the idea of the "story within a story" from Varric, but that could have just as easily been portrayed in a multitude of ways and still delivered an action oriented beginning. Furthermore, I can think of an alternate intro that is just as good, if not better, and that I believe a wide range of fans would have loved to have seen. DA2 hints that you, and or possibly members of your family and for certain Aveline, were at the battle of Ostagar. Since the game talks about this I cannot, for the life of me, understand why DA2 started with you fleeing Loathering and did not begin basically at the same place where DA: O started, Ostagar. There for, intertwining the storylines more intimately and giving a returning audience a deeper connection to their relationship with the narrative. Also, as for the "story within a story" concept, the exaggerated "first Varric version" could have easily been applied with The Champion mutilating entire groups of the Dark Spawn Blight soldiers in single assaults on the battle field of Ostagar. Seriously, who would not have loved the game to start with your character standing side-by-side with King Cailan and Duncan on the battlefield of Ostagar? We could have finally seen Duncan's true demise…or his breath-taking escape from the Battle of Ostagar. Which the scenes of the Battle of Ostagar from DA: O cut short. Even possibly incorporating and revealing the unseen events of Flemeth's successful rescue attempt of the HoF from the bell tower.

THEN, after several close calls with the Blight (Ostagar being one close call then a never formerly told event in Loathering in which the town is actually seen being swarmed and pillaged by the Blight for the first time) Hawke realizing the futility of their struggle decides to save his entire family instead of sacrificing them to the Blight and they depart for Kirkwall. Kirkwall seems like the rational place to go because, according to Hawke's mother, that is where their family once had some hierarchical stature. Thus saving face and initially not looking cowardly.

This different chain of events could have simultaneously worked as a way of introducing Flemeth to DA2 while she saves you from the Battle of Ostagar and revealing her true alternative reason for saving you which she revealed in the actual DA2 storyline. Flemeth's actual motive was the transport of an amulet from "the wilds" to Kirkwall. Wherein, you discover later the amulet housed her non-corporeal form internally. For what motive, she wanted or needed the amulet with her essence inside transported in that manner, Dragon Age II's story never follows-up on and leaves it a mystery.

This cheap attention grab, of throwing Flemeth into the game early on and in the demo, was a sorry excuse for trying to push the story forward and to keep DA: O players interested. It is widely known that Morrigan, and her story, is a fan favorite of the DA: Origins' tale and that everyone is salivating for a taste of its conclusion. So, to throw Flemeth in the story and to imply follow-through with some of Flemeth/Morrigan's story, but not deliver…at all, was a huge disappointment. When you are on the summit, where Flemeth wanted the amulet delivered, and Flemeth returns to her corporeal form and you ask her "why did you want me to bring this here?" Flemeth's reply is basically "I'm out… (Turns into dragon and flies away)" you can't help but feel cheated when the story does not answer the question, your own character just asked, within the same videogame. This would have been fine if it was addressed in the same game, but since it didn't, in retrospect, it just feels like they're setting up for another game's story and not trying to deliver the full potential of this game's fable.

Many aspects of the story felt like they were only thrown in for the reasons of "setting-up" events for another installment of the franchise. For example, one set-up is the conclusion to the game's final segment. Also known as the Circle of Magi, Templar feud. Even the conclusion of Chapter 2 felt as though the story is just setting-up for something else with the Arishok's last words being "One day…we shall return". If the Qun would have returned in DA2 it wouldn't have felt like it was just framework for something else. But, the Qunari never returned. The bulk of the story felt as though it was only setting-up all of the conditions for a chronicling of epic proportions instead of delivering them in the story at hand.

The way the first chapter's conclusion is pathetically attempted to be validated as an important plot point by adding the Dwarven Artifact to Meredith's sword hilt was pitiful. The first chapter's conclusion really had almost no significance. The Dwarven artifact was absent from the end of Chapter 1 until the last boss encounter of the game. The story could have had the exact same chain of events without their lame attempt to include the Lyrium Idol onto Meredith's sword. In reality the only real importance of the entire first chapter was the exodus from Loathering and gaining some social standing. Because of the way the story feebly ratifies the first chapter's importance it makes the entire first chapter feel meaningless. Also, if the only real goal of the first chapter was to gain your family estate you could have easily done that by subtracting chapter 1's conclusion for chapter 2's ending, with the Champion defending Kirkwall and besting the Arishok.

Since the Qunari's response to the death of the Arishok was never felt and the absence of the impending war between the Templars and Mages never came to fruition I don't see how they could be okay with the story ending where it did. The story could have easily merged the conclusions of all three chapters into a single chapter. The story could have had the Champion find their wealth, the Arishok's death, and the straws that broke the camel's back to ignite the true conflict between the Mages and Templars in a single interval. I will get to my concept for this outcome in a moment.

This is why the story feels so obfuscated. What was the true meaning and important theme here? Yes, it is a good thing to have an ambiguous ending which begs the audience to draw their own outcome from the possibility of multiple interpretations, but the audience's options to choose upon important plot points should not be so construed. What is the story's actual axiom? Is the axiom the Ancient Dwarven artifacts that are Lyrium Idols and their influences on the sentient mind? Is it the corruption of Kirkwall's citizen's way of life and or the way a foreign dignitary can be affected by an "alien" culture to such a magnitude as to call upon confrontation? Finally, is the story about the moral and ethical pressures in the delicate world of a special type of "indentured servants" known as Mages and the overseers of said servants, known as Templars, who are supposed to be the "checks" in the balance between the two? The truth is that the story has no axiom or self-evident morality lesson. The story is obfuscated and the ambiguity of multiple interpretations is not within the realm of rational. Also, if you say "the story is, well…about all of those things" then you cannot deny that DA2's story is just the intermediary for setting the key players up for a different tale because of the way the narrative does not respond to any of these questions the protagonist(the audience, you) asks. Furthermore, if you claim that the city of Kirkwall is the real antagonist it is irrelevant because the story still never concludes any of the situations that are introduced with any amount of finality. Again, will the Qunari be back with a formidable force? What is going to happen in Kirkwall with the conflict between the Chantry, Templars, and Mages? Does the Dwarven artifact's manipulation of sentient life forms have significance to the plot? What the heck happened to Flemeth and Morrigan? Why not answer some of these questions in the same body of work if the objective of the narrative was not solely to set the stage for another game?

Here is a concept for what should have happened. Hawke should have risen to a respectable level of political power from defending Kirkwall from the Arishok and the tension of the Templar/Mage conflict should have ignited in a single chapter. This would have left the rest of the story open to finish up the quarrel between the Mages and Templars and or the gathering of funds and troops for the impending Qunari invasion to defend your new homeland. Which your character had failed to do once before in Loathering and wouldn't see it happen again in the case of Kirkwall, the Champion's new home. I am sure that some of these uncertainties will be answered…not until the next game though. Until this happens you cannot refute that you have only gotten a sample of the Champion's story. The tale of the Champion, in comparison to the epic of the Hero of Ferelden, only felt as though you got a small amount and what you have seen so far is nowhere near the Champion's start-to-finish history like HoF's story was. I don't know about you, but I feel cheated. Yes, it is fine to have a hero born in battle and circumstance, tell their tale, then have a continuation of their legends after words, but this story never finishes on ANY of the real predicaments awakened in it.

The equivalent of this would be like opening up a book and only getting the first couple of chapters read then the rest of the pages are blank. I would be very unhappy with that situation if I just paid 60$ for my brand-new book.

Dragon Age: Origins did not suffer from any of these shortcomings. Even if the tale of the Hero of Ferelden is looked at in the same simple way I stated it earlier " Blight, get help, new monarch, Archdemon" one can still tell that nearly all of the issues awakened in the story were addressed with finality. I will breakdown the story in the same manner as I broke down DA2. Chapter 1 would be the birth of a Grey Warden and the fall of a king because of the treason of Loghain. Chapter 2 would be the newly awakened urgency of the need to gather a formidable force to battle the Blight. Chapter 2's conclusion would be the gathering of said armies. Lastly, chapter 3 is about the rise of a new king and to conquer your opposing enemy king…the Archdemon. The first part of the story introduced the antagonists and by the end of the story all of them had been dealt with in one way or another, including Loghain. The only question the game did not address was if Morrigan was a friend to the HoF throughout or actually a brilliant antagonist the entire time who took the motto of "keep your friends close, but keep you enemies closer" to scary level of dedication. Why did she want that baby inside her to have the essence of the Archdemon's soul? What is her endgame? Was she actually manipulating you the entire time or were her motives righteous? This unanswered question was fine because it was an excellent plot twist and was only brought about moments before your ascent into the final battle. This question left the "door" open for possible sequels and remained to be one of the story's most intelligently ambiguous occurrences.

All in all, in the case of Dragon Age one very important part of "What can save a story?" seems to be follow-through.

I am not saying that Dragon Age II is bad writing, I am saying the story felt like it was all prologue.

Leave your ideas as to what can save a story. Make or break it. What game do you think had the best story in a video game? Also, leave any suggestions to what you think could have enhanced your Dragon Age story experience and or did you think it was perfect the way it was?

Stay tuned for my "future" Dragon Age plot idea.