1279 réponses à ce sujet

[soundchaser721]

Seriously, how the hell is this guy even a journalist? That article was just awful it provided no new info at all while slandering origins, praising mass effect and lauding the shift in gameplay and style for DA2. The dialogue wheel isn't the greatest gameplay mechanic of the past ten years like some of these articles make it out to be. Personally, I can't stand it; you really have little control over the conversation and you have no idea what hes going to say just some vague idea of how the conversation will play out thanks to a couple of words on the wheel. I prefer a silent protagonist because it allows for greater immersion in the game, you feel like your actually in it rather than just watching a movie. Sometimes a voiced PC can work, and sometimes it doesn't. So the warden didn't show any emotion? just like Mark Meer had so much emotion in his voice through ME1 and 2. Thats just my opinion however.

[soundchaser721]

Modifié par soundchaser721, 19 septembre 2010 - 02:19 .

[Amioran]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

I rage against it because they make it out like this is a horrible thing, when it's been around for ages and no one has complained about it beforehand. I have an imagination, and in an RPG, I like it use it. Imagination brings more to the story's table. It's hard to describe, perhaps because I am listening to a Bombcast atm, but I am sick of everyone bashing the whole silent protagonist thing. I really am. 

Those who "bash" a silent protagonist do so because they like to see the thing only from a perspective. This, however, it is true also for the contrary. Both systems have advantages and disavantages, none of them is absolutely best. Firstly because it always depends on how the "means" are used (you can either have the most valuable pen in the market, but if you don't know how to write it will make you not good at all), and secondly because they use different ways to approach things. So it would be like comparing lemons to oranges asking what it is better. Apart taste, there's no clear answer, or it is anyway much more complicate than people like to think about.

Modifié par Amioran, 19 septembre 2010 - 02:31 .

[Amioran]

soundchaser721 wrote...

Personally, I can't stand it; you really have little control over the conversation and you have no idea what hes going to say just some vague idea of how the conversation will play out thanks to a couple of words on the wheel.

So you are telling me that in real life you cannot stand a conversation? You know also there you don't clearly know before what will happen next, not the implications of everything you are about to say. You just choose a mood and go with it.

Naturally it also depends on how you approach it. If you are one of those people that cannot stand to make a "wrong" decision in some part and have to replay absolutely chosing the "right" one then I can understand your frustration, but you know, uncertainity is what makes things interesting.

I prefer a silent protagonist because it allows for greater immersion in the game, you feel like your actually in it rather than just watching a movie.

Actually if used well the using of "not known replies" should give you exactly that: "more immersion", being much more similar to a real conversation. As I said it depends on how it is used, but still it is just the contrary of what you say. A silent protagonist give you more leisure and thinking on what you are going to do, but the type of immersion given by this is more of a "dreaming" type. There could be more choices but the tension is less.

Modifié par Amioran, 19 septembre 2010 - 02:28 .

[Seagloom]

I got around to reading this finally and I have to state, that was journalism. Other than his leaving off the e in Hawke and misspelling Mike Darrah's name, he reported factual information. That is all journalists are expected to do. Those mistakes and errors such as "mano amano" should have been caught by his editor. Yes, a writer should strive to proofread their work before submitting it, but an editor should still review it to catch whatever the writer missed.

Something else to consider: this writer works for a gaming site. He is not employed by a scholarly journal or major news outlet where they strive harder to report objectively. Of course, even in *those* cases misinformation happens, facts are screwed up, and subjective opinions are shared. Journalism in the modern era is as much entertainment as it is relating the news. It is not unexpected for a writer to share their personal opinions and pepper said opinions with colorful language. Few people would get through the first paragraph if it was a dry accounting of his experiences with the demo.

In short, I thought it was a decent preview despite disagreeing with the writer on a few areas. I also think some of the blame should fall on his editor, not that I found those minor errors galling personally.

Modifié par Seagloom, 19 septembre 2010 - 05:10 .

[soundchaser721]

Amioran wrote...

soundchaser721 wrote...

Personally, I can't stand it; you really have little control over the conversation and you have no idea what hes going to say just some vague idea of how the conversation will play out thanks to a couple of words on the wheel.

So you are telling me that in real life you cannot stand a conversation? You know also there you don't clearly know before what will happen next, not the implications of everything you are about to say. You just choose a mood and go with it.

Naturally it also depends on how you approach it. If you are one of those people that cannot stand to make a "wrong" decision in some part and have to replay absolutely chosing the "right" one then I can understand your frustration, but you know, uncertainity is what makes things interesting.

I prefer a silent protagonist because it allows for greater immersion in the game, you feel like your actually in it rather than just watching a movie.

Actually if used well the using of "not known replies" should give you exactly that: "more immersion", being much more similar to a real conversation. As I said it depends on how it is used, but still it is just the contrary of what you say. A silent protagonist give you more leisure and thinking on what you are going to do, but the type of immersion given by this is more of a "dreaming" type. There could be more choices but the tension is less.

I never mentioned that I can't stand real life conversations, the dialgoue wheel is obviously far from a real life conversation but it all comes down to personal preference if you enjoy the wheel than fine its your opinion. I'm more of a fan of old school rpg's with silent protagonists. To me the ME wheel was frustrating, but I'm interested to see how it will be handled in DA2

[Amioran]

soundchaser721 wrote...

I never mentioned that I can't stand real life conversations, the dialgoue wheel is obviously far from a real life conversation

Obvious. However surely it is more similar than written choices. At last you have unpredictability there, as in a real conversation. It will be long time before a game would be able to simulate a real conversation. Still, in a face to face standard you are not sure of what will happen next, not what you are going to say, specifically.
 

if you enjoy the wheel than fine its your opinion. I'm more of a fan of old school rpg's with silent protagonists. To me the ME wheel was frustrating, but I'm interested to see how it will be handled in DA2

Actually I don't have a real preference, just because it would only be a bias one way or another without looking at the thing objectively. I think they are different means, both having advantages and disavantages. It all depends on how they are used. While I agree that in ME the method wasn't used well, it is still not worser in an absolute sense (as many people are implying) than the other. It is different. The silent approach is more concerned about choices and pondering, the "wheel" approach by building up tension and not clearly knowing what willl happen next. So both have their good points and bad ones.

[FieryDove]

Amioran wrote...

soundchaser721 wrote...

I never mentioned that I can't stand real life conversations, the dialgoue wheel is obviously far from a real life conversation

Obvious. However surely it is more similar than written choices. At last you have unpredictability there, as in a real conversation.  

So in a real conversation you never know what you are going to say and just throw out phrases that sound good, read in a book, seen on the billboard or are hearing on the radio at the moment and these have nothing to do with whatever the subject is? I would imagine most people would back away slowly or just stop talking at all to anyone that has a *real* conversation in this manner.

The wheel is ebil and nothing anyone can say will make it otherwise. I have seen it in the ME games and it should stay there...imho (Or better yet die a quick death)

[Monica83]

Pahraphrases system= less deep dialogues

I think if DA use the wheel dialogue uses also Paraphrases system.. blah

[JPL1138]

This preview pretty much sums up my attitudes towards the "gaming press" in general. Without fail, almost 95% of "AAA" games get 9/10 or more without fail, with gushing reviews and declarations of GOTY! from these guys. If this is true, then we must be living in some kind of Golden Age of gaming.

Then, when the sequel comes across, they suddenly do a 180 and completely bash the previous game in an effort to hype up the new ****. I'm truly surprised that anyone with half a brain even takes these guys seriously. Face it people, the majority of these sites and magazines are really little more than paid advertising for games these days. I'm sure most of you sure as heck wouldn't trust everything that's said on an infomercial, and these days it's pretty much the same with the gaming press. This is why I prefer to read user reviews.

Modifié par JPL1138, 19 septembre 2010 - 05:50 .

[exoproto]

I don't understand your argument, Monica.

The fact that we now have a voiced character actually means we will, in fact, have deeper dialogues. Sure, we get a tidbit of information (aka paraphrases) to allow us to get a feel of what we're going to say, but the actual spoken line will probably be "deeper" than any line we actually had in DA:O. It would be tedious to read what you're going to say only to hear the exact same thing being spoken aloud by your character. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not skip over every dialpogue because I already knew what was going to be said.

I'm almost positive I had read a dev post out there saying the same thing. I could be wrong, though.

Modifié par exoproto, 19 septembre 2010 - 05:55 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

COMPANIONS DO NOT STAND AROUND FOR A BLOODY HOUR WAITING FOR YOU TO TALK. IT'S CALLED SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF. WE HAVE USED THIS METHOD SINCE THE BIRTH OF ART. THE BIRTH. AS. IN. THE BEGINNING OF SENTIENT LIFE. 

GOD DAMMIT PEOPLE USE YOUR BRAINS. OH, RIGHT I FORGOT THAT ALL MODERN GAMERS DO NOT HAVE ANY PATIENCE NOR BRAINPOWER TO THINK. THANKS FOR REINSTATING THAT BELIEF.

If this means the end of the camp mechanic, I'm ecstatic.  I've been trying to get rid of the camp (with its nonsensical levelling mechanic) since it first appeared.

[MerinTB]

Toast of Fury wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
I am personally sick of all the previews of DA2 bashing DA:O into the ground with it's "long list of faults that everyone acknowledges needed fixing."

Newsflash - not everyone agrees. Some do, some don't.
I, for one, prefer no voice to my MC than the experience I had with Alpha Protocol and Mass Effect (as much as I enjoy those games, it wasn't because of the VO for the MC.)

I'd like to see just one, just one, skeptical preview of DA2. One that doesn't praise the changes and bad mouth DA:O.

Not trying to call you out here, but I think this is a point that many of the people panicking about any changes to DA2 are missing:  They are the minority.  While of course everyone didn't find many faults with Origins, on the other hand many others did.  Read any professional reviews of the first game, and the main negatives were likely to be the clunky combat, dated presentation, and lack of a voiced protagonist, especially after Mass Effect proved that it could be a feasible option.

I read many, many reviews on the game - almost all were glowing.  If there are all these "major problems" in the game that "desperately needed fixing" then it wouldn't have gotten glowing reviews.  Clearly whatever "flaws" the reviews I read thought it had they didn't highlight the way all the previews of DA2 are.

I will grant the caveat that I read only PC version reviews, as that's what I intended to buy, what I did buy, and all I ever intended to play.  Those same reviews, if they played multiple versions, will often state the clunkiness of the game via the poor port to the consoles - but that's not really BioWare, the game, or the console's fault.

X-Play gave it a 5 out of 5 and they are usually harsh on RPGs, for example.  - http://www.hulu.com/...-origins-review EDIT - just rewatched this one again, and they PRAISE the combat system - only dislike loading times and hackneyed story.
CGW has this glowing review - http://www.computera...e.php?id=226557 - where the ONLY glaring flaw according to the reviewer is how hard the combat is at Normal setting. 

Metacritic has 66 positive and 1 negative critic reviews for DA:O on the PC... let me give you a breakdown of the first several reviews listed on that site-
Onion AV Club - review has no flaws listed, counts as 100.
Gamepro's summary - "PROS: Wonderfully detailed world; amazing story; memorable characters and party interaction / CONS: Difficulty spikes are frustrating at times; slightly annoying inventory management; camera can get bogged down in the heat of battle."  Counts as 100.
Gameshark - "Ultimately, Dragon Age: Origins is quite possibly the best game ever to come out of Bioware. That alone puts it on the short list for best role playing game ever made. It’s not everything it could or even should have
been. There are moments where the graphics, dialog, and general gameplay get in the way of the experience; an AI party member who refuses to stay in a flanking position, a crucial plot twist that is too obviously forced, a seemingly important choice that didn’t seem to have the necessary consequences, or a beautiful, intricate world that is far too restrictive. These faults all pale in comparison to everything that Bioware has gotten right with this game. This is a pure gem that is among the few AAA releases to not only match its hype, but exceed it."  Counts as 100
1UP - "The folks at BioWare have shown that they're always looking for ways to make their games better -- each of their RPGs builds upon the previous title. Dragon Age displays  this refinement, and while the story may not be completely original,  it's told in a way that enthralls and enchants the player. It's the best RPG of the year -- and maybe the best of the HD era." Only complaints were on fantasy tropes. Counts as 100.

---

Now, I'm positive you could find me "professional reviews" where "dated presentation, unvoiced MC, clunky combat" were listed - but your claim that "any" professional review listed them is quite clearly false.

BioWare is somehow successfully marketing against the success of their own game in an attempt to justify the changes in the game.  I don't understand the reasoning - but I can clearly see they are being as successful as they were in convincing many people that RPG = story.

EDIT - Most of the reviews I read, if they disliked anything, it was how cliche the story was.

Modifié par MerinTB, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:49 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

exoproto wrote...

I don't understand your argument, Monica.

The fact that we now have a voiced character actually means we will, in fact, have deeper dialogues. Sure, we get a tidbit of information (aka paraphrases) to allow us to get a feel of what we're going to say, but the actual spoken line will probably be "deeper" than any line we actually had in DA:O. It would be tedious to read what you're going to say only to hear the exact same thing being spoken aloud by your character. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not skip over every dialpogue because I already knew what was going to be said.

But we won't know what it is the character is going to say, so our input won't be as deep.  We can't put as much thought into what it is we're going to say because those lines are kept hidden from us.

Try playing Mass Effect with specific conversation objectives in mind.  For example: "I don't trust this guy - I don't want to tell him anything."  In DAO (or KotOR, or NWN, or BG) you can choose dialogue options that avoid revelaing information.  Don't make any declarative statements you believe to be true, and you'll make it through without acting out of character.

But in Mass Effect, you can't do that.  You don't know what the lines are going to say, so you don't actually get any input into how your character behaves.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MerinTB wrote...

I can clearly see they are being as successful as they were in convincing many people that RPG = story.

I will never accept that definition.  RPG = roleplaying.

[Meltemph]

Amioran wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

He came across as obnoxious and condescending(and I agree he was) because you did as well.

LOL.

No, I'm not obnoxious, it is only that what I cannot stand the most is people talking of things they don't clearly understand as if they are experts.

Then, when you come to the end, they always reply they have a good argument but they will not show you. And the story repeats.

I started that argument already knowing where it would end, for this the "condescending" tone.

I still think you came across as condescending, but I also think he/she deserved it so don't take it the wrong way.  I'm glad you came out strong, because they do the exact same thing and never directly answer anything whne you truly challenge them on their "views"

[MerinTB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Lucy_Glitter wrote...
COMPANIONS DO NOT STAND AROUND FOR A BLOODY HOUR WAITING FOR YOU TO TALK. IT'S CALLED SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF. WE HAVE USED THIS METHOD SINCE THE BIRTH OF ART. THE BIRTH. AS. IN. THE BEGINNING OF SENTIENT LIFE.

GOD DAMMIT PEOPLE USE YOUR BRAINS. OH, RIGHT I FORGOT THAT ALL MODERN GAMERS DO NOT HAVE ANY PATIENCE NOR BRAINPOWER TO THINK. THANKS FOR REINSTATING THAT BELIEF.

If this means the end of the camp mechanic, I'm ecstatic.  I've been trying to get rid of the camp (with its nonsensical levelling mechanic) since it first appeared.

IF I ever get my In Genre Podcast #1 editted (been sick since we recorded it, the second time) I bring up in in how I've really disliked the "camp/ship" technique that BioWare uses for "holding your followers in reserve."  In KotOR it was new and I didn't notice it, but when ever BioWare RPG afterward continued this method... blech.  It made NO SENSE in Jade Empire, where you "kind of" ran around with 1 follower, and had nearly a dozen waiting back "at camp" for you...

[Monica83]

Have a voiced character don't means have deep dialogues.. In mass effect 2 the paraphrases system don't works well you click a response and the character tells a complete different thing of what you mean... So if its implemented at the same way its implemented in mass effect 2 its very worse and not better...



Lack of contect: To have a voice character they cut out origins story and race selection.. This is a true stepback from origins.. In origins you can chose who you are by selecting class and race.. And origins story explain to you how you become a gray warden.. This is a deep storyline that make you feel inside the game.. With the class building of Dragon age origins you are more free if you like to be a warrior but you don't want to be a muscolar one you can select dual weild and bow specialization.. Ok its not good if they wear a full plate but is always better than cut off those ability in the sequel and cut the roleplay customization of a character for a Gameplay thing! or for Cool Animations!.. So they added cool animation they added VO character and whell of dialogues.. How can this be better from DAO?.. I see only a lot of features cut off to have an easy sequel the only thing i like of DA2 is the new design..

Why don't keep dragon age a old style Rpg?. For release fast another sequel?.. At that point i prefear to whait more and have a true sequel that follows the DAO setting and with a much more improvements..



Multiple Races

Better Graphic..

Fixed Animations

Fixed classes..

ecc ecc..

We have tons of schematic roleplay /action game around.. Why destroy the dragon age originality?

This is really bad but its what i feel..

[Sylvius the Mad]

MerinTB wrote...

IF I ever get my In Genre Podcast #1 editted (been sick since we recorded it, the second time) I bring up in in how I've really disliked the "camp/ship" technique that BioWare uses for "holding your followers in reserve."  In KotOR it was new and I didn't notice it, but when ever BioWare RPG afterward continued this method... blech.  It made NO SENSE in Jade Empire, where you "kind of" ran around with 1 follower, and had nearly a dozen waiting back "at camp" for you...

I want to know why the party members gain levels while waiting at the camp doing nothing.

And if they're not doing nothing, how come they never get injured and die?

Whatever they're doing to gain XP in a risk-free environment, why can't I do it?

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:23 .

[axa89]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Whatever they're doing to gain XP in a risk-free environment, why can't I do it?

Well, now don't tell me you would prefer staring at the fire instead of crushing skulls.

[Sylvius the Mad]

axa89 wrote...

Well, now don't tell me you would prefer staring at the fire instead of crushing skulls.

Crushing skulls is dangerous.  Staring at the fire apparently carries zero risk.

Wouldn't you choose the safer route?

I'm not asking you if you, the player, would preer that type of gameplay.  I'm asking if you, were you a character in the setting, would choose to face danger unnecessarily rather than spend the day relaxing by the fire.

I'd choose the fire.  Every time.

[exoproto]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

exoproto wrote...

I don't understand your argument, Monica.

The fact that we now have a voiced character actually means we will, in fact, have deeper dialogues. Sure, we get a tidbit of information (aka paraphrases) to allow us to get a feel of what we're going to say, but the actual spoken line will probably be "deeper" than any line we actually had in DA:O. It would be tedious to read what you're going to say only to hear the exact same thing being spoken aloud by your character. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not skip over every dialpogue because I already knew what was going to be said.

But we won't know what it is the character is going to say, so our input won't be as deep.  We can't put as much thought into what it is we're going to say because those lines are kept hidden from us.

Try playing Mass Effect with specific conversation objectives in mind.  For example: "I don't trust this guy - I don't want to tell him anything."  In DAO (or KotOR, or NWN, or BG) you can choose dialogue options that avoid revelaing information.  Don't make any declarative statements you believe to be true, and you'll make it through without acting out of character.

But in Mass Effect, you can't do that.  You don't know what the lines are going to say, so you don't actually get any input into how your character behaves.

True, that does happen, but I wouldn't go about saying that Dragon Age is turning into Mass Effect simply because the two share one common feature.

Dragon Age has different writers (for the most part) and I can only hope that they will use the conversation wheel in a manner much different than how Mass Effect implemented it. We've already been told that it won't act the same way as it did in Mass Effect and that gives me some hope. For example: the top was always the "paragon" option, the middle was always neutral, and the bottom was always "renegade". Instead, the choices are now varied and we may have up to ten choices to choose from.

I just hope to see the wheel used as a way to organize your choices.

[Meltemph]

But we won't know what it is the character is going to say, so our input won't be as deep. We can't put as much thought into what it is we're going to say because those lines are kept hidden from us.

But you don't get "much thought" the other way either, only with what they wrote, only difference is you can't "game" the system as much. Either way you choices are limited to what they want, you may feel this gives the illusion of a deeper choice, but it is only as deep as the options they give you.

Try playing Mass Effect with specific conversation objectives in mind. For example: "I don't trust this guy - I don't want to tell him anything." In DAO (or KotOR, or NWN, or BG) you can choose dialogue options that avoid revelaing information. Don't make any declarative statements you believe to be true, and you'll make it through without acting out of character.

That is because it is writing with different intentions in mind, not because the wheel makes it harder. In Mass Effect story structure is much more important and there is less to "read into" so obviously you won't be able to control the dialog as much.

But in Mass Effect, you can't do that. You don't know what the lines are going to say, so you don't actually get any input into how your character behaves.

 The writing is what matters, not how we perceive the writing is accomplished.

In mass effect 2 the paraphrases system don't works well you click a response and the character tells a complete different thing of what you mean...

Never ran into that problem, I always had an idea how that line would express itself, but I was thinking on how Shepard is responding, now how "I" meant it.

Lack of contect: To have a voice character they cut out origins story and race selection..

Why would you assume that is the reason? The voice could easily be used for all races, what reason could they not? No, this was a story choice as much as it was a design choice.

In origins you can chose who you are by selecting class and race.. And origins story explain to you how you become a gray warden.. This is a deep storyline that make you feel inside the game..

You will have more character development like the origins stories because they can focus on 1 single character instead of making a multitude of separate stories that wraps around the whole story. Outside of some relative minor things and the ending the origins did not really make much of a impact in the overall story, so I don't really see much of a loss.

With the class building of Dragon age origins you are more free if you like to be a warrior but you don't want to be a muscolar one you can select dual weild and bow specialization..

It is a design choice to put distinction between the 2 classes more so then there was. Quite frankly rogues and warriors were way to similar outside of their "specialized" talents. Whether you like the choice in the class design is one thing, but I don't understand why you would encourage homogenization that DAO suffered from with Rogues and Warriors.

better than cut off those ability in the sequel and cut the roleplay customization of a character for a Gameplay thing! or for Cool Animations!.. So they added cool animation they added VO character and whell of dialogues.. How can this be better from DAO?.. I see only a lot of features cut off to have an easy sequel the only thing i like of DA2 is the new design..

It is a brand new setting, they 1st need to make sure they have their base secure before they start increasing customization(Just like DnD). They are trying to make a more reason for choosing rogues or warriors.

Why don't keep dragon age a old style Rpg?. For release fast another sequel?.. At that point i prefear to whait more and have a true sequel that follows the DAO setting and with a much more improvements..

And this is why people get aggravated at complainers, when they start making assumptions and acting like "professional designers". To this all I can say is, I am glad you are not in-charge of the design of the game.

Modifié par Meltemph, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:45 .

[SirOccam]

Monica83 wrote...

Have a voiced character don't means have deep dialogues.. In mass effect 2 the paraphrases system don't works well you click a response and the character tells a complete different thing of what you mean... So if its implemented at the same way its implemented in mass effect 2 its very worse and not better...

The presence of a voiced character doesn't mean the dialogue will be deep, but it doesn't mean it won't be either. It's just presentation. The writers are the same. They made the dialogue very deep in Origins; of course they can do the same here. Having a paraphrase doesn't change the actual line.

Lack of contect: To have a voice character they cut out origins story and race selection.. This is a true stepback from origins.. In origins you can chose who you are by selecting class and race.. And origins story explain to you how you become a gray warden.. This is a deep storyline that make you feel inside the game..

How do you know that they'd have Origins again if they didn't go with a voiced protagonist? Have they ever said "we were going to have more Origins, but we thought having a voiced character would be cooler"? Origins were a part of Origins...it wasn't a promise that the entire series would always follow suit.

And look at it this way: the origins explain how you become a grey warden; this is true. But the entire game of DA2 explains how you become the Champion of Kirkwall. And you will still see the same "call to adventure" that the origins gave you. In DA2, it is the destruction of Lothering. So in a sense, there is an Origin, only they don't call it as such.

One final point...DA2's storyline is going to be much, MUCH deeper than DAO's. In DAO you could choose your race, yes, but everyone pretty much followed the same path. The game is about defeating the Blight. You could do things in a different order, or you could trade one ally for another (like Werewolves instead of Elves), but in any case, you visit these 4 locations, resolve their issues, then fight the Archdemon. It's all about The Mission. But in DA2, there is no all-important "Mission" taking precedence in every decision you make. You are just a person first trying to survive, then trying to make your mark on the world. That is much more freedom than in Origins, where you had no choice about becoming a Warden and no choice about your ultimate goal.

With the class building of Dragon age origins you are more free if you like to be a warrior but you don't want to be a muscolar one you can select dual weild and bow specialization.. Ok its not good if they wear a full plate but is always better than cut off those ability in the sequel and cut the roleplay customization of a character for a Gameplay thing!

I don't see how selecting dual-wield and bow means you are less muscular. And if you want those things, then why not be a rogue? I don't think it's as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Making classes more distinct is a good thing, though understandably it might upset some people. As great as Origins was, it's a legitimate complaint that rogues often just felt like weak warriors.

or for Cool Animations!.. So they added cool animation they added VO character and whell of dialogues.. How can this be better from DAO?.. I see only a lot of features cut off to have an easy sequel the only thing i like of DA2 is the new design..
Why don't keep dragon age a old style Rpg?. For release fast another sequel?.. At that point i prefear to whait more and have a true sequel that follows the DAO setting and with a much more improvements..

I don't understand. You just listed three huge features added, then you say you only see features cut off. The VO/wheel is going to be a matter of taste, but for some people it increases immersion. Obviously you can suspend your disbelief when you have to, but not having to is always going to be better, in my opinion. We could be playing a text-based game like Zork, but I for one like to see what's going on, even if it means I can't simply use my imagination and make the setting appear exactly like I want.

All I can say is have some faith. They have the same excellent team of writers from Origins (with one additional writer), so they're not suddenly going to transform into the team that made Mass Effect. Having a dialogue wheel does not mean that the paraphrases have to be bad, nor that the voice has to be Mark Meer, or whatever else. It's just a different way of presenting the same high quality of content we got in Origins.

[axa89]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I'm not asking you if you, the player, would preer that type of gameplay.  I'm asking if you, were you a character in the setting, would choose to face danger unnecessarily rather than spend the day relaxing by the fire.

Why unnecessarily?

Anyway, I suppose it would depend on the type of character, wouldn't it? A lot seem to like a life of adventures (at least, in games).