Good thread!
Personally, other than the gameplay, my concern is on the number of non-avoidable fightings that will be in the game.
One thing I didn't like in DAO was the excessive number of enemies in some parts of the game, as in the Deep Roads. In DA II I'd like less fightings, or at least the possibility to avoid a bigger part of the combats if I have the right abilities (persuasion for example, but sneaking too maybe)... after all, I love BioWare games for the dialogues with the NPCs and the companions, for the banters between them and for the stories and subplots. If the combat system is good even killing monsters and other enemies is fun, but I don't want just to kill things for hours and hours like the Deep Roads section of DAO.
What ONE thing has you worried about Dragon Age II?
Débuté par
Chris Priestly
, nov. 26 2010 04:32
-
Ce sujet est fermé
- Show only BioWare posts
Retour en haut
#427
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:10
tishyw
-
- Members
- 581 messages
I worry that the role playing elements of the game will be 'streamlined' out of existence, just as they where with ME2.
#428
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:23
The Gentle Ben
-
- Members
- 86 messages
Forgive the lengthy post. It's been said before, but my greatest concern is that whole styles of character and gameplay (Including my personal favorites) seem to have been effectively eliminated.
Part of what I find so compelling about RPGs is the combination of Story and Choice. While I have little doubt that DA2 will prove satisfactory in its narrative and in-game choices, I can't help some disappointment at the perceived lack of character options.
Sadly, the racial choice has already been eliminated (Removing the elf, whose perspective I have always found most interesting). I can understand this from a narrative/vocal perspective, and have no doubt I will ultimately find Hawke the Human sufficiently compelling, but after the breadth of Origins it still feels a rather jarring readjustment.
In addition, the apparent new class delineations seem to have precluded historically (at least from a fantasy perspective) viable class and play styles. As an example: Since the days of BG1, the lightly armored, fast-moving, high damage warrior (usually dual-weapon) has been my class/build of choice -- warrior to either Kensai or Weaponmaster. At first blush it seems that this has been eliminated. The 2-hander and sword/shield warriors do not personally appeal to me very much, either in terms of gameplay or aesthetics. Perhaps the rogue can now be configured to approximate the effect, but daggers are not the weapons I would choose, nor is a play-style based primarily on stealth/positioning/backstabbing what I am looking for. It is strange to me that my traditional (non-radical) play-style appears to no longer be supported.
To return briefly to Origins (which I greatly enjoyed despite what I personally perceived as some notable blemishes), one of my greatest disappointments was the character progression/advancement system. The assignation of attribute points seemed greatly overdone (which both made pre-game stats laughable and offered little level-by-level perceivable impact), while I found the skills/talents largely unexciting/underdeveloped. There was little about a level advancement that felt transformative. The talent/skill advancement was painfully linear, and the specializations in particular were a feature I found underwhelming.
Typically in Bioware games (and in my opinion, preferably), specializations have been used to refine classes, rather that broaden them (as was the case in Origins). In Origins (with the possible exception of the arcane warrior), the specializations felt like tacked on abilities and did little to fundamentally alter the dynamic of gameplay. Part of what I viewed as the rationale for three base classes, was the ability to further differentiate into sub-classes down the line. It's my hope that in DA2 the base classes and specializations will accommodate/facilitate more clearly divergent playstyles as opposed to merely adding the off-hand ability to the base-class approach.
My apologies for the length of the post, but I wished to express the fullness of my thought. Let me add my thanks for the opportunity to express our concerns – the forum is appreciated (pun perhaps intended).
Part of what I find so compelling about RPGs is the combination of Story and Choice. While I have little doubt that DA2 will prove satisfactory in its narrative and in-game choices, I can't help some disappointment at the perceived lack of character options.
Sadly, the racial choice has already been eliminated (Removing the elf, whose perspective I have always found most interesting). I can understand this from a narrative/vocal perspective, and have no doubt I will ultimately find Hawke the Human sufficiently compelling, but after the breadth of Origins it still feels a rather jarring readjustment.
In addition, the apparent new class delineations seem to have precluded historically (at least from a fantasy perspective) viable class and play styles. As an example: Since the days of BG1, the lightly armored, fast-moving, high damage warrior (usually dual-weapon) has been my class/build of choice -- warrior to either Kensai or Weaponmaster. At first blush it seems that this has been eliminated. The 2-hander and sword/shield warriors do not personally appeal to me very much, either in terms of gameplay or aesthetics. Perhaps the rogue can now be configured to approximate the effect, but daggers are not the weapons I would choose, nor is a play-style based primarily on stealth/positioning/backstabbing what I am looking for. It is strange to me that my traditional (non-radical) play-style appears to no longer be supported.
To return briefly to Origins (which I greatly enjoyed despite what I personally perceived as some notable blemishes), one of my greatest disappointments was the character progression/advancement system. The assignation of attribute points seemed greatly overdone (which both made pre-game stats laughable and offered little level-by-level perceivable impact), while I found the skills/talents largely unexciting/underdeveloped. There was little about a level advancement that felt transformative. The talent/skill advancement was painfully linear, and the specializations in particular were a feature I found underwhelming.
Typically in Bioware games (and in my opinion, preferably), specializations have been used to refine classes, rather that broaden them (as was the case in Origins). In Origins (with the possible exception of the arcane warrior), the specializations felt like tacked on abilities and did little to fundamentally alter the dynamic of gameplay. Part of what I viewed as the rationale for three base classes, was the ability to further differentiate into sub-classes down the line. It's my hope that in DA2 the base classes and specializations will accommodate/facilitate more clearly divergent playstyles as opposed to merely adding the off-hand ability to the base-class approach.
My apologies for the length of the post, but I wished to express the fullness of my thought. Let me add my thanks for the opportunity to express our concerns – the forum is appreciated (pun perhaps intended).
#429
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:24
Mihura
-
- Members
- 1 484 messages
I bet that someone wrote the same but my biggest concern is the content directly relate to the companions, and when I mean content, I mean deep, customization, dialog... etc
I really do not want Dragon Age 2 to be the same as Mass Effect 2 in that aspect, although I know that Mass Effect games are more center on Shepard and her/his epic mission this is not the case with Dragon Age, the story is more about the group and the interaction with everyone, if DA:O did not had that in his story, the game world would had been pretty boring and cliche.
One of the biggest mistake to me in ME 2 is that the game was trying to had a meh main story and a meh character interaction, I always felt that the Normandy was empty and I never got that attached to any companion since I could not even be a friend to them, just a lover.
People complain about Chambers but she and Joker were the only things that felt a little like Dragon Age, where you could really see that there was interaction between your companions. Things like Alistair's gossip, Morrigan's question about your lover or even the dog reaction to the various companions in camp, perfect examples of the things that should be in DA 2 and by the way the hate between Jack and Miranda&Legion and Tali was really poor character development to me.
The best way to compare the two, is to take the side quest of Alistair and compare it to Miranda's side quest. If you play your cards right that moment can change Alistair forever and he just talks to his sister. With Miranda, she can kill her best friend and not talk with her sister but that does not change her character and her choices after that mission, in conclusion I really hope we have a deep and rewarding experience with the characters and not something in the middle.
I really do not want Dragon Age 2 to be the same as Mass Effect 2 in that aspect, although I know that Mass Effect games are more center on Shepard and her/his epic mission this is not the case with Dragon Age, the story is more about the group and the interaction with everyone, if DA:O did not had that in his story, the game world would had been pretty boring and cliche.
One of the biggest mistake to me in ME 2 is that the game was trying to had a meh main story and a meh character interaction, I always felt that the Normandy was empty and I never got that attached to any companion since I could not even be a friend to them, just a lover.
People complain about Chambers but she and Joker were the only things that felt a little like Dragon Age, where you could really see that there was interaction between your companions. Things like Alistair's gossip, Morrigan's question about your lover or even the dog reaction to the various companions in camp, perfect examples of the things that should be in DA 2 and by the way the hate between Jack and Miranda&Legion and Tali was really poor character development to me.
The best way to compare the two, is to take the side quest of Alistair and compare it to Miranda's side quest. If you play your cards right that moment can change Alistair forever and he just talks to his sister. With Miranda, she can kill her best friend and not talk with her sister but that does not change her character and her choices after that mission, in conclusion I really hope we have a deep and rewarding experience with the characters and not something in the middle.
Modifié par Mihura, 28 novembre 2010 - 11:26 .
#430
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:38
BlazePT
-
- Members
- 240 messages
Mihura wrote...
I bet that someone wrote the same but my biggest concern is the content directly relate to the companions, and when I mean content, I mean deep, customization, dialog... etc
I really do not want Dragon Age 2 to be the same as Mass Effect 2 in that aspect, although I know that Mass Effect games are more center on Shepard and her/his epic mission this is not the case with Dragon Age, the story is more about the group and the interaction with everyone, if DA:O did not had that in his story, the game world would had been pretty boring and cliche.
One of the biggest mistake to me in ME 2 is that the game was trying to had a meh main story and a meh character interaction, I always felt that the Normandy was empty and I never got that attached to any companion since I could not even be a friend to them, just a lover.
People complain about Chambers but she and Joker were the only things that felt a little like Dragon Age, where you could really see that there was interaction between your companions. Things like Alistair's gossip, Morrigan's question about your lover or even the dog reaction to the various companions in camp, perfect examples of the things that should be in DA 2 and by the way the hate between Jack and Miranda&Legion and Tali was really poor character development to me.
The best way to compare the two, is to take the side quest of Alistair and compare it to Miranda's side quest. If you play your cards right that moment can change Alistair forever and he just talks to his sister. With Miranda, she can kill her best friend and not talk with her sister but that does not change her character and her choices after that mission, in conclusion I really hope we have a deep and rewarding experience with the characters and not something in the middle.
Mihura, dear. You just won an internet!
#431
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:54
Brockololly
-
- Members
- 9 029 messages
I feel compelled to echo some other concerns people have mentioned, all of which sort of fall under the auspices of the seeming ME2ification of Dragon Age and a subsequent decrease in Player Agency:
Game Length:
Origins was a long game. That was a good thing. For me, ME2 was a much shorter game than Origins. It was still good, but I wonder how 10 years of game time can fit into a ME2 length game without feeling as if something will be missing or the pacing may go about too fast- kind of like Awakening. The great thing about Origins was that it seemed like reading a long book that let you get immersed in the world as opposed to breezing through watching some summer blockbuster (ME2). Then with Awakening, in part due to its length, certain things felt rushed and characters felt shallow.
Its about finishing a game and being satisfied with the experience. Awakening left me scratching my head wondering "thats it?" WIth ME2, it was great, but after finishing it, I was like..."oh, thats all there is?" Origins was a tremendous value in terms of content for an RPG and its disappointing that for whatever reason, in a sequel no less, DA2 will be a shorter game. It matters what the content is surely, but still, usually you expect sequels to have more content not less than their predecessors. But this ties into other concerns.
Time Jumps/ Framed Narrative and Agency:
My concern is that due in part to the framed narrative, the game will feel like its on rails and very linear and compartmentalized as a result. That, like SirOccam and Saibh mentioned, it will feel like the story is being rushed along and any interactions with companions and events will feel forced and rushed along. That by simply experiencing 10 years of Hawke's life, the time jumps will lessen player agency as too much changes in the jumps or Hawke does things or other characters do things in between periods that won't feel to the player like they make much sense. And that simply "skipping" to the best, most epic moments in Hawke's life undercuts any emotional context or sense of agency the player has as it all feels like some on rails, linear story. So instead of being able to slowly develop a relationship with another companion and get to know them gradually through lower impact dialogue, you'll talk with them a couple times and then the time jumps will be used to show character's development- and that will make the whole thing feel very disconnected and disjointed to the player. Especially in conjunction with...
Voiced Player Character/ Paraphrases/ Dialogue System/ Character interaction and Player Agency:
Having a voiced PC, for me at least, makes the PC feel more like some other NPC and not a character I'm fully in control of. It may make things more cinematic, but it does so at the expense of me feeling as invested in the story and characters since its more like just watching some movie and not playing an RPG.
With the paraphrase/emotion icon system, agency is taken away when I don't know what my PC is going to actually say or do- as others have said, "sigh" should not equal, "I should kill both of you idiots." Not knowing exactly what my PC is going to do or say further distances me from retaining any sense of agency. Like ejoslin said, having that voice in there with the wheel makes it seem like you're simply directing or suggesting something to the PC instead of actually being able to inhabit the PC.
This goes into interactions with other companions too. Like seagloom and errant_knight mentioned, how you interact with the companions and how much they talk has a big effect on feeling invested in the story. I thought Origins was fantastic and simple in being able to start a conversation when you simply clicked on a companion and that system held throughout the game. The problem with Awakening I felt was that it reduced player agency by having an inconsistent system where you clicked on inanimate objects to start some random conversation but sometimes you could still click on the companion. How is DA2's system going to work? Being able to talk to companions at any time gave player's a greater sense of agency- having conversation limited to certain zones or linked to inanimate objects makes it all feel much more gimicky and inconsistent.
And like seagloom said, in something like ME2, the companions run out of dialogue fast. Calibrations, anyone? Again, I just worry that combined with the framed narrative, while the conversations may be spaced out more or limited to reduce someone from burning through all of them at once like you could in Origins, that by limiting them to being initiated by the NPC or limiting them to certain dialogue zones or not when you're out adventuring, it makes the companions, no matter how good their dialogue may be, feel like nothing more than AI bots- something I felt Origins avoided.
And especially in romances, I feel like the voiced PC just makes things very weird and off putting- the vague paraphrases plus lack of agency in how the PC speaks = Jacob Taylor sexual harrassment "romance.":sick:
Hot Rod Samurai:
As I recall, DA was supposed to be a more gritty, dark heroic fantasy world that took more cues from A Song of Ice and Fire than DragonBall Z. Exaggeration, sure, but the HOT ROD SAMURAI combat animations look absurd, especially in contrast to what the setting is supposed to be all about. The new combat looks exceedingly "floaty" and lacks any sense of gravity or heft or "ooomph" Which combined with trails and such on the sword swings, makes it look like a bad action game, not a gritty, dark heroic fantasy. Add in the more stylized look and it just doesn't seem much like Dragon Age anymore to me, at least visually.
To me, it looks like some 300/God of War/ Devil May Cry action game wannabe. Even if the RPG systems are buried underneath, the coat of Marilyn Manson new poo is seemingly coated on so thick that it doesn't "look" much at all like the world I so enjoyed in Origins. Its lacking obvious visual continuity and combined with all the other changes makes DA2 seem to me like one big reboot and not a sequel.
Oh, and the characters with the new face morph system all seem to have buggy eyes, zombie like vacant expressions and huge jaws/chins. Kind of Uncanny valley.
HagSpawn wrote...
OK bottom line I am worried it has turned into a medieval fantasy version of ME2. We now have a voiced protagonist, static clothing and a dialog wheel so I'm worried what else will be applied from that franchise. I know there is just as many for it as against but I would love to see the games differ and not get streamlined with just different names and theme.
Nighteye2 wrote...
Player agency. I'm worried that features like the paraphrased dialogue wheel create too much virtual distance between the player and the PC.
What will be done to increase player agency in DA2, to bridge the gap that separates the player from the PC?
Game Length:
Origins was a long game. That was a good thing. For me, ME2 was a much shorter game than Origins. It was still good, but I wonder how 10 years of game time can fit into a ME2 length game without feeling as if something will be missing or the pacing may go about too fast- kind of like Awakening. The great thing about Origins was that it seemed like reading a long book that let you get immersed in the world as opposed to breezing through watching some summer blockbuster (ME2). Then with Awakening, in part due to its length, certain things felt rushed and characters felt shallow.
Its about finishing a game and being satisfied with the experience. Awakening left me scratching my head wondering "thats it?" WIth ME2, it was great, but after finishing it, I was like..."oh, thats all there is?" Origins was a tremendous value in terms of content for an RPG and its disappointing that for whatever reason, in a sequel no less, DA2 will be a shorter game. It matters what the content is surely, but still, usually you expect sequels to have more content not less than their predecessors. But this ties into other concerns.
Time Jumps/ Framed Narrative and Agency:
SirOccam wrote...
At the end of Dragon Age: Origins, it really felt like my character had been with his companions for a year or more, and I loved that. Both the friendships and the romances felt real. For DA2, I hear things like "skipping over boring parts to get right to the action" (paraphrased of course) and although I realize that some type of time jumps are going to be necessary (otherwise covering 10 years would be all but impossible), I worry that companions and the world, really, will change so much during these time jumps that I won't feel like I know them that well.
Saibh wrote...
I'm worried that the story will move very fast in between time jumps. Normally a game between Origins and
Awakening length wouldn't be a problem--I've invested in plenty of games that short. But I'm worried a game that skips over an entire decade will seem rushed or stilted in an effort to fit everything in.
Having just played Fable III, the beginning of that game was incredibly rushed. There was no time to get your bearings. I was supposed to feel like I was the Princess of the land, and that I hated my brother, but it all happened so fast I wasn't sure what was going on or why I was supposed to care which is positively detrimental to how I, personally, play RPGs. It didn't start arranging right to me until I made my first promise, but then it was too late for me to really care about the world or why I was supposed to be leading a rebellion.
I'm afraid the game will feel too much like "go here, do this" and not slow down, or that the relationships between party members will feel phony because there's only a little bit of time to get to know them over the course of
ten years. So while they might be attached to me because we've known each other for a decade, all I can think about is the forced conversations we've been having geared to make me attached to them.
Atakuma wrote...
I'm worried that the framed narrative would make the game feel episodic, and give it an awkward pace like ME2.
My concern is that due in part to the framed narrative, the game will feel like its on rails and very linear and compartmentalized as a result. That, like SirOccam and Saibh mentioned, it will feel like the story is being rushed along and any interactions with companions and events will feel forced and rushed along. That by simply experiencing 10 years of Hawke's life, the time jumps will lessen player agency as too much changes in the jumps or Hawke does things or other characters do things in between periods that won't feel to the player like they make much sense. And that simply "skipping" to the best, most epic moments in Hawke's life undercuts any emotional context or sense of agency the player has as it all feels like some on rails, linear story. So instead of being able to slowly develop a relationship with another companion and get to know them gradually through lower impact dialogue, you'll talk with them a couple times and then the time jumps will be used to show character's development- and that will make the whole thing feel very disconnected and disjointed to the player. Especially in conjunction with...
Voiced Player Character/ Paraphrases/ Dialogue System/ Character interaction and Player Agency:
Seagloom wrote...
My greatest fear is that DA2 will be lean on character interaction given its shorter length and voiced protagonist. The "Mass Effect" games had few unique dialogues which led to much of the cast coming across as underdeveloped. Will party members have as much breadth and depth as in Origins, or is DA2 closer to the "Mass Effect" series or "Awakening"?
Lucy_Glitter wrote...
Lack of silent protagonist. I think it was one thing that really defined DA mechanics wise, and I find it very difficult to get into a character when they will say things that i won't want them to say... I like a certain amount of control over a character that I can apparently give full customisation to.
ejoslin wrote...
My major concern is the change from a first person narrative to a third person via a voiced protagonist and dialog wheel. I'm really worried that I will not feel as much a part of the world, and that I will feel like i'm watching Hawke instead of actually being Hawke.
errant_knight wrote...
I think that one of the primary reasons that I felt as close to the companions as I did in DA:O was that I could interact with them whenever I wanted.
The thing is, I find it incredibly alienating not to be able to talk to companions when we're out doing stuff, or if a moment has just occured that in roleplay would make me want to talk to a particular companion. Especially when they tell me to go work, not chat. It feels like the bird. I think that's why I never felt very close to the companions in Awakening or in the DLC.
Having a voiced PC, for me at least, makes the PC feel more like some other NPC and not a character I'm fully in control of. It may make things more cinematic, but it does so at the expense of me feeling as invested in the story and characters since its more like just watching some movie and not playing an RPG.
With the paraphrase/emotion icon system, agency is taken away when I don't know what my PC is going to actually say or do- as others have said, "sigh" should not equal, "I should kill both of you idiots." Not knowing exactly what my PC is going to do or say further distances me from retaining any sense of agency. Like ejoslin said, having that voice in there with the wheel makes it seem like you're simply directing or suggesting something to the PC instead of actually being able to inhabit the PC.
This goes into interactions with other companions too. Like seagloom and errant_knight mentioned, how you interact with the companions and how much they talk has a big effect on feeling invested in the story. I thought Origins was fantastic and simple in being able to start a conversation when you simply clicked on a companion and that system held throughout the game. The problem with Awakening I felt was that it reduced player agency by having an inconsistent system where you clicked on inanimate objects to start some random conversation but sometimes you could still click on the companion. How is DA2's system going to work? Being able to talk to companions at any time gave player's a greater sense of agency- having conversation limited to certain zones or linked to inanimate objects makes it all feel much more gimicky and inconsistent.
And like seagloom said, in something like ME2, the companions run out of dialogue fast. Calibrations, anyone? Again, I just worry that combined with the framed narrative, while the conversations may be spaced out more or limited to reduce someone from burning through all of them at once like you could in Origins, that by limiting them to being initiated by the NPC or limiting them to certain dialogue zones or not when you're out adventuring, it makes the companions, no matter how good their dialogue may be, feel like nothing more than AI bots- something I felt Origins avoided.
And especially in romances, I feel like the voiced PC just makes things very weird and off putting- the vague paraphrases plus lack of agency in how the PC speaks = Jacob Taylor sexual harrassment "romance.":sick:
Hot Rod Samurai:
RyuAzai wrote...
The only thing I am worried about, to be completely honest, is where the line is between 'super fantasy' and 'fantasy'. For the setting.
What I mean is, Dragon Age is obviously a fantasy setting. There is magic, swords, trolls, people with inhumane strength, etc etc. But for the most it was kept, in a way, realistic. You couldn't run up walls, disappear, or be a ninja. So to speak.
As I recall, DA was supposed to be a more gritty, dark heroic fantasy world that took more cues from A Song of Ice and Fire than DragonBall Z. Exaggeration, sure, but the HOT ROD SAMURAI combat animations look absurd, especially in contrast to what the setting is supposed to be all about. The new combat looks exceedingly "floaty" and lacks any sense of gravity or heft or "ooomph" Which combined with trails and such on the sword swings, makes it look like a bad action game, not a gritty, dark heroic fantasy. Add in the more stylized look and it just doesn't seem much like Dragon Age anymore to me, at least visually.
To me, it looks like some 300/God of War/ Devil May Cry action game wannabe. Even if the RPG systems are buried underneath, the coat of Marilyn Manson new poo is seemingly coated on so thick that it doesn't "look" much at all like the world I so enjoyed in Origins. Its lacking obvious visual continuity and combined with all the other changes makes DA2 seem to me like one big reboot and not a sequel.
Oh, and the characters with the new face morph system all seem to have buggy eyes, zombie like vacant expressions and huge jaws/chins. Kind of Uncanny valley.
Modifié par Brockololly, 28 novembre 2010 - 11:58 .
#432
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:55
Mihura
-
- Members
- 1 484 messages
BlazePT wrote...
Mihura wrote...
I bet that someone wrote the same but my biggest concern is the content directly relate to the companions, and when I mean content, I mean deep, customization, dialog... etc
I really do not want Dragon Age 2 to be the same as Mass Effect 2 in that aspect, although I know that Mass Effect games are more center on Shepard and her/his epic mission this is not the case with Dragon Age, the story is more about the group and the interaction with everyone, if DA:O did not had that in his story, the game world would had been pretty boring and cliche.
One of the biggest mistake to me in ME 2 is that the game was trying to had a meh main story and a meh character interaction, I always felt that the Normandy was empty and I never got that attached to any companion since I could not even be a friend to them, just a lover.
People complain about Chambers but she and Joker were the only things that felt a little like Dragon Age, where you could really see that there was interaction between your companions. Things like Alistair's gossip, Morrigan's question about your lover or even the dog reaction to the various companions in camp, perfect examples of the things that should be in DA 2 and by the way the hate between Jack and Miranda&Legion and Tali was really poor character development to me.
The best way to compare the two, is to take the side quest of Alistair and compare it to Miranda's side quest. If you play your cards right that moment can change Alistair forever and he just talks to his sister. With Miranda, she can kill her best friend and not talk with her sister but that does not change her character and her choices after that mission, in conclusion I really hope we have a deep and rewarding experience with the characters and not something in the middle.
Mihura, dear. You just won an internet!
Thanks :happy: I do not write that many things on English because of my bad spelling skills but this had to be here since is kinda of the general felling I am starting to get from DA 2.
Modifié par Mihura, 28 novembre 2010 - 11:55 .
#433
Posté 28 novembre 2010 - 11:58
BlazePT
-
- Members
- 240 messages
Hell, I even felt in on ME2, not enough party banter.
Disregard, your English is fine.
Disregard, your English is fine.
#434
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:16
So Sweeet
-
- Members
- 6 messages
I'm personally worried about the fact that's it going to be on consoles as well, I don't want it to be another console port like most games are nowadays.
#435
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:17
untoldsarcasm
-
- Members
- 115 messages
My main concern is that the priority given to straight white males in the marketing of the Dragon Age series will extend to DAII itself.
Modifié par untoldsarcasm, 29 novembre 2010 - 12:19 .
#436
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:19
Alodar
-
- Members
- 674 messages
MB957 wrote...
My concern deals with the combat part of DA2. In DAO, I was able to "pause" the game in combat, and select my targets and decide which talent/spell I wanted to use. I like this slowed down pace option, because it gives me time to think and figure out my play.
My brother in law was playing ME and he mentioned that you couldn't "pause" for combat. You just had to "run and gun". I don't play the run and gun style because it makes me dizzy!
I saw an interview with a bioware rep, and he mentioned that in DA2, we could choose which combat style we wanted. Does that mean that I can choose between a "pause" style like in DAO and a "run and gun" style as in other games?
If I can't pause the game during combat as in DAO, I won't be able to physically play the game, which will be a bummer because I dearly enjoy playing DAO.
I can quell this fear right now.
- First off your friend was wrong, you can pause in the PC version of Mass Effect 1 and 2. You can pause, rotate the camera, queue up actions. All that good stuff.
- It has already been stated that the pause functionality was in Dragon Age 2.
Alodar
#437
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:21
Mihura
-
- Members
- 1 484 messages
BlazePT wrote...
Hell, I even felt in on ME2, not enough party banter.
Disregard, your English is fine.
Agree, I even remember that in my first playthrough all the dialogs with Miranda and Jacob were over and I was only in the middle of the game. This is the other thing that I am really afraid, since we have now a voice PC, which is kinda cool but the cuts in the content are not worth to me.
Modifié par Mihura, 29 novembre 2010 - 12:24 .
#438
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:28
Hamarabi2006
-
- Members
- 78 messages
- "Press a button and something awesome happens."
Consider the many movies past released where the non-stop "over-the-top" action and special effects overwhelmed the story, subtracting from the overall quality of the film. Didn't the great "Peter Jackson" warn of this mistake in an interview?
Modifié par Hamarabi2006, 29 novembre 2010 - 12:48 .
#439
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:33
TomBmbadil
-
- Members
- 135 messages
yesPeridian wrote...
Music. I've found that with numerous games the music can make or break the feel of it. What I'm worried about is that the music will be half-assed or (much, much worse) that it would be so unnoticable that you don't even realize it is/isn't there.
#441
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:54
Warden 2
-
- Members
- 1 messages
I apologize in advance for the multiple concerns. I saw other people list more than one so I figured that it was okay.
My biggest concern is the characters. Origins had by far the best cast of characters that I had ever seen in an RPG. I really hope that DA2 can live up to that. However, based only on the characters that have been revealed so far I don’t think that it is. So far there is no appealing lead human female love interest like Morrigan and no cool human male sidekick like Alistair. Hopefully BioWare is saving the best character reveals for last.
My second concern is that it seems like basically all the action is going to take place in and around the city of Kirkwall. For me exploration is an essential part of an RPG. I want to be able to explore a big area like in Origins and see many different environments, towns and cities. I really hope that we will be able to visit other city-states in the Free Marches besides just Kirkwall.
Finally, I just wanted to say that I absolutely love the changes made to the battle system for the consoles and really hope that BioWare has no second thoughts about any of them. If I understand correctly we thankfully don’t have to use auto-attack in DA2. This is great news. I want to be able to manually control every swipe of the sword that my character makes instead of merely sitting back and watching my guy take care of business himself. Besides, the consoles cry out for this sort of combat. There is no way to conveniently pause the game, zoom out and micromanage everything that each of your characters do on the consoles like with the PC. Instead you really have to take direct control of just one character and leave the rest of your party alone most of the time. So it makes sense to give you complete control over his attacks instead of having you just give orders and watch.
My biggest concern is the characters. Origins had by far the best cast of characters that I had ever seen in an RPG. I really hope that DA2 can live up to that. However, based only on the characters that have been revealed so far I don’t think that it is. So far there is no appealing lead human female love interest like Morrigan and no cool human male sidekick like Alistair. Hopefully BioWare is saving the best character reveals for last.
My second concern is that it seems like basically all the action is going to take place in and around the city of Kirkwall. For me exploration is an essential part of an RPG. I want to be able to explore a big area like in Origins and see many different environments, towns and cities. I really hope that we will be able to visit other city-states in the Free Marches besides just Kirkwall.
Finally, I just wanted to say that I absolutely love the changes made to the battle system for the consoles and really hope that BioWare has no second thoughts about any of them. If I understand correctly we thankfully don’t have to use auto-attack in DA2. This is great news. I want to be able to manually control every swipe of the sword that my character makes instead of merely sitting back and watching my guy take care of business himself. Besides, the consoles cry out for this sort of combat. There is no way to conveniently pause the game, zoom out and micromanage everything that each of your characters do on the consoles like with the PC. Instead you really have to take direct control of just one character and leave the rest of your party alone most of the time. So it makes sense to give you complete control over his attacks instead of having you just give orders and watch.
Modifié par Warden 2, 29 novembre 2010 - 01:00 .
#442
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 12:59
RogueWarrior626
-
- Members
- 95 messages
DAO is my all time favorite game for many reasons.To me its epic as a rpg.What BW did with DAO was amazing you so became part of the game with its interactions.Also its replayablities.I'm still playing it since its launch.My fear is that it will loose that.If You top yourselves Over DAO I'll Be Happy.
#443
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:16
claralyn
-
- Members
- 1 messages
I don't know if I want to play DA2 given that you are telling us Hawke rises to be the most important figure in Thedas. I feel like it totally negates my efforts in DA:O. I mean, my Warden single-handedly stopped a Blight before it really begun AND married herself into the royal family at the same time. How can Hawke EVER best that?! I am also disappointed that nothing in DA:O is canon and it sees that none of my decisions made during the game will be of much significance in DA2.
#444
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:32
Tsuga C
-
- Members
- 439 messages
As long as your primary writers for DA:O (Gaider, Chee, Kirby) are on the job for this one, the story and companions won't be a problem. Gameplay and other issues of "feel", however, are a very different story. I'm a grognard and everything I've seen thus far indicates that you're altering the feel of the original game in formulaic fashion to appeal to a significantly different market segment.
No compromises should be made on the PC version for the sake of ease of portability to the consoles or to appeal to the junior high school demographic. None. Adding insipid finishing moves was a bad idea in DA:O and having the protagonist bounce around like a raquetball in DA2 is flat-out asinine. I like my pseudo-medieval fantasy heavy on the medieval and light on the fantasy and what I've seen thus far has inspired nothing but eye-rolling contempt from myself and many others who seek a traditional cRPG.
It is simply not possible to create a game that appeals equally to the ME/shooter/action crowd and traditional DA:O cRPG players without producing a hopeless muddle that satisfies neither fanbase, so stop trying. You've taken enough flak on the forums and you damn well know it's not going over well, so knock off the greasy reassurances better suited for a used car lot and give us a proper cRPG.
No compromises should be made on the PC version for the sake of ease of portability to the consoles or to appeal to the junior high school demographic. None. Adding insipid finishing moves was a bad idea in DA:O and having the protagonist bounce around like a raquetball in DA2 is flat-out asinine. I like my pseudo-medieval fantasy heavy on the medieval and light on the fantasy and what I've seen thus far has inspired nothing but eye-rolling contempt from myself and many others who seek a traditional cRPG.
It is simply not possible to create a game that appeals equally to the ME/shooter/action crowd and traditional DA:O cRPG players without producing a hopeless muddle that satisfies neither fanbase, so stop trying. You've taken enough flak on the forums and you damn well know it's not going over well, so knock off the greasy reassurances better suited for a used car lot and give us a proper cRPG.
Modifié par Tsuga C, 29 novembre 2010 - 02:11 .
#445
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:33
Ayanna Nyx
-
- Members
- 249 messages
Apart from the obvious being the length and quality of the story, I can't deny that the detail of the graphics worries me from the screenshots I've seen. Looks aren't everything, I know, but with Mass Effect, it went from great to fantastic. Not only is the story and gameplay spot on but its just beautiful to look at. Having played DA before ME, I realized how primitive the visuals were for DA in comparison. So I was hoping for a true upgrade from that, but I've not seen that as of yet and honestly I'm not expecting it in order to avoid disappointment. With ME 2, we had 2 disks which of course was a big help with the level of detail that can be put into the game, but I'm thinking that won't be the case with DA2. Other than that (and what others have already mentioned) it would have to be as I said before, length of the game, and the time given to develop your character without feeling rushed into continuing the main story.
#446
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:33
xyzmkrysvr
-
- Members
- 813 messages
My main concern is the lack of a same-sex LI for gay and lesbian gamers.
Please just give me a bisexual male character to romance...! I don't even care if he looks like The Harvester - I'd just like the option, thanks!
(I was really disappointed with ME2 cause I heard rumors that Thane and Jack would be romanceable by both genders)
Please just give me a bisexual male character to romance...! I don't even care if he looks like The Harvester - I'd just like the option, thanks!
(I was really disappointed with ME2 cause I heard rumors that Thane and Jack would be romanceable by both genders)
#447
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:36
Ceridwen
-
- Members
- 408 messages
TomBmbadil wrote...
yesPeridian wrote...
Music. I've found that with numerous games the music can make or break the feel of it. What I'm worried about is that the music will be half-assed or (much, much worse) that it would be so unnoticable that you don't even realize it is/isn't there.
Yesss. I couldn't hear the ambient music in DA:O very well. Maybe that's just a problem with my stereo system; however, I would enjoy a more extensive track of songs that played in all areas of the game - I felt so alone in Lothering, or the Denerim Market even, without music.
Modifié par kwintessa, 29 novembre 2010 - 01:37 .
#448
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 01:51
Rhadagast60
-
- Members
- 5 messages
You want us to share just one concern, but I have so many. But from the information we have been given so far, most of my worst fears for the game have been confirmed. Every new announcement, every new bit of info we get about the game is another nail in the coffin.
Okay, one concern:
That Dragon Age 2 isn't following the simplified design model of ME2. But It's becoming more and more obvious that it is.
Maybe another developer will come along that will make games like Bioware used to make. But then, they'll probably be bought by EA too. And I guess I'm just not EA's or Bioware's target audience anymore.
Okay, one concern:
That Dragon Age 2 isn't following the simplified design model of ME2. But It's becoming more and more obvious that it is.
Maybe another developer will come along that will make games like Bioware used to make. But then, they'll probably be bought by EA too. And I guess I'm just not EA's or Bioware's target audience anymore.
#449
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 02:18
adembroski11
-
- Members
- 189 messages
I am worried I'm going to have the same depressing, empty feeling I had after my first several hours of playing that I had for Mass Effect 2. The feeling that the very satisfying RPG I played had been replaced by a far less engaging action game. I enjoyed ME2, but it did not have the depth of ME1.
#450
Posté 29 novembre 2010 - 02:28
Havokk7
-
- Members
- 228 messages
My top issue is control of party members.
I want a lot of control over them both manually and programmatically (like DA had, but more tactics please). I don't want uncontrolled party members (like ME and ME2 had).
I think you should produce some videos showing off the "tactical party combat" side of the game.
TIA
B
I want a lot of control over them both manually and programmatically (like DA had, but more tactics please). I don't want uncontrolled party members (like ME and ME2 had).
I think you should produce some videos showing off the "tactical party combat" side of the game.
TIA
B
