8659 réponses à ce sujet

[thesnake777]

Played the ps3 Demo......I want my game now......

[Josielyn]

I played the PC version, and the combat really is great this time around. Even on Low graphics, it was visually marvelous. However, sometimes when you would click a character's portrait in the level up screen, it would take you back to the gameplay screen instead of to their level up page- I ended up having to left-click on their portrait during gameplay and then hit escape, then level up. It was interesting how when you picked new skills for your party members, the system logically chooses what the best tactics would be based on the new skills. I don't know if that was demo-specific or going to be that way in the real game, but I really liked that! It is a nice timesaver. There were some glitches with changing the Tactics setup during level up- the buttons would not select the target or action you were trying to fill in, and would fill in something else, (i.e. Ally Health <50%-- Attack) so I finally gave up trying to set up custom tactics, had to hit "don't confirm" and go back, but it corrected itself when I went back into it. I felt very sorry for all the guys who wanted Aveline as a love interest- she looks both beautiful and powerful! And it was refreshing to see the role reversal where she was more the protector rather than her big Templar husband. The scene of her putting her husband Wesley out of his misery was very poignant. I am much more interested in her character now as a result. I played as both a Rogue and a Mage, and the Mage was harder, especially since I was playing as more of a healer mage and wasn't expecting Bethany to get the axe! Played it as a damage dealing mage the 2nd time and made it through much easier.

[Tommy6860]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

[Reaverwind]

mione wrote...

Has anyone else come across the glitch where Hawke and Co stop fighting and just stand there not engaging in combat with the darkspawn even when they are being attacked?

I have to switch to each person and start combat with them before they engage >.<

Oh yes, several times. I quit trying to do anything with them. It was especially annoying during the ogre battle - my mage had to solo that thing - which drove home how dreadfully boring playing a DA2 mage is.

Modifié par Reaverwind, 28 février 2011 - 02:04 .

[SonRyu]

Guess I'm still a little iffy on the whole thing after witch hunt, but overall pretty interesting. Combat much smoother, but wondering if you have to control allies as well, if so the auto attack option being gone is gonna be a problem. Things I didn't like are little nit picky things, but things that kind of hit me to the core.....

was it neccessary to change EVERYTHING about the original characters, not even the darkspawn resemble themselves from DA:O, I can understand some of the characters looking a little different over 10 years, but Flemeth comes out looking like 'Flemeth the crazy goth granny milf' supposedly no more than a week after the Warden leaves the Wilds. Just bugs me a bit why every character had to be redesigned. That, and reading is terrible on older TV's, went blind trying to read a codex. Other than that, consider me interested.

[Deebe]

DJBare wrote...

Or Cassandra pushing a blade through half the pages of a book including it's cover, I thought that was quite impressive

Yes, I rather liked that scene..

-Cassandra kindnaps varric for interrogation
-Orders her minions to wait outside
-Cassandra then smacks varrric and gives him a nice little dagger
-Then she turns her back on him..

Modifié par Deebe, 28 février 2011 - 02:05 .

[Lightwolf alpha]

Looking forward to Dragon Age 2,I enjoyed the demo and I cannot wait for march the 8th to get here! Like Kotor,Jade Empire and Mass Effect, the Dragon Age series is definately one of my favorite franchises and Rpg's of all time! I just hope there are no system freezing glitches to my PS3 like I experienced with Dragon Age origins!

[Tommy6860]

Javanaut wrote...

[PC Player]

My initial review of the demo was more... techinical (for lack of a better term). Now that I've had the opportunity to play through a few times with the various classes I'd like to give my impressions of the game from an entertainment perspective.
Obviously this opinion is based soley on the demo and not the final product. However, I feel demo's are meant to showcase a product.

 {Enemy; Any; Activate Ability; Flame Shield}

TL;DR
I'm not opposed to Bioware taking Dragon Age in a different direction. My problem is that I don't feel like it was executed very well. I feel like I'm being 'teased' with two different genres, but satisfied by neither:

Combat

I enjoyed the tactical nature of combat from DAO, but I understand the decision to make the combat more action based. I enjoy that type of gaming from time to time. However, I feel like the execution of the idea fell short. While it's absolutely true that I can still play DA2 in a tactical way. There really is no incentive to when I can take out 6 darkspawn with 1 Whirlwind and dash several yards to a ranged enemy at the blink of an eye. You don't even need crowd control anymore. I would be completely fine with that and approach the combat with a different mindset. But there are a lot of games in the market already that are so much better at it. The first thought that popped into mind while engaged in combat for DA2 was, "I'd rather be playing Bayonetta. The mechanics are so much better." I don't feel like I really have to work or think to win battles in DA2. I feel like they are just handed to me dimishing the combat experience into nothing more than 'busy work' until I can trigger the next part of the story. DA2's combat leaves me feeling empty and superfluous.

Let me sum that up: Combat in the DA2 demo made me want to play another developer's game. Assuming that the purpose of a demo is to showcase your product, then this one does not succeed.

Combat Animations: 

Livening up the animations was a good idea, but I felt it is done too often. The flashier delivery loses it's value when it's done constantly. It's exciting at first, but after about 15 mins of playing the game it becomes distracting and... forgive me... silly. That delivery style works in games like God of War, Dante's Inferno, Darksiders, the aforementioned Bayonetta; but it doesn't work with DA2. The reason those flashy moves work in games I just listed is because you are only focused on controlling one character. When controlling a group of characters, all employing sassy flair in combat; it becomes very 'busy' almost to the point of sensory overload. After watching the mage wield his/her staff for a short time; I half expected the mage to jam their staff between thier legs like a phallus and thrust their hips hands-free to fire it while giving high-fives to other party members. Again - good idea, poorly executed. In my opinion it would have been more entertaining to increase the flash, but reserve it for abilities and finishing moves.

RPG and the Dialog Wheel

Streamlining the RPG elements worked in Mass Effect 2. Why? Because Shepard, as a character, was already established with a rich and personalized history in ME1. It doesn't work in DA2. It doesn't work, because Hawke is a new character. In order to get a real sense of role playing with a new hero there needs to be more shades of grey. I don't feel like my dialogue has any impact on the people and circumstances around me. I feel like no matter how I act as Hawke the result is the same.

Examples:

No matter what I say when discussing what to do with the rest of Hawke's family the response is exactly the same.
Mama Hawke: "Please. Listen to your brother."

No matter what I say when Carver dies, the result is the same.
Mama Hawke: "How could you let him charge off like that?! Your own little brother?!"

This makes the game an RPG on the surface only. It leaves Hawke feeling very two dimentional. There's very little depth to his persona. Good, bad, sarcastic.  Doesn't matter, because reactions to my behavior are static. 

Summary

The concept of merging these two genres was a great idea on paper. However, it's my opinion as a video game consumer that it needed more development. Most likely, I will still play this game. I don't feel like it's worth my money unfortunately. I will borrow a friend's copy, play it once, and forget about it. 

Good summary, and pretty much my thoughts as well.

[Killjoy Cutter]

mione wrote...

Has anyone else come across the glitch where Hawke and Co stop fighting and just stand there not engaging in combat with the darkspawn even when they are being attacked?

I have to switch to each person and start combat with them before they engage >.<

I've had that happen with one character in a couple of fights.  More common is that a character will finish off his/her current target, and then run back to where they were when the combat started, and just stand there until issued an order. 

[SonRyu]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Javanaut wrote...

[PC Player]

My initial review of the demo was more... techinical (for lack of a better term). Now that I've had the opportunity to play through a few times with the various classes I'd like to give my impressions of the game from an entertainment perspective.
Obviously this opinion is based soley on the demo and not the final product. However, I feel demo's are meant to showcase a product.

 {Enemy; Any; Activate Ability; Flame Shield}

TL;DR
I'm not opposed to Bioware taking Dragon Age in a different direction. My problem is that I don't feel like it was executed very well. I feel like I'm being 'teased' with two different genres, but satisfied by neither:

Combat

I enjoyed the tactical nature of combat from DAO, but I understand the decision to make the combat more action based. I enjoy that type of gaming from time to time. However, I feel like the execution of the idea fell short. While it's absolutely true that I can still play DA2 in a tactical way. There really is no incentive to when I can take out 6 darkspawn with 1 Whirlwind and dash several yards to a ranged enemy at the blink of an eye. You don't even need crowd control anymore. I would be completely fine with that and approach the combat with a different mindset. But there are a lot of games in the market already that are so much better at it. The first thought that popped into mind while engaged in combat for DA2 was, "I'd rather be playing Bayonetta. The mechanics are so much better." I don't feel like I really have to work or think to win battles in DA2. I feel like they are just handed to me dimishing the combat experience into nothing more than 'busy work' until I can trigger the next part of the story. DA2's combat leaves me feeling empty and superfluous.

Let me sum that up: Combat in the DA2 demo made me want to play another developer's game. Assuming that the purpose of a demo is to showcase your product, then this one does not succeed.

Combat Animations: 

Livening up the animations was a good idea, but I felt it is done too often. The flashier delivery loses it's value when it's done constantly. It's exciting at first, but after about 15 mins of playing the game it becomes distracting and... forgive me... silly. That delivery style works in games like God of War, Dante's Inferno, Darksiders, the aforementioned Bayonetta; but it doesn't work with DA2. The reason those flashy moves work in games I just listed is because you are only focused on controlling one character. When controlling a group of characters, all employing sassy flair in combat; it becomes very 'busy' almost to the point of sensory overload. After watching the mage wield his/her staff for a short time; I half expected the mage to jam their staff between thier legs like a phallus and thrust their hips hands-free to fire it while giving high-fives to other party members. Again - good idea, poorly executed. In my opinion it would have been more entertaining to increase the flash, but reserve it for abilities and finishing moves.

RPG and the Dialog Wheel

Streamlining the RPG elements worked in Mass Effect 2. Why? Because Shepard, as a character, was already established with a rich and personalized history in ME1. It doesn't work in DA2. It doesn't work, because Hawke is a new character. In order to get a real sense of role playing with a new hero there needs to be more shades of grey. I don't feel like my dialogue has any impact on the people and circumstances around me. I feel like no matter how I act as Hawke the result is the same.

Examples:

No matter what I say when discussing what to do with the rest of Hawke's family the response is exactly the same.
Mama Hawke: "Please. Listen to your brother."

No matter what I say when Carver dies, the result is the same.
Mama Hawke: "How could you let him charge off like that?! Your own little brother?!"

This makes the game an RPG on the surface only. It leaves Hawke feeling very two dimentional. There's very little depth to his persona. Good, bad, sarcastic.  Doesn't matter, because reactions to my behavior are static. 

Summary

The concept of merging these two genres was a great idea on paper. However, it's my opinion as a video game consumer that it needed more development. Most likely, I will still play this game. I don't feel like it's worth my money unfortunately. I will borrow a friend's copy, play it once, and forget about it. 

Good summary, and pretty much my thoughts as well.

Great points.  My very first thought when he actually had dialog is "who is this a**hole, and why is he talking?"

[TEWR]

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

no not necessarily. I won't be able to give a full answer to your statement and question, so maybe someone else can, but I'll wing it. Like I believe I said in that post somewhere, Baldur's Gate is one game series I have not played. Anyway, Dragon Age is only a spiritual successor, meaning some elements of Baldur's Gate may be seen in Dragon Age, but not all will. As such, some things will get changed or even vanish, but the idea of it being a spiritual successor stays the same and very much so some things will stay.

did that help a little?

[cherokeedragon00]

SonRyu wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Javanaut wrote...

[PC Player]

My initial review of the demo was more... techinical (for lack of a better term). Now that I've had the opportunity to play through a few times with the various classes I'd like to give my impressions of the game from an entertainment perspective.
Obviously this opinion is based soley on the demo and not the final product. However, I feel demo's are meant to showcase a product.

 {Enemy; Any; Activate Ability; Flame Shield}

TL;DR
I'm not opposed to Bioware taking Dragon Age in a different direction. My problem is that I don't feel like it was executed very well. I feel like I'm being 'teased' with two different genres, but satisfied by neither:

Combat

I enjoyed the tactical nature of combat from DAO, but I understand the decision to make the combat more action based. I enjoy that type of gaming from time to time. However, I feel like the execution of the idea fell short. While it's absolutely true that I can still play DA2 in a tactical way. There really is no incentive to when I can take out 6 darkspawn with 1 Whirlwind and dash several yards to a ranged enemy at the blink of an eye. You don't even need crowd control anymore. I would be completely fine with that and approach the combat with a different mindset. But there are a lot of games in the market already that are so much better at it. The first thought that popped into mind while engaged in combat for DA2 was, "I'd rather be playing Bayonetta. The mechanics are so much better." I don't feel like I really have to work or think to win battles in DA2. I feel like they are just handed to me dimishing the combat experience into nothing more than 'busy work' until I can trigger the next part of the story. DA2's combat leaves me feeling empty and superfluous.

Let me sum that up: Combat in the DA2 demo made me want to play another developer's game. Assuming that the purpose of a demo is to showcase your product, then this one does not succeed.

Combat Animations: 

Livening up the animations was a good idea, but I felt it is done too often. The flashier delivery loses it's value when it's done constantly. It's exciting at first, but after about 15 mins of playing the game it becomes distracting and... forgive me... silly. That delivery style works in games like God of War, Dante's Inferno, Darksiders, the aforementioned Bayonetta; but it doesn't work with DA2. The reason those flashy moves work in games I just listed is because you are only focused on controlling one character. When controlling a group of characters, all employing sassy flair in combat; it becomes very 'busy' almost to the point of sensory overload. After watching the mage wield his/her staff for a short time; I half expected the mage to jam their staff between thier legs like a phallus and thrust their hips hands-free to fire it while giving high-fives to other party members. Again - good idea, poorly executed. In my opinion it would have been more entertaining to increase the flash, but reserve it for abilities and finishing moves.

RPG and the Dialog Wheel

Streamlining the RPG elements worked in Mass Effect 2. Why? Because Shepard, as a character, was already established with a rich and personalized history in ME1. It doesn't work in DA2. It doesn't work, because Hawke is a new character. In order to get a real sense of role playing with a new hero there needs to be more shades of grey. I don't feel like my dialogue has any impact on the people and circumstances around me. I feel like no matter how I act as Hawke the result is the same.

Examples:

No matter what I say when discussing what to do with the rest of Hawke's family the response is exactly the same.
Mama Hawke: "Please. Listen to your brother."

No matter what I say when Carver dies, the result is the same.
Mama Hawke: "How could you let him charge off like that?! Your own little brother?!"

This makes the game an RPG on the surface only. It leaves Hawke feeling very two dimentional. There's very little depth to his persona. Good, bad, sarcastic.  Doesn't matter, because reactions to my behavior are static. 

Summary

The concept of merging these two genres was a great idea on paper. However, it's my opinion as a video game consumer that it needed more development. Most likely, I will still play this game. I don't feel like it's worth my money unfortunately. I will borrow a friend's copy, play it once, and forget about it. 

Good summary, and pretty much my thoughts as well.

Great points.  My very first thought when he actually had dialog is "who is this a**hole, and why is he talking?"

I have to agree as well...

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

The demo is the greatest thing of all time. Combat was excellent. People saying combat was way to easy and could kill things in one normal hit forget that this is the first 40 minutes meant to hold ur hand. and its normal. Also the wheel was awesome. Makes no sense to try and say that there are reduced options when we havent played enough into the game to be order to make any decisions. If anyone can point to decisions in the first 30 minutes of DAO where you made choices that had significant impact id like to hear it.

[Navasha]

Just completed another playthrough of the demo...
A couple other things since this is a feedback thread.
1) Combat just seems a bit too quick at times. Why bother pausing if just pressing a single button is going to wipe out a half dozen enemies completely? Other times its too slow.. Having the 4 characters standing around a boss enemy beating on them for a minute, while not suffering much if any damage in return just feels off. I think just slowing the combat animations down, but adding more damage per hit would make it feel less like a street fighter game and more of an rpg.
2) Combat also doesn't always quite feel like combat for an RPG. I mean.. I was able to simply run out of the way of the ogres attacks every time. At times, it felt very much like a MMO raid.
3) The lip-synching could be improved as well as some more emotional faces. Origins actually did this better. I never had the sense that I was just watching a 3d model in origins.
4) Some of the shadows appear painted on the textures there in the city. The street lights weren't actually casting shadows. Of course, this could entirely be my settings and not using dx11 and such.

All in all... I was going to buy the game either way. This was just my constructive criticism. Some of this might just be due to it being a demo version. Hopefully, it will still include the ability for the PC version to up the texture sizes and such. I pretty much trust PC gamer reviews for the most part and if they can give it such a high rating, then the final game on release will probably be enjoyable.

[jhnxsmth]

A+ The conversation wheel is not straight out of ME. I could basically see my lines, and I could skip.

C- I really can't imagine there being any builds with this encounter/combat-system. As far as I can tell, you don't need to think like a general, but fighting like you're playing Smash Bros Brawl wouldn't hurt.

F? Demo did not show the inventory system. You guys may have forgotten that inventory systems practically founded Blizzard (for one). What I've heard, though, is almost worse than not showing the inventory at all...

Overall: Shaping up to be Dragon Age: Combat Evolved. I'm neither surprised nor excited.

[Tommy6860]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

no not necessarily. I won't be able to give a full answer to your statement and question, so maybe someone else can, but I'll wing it. Like I believe I said in that post somewhere, Baldur's Gate is one game series I have not played. Anyway, Dragon Age is only a spiritual successor, meaning some elements of Baldur's Gate may be seen in Dragon Age, but not all will. As such, some things will get changed or even vanish, but the idea of it being a spiritual successor stays the same and very much so some things will stay.

did that help a little?

No, doesn't help at all, because now your delving into semantics a bit, but you made a definitive statement when telling others what their expectations should and should not be. If you want to make correlations or comparisons between Origins and BG, then that can be done. If you want to make comparisons between Origins and DA2, that cane be done, But what you specifically stated before simply doesn't follow; I expect to play somewhat the essence of what was Origins and that may very well happen, but the demo didn't give that feel nor the emotion. 

I can cite comparative elements between games series that have no relevance to each other in style or system, yet I can make a correlations if I so please.  Dragon Age was a different story and different style gameplay than BG and I played BG, despite the similarities in other elements. A proper analogy would be that Torchlight is like Diablo as is DA:O being like BG. Since we the age of the internet, people can make blog/forum posts, such as these, citing such comparisons endlessly. Having said that, it doesn't make the comparisons of a new franchise to a  completely older one, to one that is a continuation of another the same thing, and that is what you essentially alluded to when excluding one while including another.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 28 février 2011 - 02:47 .

[Biotic Budah]

I played through once more with a rogue archer. At least the archer can do some actual damage early on.

I still dislike the art design. You should have stuck with what you had and just improved the graphics of it.

[TEWR]

either you didn't understand what I was trying to say, or you did and I'm not really understanding what you're saying. Bah. I know not how Torchlight or Diablo works, as I've never played them either (sad yes. I guess I've missed a lot of good games). If you're saying my comparison of Dragon Age being a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate is erroneous, I assure you that is not the case, as it has been called such by official sources.

Yes you may play DA2 and get the same feel as Origins. time will tell.

Again though, I'm frigging lost in this discussion, so you'll have to forgive me. I'm running on only a couple hours of sleep, so I'm not able to think straight.

[88mphSlayer]

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

pretty much every major rpg sequel is evolving in big ways this year because the market demands it, i think what's really going on isn't that Bioware evolved DA2 - it's that people feel the new ideas are uninspired, i think that's what's really going on

[Biotic Budah]

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

no not necessarily. I won't be able to give a full answer to your statement and question, so maybe someone else can, but I'll wing it. Like I believe I said in that post somewhere, Baldur's Gate is one game series I have not played. Anyway, Dragon Age is only a spiritual successor, meaning some elements of Baldur's Gate may be seen in Dragon Age, but not all will. As such, some things will get changed or even vanish, but the idea of it being a spiritual successor stays the same and very much so some things will stay.

did that help a little?

No, doesn't help at all, because now your delving into semantics a bit, but you made a definitive statement when telling others what their expectations should and should not be. If you want to make correlations or comparisons between Origins and BG, then that can be done. If you want to make comparisons between Origins and DA2, that cane be done, But what you specifically stated before simply doesn't follow; I expect to play somewhat the essence of what was Origins and that may very well happen, but the demo didn't give that feel nor the emotion. 

I can cite comparative elements between games series that have no relevance to each other in style or system, yet I can make a correlations if I so please.  Dragon Age was a different story and different style gameplay than BG and I played BG, despite the similarities in other elements. A proper analogy would be that Torchlight is like Diablo as is DA:O being like BG. Since we the age of the internet, people can make blog/forum posts, such as these, citing such comparisons endlessly. Having said that, it doesn't make the comparisons of a new franchise to a  completely older one, to one that is a continuation of another the same thing, and that is what you essentially alluded to when excluding one while including another.

I think the best way to approach this game is to NOT look at it as a sequel. They've pretty much changed everything they possibly could in respect to DA:O. I think they threw in Anders just to sate the fans of the old games thirst for familiarity. If you play the game with that mind set then you will enjoy it more and then when tie-ins show up it will be like an easter egg for you. 

[Tanstar]

I've played through once as a warrior (sword and shield) and once as a rogue on the PS3. Tried playing through as a rogue on the PC, but my computer would randomly reboot during play through Luckily I pre-ordered the PS3 version. I always play a warrior, but the dual welding rogue has won me over! Action is fast and fun. Graphics look great. Preferred the dialog options in DA:O. I like to know what I'm saying Didn't like that I couldn't access the equipment screen All in all, lots of fun!

P.S.  Not happy that the hottest female character, by far, is my character's sister

Modifié par Tanstar, 28 février 2011 - 02:59 .

[Rolenka]

A 1 minute cooldown on the Heal spell seemed really restrictive. Like you'd better cast it right away even if you don't really need it just to get the cooldown started ticking down.

I don't know if the goal is to prevent us from just getting a mage and setting them up with healing tactics and just forgetting about healing or what, but the 1 minute thing changes it from a "save your butt" spell to a "use fewer potions" spell.

Kudos on making it heal a percentage of health, though.

[Blackened25]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

 Makes no sense to try and say that there are reduced options when we havent played enough into the game to be order to make any decisions. If anyone can point to decisions in the first 30 minutes of DAO where you made choices that had significant impact id like to hear it.

The answer to this would depend on wether you're interested in the roleplaying or not. There were no decisons made early in DA:O that shook the universe, but there were plenty that helped you shape what type of character you were playing. Examples are wether you took the bribe in the city elf origin, wether you killed the human hunters in the dalish origin, wether you helped jowan and lied about the staff in the mage origin. There are many other examples of these.

There could have been a couple signifigant roleplaying decisions made in the demo. For example, if you're playing a mage, leaving the templar there to suffer his fate could be seen as just deserts for all the mages templars have slain. Or perhaps a good character might leave him there thinking life as a hurlock is better than none at all. Those are small things maybe in the grand scheme of things, but they matter.

[Biotic Budah]

88mphSlayer wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'd like to say, I'm not getting into a debate. I may be right, I may be wrong, I may be both or I may be neither. Maybe you're one of those options. Frankly, whatever the case may be, I don't care. I just want to enjoy the demo and DA2, which for me is hard because I see comments that I feel the need to respond to. No matter how hard I try not to respond to them, I end up responding.

And, people have been saying DA2 is for the idiots. At the very least, they're saying it's for the ADD people out there, which is.... all I can say is that I want to dive through my computer and into their computer area and slap them for saying that. You look through the last 50 or so pages, you'll find some comments along that area.

EDIT: I'm not mad, maybe irritated, but that's what the Bioware Forums do to me.

yeah the name calling is really dumb of DAO purists when DAO itself has been mocked by fans of other franchises

regardless there are things that have changed, whether you like them or not seems to largely be how much formula change you can tolerate, i can totally understand where people come from if they were only interested in DAO because they wanted another Baldur's Gate, although i think even those people can acknowledge that DAO never really succeeded at being a true BG spiritual successor but still took whatever they could get...

now that DA2 is doing something different than being a BG spiritual successor, the line between enjoyment vs. disgust seems to be - when you played DAO did you enjoy it for its nostalgic properties? or did you enjoy it for what it did based on its own merits? i think if you enjoyed DAO for its own merits you can more easily stomach changes

If people want Baldur's Gate, go play Baldur's gate, but they shouldn't be mad that DA:O isn't another Baldur's Gate. Of course it isn't, it's Dragon Age. It's a whole different videogame series with it's OWN way of doing things.

That doesn't make sense, I certainly wouldn't want DA:O to to be a Balder's Gate either, then again, I expected Dragon Age 2 to be somewhat what Dragon Age: Origins was, your logic doesn't follow.

Using that logic, shouldn't Dragon Age 2 been called something else outside of having Dragon Age in the name?

pretty much every major rpg sequel is evolving in big ways this year because the market demands it, i think what's really going on isn't that Bioware evolved DA2 - it's that people feel the new ideas are uninspired, i think that's what's really going on

I agree to a point. Look at Mass Effect. They improved the graphics, and fixed what was wrong with the combat. They didn't change the basic art design, and they kept many of the key characters. Not just Shepard, which was a gimme, but Garrus, Tali, Liara. DA2 just brings about a ridiculous amount of change to  a game that was already good and had already won RPG of the year. This is like a total reboot.

The full game may well prove me wrong, but so far the art stinks. The darkspawn do not look threatening at all and look as if they raided the Gimps wardrobe from Pulp Function, the armour doesn't have the shine, or intricate engraving to it. It's like they went with the lowest bidder and he got lazy.  Oh, they are dazzling people with the blood letting, but have sold their souls to do so in this demo. I really, really hope the full game pulls it out with a compelling story.

Modifié par Biotic Budah, 28 février 2011 - 03:09 .