8659 réponses à ce sujet

[dilyla]

haplessweasel wrote...

Is anybody else having a problem with the camera freaking out for ~30 seconds after using backstab? It's driving me a little crazy and I'm wondering if it will be like that in the full game.

Yes!!!!  It drove me crazy.  Why does it do that?  It just kept on spinning....made me a little queasy...LOL.  Hope they fix this.

[sreaction]

I think you’re wrong. The fact that DAII was going to be very different from the
DAO is no big secret. Dig up all theinterviews/podcasts of Mike Laidlaw and
others. It has been made absolutely cleart hat the intention is to aim for a
broad market by slimming the game down, simplifying it and giving the combat the
feel of a console type action game.  This is common knowledge and there is
a host of written and oral evidence to back this up on this website and others. You
are free to investigate this.

Lack of connection. I'd like to introduce you to TheNameless One, the
Vault Dweller and the Bhaalspawn just to name a few - oh andthe Grey Warden.
These people aren't tabula rasa in any game they have a pointand story and that
is what you show up to play. Picking hair color and race aremeaningless
aestheitc choices you might as well rail on the lack of purple hairand eye
liner for men."

Bullcrap,
giving the player choices to customize enhances his or her connection with the
game. Of course there is going to be a base point which your character
starts  a sort of skeletal reference, but in a real RPG’s it’sup to you to
fill in the details.

Your PC is the intermediary to the game world and obviously of vital
importance. Limiting customization diminishes your connection to that world. It
is a subtle but vital function in RPG's.

I had no connection to the voiced nameless character in Gothic III, none whatsoever
to Geralt of Rivia, Hawke may be similar in that regard.

However,
to be fair I am pretty sure you can customize Hawke. Also Hawke is his last
name not his first so in this regard it is similar to the warden character.

Also, in the PC version at least, I am pretty sure characters didn’t regenerate
health until after the battle was over. If there was health regeneration it was
not noticeable to me. I know certain enhanced items have health regenerative
perks, armor, weapons etc. but that’s different

I still don’t
like the demo and I still think they've taken a backwards step. You haven’t
suggested anything to convince me otherwise.

Modifié par sreaction, 08 mars 2011 - 08:49 .

[Palathas]

I liked the flow of combat, I liked the art direction change (although what's with all the big jaws/chins? ), was a bit disappointed that you couldn't do anything in the inventory but hey, it's the demo. I like the new structure of the skill trees, a lot of upgrades and specialisations actually make sense.

Most of all I like that if you have more than one melee companion on the same target you don't keep getting pushed out of the way like you do in DA:O.

Overall I really liked it and am looking forward to it's release in a few days.

Modifié par Palathas, 07 mars 2011 - 06:39 .

[Kastagir]

I also agree that DA2 looks like a huge step backwards in all the ways DA:O stood out among its competition at the time (and since).  All of the wonderful features are either gone or never fully implemented due to bugs or a complete lack of support.  What we're left with is another ME2/KOTOR style approach that will appeal to plenty of people, but effectively abandons a large group of core fans of DA:O.  Why would any developer choose to alienate the fans of one of their games with the production of a sequel?  The production of a sequel is best realized through a refinement and expansion of an idea that worked, while removing what didn't.  It seems that a completely new direction is the choice Bioware has made in lieu of tackling the hard problem of product support and quality assurance.  This is what has always baffled me about Bioware.  I didn't like KOTOR or ME, yet I loved DA:O.  The variety of their approaches to the game experience gave the genre some hope, but it now appears they have chosen a quick and easy path to appeal to a completely new set of expectations and a very low learning curve in order to make the game easily accessible, appealing and light.  There is now not a single game in the Bioware lineup that interests me.

Regarding the skill tree, I think it is far too ambitious.  Despite the fact that half of the talents in DA:O were not implemented properly, each one provided a significant effect and resulted in a tactical edge in combat.  In DA2, there are many times as many talents.  It is not conceivable that each and every one, even if they are all implemented and working according to their descriptions, will provide a noticeable effect in combat in any tactical sense.  If the sheer numbers of talents isn't an indication of this, the rapid-fire refresh of the abilities evident in the demo certainly is.  In other words, there are too  many talents, so individually they will be less important or impactful to the game experience.  And I have zero confidence that they will all be working when the game ships because that's just the kind of developer Bioware has proven itself to be.

I'm welcome to my opinion, as is everyone else.  It's clear that plenty of people love the changes and will likely purchase the game.  I personally think their enjoyment will be short-lived, but for some that will be enough.

[Tennessee88]

I have played through the demo about 8 times now and I hate to say I hate it.... no other way around it. I am happy for those of you who like it... anyways on to my reasoning. I am going to focus on the immersion/environment because its the one place where I feel Bioware has been slipping lately. I didn't like the combat compared to DA:O, but thats my preference. I thought the voice acting was fine, can't judge the characters yet, and want to see more of the plot.

I am playing on PC - 1080p resolution - GTX 260 w/ Q9450 @ 3.4 GHz & 4 GB DRR2 1000
Settings were maxed out.

Everything started out fine, I thought the game looked ok but I knew I wasn't in for something special when it came to graphics. However when the demo actually began I was disappointed. I don't know why but I feel like Bioware is actually getting worse and worse at crafting environments. Yes, many of the textures were somewhat better but everything else seemed regressive...

There was absolutely nothing that caught my eye in the blight lands. The ruins, logs, ground, sky. etc felt randomly placed, hardly thought out, and quite frankly neglected. The hurlocks spawning in plain view was frankly lazy and really heaped onto this weak sense of immersion/environment. The fact that many of them share a very limited set of animations which much of the time were done in unison (them charging at you) was a major turn off. At first I thought much of the choices (excluding animations and spawning) were choices made to create emotions. Then I saw Kirkwall... Nothing felt like it was made with pride. I guess if I had to give an example it would be a high school play. The actors can be great, the costumes realistic, etc... but at the end of the day they are still on a stage in the gym with plywood castles and cardboard trees.

I don't understand why it has become acceptable for the same NPC's to stand at the exact same place looping the exact same lines of dialogue. Or why cities feel so lifeless, not only from lack of NPC's but from the fact that everything feels stamped out. Don't tell me Bioware has never been good at this, Baldur's Gate and Athkalta were awe inspiring and lovingly built. About 90% of the environments in Dragon Age were pitiful... but compared to what I have seen in the Demo they look cutting edge. Heck I thought Mass Effect 2 was in many ways a step backwards when it came to hub environments.

I love Bioware but its gotten to the point where I am just tired of watching immersion take a back seat. Between the combat and the weak environments I am going to have to pass on this game. I know they can do better on this and they really have no excuse not to. For those of you who will come at me with money concerns/performance issues. I understand that time and resources cut into revenue and really cannot argue against financial decisions. However, Bioware isn't exactly a studio without success and a decent stream of income. As for the performance issues... All I can say is that there are plenty of games (many of which are several years old) which manage to create a great sense of immersion.

Finally let me say again, that for those of you who love it, I wish you all the best. Honestly if I enjoyed the combat I would overlook my other complaints just to enjoy another Bioware story which I am sure will be fantastic. But I barely made it through the demo without wanting to do something else. Good luck to everyone and have fun.

[Graunt]

Kastagir wrote...

I also agree that DA2 looks like a huge step backwards in all the ways DA:O stood out among its competition at the time (and since).

Competition?  When the lake is already bone-dry, anything looks better next to nothing.  Origins was good in many areas, but it was completely lacking in many as well.  When you're dying of dehydration, you don't care if the water has dirt in it.

[FlintlockJazz]

Graunt wrote...

Kajukenbo wrote...
An action game is an action game, a RPG is a RPG.

Tell that to the LARPERS. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

Several varieties of RPG also exist in electronic media, including multi-player text-based MUDs and their graphics-based successors, massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs). Role-playing games also include single-player offline role-playing video games
in which players control a character or team who undertake quests, and
whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics. These games
often share settings and rules with pen-and-paper RPGs, but emphasize
character advancement more than collaborative storytelling.

I am a LARPer, I have played systems from full-contact LARP such as Maelstrom to zero-contact LRP such as the Mind's Eye Theatre of White Wolf's system, and I can tell you that you are completely wrong.  Wikipedia =/= Facts.  Don't bring in things you know nothing about.

[Graunt]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

Graunt wrote...

Kajukenbo wrote...
An action game is an action game, a RPG is a RPG.

Tell that to the LARPERS. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

Several varieties of RPG also exist in electronic media, including multi-player text-based MUDs and their graphics-based successors, massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs). Role-playing games also include single-player offline role-playing video games
in which players control a character or team who undertake quests, and
whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics. These games
often share settings and rules with pen-and-paper RPGs, but emphasize
character advancement more than collaborative storytelling.

I am a LARPer, I have played systems from full-contact LARP such as Maelstrom to zero-contact LRP such as the Mind's Eye Theatre of White Wolf's system, and I can tell you that you are completely wrong.  Wikipedia =/= Facts.  Don't bring in things you know nothing about.

The fact that I even mentioned LARPING doesn't change anything about what an RPG is or is not. I'd also be interested in what your definition of LARPING really is -- since I didn't say anything about it requiring contact, and neither did the wiki definition (which you somehow overlooked).  To me LARPING is nothing more than "playing a part" aka acting, and it shouldn't matter what the scenario is.  The fact that you can "LARP" different ways means exactly what in regards to "role-playing"?  Nothing, because if it did, you wouldn't be LARPING.  Oh hey, let me generalize like the poster I posted that for anyway: "Only contact LARPING is true LARPING and stage acting is stage acting".

You really must have missed this too:

A LARP is played more like improvisational theatre.[19] Participants act out their characters' actions instead of describing them, and the real environment is used to represent the imaginary setting of the game world.[3] Players are often costumed as their characters and use appropriate props, and the venue may be decorated to resemble the fictional setting.[20][21]

Some live action role-playing games use rock-paper-scissors or comparison of attributes to resolve conflicts symbolically, while other LARPs use physical combat with simulated arms such as airsoft guns or foam weapons.[22] LARPs vary in size from a handful of players to several thousand, and in duration from a couple of hours to several days.[23][24] Because the number of players in a LARP is usually larger than in a tabletop role-playing game, and the players may be interacting in separate physical spaces, there is typically less of an emphasis on tightly maintaining a narrative or directly entertaining the players, and game sessions are often managed in a more distributed manner.

Emphasized key words just so you don't miss them and rage over nothing again.

Modifié par Graunt, 07 mars 2011 - 09:59 .

[Archer zr0]

People still beefing about that old build from the demo jeez. The demo is also out of context not the very beginning of the game, for those people who have no connection. Its like people coordinated to find dumb crap to complain about.

Modifié par Archer zr0, 07 mars 2011 - 09:52 .

[FlintlockJazz]

Graunt wrote...


The fact that I even
mentioned LARPING doesn't change anything about what an RPG is or is
not. I'd also be interested in what your definition of LARPING really is
-- since I didn't say anything about it requiring contact, and neither did the wiki definition (which you somehow overlooked).  To me LARPING is nothing more than "playing a part" aka acting, and it shouldn't matter what the scenario is.  The fact that you can "LARP" different ways means exactly what in regards to "role-playing"?  Nothing, because if it did, you wouldn't be LARPING.

You really must have missed this too:

Emphasised key words just so you don't miss them and rage over nothing again.

Obviously you missed the part where I said that I did zero-contact too.  Again, quoting from sources does not do you any good, and explaining it to you wouldn't help, you would need to play it for yourself to understand it, plus this isn't a thread about LARP, suffice to say stop bringing in things you have no experience with, it does your argument no good.

By denying the complaints people have about DA2 you are actually doing it a disservice: I can quite happily see that there will be plenty of people who will love the changes made to DA2 but if they were to believe you they would be put off from trying it, thinking it's no different to DAO, whereas those who would not like the changes end up trying it thinking it's the same and then raging on the boards here when they find out it's not.

Oh, and I wasn't raging, I just find it annoying when someone who knows absolutely nothing about my favorite pastime tries to bring it into an argument where it doesn't even apply and spread falsehoods about it.  Please, for everyone's sakes, just stick to what you know.

[Graunt]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Obviously you missed the part where I said that I did zero-contact too.

No I didn't, which is why I specifically said I never stated it required contact.  Do you really have that much of a comprehension issue, or are you simply skimming and quick replying?  I also don't have to have LARPED to know something about it, and I doubt you're the last word on it either despite your proclaimed experience.  The fact that you're even disputing my actual point (which isn't even about LARPING at all) makes no sense either because you're essentially contradicting yourself.

Modifié par Graunt, 07 mars 2011 - 10:08 .

[FlintlockJazz]

Graunt wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Obviously you missed the part where I said that I did zero-contact too.

No I didn't, which is why I specifically said I never stated it required contact.  Do you really have that much of a comprehension issue, or are you simply skimming and quick replying?  I also don't have to have LARPED to know something about it, and I doubt you're the last word on it either despite your proclaimed experience.  The fact that you're even disputing my actual point (which isn't even about LARPING at all) makes no sense either because you're essentially contradicting yourself.

I never said that I was the last word on it, but I do know more about it than you do, who has only read Wiki sources on it and yet still thinks it gives you the knowledge to speak about the matter.  As to you specifically stating that it required contact, I think you're the one with the comprehension issue, as I was merely showing the range of the experience I've had with LARP and you then took it to mean that I was making some issue out of it. 

I also like how you have, consistently, taken tiny parts of other people's posts and ignored the rest, constructed strawman arguments and put words in other people's mouths.  You, sir, are the greatest threat to DA2 on these forums.

[yawerabbas]

Played the demo on my xbox 360 and i loved it this game will be awesome.

[Tommy6860]

Tennessee88 wrote...

I have played through the demo about 8 times now and I hate to say I hate it.... no other way around it. I am happy for those of you who like it... anyways on to my reasoning. I am going to focus on the immersion/environment because its the one place where I feel Bioware has been slipping lately. I didn't like the combat compared to DA:O, but thats my preference. I thought the voice acting was fine, can't judge the characters yet, and want to see more of the plot.

I am playing on PC - 1080p resolution - GTX 260 w/ Q9450 @ 3.4 GHz & 4 GB DRR2 1000
Settings were maxed out.

Everything started out fine, I thought the game looked ok but I knew I wasn't in for something special when it came to graphics. However when the demo actually began I was disappointed. I don't know why but I feel like Bioware is actually getting worse and worse at crafting environments. Yes, many of the textures were somewhat better but everything else seemed regressive...

There was absolutely nothing that caught my eye in the blight lands. The ruins, logs, ground, sky. etc felt randomly placed, hardly thought out, and quite frankly neglected. The hurlocks spawning in plain view was frankly lazy and really heaped onto this weak sense of immersion/environment. The fact that many of them share a very limited set of animations which much of the time were done in unison (them charging at you) was a major turn off. At first I thought much of the choices (excluding animations and spawning) were choices made to create emotions. Then I saw Kirkwall... Nothing felt like it was made with pride. I guess if I had to give an example it would be a high school play. The actors can be great, the costumes realistic, etc... but at the end of the day they are still on a stage in the gym with plywood castles and cardboard trees.

I don't understand why it has become acceptable for the same NPC's to stand at the exact same place looping the exact same lines of dialogue. Or why cities feel so lifeless, not only from lack of NPC's but from the fact that everything feels stamped out. Don't tell me Bioware has never been good at this, Baldur's Gate and Athkalta were awe inspiring and lovingly built. About 90% of the environments in Dragon Age were pitiful... but compared to what I have seen in the Demo they look cutting edge. Heck I thought Mass Effect 2 was in many ways a step backwards when it came to hub environments.

I love Bioware but its gotten to the point where I am just tired of watching immersion take a back seat. Between the combat and the weak environments I am going to have to pass on this game. I know they can do better on this and they really have no excuse not to. For those of you who will come at me with money concerns/performance issues. I understand that time and resources cut into revenue and really cannot argue against financial decisions. However, Bioware isn't exactly a studio without success and a decent stream of income. As for the performance issues... All I can say is that there are plenty of games (many of which are several years old) which manage to create a great sense of immersion.

Finally let me say again, that for those of you who love it, I wish you all the best. Honestly if I enjoyed the combat I would overlook my other complaints just to enjoy another Bioware story which I am sure will be fantastic. But I barely made it through the demo without wanting to do something else. Good luck to everyone and have fun.

I love Bioware too, but in all fairness, they have some say in the direction they want the games to go. EA owns Bioware, and my fears of Bioware's acquistion by EA a few years back, are beginning to rear its ugly head..

[Graunt]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
You, sir, are the greatest threat to DA2 on these forums.

That's certainly some fine LARPING; am I watching a dramedy, mockumentary or action adventure?  It's so hard to tell.

[leewells]

After about 8 playthoughs with diffrent classes I can contribute the following:

1) The textures and models (humans mainly) were not even anything to note -- very disappointed.

2) The demo crashed a LOT without the ability to save I realize this was more frustrating than the game itself would be with the save feature.

3) Music, Art, and Voice acting was impressive.

4) The combat moves and animations had some improvements over DA2 without the killing blows -- that I'll miss.

5) The combat system itself seemed very scaled back from what was in DAO with being able to queue up abilities.

As a side-note the healing cool-down is very under-powering; if you can drink a potion to instantly get 50% of your HP back and near-instantly re-click a mage should be able to do the same at the cost of mana.

Overall I was not very impressed -- As I really did hope to be. I just do not feel the time was spent ensuring that the game(demo) was compatible and used the latest rendering technologies.  I do, however believe that tremendous time and effort was put into story writing and voice acting -- I do wish however more time was taken in attention to detail in the game like was done in ME2 (with the eyes -- this made a huge impression on a lot of folks).

Modifié par leewells, 07 mars 2011 - 12:21 .

[FedericoV]

FWIW, as a person who played the original Wizardy series, Bard's Tale, etc. back in the '80's and considering that original Baldur's Gate 1 did not come out until 1998, I think I am qualified to say that DA2 does not appear to be an "old-school RPG".  I have said previously that the demo for DA2 did not feel like a RPG to me.

I am qualified as yours in terms of gaming background. DA2 is not an old school RPG. I do agree. But the genre has changed and evolved a lot over time. Even BG I was criticized by Ultima/Golden Box fans because of its gameplay. Many players argued that it was not an RPG because of its "diabloesque" gameplay. So, I respect your personal opinion and tastes. But DA2 is an RPG. A different kind, a different breed, but still an RPG.

Furthermore, the trend to call an "action" game that includes power-ups and skill trees a RPG does make me believe that people who lament the end of the C-RPG genre are not too far off.

Many features of RPGs are now used in many different genres becuase of their popularity. That only show that labels and genres are mostly non-sensical if taken litterally. Personally,   I'm only interested about those genre classification: good, mediocre and bad games .

No, the old games did not have the same speed or graphics of the new ones.
To make up for that the story and gameplay had to be top notch.

Sorry, but that's bull****. Most of the classic games have silly or non-sensical stories. RPGs began to give some attention to story with the Fallout/IE generation. Story and storytelling are way better in contemporary games.

Often, the technology has taken the place of the story nowadays.

No. The importance of story and interaction with the narrative have increased over time. Simply put, devs have cut the "boring stuff". Some depth have been lost in the process, but mostly I do agree with the desire of contemporary games to mix accessibility and depth.

It is like the people who thought Avatar was the greatest movie ever, basically because of the visuals.
Those people must not have ever seen "Ferngully: The Last Rainforest" or even "Pocahantas".
* I still do not understand why Cameron has not been sued by someone.  Oh well.

Ahhhh, the nostalgic and never ending allure of the good old days...

DA:O was one of the few pleasant exceptions to the trend.
Good story with some tough choices, good gameplay (a few annoyances but nothing like the DA2 demo) and decent graphics.
DA2's demo seems to pander to the fast-twitch FPS crowd - "Look, the gameplay is fast and a lot like xyz, but you keep your upgrades!"

The game look and plays faster. But that has nothing to do with DA2 being an RPG or not. Even BG I was faster than Ultima V or The Eye of the Beholder. Btw, imho the combat system is way better this time around and the changes go in the right direction. Was it for me, I would have done even something more extreme and actiony (I believe that a game that is not turn based and where action are not in sync, being in real time or not, does not work well with pause and play).

That is fine, Bioware can do whatever they want to sell product, but it is not a RPG just because I must make a few dialog choices.
An action game is an action game, a RPG is a RPG.

Well, it's time for you to estabilish what is an RPG and what is not. I want an objective definition where everyone can agree. Good luck!

[Tennessee88]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Tennessee88 wrote...

I have played through the demo about 8 times now and I hate to say I hate it.... no other way around it. I am happy for those of you who like it... anyways on to my reasoning. I am going to focus on the immersion/environment because its the one place where I feel Bioware has been slipping lately. I didn't like the combat compared to DA:O, but thats my preference. I thought the voice acting was fine, can't judge the characters yet, and want to see more of the plot.

I am playing on PC - 1080p resolution - GTX 260 w/ Q9450 @ 3.4 GHz & 4 GB DRR2 1000
Settings were maxed out.

Everything started out fine, I thought the game looked ok but I knew I wasn't in for something special when it came to graphics. However when the demo actually began I was disappointed. I don't know why but I feel like Bioware is actually getting worse and worse at crafting environments. Yes, many of the textures were somewhat better but everything else seemed regressive...

There was absolutely nothing that caught my eye in the blight lands. The ruins, logs, ground, sky. etc felt randomly placed, hardly thought out, and quite frankly neglected. The hurlocks spawning in plain view was frankly lazy and really heaped onto this weak sense of immersion/environment. The fact that many of them share a very limited set of animations which much of the time were done in unison (them charging at you) was a major turn off. At first I thought much of the choices (excluding animations and spawning) were choices made to create emotions. Then I saw Kirkwall... Nothing felt like it was made with pride. I guess if I had to give an example it would be a high school play. The actors can be great, the costumes realistic, etc... but at the end of the day they are still on a stage in the gym with plywood castles and cardboard trees.

I don't understand why it has become acceptable for the same NPC's to stand at the exact same place looping the exact same lines of dialogue. Or why cities feel so lifeless, not only from lack of NPC's but from the fact that everything feels stamped out. Don't tell me Bioware has never been good at this, Baldur's Gate and Athkalta were awe inspiring and lovingly built. About 90% of the environments in Dragon Age were pitiful... but compared to what I have seen in the Demo they look cutting edge. Heck I thought Mass Effect 2 was in many ways a step backwards when it came to hub environments.

I love Bioware but its gotten to the point where I am just tired of watching immersion take a back seat. Between the combat and the weak environments I am going to have to pass on this game. I know they can do better on this and they really have no excuse not to. For those of you who will come at me with money concerns/performance issues. I understand that time and resources cut into revenue and really cannot argue against financial decisions. However, Bioware isn't exactly a studio without success and a decent stream of income. As for the performance issues... All I can say is that there are plenty of games (many of which are several years old) which manage to create a great sense of immersion.

Finally let me say again, that for those of you who love it, I wish you all the best. Honestly if I enjoyed the combat I would overlook my other complaints just to enjoy another Bioware story which I am sure will be fantastic. But I barely made it through the demo without wanting to do something else. Good luck to everyone and have fun.

I love Bioware too, but in all fairness, they have some say in the direction they want the games to go. EA owns Bioware, and my fears of Bioware's acquistion by EA a few years back, are beginning to rear its ugly head..

I agree completely that they have full say over their creation and think in most cases they do a good job. The combat was just so goofy and the art style so strange that I simply think the game does not fit my tastes.

However the issue with their recent track record on environments does have me worried about EA's hands. But EA is following market trends which give the most bang for the buck in a highly competitive market... Ultimately the blame lies with consumers, until this larger audience demands more (which I doubt it will anytime soon), streamlining and efficiency are the name of the game. 

[FedericoV]

Tennessee88 wrote...

However the issue with their recent track record on environments does have me worried about EA's hands. But EA is following market trends which give the most bang for the buck in a highly competitive market... Ultimately the blame lies with consumers, until this larger audience demands more (which I doubt it will anytime soon), streamlining and efficiency are the name of the game. 

Help me understand. You don't like the environments. Ok, I respect your view. I'm not too much on the graphic side so for me it's not a problem but still I respect your concern. Having said that, most players agree that ME2 has some wonderfull environments in terms of graphics. So let me understand what EA has to do with DA2 evinronments.

[bill4747bill]

Finally got tho play the demo on my rapidly failing pc. I will have to wait to get DA2 until my new PC arrives in a month to enjoy it properly.

But, here is my opinion of the Demo.
 
I am a dragon age fanboy. I prefer rpg's to shooters. I often struggle with learning curves in games.

Ok, I played a bow rogue on normal difficulty and no one died even once. It felt reasonably diffcult but I did not actually get anyone killed.

Strategy wise, I really only had my rogue target other ranged enemies. The AI companions kicked ass with no micromanagement required.

Ogre was no problem; no kiting or fancy strategy required. 

Game ran perfectly on my crap PC.

Combat pace was fast, or feels that way at first. I am sure after an hour or two I will get used to it.

Art and animations were good, and this was not even the best graphic settings due to being a semi locked demo.

Story was good. Reminded me of DA1. I vastly prefer the voiced protagonist.

The 'drama' in the demo was similar to the 'drama' in the human noble origion of DA1; I like that stuff a lot.


Not much to complain about, really. Locked inventory? Demo

I had to save Talent points to be able to buy what I wanted; irritating but not game breaking.

So my conmplaint is that you should be able to buy whatever Talents you want from level 1.  It was annoying to not have a ranged talent option to buy. I did not want 'sabotage' at all.



So huge thumbs up from me, for what that is worth.


Almost forgot...Isabella's cleavage was very eye catching. Must make those thirty foot leaps into battle interesting. 

Modifié par bill4747bill, 07 mars 2011 - 02:03 .

[Archmage Silvery]

Ok, to join the rest of you, here's my demo rant: I'll list the pros and cons first, and then I'll try to say something about each one without resorting to the use of expletives to make my point.

PROS:
+ Improved World Graphics
+ Improved Spell Animations
+ Improved Combat Animations

The world graphics are pretty good, and they are certainly an improvement over Origins, although we don't get to see that much of them in the demo. There is plenty of material to go around in videos though. I played the demo with 4xAA and 16xAF - I enabled AF from the .ini file & GeForce's profile settings. This change was also reflected in the demo options. If I had a high-end DX11 machine, I'm sure it'd look even better.

The spell and combat animations are much more fluid than they were in Origins, and although the combat AI stutters are still there to some extent, I see this as an improved part of the game. Some of the melee special attack animations are still too jRPGy (it's a word!) for my tastes though.

CONS:
- Clunky UI
- Dialogue Wheel
- Partly Subpar Voice Acting
- Changed Darkspawn Visuals
- Poor Attack DMG/Enemy HP Balance
- Artificial/Plastic Looking Character Faces
- Robotic/Mechanic Character Face Animations

The user interface is really clunky in my opinion, much more so than it was in Origins. Frankly, it gets old really fast - and it's straining to look at for longer periods of time. I don't like it at all. I could say much the same for some of the voice acting, only that it strains my ears instead of my eyes. The larger part of it is acceptable though, but I wish they had paid more attention to the way the lines are delivered.

The dialogue wheel is a real letdown, it doesn't result in Hawke saying the things you'd expect to hear most of the time. It's a Mass Effect thing, and that's where I'd leave it. Traditional dialogue paths - I want them back, this new age crap isn't working. What is the world coming to?

The darkspawn visual appearance changes are something I was against ever since I first saw the now infamous screenshot. It's just something BioWare absolutely shouldn't have changed. That's all I'm going to say about it.

The way they've changed the combat is just appalling. You now have to whack everyone for 20-30 times, elites probably 100-300 times depending on their class/race (cue ogre roar). And that's only on normal. Yeah, I don't even want to think about Nightmare. And it's not like you can't beat the enemies - playing as a mage is particularly easy, beating enemies just takes too long, and it becomes very boring very quickly. BioWare didn't get the character attack damage and enemy health points ratio anywhere near correct.

The character faces now look somewhere between artificial something and plastic. There's absolutely no immersion factor here, and I don't seem to be able to show any emotion towards any of the characters, other than that they annoy me. I feel detached. This fact isn't helped by the mechanical, unnatural animations used for the character faces. See Cassandra's raised eyebrows animation if you don't believe me. It's very easy to spot there. It's an immersion killer, and downright near a gamestopping "bug" if you ask me.

CONCLUSION:
Despite its graphical enhancements, I'm pretty disappointed in BioWare's latest offering, and I'm glad that I got the Signature Edition pre-ordered for very little money. I would have cancelled my pre-order if it had been a 60 euro Collector's Edition. Yeah, that's right - I don't like this development at all. That said, Mass Effect 3 will be a good game. For a shooter.

At least the demo didn't bug out on unlocking Hayder's Razor. That's got to be a positive, right? Right? Crud.

Modifié par Archmage Silvery, 07 mars 2011 - 02:11 .

[Lissome Kid]

I only hope that the demo, we've been presented with, is just a COMBAT-demo. Made to demonstrate new combat mechanics. Then it's OK for me, as animation looks definitely better than in DAO. Graphic is pretty the same with DX9 (hope it's much better with DX11).
BUT Line-based levels, short, non-informing dialogs, obvious choices, no customization for protagonist or crew - this is not THE MIGHTY OLD-SCHOOL RPG, that I love so much.
So if this demo just an illustration for new graphics and animations - it's OK, BUT THIS DEMO is NOT an RPG-DEMO.
PS. And it was TOO easy... Difficulty level needs a tweak. It was almost a run-through for me, using mostly just one talent for each class, using NO salves - no need of tactics at all (presuming that tactics IS the main point of PARTY-COMBAT).

[bill4747bill]

Wow. hard to believe we were playing the same demo,

I only had to shoot a darkspawn about 5 times to kill it, Same as dragon age 1, but much faster pace. Not sure why your game was so different.

I was quite immersed, sorry to hear you did not like it.

[Augoeides]

My experience of difficulty was quite different, Aveline and Carver both died at the Ogre's hands, mind you, I was only using occasional basic staff attacks while they were getting eaten alive by the Ogre and hurlocks. However, the battle was quite easy in and of itself, the ability to kite with the mage was great fun. I also have new found adoration of the Creation tree (first with Heal which has always been good, then the Heroic Aura and THEN later one Glyph of Paralysis made me orgasm, Glyph of Repulsion... less so... I wanted to see more rag doll physics repulsion then a nudge to the side), and I'm going to load up my Witch hunt Save later today and respec my mage to be more creation focused. Sure it won't make a difference to DA2 but I like to pretend it'll add to the consistency of my playstyle.

My only negatives were:
-A few locked trees barred my talent choices
-The similarities some draw between the hurlocks and putties from Power Rangers is not something I see in the base visual design, the way they jumped around like monkeys however.... (also their emotion and scary roars seemed out of place with their jumping)
-Sometimes the text was too small and it was quite hard to read, now it may be fine for others but I'm practically blind out of one eye and have quite bad sight in the other, and my glasses can only do so much for that but it was an issue at points, though the inclusion of the dialogue wheel icons helped clear things up when I was unsure on a word or too.

Everything else I liked especially Flemeth's look, lines, attitude and transformation sequence.

[bill4747bill]

Flemeth was cool enough that I forgave her for 'saving the day'

I don't mind the new darkspawn designs, but I am scratching my head that the old ones looked scarier.

Free locked Talents now! Seriously, my bow rogue had to save up talent points to avoid taking ucky Sabotage talents.