523 réponses à ce sujet

[Jarradane]

I don't know, it felt pretty much the same to me.

Just with better flow to the combat.



And it's not like a demo is going to be super challenging anyway.

If it was, the same people would just be complaining about how difficult the game will be.

[cabbagesoup]

[quote]AlanC9 wrote...

[quote]Bone-Dragon wrote...
Why? Because when I sat down and played DA:O on PC, I felt like I was playing an old Baldur's Gate RPG with a better ruleset. Now, I feel like I'm playing a Poorly developed Over-the-Shoulder Hyper MMORPG where I have to swap viewpoints with every character as if I was multiboxing. Thats not fun at all. Thats what made the PS3/360 versions terrible.[/quote]

There's nothing wrong with feeling that way about the camera, as long as you're not saying that losing the top-down view = dumbed down. It's the top-down view itself that's dumbed-down, since if gives the player access to a view of the battle field that his character simply doesn't have.
[/quot

You're arguement only works if you are playing a first person shooter or fighter not something that requires party tactics.
Think about it. strategy games with tactics using units or a party can not be done if you can't see what's going on in the battle-unless like DA2 it doesn't matter since there are no tactics only a fast paced sence of action  and all you have to do is hit attack button over and over and wait for cool downs to use and ability you don't even necessarily need.

Modifié par cabbagesoup, 27 février 2011 - 12:35 .

[Ivolon]

Not dumbed down, but the console iteration of the IP with all the natural consequences.

[Walker White]

cabbagesoup wrote...

That's not the way it works if its deep it has to be slower. Has to be. Check out some of the grand strategy games and war games and you'll see there is no "fast" combat.

Correlation does not equal causation.

And: Lightning Chess.

Modifié par Walker White, 27 février 2011 - 12:44 .

[Cammander Jazzy Shepard]

It felt good to be back in the Dragon Age world. There were lots of improvement and that good.

[cabbagesoup]

Walker White wrote...

cabbagesoup wrote...

That's not the way it works if its deep it has to be slower. Has to be. Check out some of the grand strategy games and war games and you'll see there is no "fast" combat.

Correlation does not equal causation.

And: Lightning Chess.

Regardless the faster you go the more shallow and simplistic so it does. Lighting chess is throwing the pieces around rather than thinking about what you are doing.

Modifié par cabbagesoup, 27 février 2011 - 12:48 .

[cabbagesoup]

[quote]Cammander Jazzy Shepard wrote...

It felt good to be back in the Dragon Age world. There were lots of improvement and that good.[/quote

How cute

[Cammander Jazzy Shepard]

[quote]cabbagesoup wrote...

[quote]Cammander Jazzy Shepard wrote...

It felt good to be back in the Dragon Age world. There were lots of improvement and that good.[/quote

How cute

[/quote]
anyways....I thought it was more futuristic than the last two games. Bioware never lest downs

[Murdario]

thank god they added those handy star ratings to the items. all those compicated numbers in the origins confused me so much that i had to stop playing. now its easy just like looking up a movie review! that and the fact that game was too long. my short attention span doesnt allow me to complete a game that is more than 8 hours long. i heard bioware has been working on this flaw also, great job fellas! maybe now the game is accessible enough for me to complete it and experience the awesome cinematic story to the fullest. there are millions of us farmville players who are dying to give our money to you bioware, if you just make it accessible enough.



ps. i hope something AWESOME happens everytime i push a button!

[cabbagesoup]

[quote]Cammander Jazzy Shepard wrote...

[quote]cabbagesoup wrote...

[quote]Cammander Jazzy Shepard wrote...

It felt good to be back in the Dragon Age world. There were lots of improvement and that good.[/quote

How cute

[/quote]
anyways....I thought it was more futuristic than the last two games. Bioware never lest downs

[/quote

Yeah, I like all of biowares or most of there games. This one I have my doubts about though after playing the demo. I want an RPG with good tactics, Characters I care about and for whom I can make decisions that count for something and shape who the are and will make for an individualized story.

[astranger_90]

Well, given that DAO wasn't exactly tactical itself, I'm going to go ahead and say that it isn't dumbed down.



Just a huge amount of people whining about changes.

[Melness]

Yeah, I like all of biowares or most of there games. This one I have my doubts about though after playing the demo. I want an RPG with good tactics, Characters I care about and for whom I can make decisions that count for something and shape who the are and will make for an individualized story.

You shouldn't give up so soon, be it about the tactical appeal or the characters of the game. The demo was just a 4 month old build of an Origin story, without inventory, most abilities and lots of cuts. On Normal difficulty.

Modifié par Melness, 27 février 2011 - 01:15 .

[cabbagesoup]

astranger_90 wrote...

Well, given that DAO wasn't exactly tactical itself, I'm going to go ahead and say that it isn't dumbed down.

Just a huge amount of people whining about changes.

It wasn't tactical? What version were you playing? PS3 Xbox 360? Certainly not the most difficult and techically challenging tactical game but on the level I was playing on the PC I needed to use a lot of tactics with my party.

[RedVisionaire]

cabbagesoup wrote...

It wasn't tactical? What version were you playing? PS3 Xbox 360? Certainly not the most difficult and techically challenging tactical game but on the level I was playing on the PC I needed to use a lot of tactics with my party.

Playing as a Two-Handed warrior on Hard, I was able to beat the game entirely by running directly into the largest group of enemies and hitting them with my sword.  I did have to set up my (only one) mage to cast the heal spell when the two-hander character got below 50% health, and to use regeneration on him at 75% health, but I'd hardly call that extremely tactical combat.  That character got the achivement for not once falling in battle (I was playin on PC, by the way, though that question wasn't directed at me).

My favorite fight was with the Broodmother, because enemies came in during the fight.  If the demo is anything to go by, this'll happen a lot in DA2.  I'm really looking forward to it.  I love having to 'think on my feet' so to speak, and change up my tactics on the fly (something rarely needed in DA:O - whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is debatable I suppse).

I can understand a lot of complaints about DA2.  The art style change is certainly subjective, same with the voiced protaganist.  I believe on consoles you have to hit A to attack, and I certainly wouldn't want to play that game.  But, based on what we've seen of the skill trees and what I have personally experianced in the demo, I find it baffling that people could think the mechanics of the game have been simplified.  To each their own, I suppose.

[Melness]

Playing as a Two-Handed warrior on Hard, I was able to beat the game entirely by running directly into the largest group of enemies and hitting them with my sword. I did have to set up my (only one) mage to cast the heal spell when the two-hander character got below 50% health, and to use regeneration on him at 75% health, but I'd hardly call that extremely tactical combat.

Inbf, people pick on you for not playing on Nightmare (which isn't that hard).

Modifié par Melness, 27 février 2011 - 01:30 .

[cabbagesoup]

RedVisionaire wrote...

cabbagesoup wrote...

It wasn't tactical? What version were you playing? PS3 Xbox 360? Certainly not the most difficult and techically challenging tactical game but on the level I was playing on the PC I needed to use a lot of tactics with my party.

Playing as a Two-Handed warrior on Hard, I was able to beat the game entirely by running directly into the largest group of enemies and hitting them with my sword.  I did have to set up my (only one) mage to cast the heal spell when the two-hander character got below 50% health, and to use regeneration on him at 75% health, but I'd hardly call that extremely tactical combat.  That character got the achivement for not once falling in battle (I was playin on PC, by the way, though that question wasn't directed at me).

My favorite fight was with the Broodmother, because enemies came in during the fight.  If the demo is anything to go by, this'll happen a lot in DA2.  I'm really looking forward to it.  I love having to 'think on my feet' so to speak, and change up my tactics on the fly (something rarely needed in DA:O - whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is debatable I suppse).

I can understand a lot of complaints about DA2.  The art style change is certainly subjective, same with the voiced protaganist.  I believe on consoles you have to hit A to attack, and I certainly wouldn't want to play that game.  But, based on what we've seen of the skill trees and what I have personally experianced in the demo, I find it baffling that people could think the mechanics of the game have been simplified.  To each their own, I suppose.

Sounds like you had to think tactically with one charcter basically. That could'nt have been easy.
As people finding the mechanics over simplified it certainly doesn't baffle me. Especially when I can beat it half asleep
with doing nothing but hitting attact over and over. For one thing I could really even think tactically for I could see anything what with the bad camera where I couldn't see over the top and everthing happening so fast not to mention
I didn't really even need to see what was going on because the battle was always over in seconds and I'd lost little if no health at all and I hadn't even really done anything intential other than hit attack and randomly try abilities.
This sort of thing you could never do in DAO

Modifié par cabbagesoup, 27 février 2011 - 01:37 .

[Melness]

This sort of thing you could never do in DAO

Perhaps it did on an origin story on Normal? Because thats what the demo seems to be.

[RedVisionaire]

Melness wrote...

Playing as a Two-Handed warrior on Hard, I was able to beat the game entirely by running directly into the largest group of enemies and hitting them with my sword. I did have to set up my (only one) mage to cast the heal spell when the two-hander character got below 50% health, and to use regeneration on him at 75% health, but I'd hardly call that extremely tactical combat.



Inbf, people pick on you for not playing on Nightmare (which isn't that hard).

Heh, I generally try to pick the 'most fair' option when I play a game. I don't want any special bonuses, but I don't want the enemies to have them either. I do, however, consider friendly fire absolutely essential, so I think I'm going to play through DA2 on Nightmare - which kind of scares me, as it seems like it'll be a lot more difficult than any of DA:O's difficulty settings.

cabbagesoup wrote...

Sounds like you had to think tactically with one charcter basically. That could'nt have been easy.
As people finding the mechanics over simplified it certainly doesn't baffle me. Especially when I can beat it half asleep
with doing nothing but hitting attact over and over. For one thing I could really even think tactically for I could see anything what with the bad camera where I couldn't see over the top and everthing happening so fast not to mention
I didn't really even need to see what was going on because the battle was always over in seconds and I'd lost little if no health at all and I hadn't even really done anything intential other than hit attack and randomly try abilities.
This sort of thing you could never do in DAO

Well, I don't really think I fought very tactically. I play a lot of turn based tactical games, X-Com, Jagged Alliance and the like - those I have to spend a lot of time creating a plan of attack, fields of fire; hell, I've spent hours just moving my people into position for an ambush/assault that lasted all of two minutes game time. In DA:O, my tactics were limited to "locate the biggest, meanest enemy. Kill him. Repeat".

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying with your complaints. The demo difficulty was, after all, locked at normal - and it felt to me to be about as challenging as my playthrough on Hard (actually, significantly moreso with the tactics screen FUBAR'd and Bethany constantly using fireball where the enemies were ten minutes ago). I didn't think the combat itself was faster - that is to say, yes, you hit more and jump around and stuff (something I'm not fond of, but it's no gamebreaker for me), but enemies seemed to take about the same amount of time to kill. The fight with the Ogre, for example, lasted (for me) significantly longer than than the first time I fought the Ogre in the tower in Origins. While the lack of a fully isometric camera disappoints me, I was able to see what was going on with the more limited camera displayed in the demo - not ideal, certainly, but not terrible.

Modifié par RedVisionaire, 27 février 2011 - 01:50 .

[cabbagesoup]

RedVisionaire wrote...

Melness wrote...

Playing as a Two-Handed warrior on Hard, I was able to beat the game entirely by running directly into the largest group of enemies and hitting them with my sword. I did have to set up my (only one) mage to cast the heal spell when the two-hander character got below 50% health, and to use regeneration on him at 75% health, but I'd hardly call that extremely tactical combat.



Inbf, people pick on you for not playing on Nightmare (which isn't that hard).

Heh, I generally try to pick the 'most fair' option when I play a game. I don't want any special bonuses, but I don't want the enemies to have them either. I do, however, consider friendly fire absolutely essential, so I think I'm going to play through DA2 on Nightmare - which kind of scares me, as it seems like it'll be a lot more difficult than any of DA:O's difficulty settings.

cabbagesoup wrote...

Sounds like you had to think tactically with one charcter basically. That could'nt have been easy.
As people finding the mechanics over simplified it certainly doesn't baffle me. Especially when I can beat it half asleep
with doing nothing but hitting attact over and over. For one thing I could really even think tactically for I could see anything what with the bad camera where I couldn't see over the top and everthing happening so fast not to mention
I didn't really even need to see what was going on because the battle was always over in seconds and I'd lost little if no health at all and I hadn't even really done anything intential other than hit attack and randomly try abilities.
This sort of thing you could never do in DAO

Well, I don't really think I fought very tactically. I play a lot of turn based tactical games, X-Com, Jagged Alliance and the like - those I have to spend a lot of time creating a plan of attack, fields of fire; hell, I've spent hours just moving my people into position for an ambush/assault that lasted all of two minutes game time. In DA:O, my tactics were limited to "locate the biggest, meanest enemy. Kill him. Repeat".

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying with your complaints. The demo difficulty was, after all, locked at normal - and it felt to me to be about as challenging as my playthrough on Hard (actually, significantly moreso with the tactics screen FUBAR'd and Bethany constantly using fireball where the enemies were ten minutes ago). I didn't think the combat itself was faster - that is to say, yes, you hit more and jump around and stuff (something I'm not fond of, but it's no gamebreaker for me), but enemies seemed to take about the same amount of time to kill. The fight with the Ogre, for example, lasted (for me) significantly longer than than the first time I fought the Ogre in the tower in Origins. While the lack of a fully isometric camera disappoints me, I was able to see what was going on with the more limited camera displayed in the demo - not ideal, certainly, but not terrible.

Jagged alliance and xcom. You are a real tactical gamer man. JA2 is the $h**! We'll probably never see a tactical game that good.

As for the demo it was much easier on normal than playing on normal DAO normal on the demo would probably be more like easy on DAO

[Deadmac]

Dubya75 wrote...
So many people are complaining about DA2 saying it is "dumbed down". I really don't get where this opinion originated from. None of us have played the full game so how do we know it is "dumbed down"? ]/quote]
We all played the demo and saw the gameplay interveiws. Instead of just saying 'its dumbed down', I will do as you suggest and give you and example.

Game Dialogue:
If you pay attention to your dialogue options (within the demo), they are not presented in an intellectual or adult manner. When the pc character didn't have a voice-over, the writers were forced to write them as descriptively and witty as possible. Other words, the choices you read on screen sounded more adult and thought out. An example of this would be comparing the language found in young adult books to kiddy books.

"I want to be a dragon" is not as intelligent as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?". Even though the voice-over player-character says the later statement, reading "I want to be a dragon" is not as stimulating or intelligent. It is written in a fundamental manner, which relates to five year old school children. 'Majority' of the dialogue in "Dragon Age: Origins" was fleshed out; thus, what you consumed onscreen could match your level of thinking. "Dragon Age II's" dialogue is too-too-too fundamental.

Another dumbed down feature are the new dialogue icons, which informs you that a specific line is either evil, kind, or a joke. If BioWare wrote out the dialogue with more sophistication, people would automatically pick up the meaning behind each response. Since the icons are now in place, you now longer have to read or think. Just roll your mouse over an option, look at the icon, and click.

My second example will be in the next post...

Modifié par Deadmac, 27 février 2011 - 02:04 .

[cabbagesoup]

Deadmac wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...
So many people are complaining about DA2 saying it is "dumbed down". I really don't get where this opinion originated from. None of us have played the full game so how do we know it is "dumbed down"? ]/quote]
We all played the demo and saw the gameplay interveiws. Instead of just saying 'its dumbed down', I will do as you suggest and give you and example.

Game Dialogue:
If you pay attention to your dialogue options (within the demo), they are not presented in an intellectual or adult manner. When the pc character didn't have a voice-over, the writers were forced to write them as descriptively and witty as possible. Other words, the choices you read on screen sounded more adult and thought out. An example of this would be comparing the language found in young adult books to kiddy books.

"I want to be a dragon" is not as intelligent as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?". Even though the voice-over player-character says the later statement, reading "I want to be a dragon" is not as stimulating or intelligent. It is written in a fundamental manner, which relates to five year old school children. 'Majority' of the dialogue in "Dragon Age: Origins" was fleshed out; thus, what you consumed onscreen could match your level of thinking. "Dragon Age II's" dialogue is too-too-too fundamental.

Another dumbed down feature are the new dialogue icons, which informs you that a specific line is either evil, kind, or a joke. If BioWare wrote out the dialogue with more sophistication, people would automatically pick up the meaning behind each response. Since the icons are now in place, you now longer have to read or think. Just roll your mouse over an option, look at the icon, and click.

Very well put. Yes I totally agree. You don't even have to think about what is being said in the demo where as in DAO you did.
My second example will be in the next post...

[RedVisionaire]

cabbagesoup wrote...
Jagged alliance and xcom. You are a real tactical gamer man. JA2 is the $h**! We'll probably never see a tactical game that good.

Tell me about it. My dream game would be say, ME2, but with turn based tactical combat. BioWare style characters and story progession with that kind of combat would put me in heaven.

cabbagesoup wrote...
As for the demo it was much easier on normal than playing on normal DAO normal on the demo would probably be more like easy on DAO

I guess we just don't see eye to eye. It seemed to me to be, at the easiest of times, about as difficult as my Hard playthrough of Origins, sometimes exasperated by the fact that I wasn't able to set up worthwhile tactics. A pity the game feels too easy for your taste, but if you intend to buy it anyway (on sale, perhaps), I imagine Nightmare might make things difficult.

Deadmac wrote...
Another dumbed down feature are the new dialogue icons, which informs you that a specific line is either evil, kind, or a joke. If BioWare wrote out the dialogue with more sophistication, people would automatically pick up the meaning behind each response. Since the icons are now in place, you now longer have to read or think. Just roll your mouse over an option, look at the icon, and click.

While it remains to be seen how it will play out, that's far from the intentions. You are general given "Diplomatic", "Sarcastic", or "Forceful". Equating diplomatic with 'good' and forceful with 'evil' at this point says more about you than the game. If, however, the developers make the majority of forceful replies 'evil' and the diplomatic replies 'good', then you are correct, and that is a gross simplification.

[Deadmac]

...part two...

No More Skills: - http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Skills
One of the greatest characteristics to a BioWare game are the skills. As you progress from stage one to stage two, the level of your skills opens up more of the game. Dialogue, looting, stealing, disarming traps, and opening certain doors depends upon them. Its a reward system for making certain cognitive descisions about character development. Sure, "Dragon Age: Origins" had a looting issue with not being able to unlock many of the chests, but all they had to do is tweak the difficulty depending on your location in the game. Earlier chests = easier to open. Later chests = more higher skill base. Its not that very hard to fix. Within the new "Dragon Age II" system, you have two settings that solve the whole issue. 'Willpower' and/or 'cunning' will solve all your problems. 

Tell me... How many people liked the 'stealing' skill? If they tweaked the reward system, the skill stealing would have been a blast. All they had to do is tweak the rewards.

Now, all you need is one or two points in cunning and/or willpower. Done.

...part one:
http://social.biowar...6714/11#6245879

Modifié par Deadmac, 27 février 2011 - 02:34 .

[godlike13]

In DA2 demo we got "I want to be a dragon" for a snaky reply of "You can show me that trick of yours, that looks useful", its not as "intelligent" as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?" because its not meant to be a intelligence reply.

In DA:O when the dialog choice came up as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?" and u clicked it, that's what u said. In DA2 now u get general "Diplomatic", "Sarcastic", or "Forceful" dialog choices, though not exclusively just those, in which u click and u get something of that suit, rather then the exact thing u click. Not only that, the more u choose a certain type, the more it will influence ur character. So no, i wouldn't say they dumb down the dialog.

Modifié par godlike13, 27 février 2011 - 02:36 .

[Deadmac]

godlike13 wrote...

In DA2 demo we got "I want to be a dragon" for a snaky reply of "You can show me that trick of yours, that looks useful", its not as "intelligent" as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?" because its not meant to be a intelligence reply.

In DA:O when the dialog choice came up as "Shape-shifting must exert a lot of lyrium. Is it possible for someone such as myself to learn this ability?" and u clicked it, that's what u said. In DA2 now u just get general "Diplomatic", "Sarcastic", or "Forceful" dialog choices in which u click and u get something of that suit, rather then the exact thing u click. Not only that, the more u choose a certain type, the more it will influence ur character. So no, i wouldn't say they dumb down the dialog.

Basically, you like the whole "look at the icon and click" rather than read?

I keep forgeting the new generation's definition to the phrase 'tech savvy' is point and click on the gui. No one wants to think deeper. What is up with that?

Modifié par Deadmac, 27 février 2011 - 02:41 .