523 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ziggeh wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Not only were the skills removed, you also get less talents/spells. As far as I understand you will be around level 25 at the end of the game. You'll get only one talent/spell per level, so that's a significant change as well.

The complexity of the skills is more to do with the manner in which they interact and not the raw number available.

As far as I can see there aren't any skills in DA2. So I am not sure what interaction you are talking about. What's left are talents or spells and you'll get less of those.

[Derrp]

The conversation system is the only thing I see dumbed down

I'm glad there's no paragon / renegade system

but it would have been cool to have optional cut scene actions that would affect the outcome of whatever is going on

[Darji]

The Minority wrote...

What does dumbed down even mean really? It depends on preference really.

I agree with you on the combat system and ok its arguable with the dialoguesystem. But when you cut skills, cut the game length,  reuse many areas etc. its cleary dumbed down.

@DerP: Its exactly the Parragon and renegadesystem. And here its even more clear than it was in Mass effect.

Modifié par Darji, 28 février 2011 - 08:54 .

[rob_k]

Wrong. There is no moral compass for the dialog system. Only tones. How things are said etc.

Edit: Btw, I don't understand how anyone can say we get less talents in the game (when compared to Origins and not Awakening), especially when we haven't played it. In Origins, for the most part, we got 1 talent point per level as well. Then there were a few tomes. So, it seems the same to me...

I think it was Peter who said he managed to invest heavily in around 4 skill trees with a few points left over? (My mind's a bit foggy on that). That was in the character attributes thread anyway.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 10:11 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

rob_k wrote...

Wrong. There is no moral compass for the dialog system. Only tones. How things are said etc.

Edit: Btw, I don't understand how anyone can say we get less talents in the game (when compared to Origins and not Awakening), especially when we haven't played it. In Origins, for the most part, we got 1 talent point per level as well. Then there were a few tomes. So, it seems the same to me...

I think it was Peter who said he managed to invest heavily in around 4 skill trees with a few points left over? (My mind's a bit foggy on that). That was in the character attributes thread anyway.

And that's not correct either. Example. One of the devs stated that Anders requires to be approached in a certain way, to make him develop him into something you like or not.

About your edit: One talent/spell per level in DA2. In DA:O you'll get more at lower levels. At level 25 you'll have 25 talents/spells in DA2 and you'll have 33 in DA:O. In addition to that there are no skills in DA2 (as far as I can see).

[rob_k]

No skills yes, but replaying Origins now and it's one talent point per level for me. I'm like level 9 at the moment and I cannot remember it being any different when I played the game last on the PC (with Awakening)

Regarding dialog, point was it's not as cut and dry as Mass Effect's dialog system. And because one situation requires one particular response doesn't invalidate my point.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 10:31 .

[Altima Darkspells]

rob_k wrote...


Edit: Btw, I don't understand how anyone can say we get less talents in the game (when compared to Origins and not Awakening), especially when we haven't played it. In Origins, for the most part, we got 1 talent point per level as well. Then there were a few tomes. So, it seems the same to me...

It's simple.

Upgrades to current talents do not equal new talents.  In many cases, it's merely a bonus amount of damage and/or a cooldown reduction.  Also, of course, it seems DA2 is following in Origins' footsteps by forcing the player to purchase skills he or she may not necessarily be interested in or even find useful.

To put it in perspective, it'd be like having to spend a talent point on Cone of Cold's freezing effect, in addition to the main spell.  Or fireball's knockdown.

So when people say less talents, they mean less useable talents.  Weapon trees go from the 12 in Origins to the five or so in DA2, for example.

And that's assuming that every talent works perfectly and exactly as intended--unlike in Origins.

[rob_k]

Yeah alright, but I wasn't referring to the number of useable talents we get to pick from.

I was referring to Angry hinting that we basically get more than one talent/spell per level in DA: O, without tomes.

As far as I remember, the only extra point that we can invest comes at character creation.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 10:41 .

[Rockworm503]

 People are throwing the terms "dumbed down" and "Hack and Slash" to the point where they have lost all meaning.
lets seriously look at what has changed.
Isometric view gone.  I don't know about anyone else but I never used the Isometric view in DAO no joke.  I never felt the need.  When I paused and switched I clicked on the potrait and I got a good feel of the action from that.  I can't be blamed for not missing a feature that I never used.
Faster more streamlined combat....  The characters aren't shuffling into position and actually responding and somehow thats a bad thing like shuffling and bad pathfinding made DAO more tactical or something.
I honestly believe a lot of people had preconcieved notions about DA2.  Some people had already pegged it as a terrible game before they even played the demo and was just waiting for the demo to prove them right.
People been bashing on it so much its rediciulous.  Some people believe that simply because its on the consoles that it just sucks.
Others have compared it to games like God of War for some reason.  If they ever played GoW they'd know that there is no similarities at all.  Its a Hack and Slash dumbed down port?  If you really think that than you don't know what the term means if it even has meaning anymore.

[Cadaveth]

rob_k wrote...

Wrong. There is no moral compass for the dialog system. Only tones. How things are said etc.

What? Isn't that a moral compass right there? O.o

You say thing number 1 which has happy face next to it. You say thing number 2 with neutral face next to it. You say thing number 3 with angry face next to it. No matter what you say, it's good, neutral bad. Could prove me wrong if you wish though.

[rob_k]

Rockworm503 wrote...

 People are throwing the terms "dumbed down" and "Hack and Slash" to the point where they have lost all meaning.
lets seriously look at what has changed.
Isometric view gone.  I don't know about anyone else but I never used the Isometric view in DAO no joke.  I never felt the need.  When I paused and switched I clicked on the potrait and I got a good feel of the action from that.  I can't be blamed for not missing a feature that I never used.
Faster more streamlined combat....  The characters aren't shuffling into position and actually responding and somehow thats a bad thing like shuffling and bad pathfinding made DAO more tactical or something.
I honestly believe a lot of people had preconcieved notions about DA2.  Some people had already pegged it as a terrible game before they even played the demo and was just waiting for the demo to prove them right.
People been bashing on it so much its rediciulous.  Some people believe that simply because its on the consoles that it just sucks.
Others have compared it to games like God of War for some reason.  If they ever played GoW they'd know that there is no similarities at all.  Its a Hack and Slash dumbed down port?  If you really think that than you don't know what the term means if it even has meaning anymore.

I've been saying that as well. I firmly believe people went into playing the demo etc. expecting to hate it. I mean, statting you get anything from levelling other than one talent point in Origins and 3 attritbute points to make a point against DA 2 is kinda... well, forget it.

[rob_k]

Cadaveth wrote...

rob_k wrote...

Wrong. There is no moral compass for the dialog system. Only tones. How things are said etc.

What? Isn't that a moral compass right there? O.o

You say thing number 1 which has happy face next to it. You say thing number 2 with neutral face next to it. You say thing number 3 with angry face next to it. No matter what you say, it's good, neutral bad. Could prove me wrong if you wish though.

Cadeveth,

The bottom option is normally aggressive. Because you choose that, it doesn't mean you're performing a 'renegade' option, like you would be in Mass Effect. Plus there are 12 - 15 icons in the game, representing different tones. So, I don't think it'll always come down to aggressive, saint, sarcastic and diplomatic options. (And the middle icon in the dialog wheel, based on the demo, was normally sarcastic/snarky or whatever you want to call it rather than actually being neutral)

There's no real morality slider in the game either. In fact, there's none at all other than how you're perceived by other characters.

And I'm really not going to debate this further. People just want to bash the game and nitpick at the slightest detail the moment they get the chance.

There's also a thread on the forum you can check out:

http://social.biowar...2420/40#6268832

In particular, check out the dev responses.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 11:10 .

[monstertrucks]

I hope that they made the storyline just as comprehensive as DA:O because I thought the Mass Effect storyline was a little short and simplistic. I dunno how to say it but DA:O was just way more engaging and felt like it took a much longer time to play.

[rob_k]

Monster,

There's absolutely no problem with hoping that. By all accounts, it seems the story is more political in nature for DA 2 where you choose to side with particular factions as you rise to power (become the champion), rather than having you fight some big bad.

I don't know if that seems like something you'd like.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 11:00 .

[Tleining]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

So when people say less talents, they mean less useable talents. Weapon trees go from the 12 in Origins to the five or so in DA2, for example.

And that's assuming that every talent works perfectly and exactly as intended--unlike in Origins.

but isn't that a bit shortsighted? You compare one Tree (two handed for example, 6 Activated Talents (Origins) to 3 (DA2). In Origins, each Tree needed a special type of weapon. If you didn't have that weapon, the Talents became useless. In DA2, you have less usable Talents per Tree, but you have more Trees that work with every weapon.


@ AngryFrozenWater
oh, and in Origins, you get one Talent Point per Level. You also get Bonus Points, that's how people had 33 Talent Points at Level 25. No one said that that is going to be different in DA2.

[rob_k]

I'm beginning to think whatever we say, Tleining, isn't going to have any effect.

I said the same as you above and well, Angry didn't seem to listen to me.

Hopefully I'm wrong though and it was a genuine mistake by Angry. If it was, I do apologise for the statement here.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 11:33 .

[Morroian]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

Upgrades to current talents do not equal new talents.  In many cases, it's merely a bonus amount of damage and/or a cooldown reduction.  Also, of course, it seems DA2 is following in Origins' footsteps by forcing the player to purchase skills he or she may not necessarily be interested in or even find useful.

There's always going to be some of that, why should a character get spirit mastery without investing a significant number of points in the tree. DA2 at least appears to handle it better than DAO by having far fewer utterly useless spells and using an upgrade system rather than have new spells as upgrades.

[Rawgrim]

Less is never more.

[AkiKishi]

rob_k wrote...

I'm beginning to think whatever we say, Tleining, isn't going to have any effect.

I said the same as you above and well, Angry didn't seem to listen to me.

Hopefully I'm wrong though and it was a genuine mistake by Angry. If it was, I do apologise for the statement here.

That's because the changes are there to see, whether or not you see those changes as being good or bad is down to the individual.

[Rogue Unit]

Rawgrim wrote...

Less is never more.

But sometimes less is better.

[rob_k]

BobSmith101 wrote...

rob_k wrote...

I'm beginning to think whatever we say, Tleining, isn't going to have any effect.

I said the same as you above and well, Angry didn't seem to listen to me.

Hopefully I'm wrong though and it was a genuine mistake by Angry. If it was, I do apologise for the statement here.

That's because the changes are there to see, whether or not you see those changes as being good or bad is down to the individual.

Right, but the person I was referring to is claiming you got more than one talent point per level in DA: O at lower levels. It's simply not correct in the base game without mods and the only way you get more than that is by using tomes.

So, I'm left wondering if the person is genuinely mistaken or just trying to make up information to make DA 2 look bad.

I'm settling on it being a genuine mistake, to give them the benefit of doubt.

Modifié par rob_k, 28 février 2011 - 11:40 .

[Zigzaggy]

It annoys me that people can argue against the game being dumbed ..with no insight or aptitude to digest what they are being told.

It isn't even deniable that it is dumbed down.

http://news.softpedi...rm=dragon age 2

3rd down

Modifié par Zigzaggy, 28 février 2011 - 11:42 .

[Lord Drakkul]

The most dumbed down thing about DA2 was the overly hyped and under delivered demo. I personally enjoyed it and it convinced me to at least rent the game to give it a try. In that regard, it succeeded. However, I'm the type of player that can get into both Pure and Action RPGs without any issues. For those who are strictly purist...this demo failed in some ways to show what is at their disposal for their style of play. A few features were left out that would have allowed players to have more precise control, and if they had added the other difficulty setting to make things rougher with friendly fire and such, I doubt we'd have so many back and forth love & hate threads. That, and marketing a demo as heavily as they did...they really should have updated it to be closer to the final product. They also should have made it more obvious that the transition from the Flemeth conversation to the Isabella quest was a time skip and not representative of how it plays out in the final game...as for some reason a lot of people didn't catch on to that.

Unfortunately, a game of this sheer size and scope does not lend itself well to demo's in my opinion. There is too much depth and too many mechanics to pile into 30 minutes. I do feel they could have better represented themselves though. I think the final product will be fantastic, and this is coming from someone who felt the first game was an unfinished, unpolished, buggy mess of a game.

[AkiKishi]

rob_k wrote...

Right, but the person I was referring to is claiming you got more than one talent point per level in DA: O at lower levels. It's simply not correct in the base game without mods and the only way you get more than that is by using tomes.

So, I'm left wondering if the person is genuinely mistaken or just trying to make up information to make DA 2 look bad.

I'm settling on it being a genuine mistake, to give them the benefit of doubt.

If I'm remembering right you get extras at key levels, is that what they meant?

[Morroian]

Zigzaggy wrote...

It annoys me that people can argue against the game being dumbed ..with no insight or aptitude to digest what they are being told.

It isn't even deniable that it is dumbed down.

Sure it is and if you had an argument refuting those saying it isn't dumbed down you'd make it, but you obviously don't, just like most of the closed minded purists you can't see part the surface of the game for the depth underneath.

Modifié par Morroian, 28 février 2011 - 11:48 .