I've just finished the game. My opinion has gone full circle. I thought the game was 'ok'. It had some good moments. But while everything is fresh in my mind, I would like to offer you some feedback.
There have been some decent improvements over the first game, and like I said, it does have it's moments and it does some things well. I think the presentation was much better this time, graphics etc, and you added more spells/skills.
However, this dreaded "dumbing down" thing... it is genuine. At first I thought it was ok, but now that it's
over, I can say that it does exist, and it did negatively affect the game for me. Some things I didn't mind too much, the simplified herbalism and tradeskills etc, I personally don't mind about that. Same goes for the "Junk" loot thing, I thought that was fine. I was never one for weeding through my virtual belongings anyway. But the streamlining
just went too far. You must have known posts like this would happen. After all, you started with Baldur's Gate which was packed with depth. You simplified it down to Dragon Age, which some of us hoped was just a
new start that may grow in the future. But now you've simplified it down again, all the way the point now, where it's pretty much a different genre of game. It's gone from being a slow, tactical, thoughtful, almost turn based RPG, to being a very straightforward action game.
Anyway, there's no point me criticising you because you obviously did it for the money. But here are my suggestions anyway. I'm not above hack 'n slash RPG's, they can be fun, in a disposable game of the month kind of way, but I really need there to at least be something more in there. So if was to ever buy another Dragon Age game again, it would need most or all of these changes:
1) Combat:With these "Tactics", the game pretty much plays itself now. A few good lines of tactics on each character, and I basically sit back and watch the game run on auto-pilot. I don't mind this too much, for the other characters my party, but I need to at least have comprehensive control over ONE of the characters. The Mage is still semi-playable, and I can't be bothered going in to Warriors, but Rogues I can give some input on. The chain skill, I think should be an activated ability that the player chooses when to start. Seeing as the Explosive Strike is activated, it means that the player can be involved in making the most out of the chain. It should cost a lot of stamina to use, so on weaker mobs, the player should make sure they don't start the chain or it's a waste of their stamina. On stronger enemies, they should start the chain early, and then the player should have to count the strikes... If they leave it too long, on the 10th strike, the chain ends. But when the player clicks the Explosive Strike, it does damage with the multiplier based on
the earlier strikes, so if the player panics and uses it too early, they don't get much of a boost. If the player is cool headed they can wait for the 9th strike and get the full benefit from a big powerful strike. In addition to the chain, I also miss manoeuvring my rogue around the back, and performing the painful backstabbing. Them doing it themselves just makes me wonder why I'm even playing. Even just having the chain, and manual backstabs, would be something for me to actually do during battles. I'm always going to prefer the older Bioware games way, where I had full control over all my characters. But even with tactics it could be entertaining if, individually, they were fun to play and had some depth. That's just not how it is now though. One other thing about this, is that the progress is too slow. In the old AD&D games, you used to get 2 or 3 skills/spells with the level ups. Now it's just one, and some of them are passive, and some are buffs. So even near the end of the game, my characters only really had a few usable options which makes for very dull gameplay.
2) Dialogue:I remember reading a criticism of this in preview of the game on Eurogamer or IGN or something, but I didn't really appreciate it seeing as I've never played Mass Effect 2. But now I know, and I really dislike what you did with the dialogue options. It was a pity that they were more restrictive than the Bioware games of old, but my main gripe is
that I just don't really know what they are going to say. For example when (another male character) was telling me of his troubled past, I wanted to be able to comfort him, but the nearest option resulted in my character making a homosexual advance. Kudos on working towards a more broad minded gaming future, but big bad negative points for watering down the all important dialogue in an RPG.
3) Character customisation:I need the freedom back to customise my characters. I think what you did with this game was a big mistake. For example the dwarven rogue can only really be built as a ranger, and some warrior types are two handed
fighters etc.. I really want to be able to make the characters as I choose. I like my warriors to be true tanks, so I want to give them the Sword & Shield ability, and then build their skills from there. I've only found one character that could fight with sword and shield, and I didn't like her very much, but I was stuck with her for the entire game. If you gave us freedom the first game had, I could have taken my brother character with me, or the guy with the cool white veins with me, and just respecced him as sword/shield fighter. But all that freedom was gone in DA2.
Also, you went through the time and effort to come up with lots of extra, interesting spells and abilities (like the Dalish
Elf Mage's cool Elvhen spells, etc). This was GREAT! But then you went and ruined it by putting silly artificial restrictions on who could use what. So not only was I restricted to just 4 characters in this game, I was also restricted to specific ones to fulfil specific roles, and I was restricted in how I could build them too. Very silly. If you had just
given us the freedom the first game had, I could have re-specced my own mage to be a kind of Dalish Druid type character and used spells like that, but instead, I played the whole game without even seeing any of these spells.
In the future, you should write the character builds as a World of Warcraft style talent tree. Have your Warrior/Rogue/Priest as the base, and then each of those classes has a full-fat talent tree to build their class from. And if you want to restrict things, for example you seemed to want to disallow the Dalish Elf from having any healing magic, you can achieve that by just putting certain things at higher points in each path of the talent tree, so the player can't have
both. But if I make a Mage, then it's stupid to not give me ALL the Mage spells you've gone through the trouble of making, as at least an option when I level up. Forget about Bianca's skills and certain characters being able to become Spirit Healers etc.. Give us all of these options on our characters, and the freedom to choose how we build them up.
4) The equipment:My
character was a mage, and I had a second mage in the party, so not
being able to just give him my previously used gear as I upgraded, was a
constant annoyance. It was worse than that though. Nice rogue and tank
gear would regularly drop that I couldn't use on my rogue or tank,
because the gear was restricted to my main character. So half the
interesting loot in the game I just ended up selling without being able
to use it and appreciate it. Restriction seems to be a common theme with
this game. It's nice that the game was rushed through development and
delivered in just 12 months or whatever, but these trade offs are just
too significant for it to be worth it. I would rather have waited
another 12 months and got a full game, and not one that feels like it
was made by some small company with a small budget. You need to
carefully weigh this up next time. How much of your costs did you save
on rushing the game through development? Weight that up against how many
customers like me you have potentially lost by coming across as a
company that doesn't care anymore, and just wants to rush out mass
produced, low quality games.
5) Repeated locations:
Again,
I know this game was all about being made asap with minimal everything.
But if you are going to re-use content, at least do it properly. Look
at MMORPG's for how to do this. People have been playing WoW for about 5
years, so how many times do you think they have visited The Barrens?
The difference though is that these places a big, open, interesting,
content filled locations, which are constantly alive with respawning
enemies and quests that take you to different parts of the area. If you
are going send me back to the same place several times, at least make it
a big open area and not just a 6 foot wide linear path in a circle.
These areas are just not good enough. In the first game it wasn't so bad
because they were so many of them, most of them were less restrictive,
and there was far less re-using of them. But with this game, it was just
bad... Which leads me to my last point.
6) Technology:
You
are waaaaaay behind the curve with your game worlds these days. This
kind of game may have been acceptable in 1996, but it's just not cutting
the mustard anymore. In the past, I think most of us didn't complain,
because you were always providing so much else. For example you often
gave us a player usable toolset so that explained why the world was a
bit clunky and basic. And we got super deep gameplay, with all kinds of
rare quested weapons and armor, riddles and puzzles to solve, lots of
bosses, and just vast deep games in general. But you've turned your back
on that now, and you are making very shallow action games that still
try to pose as a proper RPG. So without all the depth, I can't let you
get away with the basic technology you use. If I'm going to play a
dumbed down action game, I'm going to at least need CryEngine3 graphics,
with bigger areas, the ability to jump, the ability to take shortcuts
down steep slopes and walk through bushes, and have the locations joined
together properly like a real world, and not just a dozen individual
locations accessed from a map like a Flash game.
Like I
said, the game was "ok". It had some good bits, but it was just a
mediocre action game, and that's not my thing. If I'm going to play an
action RPG I'd rather do it other games, The Witcher 2 is due soon which
I think will no doubt wipe the floor with this game. And then of course
Skyrim. If this was made by a small independent company, I would be
encouraging, but then, they wouldn't have been charging full price for
it. Considering this is from the supposed RPG masters Bioware, with the
backing of EA, it's just not good enough.
If you can survive
with this new audience you have gone for, then good for you, and
consider this entire post redundant. But if you end up wanting to exist
in some kind of middle ground that still keeps those of us from your
previous audience interested, then you are really going to need to up
your game, a lot.
Modifié par fsfsfsfsfsfsf, 14 mars 2011 - 09:25 .