2797 réponses à ce sujet

[Riknas]

Y'know, one thing I'd like to throw in, aside from my previous review were a couple thoughts, and I can keep it reasonably short.

1. Environmentally speaking, its just kind of odd in random encounters, when there are other NPCs, they stand around fearfully watching you fight. This is most prominent fighting the Shallowguard in Hightown, where the usual Red Lantern guard is standing around as I kill the false guards all around me.

2. Many people made the demand that Bioware/EA provide free DLC as part of an apology. I know that quite simply, that's not going to happen, nor do I personally think it practical. That said, because we are seeing a strong dedication to the patching (as opposed to the distinct lack of patching for DA:O and DA:A), fixing bugs and making tweaks, it would be very heartening to see the addition of the cut-content. It's nothing major (not saying that the coding is easy, just that it's not a full blown DLC or a long list of things), and seems like a nice compromise of good faith.

It's been stated a couple times that Merrill, for instance had a few cutscenes in regards to our siblings, which were cut due to programming issues. If these, (and any other knick-knacks that may have been left out for one reason or another) could just be added back in it would be wonderful, even if they come after the regular DLC, and could be perceived as a sort of "director's cut" without dedicating a large amount of new resources to it.

[TEWR]

I remember people stating that they disliked the arrows over characters' heads in DA2, but that was in Origins too. I'm playing the Human Noble Origin and Nan has an arrow over her head.

It's just as stupid, but people shouldn't say that it's the fault of DA2.

[Blackfishie]

Well start with positives first:

I much prefer the new combat, it fast but still tactical and every class feels needed as a team unlike origins were half the time it felt like i was just filler for my mages.

The voiced protagonist is a improvement, the wardens silence added with his facial expressions never changing lead to him being less of a character and more a plot device i was using to guide the game.

Im probably one of the few that likes the new armour and crafting systems, mainly because having to go through all my armour and see if it was a upgrade for a companion got old fast, and carrying half a forest in crafting matts with a carrying limit was likewise annoying.

And now the negatives

Been said to death but the map reuse realy is inexcuseable, having the game set in one city could have been great but it relied on Kirkwall feeling alive, more unique maps and npcs could have achieved this.

Choice not realy changing much, obviously some events must happen for the series plot at large to happen but having this great champion basicly change nothing seems weird.

Bugs, now i accept no game shipps bug free and i wasent expecting DA2 to be any different but some of them (mainly the thumbs up and save import bugs) realy should have been caught and fixed. Maybe blaming this on you is unfair as i appreciate you had a strict timeline to work by but meh, on the plus side it nice to see patches coming out with fixes.

Overall i enjoyed DA2 and whilst i probably was dissapointed it still immersed me in the world just like origins did.

[thedistortedchild]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I remember people stating that they disliked the arrows over characters' heads in DA2, but that was in Origins too. I'm playing the Human Noble Origin and Nan has an arrow over her head.

It's just as stupid, but people shouldn't say that it's the fault of DA2.

You can turn that off in the options menu for both games...


What an odd thing to complain about.

[Foolsfolly]

I never listened to that complaint.

I'd rather have quest icons to help guide me than have none and just run around clicking on everyone and everything.

There's an option to turn it off. If you don't like it, turn it off and stumble around blind instead of taking on missions.

[TEWR]

and that's what bugs me about some of the people who criticize DA2. They're finding things to hate about it and ignoring the fact that these very things existed in Origins too. Which makes it hard for me to take anything they say seriously if they can't even be bothered to realize what was in both games and what was in only one of the two.

[Aesieru]

Was excited... then disappointed... didn't finish game... Oh look "Griffins".

More like "couldn't".

At first, I stopped at about the half mark, the wave enemies were just too much for me, too unrealistic, too stupid, too much health, and just too detracting from the story and the idea of the game... I was not enjoying myself.

So I took a week or so off (this was a few months or so ago) and I read the strategy guide... (not really it wasn't all that interesting even if pretty because the game was unfortunately utter garbage (yes and I mean that, and yes I'm a BioWare supporter... or am I? After all, SWTOR is looking very cheesy and less KOTOR and more WoW, while I'm afraid of what else BioWare has going on...) and then I came back...

I of course went through the second half and got pretty far decided on what way I was going to go, thinking it had any significance, then realized that both choices for either mage or templar were bad since both pretty much had no saving graces or redeeming factors apart from "maybe less die", but probably not.

So I was upset at the lack of signifiance in choice after it was touted and while DA:O didn't have much choice really or much significance in it... well at least it was better.

Cue a lot more waves until I respeced to a fire mage and then things were easier (which is stupid) and I fought through more waves and got to the second to final boss... and unfortunately it was about as annoying or perhaps more annoying than when I faced it in DA:O... while the dragon was about as annoying and more unrealistic (in terms of enemies and what was happening) and less enjoyable...

Things continued (forgive my sentence structure... not fully awake) and I got stuck on that boss... I nearly beat it several times but I either didn't have enough revives (hate it when games are based on the the assurance characters will die no matter what and you must revive someone (like that dumb rock fall on the Strider or whatever it was called) or enough damage wasn't being done... or whatever... and so I stopped there.

This was about a while ago... after all I played Portal 2 (enjoyed that) Crysis 2 (didn't enjoy that), the Witcher 2 (was actually good as the first game crashed every 20 minutes on a new-gen computer, and the story and gameplay sucked on that) and Just Cause 2 (which was horrible)... Killzone 3 (and I hate KZ but GameFly gave it, but the controller died from touching a drop of water (stupid) and so I had to return that... and other things..

Anyway, long story short... I didn't really enjoy the game... it was a chore to work through it much like the original Witcher which crashed all day (a real chore, but I'm persistent) and other games I've played... I don't think a single moment of enjoyment was found, even with the nice special cutscenes because honestly... I always knew the chore was coming back and nothing I did was really important, as it all was rehearsed and laid out for me.

So...

I had pretty much written off all BioWare games after that, and while I'll restart DA2 again and perhaps beat it finally... it will just be to finish the game, and I'll never replay it because of the horrible presence and essence it has plagued me mind with.

But of course there is SWTOR and that's only because I've read 100+ Star Wars books and love the series... but from what I've seen... I may not buy it and it looks pretty poor... and there are juvenile idiots (I don't mean to insult so perhaps "children" is a better term) who just praise anything that SWTOR adds to it... even though everything looks pretty generic... or at least ridiculous.

Anyway... to wrap it all up...

I saw the "apology" letter on another site and so I popped in, but from what I can see, we were duped in by a letter that seemed sincere, and then redirected to DLC or DA-3 content that will be years off (hopefully, but perhaps not... which means another rush) and focused on the idea that "Griffins" something that is EXTINCT (how does something extinct become alive again?) are coming back (kind of like the "look at the shiny light while I steal from you scenario). In fact, it seemed so ridiculous I had to re-read it a second time.

I'm... not very optimistic... and I don't see how anyone A: liked DA:2, though I'm willing to believe and acknowledge SOME did... and B: how anyone can not see the hundreds of flaws and the ridiculous of the game... and be so willing to forgive a company that is supposed to be for the people who buy their games... when no one but someone drunk off their rear could make such decisions and NOT realize that MAYBE THIS IS GENERIC AND BAD.

After all, they aren't idiots... or is that what they're admitting? If so, then what about the fact that they made the first game and other games... that WEREN'T idiocy?

I don't have any cause to forgive a company or developers for something that intentionally did, and now just don't want to lose the other part of their consumer base, and so have decided to throw out the shiny lights and balls of yarn so that the hatred is distracted... after all, they make games we don't... therefore they know what's stupid and what's not, and yet... apparently they decided to ignore everything and it hit them in the face and so now they're trying to crawl back... but not even mature enough to admit that that's what they're doing.

I've no personal threats or anything, but I have no confidence in this development group anymore.

[Skilled Seeker]

Nothing constructive about your rant Aesieru. You have a quick tongue but a slow brain.

Modifié par Skilled Seeker, 30 mai 2011 - 07:18 .

[Aesieru]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Nothing constructive about your rant Aesieru. You have a quick tongue but a slow brain.

Says the person who only replies with non conducive responses...

Right, that shows a fast-acting brain right there...

Sigh, come back later when you've matured...

---

I posted this because it's my criticism.

[John Epler]

Let's remember that this thread is meant for people to post how they feel in what they see as a constructive fashion - not a place for arguments and bickering.

That means - if you disagree with someone's point, you can do so civilly and politely but make sure you're being constructive. Insults and personal attacks are not acceptable.

[Skilled Seeker]

Aesieru wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Nothing constructive about your rant Aesieru. You have a quick tongue but a slow brain.

Says the person who only replies with non conducive responses...

Right, that shows a fast-acting brain right there...

Sigh, come back later when you've matured...

---

I posted this because it's my criticism.

The term you're looking for is 'constructive', before you embarrass yourself further. Conductive means conducting something like heat or electricity.

You can't call me out when I fail to see anything constructive about your post.

Modifié par Skilled Seeker, 30 mai 2011 - 07:34 .

[Aesieru]

I wasn't expecting an apology at all, it was just that it was considered that by the majority and so I referenced it as such.

I would say that when someone makes such a well-understood flop of a game when they promised better... a necessity for an apology is the minimum of what is required.

Oh come now, if it will save the fan-base, griffins will appear... not even I'm naive enough not to see that.

---

Seeker...

— adj (when postpositive, foll by to )
contributing, leading, or tending

It would be prudent for you to apologize for your lack of foresight that I might be actually correct and you might actually be incorrect.

Your responses are not conducive to the conversation or leading to any intelligent discussion.

They are ALSO not constructive.

Edit:

I intend no insult or harassment or attack by stating this, merely clarification and blunt statement of my observation of what your responses have lead to.

Modifié par Aesieru, 30 mai 2011 - 07:44 .

[John Epler]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

You can't call me out when I fail to see anything constructive about your post.

Perhaps my last post was not clear enough when I said to cut it out. This is not the place for it.

[Aesieru]

Hope isn't completely gone, but confidence is...

If they brought that back as part of the story of a significant expansion (would have to be a graphics and design and gameplay change to make it work, so most likely a different game such as the third, but since the third will be rushed out it doesn't seem that way).

I'm willing to bet money that we'll see Dragon Age 3 in 2 years.

[TEWR]

The bear speaks truth.

[flexxdk]

Griffons?

BioWare can take their griffons and...

Well, I won't go further than that. I'm afraid I have even gone too far with that one.

Either way, griffons won't do it for me. I don't want griffons and I don't need them.

But that's just my opinion.

[SilentK]

First, where am I coming from. The bioware-fangirl-corner. I have 2 finished wardens, 3 finished Hawkes and 2 finished Shepards. Currently working on a third shep, like to mix games a bit so that story and gameplay feels fresh. Starting out with changes that I really have appreciated, and then moving on to some things that bugs me.

Love:

Voice – Finally being able to have a voice in DA2 has made great difference to me because it brings my Hawke to life. The silent warden not being able to participate threw me a little, didn’t know why until I started with ME after I finished DA:O for the first time. Personally I really love the 3 different tones, I always play paragon in ME which means that the games sounds the same for the most part. Making it less fun to play two times in a row. DA2 however I have done 3 times in a row, changing the overall tone gave enough of a different feel to make it fun to play straight away even if you have the plot and q’s very fresh in memory.
Wheel – Love the intent-symbols. Why I think they are needed, examples from bioware games I have played. My husband thought that he romanced Leliana in DA:O. He was a little sad when he realized that it was a one-sided romance. He had simply been too polite, had taken lines that he thought had been politely flirty but Leliana didn’t take them that way. I have always been wary of Kelly in ME2 which is sad because I like her quite a lot. I just don’t want to trigger anything romantic-wise so I can sometimes be a little chilly to her just in order to be on the safe side. That goes for all the possible LI:s. My Hawkes, Wardens and Sheps are pretty much always faithful so I try not to trigger anything. Knowing the intent of the line makes it easier for me to get a closer friendship with my companions without jeopardizing any romances. It could easily be avoided by googling all the conversation and seeing what the outcomes are but that would make live in-game and make it feel more like a to do list to talk and less like an actual conversation.
Paraphrased lines – When there is a list with 7 alternatives all written out as in DA:O I remember them quite well, information presented in written form sticks pretty good for me. Alistair was a great romance, think my husband was a very patient guy when I sat glued to the computer on game evenings. I was completely hooked, I had never before played a game in which you had friends and romances in this way and I won’t go without it now. But, the second time I played DA:O the magic was gone from the Alistair romance. I had been so focused on the conversations that I remembered the lists with possible things to say. The romance was gone simply because it didn’t feel like we were talking, I was simply clicking through the lines I wanted. Hawke the 2:nd by comparison was fun since I had a different tone and didn’t know exactly what was coming. I still don’t know all possible things that Hawke can say which makes replays so much more enjoyable for me. By comparison DA:O is a little more boring for me, since I know what is possible to say at given times. Not the entire game, but the conversations that you really pay attention to.

The Hmmm… list:

So, I was very much set up for loving the game and I have enjoyed it greatly. Otherwise I wouldn’t have finished it 3 times. But there are some things that takes it down a little for me.
More variation in environment- Really like the new version of the deep roads with more colours. The blue and red lyrium stretching out in various forms, I think the lighting is different. Whoever decided to put vegetation in the caves, thank you, I really liked that touch. The wounded coast is very pretty and different from areas in DA:O which is fun. Just wish there had been something in that map that had been more of a settlement and the starting point for q’s and a little less of the q’s with the pattern. Start: Inner city, go to coast to hit something, go back to city. Perhaps the qunari or the alianage could have been located in the wounded coast? Just so that something else had happened in that map. It felt a little repetitive which was sad because the environments are very nice. I think the environments are very very pretty and great to look at. But reuse can make one forget it. Kirkwall is a wonderful city, I like the night and day mode and little touches as having the evening light in Act 3. But it’s simply too much of Kirkwall. The game plays out in a very small area so it’s important that you see something new every now and then. DA:O was perhaps not that much bigger but you could see more environments, the pretty winter areas stand out in my memory. I think that if the wounded coast had been a second q-hub and not just the place you run around and kill people in I would have been much happier with how much of the game that plays out inside of the city walls. There is often a different feeling in a q-hub from a killing-zone, can’t really say it better. As it is now, Kirkwall is the only q-hub. One more at least. You don’t have to spread yourself too thinly, I thought that the brecilian forrest was pretty but boring after a while in DA:O so no need to make a 100 different places.
Romance and life in Act 3 – Hopeless romantic here   =)   I wish there had been a little more of the romance in Act 3. I love Act 1 and Act 2, there are some great q’s and these are the best romances I’ve seen. The scenes are great! The Anders-kiss is wonderful, Fenris-wall-kiss, wow! Cuddling with Merrill, my sweetheart. So glad that my F!Hawke can romance Merrill so that it isn’t Tali all over again since I only play F!Hawkes, F!Wardens and F!Sheps. Haven’t Romanced Izzy yet but my husband liked it very much. And then we move to Act 3 in which there is very little with the LI and that makes me feel a little lonely. I would not like to frontload the companions in the beginning and then having them quiet. That is pretty much how I played DA:O when I had no restrictions on conversations and used them up as quick as I could. Having a silent party by the end was pretty much standard fare for me and I would rather build it up towards the end. Act 2 was great! After that one Act 3 felt a little less involved. Less LI, and less family and no qunari to make life a little different. If there is one act in which I would like to play my dlc it is in Act 3 to bolster it a bit. The ending was also a bit of a anti-climax. For me I needed to see my Hawke having one scene afterwards. Something showing the feelings of being relieved to be alive, catching your breath. I needed the ME2 finishing scene but tailored to suit DA2. Taking the group close, just giving them the look that it was a good fight. Grab Merrill by the hand and then run for the hills. I can see how it suits the story to finish it as it does and I was surprised myself by not being totally happy with the ending. I am my Hawke, I want wanted to see her after the fight. The gallows preparing for the fight was a really good scene. Just something at the absolute end when you pat yourself on the back and tell yourself that you did good.

All in all. I <3 DA2        =)     Sorry for the wall of text.

[Majical]

 Having read a fair amount of posts in this thread, I see a lot concerning the combat in DA2. 
On a different point though, I would like to emphasise the views concerning not being able to go to my companions and talk to them, unless on a quest. I think this is one main reason why I did not feel as close to my companions in DA2.


Having the ability of being able to talk to someone at will (especially a character you hopefully care about) should naturally improve the experience. 
I apologise for using Origins  here as an explanatory tool but it is a strong example. In Origins I was able to initiate and have full conversations with my companions at the party camp. And I would revel in doing so because I wanted get to know them; their feedback offers a strong way of drawing a player into this extraordinary world. However when I wanted to get to know the players in DA2 (and I did, just as in origins) I could not, simply because no conversations existed. I then received quests or was visited in my home in order to talk to companions and this is the key difference. I was being told when to go and talk to my companions. I think this made it feel much less personal as although I did want to get to know them, I had very limited control over that. It almost felt as if I was talking to them for the sake's of a quest, rather than because I wanted to and chose to.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this mechanic is bad. In fact I think it would be a great feature to implement when a companion is requesting you for something. Just not as the only way to get to know my characters. 


On a further note: I will however say that I thought companion-to-companion dialogue whilst adventuring was well done, simply because there was a lot of it .

Modifié par Majical, 30 mai 2011 - 11:31 .

[Parahexavoctal]

Just read Mike Laidlaw's "Thank You" (thanks for that, and yw). In it, one particular phrase was (re-)used that pretty much sums up my single biggest issue with DA2. So, as constructive feedback, I'll try to put it into words here.
I feel that this, more than any amount of re-used environments, re-designed darkspawn, waves or voice protagonist is the reason why I can't work up the interest to finish my second play through.

"Kicking over the sandcastle."
I read the term in DA2 context for the first time in an interview, and it was casually mentioned again in a reply to the thread. I very much agree with the core premise as I understand it; a good story needs strife, conflict, intrigue etc. It is by confronting and overcoming these elements that a hero is made and an adventure forged.
DAO had it's fair share for all the origin stories; an impending blight, political intrigue set up to plunge the country into civil war, and for more origins than not, death of friends and family setting the scene. All of these made for excellent material to test and forge the warden, and resolving them after much hardship was a rewarding feeling.
I will also readily agree that post Origis + Awakening, the world probably did not have enough conflict, strife, etc. to make for another compelling advanture. The sandcastle did need to be kicked over as it were, to create the sort of environment in which an epic advanture could take place.
However, where I personally think Bioware went wrong, was in letting us play the story of how the sandcastle was kicked over. That story is a depressing tale of how conflict, intrigue, civil war and chaos was brought into a corner of the world where formerly there was none or much less of it. Whether I am a bystander, indirect or direct cause of this story, it is not a very rewarding experience.
When as the warden I ended the blight, I felt awesome, and I could look happy at what my efforts had achieved for myself and the people around me as the epilogue played out.
When as the champion I watched the result of my efforts and the effect they had, I felt depressed and frustrated.
I think the game would have been much better for me (despite other flaws I perceive), if the sandcastle had been kicked over in the backstory/prologue/first chapter, and the story had been about how I rose to become the champion by making a difference through overcoming and ending some of the troubles introduced in the world.

So, this is my 2¢ of constructive criticism; I'd much rather play a game in which I can be the hero, than one in which I experience the creation of a good setting for an adventure. The latter may be more innovative, it may be refreshingly new and boldly step away from cliche.. but I honestly didn't enjoy it, and I have enjoyed the former many times.

As an afterthought, I do think that this is also part of why complaints about the lack of choice are so frequent; we all notice the rails more when they don't take us where we want to go.

[49todd]

DA2 was a huge disappointment for me. Origins is my favorite game and i enjoyed every part of it. Most of the changes DA2 made were not to my liking and i really hope Bioware makes DA3 more like Origins. Here are some things i liked and disliked about DA2:

Dislikes:

• Level re-use.
  
• Party portraits on the side of the screen. I know it isn't really a big deal but they looked so much better in Origins than in DA2.
  
• I hated being stuck in Kirkwall. It was an interesting place but i want to travel the world.
  
• Re-design of the races. The Qunari look silly, why do they never wear shirts now? Why are they covered in war paint? They look more like aliens than humans now and i don't really like that. And the Arishok's horns were ridiculous. The Darkspawn probably got the worst of it. The way they looked in Origins was great, there was no need to change this at all. Flemeth's re-design looked terrible in my opinion. I understand that she can change her form but the one you gave her just looked bad. The Elves weren't as bad as the rest, but they still didn't look right. Maybe a mix between the new and old would be OK.
  
• I'm just not a fan of the new art direction in general. I'd rather have the old one back.
• All of the enemies you face look the same. There is no variation between two hurlocks or two Qunari or what have you.
  
• WAVES OF ENEMIES!!! I hated this. You never knew when the fights were over and it didn't make sense for them to drop out of the sky anyway. Waves can be used very rarely in large battles but not every single encounter. The fights in Origins between two evenly matched, small parties were very fun and required alot of thought at times.
  
• The combat animations are way too over the top. Only the mage class had animations that were better than Origins. I can't stand it when I stab somebody and they explode into a million pieces. It looks childish and downright stupid.
  
• Most of the side quests had nothing to do with the main story. This was disappointing.
  
• Your family, which was supposed to play a big role in the game, was hardly a factor. I would've liked to get to know them better.
  
• All party members and npcs, family included, were underdeveloped. In Origins I really got to know my party members and form a relationship with them. In DA2, this wasn't able to happen; mostly because of limited dialogue and not being able to engage in conversation whenever I wanted. This was a great feature of Origins and i would love to see it return.
  
• Choices. I made alot, but they hardly even mattered. In Origins, I felt like all of the choices I made directly affected how the world turned out in the end. In DA2, my choices had very little signifigance. Especially the choices involving templars and mages. The game ends the same no matter what I do. I deffinately don't get the feeling that I'm the "Most important person in the world".
  
• I have gotten through one playthrough of DA2 and that will probably be the only one I do. The game isn't very "replayable".

Likes

• The voiced protagonist was very cool in my opinion. My words felt like they had meaning. This should be kept in future games.
  
• The wheel showing the intended meaning of your words was also a nice feature.
  
• The Dalish Elves' new accents seemed to fit them better than American accents.

Bioware and EA, please listen to my feedback. DA2 was not a good game compared to Origins. I really hope you go back to the style of Origins with DA3 so this franchise is not ruined. Good luck with DA3!

Modifié par 49todd, 01 juin 2011 - 11:01 .

[Spell Singer]

Having had a bit of time and playing more DA:O-A, Alpha Protocol and the Witcher 2 has helped put a few things in perspective.

I have played on NWNx PW's and in MMO's so the level reuse doesn't bother me so much. I can understand why people are upset about it but frankly for the most part the reason seems clear. It takes time, and disk space to make a location and the temptation to re-use it must be extreme. I've done area building for NWN and I know how much time it takes to make a nice area so re-using it when possible is hard to argue against. But having said that I think that the outdoor adventure areas should have been different between acts in the story. The changes to Kirkwall were good (even if people seem mostly to have missed them) but the NPCs should have had different clothes between the acts (including the merchants). This is all very subjective, I found the fact that Fenris's home did not change at all from the first time you enter it the most immersion crippling aspect of the re-use of locations. A tunnel is a tunnel and the re-use of these was far less of an issue. Again, I suspect strongly this is due to playing on PW and in MMO's were static terrain is a given.

One thing that really stands out (especially after Alpha Protocol) is that this game is 95% or more simply killing things. There are virtually no quests/missions that are anything but go to a place and kill everything present. There are remarkably few encounters that can be resolved without violence even when it seems reasonable that you could resolve the situation with words. There are missions where you talk to people this is true but they are largely only the set up for "the real" mission which involves killing everything that moves in some location. I would have appreciated some different kinds of missions.

I must admit that the Witcher 2 has managed to eclipse combat in DA2 on the my personal frustration scale. Still there are two serious aspects of the combat system in DA2 that render it worse then that in DA:O-A.

The first is the speed. This has a much bigger effect on the over all combat then is obvious. It makes controlling the companions harder than it should be. In a very short space of time a companion can go from healthy to dead. Since loosing a companion can have a fairly serious consequence on the combat having it happen so fast that the player can't react gets annoying quickly. The worst situation is a stealth attack by an "assassin NPC" which up till around the end of the game can kill most companions (outside of maybe avaline and fenris) in a single blow which can't be stopped. Since there is remarkably little you as the player can do once the assassin goes into stealth it is simply frustrating. It is similar to playing with a killer DM, the fun vanishes. Also the speed things can happen means that you often spend a lot of time baby sitting your companions, and worst case trying to get squishy one out of danger situation A means squishy two gets killed while you are doing your best to deal with the first crisis.

A second strong point is the lack of tactical depth. Fundamentally you are left with few tools to deal with the situation in the combat zone. You have a crippled overview since you can't zoom out far enough to see the whole battle ground. So you can easily loose track of what is going on to the companions and that with the speed of events can result in problems. Worse there is no way to use terrain (since blocking movement is impossible) to limit the number of foes. This means that you have to "kite" as it is called your squishes around the battle field in a fairly absurd fashion. Worse you have to take some skills regardless of your character concept simply to be able to trigger cross class combos. Then you have the problem that although the game allows you to program tactics realistically there are very very few times simple if statements cut it in a battle. I might want the people to "focus fire" on my current target, to engage the weakest enemies, to terminate the near dead or to shoot on a specific class of targets all in a single battle depending on how it develops. There is simply no way to program that with the tactics plus put in things which are sensible such as "if there is a person charging at you target them." It often seems that the NPCs have a better self defense programing then the companions. Since if you run up and engage them, the stop shooting a target half way across the battle field and actually engage you.

This is far more obvious due to the speed of events in DA2 compared to DA:O-A where the exact same situations can show up but the player has more time to react to them before they become critical.

Another two linked points, are the fact that armour went from absorbing direct damage to absorbing fractional damage and the fact that damage went through the roof. The two are related. In DA:O-A armour stops damage directly up to a certain value. Weapons had a penetration that negated that and cunning increased that. This made for a nice mix. DA2 dropped penetration and changed a direct amount to a fraction of incoming damage. This forces the damage upwards because rather than the maximum armour stopping say 40 hit points, it now stops around 90% of incoming damage. This means in one case to do 60 points you need a weapon with a penetration of 10 and 90 pts total damage, and in the other a weapon that does 600 pts of damage. This damage inflation, coupled with the inflated hit points either lead to or are because of the cross class combo effects but eventually produce absurdities of a single NPC having several times the combined hitpoints of the party, and your own party members being extremely vulnerable to damage. I had to control Isabella nearly all the time since the basic AI plus my written tactics didn't play her sufficiently intelligently to survive, yet she was the single biggest damage dealer in the party often enough (assuming I controlled her to take advantage of her abilities)...if left to the AI her low hitpoints plus high output damage usually led to her death quickly.

It is hard to not classify this inflation as absurd...it renders the game solely about "DPS" since a lot of the more useful crowd control abilities seems to have been "nerfed" badly. Hexes, and sleep are no longer quite so useful as simply blasting the target. Isabella's twin daggers were up to 152 DPS, compared to my characters 87 DPS from sword and shield. And realistically I never saw anything like that...my damage per hit was 30-50 at the end of the game compared to Isabella's 50-150. She could do up to 1200 with twin dragon compared to 300 with an assault. About the only difference I could spot was that my character was attacking multiple opponents but this is not a factor during boss encounters where you are fighting a single target.

Another issues particular to the control scheme. Several abilities where chains but when you popped into a character to take control you had no way of knowing where in the possible chain you were. Was it the first shot, the 5th shot, etc. This meant you had no idea if you should trigger the "finisher." As popping in and out of character is pretty much a requirement this came up often in the last act of the game.

I also noticed when activating Panacea that the companion would continue to attempt to cast offensive spells even though the mode didn't allow this. I felt quite frankly that healing in this game got drubbed. In DA:O-A my mage does a lot of "support" and very little direct damage (having virtually no direct damage spells) in this game mage healing support is minimal. I ended up playing most of the game (including the ending) without any healer in the party. Potions are simply enough.

Also it is possible to trigger a spawn when you are actually quite some distance from it (due to the convoluted path to get there). This can either result in the enemies needing to rush about half the map to get to you (if it happens in the outdoor area) to the sudden presence of several groups of enemies simultaneously. I had the latter happen one time in the caverns, when I suddenly found myself facing Lyrium smuggler wave 1, Lyrium smugglers wave 2 and the spider spawn from down a secondary corridor. Needless to say this didn't end well. The same thing may have happened at the end of Merril's quest where I seemed to be fighting around 15-20 opponents simultaneously. That was brutal to put it mildly.

Then the fact there was no secondary weapon form allowed. This meant for example if I wanted to fight in a doorway Isabella was worse then useless. She could not fire a crossbow, throw daggers or anything else. I could use her to launch ambushes on anyone that just ran past my character but since she worked best when behind a character attempting to use her would result in her being on one side of the fight and my character on the other and if she generated agro (a virtual certainty) she died. Being able to give everyone a missile weapon for the times when you want to thin out the enemies at range should be an option.

Are the oversized weapons really necessary? The boss one at the end of the game really rubbed me the wrong way...not to mention the "anime jumping" that was going on.

Is it necessary to have the weapons stored on the back of the characters? I personally could live the with weapons teleporting into the characters hands during the start of combat. It isn't a PvP MMO where knowing what weapon a person has is either useful or a way of showing how über you are.

My comments about the combat system in particular reflect my personal bias. I have no twitch reflexes honed by hours of button mashing as a child. I ran into the same problem with Jade Empire and with the Witcher (or for that matter warhammer). Instead of feeling like a general and fighting like a spartan (the historical ones not the 300 sort) I felt more like I was back being a drill NCO and dealing with a particularly clueless bunch of raw recruits. I was admittedly terrified you were going to go the button mashing route in the change from ME1 to ME2 but in that case you actually simplified (for me) the combat by removing "run and gun" and going to "shoot from cover." In the case of DA2 you went closer to Jade Empire from what I can see...except for boss battles which became tedious, long drawn out, drink many potions affairs mostly reminding me of what I hear final fantasy games are like.