4 réponses à ce sujet

[Schattenkeil]

Just to give my personal oppinion on Dragon Age II before I expose myself to forum battleground, which tend to have a strangely polarizing effect on oppinions and positions...

Played through Dragon Age II last weekend, and I must say, even though it wasn't quite what I expected, I enjoyed playing it a lot.

My main problem I had with its predecessor was the difficulty. Even on normal I had a hard time, using tactics, posing the game and taking extensive time to think, retreating, regrouping, channeling the enemy… I always needed more health poutices. I think one could say that may choice of group was poor and my choice of skills not quite ideal, but even then I found the original Dragon Age on normal harder than Mass Effect on insanity. Same goes for past games like Neverwinter Nights or Knights of the Old Republic, non of which I found particularly difficult, even on the strict Starwars D20 / D&D 3 rules I usually played at. So the one thing I took with me from Dragon Age was frustration, and if it wasn't for the fact that I love Bioware's games and after all, I did enjoy Dragon Age's gloomy atmosphere I would have never tried Dragon Age II.

The truth is, I never finished Dragon Age before I finished Dragon Age II. I was at the bottom of the tower at which the archdemon expected me when I gave up on Dragon Age. My group consisted out of my own rogue/duelist, my love interest leliana as mixed crowd controller damage dealer, Wynne as healer and Allister as tank. I had no more potions of any kind and Allister had two wounds. After I had finished Dragon Age II, I swallowed my pride, set the difficulty to easy and brought it to an end. Turned out that I found large caches of potions very soon.

So I started I am on a second play-through now. With a new character who matches my traditional preferences a lot better, on "hard" difficulty. So far it seems doable, even though hard means actually hard in Dragon Age II, unlike games like Mass Effect or Neverwinter Nights were hard meant a relative relaxed challenge.

A bad start was the absence of any race choice. I usually play elves, or better half elves if available, but I can live with playing a human for a change for one game. It just shouldn't become a habit. Unfortunately it seems like Dragon Age III would continue Dragon Age II, so the character will stay.

Combat and Tactics
Dragon Age II in turn was relatively simply. Which was a relief. In articles about Star Wars: The Old Republic I've read about a design philosophy that Bioware wants to get away from a big amount of "heroes" bashing a single or few creatures because it isn't really heroic and want the protagonist outnumbered. That was certainly the case in Dragon Age II, and I am not sure about how feel by the huge number of enemies who go down in less than a second. Of course it has something realistic about it. You get hit by a sword, a normal person would perish very quickly and it's not uncommon for heroes in epic stories to be able to suffer a lot more than an enemy critter. Yet the constant butchering through hordes of inferior enemies leaves a shale taste in the mouth on the long run, and the constant adds made it difficult to utilize sophisticate tactics, utilizing the environment. Thus, while I find the difficult a lot more comfortable, I am not sure what I feel about this mass destruction. I see the point of the development, and I find it enjoyable on a certain level, but driven too far.

I've only played through once, so my insight into the game is limited. As for the rogue, fast, evasive, elusive hard hitters, I must say I find the class very enjoyable, jet a lot of skills pretty redundant and the diversity of the class system, considering all its options, a bit limited. I really miss the freedom of the old D&D 3 games where you could develop completely different weapons styles with the same character. But Dragon Age II offers a good abstraction after all. More dancing in the middle of thing, dealing a bit of damage to everyone, more mage-hunter, more hard-hitter in one on one… Alone the duel fight against Arishok: There was no way I could do it with my rogue. He was just too tough, his attacks just too powerful and too irresistible. I couldn't effort an outright assault, for he just push me back and cut me into pieces before I could land a second blow, but also too resilient to take him down with a patient needle stings, hit and run attacks over time. I could avoid being struck by him but not deal enough damage to take him down faster than his potions would heal him. After a couple of times when I hadn't found even an angle I gave up. I don't know maybe there was something in the environment I could have used that I missed, and I'll look out for it when I am back there again, but to me it looked as though something was a tad out of balance. I solved the problem with reloading, refusing a duel and taking everyone down in a big fight on first try.

Atmosphere & Environment
The atmosphere was appropriate for a fantasy rpg, yet I missed that darkness of Dragon Age a little. I wasn't exactly happy with how repetitive the game world seemed to be and how few actually different zones there were. Nevertheless, the city was certainly well done. Also the parts of the city might have differed somewhat greater - the alianage made have been more than the same houses as everywhere with a tree in the middle. The constant attacks of gangs in the city at night got a little tiring, but that's ok. The costumes and looks of the people got a little fancier, less realistic medieval, more fantastic fairy tale.

All in all I think the slightly warmer atmosphere fit to the story of a fortune knight's life - as apposed to the story of a desperate grey warden fighting archdemon.

Characters & Companions
Characters seemed generally not quite as driven to extremes as in Dragon Age. Morrigan, Allister even Leliana were so absolute in the way they were that it was sometimes hard to bear. I felt that in Dragon Age II the companions felt a lot more human in general and that was a good thing. Yes, I missed Leliana, my love interest in Dragon Age, and my heart made a jump when she appeared in the end. I missed Allister and was happy when he showed up during the game. Made me feel a lot more "at home" in the game suddenly. I was glad no Shale type of character was there. He was supposedly funny an, a character as unlikely and out of the line one could think of. But I didn't find him funny and he didn't really fit into the picture. It was like having Charly Chapplin appear in a scene of Alien. I am not really a friend of all these romances in video games and though I don't try to intentionally avoid them either. So Dragon Age II was the first time I had actually two in one game - first with Isabela, then with Anders. The latter turning out a little strange…

For the first time in for a few Bioware games I had the feeling your companions were actually on my side, they weren't a challenge of the game, things that may bite you in the backside on the long run, but actually friends of your main. And that was good feeling. Sometimes you lost influence, but I usually could live with it. I shouldn't have tried to be Merrill's and Fenris' friend, for the game makes it perfectly worthwhile to say just what you mean. You don't have to keep smearing honey around everyone's beard. Ok, in the end I would probably have not made it to Fenris rival against the wall, because too many times I just agreed with him. But after all that wouldn't have changed anything. He still would have turned against me in the final fight, when I sided with the mages. I am curious if Merrill would side against me if I side with mages and she's my full enemy… or she's my full rival.

Bethany: You may argue she's a Mary Sue, but even so, I don't think I ever felt so deeply for a video game character since Imoen. She was the good one. The mage who didn't never even consider fall prey to temptation while facing certain death, and yet was very much alive. The only thing that disturbed me about her was this dress. Looked like a bard's outfit, a strange combination actually, yet with completely pointless chain applications and a neckline that made stare at my own sister's chest. She would be - just like Imoen - the kind of character I'd forget all rules for to save her. Unfortunately I couldn't save her from the taint of the dark spawn. The memory of Bethany was what made me decide for the mages in the conflict, over than remaining neutral as many of my characters in the past would have. And if more mages had died as brave as Bethany did, the Templars would have a lot less justification.
Isabella: I liked her relaxed attitude towards sex as well as her sparks of compassion mixed up with outward greed and selfishness to start with. When she brought back that book my champion would have pounced and kissed her in front of the Arishok, given the option. I like how the relationship between her and Aveline developed. The romance was nice in so far as it was not really a romance to begin with but just a sexual adventure. But I did like the Isabela more and more throughout the game. In the end I wondered, why I why did I give up on her for Anders - yes, I never had the intention for my champion to be lesbian (and a single one adventure doesn't really count), after all I just liked her.
Anders: So he turned out to be… well, what? Not really the criminal, but in a way, you could fairly call him terrorist, because intentionally used terror to spark a war and make the city's descent into chaos complete. At the same time he was my love interest. To be honest his obsession frustrated me more and more anyway - I am not sure whether I won't just stick with Isabela on my second play through. He was a good companion though, and the best advisor on magic and spirits of the fade I had. I actually enjoyed the encounter with the actual Justice on the trip into the fade, and actually counted him to the characters of relatively high integrity. Until the end that is. After he had blown up the chantry I sent him away, but picked him up again later, after I joined the mages in the fight. It felt strange to walk away with the one who had caused so much destruction. I have no idea what will turn out of it, but in a bit of Merril like denial, my champion just couldn't give up on him.

The story
A long time multiple episode story of considerably less impact to the game world than usual for Bioware. Well, barring Neverwinter Nights, were it was only about the fate of one city as well. It was a different approach, I liked tracing the story of the years, see how your choices made impact within the game, things developed around you. And yet I missed a concrete greater task to follow, a heroic agenda instead of a multitude of episodes. It was certainly nice for a game but I wouldn't want it to become a habit. However, I found it certainly better than Mass Effect 2, where the majority of the game was doing your team mates' stories, which were even a lot less related to a greater whole than the episodes of Dragon Age II. However, having back clearly related episodes, each one contributing to a greater picture as in Dragon Age would not have been bad.

One very positive thing about Dragon Age II was that there were more dragons, even though final end boss was just an insane, obsessed woman if comparably little relevance,

One of the two things that seriously annoyed me about Dragon Age II: In the background it's always Varric talking to that chantry woman about the champion. It was my impression that the final chapter would be the one where the chantry approaches the champion with what they need, that there would be at least one chapter when reality catches up with the story told in background. I was completely surprised when the game was over after defeating Meridith, especially considering she wasn't really the classic ultimate enemy. In had always been extreme and there were rumors even before she got possession of the artifact, but in the end she had fallen prey to the exact same thing as Varric's brother. And in a way, Bethany. The end titles scrolled down just in the moment when I expected it to actually start, when a purpose seemed to have shaped.

Equipment and Looks
I liked the simplification of the crafting system in Dragon Age. The original system seemed like a waste of skill points to me since I never really came across enough resources to create stuff to the amount that made it appear worthwhile. In Dragon Age II it seemed fair, ordering the stuff from crafter contacts of yours.

I've already a mentioned, yet wanted to say at this point again, that it appeared that some fashion designers had gone a little too wild in Dragon Age II. Not really a problem and if it wasn't for the shame of staring into my own sister's neckline I'd have not mentioned it, but I actually prefer the looks armor in Dragon Age. The weapons themselves looked better in Dragon Age II, except for two handed swords that looked like sprung from a manga comic but many weapons seemed less exaggerated. Like the saw sword in DA:O.

The lack of choice when it came to weapons and armor was a bit annoying. Not being able to change your companions appearance is fair. It makes sense to take that out of the hand of the player, my companions aren't my main's dress up dolls after all. Even though it did disturb me how the game always hit this "can only be used by hawke" into my face constantly.

The junk function helped managing stuff a lot, spared a lot of time. What I missed from Mass Effect was a central point to manage the equipment of all companions at once. I think a good future development would be to have inventory as something that you can manage in your home base, not so much in-fields. Basically like the Mass Effect 2 loadout screen and armor customization screen at once, just with more options and actually different equipment.

One minor feature that I missed very much was the absence of two weapon configurations between which you could switch easily. In Dragon Age every character had some means to engage the enemy on range and switch between the modes easily. That was an interesting tactical facet and should not have been removed.

To conclude
I can only say that I played the game in less than a week and enjoyed it. Though many of my comments seemed very, very critical. I really loved the freedom the game gave me that wasn't their previously, but missed the dark atmosphere of pending doom. It was not quite as "serious" as previous games but a good, round whole, very pleasant to play. But, by the maker, I realized how much I missed Leliana when I saw her in the end. What was really amiss was a clear storyline and even more so a clear end.

[Skokes]

Schattenkeil wrote...

What I missed from Mass Effect was a central point to manage the equipment of all companions at once. I think a good future development would be to have inventory as something that you can manage in your home base, not so much in-fields. Basically like the Mass Effect 2 loadout screen and armor customization screen at once, just with more options and actually different equipment.

Agreed. Why BioWare continues to choose to put storage spaces in areas where you don't have access to the full party (as occurs in each of the Dragon Age games) confounds me.

Though I'm of the minority who would just as soon toss out the inventory system more or less completely.

[Schattenkeil]

Inventory is a difficult topic. An integral part of the game's challenge is to become more powerful in an rpg. Overcoming the actual obstacles the game provides won't be so very much difficult if you just have the proper power level.

Consequently, virtually all rewards for achievements are payed out in abstract values that make the player more powerful. There are exceptions of course: The bonus outfits for your team mates or badges (.e. "achievements) and pure storyline items that serve no actual function do not really make you more powerful.

Equipment you would normally put into your inventory is nothing but such abstract rewards and the classic paper doll inventory is the hoard. A ring that makes you stronger doesn't make a lot of sense. You can always explain it with magic, but then the amount of magic you come across in form of inventory items would vastly exceed the amount of magic apparent in the game world. A ring that is not apparent, gives you a bonus on skills, and his no history, explanation or justification isn't really a ring. It doesn't make sense and from an in-world perspective. It's just an abstract, slotable strength reward.

The modern video game rpg inventory does not have anything to with traditional adventurer equipment in the first computer rpgs or pen and paper rpgs in the past. Ammunition, ropes, lamps, means to make fire, climbing equipment etc. All those things don't really make one more powerful, you just need them at a certain point. So they fell prey to abstraction. It's never so dark that you can't see, you will just have climbing equipment if needed or won't need equipment, ammunition is just assumed to be there. The equipment you bring nowadays is completely different, it doesn't visibly effect the game world at all. Their only actual effect is on complex, abstract game system. Still they are considered real, because you can drag them into the paper doll that shows up when you hit the "I" key. This is not a natural necessity of the game, it's a kind of mutual conditioning of gaming industry and players.

If you remove inventory players start believe that something important to the game had been removed, even if only a very high level abstract mechanism was replaced by another. The real inventory doesn't exist for a long time anymore, modern inventory is just a means to manipulate the game engine. But to the player it feels like they get less reward for their kill. That they aren't allowed o excell as much as before anymore, that they#re not allowed to set apart from everyone else as much as before.

Modifié par Schattenkeil, 13 avril 2011 - 03:58 .

[Asdara]

Schattenkeil wrote...

Inventory is a difficult topic. An integral part of the game's challenge is to become more powerful in an rpg. Overcoming the actual obstacles the game provides won't be so very much difficult if you just have the proper power level.

Consequently, virtually all rewards for achievements are payed out in abstract values that make the player more powerful. There are exceptions of course: The bonus outfits for your team mates or badges (.e. "achievements) and pure storyline items that serve no actual function do not really make you more powerful.

Equipment you would normally put into your inventory is nothing but such abstract rewards and the classic paper doll inventory is the hoard. A ring that makes you stronger doesn't make a lot of sense. You can always explain it with magic, but then the amount of magic you come across in form of inventory items would vastly exceed the amount of magic apparent in the game world. A ring that is not apparent, gives you a bonus on skills, and his no history, explanation or justification isn't really a ring. It doesn't make sense and from an in-world perspective. It's just an abstract, slotable strength reward.

The modern video game rpg inventory does not have anything to with traditional adventurer equipment in the first computer rpgs or pen and paper rpgs in the past. Ammunition, ropes, lamps, means to make fire, climbing equipment etc. All those things don't really make one more powerful, you just need them at a certain point. So they fell prey to abstraction. It's never so dark that you can't see, you will just have climbing equipment if needed or won't need equipment, ammunition is just assumed to be there. The equipment you bring nowadays is completely different, it doesn't visibly effect the game world at all. Their only actual effect is on complex, abstract game system. Still they are considered real, because you can drag them into the paper doll that shows up when you hit the "I" key. This is not a natural necessity of the game, it's a kind of mutual conditioning of gaming industry and players.

If you remove inventory players start believe that something important to the game had been removed, even if only a very high level abstract mechanism was replaced by another. The real inventory doesn't exist for a long time anymore, modern inventory is just a means to manipulate the game engine. But to the player it feels like they get less reward for their kill. That they aren't allowed o excell as much as before anymore, that they#re not allowed to set apart from everyone else as much as before.

Interesting post.  I agree that the "equipment" component of the RPG (rope, rations, crampons, tent, kettle, ect.) has come and gone in the pen and paper stages of the genre.  However, I disagree that rings, necklaces, and belts merely supply "status rewards" in a 'physical' manifestation.  They do supply status upgrades (+2 str, +magic, whatever), but they are also customization opportunities for the character.  Example: my "staff and robe" mages all went for the + magic, spellpower, etc. rings, belts, and such whereas my "arcane warrior" always opted for dex enhancements, simply because that served how I was playing in combat far better.  You don't SEE them, that's true, but they are more significant than a simple stat upgrade in that they offer choice and customization by being shared among the group in item form.  If I don't need a +3 dex ring then I'll give that to Isabella or Zevran, but if I do then it's mine.  I don't want the game determining that for me, because it removes my ability to tweak my stats to a specific niche playstyle in combat.

As far as making sense... I don't know there are a lot of enchanters in the game world and enchanted items seem VERY common.  It's magic that is fluid and instant that seems most threatening to the people of Thedas - once you know that it's been put into stasis and does only 1 thing (or 2, whatever) then it's just a useful tool.  A ring that makes you stronger or a necklace that gives you more mana doesn't seem as unlikely in Thedas as it would in another game - like ME games for example.  There the excuse of "super science" comes in with the ability to "augment" you and that, to me, seems like it would be more expensive/controlled than "magic" items in a pre-industrial fantasy world.  

Any costume, clothing, or trinket that augments a personal attribute is somewhat farfetched, but that's the standard we've accepted in the RPG genre practically since its invention, so I don't see a reason to discard it out of hand.

[Schattenkeil]

It's true that items enable you to pass advantages between the group but I'd prefer considerably less stuff of more significance. Take the Warden's Oath in DA:O for example. That is an item that has history, it has meaning, personally to you. But you eventually swap it out because enemy #3641 dropped a better item. I find that a shame.

If you forgive me some wishful thinking:

Things like this don't need to go to the inventory, but instead, have a simple list memories and tokens of past events, which you can activate and deactivate for example, only so many at a time. That may be simple things, but if you would activate them they appear. The warden's oath on your chest, the silken shawl of the maiden princess in your chest pocket, the feather of the king of giant eagles bound to your upper arm, Isabela's love bite at your neck...

Maybe you have only one pool of such items to activate for the whole group but not all items work for everyone. Maybe each has their completely own set but certain items work better together because they bind they represent a common ideal, experience, hope, enemy.

The inventory you would always keep is a main weapon and your armor. But those should be more personal as well. Armor should not be looted o, it should be created or made as gifts for exceptional services, just the access to armor smiths, scarce resources changes. Once you've found an armor you like you can keep improving it, replacing steel parts with mithril, carbon fiber or a titanium alloy. You always have the choice to save for an entirely new armor with better base values or progressing your existing one. Each set of armor having an own unique set of specialities, those with the higher base values more desirable ones. Ultimately every armor would be worthwhile though. You cannot replace individual parts unless on the course of the armor's own "skill tree".

Apart from that I'd love to have outfits a greater social appearance on the game world. So that characters have different sets, like a female rogue could choose to appear medium elven chainmail, king Eralon gave you for save his oracle parrot, the silent hunter cloth, or a ball gown, weapons hidden under the skirt part. Each set having own advantages and disadvantages. A nice thing about Dragon Age origins is, that the actual armor sets all do have a story. This story should just be more personal to protagonist, she should experience it, and there should be choice.

Another very personal item would be your main weapon, of course... that would give similar opportunities.

But no one really needs a left hand ring slot.

Modifié par Schattenkeil, 13 avril 2011 - 07:22 .