2816 réponses à ce sujet

[HiroVoid]

Have items come with descriptions. I missed that in DA2.

[VoodooDrackus]

Mark Darrah wrote...

We will try to bring some closure to Hawke's story but likely not in a playable form. Originally we had planned to do an expansion pack but had to stop to focus on what we are working on now.

Nooooooooo...

I enjoyed Hawke's story via Varric, no, I loved it. I played through DA2 so many times and would never do the same with Origins.

This actually depresses me. You guys probably won't have a DA 3 out until fall of 2014 now. I assumed you were already working on 3. I understand you want to listen to your fans so that you give them what they want, but don't let it change the story you had planned for 3. Maybe give them more armor, items, etc for your companions, make the locations more unique... vary it a little like you did in Origins. Voice actors for the character you play like in 2 would be awesome.

2 was not flawless but I loved it... it took me awhile to realize that time had passed and a lot went on during the year between chapters. A better transition would have brought that home more. That is my only real complaint... 

I liked the gameplay, the characters and story better in 2. It saddens me that I have to wait a couple of years for a conclusion/continuation of the story. I am just hoping that you won't let people who didn't actually play DA2 and just saw someone else play it on youtube or read someones opinion dictate the direction of the next game.

[Rorschachinstein]

Dragon Age has so much lore that we never get to see. Why haven't there been any Alamerri Barbarians, Ash warriors, Qunari females, some sort of return of the griffins, unique Fade spirits, and an answer to whether or not there are Deities.

[K_Tabris]

More of the Qunari culture would be welcome.

Did Bioware ever explain why Sten has no horns, and Arishok and co. do? Is this chalked to a redesign, or do some Qunari just not have horns?

I absolutely loved the detailed codex and journal, the random nots and love letters floating all around Ferelden, the ability to make armor from collected materials (dragon hide and drake skin, for ex.). More of this would be quite welcome. I would also happily trade quantity of armor and clothing customization if we are allowed to play as an elf.

[Catic]

What I'm most concerned about is the dialogue, as many seems set on continuing with a voice acted protagonist, or even a dialogue wheel.
Making the protagonist have a voice of his/her own isn't a bad thing in and of itself. I think what players who are against the idea are really worried about is that doing so would limit the options within a conversation (there was a HUUUUGE list of options in the first game for most of the conversations). Having a dialogue wall, rather than a wheel not only enables you to pick from more selections, but it also keeps one from feeling like they need to continually pick from set categories. Then of course there's the issue of not knowing exactly what your character is going to say when you pick something. The whole thing makes you feel disconnected from your character, as if you're watching the dialogue rather than participating in it.

For example, I really liked being able to choose exactly which joke or prod to make at Alistair during some of the humourous conversations the game had with him. And seeing him respond exactly to what I said made it feel so much more engaging. In DAII, all of the replies were so vague that it frankly got boring to talk to people.
----------------------
There can be a way to compromise, however. What another user suggested a while back was to maybe implement a system where you retain both the PC's voice acting acting as seen in DAII, as well as the dialogue "wall" as seen in DA:O. To solve the abridged text issue within the dialogue selections, it could be set so that the entire string appears when one mouses over the one of the options.

Those who like their PC with a voice will get it, and those who liked the way it was in DA:O should have no reason to complain (so long as there is still a huge variety of things to say) Perhaps there could even be settings to disable the PC's voiced reply, should certain people prefer to play that way.

This seems like an almost perfect solution and I hope to god they do something like this. 

Modifié par Catic, 20 mars 2012 - 08:08 .

[Statulos]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Dragon Age has so much lore that we never get to see. Why haven't there been any Alamerri Barbarians, Ash warriors, Qunari females, some sort of return of the griffins, unique Fade spirits, and an answer to whether or not there are Deities.

I hope to never have a definitive answer for that.

[Tpiom]

Actually, since this is more of a thread of Dragon Age as a whole rather than individual games I should throw in my coins on other stuff too. Now where to begin...?

Dragon Age I had a map (of Ferelden) when you moved around, which helped a bit, which DA2 didn't need to you made a wise decision to skip that. The map helped you place everything geographically which was cool - but at first, I thought Ferelden was all there was. Then I heard Loghain mention other places such as Orlais and Zevran talked about Antiva I was: "huh...? Where are those places - can't find them on the map" Alistair mentioned Weisshaupt fortress which was thousands of miles away and then I realized that the world was bigger.

But then you also had some questionable story decisions. It's not *clearly* explain why Loghain hunts you. Anyway, you resolve the dwarves, elves other problems before Landsmeet. Why? Shouldn't *your* problem be fixed first (you could have used Alistair' past as a twist and then have it be ok). But now it is: "Hey, we have an heir to the throne here but we will not bother with that stuff and get official support from the country as we help the other cities". Not to mention, after Landsmeet you go to Redcliffe only to go back to Denerim later (it's a bit silly). But moving on... Ostagar could have been more powerful. After all, it is what shapes the story. We are barely introduced to the king, Duncan and they are killed off so quickly. I was like "Cailan who?" the first time when I talked to people after the incident. Some areas could get a bit repetitive compared to other parts in the game (such as Orzammar's dungeons). You don't wander aimlessly elsewhere in the game.


Oh, Dragon Age II is not innocent either. The Qunari should have been the final act. Now it's like "kill Qunari" and get back to killing each other. It's a bit irrelevant as we know that both mages and the Templar were damaged in the conflict (I hope!). But if we place them after the mages vs templar act, your side (mages OR templars) is weakened after battling the other side. Also, it makes sense for them to strike against a destroyed force but Hawke rides along and saves the day.

Not to mention the family... What's the point of introducing family members if they are dropped after the first act? It would have been awesome to fight with someone you know closely (brother or sister) and perhaps even give the player a moral dilemma. Save your mother OR cut off the Quanri escape. There's not enough time for both.


What more?...

Oh, right. Elper... John... I don't remember your name but whatever, I love you and your team. The cutscenes and the cinematography was excellent in both games. I don't really have any criticism to give you. I'm not an expert in your area either but I know the basics.


Oh, right... About the iconic appearances - you should motivate players to keep the iconic robes or whatever to give them slightly better attributes or that they advance level with the player. For instance, Player's level 1 - robe gives you +1 in Dex - Player's level 5 - robe gives you +5 in Dex. etc... Or in other ways reward players who keep their iconic clothes. Maybe "Companion X" must have its default clothes (can't sell it? - don't let it take a place in the bags either!) to complete a certain mission. For instance, Leliana must keep her sister robes to enter the chantry - or else the guards will stab her or something...

I don't mind reused areas if they are hidden (like in Origins?). I am pretty sure there are reused areas, but much better concealed. If it gives me a side quest or two then sure. Go ahead!

About the voiced vs silent protagonist. The very core reason I say silent guy is because a voiced character is limited and takes more time (if it doesn't... then ok I guess) to accomplish. A defined character such as Hawke makes sense with using a voice actor/actress but a much more vague character like the Warden is where you should let the player choose his/her role.


And a few minor things you should consider:
* The menus... in Origins they were gritty and bloody that helps with the immersion. Why was it changed?
* Think about the bridge between the games. Where is Hawke and his family in Lothering when the Warden is there...? If we play as a NPC that is in Dragon Age II (or I) many people will be like: "Hey,
I know/helped/saw/hurt that guy in previous games..." That's cool and very appreciated.
* Don't redraw stuff... Flemeth looks completely different and so does the darkspawn. In fact, they look rather hilarious in DA2. A blight is when they arrive and consume the world - and they were very evil in Awakening so why are they acting like trash mobs in DA2? For many people, they were a challenge in DA:O. They are not introduced as a danger in the sequel. Although, you did a better job with the Ogres - they might look stupid but they are at least strong. The one with the shield in the first DLC was very good. Easy, nonetheless, but you know it's a big creature and therefore very dangerous.

And Anders. He (and Justice) were introduced as rather comical characters in Awakening but then they are pricks in Dragon Age II. They hated injustice in Awakening too but used different ways to solve it. I would have been fine with it if we saw them fall from fools (Awakening) to jackasses (DA2) but we don't even see that


That's all I can think of at the moment... if I don't complain about it means it's introduced/done rather well in the games.

[Cyr8]

I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

[Xewaka]

Mark Darrah wrote...
This thread is great! I really like most of the feedback that I am seeing (though I'm definately not able to read everything anymore)
To set expectations:
We are gathering feedback right now.
We haven't announced anything so don't expect a lot of concrete answers from us for a while.
As I said earlier, I would rather have something to show you as opposed to just a bunch of yalking points.
Come see us at PAX East as well if you want to continue the discussion.

Well, since you're gathering feedback, I'll repost my review of the game:

After completing and mulling over about the game’s flaws and hits, I’ve decided to write up a review of the same, highlighting some of the more contentious points in the game. I will visit in no particular order several points of contention that need to be adressed to improve the quality of future titles.
Warning, there will be a few spoilers, in “The family angle” section and “Story and Gameplay segregation”, due to the nature of the topic they cover.

Combat gameplay.
The force/fortitude concept is an intriguing one. It could use some tweaking, but it adds a very interesting effect to the combat dynamic. The Cross class Combo is a nice feature that reinforces the theme of a well balanced and coordinated party; it's a pity it came at the cost of intra-class combos, though, as it means at least two party members can’t cooperate between themselves, as there will always be at least a doubled class in the group.
The combat style is unexpected, at first. The way it mixes deliberate, pause and play style with a more active dodging (due to the way collision detection works in bosses) will probably confuse players who favor either, until they realize the need to hybridize their play style. This combined with damage and casting moved from the conclusion of the animation to the start of it may, at first, give the illusion of a more responsive, faster gameplay. However, when coupled with the active dodging it actually becomes the opposite: The animation must run to conclusion once an action is started, so snap reaction time is much worse. You can’t interrupt yourself once an action is started, which hurts the intended faster combat pacing. It is made worse by the fact that even autoattacks are affected by this rule, which runs counter to the faster paced combat: you cannot snap-react to the battlefield, destroying the illusion of action-based gameplay, and due to the need of active dodging you cannot fight in the deliberate, detached manner that party-based pause and play game style allows.
The wave reinforce mechanic, despite being a good idea, is poorly executed in game by sheer amount of repetition and haphazard position. When practically every fight consists of at the very least three waves of enemies, instead of being used judiciously to challenge the player at specific points, they get old fast. The fact that there are points at which the waves simply spawn out of thin air, rather than being at least handwaved as dropping from the ceilings / balconies, hurts the credibility of the system. Taking a look at how Drakensang (for example) handles reinforcement waves, they’re better integrated there: walls collapse and locked doors open to let the wave come in. They’re not used in every combat, but only when it would make sense and make the fight more challenging.
I should probably mention the recycled fight scenarios, but since it has been covered by practically every review, I think that point can be skipped.

Non-combat gameplay.
It would be nice to have some.
DA 2 quickly enters a “Fight. Talk. Fight. Talk” dynamic and never really abandons it. Relying on a single gameplay element to pull the player across the whole game is a mistake, as doing basically the same motions over and over builds fatigue upon the player. The game is in dire need of some breath room to break its cyclic pace and give the player a refreshing new challenge. Varric's act 2 mission does this to a point, and it is a much needed relief. As a whole, however, the lack of a good puzzle level – or other similar pace breaker – hurts the progression and enjoyment of the game. Fatigue builds upon the player with no real breather level to break the monotony of fight after fight, and the player is never challenged in a new, different, engaging way through the game.

Main Character Building and Customization
The removal of off-combat skills (Coercion, Herbalism, Survival, etc) while at first seems to reduce the clog in the leveling system, it also has an unintended malign effect: It further destroys the illusion that there's more to the game than fighting. Not that there actually is more to the game than fighting (as the previous section noted) but giving the player absolutely no way to influence the world in a way other than by hitting people with sharp sticks makes it painfully clear: we’re not creating a character, we’re building a lawnmower.
It is a very fun lawnmower to build, don’t get me wrong, and the skill webs are leaps and bounds above the linear talents/spells in Origins. But still, it feels as if half the character sheet is missing.
Itemization in the game could be better. Yes, the star code allows for at-a-glance evaluations, which will be needed, as it is the only way to tell items from the same type apart, and even then. What happened to the ambient text? Where are the short writings about the story of the weapon, armor, or complement and the crafter behind it? Where is the flavor? Equipment is just a bunch of raw statistics, nothing to make them stand out. Again, they serve their purpose, and there is enough loot lying around to never need to visit a shop – and still get some very good equipment from those. Overall, while the character building is functional and the combat skills are well designed, the inventory lack of flavor and the non-existent non-combat skills make the character feel less like a character and more like a set of skill combos.

Companion Characterization and Customization
It is done the wrong way. In order to give each companion an unique feel, the player's options to tinker with them have been cut with no compensation for these changes. Characterization has to come from additions and trade-offs, not from restrictions. To show an example of characterization done well, allow me to go down the nostalgia road and bring up one of the most beloved Bioware companions: Minsc. Minsc is a man of the wilds, a barbarian. However, when Baldur's Gate came out, there was no such class in the D&D rulebook. So they took the next best thing (a Ranger), and gave to him an additional Berserk skill. In addition, to further cement his quirky nature, they traded the regular animal companion of a Ranger for Boo, a quick slot item that increased Minsc's damage output. By a single addition and a trade-off, Minsc became this unique, beloved character. This is the proper way to characterize companions: Additions and trade-offs. This way, the companions are given their own flair, their own personality, without getting in the way of gameplay. It allows the player to build the party based not on class-skill combinations, but rather, by choice of companions. It allows a greater enjoyment of the game.
Redundancy and overlapping within companions is a good thing, as it allows a higher party composition variety. Specially considering the emphasis on teamwork, having the team variety in options limited hurts party building possibilities. You're pretty much forced to pick an specific companion or do it yourself if you want a certain role in the party covered. Not that there shouldn't be specialists, but rather than a specialist shouldn't be the only one to perform his specialization task: being the best at something shouldn't mean being the only option to do said thing.
However, neither of those things are present in DA 2 companions: Their character sheet is even more restricted than Hawke’s, with less personalization options, and they have random skill trees missing. Even if it could be justified for the mundane characters (as weapon specialists), Magi characters being barred a spell school for no good reason simply does not make sense.
The limitations in customization and specialization placed around the characters are arbitrary restrictions that serve no true gameplay purpose, and limit the player’s creativity for no apparent reason. You might say it’s to properly characterize the companions, but as I explained earlier, I do not consider it a valid reason, when said characterization can be done in a much more engaging and creative way.

“The family angle”

Apparently, in creator lingo, “exploring the family angle” equals “setting up a source of cheap, easy emotional punches for the player”. And the worst part is that it fails at it. The first family member we mmet that will be killed is killed in the prologue, before the player has had a chance to actually connect with the characters. And the way the characters act reinforces the feeling that the death was superficial and meaningless, there only for a perceived shock value: even the gameplay bit immediately after the scene destroys any semblance of impact the death could have (more on that later). There’s a similar scene at the act 1 finale, that only triggers if certain conditions are met, that has a much more meaningful impact in the player. By that point, the player has had time to become familiar with said character: we’re not being asked to care five minutes into the game, but after six hours of meeting and interacting with the character: the scene actually has weight because the player has been allowed to build a connection.
Then there comes another act 2 quest that tries to capitalize on this but fails. Mostly because at its resolution, the player is struck with the following thought “I’m talking to the magically animated disembodied head of my mother grafted to a rag built body”; which completely destroys any meaningful impact the scene might have had.


Gameplay and Storyline segregation
This is one of the most glaring, crippling, off-putting, recurring failures in the game. At every turn, the story the dialogue and codex tells, and the story the world and gameplay tells, are completely unrelated.
The dialogue tells that Kirkwall is overcrowded with refugees, and even before, it was already a bustling community. What we travel around is an almost deserted city with a scarce population that look more like cardboard cuts than actual people.
The dialogues with Bethany and the codex reflect a heavy Templar presence, and her fear that using her powers would result in her capture. The gameplay has us casting spells openly all around Kirkwall, several times in front of Templars, and they wouldn’t bat an eyelash.
The codex and dialogues reveal that Blood Magic is a risky affair, and that the power it grants ends corrupting the user beyond redemption; it also tells us that said forbidden lore can only be learnt by dealing with demons or cooperating with other corrupted mages. Gameplay has us spend a talent point and never throws the consequences at the player.
The slides and dialogue tell years pass between acts, yet no character changes looks, no merchants open new business, every city NPC (all three of them) remain exactly at the same place, leaving the whole city in stasis for the duration of the game.
I could go on, but I think I made this point clear: the lore and the gameplay tell two different, completely unrelated, and usually conflicting stories, and the player is at a loss of which one he’s supposed to follow, destroying any attempt at immersion.

The Story
I salute the effort in trying to show a different plot than “Hero saves the day”. I really enjoyed the fact that Hawke is not a hero, but a war profiteer that uses every chance he/she gets to turn the situation to his/her advantage. However, the former point –gameplay and story segregation – dilutes a lot of the impact the story would have, as the two conflicting stories we’re being told muddy the three vignettes about Hawke’s life changing events (his reclaim of his noblehood, his ascension to champion, and his involvement in the first battle of the mage revolution). The conflicting lore and gameplay do a disservice to the events in Hawke’s life we’re supposed to be caring about.

The Paraphrase Wheel
This is the other most glaring, crippling, off-putting, recurring failures in the game
First things first, the way the paraphrase wheel mechanic works in Dragon Age 2 is an improvement over former Bioware examples (read: Mass Effect) and less of a headache. Then again, bashing your head against a wall until you hear a wet snap is also less of a headache than Mass Effect wheel; but you take your victories where you can.
The inclusion of the tone icons is there to help the character understand better the meaning of the paraphrases. However, they only clarify intent, not content. We’re still doing guesswork rather than choices, as we still don’t know what will be said, only how. This difference between intent and content needs to be pointed out: Choosing a dialogue option should be based on content, not intent, as choices are only meaningful when we know WHAT our character will say, rather than HOW. Being surprised by our own character is the fastest way to destroy the enjoyment of the game.
As a matter of fact, when we need the clarification the icons should bring the most is when they fail: choices. When we’re asked to take a position, the icons do absolutely nothing to help us know what each choice will actually mean: we’re left again at the mercy of incomplete paraphrases that do not carry enough information for us to know if the paraphrase we’re choosing is actually the stance our character would take. Simply put, paraphrases fail as a method of conveying information to the player, and due to their strict character limitations they can never convey enough information to allow the player to make informed choices; the best thing they can offer is educated guesses. And that is simply not good enough.
This huge, glaring defect is apparently offset by the voice over benefits. Due to my specific situation (I play the game in Spanish, an idiom the game is subbed but not dubbed to), I must endure all the drawbacks a voiced character comes with without enjoying any of the alleged benefits. I’m sure those benefits are there: I’m having a hard time figuring out how they can offset the glaring drawback of removing character control from the player in a RPG.
Now, I understand the reason behind the paraphrases: apparently subvocalization was a big enough problem in the focus test groups that there was the need to *force* the players to listen to the voice over by removing the subtitles and putting paraphrases instead of full lines. After several conversations with a fellow forumite (Upsettingshorts), and excellent fellow who actually experiences the subvocalization issue, we came up with a solution of compromise that would allow the paraphrases to remain while allowing people who want to know the exact content of the line to do so as well: Holdover over a paraphrase option for a few seconds would cause the subtitle associated with the full line to show up in the subtitle section. This allows both parties to be satisfied, as those with subvocalization problems can consider the paraphrase alone while those who want to know the full content of the line can simply wait a bit to learn its content.

Overall conclusion
 It’s a pity. A better execution of the game, a better intertwining of gameplay and story, a more polished character and companion development, a more worked out combat system and encounter design would have made the game much better than the product we have in our hands, which feels unfinished. We can glimpse the game it wanted to be, it was supposed to be, around the cracks, and it is a much more engaging experience than the game that came out. The flashes of brilliance, specially the new story angle, are muted by all the gaping flaws in the product.


And I can’t even play as a Dorf.

Modifié par Xewaka, 20 mars 2012 - 08:12 .

[Alessa]

Cyr8 wrote...

I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

Good question ... yes, please ....

[Ghost_Nappa]

Alessa-00 wrote...

Cyr8 wrote...

I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

Good question ... yes, please ....

I third this.

[Sylvianus]

Mark Darrah wrote...

As I said earlier, I would rather have something to show you as opposed to just a bunch of yalking points.

Definitely better than words, indeed.

I can't wait to see how will look DA3, visually, and some stuff about customization.

[Morroian]

mariosgh wrote...

Please make more long, complex quests. Quests, where there is some mystery, investigation etc. Amount and variety of quests was one of the reasons why BG2 was such a fun.

DA2 had detective style quests but there still could be more variety. As for length I for one would like to keep the quests at a similar length to DA2. The long dungeon crawls in DAO became too much of a grind and its worth noting games like Skyrim don't have long quests either.

[Rorschachinstein]

Statulos wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Dragon Age has so much lore that we never get to see. Why haven't there been any Alamerri Barbarians, Ash warriors, Qunari females, some sort of return of the griffins, unique Fade spirits, and an answer to whether or not there are Deities.

I hope to never have a definitive answer for that.

well yes, not an outright "the maker is real" answer

[Kavatica]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

More of the Qunari culture would be welcome.

Did Bioware ever explain why Sten has no horns, and Arishok and co. do? Is this chalked to a redesign, or do some Qunari just not have horns?

I heard somewhere around the internets that they wanted the Qun to look like they do in DA2 in DAO but weren't able to carry through with the design for whatever reason. My explanation for this difference, based on things I have heard around the internets/in game:

a) The Qunari are a religion, not a race.
The Qunari we see in DAO are just a small portion of the Qun. Who is to say that the majority of the Qun don't have horns and Sten is just one of the few who doesn't?

[Statulos]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Statulos wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Dragon Age has so much lore that we never get to see. Why haven't there been any Alamerri Barbarians, Ash warriors, Qunari females, some sort of return of the griffins, unique Fade spirits, and an answer to whether or not there are Deities.

I hope to never have a definitive answer for that.

well yes, not an outright "the maker is real" answer

In fact I'd rather see no answer at all. Belief exists and that's the only thing we need. This is one of the few medieval settings where atheism exists and I like it that way a lot.

[David Gaider]

Cyr8 wrote...
I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

Well, Mark already mentioned that elements of the expansion's story were being necessarily drawn into the rest of DA's arc. So once that's done, there's really no going back again. And that's even if we were willing to work on a DA2 expansion when "work on DA2 is now finished". So, sadly, I suspect the answer to that is "no". But nothing is ever impossible.

[Dave of Canada]

Ghost_Nappa wrote...

Alessa-00 wrote...

Cyr8 wrote...

I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

Good question ... yes, please ....

I third this.

Going back and supporting your previous game is not financially wise.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 20 mars 2012 - 08:17 .

[Rorschachinstein]

Statulos wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Statulos wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Dragon Age has so much lore that we never get to see. Why haven't there been any Alamerri Barbarians, Ash warriors, Qunari females, some sort of return of the griffins, unique Fade spirits, and an answer to whether or not there are Deities.

I hope to never have a definitive answer for that.

well yes, not an outright "the maker is real" answer

In fact I'd rather see no answer at all. Belief exists and that's the only thing we need. This is one of the few medieval settings where atheism exists and I like it that way a lot.

But Dumat still having power over the mortal realm doesn't make you wonder?

[LordHuffnPuff]

Hey devs en masse.

I wanted to lead off by saying thank you for continuing to be involved with the community on an intimate basis. Bioware is one of two companies (the other being Asymmetric Publications, makers of Kingdom of Loathing) who regularly interact on a personal level with their consumer base. It definitely leads to an improved product and allows us, the fans, to feel a stronger connection with what we ultimately receive for our money. You all know this, of course, I simply reiterate it to you to let you know you are doing the right thing from where I stand.

Though I felt that Dragon Age II was a weaker product than Origins [and I consistently defend DAII as an overall experience, especially post-rebalancing patch], you already have my money for whatever Dragon Age game you produce next, be it DAIII or Warden Kart. That said, I have some feedback of my own, as well as some answers to specific questions put forward in this thread.

1) Regarding voiced/silent protagonists -- I weakly preferred the silent protagonist in Origins, but that battle has been lost and there are definite benefits in both directions. As to clarity of what the protagonist says when selecting dialogue choices, I would prefer the exact text to appear as opposed to a generalized version. Mike, despite your opinion that you dislike having the exact same thing you've just read on-screen read back to you, I think this is ultimately a safer choice for those that are deep into roleplaying their characters. The paraphrase works well enough in Mass Effect which is comparatively much lighter on the roleplaying aspects, but in Dragon Age, which is a more traditional experience, I think literal is superior.

2) What do you want to see in the future? -- Aside from the already oft-requested things such as customizing the armour of allies and not repeating area designs, length is a major issue. Dragon Age: Origins was massive. If Steam tells the truth, I've logged over 200 hours. I've only completed the game once, though I did check out the other origin stories and a few alternate endings. I simply did every sidequest available, killed every enemy, and played through Awakening and all of the DLC. Comparatively, completing everything in Dragon Age II takes perhaps 40 to 50 hours on a first run. I would like to see a return to the longer, slow burning style of Origins. Also, bring in some of the as-of-yet book exclusive characters. Mass Effect did it, so can you!

And a two-part question:

The import issues from Origins to DA2 were a big issue, as has already been discussed in this thread. I may be incorrect, but I have read that the way Origins stored import data was a handful of flags that were checked, and the rest of the data was ignored -- preventing DA2 from even having the potential to check trivial things such as, say, how many areas you marked with Mabari Dominance. In contrast, I have read that the save file type for DA2 [and ME2 -> ME3] is much more dynamic, allowing Bioware to check pretty much anything. My questions are:

1) Is this information technically accurate?

2) If so, would there be the possibility of actually seeing Hawke [as an NPC or otherwise] in future titles with our customized facial appearances, unlike the appearance of The Warden being unavailable in DAII?

[DAYtheELF]

David Gaider wrote...

Cyr8 wrote...
I have a question: after you release your current Dragon Aae project ® that you aren't announcing, is there a possibility that you would go back and work on that expansion pack that you mentioned? I know I would like that.

Well, Mark already mentioned that elements of the expansion's story were being necessarily drawn into the rest of DA's arc. So once that's done, there's really no going back again. And that's even if we were willing to work on a DA2 expansion when "work on DA2 is now finished". So, sadly, I suspect the answer to that is "no". But nothing is ever impossible.

You know, Mr. Gaider (), you could always write a short story or novel to cover the expansion's plot or lingering DA2 story bits... *hinthint* :innocent: 

Modifié par DAYtheELF, 20 mars 2012 - 08:30 .

[Malakar1]

Alain Baxter wrote...

waouh wrote...
eh merde je ne comprend rien lol

Ha! Je peux parler un peut, mais mon 'franglais' est terrible.
Qu'est ce qu'ont dit c'est que on est finis avec Dragon Age II et on va travailler sur un autre project dans la famille de Dragon Age. On parles avec vous dans les forums et en veut savoir quoi que tous aimes / n'aimes pas avec DA:O et DAII. Si tu as des chose a dire, dites-les!

phew!

[Sorry for gramatically destroying the french language... my mother would _not_ be proud...]

That's quite alright to be honest. I am french Canadian but I can speak a fair amount of english. I'm pretty sure I've been destroying english grammar myself  
Important part is to try!

[Firky]

HiroVoid wrote...

Have items come with descriptions. I missed that in DA2.

!!!!

That.

(Although there were items that were described, mostly DLC and in codices. But, yeah. I concur!)

[taumel]

I'm playing RPGs since quite some time and i did enjoy DA2 a lot more than DAO.

DAO felt kind of outdated, too much pathos/cliches/borrowed ideas, cumbersome micromanagement, beside of Leliana not really interesting characters and so on. I had to force myself to complete it. On the other side i played through DA2 for a couple of times and did enjoy both DLCs as well. DA2 featured a interesting story, good dialogues, nice humour, more mature content and characters, better and more atmospheric gfx, a very good localisation (German), a cross release (OS X version). I enjoyed walking through Kirkwall, also multiple times, and the increased action in the fights. DA2 introduced some fresh wind and was the best RPG since quite some time.

My wishes for a DA3, beside of another DLC for DA2, are, that it's based on DA2 with all it's strengths plus less level recycling & more original quality content, more complex AI for the fights, a enhanced 3d camera instead of the rather displaced tactical map from DAO, mature content and great writing, i want to progress in the story and less spend my time in the inventory, collecting stuff from barrels and killing mice. I also prefer content instead of a open world sandbox.

Modifié par taumel, 20 mars 2012 - 08:36 .