232 réponses à ce sujet

[seraphymon]

Sure speed has little if not zero to do with tactiful, it was everything else. DA2 was nowhere near as tactful, even if you tried to make it so.

[taine]

Morroian wrote...

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Its not a genre shift. You may not have wanted DA2 to be exactly like DAO but quite a lot clearly did.

As for the gameplay, mechanically its actually pretty similar.

Seems like a pretty strong genre shift from Tactical RPG to Action RPG to me

DA2 was just as tactical as DAO to me. Speed has nothing to do with whether its tactical or not. Most RTS games are jjust as fast.

If you want to learn what people mean by 'tactical' go try a game like Jagged Alliance 2 or XCom. DA:O didn't require brilliant strategic planning or anything, but it allowed you to get a view of the battlefield, control your party members easily, and use formations to your advantage.

DA2 on the other hand, had a camera which would not let you see the whole battlefield, had extremely clunky companion control meaning you were just letting the AI play most of the time, and the warped in enemies made any sort of strategic positioning meaningless. 

[Morroian]

seraphymon wrote...

Sure speed has little if not zero to do with tactiful, it was everything else. DA2 was nowhere near as tactful, even if you tried to make it so.

I had to be smarter tactically to get through DA2 on nightmare than I did on DAO on nightmare.

taine wrote...

Morroian wrote...

DA2 was just as tactical as DAO to me. Speed has nothing to do with whether its tactical or not. Most RTS games are jjust as fast.

If you want to learn what people mean by 'tactical' go try a game like Jagged Alliance 2 or XCom. DA:O didn't require brilliant strategic planning or anything, but it allowed you to get a view of the battlefield, control your party members easily, and use formations to your advantage.

DA2 on the other hand, had a camera which would not let you see the whole battlefield, had extremely clunky companion control meaning you were just letting the AI play most of the time, and the warped in enemies made any sort of strategic positioning meaningless. 

No need to be so patronising, Xcom is my favourite or second favourite game of all time and I've played Jagged Alliance. So yes I know what it means to be tactical.

LIke speed the lack of an iso view doesn't mean you can't control your party tactically, sure it makes it a bit harder but it can be done and I didn't find companion control clunky. As for the waves once I knew they were there I planned for them. 

Modifié par Morroian, 25 mars 2012 - 10:43 .

[Melca36]

The developers said in the past that combat in DA:3 would be different than it is in DA:2

The hardcore DA:2 fans should brace themselves for that difference.

I think they should tone down the speed. I don't want it like Origins but it was way over the top in DA:2

And heres hoping the rogue class gets back to normal and is not so kamikaze like.

[Melca36]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

schalafi wrote...

The funny thing about this whole post is the fact that Bioware never said that any of the Dragon Age games would be the same, but that there would be new protagonists, new areas, different times, different stories. So why do people keep going on and on about DA2 not continuing the Origins story? Even more confusing is that DA3 is probably going to do the same thing; a new story and setting.

The only thing I've heard from the Devs is that they will be taking some of the aspects of both games and combining them to make DA3 a better game, and that they are considering some of the suggestions from the fans. "Considering" being the key word.

It's not the story or setting most people complained about, it was the amazingly inferior gameplay and setup. Nobody wanted DA2 to be exactly like DA:O, I didn't at least, what we wanted was a sequel the way a sequel should be. You don't think a genre shift is a bit much?

Enjoyed the story and the characters. My issues were with the gameplay. It was definitely simplied for the gamers who want everything handed to them without working for it.

[seraphymon]

Morroian wrote...
I had to be smarter tactically to get through DA2 on nightmare than I did on DAO on nightmare.

The only thing i had to worry about on nightmare in DA2, is placement of Aoe,s becauseof of how badly implmented the friendly fire system is, just to make things seem harder. But it wasnt, aside from that that battles just lasted longer, they were never more tactful. On DAO point is you can be tactful, even if the fights dont require it. in DA2, You are really unable to, mostly.

Sure you can prepare for waves, when you learn to expect them, but first time through your not gonna know when   how many and especially where they will appear.

[HanErlik]

seraphymon wrote...

Morroian wrote...
I had to be smarter tactically to get through DA2 on nightmare than I did on DAO on nightmare.

The only thing i had to worry about on nightmare in DA2, is placement of Aoe,s becauseof of how badly implmented the friendly fire system is, just to make things seem harder. But it wasnt, aside from that that battles just lasted longer, they were never more tactful. On DAO point is you can be tactful, even if the fights dont require it. in DA2, You are really unable to, mostly.

Sure you can prepare for waves, when you learn to expect them, but first time through your not gonna know when   how many and especially where they will appear.

Also enemy diversity is pretty limited in DA2. In DA:O you can fight with a Darkspawn group which includes a mage (emissary), a commander (alpha), a tank (ogre), an infiltrator (shriek), and some rogues (genlocks). But in DA2 you generally fight against one or two types of enemies.

[Morroian]

HanErlik wrote...

Also enemy diversity is pretty limited in DA2. In DA:O you can fight with a Darkspawn group which includes a mage (emissary), a commander (alpha), a tank (ogre), an infiltrator (shriek), and some rogues (genlocks). But in DA2 you generally fight against one or two types of enemies.

I agree that enemy diversity and the range of enemy abilities is something that should be improved in DA3.

[Silverfox4]

I got about 180 hours out of DAO. I got about 45 hours out of DA2. DAO was great, DA2 was ok'ish.

DA2 was so average and didnt live up to DOA of course, but i did get a good amount of hours out of it. If they make DA3 extremely similar to DA2 I won't buy it as a day one purchase. I will buy it when it goes on sale though.

I know they won't change the combat. But maybe they can bring back choices, darker atmosphere, more loot, companion armors/choices, better LI's ect ect...i could buy it day one.

I other words, I can be fooled again.

[MDarwin]

schalafi wrote...

The funny thing about this whole post is the fact that Bioware never said that any of the Dragon Age games would be the same, but that there would be new protagonists, new areas, different times, different stories. So why do people keep going on and on about DA2 not continuing the Origins story? Even more confusing is that DA3 is probably going to do the same thing; a new story and setting.

As far as I remember, on the Old NWN forum was the DA Franchise going to be" very close as an RPG, like the BG title." Your PC/Hero was (if I remember right) supposed to be Imported in to the next "Adventure Title" of the DA Franchise, If you choosed so. That was even before EA took over/joined BW.

[Rorschachinstein]

More territory like in DA:O would be nice. The quest to get the ashes was bigger than most of kirkwall.

[LegendaryBlade]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

More territory like in DA:O would be nice. The quest to get the ashes was bigger than most of kirkwall.

I think that, thankfully, it's already confirmed we'll get a bigger world map. The Kirkwall thing was probably, well, the worst idea BW has ever had and they know it. Nobody wants to be stuck in one town in an RPG

[Meris]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

More territory like in DA:O would be nice. The quest to get the ashes was bigger than most of kirkwall.

I think that, thankfully, it's already confirmed we'll get a bigger world map. The Kirkwall thing was probably, well, the worst idea BW has ever had and they know it. Nobody wants to be stuck in one town in an RPG

The problem isn't that its one town, but rather that this was obviously a stylistic choice to do less work. If Kirkwall and its surroundings were as detailed as what we've seen of Ferelden and Orzammar, then it would have been the richest setting in Thedas.

Morroian wrote...

seraphymon wrote...

Sure speed has little if not zero to do with tactiful, it was everything else. DA2 was nowhere near as tactful, even if you tried to make it so.

I had to be smarter tactically to get through DA2 on nightmare than I did on DAO on nightmare.

 

I'm on of the players who finished my first Origins playthrough on Nightmare and wanted a harder experience, but I call DA2's Nightmare cheap in obnoxious ways. Random bandits with random elemental immunities, inflated health bars, one shot enemy AoE spells and untraceable rogues that don't require you to think tactically, just pray that they target the tank instead of anyone else just made me bring the difficulty down. Mind you, I only played early on and refused to use dlc items.

Modifié par Meris, 26 mars 2012 - 01:11 .

[Carmen_Willow]

Coming late to this topic, I just wish to say that I adored DA:O and despite a rough beginning, DA:2 grew on me and I actually enjoy playing it and have. So I am more than willing to give DA:3 a try. Will I preorder? Perhaps not, given what has happened with ME 3, and most definitely not the collector's edition, but I will certainly download any demo and test it out and perhaps make a decision based on the demo, or wait until I hear from the fans.

As I said, DA:2 grew on me, and I like the combat better in DA:2 (going back to the slow moving Origins combat is somewhat painful), so I am not as disappointed as some. I worry as to what disastrous ending we may find in DA 3 given the rather abrupt ending of 2 and the totally bizarre ending of ME 3, but even that may be worth the price of admission--you know, just to see if Bioware's next ending drives the villagers to storm the castle yet again (and I was one of the villagers, torch and pitchfork in hand, pounding on the gates).

Should be interesting,to say the least.

[Carmen_Willow]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Rorschachinstein wrote...

More territory like in DA:O would be nice. The quest to get the ashes was bigger than most of kirkwall.

I think that, thankfully, it's already confirmed we'll get a bigger world map. The Kirkwall thing was probably, well, the worst idea BW has ever had and they know it. Nobody wants to be stuck in one town in an RPG

I have actually grown fond of Kirkwall, it feels like home to my DA:2 characters. I just hate fighting in the same cave/mine/underground hole/dungeon/ruin over and over again and the same mansion/house  over and over again.  A couple of different maps and settings, and I would have been pleased as punch.

[Carmen_Willow]

Silverfox4 wrote...

I got about 180 hours out of DAO. I got about 45 hours out of DA2. DAO was great, DA2 was ok'ish.

DA2 was so average and didnt live up to DOA of course, but i did get a good amount of hours out of it. If they make DA3 extremely similar to DA2 I won't buy it as a day one purchase. I will buy it when it goes on sale though.

I know they won't change the combat. But maybe they can bring back choices, darker atmosphere, more loot, companion armors/choices, better LI's ect ect...i could buy it day one.

I other words, I can be fooled again.

I agree with you about better loot.  Torn trousers just doesn't cut it.  Fighting a major boss and getting torn trousers was unbeliveably stupid on their part.  I would like to dress my companions in all that lovely armor I paid so much extra coin for.  it annoyed me no end that so much of what I purchased sat in chests the entire game and wasn't even worth the cost of selling.

[schalafi]

MDarwin wrote...

schalafi wrote...

The funny thing about this whole post is the fact that Bioware never said that any of the Dragon Age games would be the same, but that there would be new protagonists, new areas, different times, different stories. So why do people keep going on and on about DA2 not continuing the Origins story? Even more confusing is that DA3 is probably going to do the same thing; a new story and setting.

As far as I remember, on the Old NWN forum was the DA Franchise going to be" very close as an RPG, like the BG title." Your PC/Hero was (if I remember right) supposed to be Imported in to the next "Adventure Title" of the DA Franchise, If you choosed so. That was even before EA took over/joined BW.

I think that was referring to DA:Origins, and the following game Awakening. You could have your same hero of Origins as the pc in Awakening, but that wasn't considered the second game of the DA franchise.

[Toyou4you]

How about you shut the hell up and wait for us to hear about Dragon Age 3 first okay

[Nathan Redgrave]

Plaintiff wrote...

We're so lucky that we have you here to tell us what our opinions are going to be. We'd never get by without you.

I'll stick to fortune cookies, thanks. They've never steered me wrong before.

[Jerrybnsn]

I held of on pre-ordering DAII when I heard they weren't going to have the Warden carry the next story along and that it was going to more emphasis on combat fighting. The art work also turned me off. I thought when they said they wanted to go with better graphics that they were thinking more like Mass Effect's style instead of a JRPG style. I didn't regret not pre-ordering because of all the negative reviews and decided to wait for about six months and get it at half price. Little did I know I would be able to get it at 1/3 of the price.

DAII was just so disjointed as far as storyline went, and it never really had a plot.

[astreqwerty]

I just dont know what they can do to convince me to buy their games anymore..of course im gonna play da3 whatever it turns out to be (or not to be) i will just rent it.i want honesty for once and especially after the ME3 fiasco i have zero faith on them as a dev.they proved they cant be trusted to create whole games anymore and i just dont get..?People blame EA for that but EA is a collosal company,are they really in such dire need for commercial half baked titles that will damage them in the long run?especially when those titles stem from their most succesful franchises??i doubt that. Plus the dev cycles of games like battlefield 3,spore,the sims and dao have proven that EA can spare the dev enough time to complete their games..conclusion: bioware simply lost their touch

[Maria Caliban]

Melca36 wrote...

The developers said in the past that combat in DA:3 would be different than it is in DA:2

The hardcore DA:2 fans should brace themselves for that difference.

Combat in DA:O and DA II were kissing cousins. DA II had waves, faster animation, and a smaller camera view. That's about it.

What radical new difference are you expecting?

Wait, DA II had regen on health. They'll take that out, pull back the camera, and the DA:O fans will go, "Ha! We have saved the game from the mindless COD crowd."

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 27 mars 2012 - 12:54 .

[Zzulu2]

Play on harder difficulties to avoid regenerating health

[Realmzmaster]

Melca36 wrote...

The developers said in the past that combat in DA:3 would be different than it is in DA:2

The hardcore DA:2 fans should brace themselves for that difference.

I think they should tone down the speed. I don't want it like Origins but it was way over the top in DA:2

And heres hoping the rogue class gets back to normal and is not so kamikaze like.

Actually I hoping they add to the rogue class with a ninja sub class. Maybe throw in a monk class.

Also what difference in combat ? The animations where different but the mechanics are basically the same. In fact the mechanics in both games is just a more polished version of the combat mechanics introduce in Baldur's Gate minus of course the D & D underpining. 

No need to brace the adjustment will be easy if they change the combat. Just like the adjustment from DAo to DA2 was a snap for me. IMHO.

[Blastback]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

The developers said in the past that combat in DA:3 would be different than it is in DA:2

The hardcore DA:2 fans should brace themselves for that difference.

Combat in DA:O and DA II were kissing cousins. DA II had waves, faster animation, and a smaller camera view. That's about it.

What radical new difference are you expecting?

Wait, DA II had regen on health. They'll take that out, pull back the camera, and the DA:O fans will go, "Ha! We have saved the game from the mindless COD crowd."

You forgot more consistantly over the top combat animations.

And OP, I am very very very disapointed that you didn't follow up the thread title with
...Shame on you.  Fool me twice, watch it! I'm huge!

Modifié par Blastback, 27 mars 2012 - 02:05 .