80 réponses à ce sujet

[wicked cool]

Ok i get why certain monsters were removed but why were lots of other things removed such as (see below) could they be added in dlc
Finishing moves- very satisfying in dao to cut down a darkspawn and chop off its head. This is a feature that is in a ton of todays games
Heavy armors-is there platemail in the game.
Switching out of weapons in combat-im a rogue and theres a dragon and i cant switch out of daggers to bow or switch spells
The ability for rogues to use swords and shields. Make it harder to obtain the skill but streamlining it to where its one weapon takes a lot of fun out of being an rpg
Talking to companions while walking. I just to able to talk to morrigan or sten while traveling
Beards and hair- why is there more clipping in dai than in Dao?
Cities and towns-no cities like denerim? Less random backstreet encounters, orphanages, no children, warehouses, thieves etc
Less stop gap encounters between locations. Meeting sera is the only 1?
City elves-you never get the feeling theres 2 classes of elves
Tons of qunari mercenaries? Lot lessin dai
Sandal and bodahn?

So much more. With modern rpgs and modern combat games it feels like they pulled the reigns 2 far back

[ShinsFortress]

It was less difficult for them?

 

Less difficult is supposed to equal more profitable.  It didn't work on me, I didn't buy it.  Even if they fix the bugs that make it unplayable for many people, I doubt I will (short of some sort of UE on sale one day) unless some significant gameplay issues were changed.

 

"Prospect of success.... slight." - Nordom.

[Rawgrim]

Because EA felt Origins was too complex for their new target audience. That is why. Now the game does everything for you. Including the "tactics". Next time the game won't have choices when you level up, I am sure. You just get various spells and stuff when you reach a certain level.

[Lucirak]

Because EA felt Origins was too complex for their new target audience. That is why. Now the game does everything for you. Including the "tactics". Next time the game won't have choices when you level up, I am sure. You just get various spells and stuff when you reach a certain level.

like blizzard> diablo

 

I hope not, but there are some similarities

 

- we placed points on attributes in diablo, now no more. Dragon age did the same

- Weapon damage (dps) determining the power of abilities. At least in dragon age we can still choose skills on lvl up. No more in Diablo

- RNG determining the loot. The two games do this and do it wrong. We can spend hours and not see a specific item/schematic

[Benman1964]

Because EA felt Origins was too complex for their new target audience. That is why. Now the game does everything for you. Including the "tactics". Next time the game won't have choices when you level up, I am sure. You just get various spells and stuff when you reach a certain level.

 

The next Dragon Age will be DAS, Dragon Age: Sonic: Just running around collecting stuff!

[Uccio]

Because EA felt Origins was too complex for their new target audience. That is why. Now the game does everything for you. Including the "tactics". Next time the game won't have choices when you level up, I am sure. You just get various spells and stuff when you reach a certain level.

 

Well at least it would make my decision of not buying the game so much easier.

[wicked cool]

What is their target audience? Diablo players? I dont think it was ea as healing spam would have been left in. If the target was the skyrim audience (i fall into this) there was more choices. Theres nudity which i would think would be more of a risk than decapatation. Samegoes with storage chests.
Has anyone from biowRe commented on art direction or a change in philosophy

[Average Designer]

Rogues in DA:O never could use a sword and shield. Not sure what game you were playing. But in DA:O the rogue could only equip daggers or Bow and Arrow.

 

It was the Warrior in DA:O that could equip dual weapons, sword and shield or bow and arrow. They were the ultimate cross between rogue and Warrior. Only difference between the two classes was the Warrior could wear heavy armor where the Rogue could not. And the Rogue could open locks and locked chests where the Warrior could not. Oh and the rogue could make traps and poisons where the Warrior could not do either.

 

Still the removal of the ability to swap weapons in mid battle, the removal of the ability to spend skill points where we wanted, the removal of healing magic, the removal of the rock armor spell... The list goes on of things removed that me and my girlfriend just blink and go WTF.

[Rawgrim]

Rogues in DA:O never could use a sword and shield. Not sure what game you were playing. But in DA:O the rogue could only equip daggers or Bow and Arrow.

 

It was the Warrior in DA:O that could equip dual weapons, sword and shield or bow and arrow. They were the ultimate cross between rogue and Warrior. Only difference between the two classes was the Warrior could wear heavy armor where the Rogue could not. And the Rogue could open locks and locked chests where the Warrior could not. Oh and the rogue could make traps and poisons where the Warrior could not do either.

 

Still the removal of the ability to swap weapons in mid battle, the removal of the ability to spend skill points where we wanted, the removal of healing magic, the removal of the rock armor spell... The list goes on of things removed that me and my girlfriend just blink and go WTF.

 

Actually rogues could equip sword, shields, two handed swords, one sword in each hand, one axe in each hand, one mace in each hand. Anything, really. They could also wear heavy armour.

[fireproof_boots]

Actually rogues could equip sword, shields, two handed swords, one sword in each hand, one axe in each hand, one mace in each hand. Anything, really. They could also wear heavy armour.

 

This is true, they just didn't have access to the skill trees for Sword/Shield or Two handed, so it didn't work very well.

[Jeffry]

This is true, they just didn't have access to the skill trees for Sword/Shield or Two handed, so it didn't work very well.

 

Correct. Axes or longswords were viable though when one didn't go for the cookie-cutter cunning bard build.

[AlanC9]

I sometimes get the feeling that someone at Bio really hated the look of someone waving two longswords around.

[Raoni Luna]

Rogues in DA:O never could use a sword and shield. Not sure what game you were playing. But in DA:O the rogue could only equip daggers or Bow and Arrow.

 

It was the Warrior in DA:O that could equip dual weapons, sword and shield or bow and arrow. They were the ultimate cross between rogue and Warrior. Only difference between the two classes was the Warrior could wear heavy armor where the Rogue could not. And the Rogue could open locks and locked chests where the Warrior could not. Oh and the rogue could make traps and poisons where the Warrior could not do either.

 

Still the removal of the ability to swap weapons in mid battle, the removal of the ability to spend skill points where we wanted, the removal of healing magic, the removal of the rock armor spell... The list goes on of things removed that me and my girlfriend just blink and go WTF.

You are wrong and I think I know why...
What you are saying is that rogues only had skills for dual dagger and bow and arrow. Yes. But they, or any other class, could equip any kind of weapon or armor they found as long as they met the requirements, there were no restrictions with "type of equipment" base, it was specific to each equipment. So you can equip sword and shield with the rogue, you would need strength enough to do som and your weapon skills wouldn't work, but you could. Same with two handed weapons.

DA:O is clearly superior in all and every single aspect.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The thing I miss most from DAO is the Fireball. A quick AoE with a knockdown and DoT. It was the perfect offensive spell.

Also, those atypical Rogue builds worked well with a high Cunning Rogue. 2-handed backstabs did massive damage.

[Vader20]

Because EA felt Origins was too complex for their new target audience. That is why. Now the game does everything for you. Including the "tactics". Next time the game won't have choices when you level up, I am sure. You just get various spells and stuff when you reach a certain level.

 

Damn.. are you sure ? Because this means that EA doesn't think too much about it's target audience's intelectual capacity....   Are we mindless apes who are unable to pick stats and choose from more complex spell trees ? I mean, is it that hard ?

Jesus Christ... How were some of us able to play Baldurs Gate and Morrowind ?

[blackdeath]

Blame lead Director Mike laidlaw he is the gentleman that Gave us Dragon age 2 He's the Man in Charge He's the Boss and he is the Reason why Dragon age went from a stellar RPG to this Fetch quest MMO

[Sylvius the Mad]

Damn.. are you sure ? Because this means that EA doesn't think too much about it's target audience's intelectual capacity.... Are we mindless apes who are unable to pick stats and choose from more complex spell trees ? I mean, is it that hard ?

Jesus Christ... How were some of us able to play Baldurs Gate and Morrowind ?

The vast majority of the target audience didn't do those things.

[Realmzmaster]

I for one am glad that DAI does not have regenerating health. I also like the limited number of health potions and the removal of the heal spell. As far as picking stats in BG1,BG2 or NWN after the initial creation you could not change stats. I like the method of stat allocation being tied to the skills selected or equipment used. 

IMHO it provides a more flexible system in that regard.

I would be real happy to see the return of permadeath. I was disappointed when NWN removed permadeath. If the Inquisitor died during combat it should have been your journey ends like it was when the Bhaalspawsn died in BG1 abd BG2 especially before closing the Breach.

[Jeffry]

I for one am glad that DAI does not have regenerating health. I also like the limited number of health potions and the removal of the heal spell. As far as picking stats in BG1,BG2 or NWN after the initial creation you could not change stats. I like the method of stat allocation being tied to the skills selected or equipment used. 

IMHO it provides a more flexible system in that regard.

I would be real happy to see the return of permadeath. I was disappointed when NWN removed permadeath. If the Inquisitor died during combat it should have been your journey ends like it was when the Bhaalspawsn died in BG1 abd BG2 especially before closing the Breach.

 

If the removal of healing spells and OOC health regen would add anything to the challenge, I wouldn't mind it. But the only thing it does is making the game tedious during certain early sections, especially if you have a bad luck on stupid respawns. Thus forcing you to backtrack and artificially prolonging the gameplay. It doesn't matter at all during the 2nd half of the game because of masterworks, heal on kill upgrades / items, the fact that you will probably overlevel pretty much anything and there is a high possibility you will have in your party a few OP characters who will just mop up the battlefield on their own.

 

Heh, permadeath would certainly make things interesting, but there is no chance we will ever see that in DA given the direction the game is heading.

[luism]

I miss Rangers,I miss dual wield swords not sissy daggers, I miss options, i miss swapping weapons sets, I miss armor sets, I miss blood and gore, I miss morrigans boobs, I miss spirit healers, I miss blood mages,


Sigh

I just miss origins

[Realmzmaster]

If the removal of healing spells and OOC health regen would add anything to the challenge, I wouldn't mind it. But the only thing it does is making the game tedious during certain early sections, especially if you have a bad luck on stupid respawns. Thus forcing you to backtrack and artificially prolonging the gameplay. It doesn't matter at all during the 2nd half of the game because of masterworks, heal on kill upgrades / items, the fact that you will probably overlevel pretty much anything and there is a high possibility you will have in your party a few OP characters who will just mop up the battlefield on their own.

 

Heh, permadeath would certainly make things interesting, but there is no chance we will ever see that in DA given the direction the game is heading.

 

That direction on permadeath started in NWN. DAO simply continued the trend. Actually for me I did not miss the healing spells at all. I rarely went back to a camp. I simply pushed on and established the next one until all camps available in an area were set up.

I enjoyed the respawns. It reminded me of some of the earlier cRPGs that had combat every five steps or so. In fact in the early Might and Magic's the only place the game could be saved was an inn or Adventurer's Guild. After saving you set out of the inn to be met with more combat in areas that the party had been through. If caught between cities you had to make a choice push on to the next village and hope it had a place to rest or go back to the previous inn. The party then had to fight respawning enemies once it set out of the inn.

Good times! 

[Rizilliant]

I miss Rangers,I miss dual wield swords not sissy daggers, I miss options, i miss swapping weapons sets, I miss armor sets, I miss blood and gore, I miss morrigans boobs, I miss spirit healers, I miss blood mages,


Sigh

I just miss origins

 

I miss Dragon Age too man.. I miss it too...  

 

In fact: after 178hour play of Inquisition, i started a new Origins run again.. SO much better.. Every, single aspect is better.. Graphics even, since everything doesnt look like it was made by Playschool!

 

Edit:  I noticed something odd.. I played i right before I got Inquisition, and it was all good.. When i got Inquisition, i had to install Origin.. When i tried to play DAO again, it would not acknowledge a disk.. I reinstalled twice from my physical copy, which is read while installing, but wouldnt allow me to play it.. So i broke down, and installed through Origin.. Several things seem to be different abpout the game, and im wondering if it was deliberate, to make it look less appealing compared to Inquisition? Im thinking of uninstalling Origin, so i can play my physical copy, to make a point, by point comparison...

 

PS: DAO did not have permadeath.. They had Injury! And respawning ontop of you, while your still fighting the previous 1, 2, or 3 is not at all fun, or engaging.. Its completely immersion breaking!

[Jeffry]

Edit:  I noticed something odd.. I played i right before I got Inquisition, and it was all good.. When i got Inquisition, i had to install Origin.. When i tried to play DAO again, it would not acknowledge a disk.. I reinstalled twice from my physical copy, which is read while installing, but wouldnt allow me to play it.. So i broke down, and installed through Origin.. Several things seem to be different abpout the game, and im wondering if it was deliberate, to make it look less appealing compared to Inquisition? Im thinking of uninstalling Origin, so i can play my physical copy, to make a point, by point comparison...

 

Nah, DAO has always looked like this, I had both disk and Origin version installed at some point (atm Origin version, because I hate when the game requires a disk and I refuse to crack the games I bought). Even back in 2009 the game looked a bit dated. It is kinda understandable, the game had been in development for many years. But to be honest, it hasn't aged particularly well as far as graphics are concerned. BUT you can download many mods that improve them greatly (although you have to patch the exe file so the game can use more than 2 GB of memory, otherwise it will crash often)

[Realmzmaster]

Nah, DAO has always looked like this, I had both disk and Origin version installed at some point (atm Origin version, because I hate when the game requires a disk and I refuse to crack the games I bought). Even back in 2009 the game looked a bit dated. It is kinda understandable, the game had been in development for many years. But to be honest, it hasn't aged particularly well as far as graphics are concerned. BUT you can download many mods that improve them greatly (although you have to patch the exe file so the game can use more than 2 GB of memory, otherwise it will crash often)

 

Some of the early parts of the game was made in an older engine. During development they switch engines which is why the latter parts of the game look better than the early parts. This can happen over a long development time. Rather than re-doing the early assets they simply get recycled them into the new engine. It saves both time and money. DAO was announced in 2004. It was not released until 2009. A lot of turmoil happened during those five years.

[Jeffry]

Some of the early parts of the game was made in an older engine. During development they switch engines which is why the latter parts of the game look better than the early parts. This can happen over a long development time. Rather than re-doing the early assets they simply get recycled them into the new engine. It saves both time and money. DAO was announced in 2004. It was not released until 2009. A lot of turmoil happened during those five years.

 

Thanks for this tidbit Didn't know about the engine switch, it makes sense though, the game had to be in production since 2003. Btw the first engine was the one from NWN (or probably its modified version) which then CD Projekt used and further modified for the first Witcher?

 

But honestly I didn't even notice any change in graphics when I was first playing the game, I was so captivated by all the other aspects that I payed very little attention to graphics. I also think I played the entire time in the tactical view during my first playthrough, since I was so used to it from BG2. Only later I applied mods.