Dragon Age II: now more like Mass Effect 2

Discussion in 'General Gaming and Hardware Forum' started by Brother None, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Of course thats what I mean with inteligent design. It should not be always a preasure. Like a romantic scene for example or a usual conversation in a pup should not work that way. But in certain situations for dramatic effect and a sense of realism. Why not.
  2. Foilman

    Foilman First time out of the vault

    Aug 20, 2010
    The game sounds really good so far but I had a look at some images and the graphics don't look so great, hopefully they aren't the final.
  3. rcorporon

    rcorporon So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Jan 31, 2008
  4. Brother None

    Brother None This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Apr 3, 2003
  5. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Is it just me or do the visuals and animations look worse then in Dragon Age 1 ...
  6. Black Feather

    Black Feather Mildly Dipped

    Nov 10, 2010
    I hate Dragon Age with a passion. Won't buy it, will flame every fanboy of it.

    I reckon Mass Effect 3 will be the last BW game i will buy.
  7. Hamenaglar

    Hamenaglar It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Jun 2, 2009
    It looks terrible! That silly looking armor. Jumping around twirling in the air and doing saltos. I'm so not going to play it.

    I felt DA:O could have been a great game. But this feels like a step in the wrong direction for me.
  8. Surf Solar

    Surf Solar So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Aug 20, 2009
    I am really no graphic whore, but this looks horrible. The gameplay looks like some Offline MMO. And god, are they really going with that ugly UI?
  9. Ilosar

    Ilosar Vault Fossil

    Apr 20, 2010
    DA "fanboy" inc.

    On one hand, I appreciate that the combat is not hack and slash (as initially feared) and plays pretty much like origins. Also, Warrior and Mage animation look vastly improved, especially the mage one what with the swirling energy and the various staff poses; much better than the static animation of Origins, while Warriors seem to have a punch to their attacks that was missing.

    But the rogues... ugh. All that backfliping-dodging-twirling-teleporting-around-looking-cool stuff looks too over-the-top to be believable, especially in a "dark fantasy" setting. And throwing a vial by kicking it? The Rain of Arrows looks kinda weird, but i guess if a weapon could do that its Varric's super-crossbow. And I noticed no combat feedback (damage numbers, effects, ect), wich displeases me.

    Also, the UI lokks like a glorified Windows 7 taskbar. What was wrong with Origin's? Putting the hp/mana in the lower corner is just impractical. Looks like they just haven't adapted the console UI to me.

    I am still glad overall that they at least pretend to keep the combat what it was, and I am less fearful than I was when they announced it. But Hawke will always remain an absolutely shitty name, on the level of "Project Lazarus". :scratch:
  10. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    That combat walkthrough looked... okay. The tactical depth is still there but the question I really have is, is it going to be necessary to play smart, or can you just hack and slash your way through situations? Tactical depth is nothing if it doesn't give you an edge that regular action-style play doesn't. That's why I always played Dragon Age on nightmare difficulty... you were forced to make really good decisions in combat, how to exploit enemy weaknesses and how certain combinations of abilities worked well together. The best part about that game's balance is that it still felt fair... bad mistakes were punished but good decisions were rewarded, and learning to make those good decisions consistently almost always led to positive outcomes (unlike Baldur's Gate, which is just kind of mind-numbingly hard). When it came to Awakening and its extremely low difficulty, though, I was just disappointed and almost every fight, I pretty much just set up my tactics and let the AI do the fighting for me. There was no need to use more advanced techniques because the game never once gave me a reason to. I got the distinct impression that BioWare responded to complaints that the original game required people to actually *gasp* think a little bit to win by simply removing all challenge.

    Additionally, while the stylised visuals look great in screenshots, right there it just looks flat and lifeless... not enough coloured lights and shadows. It's actually quite obvious it's the same engine from the first game but spruced up a little... hell from the look of it, I think they're even using the same lightmap software, along with all its quirks and limitations. I don't mind the slightly over the top look to the animations and stuff, but I'd prefer they were reserved for more special attacks and the like, rather than on display all the time.

    On the interface: lame, lame, lame. I thought the first game's interface was informative, attractive and modern without departing too far from older CRPGs of BioWare's; this time around, though, it just looks unfinished and lacking in polish. There's something to be said for a simple and easy to read interface but this one is about as minimal as it gets, and not in a good way. Meanwhile, the apparent lack of being able to play from a top-down perspective is a big problem. Being able to zoom out and take in the whole battlefield at once, then order all your party around without having to reposition the camera is a big deal, especially on higher difficulties where you'll sometimes need to pause every 0.5 to 1 seconds of game time that passes. The worst of this is that I can't think of a single reason to not let players do this... are BioWare really afraid of people not seeing their pretty new models and animations? Do they want to skip modeling the roofs of those houses? Keeping it in the game should be common sense, if only because you lose nothing by doing so, and players lose out by its removal.

    I'd say all this on the official BioWare forums, but I got banned a while ago for "endorsing piracy". Apparently the moderators there can't understand the difference between "I'd rather people pirate this DLC than spend money on it, because it's of such poor quality that I'd prefer none buy it out of principle" and "I want people to pirate this DLC because piracy is awesome". Fucking slack-jawed idiots. But I'm not bitter, I swear!
  11. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    That remains to be seen. THe combat we have seen in the video ... I dont know whats so damn tactical in it.
  12. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    Agreed, and that was the source of my initial critique. "Pausing the game to choose a spell" isn't what I would call tactical, that's just giving yourself a breather. You could have easily managed the same in real-time if you really wanted to. That's why these hybrid battle systems just don't work... you end up having to reconcile two totally different styles of play while using the exact same set of skills, underlying rules, etc., and neither approach ends up being as polished as it should be as a result.
  13. Ilosar

    Ilosar Vault Fossil

    Apr 20, 2010
    @ Crni Vuk: It's obvious that the guy was playing on an easier difficulty setting (no Friendly Fire, only happens at Nightmare). On an harder difficulty he would have been slaughtered (notice Ninja Hawke only has a sliver of HP left by the end).

    Plus, Origins was perfectly playable as an Hack-n-slash for me at easy and normal. Its only Hard and up that forced you to pause and plan. I just hope Nightmare is exactly like in Origins; hard enough to make you think, yet easy enough that you don't have to resort to cheesy shit every single fight of above average difficulty (cough BG2 cough). I felt that approach was very rewarding.

    @ Sea: I hear you. I am fine with the console game being hack-n-Slash (apparently it was nothing but a chore to play Origins on console, which sucks for people without good PCs) but PC version should have been focused on tactics. If you really wanted to play like an action game, just tone down difficulty and do not pause.

    Still, even if the game ends up being a bit less hard than Origins, if it's able to make up for it by offering a different plot than standard Bioware fare (which is not bad so much as overused) and a new, more original art style (Origin's blandness was my biggest pet peeve with it), it will be worth a peek in my wallet. I could hardly care less about the graphics in a RPG, too, so long as it has good animations and art direction, which I find much more important than moar shaders (but it doesn't sell as much hardware I guess).
  14. Ausdoerrt

    Ausdoerrt I should set a custom tit

    Oct 28, 2008
    Watched the combat video.


    I thought the first trailer looked like shit. Now combat looks like shit too. If DA:O was dumbed down, this will simply be a parody on the genre, if they have the conscience to call it a RPG.


    I think my hate levels for Dragon Age have just spiked, ridiculously.

    From what we've seen thus far, I think you're better off keeping your wallet closed for this one.
  15. Black Feather

    Black Feather Mildly Dipped

    Nov 10, 2010
    The most improtant ting is that the damn BW geeks get their "romances" wichc translates as having lesbian sex with the hottest elf (or whatever) in the party or some male equivalent for all those Alistair-fangirlies.

    GOD i hate this franchise so so much.
  16. mobucks

    mobucks As a goof Orderite

    May 22, 2010
    if you played melee, maybe DA:O was hard on nightmare.

    play a mage, and you can practicly solo the game on nightmare.

    cone of frost/cone of electric/cone of flame/cone of massive dildo kills anything.

    mind you i quit playing before the first patch came out and never beat it. so IDK.

    I just feel like you dont get the whole game if you skip the DLC, and i really really hate DLC, especially a day one release of DLC. Go fuck yourself you greedy game suits. Get a real job.
  17. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    So ? What will change on "harder" difficuility then except that the enmies will have more base HP and a stronger attack ? Or will I suddenly get a more "tactical" RPG. See. The mechanics behind it are the same. Hybrid systems always suffer this ... well often enough. As they are neither super tactical, nor super action. OR they are tweaked in favour for the later. Because:

    See Mass Effect 1. How people can call that "tactical" is something I dont understand. Cover. Shoot. Cover.Shoot. Rgenerate HP. shoot. Cover. Same thing with your "magic spells" (Biotics in game). Just that it takes a bit more time before the enemy drops. I am very very glad they have changed that for Mass Effect 2 and the game became finally a clear shooter. It was really better for the game. If they cant do a straight tactical RPG then they should simply make a good action shooter/hack n slay instead of a half arsed tactical hack n slay hybrid ...
  18. Ilosar

    Ilosar Vault Fossil

    Apr 20, 2010
    @ Crni Vuk: Well, as I said, FF means you have to be lots more careful (possibly the Rain o' Arrows would have damaged the guys in melee and changed the fight).

    And anyway, choosing the right spell and using them the right way + positioning my guys correctly = tactics, imo. In anything that isn't an RTS or a cooperative multiplayer effort (WoW, for instance), you can hardly get more elaborate tactics from players in a game (feel free to prove me wrong; I would love to play a game that goes deeper in tactics, and yes I did play Jagged Alliance).

    Of course, you can counter this by having enemies that do more than run up to you mindlessly or cast random spells (and sadly the enemies in the video did just that). The more elaborate encounters are always the most fun (I found the dragon encounters and such in Origins very nice because they broke the mold, so to speak). Problem is those encounters are frequently spoilerish, so they cannot show them in promotional videos if they have them, even if there's little doubt there's going to be a dragon fight somewhere.

    Also, who used cover in ME1? On my Vanguard all I did was to use Immunity while my enemies did too, making fights about 30 seconds of endlessly shooting at somebody, rinse and repeat. When I got tired, I just Lift the whole room and lulz ensued. Charging around in ME2 was so much more hectic and fun. You very much have a point; hybrid systems can suck very easily.

    And finally, I would not put much trust in any marketing campaign made by EA for Bioware. Origin's was all about action and blood and jumpy shit trailers and *shudders* Marilyn Manson. I found the final product much more tasteful overall; maybe it's the same thing here. I am still happy they actually did the video in the first place; it cleared some things up and calmed the endless shit-storms in the official forums a bit.
  19. matthewfarmery

    matthewfarmery It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Jun 26, 2010
    from what I seen of DA2, I have to say, Im not keen, so combat is faster, but I preferred DA:O over what I see in that vid, and yes the UI doesn't look good idea,

    looks like its another game to wipe off my wishlist, more and more games are getting dumbed down and ruined, DA2 certainly seems the case to me, I can't stand EA anymore, they also cancelled, a game code named project redmine, a syndicate remake that was in the works, as EA has the licensing, we won't be seeing another game like that at all now, damn EA :x :roll:

    at this rare, the only main game types to be done are third person and first person, as many games are just getting dumbed down or killed off
  20. Ausdoerrt

    Ausdoerrt I should set a custom tit

    Oct 28, 2008
    It's difficult to dumb down what was already dumbed down in the first place. But I guess they managed to do just that.