Relic Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 So yeah...i was sort of getting excited about this game but the things revealed here over the weekend sucked most of the anticipation away. Why most these games be continually dumbed down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I was about to start the new thread. Yeah, I've gone through several ups and downs in terms of excitement for this game and finally settled for "cautiously optimistic". Most of the gameplay changes don't seem bad to me, but those that are (i.e. the camera) really are a big deal.But like Altherion I'm quite interested in seeing Bioware step away from their established storytelling structure, which they've promised to do with this game. So that's what I'm most excited about at this point, I think.Interesting. I had never seen that map. I would assume its some sort of official Bioware release? All of a sudden, I feel like I've never been anywhere significant in the Dragon Age world! Hell, Weisshaupt is twice as far away as anywhere I went in Origins. And there are a ton of named cities on that map too.That map has been around since before the release of Origins IIRC. Bioware clearly want to set quite a few games in this world. I just hope that if any of those take place mostly in Orlais they're going to hire real French voice actors. Pretty much all the Orlesians (except for Leliana, of course) in the first game sounded ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HP Loveshaft Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 The hubworld isn't exactly Bioware exclusive though. Seems like if your game isn't open world or level-based you'll have some variation of the hubworld. It works well for RPGs especially. I'm all for Bioware experimenting with its formula and gameplay, but look how much criticism a simple camera change has earned them. How many people would be crying 'sellout' if Bioware created a GTA-style open-world game or a FPS?A Bioware version of Oblivion? That might be fun.The problem most of us have with Dragon Age is that they converted it from a Baldur's Gate 2 style game to something else. If Bioware just spun it off as something that isn't called 'Dragon Age 2' it probably wouldn't be getting treated as badly. I wouldn't mind some non-RPGs set in the Dragon Age universe. Hitman gameplay + Antiva, anyone? Survival Horror in Kal-Sharok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobin Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 *is still trying to figure out how to get a decent PC for the price of a console*Hells, my upgrade to my current PC (MB, Proc, RAM, VidCard) is probably over $700...like i posted in the MMO thread - i might have to wait to pillage the Free Marches.Some asshole hacked my WoW account and burned the Cataclysm trial key (that I was going to use to see if I wanted to go back). Bliz restored my account and now there are 8 days left for me to tinker around. So I guess I'll buy DA2 tomorrow and let it stare mournfully at me while I roll a goblin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 A Bioware version of Oblivion? That might be fun.What would a "Bioware version" of Oblivion look like? Wouldn't that basically be "Oblivion in Thedas"?*is still trying to figure out how to get a decent PC for the price of a console*It might require slightly more research than buying a console, since you need to know what you need and what is an unecessary luxury. For example there is no practical difference between a video card that gives you 30-40FPS on highest settings and one that gives you 70+, but the latter is going to be a hell of a lot more expensive.And that wasn't an update you described there, that was an entire new system, minus hard drive.;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobin Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Well, not...completely new...I still have my 3 HDs, XFi card, case, monitors and peripherals...Though I was looking at a new Viewsonic widescreen to switch out one of my 19"s. The upgrade is on hold though - need to make sure I have enough money to move in a few months.My machine is still pretty good, even without upgrading anything but the proc. and the PS in the last 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haLobEnder Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 The problem most of us have with Dragon Age is that they converted it from a Baldur's Gate 2 style game to something else. If Bioware just spun it off as something that isn't called 'Dragon Age 2' it probably wouldn't be getting treated as badly.By extension of that logic 'Fallout 3' shouldn't be called 'Fallout 3'. Same with all the numbered Grand Theft Auto games after GTA2. In both those examples the gameplay fundamentals changed a hell of a lot more than they are with DA2. What other name should they have picked? It's set in the same world as Dragon Age: Origins, the events of the first game factor in, and they wanted to make it very clear that this was a new game instead of just another expansion ala Awakening.ETA: Man I hate Amazon.ca sometimes... the shipping estimate for my signature edition isn't until Friday (which coincidentally is my birthday). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HP Loveshaft Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 By extension of that logic 'Fallout 3' shouldn't be called 'Fallout 3'.A lot of people were really pissed off about Fallout 3. There's still a vocal group that absolutely hates that game. Anyways, about naming: the first game was called Dragon Age: Origins. The expansion was Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening. They could have gone with that style of naming. Dragon Age: The Champion of Kirkwall or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobin Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I think that there were so many game structural changes that keeping the original naming convention would have been deceptive.If we wanted to think crazy, having two seperate names would let them continue to build DLC for each independently. That way the people who hated the changes, could still use DAO as a format (especially with the toolset). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 About the map, Antiva looked a lot bigger than it should have been as described by Zevran. Anyone else think this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacen Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I'm going to be a pain in the ass by asking this, but besides the camera angle change (which I noticed right away on the PC version demo) what other big fundamentals are being changed for this game? Summary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 About the map, Antiva looked a lot bigger than it should have been as described by Zevran. Anyone else think this?No, I don't know where you got the impression that it was particularly small. It's not very important (its main export appear to be assassins) on the international stage since the king is weak, with various nobles and influential merchants vying for power. I'm going to be a pain in the ass by asking this, but besides the camera angle change (which I noticed right away on the PC version demo) what other big fundamentals are being changed for this game? Summary?If you don't feel like going back to the old thread:-some tweaks to how combat works, i.e. Cunning now affects defense, not Dexterity-obvious changes how the talent system works-Warriors can no longer dual-wield weapons or use bows-no more skills, replaced by stat checks, I think (or possibly which companions you happen to bring along)-combat looks faster, without being noticeably faster. There's just more going on on screen.-the way relationships within the party are handled has changed. You can either gain approval or rivalry status with your NPCs, which will confer different boni. Hopefully this also means the generic gifts don't make a return.Probably some more, but those are amongst the more noticeable ones, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kungtotte Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Is the archery line still as fucking pointless as it was in DA1? :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Is the archery line still as fucking pointless as it was in DA1? :\It was fun enough in the first one, I thought, but judging by the demo it seems to have gotten a serious power boost (at least in terms of damage), if that's what you're asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 By extension of that logic 'Fallout 3' shouldn't be called 'Fallout 3'. Same with all the numbered Grand Theft Auto games after GTA2. In both those examples the gameplay fundamentals changed a hell of a lot more than they are with DA2. What other name should they have picked? It's set in the same world as Dragon Age: Origins, the events of the first game factor in, and they wanted to make it very clear that this was a new game instead of just another expansion ala Awakening.ETA: Man I hate Amazon.ca sometimes... the shipping estimate for my signature edition isn't until Friday (which coincidentally is my birthday).Wait, you mean Fallout 3 is considered a Fallout?That's news to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 No, I don't know where you got the impression that it was particularly small. It's not very important (its main export appear to be assassins) on the international stage since the king is weak, with various nobles and influential merchants vying for power. I think it's the fact that it's usually referred to as a "City State". Mind, Venice was one too, and that was rather expansive :PIs the archery line still as fucking pointless as it was in DA1? :\Archery was actually fairly good, you could plink out some pretty damn good damage, and Scattershot was fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merentha Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Seems to do fairly impressive damage. You do less than the dualwielding rogues, but not so much less that its useless. Varric seemed to pull his weight just fine in the demo. Also, I found archery pretty useful in DAO. Not as brokenly overpowered as dualwielding rogues or almost any mage build, but arrow of slaying and the other shattering arrow made for some nice opening salvos against trash mobs and did really nice burst damage to bosses too. Archery mainly seemed weaker, imo, because it didn't synergize with any of the specializations that well. DW rogues got better with duelist/assassin, but the best bard ability meant that you had to stop shooting and be in close quarters. The other auras were nice, but Shale was noticeably better for that. The ranger was likewise...alright, but the bow rogue really gained nothing that the dw rogue wouldn't have.I heard that archery got ridiculous in Awakenings, though I haven't actually played it.tldr: archery isn't that bad as far as i can tell.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobin Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I usually made my rogues take Ranger - it meant there was another body on the field to distract things and/or soak damage that could be directed at squishy me. After the Lockbash mod - I rarely took a rogue at all (unless it was me) since I preferred the 2mage/2tank set up. This latest playthrough of Awakening on my mage - I have been keeping Nathaniel around, even though his emo crap annoys the hell out of me."Be glad you're handy with a bow - keeps you out of FBall range." If we want to go into detail -- I usually have the BlightWolf summoned, the other two critters never made much of an impression (could be I also have a wolf fetish). Since I'm of the mind to obliterate as much as possible before my people get into the fray - the Wolf's DPS keeps up nicely while Oghren can keep everything taunted onto him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I've never liked summoning, in any game. Just a personal thing, I guess I like my characters to step up and do their killing themselves.In Origins archery has great synergy with Duelist, of all specialisations. I think only one of the talents doesn't work if you've got a bow equipped, and the bonus to attack and defense is very useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kouran Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Well I for one am glad they removed dual weild from warriors, that was way OP in DAO. It wasnt so bad in Awakening, but in DAO dual wield warrior was just silly. Also archery was one of the best ways to kill really tough mobs, much lower miss rate and wasnt parry/dodged. Tobin I thought you gave up WoW crack? Dont fall off the wagon now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.