Malevolent-Gaming

a sarcastic bas'tad's view on the scene
It is currently Sep 22 2018 4:21 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Dragon Age II Announced
PostPosted: Jul 08 2010 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 3:47 pm
Posts: 1763
Location: Boondock
Rejoice?

Not sure.

http://dragonage.bioware.com/da2/

http://kotaku.com/5582435/dragon-age-ii ... er-shepard

Not sure how I feel about this. Hopefully the trailer gives us some more, and hopefully hand-on previews let us know if this has been tailored more towards consoles. DA:O did very well on PC, ME2 did okay (under projections) on 360. I would think they'd try to preserve the DA audience, but just reading this makes me think they're trying to expand DA to include consoles.

Only one origin.

Not sure how well this ties in to the endings of the first game.

I'm reserving judgment until I know more, but for now, my hype level is tepid.

_________________
Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 08 2010 3:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
Just..... stop...... ruining my day.

[whine]I already had to see all of this in emails from you. It makes me sad. "New combat system" makes me nervous. I don't like it at all. The first one was awesome. They could have made an awesome franchise off of it for another few games. All of the stuff was there. It could have been in and out of development. Suddenly, they are doing a Spiderman reboot of the game that was game of the year for 2009? Stupid, I say.

And I don't wanna play the main human character. I don't like it...............[/whine]

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 31 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: DARK SOULS
So....the cool stuff from DA1 is gone? Man, I'm just passing up movies and games left and right here....::sigh::


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
Since my husband is a total jerk, and he knows I am really pissed at all the DAII news, he sent me this: http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/07/09/five-facts-about-hawke-in-dragon-age-ii.aspx

Five facts about the ONLY character you can play in the game.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Apr 04 2003 1:57 am
Posts: 4483
Location: Redmond, WA
If they're doing what it sounds like they're trying to do, it doesn't sound that bad. It sounds like they're trying to move the origin story into gameplay, which is definitely a lower barrier to entry. It also gives greater buy-in to the origin by the end of the game, if done correctly. And I'm sure Bioware will take advantage of the fewer character options to craft the story closer to the character.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 31 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: DARK SOULS
It seems interesting, but I enjoyed the open-ness of DA:O. Ah well, there is always Fallout.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
But..... I don't wanna be human.

(At least not on every playthrough)

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 09 2010 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Apr 04 2003 1:57 am
Posts: 4483
Location: Redmond, WA
I understand, though, IMO, much of the novelty of choosing race is lost in a party-style RPG. You can get much of the flavor of a different race by having one or two in your party. That is, of course, provided that there are enough of them around capable of joining your party to get roughly the right temperament/class/gender/etc. as you would've picked.

I played one RPG where you could create each party member. That was really awesome in one sense, but there was a high cost to utilizing it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 12 2010 9:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
I agree with what you are saying, Inane. The race in DAO played in a few different ways for the main character. Mainly, it made for an intense love story with Alistair if you were anyone but a human Cousland. There were other small things that came into play too. Mostly, it just set the mood and origin, though.

I am not thrilled with it. I think I will like the game, but I won't like it like I like Dragon Age Origins. There won't really be Dark Spawn or an Archdemon, etc. It isn't about a blight. It is all new.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 12 2010 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 12:06 pm
Posts: 9745
Location: MI,
Love with Alistair?! NO NO NO. Bad images in my head.

_________________
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 12 2010 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
Quick Kick wrote:
Love with Alistair?! NO NO NO. Bad images in my head.


I would run off and marry Alistair if, you know, he was real, I wasn't married, I was a grey warden and in that situation. He was awesome.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 13 2010 9:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 31 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: DARK SOULS
Alistar? I didn't get a grasp on the game and the general paths of charcters until much later. My second play through would be as an evil magic user with the neutral warrior, the chaotic rogue and Morrigan. I like the evil characters better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 13 2010 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Apr 04 2003 1:57 am
Posts: 4483
Location: Redmond, WA
Branching dialogue going away in favor of a dialogue wheel is probably too far, Bioware. Now DA and ME are simply too close.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 13 2010 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 12:06 pm
Posts: 9745
Location: MI,
90's RPG era.
The end of the three big RPG franchises (Might and Magic, Ultima and Wizardry)
The rise of BioWare

DAMN YOU BIOWARE! :cuss:

_________________
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 13 2010 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Apr 04 2003 6:01 am
Posts: 4274
Location: VA
Also the end of the great cartridge RPGs, and the beginning of what I like to call the "FMVRPGs". Boo. :cuss:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jul 14 2010 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 31 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: DARK SOULS
Indie games will serve you well....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 9:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 3:47 pm
Posts: 1763
Location: Boondock
There's a post on the official forums now where one of the gameplay guys is answering a bunch of gameplay related questions (and fending off plot related ones). A distillation I found elsewhere:

Quote:
    * Warriors are restricted to 2h or sword and board. Rogues get archery and dual wielding. Mages get staff. You can only equip a weapon that you have the skill for, so no warriors with bows.
    * While the number of tactic slots is not locked down, they intend to give you more of them at the beginning.
    * Almost all warrior attacks, including auto-attack, will deal damage in an arc instead of to a single target, with 2H having greater reach than sword and board. Dual wield is intended to be the highest single-target DPS.
    * Currently each class has 6 branching talent trees in addition to specialization trees.
    * Friendly-fire is currently only turned on for Nightmare difficulty, but that might change.
    * Tooltips are being reworked to give hard numbers for damage and will update to reflect the resistances of the targeted enemy.
    * No more fatigue from armor.
    * You will be able to knock around weak enemies with regular attacks. This will both throw them around and interrupt their abilities.
    * All three classes regain stamina in different ways. Mages passively regenerate, Warriors use specific abilities, and Rogues get stamina from auto-attack.
    * No more potion spam. Potions are on a long shared cool down.


My comments on that -

I like that they're differentiating the classes more. Having the warriors unable to use rogue weapons and attack styles is good. That makes it more valuable for replay, but also means that you will want to specialize a lot more. I like it. Also, giving them different attack methodology (warrior attacks in an arc, rogue is single target) is really cool. It really reinforces the build types and will make the battles a lot more tactical. Where do you focus your rogue while your warrior tanks the mob of low level baddies?

No more fatigue from armor is also good. I hate that you have to consider whether a lighter armor with less fatigue is better than heavier armor with more. Better should just be better. Just restrict by type (Heavy Plate only for warriors, etc.), or by stats (Strength).

The stamina thing is interesting; I'd like to see that in action.

No more potion spam is awesome. The late stages of Dragon Age (where it should be getting super hard) are trivially easy because by that point you have ~100 of each type of potion, so you can just chug and never die. Now you'll have to play smart.

_________________
Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
nijimeijer wrote:

I like that they're differentiating the classes more. Having the warriors unable to use rogue weapons and attack styles is good. That makes it more valuable for replay, but also means that you will want to specialize a lot more. I like it. Also, giving them different attack methodology (warrior attacks in an arc, rogue is single target) is really cool. It really reinforces the build types and will make the battles a lot more tactical. Where do you focus your rogue while your warrior tanks the mob of low level baddies?

No more fatigue from armor is also good. I hate that you have to consider whether a lighter armor with less fatigue is better than heavier armor with more. Better should just be better. Just restrict by type (Heavy Plate only for warriors, etc.), or by stats (Strength).

The stamina thing is interesting; I'd like to see that in action.

No more potion spam is awesome. The late stages of Dragon Age (where it should be getting super hard) are trivially easy because by that point you have ~100 of each type of potion, so you can just chug and never die. Now you'll have to play smart.


I want a divorce. :D

There is no reason a warrior can't pick up a bow. He might not be good at it, but there is absolutely no reason. I mean, if it were a real rpg, that wouldn't be a problem.

Armor should have positive and negative stats. If I run around outside in leather armor and then run around in full plate mail, I bet my fatigue is different. If I want my rogue in heavy armor, it might go against what my abilities are, but I should be able to put it on.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 10:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 3:47 pm
Posts: 1763
Location: Boondock
You're insane; much of that sounds like good, solid gameplay changes. They will force you to be more tactical with your party loadout and to manage your battles more carefully by making the character classes more specialized.

And no more "Oh, they're low, just potion it up." Instead, you'll want to avoid damage as much as possible now.

Tooltips that will show resistances, etc. is awesome; I hated *not* knowing that in DA:O.

The only one you could possibly not like there (other than the Friendly Fire thing) is no more fatigue from armor. But like I said, personally, I believe that is a pointless thing to have in game. Better should just be better.

_________________
Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
Oh, I have no problem building a character. In fact, my characters could take out your characters any day in a PvP match (if there was a mode for it.) :P I have no problem with my tactics, either. I get what they are doing, but I think it is petty, stupid stuff that just dumbs down the game a little more each time I hear something. I want it to go deep. I like stressing out about my character builds. However, I just think many of the points they bring up, like the ones you posted and others I have read, are pretty ridiculous.

Maybe it will all come together to be a fantastic game. I hope it does. I just don't know why they have a fantastic formula that was game of the year just last year, and they are going to change EVERYTHING up. Changes, sure, have to do that. EVERYTHING? Stupid. They had a hit on their hands with the first. It worked. They should have built off of that instead.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 3:47 pm
Posts: 1763
Location: Boondock
I dunno. I see most of those changes as deepening the game by making all of the decisions more tactical. From character builds to how combat will play out, those seem like they will deepen the game and force the player to make decisions they didn't necessarily need to make in Origins.

_________________
Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
I can see what you're saying. I just hope you are right and I'm wrong.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 1:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Apr 04 2003 6:01 am
Posts: 4274
Location: VA
Remy wrote:
There is no reason a warrior can't pick up a bow. He might not be good at it, but there is absolutely no reason.


I agree with this. The tactical decision is still there, because you'll really suck with a bow, so you have to decide whether or not the ranged attack is worth it if you miss half of your attacks (or whatever).

Quote:
Armor should have positive and negative stats. If I run around outside in leather armor and then run around in full plate mail, I bet my fatigue is different. If I want my rogue in heavy armor, it might go against what my abilities are, but I should be able to put it on.


Agree with this too. Again, this is another tactical decision.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 2:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 3:47 pm
Posts: 1763
Location: Boondock
Armor can still have negative effects applied. You could receive, for instance, negatives to Attack and to Dex and what-have-you when wearing massive armor.

The fatigue penalty was always too nebulous. Fatigue is, essentially, mana for warriors and rogues. Warriors and rogues already have abilities that either constantly drain or take a set pool of fatigue at times, same as mages. Yet mages don't have robes that penalize their mana. Having armor do the same seems pointless; and again, it's fairly vaguely applied in game when you don't have the rest of the numbers to do on-the-fly math in your head. I imagine they will keep negative stat hits on heavier armor; they're just removing the most meaningless portion of that (the fatigue drain).

As for the bow; I could care less if they let you equip it or not, but I don't see it as a valid tactical choice. If you want the tactical choice of ranged combat, you have mages and rogues, both of whom are better suited. Why should they try to balance or make bows work with a character class where it shouldn't apply? This way, they can focus the abilities on a per-class basis, and hopefully take them deeper since there will be less crossover.

_________________
Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sep 16 2010 2:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27 2003 1:00 pm
Posts: 8114
nijimeijer wrote:
Armor can still have negative effects applied. You could receive, for instance, negatives to Attack and to Dex and what-have-you when wearing massive armor.

The fatigue penalty was always too nebulous. Fatigue is, essentially, mana for warriors and rogues. Warriors and rogues already have abilities that either constantly drain or take a set pool of fatigue at times, same as mages. Yet mages don't have robes that penalize their mana. Having armor do the same seems pointless; and again, it's fairly vaguely applied in game when you don't have the rest of the numbers to do on-the-fly math in your head. I imagine they will keep negative stat hits on heavier armor; they're just removing the most meaningless portion of that (the fatigue drain).



Actually, I think you made a fine point here, but again, I don't really agree. It was a trade off for your warrior. You had to choose between:
a) having a great tank that could rush in, take lots of damage, but burn through the stamina quickly
or
b) wearing lighter armor, being more cautious with him, but having all of your reserve stamina/fatigue for your special powers.

When I think of how you and I built Alistair up differently, I went for a lighter armor for more power and you put him in the heaviest stuff you could find, I can see how this narrows down how you build the character. I'm not saying they are taking away major choices with this, but they are taking away choices.

_________________
Saul is on the move.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group