So Dragon Age 2 is really bad on the PC and consolized?

[Phobic9]

Bioware had to fuck up sooner or later. They're my favorite developer so I hope they can learn from this and actually do Dragon Age 3 correctly.

Of course, the question is...will EA let them?

Dragon Age: Origins took what... 5 years to make?

Dragon Age 2 took over a year, maybe 2?

What do you think?

Yes, most of the development for Dragon Age: Origins was the lore, game engine and all that other stuff but they could've easily ADDED to that core gameplay instead of stripping it down IMO. Of course if they get it out faster, that means more sales right?

What do I know though? I just play the damn games.

 

[Cheesetogo]

Bioware had to fuck up sooner or later. They're my favorite developer so I hope they can learn from this and actually do Dragon Age 3 correctly.

Of course, the question is...will EA let them?

You all seem to be acting as if this is all some big mistake, and that Bioware didn't intend to dumb down the game. Do you really think they didn't know what they were doing? Do you think that they didn't intend to dumb it down?

They cut quite a few RPG elements from ME2. Nonetheless, the game was a massive hit, and it my opinion, better than the first. I would have preferred it if they hadn't cut some things (e.g. size of the Citadel), but overall I think it worked quite well. The only people that really HATE the changes are big RPG fans.

It's the same deal with Dragon Age 2. Now, maybe they really did go too far -- I'm sure we'll see based on review scores and sales. But they INTENDED to dumb the game down. A company as large and as experienced as Bioware had to have known what they were doing. They obviously intended to make the game a better experience for more players. What so many people here seem to be forgetting is that cutting RPG elements through these changes does not automatically make the game bad -- it just makes it different.

 

[motsm]

What so many people here seem to be forgetting is that cutting RPG elements through these changes does not automatically make the game bad -- it just makes it different.

Yeah, but when there are so few deep RPG's coming out anymore, the loss of any just becomes endlessly frustrating. This isn't like the 90's where you had dozens of options if an RPG didn't pan out the way you'd hoped.

 

[Mem]

You all seem to be acting as if this is all some big mistake, and that Bioware didn't intend to dumb down the game. Do you really think they didn't know what they were doing? Do you think that they didn't intend to dumb it down?

They cut quite a few RPG elements from ME2. Nonetheless, the game was a massive hit, and it my opinion, better than the first. I would have preferred it if they hadn't cut some things (e.g. size of the Citadel), but overall I think it worked quite well. The only people that really HATE the changes are big RPG fans.

It's the same deal with Dragon Age 2. Now, maybe they really did go too far -- I'm sure we'll see based on review scores and sales. But they INTENDED to dumb the game down. A company as large and as experienced as Bioware had to have known what they were doing. They obviously intended to make the game a better experience for more players. What so many people here seem to be forgetting is that cutting RPG elements through these changes does not automatically make the game bad -- it just makes it different.

It works both ways ie cutting RPG elements does not make it good either,you can argue they are running out of original ideas,sadly cutting/dumbing down is the only ideas they can think of,I wonder whom they are really trying to cater for when this is all they have left?

Sadly they are going in the wrong direction with no new great ideas.

 

[Stormborn26]

If it was possible to get a refund, I would. The lack of any kind of real camera control makes the game almost unplayable for me. I'm trying to watch a Hurlock while my character is running toward him and I end up looking at a wall. I don't mind the loss of the tactical camera, but a 'disable auto-rotate' feature for the camera would have made the game infinitely better. And if I had known the PC version was going to be this 'consolized' I would have just bought it for the console. I buy the PC version because they are different from the console version, not because they make them as similar as possible.

 

[mb]

Ugh. Not only is the camera annoying but the game has crashed several times already.

What a let down so far.

 

[RavenSEAL]

You all seem to be acting as if this is all some big mistake, and that Bioware didn't intend to dumb down the game. Do you really think they didn't know what they were doing? Do you think that they didn't intend to dumb it down?

They cut quite a few RPG elements from ME2. Nonetheless, the game was a massive hit, and it my opinion, better than the first. I would have preferred it if they hadn't cut some things (e.g. size of the Citadel), but overall I think it worked quite well. The only people that really HATE the changes are big RPG fans.

It's the same deal with Dragon Age 2. Now, maybe they really did go too far -- I'm sure we'll see based on review scores and sales. But they INTENDED to dumb the game down. A company as large and as experienced as Bioware had to have known what they were doing. They obviously intended to make the game a better experience for more players. What so many people here seem to be forgetting is that cutting RPG elements through these changes does not automatically make the game bad -- it just makes it different.

They took out features that made the original good, a LOT of features.

 

[frozentundra123456]

^ Obsidian did KOTOR II, and it is 90% of a much better game than I until it falls apart at the end.

Mass Effect 2 was a great game, so I wouldn't call it off course either.

Some people might agree with you that Kotor II was "better" than the first game. It certainly had more elements of gameplay such as influencing your companions and more crafting and so forth.

That said, I enjoyed KOTOR I very much more than the second game. The second game to me just seemed like a bunch of extra stuff added to the first game, but with a very convoluted story that made no sense. Maybe if the game had been finished the ending would have tied up the plotlines, but as it was released, I just felt very frustrated and empty at the end of the game. Like, WTF, is this it?? Where is the rest of the game?? Oh well KOTOR 3 will tie up all the loose ends---NOT!!

I did not like the demo of DA 2 because of the camera issues mentioned, but I have not played full game so I wont comment any more. I liked ME2, so I would give Bioware a break on that game, although I can see how hardcore RPG players would think they dumbed it down.

My biggest disappointment with Bioware is that they turned KOTOR into an MMO. Guess they are trying to turn the franchise into a cash cow like WOW. You cant blame Obsidian for that.

 

[MagickMan]

Shit, this makes me sad. I was hoping the demo was a bad joke, or that some things were removed from it but would be in the actual game. Not being able to directly control party members or change their armor is the killer, for me.

 

[CottonRabbit]

Not being able to directly control party members or change their armor is the killer, for me.

No, you can control your party members.

Nearing the end of act 1, I feel that the gameplay hasn't changed all that much. The biggest difference is the removal of friendly fire. The other things don't affect really combat.

What may be my biggest disappointment is the story. Of course, I haven't finished the game, but so far nothing has really intrigued or excited me. Companion interactions have been minimal. Besides learning some new things about the Qunari, everything else has been detailed in the original. Hopefully there are some good twists in the later acts.

 

[Marty502]

Does it enable friendly fire on the highest difficulty?

 

[NoSoup4You]

I put about an hour and a half into the game today and as a huge DA:O fan (and someone that was initially horrified by the DA2 demo) I can say that the game is quite solid so far. The battles take some getting used to (jumping 10 feet in the air...etc.) but overall it works and is quite challenging as well.

I laugh when I hear moaning about herbalism, trap-making and pick-pocketing being removed/streamlined though. Those were throw away talents in the first game and served zero purpose and in most circumstances only required one talent point to be spent in each to get 90% of the value out of the tree. They were almost certainly ignored by the vast majority of gamers, good riddance.

The graphic performance in DA2 is quite surprising, however. My computer cannot run this game maxed, instead I need to drop AA entirely and disable SSAO. I also disabled the "Added Motion Blur" and "Depth of Field" effect just to eek out a tiny bit more performance. Even still it's not as smooth as DA:O on max and 8xAA. However it looks much nicer than DA:O so I'll live with it. But unless it's just an nvidia driver issue, don't expect to max this game without a monster system.

The challenge of the game thus far is quite good, I'm playing on Hard and having a blast. Several battles have required repeated attempts to get past and each time they were loads of fun. Bioware games are always like this though - harder at the beginning and then easing up as you advance. Hoping the difficulty stays consistent this time around...

Overall this is a fun game, I think one thing I couldn't live without was re-mapping the "attack closest enemy" hotkey to "E". This makes the game much less cumbersome and keeps the action flowing without requiring unnecessary pauses just to retarget your character constantly. I still pause all the time though, it's pretty much required on the Hard difficulty early on.

 

[NYHoustonman]

Enjoying it so far, but (for what it's worth) I've been disappointed by the reviews. I really wanted to love this game, and 3 hours in I'm enjoying it, but I can understand why some would be against it. Thinking about it, it really is a shame that they chose to abandon one of the biggest aspects of the original that differentiated it from other games.

But taken as its own game, it's damned good. Maybe a letdown for a Bioware title, but still a good game.

 

[Marty502]

I hope they find a way to get all the visual effects with a DX10 card.
I'd like to crank them someday just because.

That said, I've only tried the demo, DX9 renderer with medium settings.
Can you enable the DX11 renderer with medium settings and still gain some postprocessing FX? Or it's only with high settings?
The demo looks a bit bare and I'd like to stretch my 4670's legs a bit without AA.

 

[Locut0s]

This news makes me sad I LOVED DAO.

Edit. After looking at a review it still looks worth getting and playing but I am still saddened at the stuff they removed.

 

[Dumac]

The game came in from Amazon today, but I won't have time to play it for a little while.

I hope hearing all the negativity just lowers my expectations, thereby causing me to be not disappointed when I finally play the game.

 

[Veliko]

Baldurs Gate 2 is one of my favourite all-time games but the combat has nothing to do with that and the enemy AI was abysmal - it was why they would be halfway through casting spells the moment you walked into a room.

Combat in DA:O wasn't anything special either as the mages were stupidly overpowered.

 

[Mem]

I had a feeling DA2 would get very mixed reviews/feedback and if you go here its looks bad,http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii/user-reviews?dist=negative ,official forums at Bioware have a thread on the above http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6426423 .


End of the day I think a lot of people including myself expected more from DA2 and Bioware,you can't really complain to people for voicing their opinions,however official reviews are all over the place from low 5 to 9/10(unofficial ratings anywhere from 0 to 10)I guess only you can really judge if you think DA2 is up to Bioware and your standard.

 

[Mem]

Now we know why Brent Knowles left Bioware and DA2,

Discussion on Dragon Age 2 began around this time and looking ahead I
knew that I wasn’t going to be satisfied with what Dragon Age 2 would
be. Party control/tactical combat are huge factors in my enjoyment of a
role-playing game as is adopting the role of the hero (i.e., customizing
my character). I was fairly certain Dragon Age would transition towards
more of a Mass Effect experience, which while enjoyable is not the type
of role-playing game I play. Could I be the lead designer on such a
title? Certainly… though if I were going to work on a game adopting a
set-in-stone protagonist I’d rather work on something lighter, like a
shooter.
Through a series of circumstances it was decided that with my not
wanting to participate on Dragon Age 2 it was time to transition in a
new lead to finish the Dragon Age console versions and ramp up for
Dragon Age 2.

http://blog.brentknowles.com/2010/08/15/bioware-brent-year-10-fall-2008-summer-2009/

 

[Fenixgoon]

lol so glad i didn't bother with DA2

 

[Zenoth]

lol so glad i didn't bother with DA2

Yeah me too, I'll keep playing DAO instead and try out some mods I haven't tried yet, that's the best part, if people don't like DA2 then they can always go back to DAO, it's still there and it won't run away, same for ME1, it's not like a game's sequel should be the one taking the previous' place, if it ain't good you guys don't force yourselves to like it "because you bought it", tranquility of mind would come in the form of enjoying the previous and superior game, God forbid those who don't mind about updated graphics in our era, that would be quite something, go game-play!

 

[gothamhunter]

Dragon Age: Origins took what... 5 years to make?

Dragon Age 2 took over a year, maybe 2?

What do you think?

Yes, most of the development for Dragon Age: Origins was the lore, game engine and all that other stuff but they could've easily ADDED to that core gameplay instead of stripping it down IMO. Of course if they get it out faster, that means more sales right?

What do I know though? I just play the damn games.

You're forgetting one thing though: user demand.

Yes, the first took a long time to finish because they had to actually create everything - the story, game engine, gameplay, interfaces, etc... And yes, the second only took 1-2 years and as a result seems as though it might have been rushed, but think about it this way: if they didn't change anything, everyone would have said "ohemgee it's just DA:O again there's nothing new no innovation fuuuuuuuuuuuu not paying for DA:O 1.2", and if they took another 5 years to develop it while adding to the game, it's quite possible that they would have lost a huge chunk of their consumer base.

It's sort of a catch-22; do we try to change a few things and pump out a sequel that, although seemingly "dumbed down", is a great game on its own, so that we can give our fans another game of the same universe/setting, or do we take 4-5 years developing a sequel after we implement every little thing all of our customers want, where by that time the novelty of the sequel has probably worn off by other new IP's, and the development costs greatly outweigh the probable profit from selling the game?

IDK, just my 2 cents. I'll probably still enjoy the hell out of the game; it looks fun, and not being able to click on "create potion" isn't going to be a game changer for me, although the camera thing is slightly annoying

 

[Anteaus]

I'm beginning to wonder if this type of irrational criticism will occur everytime a sequal is released. I'm not talking about judging a game on it's merits, which absolutely should take place. I'm talking about judging a game purely on it's abstract components in relation to prior releases of a series. Most of the points made in this thread have nothing to do with how the game actually plays..just some asumptions of deficiency because x, y or z was removed or replaced and since those features existed in the earlier game, then obviously it is being dumbed down or turned into something lesser.

Many of the these criticisms have been leveled at DA2 before the game was even released, which makes me think that being objective isn't possible for some people. I find it especially odd considering that Bioware has a very good track record. I've heard similar criticisms in regards to Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age, yet each game stood on its on.

I've played about 5 hours of DA2 so far, and I certainly don't sit there every 5 minutes going, "god I wish this would control more like DA". After the the first few minutes, it feels just as naturally as DA:O was. The only true criticism I have is that the game can run like a pig sometimes, but I developed that criticism from actually playing the game.

If your tearing games like DA2 apart, I'd hate to see how you're treating games that actually deserve it.

 

[darkewaffle]

Some people might agree with you that Kotor II was "better" than the first game. It certainly had more elements of gameplay such as influencing your companions and more crafting and so forth.

That said, I enjoyed KOTOR I very much more than the second game. The second game to me just seemed like a bunch of extra stuff added to the first game

It works both ways ie cutting RPG elements does not make it good either,you can argue they are running out of original ideas,sadly cutting/dumbing down is the only ideas they can think of,I wonder whom they are really trying to cater for when this is all they have left?

Sadly they are going in the wrong direction with no new great ideas.

"They put more stuff in the game, but it was just a waste of time."

"They took stuff out of the game, I wanted more options and more to do."

:awe:

 

[Veliko]

Many of the these criticisms have been leveled at DA2 before the game was even released, which makes me think that being objective isn't possible for some people.

These days it seems to be a case of people noticing something being different followed immediately by a knee-jerk response of "OMG THE CONSOLES ARE KILLING US ALL".