Dragon Age 2 - Catch All

For those who are curious, a developer made a post on the Bioware forums in a thread about friendly fire that breaks down their philosophy for difficulty levels in DA2:

Friendly fire is only on Nightmare. There were discussions on it months ago (including toggles, having it not be toggle-able in certain modes, and even locked difficulty levels) and that was the decision that was reached.

For reference, here are our current goals for difficulty balance:

Casual - Able to be beaten playing a single character sub-optimally, with the rest of the party using default AI tactics.

Normal - Able to be beaten playing a single character optimally, with the rest of the party using default AI tactics.

Hard - Able to be beaten playing the entire party sub-optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics.

Nightmare - Able to be beaten playing the entire party optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics. Friendly fire active.

I think personally I would have preferred if hard had had half damage friendly fire the way normal did in DAO, but either way its good to know what their design intent was with the different difficulties.

Action-RPG definitely.

Dysplastic wrote:
Scratched wrote:

It's difficult to talk about the reliability of the review of DA2 specifically as it's not out for the great unwashed yet, for all I know it could be spot on. To a certain extent you could come back to whether the demo, which is all the public have at the moment, is meant to be a good representation or just a marketing expense to get people to part with their money.

On a more general note, I think there is cause to be a bit concerned and suspicious of reviews of big budget games. Part of that big budget is marketing, which can meet or exceed the development budget, and as has been anecdotally reported many times, reviewers or the companies reviewers work for do get pressured by representatives of the companies selling the games. Not to say that all reviews are useless, but it poisons the well.

I also think PC Gamer has a vested interest in reviewing big budget PC games well for its own survival. If PC Gamer told people that they might as well play DA2 on console, that could mean less PC gamers and less people buying PC Gamer. They definitely have a financial interest in keeping the "PC Gaming is AWESOME, and we're here to tell you why!" train going.

I find Rock-Paper-Shotgun much more intellectually honest, and with better writing to boot. Oh, and they also do scoreless reviews, scratched!

I still think PC Gamer is one of the more unbiased mainstream media outlets. All gaming media magazines and websites are at the mercy of developers and their marketing dollars. I freelance for home and lifestyle magazines and I'll say that the situation is just as bad - write a bad review of a powerful chef's restaurant and suddenly several restaurants no longer want to give you access or buy advertising.

zeroKFE wrote:

For those who are curious, a developer made a post on the Bioware forums in a thread about friendly fire that breaks down their philosophy for difficulty levels in DA2:

Bioware was here

I think personally I would have preferred if hard had had half damage friendly fire the way normal did in DAO, but either way its good to know what their design intent was with the different difficulties.

Hopefully those will be at least partially explained when you get to select your skill, rather than staying as a dev post on their forum that a small fraction of their playerbase will see.

Half friendly fire would be nice, I just hope there's a mod available for it.

LarryC wrote:

Action-RPG definitely.

Yeah, I'd describe it this way too to a brand new player. Based on the demo alone I would bold the Action part, but that's because the demo has a lot of the customization stripped out.

I'm predicting that much of the game will have the Action part bolded as well. This is not because there won't be more customizations later on. I'm sure there will be, just from the power branches and such. This assessment is based on their model of using aggro powers to allow tank characters to do their roles, as opposed to having the tank characters tank enemies just because their collision boxes are just that big. Since attack redirection has been moved to powers as opposed to position, it loses the tactical aspect and becomes an action game.

What's always defined the classic RPGs is this tactical aspect to combat, so removing that in favor of a more Diablo-esque approach skews to the Action-RPG genre.

zeroKFE wrote:

For those who are curious, a developer made a post on the Bioware forums in a thread about friendly fire that breaks down their philosophy for difficulty levels in DA2:

Friendly fire is only on Nightmare. There were discussions on it months ago (including toggles, having it not be toggle-able in certain modes, and even locked difficulty levels) and that was the decision that was reached.

For reference, here are our current goals for difficulty balance:

Casual - Able to be beaten playing a single character sub-optimally, with the rest of the party using default AI tactics.

Normal - Able to be beaten playing a single character optimally, with the rest of the party using default AI tactics.

Hard - Able to be beaten playing the entire party sub-optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics.

Nightmare - Able to be beaten playing the entire party optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics. Friendly fire active.

I think personally I would have preferred if hard had had half damage friendly fire the way normal did in DAO, but either way its good to know what their design intent was with the different difficulties.

As someone who famously played through most of DA:O on "casual," I feel like there are too many factions expecting too many different things from the Dragon Age sequel.

Some relish spending 15 minutes on a single battle, pausing and clicking and using tactics to craft the ultimate battle plan. These people seem the most upset by the demo, and I have to think that this group of people is also in a small minority of total game players.

I'll never forget playing through the first few hours of DA:O on "normal," and having a great time. Cue the very first "random road encounter" where my party was slaughtered approximately thirteen times in a row by a fricking pack of wolves. I very nearly quit at that point, and I imagine a pretty large number of people might have found themselves in a similar position.

I wasn't that impressed with the DA2 demo, and I was also someone who complained about the "dumbing down" of Mass Effect. Still, I have faith that the full game will be a much more rewarding experience than the demo seems to imply.

BNice wrote:
ahrezmendi wrote:

Teleporting rogues. I've seen a lot of awesome things lately (screaming magic in a dragon's face, tanks with BUNKERS ON TOP, Dante beating the snot out of Captain America), but this definitely tops them all. Well, maybe not screaming magic in a dragon's face, but it's pretty damn close.

Screaming magic in a dragon's face = Skyrim

Dante pwning Captain America = MvC3

Tanks with bunkers on top = ?

Also, I wholeheartedly agree that these things are awesome.

Dawn of War II: Retribution, I'm guessing--there's an Imperial Guard tank with a bunker on top.

oilypenguin wrote:

Rose tinted glasses from completing the first one twice? =)

Utterly fair. And I give props to your frank self-awareness. As we can see here, a rare trait.

Anyway, I totally see where you're coming from with your specifics, oily. I'm right now to say that feels to me more the result of the demo being an early section of the game than the changes to DA2. I could be utterly wrong, though. We'll see.

Well, you guys will see and I'll quietly judge and then pick this up on sale on down the road.

Unless making a rogue changes my mind. I can't remember the last time I didn't buy a bioware game on day 1 so I figure I should at least give the rogue a go before I put this title on my backburner.

SommerMatt wrote:

As someone who famously played through most of DA:O on "casual," I feel like there are too many factions expecting too many different things from the Dragon Age sequel.

Some relish spending 15 minutes on a single battle, pausing and clicking and using tactics to craft the ultimate battle plan. These people seem the most upset by the demo, and I have to think that this group of people is also in a small minority of total game players.

I think you're right about the different factions wanting different things. As a member of the "I want pausing and tactical combat" faction, I can only respond by saying that Bioware is already making Mass Effect and TOR for those who want more action focused gameplay. DAO was supposed to be the Bioware game "for us", and now its not anymore. I don't think that necessarily makes it a "bad game", it just makes it a different game, which just sucks for those of us who have very, very few options in that tactical space anymore.

But the camera still sucks, regardless

BadKen wrote:

Dawn of War II: Retribution, I'm guessing--there's an Imperial Guard tank with a bunker on top.

My edit clarified that I was thinking of C&C Generals, but it is good to know that DoW 2 also has tanks with bunkers on top. It's just a combination of things that is too awesome to overlook.

Anyway, on topic, uh... yeah, got nothing. Might try playing a Mage this weekend to compare with the Rogue, but I'm gunning to finish DA:O and Awakenings by the end of the month, so that will probably take priority. I only have the Brecilian Forest and Landsmeet remaining, plus whatever side-quests I haven't yet finished.

Based on the demo, here's my quick definition of Dragon Age II:

Choose-your-own-adventure with tactical party management on higher difficulties. (At least, I hope the latter part's true; I'm not great at party-based games and I still had no difficulty beating the demo.)

I decided to give this a go (screw it, I'll use spoiler tags even though it's a demo). First thing I notice is that it's dark as hell so I need to almost max out the brightness in my drivers just to see the menus. Second thing is that the outdoor environment you start in looks like absolute garbage.

I like that they made the combat a bit more engaging visually and more fast paced, but when I was fighting the Ogre (as a mage) I still had that issue of "sh*t my health is low, heal is on cooldown and I have 5 guys aggroed" so I need to run in a circle for a minute. Maybe I'm not doing it right, but I ran into that quite a few times in DA:O as well and it's not very fun. Flemeth's appearance was nicely done, but every other character in that opening sequence is of the boring uninspired BioWare NPC breed. They have bad lines, and they all sound like they're idiots. I just can't get into the game when all the NPC are boring as hell.

Spoiler:

Why even include the death of family members when it's poorly done and not dramatic at all?

I almost wish they cut 90% of the characters and just focused on making fewer characters better.

Also I'm not sure I like the Mass Effect dialogue system in Dragon Age. It just doesn't fit the game. It works better for ME because the pace of that game is much higher. Anyway, I'm not sure what it is but DA:O never grabbed me the way KotOR I & II did, the way ME2 did and the way I want RPGs to grab me. I'm not sure if it's the writing, or the voice acting, or the world building or all of it. I was hoping DA2 to be a big improvement over DA:O but alas. I will probably still play it sometime though.

After I got to the city and did the second boss fight the game crashed and there was not auto-save so vOv
Does the demo go on a lot further after that?

kyrieee wrote:

I almost wish they cut 90% of the characters and just focused on making fewer characters better.

It's a shame, extremely few companies seem interested in making a medium sized game. Even the much hyped DLC campaigns very rarely turns out to be more than a token effort, or to make use of what ended up on the cutting room floor from the main game.

I suspect that the Family Member Who Didn't Make It will be significantly more important than is obvious from the event.

I have to say that the demo was a really really weird slice of the game. I understand wanting to move forward and show "Here are some characters you'll meet later, and try combat with a few more abilities!", but it was just really not so great. Not to mention the lack of support for changing equipment, etc. It was just... odd.

I do like the idea of a flashback from an unreliable narrator starting the piece, though. That's a very cool setup. And honestly, the extra oogaba in the "that's not how it happened!" version was hilarious on both the level of "Yeah, this clown would totally remember it that way" and the level of poking fun at video-game oogaba.

We need more unreliable narrators in games.

You know the story teller angle is perfectly set up to make DLC fit into the core game, since it's very easy to make non-linear and to easily put you in context. Pretty smart, actually.

I tried the demo, it's uh, weird. Can't say I like it, but I'm probably not the target audience (although big boobs certainly appeal to a gentleman such as I)

I didn't get why you have to replay the first battle twice, nothing seems to change much? Except you have less powers I suppose that's what the dwarf changed in the story...

Actually honestly I didn't get like 90% of what was going on (Why does the guy have to die? He's turning into a monster?), but the combat was cool I guess, it seems intended for a controller tho. Probably won't buy this but at least I'll rent it on the Xbox. I also didn't get who the big bad guy was, probably have to play Dragon Age 1 to know (Was it the guy you meet in the city?).

The Power ranger-style baddies look dumb tho : p

edit: OH yeah, it's nice to have demos for PC games again, I almost want to buy it to support EA for that, but I wasn't hooked by the game so I guess I won't... but brownie points to EA for putting out demos

I was digging around on the Bioware forum to see if you could use a gamepad on PC to get the console 'actiony' controls (all signs point to no), and stumbled upon the snippet that apparently you can't change the armour on your companions, just weapons, trinkets, and enchantments on them. A little disappointing and I think it disables me until well after release, as much as I was ready to pull the trigger on it I think I'm going to wait another week for AC:B.

Scratched wrote:

I was digging around on the Bioware forum to see if you could use a gamepad on PC to get the console 'actiony' controls (all signs point to no), and stumbled upon the snippet that apparently you can't change the armour on your companions, just weapons, trinkets, and enchantments on them. A little disappointing and I think it disables me until well after release, as much as I was ready to pull the trigger on it I think I'm going to wait another week for AC:B.

You can upgrade their armor which gives them different looks. There was a recent clip on gamespot or something where they showed Aveline at a more progressed level and she was looking significantly more armored than at the early level of the game. You can see the difference in Carver, especially, if you start out a new demo with a mage.

Never played the first game, but based on the demo I really don't see the appeal. The whole managing other party members thing just doesn't do it for me, feels like more of a chore than anything. Would much prefer a standard action RPG where I just worry about my dude. Meh, guess just one of those games that's "not for me".

Scratched wrote:

apparently you can't change the armour on your companions, just weapons, trinkets, and enchantments on them. A little disappointing

That's a really big disappointment, if so. Jeez.

Not effecting my purchase decision either way, but damn. Why would they do that?

A lot of the changes, I've seen people saying they're just taking design decisions made for ME2 and running with them. I never bought into that. This sounds like they are indeed blindly following what the other team is doing. Blah.

Blind_Evil wrote:

Not effecting my purchase decision either way, but damn. Why would they do that?

No idea. Hey Isabela, do you know?

IMAGE(http://www.abjecthubris.com/images/da2isabella.jpg)

Nothing? How about you, Bethany?

IMAGE(http://www.lecourtierdelombre.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Screenshot_Bethany_dragon_age_2.jpg)

Guess not. But hey, Lady Hawke can change her clothes. How about her?

IMAGE(http://dualshockers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/dragonage2_female.jpg)

Huh. Now, why would they let Hawke wear different armor but not the other two? Hmmmm...

Spoiler:

It's the boobs on 'em.

Reading around a bit, I found that you're maybe not that far off Lobster. Rumor is they limited things in that manner because every character has a different model now, whereas in DA:O each race/sex combo was the exact same model.

Doesn't excuse it, in my opinion.

Personally I have no problem with it. It preserves the unique design of the character. The clothing options for NPCs in Origins never looked right, especially the rogues who had to wear the same crap any other henchman had to wear. Putting Tower mage robes and a pope hat on Morrigan was also just too sad, like making a dog wear clothes, I had to give her back her original attire.

My personal favorite RPG, Planescape: Torment, had limited equipment options for all the party members. It also had a similar equipment advancement system where you had to interact with your party members to meaningfully upgrade them rather than just finding random loot that's slightly better. I remember spending hours just talking with Dak'kon about his religion and improving his understanding of his own abilities. I'd love for there to be something similar in DA2.

zeroKFE wrote:
Normal - Able to be beaten playing a single character optimally, with the rest of the party using default AI tactics.

Hard - Able to be beaten playing the entire party sub-optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics.

Nightmare - Able to be beaten playing the entire party optimally, either controlling directly or using custom AI tactics. Friendly fire active.

Huh. I thought they did something to friendly fire in the demo, but I didn't think they would remove it from Normal difficulty. Half-Damage would be nice for Hard-Mode (which is probably how I'll play it).

Bummed about the limits on ally customization, but if I know me, I'll be more than happy to pay $14.99 for Dragon Age 2 during The 2012 Steam Summer Sale.

Latrine wrote:

Personally I have no problem with it. It preserves the unique design of the character. The clothing options for NPCs in Origins never looked right, especially the rogues who had to wear the same crap any other henchman had to wear.

I agree, and went through most of Origins and Awakening wearing the same armor and no helmet because everything else looked stupid. You'd THINK they'd offer a wide selection of light armor but no, everything looks like they stole it from a centurion.

Latrine wrote:

I remember spending hours just talking with Dak'kon about his religion and improving his understanding of his own abilities. I'd love for there to be something similar in DA2.

I remember spending hours searching through peoples' homes for stray teeth I could shove into Morte's jaw. Good times.

Dysplastic wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:

As someone who famously played through most of DA:O on "casual," I feel like there are too many factions expecting too many different things from the Dragon Age sequel.

Some relish spending 15 minutes on a single battle, pausing and clicking and using tactics to craft the ultimate battle plan. These people seem the most upset by the demo, and I have to think that this group of people is also in a small minority of total game players.


I think you're right about the different factions wanting different things.
As a member of the "I want pausing and tactical combat" faction, I can only respond by saying that Bioware is already making Mass Effect and TOR for those who want more action focused gameplay. DAO was supposed to be the Bioware game "for us", and now its not anymore. I don't think that necessarily makes it a "bad game", it just makes it a different game, which just sucks for those of us who have very, very few options in that tactical space anymore.

But the camera still sucks, regardless

Quite correct, and Bioware and EA were never going to make everyone happy. I'm convinced though that there would have been a lot less drama if Bioware had played it straight with the public from the initial announcement.

A talking head from Bioware said something along the lines of, 'There is still a zoomed out tactical view that is even better than in DA:O because it allows you to see more.' Instead we get a zoomed in view locked to the characters. In my book that's an outright lie.

Also agree that another objection to the actiony DA2 is that there already is an actiony RPG from Bioware, which I love. And the universe is far more interesting in that one too.

Thinking about it, it's not so much "I want to totally control the armour of everyone in my party, and it's a dealbreaker if I can't" as "If they've changed that, what else have they changed?", and they did disable a lot in the demo. I think I just want to have a clear picture of what exactly the game is before I dive in.

The other fun thing is that EA/Activision's insistence on raising prices on their games makes me more cautious about buying them.

Latrine wrote:

Personally I have no problem with it. It preserves the unique design of the character. The clothing options for NPCs in Origins never looked right, especially the rogues who had to wear the same crap any other henchman had to wear.

I agree, rogue and mage gear wasn't done terribly well in the first game. Cutting it altogether, though, is the lazy option. They could have put the work in, but decided to go the ME2 "streamlining" route and hack it off altogether. I'm not cool with that.

See, I can be negative on DA2! I'll most likely be satisfied with whatever customization they did leave in, but as of now it's just a pisser.