Support NeoGAF

[water_wendi]

I thought it sounded pretty good.

That hybrid combat mechanic seems interesting...I never really got into the first one basically because the action looked boring. Looks like a step in the right direction to me, and it still supposedly keeps the "tactical" aspect as well.

When they are talking about "tactical" they are talking about pausing. Ok.. so pausing is in. Thats not what makes combat tactical. Having their one development motto being "When you press a button something AWESOME happens. Button = AWESOME" means that all versions will suffer from this Dynasty Warriors treatment. This sounds about as far removed from tactical as i can think. And the very few movies we've seen of a game that releases in.. 4 months or so hasnt done anything to allay my fears for the game.

im glad its interesting to you. They can swap my purchase for yours. That doesnt seem to be the right way to go about hitting some 10 million sold figure but hey.. Bioware knows what they are doing i guess.

 

[benny_a]

From everything EA has stated, the PC version has sold extremely well.

Could you find a quote by EA or Bioware to that effect?

All I've found with a few minutes of googling is this statement in regards to Dragon Age 2:

Joystick: Why did you leave/forsake the "a la Baldur's gate" view on PC of the first Dragon Age?

Mike Laidlaw: For budgetary reasons, we focused our work on a 3rd person view, that asks for very detailed and nice textures so that the player can admire the game with a close-up view. With an aerial view [isometric] we should cover much more ground and so create other textures. Now, the game mainly sold on console, so we're going the way of the audience

Mike Laidlaw is the lead designer on DAO II.

I played DA:O on PC and on consoles with the third person camera. So I don't mind the changes, I actually welcome most of them. (Yes, I bought the game for all 3 platforms. I'm stupid.)

 

[Draft]

:lol

So when's Mass Effect 3 come out?

 

[Confidence Man]

This was an art and combat-design decision, the BioWare rep told me today. Support for that Baldur's Gate-style view forced the artists to design rooms and scenes that didn't have important things on their ceilings and skies — which top-down players wouldn't see.

Great. No iso view so they can have important things on the ceilings. Just what I was wishing for in the first game.

 

[Nirolak]

Could you find a quote by EA or Bioware to that effect?

All I've found with a few minutes of googling is this statement in regards to Dragon Age 2:

Mike Laidlaw is the lead designer on DAO II.

I played DA:O on PC and on consoles with the third person camera. So I don't mind the changes, I actually welcome most of them. (Yes, I bought the game for all 3 platforms. I'm stupid.)

On their forums Laidlaw said they misquoted him and that Dragon Age actually sold very well on PC.

 

[Dennis]

Great. No iso view so they can have important things on the ceilings. Just what I was wishing for in the first game.

Those fucking ceilings better be Sistine Chapel-quality.

 

[Gully State]

So game mechanics involving shooting/slashing at hanging exploding barrels? Fuck Awesome...

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

I'm canceling my pre-order from Amazon.

In a perfect world, this would get delayed and overhauled.

 

[Lostconfused]

:lol
So when's Mass Effect 3 come out?

Maybe some time soon, maybe not.

 

[Mrbob]

Could you find a quote by EA or Bioware to that effect?

All I've found with a few minutes of googling is this statement in regards to Dragon Age 2:

Mike Laidlaw is the lead designer on DAO II.

I played DA:O on PC and on consoles with the third person camera. So I don't mind the changes, I actually welcome most of them. (Yes, I bought the game for all 3 platforms. I'm stupid.)

Jeff Green made a comment on a podcast (I forget which one) when he worked with EA about Dragon Age sales on PC being very good. I'm not surprised the console version(s) sold more, since you are looking at a larger pool of game buyers. Doesn't mean the PC version sold poorly. Look at Bad Company 2. Seems like the PC version is hanging right in with the PS3 and 360 versions. Games can sell well on PC. Beyond this, Bioware decided they wanted to take Dragon Age 2 to a console route as soon as Origins was done and before they saw any sales.

 

[Chairman Yang]

I thought it sounded pretty good.

That hybrid combat mechanic seems interesting...I never really got into the first one basically because the action looked boring. Looks like a step in the right direction to me, and it still supposedly keeps the "tactical" aspect as well.

The problem is that Bioware's claim that they're all about choice, and that you can play the game as a mindless hack-and-slasher or a careful chess-like tactical masterpiece is total bullshit. It's self-contradictory.

Think about it this way: if you can succeed at all the combat encounters by mashing buttons, why would you use the (probably very limited) palette of tactical options that Bioware gives you? Where's the motivation? Why would you pause and unpause repeatedly, carefully issuing orders, when you can just ignore all that and still do well?

 

[ghst]

What the hell is that standing there? Looks like a dwarf mixed with a sea lion mixed with a yeti.

something awesome.

 

[nemesun]

"We gave the game very ownable, signature look that as you look at the screenshot you know instantly that it came from Dragon Age."
Proceed showing..

You certainly have accomplished that goal I'll say.

 

[stupei]

Oh hey, its that PR bullshit I was talking about! If only he had actually used the term, "visually super hot". Missed opportunity there, Bioware.

I like the idea of importing the world state from your DA:O save and the fact that apparently you'll get to see more consequence to your choices.

I do honestly feel bad for PC gamers who were expecting it to be more like the first game, but more and more Bioware are making the combat in their games operate more like other genres and the RPG elements are becoming focused primarily around character interactions and (more linear) narrative. It's been going increasingly in that direction since the start of this generation. This is who they are now. People would be a lot less unhappy if they'd stop being surprised.

Edit: It looks absolutely awful, though, graphically. :lol

ME2 was such a step up from ME1 visually, at least on consoles, it's kind of a bummer to see these screens...

Jeff Green made a comment on a podcast (I forget which one) when he worked with EA about Dragon Age sales on PC being very good. I'm not surprised the console version(s) sold more, since you are looking at a larger pool of game buyers. Doesn't mean the PC version sold poorly. Look at Bad Company 2. Seems like the PC version is hanging right in with the PS3 and 360 versions. Games can sell well on PC. Beyond this, Bioware decided they wanted to take Dragon Age 2 to a console route as soon as Origins was done and before they saw any sales.

Or perhaps after, when they realized they made more money on consoles than on PC.

Even if "a million on PC" is true, that means twice as many on consoles.

And didn't the "more consolized" Mass Effect sell better than the original?

 

[ghst]

Bioware decided they wanted to take Dragon Age 2 to a console route as soon as Origins was done and before they saw any sales.

can anyone substantiate the rumours that this direction was decided upon long before origin's release, about the same time the game went multiplatform?

 

[benny_a]

Jeff Green made a comment on a podcast (I forget which one) when he worked with EA about Dragon Age sales on PC being very good.

From what I can gather by checking out speculative numbers and comparing them to the one time EA gave numbers the PC version sold approximately 800k copies around February 2010.

If those numbers are correct, which I can't be sure of because it's just doing basic subtraction with a bad data source, that would be good. Definitely holding their own versus the individual console versions.
I was just interesting in an official statement, because you said "it sold extremely well".
Just to be sure: The dichotomy is not "extremely well" vs. "the worst shit sales ever".

On their forums Laidlaw said they misquoted him and that Dragon Age actually sold very well on PC.

My info is from this thread here. Mike Laidlow also replied, but hasn't commented on the PC sales and didn't say anything about misquotation. Can't find a search function either, and the guy posts relatively often so his recent activities does not go that far back.

 

[Patryn]

I thought it sounded pretty good.

That hybrid combat mechanic seems interesting...I never really got into the first one basically because the action looked boring. Looks like a step in the right direction to me, and it still supposedly keeps the "tactical" aspect as well.

I'm guessing that you don't understand what we're talking about when we talk "tactical".

 

[Mrbob]

I was just interesting in an official statement, because you said "it sold extremely well".

Jeff Green is the main who said the game sold extremely well, just reciprocating the message. If EA expectations are 400K, and it sells 800k, I guess this would qualify. Either way it still really doesn't matter. If Bioware wants to hit 10 million sold, they couldn't continue down the path of the PC version.

can anyone substantiate the rumours that this direction was decided upon long before origin's release, about the same time the game went multiplatform?

Nothing I can find. Only rumors that kept on coming out around the release of Origins. We constantly heard rumors about DA2 being more action focused.

 

[Fredescu]

The problem is that Bioware's claim that they're all about choice, and that you can play the game as a mindless hack-and-slasher or a careful chess-like tactical masterpiece is total bullshit. It's self-contradictory.

Think about it this way: if you can succeed at all the combat encounters by mashing buttons, why would you use the (probably very limited) palette of tactical options that Bioware gives you? Where's the motivation? Why would you pause and unpause repeatedly, carefully issuing orders, when you can just ignore all that and still do well?

Yeah, this is why everyone plays everything on Easy. I don't know why they even bother with Normal and Hard. No one uses them. Where's the motivation?

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Personally, I think they should have made the game even more like KOTOR and less like a half-assed action game. They discovered the right forumla for console RPG's a long time ago and for whatever reason they keep dumbing it down.

 

[Kittonwy]

Pretty interesting interview by GameTrailers. Game looks awesome...I'm already sold.

But-un aw-som
But-un aw-som
But-
un
aw-
som

That PR dude got the same goatee as the main character.

 

[Anasui Kishibe]

people doubting Bioware :lol

come on guys, have some faith, their curricula should grant them some sort of blind trust

 

[Patryn]

people doubting Bioware :lol

come on guys, have some faith, their curricula should grant them some sort of blind trust

Mass Effect 2 says hi.

 

[water_wendi]

Yeah, this is why everyone plays everything on Easy. I don't know why they even bother with Normal and Hard. No one uses them. Where's the motivation?

ill keep believing the "strategic" stuff they keep talking about is total marketing bullshit until i see other wise. Everything so far has been a poor mans Dynasty Warriors. You know things are bad when Crimson Sea looks better. Do you honestly think Bioware made two separate games and you can switch on the fly? Maybe but im doubtful.

 

[K.Jack]

btw, help me understand this:

But! PC gamers, your version will include a special option to zoom the camera out, just not up.

So, "out", but not "up". What?

Does that mean we're just sliding the camera around, on a 180 degree plain of the action?

 

[Wallach]

Mass Effect 2 says hi.

Darn them making one of the best games of the year. Consarn it BioWare, when will you learn?

 

[Van Owen]

they might as well give the PC version 360 Pad support, if its going to be same console game you might as well play it that way.

I think they already did...

 

[water_wendi]

people doubting Bioware :lol

come on guys, have some faith, their curricula should grant them some sort of blind trust

Theyve been on a downhill slide for how long now? Almost a decade? Any trust they built up evaporated with NWN and Jade Empire.

 

[Patryn]

Darn them making one of the best games of the year. Consarn it BioWare, when will you learn?

Sure it was a solid shooter, at the expense of depth, story and most RPG elements.

ME2 makes it clear that Bioware is out of the RPG business, and we shouldn't buy any claims from them about how DA2 is still a hardcore RPG.

 

[MushroomSamba]

When they are talking about "tactical" they are talking about pausing. Ok.. so pausing is in. Thats not what makes combat tactical. Having their one development motto being "When you press a button something AWESOME happens. Button = AWESOME" means that all versions will suffer from this Dynasty Warriors treatment. This sounds about as far removed from tactical as i can think. And the very few movies we've seen of a game that releases in.. 4 months or so hasnt done anything to allay my fears for the game.

im glad its interesting to you. They can swap my purchase for yours. That doesnt seem to be the right way to go about hitting some 10 million sold figure but hey.. Bioware knows what they are doing i guess.

I've barely touched the first one, so it'd be unfair of me to compare them or say that it's an improvement or not. It's just that the concept appeals to me...I like the idea of pressing a button and something happening as opposed to clicking an enemy and waiting as my character goes on auto-attack. I don't see how "pressing a button=something happens" suddenly means "button-masher". I'd like to think there's some middle ground before going full-blown Dynasty Warriors. Of course, if it turns out I'm wrong and that's exactly what it turns into, then yeah I'd be disappointed too.

The problem is that Bioware's claim that they're all about choice, and that you can play the game as a mindless hack-and-slasher or a careful chess-like tactical masterpiece is total bullshit. It's self-contradictory.

Think about it this way: if you can succeed at all the combat encounters by mashing buttons, why would you use the (probably very limited) palette of tactical options that Bioware gives you? Where's the motivation? Why would you pause and unpause repeatedly, carefully issuing orders, when you can just ignore all that and still do well?

Because it's more fun if it suits you? I mean, people can have fun with Street Fighter by button-mashing to wins and others enjoy taking the time to learn the combos and tactics involved. You get what you want out of it.

With ME2, for example, you can play it as a straight-up shooter if that's your thing, or if you prefer, you can also incorporate nifty adept and tech powers to get a different experience out of it.

Like I said before, it could very well turn out to a full-blown hack and slasher, but from my impression of it, there does seem to be a level of depth and variety. I wouldn't go so far as to call it Dynasty Warriors just yet. (and I don't mean that as an insult to that particular genre either, if that's your thing)

 

[Gully State]

I think they already did...

It was an omission in ME2. They'll probably omit it from DA:2 in an effort to maintain that PC feel..

 

[Wallach]

Sure it was a solid shooter, at the expense of depth, story and most RPG elements.

ME2 makes it clear that Bioware is out of the RPG business, and we shouldn't buy any claims from them about how DA2 is still a hardcore RPG.

Depth as in... gameplay depth? Because ME1 blows ass in that regard compared to ME2.

I don't disagree that the game is "less RPG" than ME1 in the sense that there are less bars for you to fill. We've had that discussion before. I don't care much for the AT&T scale of RPG greatness.

 

[Fredescu]

Do you honestly think Bioware made two separate games and you can switch on the fly? Maybe but im doubtful.

If you paused and then pressed a button four times, one for each party member, when you unpaused you'd have four times the awesome.

The fact that you can pause at all means there is some possibility of decent tactical play on higher difficulties. What's unlikely is that they've spent any time at all balancing those difficulties.

 

[Archie]

Checking this thread after a session of Baldur's Gate was a bad idea.

 

[Spirit of Jazz]

people doubting Bioware :lol

come on guys, have some faith, their curricula should grant them some sort of blind trust

Like how the fell of the deep-end post BG2; let things get much worst for the next decade, claw back to a still somewhat shitty KotoR level with DA:O and then take another huge step back?

Hurrah! Clearly my point isn't relevant as they never attempted to sell DA:O as the spiritual successor of BG2.

Thank fuck Europe exists.

 

[Mrbob]

btw, help me understand this:



So, "out", but not "up". What?

Does that mean we're just sliding the camera around, on a 180 degree plain of the action?

Just think of any 3rd person game where you can zoom the camera in and out directly behind the main character with your scroll wheel on the mouse.

 

[Lostconfused]

Sure it was a solid shooter, at the expense of depth, story and most RPG elements.

ME2 makes it clear that Bioware is out of the RPG business, and we shouldn't buy any claims from them about how DA2 is still a hardcore RPG.

Depth as in... gameplay depth? Because ME1 blows ass in that regard compared to ME2.

I don't disagree that the game is "less RPG" than ME1 in the sense that there are less bars for you to fill. We've had that discussion before. I don't care much for the AT&T scale of RPG greatness.

Can you two just post a bunch of links to the ME2 thread where this argument has been done to death already and leave it at that?

 

[water_wendi]

If you paused and then pressed a button four times, one for each party member, when you unpaused you'd have four times the awesome.

The fact that you can pause at all means there is some possibility of decent tactical play on higher difficulties. What's unlikely is that they've spent any time at all balancing those difficulties.

That could be but that tells me Bioware themselves dont know why the combat in DA:O was shallow. It wasnt because awesome stuff failed to happen when commanding a character. It was boring because all the enemies used the same tactics whether they were Darkspawn or humans (archers on high ground, mages in the back, melee charge.. every fucking time, hundreds of times). It was because the bestiary DA:O offered wasnt deep and varied enough (compare to BG where fighting spiders is not like fighting dogs for example). It was because the spells worth having were different flavors of damage (do i want to kill with fire or ice?) and the odd ones were mostly useless or redundant. It was because they didnt give you enough information about your abilities so when shit failed (like a taunt missed) you had no way of telling why exactly it failed to land.. everything was a guess as to why it worked.

 

[Gully State]

Depth as in... gameplay depth? Because ME1 blows ass in that regard compared to ME2.

I don't disagree that the game is "less RPG" than ME1 in the sense that there are less bars for you to fill. We've had that discussion before. I don't care much for the AT&T scale of RPG greatness.

I personally thought ME1's story was a lot better than ME2's but ME2 had better gameplay. However, ME1's roleplaying mechanics were not very good whereas the RPG mechanics in DA:O was fine as is.

 

[Wallach]

That could be but that tells me Bioware themselves dont know why the combat in DA:O was shallow. It wasnt because awesome stuff failed to happen when commanding a character. It was boring because all the enemies used the same tactics whether they were Darkspawn or humans (archers on high ground, mages in the back, melee charge.. every fucking time, hundreds of times). It was because the bestiary DA:O offered wasnt deep and varied enough (compare to BG where fighting spiders is not like fighting dogs for example). It was because the spells worth having were different flavors of damage (do i want to kill with fire or ice?) and the odd ones were mostly useless or redundant. It was because they didnt give you enough information about your abilities so when shit failed (like a taunt missed) you had no way of telling why exactly it failed to land.. everything was a guess as to why it worked.

I agree with this for the most part. It wasn't so much that the style of combat was uninteresting as it was the combat scenarios themselves got really old. I will say that the console versions of DA:O were kind of a sorry sight compared to the PC and I understand them wanting to move towards a system where it works better across all platforms.

I'm not going to just write it off entirely, but the concept they are going with certainly doesn't draw my attention as much. Really though my main beef with DA:O is that the plot/world itself was just fucking lame and made me not want to even finish it; I'll still likely give it a chance just to see if they do anything to make the IP itself compelling, because right now I don't care about it at all.

 

[water_wendi]

I'm not going to just write it off entirely, but the concept they are going with certainly doesn't draw my attention as much. Really though my main beef with DA:O is that the plot/world itself was just fucking lame and made me not want to even finish it; I'll still likely give it a chance just to see if they do anything to make the IP itself compelling, because right now I don't care about it at all.

ive heard that complaint a lot. Things like that were never really a problem for me. i played all the starting points for a little bit but the Dwarf Noble was so awesome i used that for my playthrough (well, partial playthrough :lol). i really liked the caste system take on dwarves.

 

[Gully State]

The only official info we've gotten from Bioware is a bunch of prerendered cutscenes and media impressions. I just don't get why this late in the game, they're still not showing extended official gameplay footage.

 

[hamchan]

I personally thought ME1's story was a lot better than ME2's but ME2 had better gameplay. However, ME1's roleplaying mechanics were not very good whereas the RPG mechanics in DA:O was fine as is.

Yep, my view as well. ME1 had a lot of bad elements in it, like that horrendous inventory system and ME2 pretty much fixed a lot of it by taking it out and polishing up every other aspect like the shooting :lol. The game turned out magnificently for it.

DA:O on the other hand did not need fixing. Nothing was majorly broken about the game for them to turn this into Dragon Age Musou. It's such a shame that they're doing this and kinda disrespectful to the console crowd to think that dumbing it down will get more sales. Bioware, if the game really sold more on consoles that means logically the console crowd also appreciated the tactical combat of the first game. Instead of just chucking out the old gameplay systems and design they should have improved on it.

 

[Wallach]

ive heard that complaint a lot. Things like that were never really a problem for me. i played all the starting points for a little bit but the Dwarf Noble was so awesome i used that for my playthrough (well, partial playthrough :lol). i really liked the caste system take on dwarves.

I actually love the start of the game. If you go back to the DA:O thread I kept telling people about Dwarves being total ballers, and yeah the Dwarf Noble really has an awesome intro. It's more when you get beyond the origin stories and into the "main game" that I start to go "bluuuuh" and it just kept getting worse and worse until I put it down entirely.

 

[Pooya]

The Witcher 2.

The Witcher 2 is looking great and all, but lets not forget that it's an action RPG more so than DAII looking to be, it's fully compatible with gamepad and from the videos it plays like a third person game you usually see on consoles and PC, the difference is that CDProjekt wanted to make a game like that, it looks like an action RPG and probably plays like one, it's beautiful, they clearly know what they are doing but it's nothing like DAO, the play/pause and isometric camera of classic BioWare games are not there, it's not really the same thing, that can replace DAO, different games.

I feel that DAII has an identity crisis, they want to make it more action oriented and appealing to more people and at the same time they want to keep portions of the old mechanics as much as they can so they can appeal to the current fans too; This is something that I don't think it's going to work because these things are contradicting each other; You expect an action RPG of this caliber to be visually great and animates slickly with really great and smooth controls, on the other hand strategic games like DAO weren't big on graphics, the presentation wasn't really the focus, it was more like an strategy game. So far from what I've seen of DAII, they are trying to do both and are failing miserably, they don't have the depth you would expect from a game like DAO and don't have good presentation and slickness of a high profile action RPG; instead of mastering either they want to have both and so far they are not doing either well. If this is how the game is going to be I think they will fail at appealing to both crowds.

The goal for The Witcher 2 was making a super hot action RPG and it's looking to be on track, I wish they had a strong marketing support from the like of EA. Right now I can't understand what Bioware is really wants to do in DAII, it looks confused. Saying that either game can replace the other is not really fair, they are different games and honestly RPG market is not really that competitive, losing a game like DA is a big loss for us, RPG fans, in a market that is driven by shooters. I think BioWare should decide, if they want to make an action RPG then drop everything and make an action RPG like the Witcher and like, if not they should stick to their classic tried and true formula, it's already proved that there is a good market for it going by DAO sales, right now I feel that they are stuck in the middle of the two and the result is a janky mess and it's not something you would expect to see from DA IP and BioWare, it just looks bad, I would love a full on action RPG in DA universe, this is not it.

 

[Dennis]

The only official info we've gotten from Bioware is a bunch of prerendered cutscenes and media impressions. I just don't get why this late in the game, they're still not showing extended official gameplay footage.

Yes it is a real mystery....

 

[HK-47]

I personally thought ME1's story was a lot better than ME2's but ME2 had better gameplay. However, ME1's roleplaying mechanics were not very good whereas the RPG mechanics in DA:O was fine as is.

They could have improved the mechanics rather than just removing most of them. The conversation system wasnt improved upon either. Its very basic. And barely any influence systems in place.

 

[water_wendi]

I actually love the start of the game. If you go back to the DA:O thread I kept telling people about Dwarves being total ballers, and yeah the Dwarf Noble really has an awesome intro. It's more when you get beyond the origin stories and into the "main game" that I start to go "bluuuuh" and it just kept getting worse and worse until I put it down entirely.

Ah. i think i got about halfway. i did Redwall(?) and then the Mages Tower.. then the elf area i think.. then i was headed to Ozrammar but just said fuck it and stopped. It wasnt really the game that made me stop (well it was a little bit.. i was getting tired of the constant combat using the same tactics and lack of variety) but i was recording so i experience 100 hours of DA but only played 30-40 :lol

 

[mr stroke]

you guys are all crazy. Does this game look like ass right now?(PC version even more so)-YES, but thats what everyone said about the original Dragon Age before it launched. I have faith in Bioware and am sure this will be ace at launch.

 

[Vamphuntr]

you guys are all crazy. Does this game look like ass right now?(PC version even more so)-YES, but thats what everyone said about the original Dragon Age before it launched. I have faith in Bioware and am sure this will be ace at launch.

It's releasing in Q1 2011. They don't have much time left :lol :lol