Dragon Age IIFollow

I can't imagine that I'm the first person to take that the wrong way.

Edited, Mar 24th 2011 3:19pm by Eske

I missed out on her my first play through as well.

Makes the final fight of act 2 a lot harder lol.

SpoilerIf she shows up to support you in that fight(Because she disappears before it) you only have to fight the Aristok in a one on one fight instead of having to fight the whole room. Which I found much easier even as a defensive warrior.

Really? I mean, don't get me wrong...I like the game, and I don't want to rain on your parade, but I can't agree.

I see improvement in a few areas: voice acting for the main character and fluidity of combat probably being the main points for me.

But the recycling of areas is absolutely egregious. The pacing is poor. The inability to customize anything about your companions has to be considered a step back from DA:O (one that ranges from insignificant to major, depending on your opinion). The omission of the isometric camera is a disappointment.

All signs point to this product being rushed. They had a great foundation built though, and that's plenty to keep the game enjoyable. I'm also still enjoying the novelty of the improvements. It's just that there are noticeable, head-scratching declinations.

Edited, Mar 25th 2011 2:53pm by Eske

I definitely agree with this. It always seemed weird in DA:O that you seemed to have all the time in the world for side quests.

Even better, in DA2, the side quests often make a ton of sense as in act I, you're doing odd jobs so as to raise money, and in acts II & III many of your side quests somehow relate to what you've done in Act I, your companions or the main story(though some are completely unrelated).

Yes please.

I'm guessing that you play on console? Isometric cam was just an option for PC in DA:O. It was real nice to have, but you didn't have to use it if you didn't want to. It made moving around a lot easier, since most PC players do their movement by mouse clicking the desired "move-to" area. With an over-the-shoulder camera, it can get very, very hard to have a character move to a distant area that way. It's nigh-impossible to get a character to move to an area that's above the camera's plane without moving him manually now. Very annoying. All they did was remove that option for PC players in DA II, which is pretty obnoxious any way you slice it.



That's fair. I had forgotten that DA:O's pacing was pretty poor in its own right. But I wouldn't say that DA II's is good. Just that it's an improvement. It still needs a lot of work in my view. I'd say that they're capable of it, because I think they could just take a cue from Mass Effect 2, where even side quests feel like forward progression to me.



I wasn't just talking about customizing gear, though. To me, the most annoying thing was not being able to customize their roles. I'd really appreciate more flexibility, so that my party decisions can be motivated more by which characters I want around me, and less by what roles I need to fill. I don't want to feel like I have to fight against the current to use my favorite party members.

As far as their gear goes, I think there are ways of dealing with it that would be a better compromise between those that want to bother with it and those that don't. Perhaps something like a robust "auto-equip" option. And a toggle that determines whether or not equipped gear affects their appearance, if you like their default look (as is, I pretty much won't use Fenris entirely because of his default outfit :P). I think design decisions like that represent care and attention to detail; advancements to the genre. Stripping away parts of the experience is just a step backwards. It's why FFXIII was so contentious. I can respect someone not wanting to bother with all the minutia, but a lot of people go to RPG's for just that. Better to find slick, well-thought-out ways of confronting those issues, than to just cut them away.



I really do love the interaction system. Every time my character says an un-promted line that reflects the way I've been responding, I get all giddy. The addition of options beyond simple "good guy response, bad guy response" is long overdue. The further these games get from a binary system, the better. I love being able to respond with subtlety and nuance in the game...my character now behaves in a much more identifiable and realistic manner.

I also love that they've found a way to make my character's facial movements respond well to his speaking parts. The head tilts, eyebrows raise with a change of inflection, and the brow furrows. It all looks natural and smooth. That's not easy to accomplish with a customizable appearance.



Edited, Mar 26th 2011 12:30pm by Eske

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 1:07pm by Eske

Whether we can forgive it or not, I still would like to see it.


As a lover of the arts. Or some other such excuse.

http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/album/Dragon+Age+Origins/3688067?src=5

...if you just want to listen to it.

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 6:32pm by Eske

I didn't see any difference. Must be a console thing.



Absolutely. Side quests make much more sense here than in DA:O. I haven't finished yet, so I don't know about the pacing of anything else, but so far, there's no rush and you can take time to enjoy the flavor a little more.



Totally agree with this. I loved that you only have to worry about upgrading weapons Spoiler(and not even that in Varric's case) and accessories now.



Meh, I dunno. The sameness of the areas fits with the fact that you're basiclly building a new life in Kirkwall. It's not like you need to go all over the place like in DA:O.



Wow. Glad I didn't go for the CE. (But then, I never do.) I just bought the soundtrack off iTunes for $4.

I have to extremely disagree here. I personally think they should add a third character to each class to as a well rounded person that can be pushed in either direction. Mainly becuase I hated how in origins there was nothing original about any given character play style. Even the main character had little originality, hell your companions offered more unique abilities then the main character half the time.

In this one you couldn't play every different play style in one run. Everyone brought their own unique character exclusive styles that were similar to the main characters but had unique touches to them. I prefer this uniqueness to keep the game from getting stale from the multiple play throughs we inevitable play. As good as the story is, the game shouldn't be held up by it alone in the re-play value.

Quick note--you are wrong that there was nothing unique about your companions--there was. But they weren't so pronounced. Difference one was that they all either had their first spec chosen or (in Sten's case) only got 1 spec. Difference 2 is that some had unique abilities (Shale, Dog, Wynne--I THINK that's it, can't remember any others). But you were still largely free to spec them as you wanted. It wasn't a huge loss to use Ohgren as a tank, if you got him early enough that he wasn't too invested in 2-handed.

Now, as to the rest of your post...

I would argue that the current system has less replay value than DA:O's did (purely in terms of party customization). Because, right now, you are vastly more constrained to party choices than you ever were in DA:O. You'd be correct if there were a ton of possible (and effective) party configurations, but there aren't--and that's because you are forced to use each character for one specific purpose.

Example 1. You are playing a Rogue.
Well, right there you now have to choose between:
Anders, Aveline, X and Anders, Fenris, X. The first lets you be whoever you want, the second heavily encourages you to roll a Duelist (and favors /shadow). Yeah, you get variety, but it comes entirely in the form of choosing which additional dps member you want. And that's governed by what you need at the moment (and will often be the person you have to bring for the quest).

Example 2. You are playing a Warrior.
Aveline, Anders, X (Rogue) or Anders, X (Rogue), X or Fenris, Anders X (Rogue).
If you are willing to tank, then you gain more customization. But that's balanced by the fact that, if you aren't, your pool of useful members is reduced to 2 (3 with DLC) from 5, because you are going to want a Rogue with you for anything locked and to disarm traps. Varric is, overall, the better option, because of his amazing tree. Sebastian is probably better against bosses, but only if he is guaranteed to flank them. If you are going to use Fenris to tank, you are probably going to want Isabella, to help take some heat off him. Of course, you don't HAVE to bring a Rogue, but it's frustrating not to.

Example 3. You are a Mage (most customization).
Aveline, X (Rogue), X or Aveline, Anders X (Rogue) or Fenris, X (Rogue), X or Fenris, Anders, X or Anders, X (Rogue), X
Your choices are governed by whether or not you are willing to heal, and whether or not you want Aveline or Fenris to tank. This class easily has the most specialization, though. No point going into it as a result, since I'd say it's the only one where you actually have real customization (for instance, it's the only scenario, imo, where a tank-less party is viable--Anders, you (Spirit Healer), Isabella and <insert good control class> is definitely interesting).

That's WAY less customization possible than in DA:O. You could have built your Mages (any of them) into Arcane Warriors if you wanted to, for instance. And since there was no way to forget your spec, you could only spec each person one way in a play through. In DA2, I can use a Maker's sigh if I want to change Fenris from DpS to tank (and then back). And my party options are super limited. Hell, in DA:O, you were perfectly free to make your toons dual-spec (though less effective in both roles). I would only have considered it for Leliana, but it was still an option.

So, no, I would much prefer they had the option to use whatever they wanted (maybe excepting Varric). I'm not saying they should do away with (or change in any way) the talent trees. Aveline would always be a better tank than Fenris. But the point is that she wouldn't be SO much better, like she is now, with personal tank talents and access to sword/shield (which gives flanking immunity, for instance). If he could get the same weapon talents that she could, it would only be their talent trees to contend with. His gives some defense/support (with a hugely expensive sustainable). But hers gives way more.

That just seems like more customization to me. And it means I can actually use Fenris if I want to, without a huge penalty. Because, right now, it just isn't worth it.

[EDIT]

What Eske said, lol. If I don't have at least 2 options for my tanks/healers, then dedicated characters don't work. If we had just 2 more characters, things would be much better (another tank, maybe a sword/shield user that focuses more on doing damage than absorbing it, and another mage with healing spells).

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 8:59pm by idiggory

I was agreeing with your idea, while elaborating on my frustrations. Obviously, I don't share those positive sentiments that you have about the issue. I do understand you, though.

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 9:27pm by Eske