• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Dragon Age II

Fail said:
It's simply unacceptable in 2011 and makes the game less interactive, sorry man, but you're wrong here, as you usually are.
Click to expand...

It's not really a question of being 'wrong', Fail. It's really about a decision either working for you, or not working for you.

You almost make it sound like the decision made by Bioware was mine. Mike Laidlaw explained why Bioware made the decision they did - and I happened to agree with that decision. I saw right away what they were trying to do, and I thought it was a great idea.

So I'm wrong again - eh?

Actually, it's called having an opinion that doesn't coincide with yours.

By the way, have you bought this game yet? You're posting an awful lot in this thread, considering that you don't seem to own the game. There's no rule against this, obviously, but I think if I had done likewise in a thread for a game which I didn't own, or hadn't played, people would be pretty fed up, and would be saying to me, Wabe, at least buy the game before creating literally 50 posts about it. You should buy it, Fail, it's a really good RPG.
 
Balthazor said:
Yes, I absolutely believe you do. Agreement is reached on this point, at least.

I don't understand how having the ability to equip NPCs is stripping away their identity, particularly in a single player game. All that would enable players to do is customize their NPCs and their apperances. Identity remains intact. You can put Morganna in armor (assuming you pimp her strength), but she's still Claudia Black. I mean, Morganna.

You're arguing that the decision to have less equipment options for NPCs is a good one, and I can't agree with you. I regretted the decision in NWN, and it seems like Bioware has almost gone back to this sort of gameplay mechanic.
Click to expand...

Mike Laidlaw said it about as good as I can, so there's not much point in me repeating it.
 
I partially agree with not having armour options, because most of the gear looked quite boring. Your party member's clothing seem to be the only pieces with any thought put into it, along with Hawke's Champion gear. But that's just the aesthetics side. At the end of the day, it's the party's personality and quality of voice acting that makes them more memorable, not some coat that you wear around for nearly 10 years.
 
WabeWalker said:
By the way, have you bought this game yet? You're posting an awful lot in this thread, considering that you don't seem to own the game. There's no rule against this, obviously, but I think if I had done likewise in a thread for a game which I didn't own, or hadn't played, people would be pretty fed up, and would be saying to me, Wabe, at least buy the game before creating literally 50 posts about it. You should buy it, Fail, it's a really good RPG.
Click to expand...


Wot, you mean like in the Witcher 2 thread?

As I always say - Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, but not everyone keeps theirs clean.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Wot, you mean like in the Witcher 2 thread?
Click to expand...

I had a really bad experience with The Witcher - and, yeah, I might have carried some of that frustration with me into discussion about The Witcher 2 - but from this point onwards I have only high hopes for The Witcher 2. Believe me, if I think it's good I'll say so. I hope it will be good.

But honestly, I think that it might be another case of what we're seeing in this thread - I feel there's a strong possibility that those who loved the first game might end up being diasappointed by the sequel. Changes are being made, and people don't really seem to like change much.
 
I beat the game a week or so ago. It's nothing like the first Dragon Age Origins. I did enjoy the game in DirectX 11. But they didn't properly test the game in DX 11. It stutters sometimes or lags terribly in an intense combat situations. I did lower it to DX 9 and it looked terrible. I had to move it back to DX 11 and tolerate it.

The end game battle was probably the one of the best encounters in the game. I don't really hate the game. But it's significantly easier than its predecessor. I was probably expecting more than what I got to be honest.
 
WabeWalker said:
I had a really bad experience with The Witcher - and, yeah, I might have carried some of that frustration with me into discussion about The Witcher 2 - but from this point onwards I have only high hopes for The Witcher 2. Believe me, if I think it's good I'll say so. I hope it will be good.

But honestly, I think that it might be another case of what we're seeing in this thread - I feel there's a strong possibility that those who loved the first game might end up being diasappointed by the sequel. Changes are being made, and people don't really seem to like change much.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm glad you realize that. For me, change can be great. But I prefer that change to be towards a more intricate RPG. One that feels like you have more impact on the gameworld itself. No, I don't mean Epic Hero Chosen By the Gods storyline, more like the choices you make have a serious impact on the outcome and overall landscape of the game.

Some people simply don't like the new changes, because they seem to head in the the opposite direction of innovation.

Overall DA2 is rated lower than DA:O, by mainstream reviewers as well as the original fanbase.

What you may not have liked about Origins, IMO, could have been corrected in more thoughtful ways.
 
Balthazor said:
Actually I just read posts from Mike Laidlaw that claims they made the decision so that Sten would loo like their conception of Sten, and not whatever you decide to equip him with. Although in defense of my prior statements, I think you can justify just about any short cut.

He says he looked at screenshots of DA:O and, towards the end, everyone's party looked the same, because they all used similar equipment. But why not just make different models for equipment for different characters, if you want the NPCs to look different? They should do this for player classes, too, so equipping said helmet doesn't make you look like a fruitcake.
Click to expand...

Easiest fix is to have armor that has character restrictions. Like you find an outfit but it's "restriction: morrigan".

This makes sense to via lore because you can come with any excuse why it will only fit her - like maybe the fact that it's not the right size for anyone else LOL or some magical reason, etc. or Sten doesn't like wool cotton blends, etc.

Then for the outfits that have charcater restrictions, they are then designed artistically with that character in mind therefore you stay within the narrow vision of what that character should be.
 
eggrock said:
We'll find out in six months when DA 3 is released. :D
Click to expand...

I doubt that. It would be a year at least. Enough time for a couple more of DLCs (that would surely be coming). LOL

Balthazor said:
I don't understand how having the ability to equip NPCs is stripping away their identity, particularly in a single player game. All that would enable players to do is customize their NPCs and their apperances. Identity remains intact. You can put Morganna in armor (assuming you pimp her strength), but she's still Claudia Black. I mean, Morganna.
Click to expand...

Don't you mean Morrigan? LOL
 
Fail said:
You're also removing control from the players, never a good thing.
Click to expand...

I hate to say it , but I totally agree with Fail here. I'm pretty sure that their "design choices" on companion armor was either just sheer laziness or a damn cash grab rush to get the damn game out the door.

By the time I finished my run throughs on Origins all my characters looked different due to me running a number of Armor mods.
 
Btw, this whole Laidlaw thing is hilarious, what do you really think he's gonna say? OMG WE HAD TO RUSH THE GAME OUT, WE COULD NOT PUT IN EVERYTHING WE WANTED???

Thinking otherwise is seriously naive.
 
I just got to act II on my 2nd playthrough. Every once in a while I'm like: hmm, couldn't I steal in the last game? Couldn't I give gifts to increase approval? Little things seem to be missing.

Vanguard 2 handed warrior is awesome. I beat the rock wraith on hard in like 4 minutes. Party: Hawk (rogue), Fenris (2hand vanguard/lyrium ghost), Varric, Anders (heal/support). Anders is mainly there to provide the group heal when the timer is up, and pop haste.

If you do DPS fast enough, the rock wraith doesn't really do anything, you just kill the profane ads and dps him.

Great encouter though. Much more inspired than the random dragon it makes you fight before that (which was insanely hard with the same party, for whatever reason).
 
You can still find gifts, but they're not as prevalent and they're all (I think) hard-coded to go with a particular character. Basically mini-quests.
 
Fail said:
Btw, this whole Laidlaw thing is hilarious, what do you really think he's gonna say? OMG WE HAD TO RUSH THE GAME OUT, WE COULD NOT PUT IN EVERYTHING WE WANTED???

Thinking otherwise is seriously naive.
Click to expand...

He took the time to explain the decisions he made - that's what the article was about. Maybe you think he's 'hilarious', but I have respect for a person who articulates himself like this.

I posted the link to the interview so that people could discuss what Laidlaw said about Dragon Age 2. If you've taken exception to what he said about his decisions then you should participate in the discussion, and say why, rather than cutting everyone down.

But since you've already made it clear that you didn't buy Dragon Age 2 I find it rather difficult to see how you would be able to add anything of value to the discussion. It seems to me, rather, that you're simply attempting to disrupt the discussion, something you've been doing from page one of this thread. There's a huge difference between debating and disrupting, and you need to learn that difference.

You are now, unquestionably, trolling this thread.
 
WabeWalker said:
"Gamespot: You have less control over your companions since you can't equip them directly as you can Hawke. Can you describe the idea behind this particular change, and did you feel that you might be running the risk of players not feeling as much of a connection to those characters?

Mike Laidlaw: The key driver behind it was the idea of unique visuals, being able to have Isabela stay Isabela instead of generic rogue put into the same leather armor your character is wearing. It lets us create a visual space between Hawke and the companions. And it gives the companions their own personalities [in the form of] unique body models and animations that are tied to how they idle--simple stuff like Aveline and the way she stands with more of a straightforward stance as opposed to the cocked hip Isabela has and so on. The overall goal there was to keep the companions in a place where they had more personality, but still provide customization in terms of amulets and rings, because having things like fire resistance is important."


Also, are you aware that you CAN upgrade the armor of your companions - you're provided the opportunity to do so in each act, by visiting the vendors. Whether you choose to or not is completely up to you. That's virtually the same as equipping your characters, meaning Bioware still had to work out the balancing issues. So no time was saved there. That's not why they were doing it anyhow - this was clearly a decision to create characters that were more identifiable and had more personality.

Again, in Origins, Sten was Sten, until I put him in that Blood Dragon Armor, at which point he was just another generic fighter. Not putting him in the armor, by the way, was hardly an option, since I would have been gimping him. In Dragon Age 2, Varic has massive amounts of personality - that pimp robe of his is a huge part of his character. Therefore, when you level-up his armor, it stays looking the same, since Bioware doesn't want to destroy his identity. Don't you have friends who wear the same type of clothing year after year - I sure as hell do.
Click to expand...

That last comment cuts both ways, how could allowing Varric to put on different armor make him less real?


The bottom line, you are completely off on this. If the fact that companions keep the same appearance is a major factor in their personality and realism, you FAILED.

It did not matter that Allistair would wear more outfits than a SF drag queen, he was a solid character based on the CORE of what makes that up, his dialog and cut scenes.


The opinion that an important part of the character persona is that they never visually change with different gear, is a GARBAGE opinion. But on what standard do I pass such judgement?

This is a sort of case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder is it not? Yes, and no.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if 99% of the beholders agree that something is an ugly, stinking, rotting turd, then it is one within the subset of most beholders. You can then state that it is ugly as a practical matter, if not an absolute one.

And so it is with the opinion that limiting character customization adds to the game. That opinion is the equivalent of stating that a lime green car with orange dots on it is not tacky. That opinion is so outside the bounds of common norms and standards of what is better or worse as to be rightly discarded as nonsense.


There is a far more plausible reason Mike and team decided not to allow as much companion gear customization. Dev time. By allowing companions to equip all that gear, the artists and modelers would be obliged to make sure it fit the different models well. That takes more time effort and man hours.

mmos do this all the time (each piece of gear made to fit EVERY race, sometimes restricted to same faction for similar dev time reasons), but they must have more people working on those items for a longer time frame.


Mike was probably not afforded that luxury, and so decided on this path instead thinking it would not be much of a bother or issue for people at all. He was wrong. I would have LOVED to give fenris some great piece of warrior armor that would increase his PATHETIC stamina pool a bit more so I could pull off more cross class combos (which I hated in part because of crappy warrior stamina and being forced to chuck stamina pots per combo at times). But oh no, I could not do that. And why? it was restricted to Hawke.

Nice deal, the artists need only design the armor to properly fit a single human male/female form, and nothing else. Great Economy, save money, make a weaker game? who cares, it saves money and time.

Stop defending pathetic design decisions and failure. It breeds more bad design decisions and failure in the future.
 
Mr Mean said:
The end game battle was probably the one of the best encounters in the game. I don't really hate the game. But it's significantly easier than its predecessor. I was probably expecting more than what I got to be honest.
Click to expand...

SPOILERY

I thought the final encounters were a load of horse shit no matter which side you choose. If you ally with the mages, Orsino's decision to turn himself into Patchwerk from WoW makes absolutely no cocking sense whatsoever, even less so that he begins to attack you, HIS FUCKING ALLY, shortly after doing it.

The same thing happens in reverse if you ally with the Templars and you have to kill Meredith after she goes all lyrium idol possessed. The fact that she is using the lyrium idol makes no fucking sense because it is clearly of magical origins and nature and her entire character is predicated on her hatred of magic and mages.

The fights themselves were very disappointing also. They are visually impressive (particularly Meredith) but in terms of challenge and strategy, it's just not there. The Rock Wraith and the High Dragon were far more challenging than both encounters. Meredith did like no damage whatsoever to my 2h warrior tanks, even when she started using all these fantastical-looking acrobatic abilities. Orsino just didn't seem to do anything at all other than have a huge health bar.
 
tybert7 said:
That last comment cuts both ways, how could allowing Varric to put on different armor make him less real?


The bottom line, you are completely off on this. If the fact that companions keep the same appearance is a major factor in their personality and realism, you FAILED.

It did not matter that Allistair would wear more outfits than a SF drag queen, he was a solid character based on the CORE of what makes that up, his dialog and cut scenes.


The opinion that an important part of the character persona is that they never visually change with different gear, is a GARBAGE opinion. But on what standard do I pass such judgement?

This is a sort of case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder is it not? Yes, and no.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if 99% of the beholders agree that something is an ugly, stinking, rotting turd, then it is one within the subset of most beholders. You can then state that it is ugly as a practical matter, if not an absolute one.

And so it is with the opinion that limiting character customization adds to the game. That opinion is the equivalent of stating that a lime green car with orange dots on it is not tacky. That opinion is so outside the bounds of common norms and standards of what is better or worse as to be rightly discarded as nonsense.


There is a far more plausible reason Mike and team decided not to allow as much companion gear customization. Dev time. By allowing companions to equip all that gear, the artists and modelers would be obliged to make sure it fit the different models well. That takes more time effort and man hours.

mmos do this all the time (each piece of gear made to fit EVERY race, sometimes restricted to same faction for similar dev time reasons), but they must have more people working on those items for a longer time frame.


Mike was probably not afforded that luxury, and so decided on this path instead thinking it would not be much of a bother or issue for people at all. He was wrong. I would have LOVED to give fenris some great piece of warrior armor that would increase his PATHETIC stamina pool a bit more so I could pull off more cross class combos (which I hated in part because of crappy warrior stamina and being forced to chuck stamina pots per combo at times). But oh no, I could not do that. And why? it was restricted to Hawke.

Nice deal, the artists need only design the armor to properly fit a single human male/female form, and nothing else. Great Economy, save money, make a weaker game? who cares, it saves money and time.

Stop defending pathetic design decisions and failure. It breeds more bad design decisions and failure in the future.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending this decision. I liked it that my characters, when their armor was upgraded, didn't lose their identities by being covered in generic armor. In Origins I loved the look of Sten, but I had to equip him with the Blood Dragon Armor, which destroyed his identity completely.

For me, it's much better to upgrade the armor, without altering the look of the characters.

But there's one thing I'm still not sure of - you are aware that you upgrade the armor of your companions in each act, right? There are four such upgrades for each character.

Also, are you aware that you can equip your characters with items, and unique weaponry? There are 27 different ways to shape your companions. I'm not going to list them all, but virtually everything you could do in Origins, you can do in DA2... AND THEN SOME. That's right, there are more ways to enhance the attributes of your companions in DA2.

What's s bit worrisome about your post is this statement: "I would have LOVED to give fenris some great piece of warrior armor that would increase his PATHETIC stamina pool a bit more so I could pull off more cross class combos."

But stamina percentage increases are gained through equipable weapons and items? No, you can't equip body armor, but if you look at the stats you'll see that the items in DA2 are more powerful than those in Origins. In other words, the stamina increases you get from equipable items in Dragon Age 2 are exactly as powerful as those in Origins.
 
I upgraded NPC armor in DA2 and didn't see a visual difference unless you were to achieve their "loyalty" armor via romance.
 
Hmm so you think that somehow if they put body armor for Fenris in the game, they wouldn't change the item's stat balance? :rolleyes:

It's a subjective opinion whether you like it or not. At first when I saw it I hated it. But I also hated, as Wabe has said, putting Sten, Morrigan or Leiliana in some generic getup in Origins. After playing through DA2, finding new companion armor was a fun find. I wish they had put more of it in the game, and a bit more variety in outfits - so it is still specifically designed, but it isn't all exactly the same appearance wise.

And especially I enjoy those who haven't bought the game who keep flaming it, 50 pages into the thread.
 
krameriffic said:
SPOILERY

I thought the final encounters were a load of horse shit no matter which side you choose. If you ally with the mages, Orsino's decision to turn himself into Patchwerk from WoW makes absolutely no cocking sense whatsoever, even less so that he begins to attack you, HIS FUCKING ALLY, shortly after doing it.

The same thing happens in reverse if you ally with the Templars and you have to kill Meredith after she goes all lyrium idol possessed. The fact that she is using the lyrium idol makes no fucking sense because it is clearly of magical origins and nature and her entire character is predicated on her hatred of magic and mages.

The fights themselves were very disappointing also. They are visually impressive (particularly Meredith) but in terms of challenge and strategy, it's just not there. The Rock Wraith and the High Dragon were far more challenging than both encounters. Meredith did like no damage whatsoever to my 2h warrior tanks, even when she started using all these fantastical-looking acrobatic abilities. Orsino just didn't seem to do anything at all other than have a huge health bar.
Click to expand...

SPOILERS AGAIN

The Meredith fight was easy because it's possible to enter it without a healer, if you decide to kill Anders. She probably didn't know about the idol's origins until after it corrupts her. Those reasons are stupid I know, but that's the way the game presents them to you.

Also, Patchwek was a million times more badass than abom-Orsino lol.
 
Dragon Age 2 is just the logical consequence of what Bioware started with the Baldur's Gate series, the dumping down of the RPG genre in exchange for increased popular appeal and, of course, sales. For a brief period after the success of Baldur's Gate it seems they actually did try to contribute something to the genre. Baldur's Gate 2 was a much more ambitious game then its predecessor, and NWN tried to brake new grounds by opening the way for online play and modding. Then something just snapped and Bioware went full retard. I don't know, perhaps its because the campaign that shipped with NWN wasn't very good, so they lost sales there, but they just weren't the same after that. First they abandoned the PC completely leaving everything they had accomplished with NWN in the dust. KOTOR was a complete step down in every way possible. It wasn't too dissimilar from Baldur's Gate, it was just less, much less, with more consolization. Then Jade Empire came, with which they moved towards a more "actiony" territory, which spawned Mass Effect, where they finally gave away with the traditional RPG dialog system (which i guess was too complicated for consoletards). Mass Effect 2 barely even pretended to be an RPG anymore. Dragon Age was supposed to be a return to the days of Baldur's Gate and i guess compared to Mass Effect it kinda did go back, barely. I don't know what was that sobered them up but it didn't last long, and they went right back to the dumping down business with Dragon Age 2. At this point they might as well just develop shooters and call it a day, its not like there's a whole lot left to remove from the RPG genre.
 
krameriffic said:
SPOILERY

I thought the final encounters were a load of horse shit no matter which side you choose. If you ally with the mages, Orsino's decision to turn himself into Patchwerk from WoW makes absolutely no cocking sense whatsoever, even less so that he begins to attack you, HIS FUCKING ALLY, shortly after doing it.

The same thing happens in reverse if you ally with the Templars and you have to kill Meredith after she goes all lyrium idol possessed. The fact that she is using the lyrium idol makes no fucking sense because it is clearly of magical origins and nature and her entire character is predicated on her hatred of magic and mages.

The fights themselves were very disappointing also. They are visually impressive (particularly Meredith) but in terms of challenge and strategy, it's just not there. The Rock Wraith and the High Dragon were far more challenging than both encounters. Meredith did like no damage whatsoever to my 2h warrior tanks, even when she started using all these fantastical-looking acrobatic abilities. Orsino just didn't seem to do anything at all other than have a huge health bar.
Click to expand...

SPOILER ALERT DO NOT READ

Storwise, I agree it didn't make ANY sense why Orsino would use blood magic and turn on his own ally. After playing the "Good" and "Bad" versions of the encounter, I assumed Bioware didn't want a unique ending but the same copy and paste ending you would get if you decide to be "Good" or "Bad" in your judgement. Very weak if you ask me. Atleast in Dragon Age Awakening I had the option to kill the Architect or keep him alive.

Meredith from what I understand was slowly getting corrupt from the artifact in Act 2. Yes you do provide a valid point in why a knight commander would never use any form of magic. But I think what they wanted to convey that she is falling from grace and the corruption started surface in Act 3.

To be honest I had some sympathy for Meredith for what Anders did. I mean do you think I am going to stand around and tolerate that bullshit that Anders pulled and he was being all buddy buddy with me? But when she said " Kill all mages " and didn't say kill Anders made me realize that there was another agenda. She was looking for an excuse to kill all the mages.

The only real challenge I had was the Mine massacre quest. It was the only encounter in the game that made me feel like I really had to pause the game and play like I had in Dragon Age Origin :)

The game was rushed plain and simple and this isn't biowares style of game. It's obvious other elements were at work when this game was released. I am shocked it was bioware that released this buggy mess. But you know what? I tolerated it and kept telling myself a patch will be out to fix this. It never came, and I beat the game in its unoptimized DX11 glory. I did like the final encounter because maybe it was not something I was expecting. The animated statues and such. But I didn't die on my first attempt either. I beat it on the first attempt pretty much like all the other boss fights except for the Mine Massacre. The only thing that pissed me off is I NEVER got to used Bethany after Act 1. I only used her again at the end. WHY!? I can't stand Anders and the only reason I had him because he was the only healer. I couldn't tolerate morrigan either but she did want to kill her mother :) So I had an uneasy alliance with her.
 
So if Dragon Age 2 is so dumbed down, then why is almost every frickin' battle, on Hard, reminiscent... not even reminiscent... but exactly like the battles I fought in the very first Baldur's Gate?

I've just started the second chapter, and am playing through a quest that's 'almost impossible' to complete. I'm talking hair pulling and desk thumpingly difficult. It's almost torture. I'm talking one Desire Demon, two Rage Demons (that alone is enough), and about six shades, who re-spawn - and for good measure, what the hell, let's just toss in a Revenant as well. My party, first time through that area, was decimated in 30 seconds. You're telling me we saw this type of thing in Origins? The hell we did. On this particular quest, every damned fight is like this. I'm usually left with only my tank standing.

I seriously don't know which game some of you guys are playing, because I saw nothing even remotely like this in Origins. Dragon Age 2 is a leap forward, and is really the spiritual successor to BG that I had hoped for from Origins and didn't get.
 
WabeWalker said:
So if Dragon Age 2 is so dumbed down, then why is almost every frickin' battle, on Hard, reminiscent... not even reminiscent... but exactly like the battles I fought in the very first Baldur's Gate?

I've just started the second chapter, and am playing through a quest that's 'almost impossible' to complete. I'm talking hair pulling and desk thumpingly difficult. It's almost torture. I'm talking one Desire Demon, two Rage Demons (that alone is enough), and about six shades, who re-spawn - and for good measure, what the hell, let's just toss in a Revenant as well. My party, first time through that area, was decimated in 30 seconds. You're telling me we saw this type of thing in Origins? The hell we did. On this particular quest, every damned fight is like this. I'm usually left with only my tank standing.

I seriously don't know which game some of you guys are playing, because I saw nothing even remotely like this in Origins. Dragon Age 2 is a leap forward, and is really the spiritual successor to BG that I had hoped for from Origins and didn't get.
Click to expand...

I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you just got Dragon Age Origin the first time. The first time I did my first battle encounter. I send all my guys to kill one guy. But you know what happened? Anders died right of the bat. There goes my other teammate dead and then I died. GAME OVER. That's how I remember Dragon Age Origin. Getting my ass kicked over the simplest things. If I was a casual gamer I probably would have flipped out.
 
I'm slapping my forehead reading your posts now. Firstly because you drag your feet through games like no other, but also because you seem to think that everyone should experience things in games the way you do. They don't, and can't. For me, Dragon Age 2 is a generous step backwards. I get irritated thinking about the shortcomings of what could have been a real blockbuster, but if it's the next best thing for you since Baldur's Gate (IMO the two games should not be mentioned in the same sentence from this day on) then that's just peachy. Regarding the "torture" difficulty, I would have felt leaps and bounds better if it had been difficulty that was not based on enemies appearing out of thin air or swinging in from railings and chandeliers (made the last one up) and difficulty that made my pre-battle maneuverings meaningless. The combat in DA2 for me was, on occasion, curse-inducing bullcrap - but for the wrong reasons.

I've never seen anyone able to keep such "tempest in a teapot" threads alive when keeping it alive only involves arguments based on subjective, personal things like gameplay experiences, though. Seems to be a track record. I applaud your apparent enthusiasm, however. Maybe in six months when your first playthrough wraps up you'll see things differently, which is exactly what happened with me.
 
Dragon Age: Origins really was a nightmare on Nightmare difficulty. If you weren't cheesing it up with mages, then you were definitely in for a challenge. I have to say I rather enjoyed that.

Having played BG1 and 2, I have to say that Origins was as others have said, slightly dumbed down, but still nonetheless a fine successor to those games, IMO.

DA2 sounds like the same mediocrity that we got from Awakenings, which I also didn't purchase. It's called voting with your wallet. Bad games are bad games, and are not worth paying for.
 
WabeWalker said:
So if Dragon Age 2 is so dumbed down, then why is almost every frickin' battle, on Hard, reminiscent... not even reminiscent... but exactly like the battles I fought in the very first Baldur's Gate?
Click to expand...

Are you serious? The first Baldur's Gate was an endless series of mind-numbingly easy battles with a few challenging encounters scattered here and there. Of course, Baldur's Gate was their first game, and the D&D system was never meant to be that challenging at low levels. Baldur's Gate 2 was a different matter altogether.

Dumping down is only part of the problem of course. For instance, enemies are a lot more resilient in Dragon Age which forces you in a sort of MMORPG grind, which gets mighty tedious after a while. Baldur's Gate 2 was more about having a deep understanding of how spells worked (beyond a simple buff/debuff paradigm) and how to properly counter special creatures and magic in general. If you knew what you were doing, battles could end very quickly in Baldur's Gate 2, thus, the system rewarded intelligent play over tedious, MMO-like repetition.
 
You know Wabe, I bet if we go through every single one of your posts over the last few years, I bet just about every single one of them that is game related, especially about major releases and/or sequels, you will cite features that have been dumbed down, stripped, or left out as "major advances" and "breakthroughs for the genre". It's absurd, it's that kind of thinking that has PC gaming going down the drain rather realizing the full potential of what our machines are capable of. I bet we'll also find that you support bad games and condemn good ones, it's really easy to see. You also constantly flame people for not having the same opinion as you do, and you try to make it about you rather than the game or discussion itself. It's getting really old, you really spend more time posting than you do playing games . . . . Act 2? No wonder you're on Act 2, you're spending all your time here supporting the game instead of playing it. Where's your priorities? I'd rather you play through the entire game, then come back here and talk about your experience. I mean it's fine if you want to spend 10 hours in the game, then report back on what you think, that's fine, but it seems like every 5 minutes you're reporting in. What have you accomplished in the game? Next to nothing . . . so there's nothing to say, you haven't experienced anything meriting discussion, you have no talking points, there's no relevant data points to discuss, just the same crap that would be said in a dull monotone like a metronome. 5 minutes Wabe, 5 minutes . . .

And when I say potential, I am talking about the overall, complete possible experience you can have on the PC platform.

It just reeks of consolitis. You sound more and more like a console gamer than you do a PC gamer with your posts. You support stripped down, dumbed down games, that add features to annoy and harrass the customer like onerous DRM, P2P servers . . . the list goes on.

Jeez Wabe, I swear I'd like you if you had the ability to offer fair and balanced criticism of a game, what are the good things? What are the bad things? Compare them to what the average gamer says, how about the hardcore gamer? That'd make for far more interesting discussion.

I know you're not stupid, your posts, you write really intelligently, however, they are slanted, and that's blantant and obvious to all of us here. Again, you're not stupid, I'm not gonna question your intelligence. Your posts are well written, well constructed, I even enjoy reading them on occasion, even if I end up annoyed, they are just that well written.

I swear, sometimes I want to stand up and clap my hands together a few times at some of the masterpieces you've constructed.

Seriously, they are all full of crap, yet you make it sound good, my hat's off to you sir. You are definitely an original.

I'll be honest, if you were capable of being objective, I'd have no problem going to you for reviews of games, I'd value your opinion, especially since you're able to articulate it so well. But therein lies the rub, you are not objective :(

If not for that, you could easily become a published reviewer of games, it's clear that you're passionate about them, just for the wrong reasons.
 
Last edited:
Also, why is the Deep Roads quest 'almost impossible' to beat? It takes like an hour and a half to get to the end of it. Before I got to that part of the game I was reading peoples' impressions of the Deep Roads and was expecting this really involved and well thought-out experience. When I was done rifling through the loot chests and standing in front of the cave door that magically leads back to Lowtown I was almost literally saying "That was it?" aloud in my room.
 
WabeWalker said:
I'm not defending this decision. I liked it that my characters, when their armor was upgraded, didn't lose their identities by being covered in generic armor. In Origins I loved the look of Sten, but I had to equip him with the Blood Dragon Armor, which destroyed his identity completely.

For me, it's much better to upgrade the armor, without altering the look of the characters.

But there's one thing I'm still not sure of - you are aware that you upgrade the armor of your companions in each act, right? There are four such upgrades for each character.

Also, are you aware that you can equip your characters with items, and unique weaponry? There are 27 different ways to shape your companions. I'm not going to list them all, but virtually everything you could do in Origins, you can do in DA2... AND THEN SOME. That's right, there are more ways to enhance the attributes of your companions in DA2.

What's s bit worrisome about your post is this statement: "I would have LOVED to give fenris some great piece of warrior armor that would increase his PATHETIC stamina pool a bit more so I could pull off more cross class combos."

But stamina percentage increases are gained through equipable weapons and items? No, you can't equip body armor, but if you look at the stats you'll see that the items in DA2 are more powerful than those in Origins. In other words, the stamina increases you get from equipable items in Dragon Age 2 are exactly as powerful as those in Origins.
Click to expand...


Hmm, ok, I was building him wrong then, focused on damage stats and crit for other items, and got annoyed that when a good chest with both stam and dps was looted it could not be given to fenris. Still annoying.


If you hated Sten simply because of the armor he had on, not sure what to tell you about that. I hated Sten because he was Sten.

If you wanted to maintain a certain "look" then you could still allow for lootable items for the characters. That is what they did with Shale. His loot basically just changed his crystal color and flashiness. The "look" was preserved, but he still got full upgrade options, often from loot that dropped and not some passive internal upgrade to the armor.

For shale that made more sense as he was literally a freaking golem and armor on him would make no sense. Different looking armor on warriors makes perfect sense. Is your Sten too proud to wear flashy plate? Then let him take a mace to his rags for armor, then maybe he'll feel more noble in his death. If you don't like the look, then wear something else in it's place.
 
Riddleofsteel said:
Also, why is the Deep Roads quest 'almost impossible' to beat? It takes like an hour and a half to get to the end of it. Before I got to that part of the game I was reading peoples' impressions of the Deep Roads and was expecting this really involved and well thought-out experience. When I was done rifling through the loot chests and standing in front of the cave door that magically leads back to Lowtown I was almost literally saying "That was it?" aloud in my room.
Click to expand...


In fairness, spending more time in the deep roads would mean less time in Kirkwall. Can't have that. That would make the game feel too, adventurous and expansive and ... the dirty word to some... EPIC!

btw epic haters, mass effect is what kind of game? it's an epic game. Epics makes the best rpgs as they lend themselves best to escapist worlds, not these brief camp outs before we return to the city life of Kirkwall.
 
Hey, guess what... I just used that mirror thing at The Black Emporium, and now my female Hawke is no longer a raven haired goddess, but a bleach blond!

I also quaffed four of those re-spec potions and re-specced my entire party!
 
WabeWalker said:
So if Dragon Age 2 is so dumbed down, then why is almost every frickin' battle, on Hard, reminiscent... not even reminiscent... but exactly like the battles I fought in the very first Baldur's Gate?

I've just started the second chapter, and am playing through a quest that's 'almost impossible' to complete. I'm talking hair pulling and desk thumpingly difficult. It's almost torture. I'm talking one Desire Demon, two Rage Demons (that alone is enough), and about six shades, who re-spawn - and for good measure, what the hell, let's just toss in a Revenant as well. My party, first time through that area, was decimated in 30 seconds. You're telling me we saw this type of thing in Origins? The hell we did. On this particular quest, every damned fight is like this. I'm usually left with only my tank standing.

I seriously don't know which game some of you guys are playing, because I saw nothing even remotely like this in Origins. Dragon Age 2 is a leap forward, and is really the spiritual successor to BG that I had hoped for from Origins and didn't get.
Click to expand...

What you smoking Wabe ? ;)

I remember in particular battles in the Brecillian Forest in Origins that I had to re do over and over because revenants and undead kept fucking my party up. Wipe after wipe after wipe. Took me like 7 tries if I remember right before I finally killed that asshole Revenant with his undead skellies.

The only things I see as good from DA2 is the combat pacing vs Origins and DA2 looks better than Origins. I like the combat better but that's about it.Oh and I absolutely LOVE Isabela. Such a tawdry little tart she is. For me Origins was head and shoulders above DA2 in almost every way.
 
Last edited:
Yeah this game sux pretty bad. Which is why I'm almost done with my 2nd playthrough, and thinking already about a 3rd playthrough, possibly on Nightmare with a mage main character. Could be tough, since Rogues and 2 handed warriors own faces.

1st playthrough: Vanguard/Reaver 2 handed warrior
2nd playthrough: Assassin/Duellist rogue

There seem to be a lot of people enjoying this game, for all the noise that we heard around launch time. There is something in this game for the RP'ers (lots of characters, better character creation), something for the min/maxers (very tough but doable solo nightmare difficulty with all classes). What, 3 weeks into it now, there are already lots of guides out, wiki is getting fleshed out pretty fast, etc.
 
By biggest problem with the game is the %$@#Q%@#%ing story. It has nothing to do with DA:O. It shouldn't have been called a sequal. That "2" has no place in the game.

I've been waiting all this time to find out what happened after DA:O and (Like, with that whole Morrigan and the demon-baby thing) and... nothing.

PS Wabe is crazy. Just ignore his posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top