Dragon Age 2

[SinisterDeath]

I was a mage, and the way my plot progressed, it was just Me vs the Arishok. (my allies were alive, but not allowed to help)

 

Needless to say, I had to cheat to beat him, because it was IMPOSSIBLE as a mage.

If i were a rogue, or a Warrior it might have been, but a mage, with virtually no armor, and having to stand still to cast.... No chance.

[Red2111]

is this game turn based or free flow in combat?

[Imperium]

its a speeded up version of the original game

 

U either have to duel the Arishok or say u won't and turn it into a group fight.

 

The Rogue Assassinate skill does so much damage

[Krakalakachkn]

Are you among the many gamers confused or less-than-thrilled about the many changes made to the Dragon Age formula with BioWare's recent Dragon Age II? In a new interview, lead designer Mike Laidlaw explains why BioWare felt like they had to mix things up to solidify the series' future.

 

Speaking to GameSpot, Laidlaw says the adjustments in Dragon Age II were for the good of the franchise, and BioWare will not be reversing back to the Dragon Age: Origins style because of fan complaints:

 

"I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the world to a place that's inherently more interesting than 'Yay, we beat the Blight. Good for us!'"

 

Laidlaw goes on to say that the strong reactions, whether negative or positive, point toward the fact that people care about Dragon Age, which is what BioWare wants. He says that the changes to combat are "a refinement that takes into account the sensibility of it being 2011 and a number of the fundamental gameplay changes we've seen across all genres."

 

According to Laidlaw, this shift has opened the Dragon Age franchise up to a much wider audience while still allowing the developer to maintain some of the core RPG attributes that they love. For those who have played Dragon Age II, do you agree with Laidlaw? Feelings about this sequel aside, does the future look brighter than it was before for BioWare's troubled world of Thedas?

[Mooka]

According to Laidlaw, this shift has opened the Dragon Age franchise up to a much wider audience while still allowing the developer to maintain some of the core RPG attributes that they love. For those who have played Dragon Age II, do you agree with Laidlaw? Feelings about this sequel aside, does the future look brighter than it was before for BioWare's troubled world of Thedas?

I assume they've sold quite a few copies so I'm sure they feel justified.

 

Personally, I don't like the game. Its too different to be called Dragon Age 2. Pushing the button faster negates wayyyy too much. And the fact that you automatically attack anything targeted is just worse. Its just an advantage that doesn't make any sense for the rest of the game.

[SinisterDeath]

Uhh, you don't push a button and attack faster, nor do you auto-attack everything insight.

And quite simply, even in DA1, when you 'targetted' a creature and attacked, it to, had Auto-Attack. meaning you sit there beating on it with your club.

 

The only dfiference with DA2 is, they added better animations to the auto-attack, to make combat look more... Fluid. (So instead of attacking every 1.5, 2.5, 3.2 seconds, you have go through a series of hits for say, 5 seconds, hitting it 5 times, with the 'final hit' doing the biggest damage, then the process starts over again.)

 

right clicking the target, for 'auto attack' does NOT making you hit faster, nor does hitting a spell nor an ability 'faster' make you use it faster. Those are still plagued with ridiculous 'cool down' periods.

[Mooka]

Uhh, you don't push a button and attack faster, nor do you auto-attack everything insight.

And quite simply, even in DA1, when you 'targetted' a creature and attacked, it to, had Auto-Attack. meaning you sit there beating on it with your club.

 

The only dfiference with DA2 is, they added better animations to the auto-attack, to make combat look more... Fluid. (So instead of attacking every 1.5, 2.5, 3.2 seconds, you have go through a series of hits for say, 5 seconds, hitting it 5 times, with the 'final hit' doing the biggest damage, then the process starts over again.)

 

right clicking the target, for 'auto attack' does NOT making you hit faster, nor does hitting a spell nor an ability 'faster' make you use it faster. Those are still plagued with ridiculous 'cool down' periods.

 

Understood, but playing I'd say 95% of the battles can be won by simply hitting the A button and nothing else. And you attack anything targeted period.

 

Your melee charatcer actually leaps across obstacles to attack things. Its way out of place.

[Mongoose]

I didn't like DA:O much, but I've heard this game is much better, so I'll likely give it a rent.

If you don't have access to the Black Emporium however, are you stuck with the default-looking Hawke(s)?

 

If so, that would suck.

[SinisterDeath]

Uhh, you don't push a button and attack faster, nor do you auto-attack everything insight.

And quite simply, even in DA1, when you 'targetted' a creature and attacked, it to, had Auto-Attack. meaning you sit there beating on it with your club.

 

The only dfiference with DA2 is, they added better animations to the auto-attack, to make combat look more... Fluid. (So instead of attacking every 1.5, 2.5, 3.2 seconds, you have go through a series of hits for say, 5 seconds, hitting it 5 times, with the 'final hit' doing the biggest damage, then the process starts over again.)

 

right clicking the target, for 'auto attack' does NOT making you hit faster, nor does hitting a spell nor an ability 'faster' make you use it faster. Those are still plagued with ridiculous 'cool down' periods.

 

Understood, but playing I'd say 95% of the battles can be won by simply hitting the A button and nothing else. And you attack anything targeted period.

 

Your melee charatcer actually leaps across obstacles to attack things. Its way out of place.

 

Have you beat it yet?

 

And, melee characters with Charge-Attacks isn't something knew to the RPG genre.

[ChrisTrebing]

I beat it as a rogue, and am currently beating it as a mage. Im trying to make different choices this time around to make it still interesting. All in all it was a lot of fun, although not as good as the first. I miss the highly variable beginning. I also miss being able to choose a race. I loved the combat in DA2 though. I also like the fact that the main character is fully voiced now.

[SinisterDeath]

I beat it as a rogue, and am currently beating it as a mage. Im trying to make different choices this time around to make it still interesting. All in all it was a lot of fun, although not as good as the first. I miss the highly variable beginning. I also miss being able to choose a race. I loved the combat in DA2 though. I also like the fact that the main character is fully voiced now.

 

 

Well, if you were a elf, or a Dwarf, having a very human-voice/accent wouldn't make much sense. And if htey had dwarves/elves thats at least 4 more voice actors required to do alll that voice acting... Aka, expensive.

 

Now, I could see them making an expansion for DA2 where one of the main characters is a dwarf, or an elf, ect.

[Sbond91]

I finished it yesterday as mage. Quite a bit shorter than Origins, which disappointed me. Although I've not the foggiest how many side quests there are compared to Origins since I generally ignore them on play-through 1 with the exception of companion quests.

 

Being a mage was a lot more fun than it was in Origins in terms of battles - the spells were a lot nicer looking - although on the whole I preferred Origins for the story and because, aside from a cameo, there just isn't enough Alistair in DA2 :P. I also wish the Arcane Warrior class was carried over from Origins to 2, although it was fairly overpowered so I can understand why it wasn't.

 

I also think combat was more tactical in Origins, at least on the PC. In DA2 I could pretty much just use Hawke and I didn't have any idea what my allies were doing other than what was happening to their health bar. The lack of a tactical view pained me.

 

But yeah, a very good game, and the moral choices were still darker and harder than any other "moral choice" RPG. Especially the "last choice" as it were, where I still can't decide if I did the right thing or not.

[Sbond91]

Oh and I have to say, even though I thought the Origins story was better, the ending of DA2 makes me want to play DA3 (assuming it's a direct sequel, which I think is a fair bet) which I guess is a win for Bioware and EA.