Dragon Age II : sacrificing PC advantages for console friendly gameplay?

No offense to anyone here, but I don't blame BioWare. They want to appeal to more gamers. What are casual gamers anyways? Gamers that play core games but just not as much as hardcore players? Because they don't put in 8 hours a day into video games, that makes them casual? I'd like to know the definition. All these terminologies of casual and hardcore gamers are so broad.

With games costing more and more money to develop, selling 2-3 million copies just doesn't suffice nowadays. So, from a business standpoint, I totally understand. For them to have to develop a game like Dragon Age for the PC separately would demand more time, money, and man-power. They work hard at what they do. All I ask is for them to make it a great gaming experience. I don't read too much into this consolized gaming subject. Let us be the judge when the game comes out.

Elann2008

I agree. From a game developer's standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. Yeah I hate that word 'consolized'. To me, it's either a good game or a bad game.

The problem here is that Bioware contradicts itself too much...Example

Games On Net interviewed Dragon Age 2 associate producer Heather Rabatich

games.on.net: GON has some hardcore PC users, are there any benefits or changes in the PC version, over and above the console version?


Heather Rabatich: I would say the PC version hasn't changed that much, we have slightly altered how we're doing the tactical camera, but the fact that we're building this across all three platforms, we've created this very natural feeling game for all three systems so, PC people are not necessarily at an advantage by playing it on the PC, the graphics will look great across all, and its going to feel natural. I know people who played it on XBox and played it on PC just to see the differences, whereas in this one the differences will mostly be in your HUD, you'll get more quickbar options, it's not that different but its still a good gaming experience on the PC. We have a ton of PC gamers at Bioware, so we make sure its tested across all systems.

then they go on to say something like

Video Games Daily interviewed BioWare's Robyn Theberge

I just ask because BioWare seems to be heading in a very Lionhead-ish direction with its RPGs – the key features haven't so much been changed as "digested", arranged in a more intuitive way. How far do you think you can follow that approach before the underlying complexity of your game suffers?

We've kept a lot of those core values, especially on PC. On consoles, we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the [casual] people. We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible. And that was one thing with our feedback – we have forums, we have a ton of great fans and we definitely listen to them, and respond to their desires and what they'd like to see, what direction they'd like to go in. And that's where a lot of the key changes that we've made to Dragon Age 2 have come from.

That is something you simply cant deny SkyWard20;)

I just found out that the PC version will cost 60$. Lolzor. I'm sorry Bioware I'm not paying 60$ for console centric game.GeneralShowzer

It's not BioWare's fault. It's their publisher, EA. I'm assuming you did not notice that Crysis 2 and Dead Space 2 are 60 bucks for the PC? Heck, they started the trend with Medal of Honor.

@devious

I don't see the problem. Why is it such a bad thing that developers make games so it's easier for casuals to get into? That's great. I had a hard time understading the DnD system ( hardly a 'master' of it anyway ). Doesn't mean the game won't be challenging on the highest difficulty available, just more accessible.

I never saw an issue with this, really. Games aren't 'ours', or something that only we 'core gamers' have a right to. It's frightening, this belief that because a game is also made with casuals in mind, thus being more accessible, it will be made for 'stupid people'. Casual gamers can be perfectly intelligent and capable individuals, you know. I really doubt there's only something 'we' can understand about games that 'they' couldn't. It's hardly a feat of high intelligence, to be able to play video games well.

Acessibility is NOT complexity/difficulty.

another edit: what I meant to say was directed at what BioWare said, not the preview itself. Fable 1 was pretty easy, I agree. And the interviewer was just asking, not making a preview after having actually played the game. You know, actually having PLAYED the game? Almost as important as bashing it?

the interviewer was just asking, not making a preview after having actually played the game. You know, actually having PLAYED the game?

SkyWard20

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"]I just found out that the PC version will cost 60$. Lolzor. I'm sorry Bioware I'm not paying 60$ for console centric game.ralph2190

It's not BioWare's fault. It's their publisher, EA. I'm assuming you did not notice that Crysis 2 and Dead Space 2 are 60 bucks for the PC? Heck, they started the trend with Medal of Honor.

@devious

I don't see the problem. Why is it such a bad thing that developers make games so it's easier for casuals to get into? That's great. I had a hard time understading the DnD system ( hardly a 'master' of it anyway ). Doesn't mean the game won't be challenging on the highest difficulty available, just more accessible.

I never saw an issue with this, really. Games aren't 'ours', or something that only we 'core gamers' have a right to. It's frightening, this belief that because a game is also made with casuals in mind, thus being more accessible, it will be made for 'stupid people'. Casual gamers can be perfectly intelligent and capable individuals, you know. I really doubt there's only something 'we' can understand about games that 'they' couldn't. It's hardly a feat of high intelligence, to be able to play video games well.

Acessibility is NOT complexity/difficulty.

SkyWard20

Accessibility should not be used as excuse for cuts. . Giving the option to do things the other way is a important thing in RPG`s.

Combat difficulty is in no way related to complexity.

Complexity is related to choice variety.

Variation in choices if presented well will not scare away the casual gamer.

Assuming that the casual gamer is not willing to learn something new is plain wrong, there is no "we" and "they".

There is only proper introduction to something new.

Not a single casual gamer claimed that He want`s less choices , decisions and variation.

Loss of options implies that the casual gamer is unable to learn.

Since they are capable individuals underestimating them by making things simpler is unnecessary.

[QUOTE="SkyWard20"]

the interviewer was just asking, not making a preview after having actually played the game. You know, actually having PLAYED the game?

devious742

I'm still waiting for another source other than Kotaku telling me that. :)

[QUOTE="SkyWard20"]

@devious

I don't see the problem. Why is it such a bad thing that developers make games so it's easier for casuals to get into? That's great. I had a hard time understading the DnD system ( hardly a 'master' of it anyway ). Doesn't mean the game won't be challenging on the highest difficulty available, just more accessible.

I never saw an issue with this, really. Games aren't 'ours', or something that only we 'core gamers' have a right to. It's frightening, this belief that because a game is also made with casuals in mind, thus being more accessible, it will be made for 'stupid people'. Casual gamers can be perfectly intelligent and capable individuals, you know. I really doubt there's only something 'we' can understand about games that 'they' couldn't. It's hardly a feat of high intelligence, to be able to play video games well.

Acessibility is NOT complexity/difficulty.

Dantus12

Accessibility should not be used as excuse for cuts. . Giving the option to do things the other way is a important thing in RPG`s.

Combat difficulty is in no way related to complexity.

Complexity is related to choice variety.

Variation in choices if presented well will not scare away the casual gamer.

Assuming that the casual gamer is not willing to learn something new is plain wrong, there is no "we" and "they".

There is only proper introduction to something new.

Not a single casual gamer claimed that He want`s less choices , decisions and variation.

Loss of options implies that the casual gamer is unable to learn.

Since they are capable individuals underestimating them by making things simpler is unnecessary.

[QUOTE="Elann2008"]

No offense to anyone here, but I don't blame BioWare. They want to appeal to more gamers. What are casual gamers anyways? Gamers that play core games but just not as much as hardcore players? Because they don't put in 8 hours a day into video games, that makes them casual? I'd like to know the definition. All these terminologies of casual and hardcore gamers are so broad.

With games costing more and more money to develop, selling 2-3 million copies just doesn't suffice nowadays. So, from a business standpoint, I totally understand. For them to have to develop a game like Dragon Age for the PC separately would demand more time, money, and man-power. They work hard at what they do. All I ask is for them to make it a great gaming experience. I don't read too much into this consolized gaming subject. Let us be the judge when the game comes out.

ralph2190

I agree. From a game developer's standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. Yeah I hate that word 'consolized'. To me, it's either a good game or a bad game.

Don't care. If it was PC only game for the PC audience, i would pay 60 $. I'm not paying 60$ for the fable wanabee.GeneralShowzer

Fable wannabe? The more you post here, the more you don't make sense. I thought that Monkey Island hater from a month ago was hard to debate with..but you sir, take the cake.

are you also going to discredit this?

let me post that again since I know you are going to ignore it

"we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the casual people. We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible."devious742

This is exactly the kind of selective quoting I'm talking about. A few posts later, you quote again:

"We've kept a lot of those core values, especially on PC. On consoles, we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the casual people.We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible."devious742

That first quote sends a MASSIVELY different message than the second, i.e. that the consoles are the ones being Fable'd specifically because it's what they want, not the PC. Why do we bother believing anything you say/quote when we realize it's going to be run through a filter to imply something completely different, as it was in the first quote? It does a ton of damage to your own credibility when people notice that sort of thing.

SkyWard there really is no point arguing with them. They are basing all of their facts and opinions over a few words in some article or demos that are several builds behind. NOTHING we have seen so far is real, concrete evidence that the game is bad. If anything, all the previews we have seen so far, end with the previewer saying that the game is shaping up to be a good RPG and that they are excited for it.

I found DA:O a bit too hardcore an RPG for my tastes (ME1 is about right for me, ME2 perhaps a bit too Action and not enough RPG). There was a lot of running around grinding your way through the levels and a whole heap of equipment you'd never, ever want to use. The lack of a character voice was annoying, but not a deal breaker - the story was still all good, but your own lack of dialogue felt strange and awkward in many instances.

So I look forward to some streamlining of the experience.

I found DA:O a bit too hardcore an RPG for my tastes (ME1 is about right for me, ME2 perhaps a bit too Action and not enough RPG). There was a lot of running around grinding your way through the levels and a whole heap of equipment you'd never, ever want to use. The lack of a character voice was annoying, but not a deal breaker - the story was still all good, but your own lack of dialogue felt strange and awkward in many instances.

So I look forward to some streamlining of the experience.

LordRork

[QUOTE="devious742"]are you also going to discredit this?

let me post that again since I know you are going to ignore it

"we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the casual people. We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible."Makari

This is exactly the kind of selective quoting I'm talking about. A few posts later, you quote again:

"We've kept a lot of those core values, especially on PC. On consoles, we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the casual people.We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible."devious742

That first quote sends a MASSIVELY different message than the second, i.e. that the consoles are the ones being Fable'd specifically because it's what they want, not the PC. Why do we bother believing anything you say/quote when we realize it's going to be run through a filter to imply something completely different, as it was in the first quote? It does a ton of damage to your own credibility when people notice that sort of thing.

I found DA:O a bit too hardcore an RPG for my tastes (ME1 is about right for me, ME2 perhaps a bit too Action and not enough RPG). There was a lot of running around grinding your way through the levels and a whole heap of equipment you'd never, ever want to use. The lack of a character voice was annoying, but not a deal breaker - the story was still all good, but your own lack of dialogue felt strange and awkward in many instances.

So I look forward to some streamlining of the experience.

LordRork

[QUOTE="Makari"]"We've kept a lot of those core values, especially on PC. On consoles, we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG...GeneralShowzer

All versions are the same... The PC version won't a be complex RPG masterpiece, while the console version a hack and slash.

You're saying 'all versions are the same' two inches away from THAT quote? Oh, come on.

I don't even have to go bother digging for quotes where they've said there's more of a design divergence between the two platforms when it comes to combat, because both you and I know they've been saying that all along. They've *said* the console version will be a hack and slash. They've also said the PC version's combat will be pretty much like DAO with a camera that sits at a shallower angle than before.

If you don't believe them when they say that it's one thing, but don't bother trying to pretend that's coming from them via taking quotes selectively and out of context from them. I mean.. seriously, chopping the bits out of a quotes to prove a point? That's some Hollywood trailer stuff right there. :D "This movie is a great example of why X sucks. I am glad I only saw it once" -> "This movie is... great. I am glad I... saw it."

I'm tired of arguing the same thing. You people believe what you want. All versions will be identical. The PC version is going to have the option to zoom the camera away from the character. Both versions will have the option to mash a button to attack or just auto attack. That's all the difference.GeneralShowzer

It's the difference between a more tactical approach and Jade Empire 2.

this is exactly the kind of selective quoting I'm talking about. A few posts later, you quote again

That first quote sends a MASSIVELY different message than the second, i.e. that the consoles are the ones being Fable'd specifically because it's what they want, not the PC. Why do we bother believing anything you say/quote when we realize it's going to be run through a filter to imply something completely different, as it was in the first quote? It does a ton of damage to your own credibility when people notice that sort of thing.Makari

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem here is that Bioware contradicts itself too much...Example

Games On Net interviewed Dragon Age 2 associate producer Heather Rabatich

games.on.net: GON has some hardcore PC users, are there any benefits or changes in the PC version, over and above the console version?


Heather Rabatich: I would say the PC version hasn't changed that much, we have slightly altered how we're doing the tactical camera, but the fact that we're building this across all three platforms, we've created this very natural feeling game for all three systems so, PC people are not necessarily at an advantage by playing it on the PC, the graphics will look great across all, and its going to feel natural. I know people who played it on XBox and played it on PC just to see the differences, whereas in this one the differences will mostly be in your HUD, you'll get more quickbar options, it's not that different but its still a good gaming experience on the PC. We have a ton of PC gamers at Bioware, so we make sure its tested across all systems.

then they go on to say something like

Video Games Daily interviewed BioWare's Robyn Theberge

I just ask because BioWare seems to be heading in a very Lionhead-ish direction with its RPGs – the key features haven't so much been changed as "digested", arranged in a more intuitive way. How far do you think you can follow that approach before the underlying complexity of your game suffers?

We've kept a lot of those core values, especially on PC. On consoles, we've definitely moved into more of an action-based RPG just so, you know, we're going to quarry that line, between the core group and the [casual] people. We want to sell videogames. We want to appeal to as many people as possible. And that was one thing with our feedback – we have forums, we have a ton of great fans and we definitely listen to them, and respond to their desires and what they'd like to see, what direction they'd like to go in. And that's where a lot of the key changes that we've made to Dragon Age 2 have come from.

I'm tired of arguing the same thing.GeneralShowzer

It's the difference between a more tactical approach and Jade Empire 2.Baranga

Perhaps you didnt read my previous postdevious742

So, the hard 'differences' between the two platforms previously - do you remember what they were? The PC had more enemies, and IIRC the entire difficulty levels where shifted down a notch on the 360/PS3 (i.e. Normal became Easy, etc). Do you think it's possible that when she refers to differences not being there anymore, she's referring to the major differences they imposed on the platforms?

[QUOTE="devious742"]Perhaps you didnt read my previous postMakari

So, the hard 'differences' between the two platforms previously - do you remember what they were? The PC had more enemies, and IIRC the entire difficulty levels where shifted down a notch on the 360/PS3 (i.e. Normal became Easy, etc). Do you think it's possible that when she refers to differences not being there anymore, she's referring to the major differences they imposed on the platforms?

Actually I was referring to the post I wrote about how Bioware contradicts itself on several occasions:|

SkyWard there really is no point arguing with them. They are basing all of their facts and opinions over a few words in some article or demos that are several builds behind. NOTHING we have seen so far is real, concrete evidence that the game is bad. If anything, all the previews we have seen so far, end with the previewer saying that the game is shaping up to be a good RPG and that they are excited for it.

ralph2190

[QUOTE="ralph2190"]

SkyWard there really is no point arguing with them. They are basing all of their facts and opinions over a few words in some article or demos that are several builds behind. NOTHING we have seen so far is real, concrete evidence that the game is bad. If anything, all the previews we have seen so far, end with the previewer saying that the game is shaping up to be a good RPG and that they are excited for it.

SkyWard20

I'm tired of arguing the same thing. You people believe what you want. All versions will be identical. The PC version is going to have the option to zoom the camera away from the character. Both versions will have the option to mash a button to attack or just auto attack. That's all the difference.GeneralShowzer

Again you're wrong. All versions are not identical. PC version has more than just an overhead view. PC version has auto-attack. Console versions have click to attack and auto-attack. You can keep believing it's not, but that doesn't change the facts.

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"]I'm tired of arguing the same thing. You people believe what you want. All versions will be identical. The PC version is going to have the option to zoom the camera away from the character. Both versions will have the option to mash a button to attack or just auto attack. That's all the difference.ralph2190

Again you're wrong. All versions are not identical. PC version has more than just an overhead view. PC version has auto-attack. Console versions have click to attack and auto-attack. You can keep believing it's not, but that doesn't change the facts.

So console gamers have more...? I mean they have the option right ...GeneralShowzer

For them, click to attack is the main form of attack and is suitable for the gamepad. For those console gamers who liked origins style combat, the old auto attack option is there as well. For us PC gamers, mashing the mouse doesn't make sense, so they took it off and so we just have auto attack.

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"]So console gamers have more...? I mean they have the option right ...ralph2190

For them, click to attack is the main form of attack and is suitable for the gamepad. For those console gamers who liked origins style combat, the old auto attack option is there as well. For us PC gamers, mashing the mouse doesn't make sense, so they took it off and so we just have auto attack.

SkyWard there really is no point arguing with them. They are basing all of their facts and opinions over a few words in some article or demos that are several builds behind. NOTHING we have seen so far is real, concrete evidence that the game is bad. If anything, all the previews we have seen so far, end with the previewer saying that the game is shaping up to be a good RPG and that they are excited for it.

ralph2190

I don't think anyone in this thread is hoping DA2 turns out to be a bad game..we are just voicing our concerns that bioware might be forgetting why people loved they're games in the first place..and that is complexity. Yes all the previews are from builds of an unfinished game,but most of what is upsetting fans of the first game isn't from the previews,but from bioware's own interviews and message board posts. Recently reps from bioware have been making statements that are giving people a good reason to wonder if they sequel to DA:O was going to "dumb down" or scaled down just like mass effect 2.

Now im saying mass effect 2 was a bad game by any means(and i know certain posters here can't tell the difference),But there were ALOT of key RPG features bioware removed that really ruined abit of the experinece for me personally. And honestly..the people that try to tell others that mass effect 2 was indeed an RPG just like the first game because bioware and some gaming outlets say so really need to stop letting the media completely control what you think. Mass effect 2 was much more of an 3rd person shooter and much less of an RPG and if anyone wants to dispute that please feel free to do so.

[QUOTE="ralph2190"]

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"]So console gamers have more...? I mean they have the option right ...GeneralShowzer

For them, click to attack is the main form of attack and is suitable for the gamepad. For those console gamers who liked origins style combat, the old auto attack option is there as well. For us PC gamers, mashing the mouse doesn't make sense, so they took it off and so we just have auto attack.

It worked for Torchlight but that's not my point. I have played DAO and I know that auto-attack combat fit really well. Apparently, console gamers had gripes about the combat for DA2 and so it got changed for them.

I don't know what kind of huge difference you are expecting between the versions.It's the same game after all.We get UI and options suitable for K&M, while console players get stuff suited for them.

Mass effect 2 was much more of an 3rd person shooter and much less of an RPG and if anyone wants to dispute that please feel free to do so.

lawlessx

It was, and it was a better game for it.

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]

Mass effect 2 was much more of an 3rd person shooter and much less of an RPG and if anyone wants to dispute that please feel free to do so.

psn8214

It was, and it was a better game for it.

It was better with the shooting aspect ,but i don't agree that it was overall better than the first game.lawlessx

Meh. The first had a better narrative and final boss. Everything else breaks for the second. I've played the first four times and the second I'm on my fourth playthrough. I'd debate you if I wasn't so certain. :P

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]It was better with the shooting aspect ,but i don't agree that it was overall better than the first game.psn8214

Meh. The first had a better narrative and final boss. Everything else breaks for the second. I've played the first four times and the second I'm on my fourth playthrough. I'd debate you if I wasn't so certain. :P

and yes that last boss in ME2 was godawful. What on earth were bioware thinking with that one?

and yes that last boss in ME2 was godawful. What on earth were bioware thinking with that one?

lawlessx

Well, the idea behind it - and the reason the Collector's had been, well, collecting, was cool as hell I thought. It even looked cool at first. Still - I lol'ed when I was able to beat it on insanity on my first try. Nice idea, not so nice execution.

[QUOTE="ralph2190"]

SkyWard there really is no point arguing with them. They are basing all of their facts and opinions over a few words in some article or demos that are several builds behind. NOTHING we have seen so far is real, concrete evidence that the game is bad. If anything, all the previews we have seen so far, end with the previewer saying that the game is shaping up to be a good RPG and that they are excited for it.

lawlessx

I don't think anyone in this thread is hoping DA2 turns out to be a bad game..we are just voicing our concerns that bioware might be forgetting why people loved they're games in the first place..and that is complexity. Yes all the previews are from builds of an unfinished game,but most of what is upsetting fans of the first game isn't from the previews,but from bioware's own interviews and message board posts. Recently reps from bioware have been making statements that are giving people a good reason to wonder if they sequel to DA:O was going to "dumb down" or scaled down just like mass effect 2.

Now im saying mass effect 2 was a bad game by any means(and i know certain posters here can't tell the difference),But there were ALOT of key RPG features bioware removed that really ruined abit of the experinece for me personally. And honestly..the people that try to tell others that mass effect 2 was indeed an RPG just like the first game because bioware and some gaming outlets say so really need to stop letting the media completely control what you think. Mass effect 2 was much more of an 3rd person shooter and much less of an RPG and if anyone wants to dispute that please feel free to do so.

This.No one ever requested big icons to explain Hers/ His
own intent.
Things like the Zevran confusion are now used as excuse for the changes instead of simply adding a few longer lines for clarification.
The dialogue wheel contains icons explaining the intent of the player character.
Not a single DAO player , platform independent asked for a clarification of his own thoughts in a RPG game.

Unless proven that these can be toggled off the entire system looks like Fable.
For Fable the system works with the setting of the game and is funny - not much for DA2 , especially when adding the fact that the DAO world decisions can be imported .
Being spoon fed in ME2 was a annoyance for a huge amount of players.
Sometimes EDI`s irresistible charm was ruined by the idea behind it.
The fact that only Joker had a mute button for Her, introduced some epic lines like :
"This is your ship".:lol:


Removal of companion armor customization :
The stats screens of DA2 are doing exactly the same thing like ME2 by adding "upgrades" or leveling instead of more options.

The "adding a more unique look "excuse, and I personally don`t care in any way what a game dev or PR guy has to say, is so incredibly silly when remembering the "Alternate appearance packs of ME2", and the recolor of Garrus armor with the holes not repaired.

Those that kept Morrigan in Her robes, mostly did so because the mage gear was so horrendous, not because She needed a fixed outfit to be distinctive.

The writing makes Her distinctive. The option to change Her outfit doesn`t change Her personality to, but adds a lot to build variety for the player.

The comments that maybe during the time spann of 10 years, we might or might not find a different armor, probably a recolor, because modelling a new one costs money -is annoying.

The only things are stats points that can be added to the armor instead of the ability to visually change their armors. It could really introduce the same problem that happened in ME2- players ignoring some companions, because their their outfits looked out of place.
The only customization for them are rings and belts.

This.No one ever requested big icons to explain Hers/ His
own intent.
Things like the Zevran confusion are now used as excuse for the changes instead of simply adding a few longer lines for clarification.
The dialogue wheel contains icons explaining the intent of the player character.
Not a single DAO player , platform independent asked for a clarification of his own thoughts in a RPG game.

Unless proven that these can be toggled off the entire system looks like Fable.
For Fable the system works with the setting of the game and is funny - not much for DA2 , especially when adding the fact that the DAO world decisions can be imported .
Being spoon fed in ME2 was a annoyance for a huge amount of players.
Sometimes EDI`s irresistible charm was ruined by the idea behind it.
The fact that only Joker had a mute button for Her, introduced some epic lines like :
"This is your ship".:lol:


Removal of companion armor customization :
The stats screens of DA2 are doing exactly the same thing like ME2 by adding "upgrades" or leveling instead of more options.

The "adding a more unique look "excuse, and I personally don`t care in any way what a game dev or PR guy has to say, is so incredibly silly when remembering the "Alternate appearance packs of ME2", and the recolor of Garrus armor with the holes not repaired.

Those that kept Morrigan in Her robes, mostly did so because the mage gear was so horrendous, not because She needed a fixed outfit to be distinctive.

The writing makes Her distinctive. The option to change Her outfit doesn`t change Her personality to, but adds a lot to build variety for the player.

The comments that maybe during the time spann of 10 years, we might or might not find a different armor, probably a recolor, because modelling a new one costs money -is annoying.

The only things are stats points that can be added to the armor instead of the ability to visually change their armors. It could really introduce the same problem that happened in ME2- players ignoring some companions, because their their outfits looked out of place.
The only customization for them are rings and belts.

Dantus12

Looks like you've really thought this through. Again, we have to see how this new system in DA2 plays out, before making assumptions that it will be like ME2.

I really hope that there is some in depth previews of the PC version before the pre-order offer closes.

If is a great offer, but with all the radical changes going on, it is not a certain buy for me until I see some more info.

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]It was better with the shooting aspect ,but i don't agree that it was overall better than the first game.psn8214

Meh. The first had a better narrative and final boss. Everything else breaks for the second. I've played the first four times and the second I'm on my fourth playthrough. I'd debate you if I wasn't so certain. :P

Got you beat, psn.:P

I have 22 playthroughs (diff cIasses, Par/Ren) - I used replayability to the max.:lol

At least The Witcher 2 is looking good.Im_single

Yup, and Impulse has it with no DRM.:)

[QUOTE="psn8214"]

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]It was better with the shooting aspect ,but i don't agree that it was overall better than the first game.topsemag55

Meh. The first had a better narrative and final boss. Everything else breaks for the second. I've played the first four times and the second I'm on my fourth playthrough. I'd debate you if I wasn't so certain. :P

Got you beat, psn.:P

I have 22 playthroughs (diff cIasses, Par/Ren) - I used replayability to the max.:lol

I reckon the Witcher 2 and DA2 will be the two best RPGs of 2011. I've pre-ordered both and really looking forward to playing them.

The blame for the direction that Bioware is heading in can be laid at the feet of the same people responsible for why Sarah Palin has become so popular, despite being an idiot: us. We are the reason that Bioware is making simpler games. There's nobody else to blame.

Every time you buy a casual game, you are casting a vote. You are saying, "I want a casual gaming experience", not an in-depth, time-consuming (yet potentially more engaging and, ultimately, more satisfying) experience. You are telling game companies how much game content you are willing to pay for that amount of money.

There is nothing wrong with casual gaming. I play tons of casual games. They are great when you know you don't have much time to sit down for one (you know the baby's gonna wake up soon, etc.). But at night, for a couple hours before bed, or on the weekends, I want something I can really get into.I want a game that is so complex (yet still fun) that I never really am able to truly master the game's systems. I want choices. In role-playing games, I want good dialogue that makes you think and gives you choices at the same time. A good game, to me, is all about choices. It's the sole thing that makes the video game, as a form of entertainment, superior to all others. The fewer choices you have, the closer that experience is to watching a movie, and movies can do what they do much better than games.

But regardless of how I, as just one person, see this issue, there are millions of others who don't give this as much thought as I have and do. They simply want to walk into a store, buy a cool-looking game where you can kill stuff, and then get on with their lives. Different strokes for different folks.

There's no use getting angry at Bioware or EA: they are only reacting to the market. If you were an executive at either of those companies and had the payment of hundreds if not thousands of paychecks to consider, you'd go the same route. Lament all you want but it won't change things.

But you can bet that some smaller companies out there, in looking to make names for themselves, will create some pretty good hardcore RPGs in the future. They won't have the budget to throw at graphics, voiceover work, etc., but the games will get made nonetheless.

So my advice for the hardcore fans? Get Dragon Age 2 after it drops in price, gets patched up, and there are GUI mods for it (so wait a few months), and forget how they made games in the "good ol' days" and enjoy it for what it is.