Dragon Age 2

[Gerowen]

Just played the demo for PS3 and I've got to say I'm impressed. While Origins didn't look bad on the PS3, there was noticable frame-rate drops in places. Literally if there was a lot of people on screen at once combat would hang for a second or more upon first contact. I had it on the 360 too and the frame-rate drops happened less often, but the game looked kind of washed out compared to the PS3 version. The demo of part 2 looked better and ran a LOT smoother on the PS3 compared to Origins on the same console. The first things I noticed was that there were no noticable drops in framerate, the framerate was in general "much" higher, and the textures were sharper (not as many jaggies or weird textures overlapping on backgrounds). I like how they've brought in the radial conversation choice thingy from Mass Effect and how combat is much faster paced now. Looks like they've put a little more effort into polishing part 2 and tweaking it for optimum performance on the different platforms. Now I've got to get off my bum and finish part 1. I've got so many games I need to finish because so many more good ones are coming out. One other thing I liked is that the darkspawn look a little less like the orcs in Lord of the Rings and more like an original creation. They changed the look just enough for them to look more "fresh" but no so much that it should detract from the appeal of the game to those of us that played Origins. I also liked the sort of cell shaded story telling from time to time, it kind of reminded me of Legend of Zelda: Windwaker. I'm really looking forward to this game, :-)

[Miuku.]

Awful, awful, awful disappointment for me personally.

I was expecting to see slow paced, tactical combat where your abilities, your decisions and positioning would matter - what I didn't expect to see was a heavily console-friendly hack-em-slash-em with completely overblown movement and combat abilities, riddled with Mass Effect "Saint/Neutral/Satan" choice wheel and hideous writing. Also judging by the sheer size of the frontal equipment on all the female characters, I can see which demography the game is aimed at.

Went from "Must have!" to "Bargain bin, if even there."

[+jamesyfx Subscriber²]

Dragon Age 1 was good on PC, but it was very very flawed. Every action and interaction felt that Robotic it made Oblivion seem realistic. >.>

If it just loosened up a bit I would probably have enjoyed it more. I may give this a look-in.

[Green_Eye]

daPhoenix while I respect your opinion I think that's being very harsh, I tried the demo on PC and having loved the first one I fully approve of this one, sure it does seem like it has been a lot more streamlined but I do not believe it has been done to the point of being noob friendly I just think that while you can sort of just hack your way past certain enemies, the pause function and consequent tactics were necessary at points to even progress and that's when it was locked on the normal difficulty, I am sure you can ramp that up in the retail game to give yourself a challenge. One thing did bug me however, I was not able to scroll back as far as I could in origins and that made changing characters a pain in the ass and made it a little more confusing to switch characters so I can see where your frustrations lie but I am looking to be a bit more optimistic :)

[DukeEsquire]

Awful, awful, awful disappointment for me personally.

I was expecting to see slow paced, tactical combat where your abilities, your decisions and positioning would matter - what I didn't expect to see was a heavily console-friendly hack-em-slash-em with completely overblown movement and combat abilities, riddled with Mass Effect "Saint/Neutral/Satan" choice wheel and hideous writing. Also judging by the sheer size of the frontal equipment on all the female characters, I can see which demography the game is aimed at.

Went from "Must have!" to "Bargain bin, if even there."

I believe that the developers have stated that at the normal difficulty level, you can hack-n-slash your way until the bosses, but at the harder difficulty levels, you would need to pause for most fights.

They're trying to make everyone happy.

[(Spork)]

i was and still am i a major fan of the first played thou many times on the 360 im in the middle of the demo and i have to say the game play is smoother and more fluid controls dont seem to log like before

[neoadorable]

the first one was crap, why would the second one be any better? even on the PC it had middling graphics and presentation, on the consoles it was downright ugly. and the combat system on both was idiotic. plus it was generally too hard. and yes, the writing was bad. go there go there, talk to that dwarf, talk to that priest, go there go there....i mean most RPGs are like that but the good action-oriented ones like The Witcher at least maintain a good pace. DA was just boring.

[Miuku.]

plus it was generally too hard

What? Just what?

DA:O on the normal difficulty was a complete ****. I laughed myself right to the end until I realized I should gone Nightmare instantly.

[Amarok]

I loved DAO. I was a little unsure about some of the changes for DA2 but after playing the demo I am so looking forward to DA2. Demo was fantastic, though a little on the short side. Really loving most of the changes that I was unsure about before. :D

[neoadorable]

what? just it was too hard. you had a different experience, well good for you. i couldn't be bothered.

[Nagisan]

What? Just what?

DA:O on the normal difficulty was a complete ****. I laughed myself right to the end until I realized I should gone Nightmare instantly.

Did you play it like a regular RPG or a turn-based RPG?

As someone who would rather play an RPG as a standard RPG, the game was ridiculously difficult even on the lowest difficulty. As someone who played it real-time, like a standard RPG, I found I had to die many times to get through some of the more difficult parts, the reason I play on the lowest difficulty is so I don't have to fight a battle for 20 minutes, die, then start from the beginning, it becomes more tedious than my nerves can handle.

Simply put, DA:O was much more difficult than it should have been, as someone who prefers more casual gaming (in that you can sit back and relax while playing), DA:O was quite a crappy and difficult game.

That being said, I have played the DA2 demo, and it seems much more fun. Combat seems much quicker and less deadly even on normal difficulty I only died I think once, because for some reason it wouldn't let me use some of the potions I had picked up. The backstab mechanic for rogues was also really fun, it basically works by teleporting behind the enemy then backstabbing them, which is much better than a skill that is only usable from behind an enemy, being basically useless in combat if you are being attacked. Plus the AoE stuns and what not made it really fun to play overall. I felt that playing DA2 in real-time was actually fun and no too difficult for being stuck on normal difficulty, unlike the first, which seemed that even on easy you were almost forced into pausing the game and planning battles rather than having fun playing through the battles.

[carson2255]

Dragon age is a tactical RPG, I dont understand people who cannot just press the space bar key to pause the game and try to figure out what they will do, it has nothing to do with turn based RPGs. As their motto goes "fight like a spartan, think like a general", not all games are supposed to be played one way and if your playing it like your standard rpg, then your really not understanding what dragon age is all about.

[PGHammer]

the first one was crap, why would the second one be any better? even on the PC it had middling graphics and presentation, on the consoles it was downright ugly. and the combat system on both was idiotic. plus it was generally too hard. and yes, the writing was bad. go there go there, talk to that dwarf, talk to that priest, go there go there....i mean most RPGs are like that but the good action-oriented ones like The Witcher at least maintain a good pace. DA was just boring.

Sounds like you are NOT a fan of RPGs in general, as that is indeed the formula for darn near every RPG in existence (even Guild Wars hasn't varied from that). Yes; that includes The Witcher (which, in case, you hadn't noticed, came *after* both Dragon Age and Dragon Age: Origins - maybe it learned from the mistakes of the earlier titles?). The Witcher is indeed more hack-and-slash than the first DA (the DA2 demo is also more hack-and-slash than the original) - and in case you haven't taken a look at DA2's demo yet, it has something the first two lacks - AA support. DA2 actually lets you hack-and-slash with a mage (something extremely uncommon in RPGs that aren't WoW, and even WoW still treats spell-casters like support troops, as opposed to deadly allies in their own right), which can actually be fun when done right. (Some portions of Guild Wars: Prophecies let you do the hack-and-slash with spells, not steel - notably the Prince Rurik missions.)

Dragon age is a tactical RPG, I dont understand people who cannot just press the space bar key to pause the game and try to figure out what they will do, it has nothing to do with turn based RPGs. As their motto goes "fight like a spartan, think like a general", not all games are supposed to be played one way and if your playing it like your standard rpg, then your really not understanding what dragon age is all about.

Most RPGs are not tactical in nature. Even fewer allow you to do the hack-and-slash with spell-casters (so far, only Guild Wars among non-tactical RPGs lets you get away with that).

Tough paradigm to wqrap your head around when it's not common in the first place.

[Lezard]

DAO on normal and hard was one of the easiest PCRPG's I have ever played.

I guess people are not being thought patience and how to use strategies any more.... I guess the "You all get trophies" mentality really screed up our children :angry:

Now I want to play chess haha

[Andre S. Veteran]

I've detailed my impressions at length as my first blog post on neowin.

In summary:

I like the new graphical style and the UI is a real achievement. The story and particularly the protagonist failed to catch my interest; the combat and abilities are now paced so fast that you have little choice but to largely rely on the AI to micro-manage most of it; my opinion on both these points could change as the demo was too short to get a very representative idea of the whole game.

As for the bad, the amount of time watching cutscenes (including dialogue) is simply outrageous, something RPGs have steadily tended towards for the last few years; and the way the dialogue wheel is implemented is an insult to my reading skills and imagination.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Simply put, DA:O was much more difficult than it should have been, as someone who prefers more casual gaming (in that you can sit back and relax while playing), DA:O was quite a crappy and difficult game.

I take it you haven't played Baldur's Gate then (officially DA:O's ancestor). At its normal difficulty, it was WAY harder than DA:O at the nightmare setting. You could be killed in one hit by the first monster you encountered, healing potions were scarce, inefficient and expensive, resting restored 2hp and could randomly get you killed if you got ambushed, resurrection required a (potentially deadly) trip to a temple and paying a ludicrous amount of money, the spell system had you plan in advance what spells you would be allowed to use on the next day (and you had precious few of them) etc. Subsequent D&D titles (Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2) did little to make the experience easier, and DA:O feels like a walk in the park in comparison to all these classic RPGs.

I'm not sure how you equate having to pause now and then to "turn-based" combat, but if you were expecting DA:O to play like an Action-RPG, I guess you must have the missed the whole "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" part.

[Nagisan]

Dragon age is a tactical RPG, I dont understand people who cannot just press the space bar key to pause the game and try to figure out what they will do, it has nothing to do with turn based RPGs. As their motto goes "fight like a spartan, think like a general", not all games are supposed to be played one way and if your playing it like your standard rpg, then your really not understanding what dragon age is all about.

That's exactly what I hate about it, you are forced to pause the gameplay to win. I would much rather continue playing the game, not pause it and assess the situation before doing anything. This is not a board game or a traditional RTS game, I shouldn't have to completely stop and assess everything happening to win, I should be able to play it like a RPG game and not like a RTS game.

DAO on normal and hard was one of the easiest PCRPG's I have ever played.

I guess people are not being thought patience and how to use strategies any more.... I guess the "You all get trophies" mentality really screed up our children :angry:

Now I want to play chess haha

I have plenty of patience, I love games that make you think, but I do not like "RPG" games that play like RTS games with a few RPG elements. I personally hate trophies and achievements, and am definitely not in the bracket of liking games for trophies/achievements, I just want to play an RPG game like an RPG game.

I take it you haven't played Baldur's Gate then (officially DA:O's ancestor). At its normal difficulty, it was WAY harder than DA:O at the nightmare setting. You could be killed in one hit by the first monster you encountered, healing potions were scarce, inefficient and expensive, resting restored 2hp and could randomly get you killed if you got ambushed, resurrection required a (potentially deadly) trip to a temple and paying a ludicrous amount of money, the spell system had you plan in advance what spells you would be allowed to use on the next day (and you had precious few of them) etc. Subsequent D&D titles (Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2) did little to make the experience easier, and DA:O feels like a walk in the park in comparison to all these classic RPGs.

I'm not sure how you equate having to pause now and then to "turn-based" combat, but if you were expecting DA:O to play like an Action-RPG, I guess you must have the missed the whole "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" part.

I tried it ages ago but didn't like it much, granted I only played for about 20 minutes, it was too dated when I played it for it to be enjoyable to me.

And yes, I am expecting DA:O to play like an Action-RPG, that is the standard RPG subgenre, not tactical-RPG or RTS/RPG. Honestly, I think DA:O equates better to a RTS game than it does a typical RPG game, which is why I feel it is "turn-based" and crappy.

I enjoy fast-paced action in video games (including RPGs), therefore to me, DA:O is a very crappy RPG, I view it more as a RTS in terms of how it feels (not in how it plays...it plays like a RPG, but feels like a RTS due to the pausing and planning required to get anything meaningful done).

What it comes down it, is tactical RPGs are just not my thing, they play too similarly to RTS games, another genre I am not extremely fond of. I would much rather see good RPGs that move quickly and play like standard RPGs rather than a RPG that tries to be a RTS without the buildings.

[Andre S. Veteran]

I have to disagree with your take on what a "standard" RPG is. Action-RPGs are notorious for having shallow storylines and little or no decision making, Diablo and its innumerable clones being examples of that. As such they are poor representatives of the RPG genre. Incidentally many of the most influential and engrossing RPGs have featured tactical, party-based combat, either Real-Time-with-Pause (Fallout 1-2, Baldur's Gate 1-2, Planescape Torment, NWN 1-2) or turn-based (Ultima series, Final Fantasy series).

What Bioware is doing with Mass Effect and, to a limited extent, DA2* is rather unique in that they blend Action-RPG battle mechanics with deep storylines and roleplaying. Maybe it's where RPGs are indeed heading (The Witcher would be another example), but it's a far cry from saying that is "standard".

*In their own words, DA2 is supposed to be more tactical than Origins, and still features Real-Time-with-Pause combat. But the emphasis on speed and action does change the dynamic somewhat.

[+jamesyfx Subscriber²]

Can't say I enjoyed this on the PS3 - it feels like an RPG built more for a PC.

[trag3dy]

Did you play it like a regular RPG or a turn-based RPG?

As someone who would rather play an RPG as a standard RPG, the game was ridiculously difficult even on the lowest difficulty. As someone who played it real-time, like a standard RPG, I found I had to die many times to get through some of the more difficult parts, the reason I play on the lowest difficulty is so I don't have to fight a battle for 20 minutes, die, then start from the beginning, it becomes more tedious than my nerves can handle.

Simply put, DA:O was much more difficult than it should have been, as someone who prefers more casual gaming (in that you can sit back and relax while playing), DA:O was quite a crappy and difficult game.

That being said, I have played the DA2 demo, and it seems much more fun. Combat seems much quicker and less deadly even on normal difficulty I only died I think once, because for some reason it wouldn't let me use some of the potions I had picked up. The backstab mechanic for rogues was also really fun, it basically works by teleporting behind the enemy then backstabbing them, which is much better than a skill that is only usable from behind an enemy, being basically useless in combat if you are being attacked. Plus the AoE stuns and what not made it really fun to play overall. I felt that playing DA2 in real-time was actually fun and no too difficult for being stuck on normal difficulty, unlike the first, which seemed that even on easy you were almost forced into pausing the game and planning battles rather than having fun playing through the battles.

You see that's the thing about opinions. I found DA:O to be way to easy on even the hardest difficulty. Once I got the mage/healer (the old lady, forgot her name) it was a cakewalk. The last boss was a joke on the hardest difficulty.

I want DA2 to be as hard as they can possible make it, that's my opinion.

[neoadorable]

thanks for the feedback Nagisan, i'm with you all the way on that one. some people love hard games, good for them. i don't get entertained easily by frustrating difficulty spikes, there's enough of those in life without paid entertainment adding to them. DA on easy was 80% walk in the park and 20% impossible, that's bad enough for me. plus it was just ugly and boring. i'm sure DA2 will sell plenty, but i won't be one of those buyers. Baldur's Gate had more charm in an hour of play than DA had in its entire alleged 150-hour campaign, of which 35 hours or so was enough for me...

[Andre S. Veteran]

plus [DA:O] was just ugly and boring. [...] Baldur's Gate had more charm in an hour of play than DA had in its entire alleged 150-hour campaign, of which 35 hours or so was enough for me...

QFT! The original destroys the "spiritual successor" easily.

[neoadorable]

thanks for agreeing! maybe we should give this one a chance tho....i don't know, i have a lot of good will towards BioWare, even some of their mediocre DLC for the two Mass Effects were enjoyable. their heart is in the right place. after all ,they are doctors.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Can't say I enjoyed this on the PS3 - it feels like an RPG built more for a PC.

I'm loving playing DA:O on the PS3, so I'll definitely need to check out this demo and see if the gameplay mechanics have changed a lot...

[soniqstylz]

I take it you haven't played Baldur's Gate then (officially DA:O's ancestor). At its normal difficulty, it was WAY harder than DA:O at the nightmare setting. You could be killed in one hit by the first monster you encountered, healing potions were scarce, inefficient and expensive, resting restored 2hp and could randomly get you killed if you got ambushed, resurrection required a (potentially deadly) trip to a temple and paying a ludicrous amount of money, the spell system had you plan in advance what spells you would be allowed to use on the next day (and you had precious few of them) etc. Subsequent D&D titles (Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate 2, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2) did little to make the experience easier, and DA:O feels like a walk in the park in comparison to all these classic RPGs.

I'm not sure how you equate having to pause now and then to "turn-based" combat, but if you were expecting DA:O to play like an Action-RPG, I guess you must have the missed the whole "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" part.

Of those, I only played Baulder's Gate 2 (and the expansion pack) and don't remember it being all that tough.

random note: don't have the link handy, but Kotaku had a post about the Dragon Age 2-related Facebook game.