Da2 and rpg's in general

I know it's long but please read!!

After finishing the da2 demo and being extremely underwhelmed, Then reading some interviews with bioware. They said they listened to the feedback from dao and came to the conclusion that people didn't like the combat (too slow and unresponsive). Also people quit playinging within the first hour or 2 and that was caused by too many stats. (although I remember dealing with the stats in the first 1 to 2 min).

So what did they do to fix it. fast forwarded the combat. Made what were once passive talents backstab, evade, ect. require you to continue to click on them over and over and delayed the stats for a half hour into the game. (still within the 1 to 2 hrs though, so I guess people will quit after a half hour). Oh and gave us cartoony graphics and more blood.

So I started thinking why no REAL improvements in party-based rpg's. (and i'm only talking party based rpg's). Sure we get newer graphics, maybe a few new spells, better ui and the such. But to me the most important part of a party based rpg (and maybe this is where I go wrong) is the tactical combat.

Why in 2011, with all the technical advancements can't i get good Ai and tactics. Why can't I tell my mage to take cover and occasionally heal someone or lob a fireball then take cover again. Why can't I have my archer take the high ground and rain down arrows and it actually matter. why can't my fireball spells catch trees, fields or houses on fire to kill enemies or seperate them so they are easier to manage. how about kick over tables as cover, snipe monsters without them instantly knowing where I am, use my environment to my advantage or just get good spacing so not every battle turns into a mass of bodys in the center of the screen or how about frogs that swallow you whole (thanks toee) think of the blood you could do there bioware. I'll take 3 frogs vs 50 darkspawn anyday. Lots of fps already have these why not party based rpg's. I can think of many others so i'm sure dev's can to but they would rather streamline for the casual gamer.

If they want to turn casual gamers into rpg gamers good luck, but seems to me they want to turn rpg's into casual games and why not shorter games ,less ai, less inventory,less monsters, less everything except money, that's still full price.

I have many more thoughts but will end it here as I would really like to hear what people think, agree, disagree or totally differant take. Thanks for sticking and reading it all. look forward to comments.

In before the inevitable assault from Bioware fanboys….

Seriously though, I understand your frustration. With a few exceptions, I've been watching crpgs become more streamlined and action-oriented for almost a decade now.

I used to get a lot more excited about new RPG releases, but now it's become more enjoyable for me to just replay some of the older titles.

Yeah, see this is what I don't get. The combat in DA:Origins is what they got right! I loved the tactics, the animations, the talents, etc. I mean, why fix what isn't broken?

I mean honestly didn't Origins sell enough to tell them that they have an audience for a game of that kind of complexity (moderate as it is)? Why dumb it down even further?

Seems to be the norm across the board for all developers this past decade or so:

They start off by make an epic game that everyone loves, then a year later or so a second in the series is in development, but for some unknown reason they think all the mechanics that made the original so amazing are suddenly not good enough! So what do they do, strip it bare and start over from scratch, and even worse off its then replaced with a new system which is not so good, horribly dumbed down, and just outright pathetic.

Why can't devs understand that when they do something right and everyone loves it, ~{besides a few vocal, impatient players}~ plus it sells very well, not to screw with the core formula. Just expand on it, add new features, but for fracks sake don't make a new one…yet they continue to do just that.

And the worst part, is when they turn to those that pirate games and blame them or the media for bad reviews, or whatever else instead of accepting the blame that it was they whom screwed up, and thats why sales were poor.

{yeah I'm quite upset with the changes to DAII…}

I'm of the opinion that all of those games that were quit after one or two hours wasn't a quit on the game because of stats. More likely, it's because people simply wanted to see the other origin stories without playing through the whole game. Also, people may have been testing certain classes. That's just what people do when a game has interesting mechanics, they play around with it and test things out. It doesn't mean that gamers were turned off by stats simply because they only finished the whole story once out of the 12 that they started.

In regards to DA2, I know I'm a minority here, but I actually like it if only for the fact that it doesn't look like dog shit on my 360 (DA:O does). I personally don't care if the combat is tactical or turn based, I've expanded enough as a gamer to appreciate many types of gameplay. The only problem that I do have is that the combat seems too much of a cross between what it used to be, in DA:O, and what the action gamers may have been crying for. If they have tactical combat, ok, I'll dig it. If it has action combat, I'll dig it. If it tries to do both without succeeding, I probably won't have a lot of fun. And that is kind of how it feels so far. It feels like action combat that is not fluid because it has a touch of DA:O combat in it.

There are basically two tracks to take in current gaming:

1) Lower budget games focused on a particular audience.
2) Mainstream games made to try and appeal to as many people as possible.

Bioware have openly and bluntly stated that they are in the second camp. They have said quite bluntly that 3+ million sales is not enough. For this reason Dragon Age 2 is not a surprise… it's meant to be faster, more streamlined, more accessible and more console-friendly, since consoles are the mainstream video game hardware of choice. That said it is still a tactical RPG, and an enjoyable one if you ask me, so it all depends on your priorities.

The thing is you cannot expect mainstream blockbusters to play like niche games. That's like expecting Shakespeare dialogue from a Michael Bay summer blockbuster, it just doesn't work like that. There is plenty of stuff in camp 1, like Dead State or Avadon, to look forward to. You just can't expect major publishers like EA to invest a hundred million dollars in niche products… doesn't work like that.

Luckily for me I guess I enjoy the niche stuff and the mainstream stuff. Make a good RPG, FPS or adventure game and I'm probably going to enjoy it.

No, there is perhaps a wrongful perception that those are the only two ways to go about it - but we've had plenty of games that sold well without fitting into either category.

So, while it's fine that Bioware are openly greedy - it's equally fine to comment on it, and give them our opinion of what they're doing.

At one point, they'll be so eager to please - that they end up forgetting how to do it in the first place.

Sometimes it's not just streamlining and taking the easiest and most obvious way to wealth.

No, sometimes you have to make an effort to challenge people and to show them you can actually make games according to your own vision, without having to scramble desperately to please everyone and their mothers.

Originally Posted by JDR13
In before the inevitable assault from Bioware fanboys….
….

You seem not have realized the point, it's the inevitable hateful assault from DAO1 fanboys here is the point and the reason of the mass. I wonder what evil person give them the RPGWatch url.

Originally Posted by Dasale
You seem not have realized the point, it's the inevitable hateful assault from DAO1 fanboys here is the point and the reason of the mass. I wonder what evil person give them the RPGWatch url.

If it is not the point, why do you feel addressed?

Originally Posted by DoctorNarrative
Bioware have openly and bluntly stated that they are in the second camp. They have said quite bluntly that 3+ million sales is not enough. For this reason Dragon Age 2 is not a surprise…

But it is, in my opinion.

DA2 simply isn´t the kind of game which will sell more.
Even the 1 million demo call to arms bullshit was fail.
The development of DA2 was obviously significantly restrained in budget, plus the game was rushed.
It had also pretty bad marketing so far and undercooked restrictive demo certainly didn´t help.

Even though there may be a tactical game in there, a lot of people won´t play it because of all those stupid animations, silly sound effects and overall action-y feel.
And as I mentioned elsewhere, for all those frantic moves, the combat as a whole wasn´t sped up anyway - basic attacks do less damage than in DA:O, enemies, trash mobs included, have inflated HP and the game most likely extensively uses enemies-in-waves mechanic which together is bound to make DA2´s battles similarly long as DA:O´s, just more repetitive.
Removing of skills, character customization (companions´ armors, Varric´s crossbow) or tactical camera doesn´t help here either. And why the hell is FF only on nightmare?

On the other hand, a lot of action games fans will still be put off by stats/talent trees and, well, the action itself does not look good (the attacks don´t connect, etc) and interestingly enough, visual effects like spells don´t look all that "cool" (unlike some in DA:O) either. There aren´t even hooks like ogre grabbing party members and such (in combat).
The game´s visuals in general simply aren´t next-gen enough.

Even some early reviews hint that the story is half-assed and not as "epic!" as in DA:O, characters are more shallow (probably due to shorter game´s length) and there´s a lot of area recycling.

Etc.

All in all, IMO, due to the pursuit to attract everyone, restricted budget, relatively short development time and also what I see as general underestimation of customers, the game has been spread too thin and it won´t manage to grab even one type of segment strongly enough to be called a clear commercial success.

Obviously I pulled most of this out of my ass, but that´s how I feel about it.
Time will tell.

Originally Posted by bkrueger
If it is not the point, why do you feel addressed?

Now answer a post is feeling it's addressed to you? You are sick today and unable to think even a little or what?

And well because you force me, I don't like ME1, won't play ME2 before I get it free or for 2/3$, KOTOR1 fights bored me and stopped long before the end, I have Jade but will probably never play it, I found NWN1 very good only thanks to editor and some user made campaigns, and I even consider BG1 quite better than BG2, knowing that they probably get help by Black Isle Studios for BG1 only….

No I'm not a fan of Bioware and I post just to help JDR13 in his understanding.

Originally Posted by sakichop

DA:O or DA:2 which sucks more and why!!

discuss!!

one is wow but single playah and the other is dynaysty warriors remake.
watchers, i am coonfused on what to decide on.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
No, there is perhaps a wrongful perception that those are the only two ways to go about it - but we've had plenty of games that sold well without fitting into either category.

I said today for a reason. Budgets for high-end games have risen to the point where you need to sell millions to come out significantly ahead, which means appealing to as many people as possible.

10 years ago or even 5 years ago you didn't have to spend as much money to make a polished and pretty game, which meant you could specialize more.

Originally Posted by DeepO
Obviously I pulled most of this out of my ass, but that´s how I feel about it.
Time will tell.

And even though I like the game I wouldn't mind this being the case, as it would show that accessibility does not always mean more sales. That would be cool.

We shall see though, early reviews have been insanely high like PC Gamer's 94% and Bioware has an amazingly high street cred on consoles due to KotOR and Mass Effect. On the other hand I bet a lot of people were tricked into buying Origins, and may be very hesitant to get DA2 or even bother with the demo.

So yeah… as you said, time will tell. I don't think there is some easy formula for mainstream success.

I'll never play DA2 because Bioware is just blindly treating us all like a bunch of idiots, quite frankly. They cant quit telling us "what went wrong w/ DA:O, and this is how we fixed it" when theyre tripping over DA:Os awards left and right, and there's legions of people (such as myself) who told them repeatedly how much we loved it. It got universal good reviews. Seriously? it was THAT BAD that Bioware had to go back to the drawing board and re-invent the game? No, they wanted a console-centric action title, yet they dont have the balls to actually say that. I rarely stand on principles (especially when talking about games), but they lost at least one customer here.

I think the npc AI was there in DA:O, sakichop. It took messing w/ the customization of each character via the individual battle tactics scripting thing. I used it a little, but eventually reverted to manual control of everyone. I read comments by many that said they used the system effectively to roll over the myriad of smaller fights, but turned it off and went manual for the bigger and more complex battles. My next DA go-round, I plan on using the battle tactics scripting exclusively, it seems like a game in itself just to make everything fall into place properly.

Originally Posted by xSamhainx
I'll never play DA2 because Bioware is just blindly treating us all like a bunch of idiots, quite frankly. They cant quit telling us "what went wrong w/ DA:O, and this is how we fixed it" when theyre tripping over DA:Os awards left and right, and there's legions of people (such as myself) who told them repeatedly how much we loved it. It got universal good reviews. Seriously? it was THAT BAD that Bioware had to go back to the drawing board and re-invent the game? No, they wanted a console-centric action title, yet they dont have the balls to actually say that. They lost at least one customer here.

Ehhh… I'm an old-school PC-only RPGer and I thought Dragon Age was pretty flawed. The combat was a slog… there was too much of it and the slow pace made it grueling eventually, like in the deep roads. The look of the game was extremely bland and cliche.

I think the changes they set out to make were good ones. It's not at all an action game by the way, you should try the demo.

Originally Posted by DoctorNarrative
We shall see though, early reviews have been insanely high like PC Gamer's 94%

Insanely? PC Gamer´s the only one above 90% so far.
And ratings were irrelevant to my point anyway, the content connotations were.

Originally Posted by DoctorNarrative
There are basically two tracks to take in current gaming:

1) Lower budget games focused on a particular audience.
2) Mainstream games made to try and appeal to as many people as possible.

Bioware have openly and bluntly stated that they are in the second camp. They have said quite bluntly that 3+ million sales is not enough. For this reason Dragon Age 2 is not a surprise… it's meant to be faster, more streamlined, more accessible and more console-friendly, since consoles are the mainstream video game hardware of choice. That said it is still a tactical RPG, and an enjoyable one if you ask me, so it all depends on your priorities.

The thing is you cannot expect mainstream blockbusters to play like niche games. That's like expecting Shakespeare dialogue from a Michael Bay summer blockbuster, it just doesn't work like that. There is plenty of stuff in camp 1, like Dead State or Avadon, to look forward to. You just can't expect major publishers like EA to invest a hundred million dollars in niche products… doesn't work like that.

Luckily for me I guess I enjoy the niche stuff and the mainstream stuff. Make a good RPG, FPS or adventure game and I'm probably going to enjoy it.

I'm not expecting Shakespeare I just want them to stay true to the genre they are using. I also like a good rpg, fps, or adventure game. I also like niche and mainstream games. I've played fear,crysis,farcry 2, gothic, fallout 3, drakensang oblivian, just cause 2, the witcher, elemental, civ, risen and a ton of others, I like all the genres. even playing angry birds.

My problem is they are making a party based rpg. Why not try to make the best one you can make. I didn't find DAO all that tactical really every battle except maybe the dragons could be handled the same way. Send in tanks, have mage support with healing or dibilitating spells (ie. mass paralyze) have thief run around and backstab the mob of monster surrounding the tank and not paying any attention to anything else.

So I figured if the make some changes add some more tactics and better enemy ai this could be a great party based rpg. Unfortunatly, every change they made was to mainstream the game not one change for the core audience of dao. If they don't want to make a great party based rpg then don't make a fun action single character game with companions, I'd play that too. But don't lure us in with promises of spiritual successor to baulder's gate to give us half that in dao then go even farther away in da2.

The main problem is this isn't a fps, if i don't like it i can't just go play one of the other 15 fps. This is one of very few of it's kind so it's even harder to watch as it drifts away.

Originally Posted by sakichop
Send in tanks, have mage support with healing or dibilitating spells (ie. mass paralyze) have thief run around and backstab the mob of monster surrounding the tank and not paying any attention to anything else.

I played the whole game two times with zero tank, I wonder why you didn't changed your single tactic if at some point it bored you.

Originally Posted by Dasale
I played the whole game two times with zero tank, I wonder why you didn't changed your single tactic if at some point it bored you.

I guess I just kept waiting for the ai to force me to change my tactics. I guess I could have went without a tank, or tried to solo, or only use thieves, but why leave companions behind that I enjoy or try to find ways to gimp my party so I have to use tactics. The use of tactics should be required by simply playing the game the way it was made.