Dragon Age 2 - Preview @ Joystiq

Remove all ads!

Joystig has penned a rather detailed preview of this game, based on a hands-on demonstration given by the game's executive producer, Mark Darrah. His comments are included into the preview as well. A couple of examples, first on how the story is organized.

This change isn't just for the sake of the story, but also serves an organizational purpose. Darrah explained that "if you weren't careful in Origins, you could kind of end up in this branching situation where you have 1,000 quests open and it'd be very easy to lose your way." This new act system will give players the freedom to do things within each act, but when an act concludes, it could jump forward a year, sometimes more. This way, it's "easier for the game to stay cohesive," Darrah said.​

Here's the second example, telling us how the Rogue will be changed from DA:Origins and why:

The big thing, the problem with the Rogue in Origins was they didn't know what role they were trying to fill," Darrah suggested. "Rogue was sort of half-warrior, half-nothing -- it had some of the same talents as the warrior: You had dual-wielding; you had archery; many of the same things the warrior did. So what we're trying to do here is make sure each of the classes has a distinct personality and purpose." I couldn't directly compare the Rogue to any of the other classes since the Rogue was the only one playable, but its strengths and weaknesses were very clear.​

 

What? I disagree. The rogue was a warrior in his own right, granted, but could make full use of cunning in combat, unlike other fighters.

And half nothing? Let's see... I can fill this "half" with scout, assassin, and generally indispensable party member due to lock picking and trap arming/disarming abilities. Rogues also had the great number of skills, so they could fill more roles than other characters from a skills perspective.

So, sorry Mark Darrah... I can only read your comment with my eyebrows raised and suspicions high. Clearly you need to take a closer look at the DA rogue (of course, this is only my (not so humble) opinion on the matter).

 

lock picking was useless in DAO. 95 percent of the locked chests only contained junk anyway. And none of the traps were fatal. Felt like I had a warrior, that just attacked abit differently, thats all. I am glad they are fixing the rogue up abit.

 

Picking locks useless? Useless? A thorough adventurer searches every chest, pockets every coin and swipes every gem. These items mean more riches, and since the best items in Dragon Age tend to be very expensive… extra cash is a very good thing. So far, I’m not with you on the useless thing, and we haven’t even considered the extra experience gained through picking locks yet. More experience equals more levels and a more powerful party! And still, he says useless.

What about traps? Are we to believe that the ability to disarm traps is useful *only* if traps are fatal? There are MANY battles in the game that take place in heavily trapped areas. I’ll take my traps in their disarmed form, and my teammates without a set of spikes clamped onto their leg, thank you very much. And again, extra experience is gained in the process which is VERY useful.

I guess you could play the rogue like a warrior that fights a little differently, but that's not how I play them, and therefore, they are much more to me than that.

I never said that there wasn’t room for the rogue to be improved (or the warrior or the mage, for that matter). I welcome such an evolution. But since the rogue is the class that I identified most with, I just don’t buy that it lacked an identity.

 

The experience wasn`t useful either, since you get to level up your whole party to level 20 just before the final battle. My last playthrough was without a rogue in the party, and I still ended up at level 20 in the end. I had zero problems with traps as well. 2 mages with the Heal spell fixes that bit right up. But I did have the most fun when I played a rogue warden, thats for sure.

 

It's my understanding that playing a Mage heavy party makes any other class redundant. But I do agree that Rogues are the most interesting class to play.

Anyway I'm really surprised by these comments from the game's executive producer. Rogues in DAO were a lot of fun that's for sure -is stealth (not to mention all the other Rogue talents) "nothing"? that is just preposterous- and I really don't get how one could get confused and lose focus because of the number of quests. It seems to me they are going to dumb it down even more.

In the "old days" of CRPGs you had to have a notebook handy to write down clues regarding quests and even draw maps, now there are quest markers and journal entries that do the job for you and it's still too confusing for players. Talk about tailoring a game for casual players and a mass market.

My expectations regarding DA2 keep sinking lower and lower...

 

Rogues aparantly "teleport" in dragon age 2 as well. The go *poof* and disapear, only to apear behind the enemy a few seconds later. This is their version of "stealth" i belive.

 

Well, when you consider that I completed Origins at more like level 24 (with Awakening installed) I guess we're coming at this with very different lenses.

Regarding traps, I guess 2 healers could do the job of healing the damage, but that doesn't seem nearly as efficient as a single rogue disarming the trap and avoiding both the damage altogether, not to mention the few seconds where the trapee is incapacitated. That's 3 party members dealing with 1 trap vs. 1 party member dealing with 1 trap.

I realize that we all have our different ways to play the game, and I respect that. The game isn't that difficult, so there are literally tons of ways to beat it. That said, what you apparently find useless, I find vitally important and integral to the game. Go figure....

 

It's not really my idea to offend anyone, but maybe games like DAO aren't the best choice for someone who wasn't able to follow quests there. I don't know if I've played rpg game where it was easier (I haven't played that much rpgs though).

But this new system just might work if done well. If after act ends game jumps forward a year, and all things that could be still done in act should be done in like 6 months for some logical reason (for example there were still things to do in some village that gets destroyed in 6 months) I'm ok with that. If the only reason for not being able to do it later is because act ended (to be easier to follow quests) then I find it really disappointing.