GhostofAnakin

Eh, I don't recall a time when RPGs didn't have Fed Ex style quests.

Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Hmm, if that's true, then why do companies choose the DLC way? I know Howard and BioWare aren't the same thing, but since they both are in the market of making RPGs, I'd assume their costs/development time would be comparable. So take Dragon Age: Origins, for example. The majority of their DLC was either decent, but extremely short, or just extremely short with no real value to them. Combined, they probably gave the player 15 or so hours of play time. If you're correct about Howard's comments (and there's no reason to think you're not), then why wouldn't BioWare put that time and effort into making another Awakenings-length expansion, than putting out a 1 hour dungeon romp every 2 or so months?

Agree with the bold part completely. While I recognize it's a lot easier (read: cheaper and quicker) to make 1-2 hour DLC than full on expansions, I simply find it a waste of money 95% of the time. At least with expansions, you feel like you're playing another story (or adding on to the existing one). DLCs often times simply feel like they added one more dungeon level for you to romp around in, with very little actual story content added.

October can't come soon enough. I've got nothing new to play until then.

While the trailer was nicely done (most trailers seem to be), it didn't show as much about Hawke's companions as the DA:O one did. That one included Sten, Morrigan and Leliana. This one had Hawke fighting a revamped Qunari, and thinking back about some obscure pirate girl. Also, I'm guessing the default Hawke is a mage then, based on what he did in that trailer?

That page that funcroc linked the interviews from has it wrong, then.

Unless I'm mixing up the date with some other game, I believe August 17th is the date a trailer is supposed to be launched.

November 16th release date? All this time I was thinking it was October 16th. Weird. I just checked Gamespot and they list it as October 19th ...

From what I understand there are A LOT of references to the first three so one that has played them will enjoy the game a lot more BUT being a new unexplored part of the world and being with a new main character, it should be a good starting point for newcomers. Just take into account that there will be a difference in gameplay between this and the originals (not as big as between Fallout 2 and 3, but still a good difference) if you then want to go back and play them. My gaming nowadays is exclusively console, which is why I'd try this game out since I see it'll have a 360 release version. Aren't the previous three PC exclusive? So I don't think I'd be trying them out either way, unless they'd run on my current POS PC (I can barely run NWN2 on here).

Does one need to have played the previous three installments to play this? Or can a newcomer just wade right in, and not be confused about the world/story?

Things I think show some promise: - Hints were dropped that we might bump into our Origins Warden at some point. - Playing as a MageHawke seems like it will have an impact on the story, and I quote "I mean, if you're a mage from Feralden, that's obviously going to be a different experience, becase are you an apostate or are you from the circle." This suggests that classes will still have an impact on the story, probably more so than Origins. - There's a HUGE Civil War of some sort which will change the world of Dragon Age forever, sparked by you. This becomes the heart of Dragon Age II, and not only will you be in control of these choices, but you will forge your own timeline that the rest of the universe will discover and react to. - "Who was the champion of Kirkwall? We're not posing you with an ancient evil you have to stop. Instead, we're asking you to give us an answer." - When you're not using them, the rest of your companions won't just sit around at camp. When they're not with you other things are happening. - There will be unique moments where having a certain party member with you will add to the event. At certain intervals, a follower option will allow you to tell a specific party member to leap into action. In a case X360 witnessed, Bethany can unleash her magic, and having the right person in the right situation can play dividends. - Enchantment! - You can customise individual spells, tweaking things like damage and knockback strength. - Rogue, Warrior and Mage all feel very unique and different now. - Battle animations are now exceptionally smooth. - "Your decisions could be far more pivotal than they ever were before." Things that worry me: - Bioware are focusing on four pivotal points with Dragon Age II; "hot-rodding" the art style, dialling up the action, making Dragon Age II newcomer friendly, and refining the game's storytelling techniques. - Bioware admits that some of the changes are controversial, and that they are "destined to create tension throughout many gamers who swore by Origins' approach..." - Regarding voice acting of Hawke, Bioware is being very careful with it. They are making sure that you still feel like you control the character and all that they do. The decision wasn't made lightly, but the pros vastly outweigh the cons. Bioware hope to make Dragon Age II a much more cinematic experience than the first was. - There's a bit about the conversation wheel. "An icon will now appear within the circle. If you want to be aggressive, you'll see a clenched fist. Fancy being a bit suave and a charming face will take its place. It's all aimed at allowing you to become immersed far more in the narrative and become closer to your character. And there won't be anymore "Oh crap I didn't mean to say it like that" moments ala Mass Effect, as apparently these icons will indicate the tone your response will have. - Grey Wardens will be in Dragon Age 2, but they're pushed to the sidelines this time around. - "I can guarantee that there will be some answers in Dragon Age II... but not all of them. - There will be cameos from Origins and I assume from Awakenings, although the latter isn't mentioned. --------------------------------- The main things that still worry me include them railroading the story along, especially with this new narrator approach, and that they're more worried about turning into an almost action game with an emphasis on "kewl combat". I also am leery of cameos because, chances are, they'll be disappointing. I can't think of a single cameo in a recent game where I didn't come away thinking, "wait, that's it? We were bestest buddies in the previous game, and all I got this time was two lines of dialogue with them?". Not to mention there's a chance they change the character's motives around. I'm also not sure how I feel about them including my Grey Warden. I mean, unless the game imports him EXACTLY as how I played him from Origins, then there's a good chance he won't act/think/react the way I want him to.

I think you should give AP a chance. I'm not sure where you got the idea it was linear, at least any more so than 95% of RPGs out there. AP certainly has its flaws, but I don't think linearity is one of them.

I liked it enough to play one time through. I just didn't love it enough to play through multiple times, or bother with the DLC for it.

Since I couldn't figure what else to re-play, I decided to dust off my old XBox and throw in Jade Empire. I guess nostalgia made me remember the graphics as being better than they actually are.

I finished re-playing Dragon Age: Origins (plus the sub-par Awakenings expansion), and now I'm in need of a new game. Was tempted to re-play Mass Effect 2, but I really don't like the main story in that game. Enjoy the sidequests (ie. recruiting my party members), but find the main quest incredibly boring. Alpha Protocol might be a go, but I'm in the mood for a game where I can do a bit of free roaming between missions. That's the one thing I disliked about AP: it was either a mission, or I was alone in my apartment. No NPC interaction during down-time. Maybe I'll go out to EB games and see what they have in the bargain bin.

It just came to me what I'm most disappointed about with AP. The fact there's no major hubs I can hang around in, shop, and interact with NPCs. Between missions, I like being able to loiter about. AP goes from mission --> safehouse --> repeat. Come on, Obsidian! Add a city with stores that I can walk around in with Mike and his Hawaiian shirt and hat.

The bolded part is pretty much my attitude toward 99% of games, even ones I like. I like playing for the story, first and foremost. So when it's basically just me fighting waves of enemies until the final boss battle with the story portion pretty much concluded (other than an epilogue after I beat the final boss), I lose interest.

I'm an oddity. I actually prefer Origins to either ME games.

Hmm. That's jarring. I didn't know he ever went by Killian or whatever the initial post said.

So wait, this is Hades? Or am I lost?

But the point is, though, that the reviews seemed to hammer AP because of these "issues", whereas games like ME and FO3 got a free pass when it came to similar issues. So you're correct, in that some people experience issues that others don't for pretty much most games. But then the reviewers out there shouldn't harp on one game's, but ignore another's. Which is pretty much the issue those who post they had no issues with AP are getting at.

I wonder which Obsidian execs are available romance options.

I'm still curious to see how this new "framed narrative" handles the ability to go back into various areas to complete tasks you didn't finish right away. From the sounds of how it's described, it's like the narrative acts as a "mini-epilogue" for each area after you finish the main task. For instance, in DA:O that would be like after you find a resolution to the Dalish/werewolf conflict, it skips to a cutscene where the narrator describes what you did. But what if you didn't finish all the minor quests in that area? Can you no longer go back to them in DA2 after the narrator has spoken about the impact you had on a given area? I'm just a little worried this is a game mechanic that'll cause more linearity, rather than less.

Right. But that doesn't change the fact it's still a retcon to the Qunari species that we, the players of DA:O, know. It's a change after the fact. Sure, it's a feasible explanation. But it still runs counter to what we saw/read about in Origins about the Qunari. Unless there was a codex entry that I overlooked in Origins that detailed what Gaider explained in his quote?