meomao

Ah, now I understand. You would like the various exploit to be less restricted. I guess the simple answer is balance between different classes. DA:O has many issues in that sense and there were many complaints about the fact that mages were too overpowered. So, it's just a gamey abstraction. Then, we could try to justify it saying that one is a magical attack while the other is a melee attack, but I admit that is a weak answer. It's just about game balance. The difference is in the nature of the power that causes the trigger. Brittle: powers that causes paralysis. Stagger: bash skills that causes a general loss in melee performance. Disorient: smoke bombs that causes confusion and lack of sight in the targets. Each different trigger causes different reaction. That does make sense, imho. I don't agree. RPG combat systems (especially party based and pen&paper inspired ones) have allways an high level of abstraction. RPG combat has never been about fluid simulation of realistic combat (otherwise they should scratch a lot of sacred cows like HP and became something else in the process... action games). Only that in ME3 the party is just there for support, the combat is a shooter and not an RPG and there are just a fraction of the skills avaible in DA2. Very different systems with very different goals: it's hard to make any comparison in my opinion.

Must repeat: I do not understand what you mean with "making sense". It's really simple. Every class has different skills that causes one kind of trigger. Brittle for Mages. Stagger for Warriors. Disorient for Thieves. The respective other two classes have a different set of skill that can exploit the Trigger. The exploit have allways a different effect but basically is just a bonus to the starting skill. It's quite balanced, fun and it's one of the few elements of depth in the DA skill system (until level 14-15): you have just to level your party with CCC in mind. There are many of them to support any kind of build at different levels of difficulty. Here's the complete list just to support my argument: http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Cross-class_combo. I think that you have levelled them wrongly. But considering that there is a respec option is not a punishing system. In my party I had 2 thieves and 1 mage and most CCC were between those charachters and they worked really well. Winter's Blast+Punishing Lance: kill mage or desire demon button. Overpowering Fog or Chaos + Virulent Walking Bomb: devastating aoe effect that work like wonders after a Pull of the Abyss. Sorry: I don't understand that point. There are already a couple of passive/active skills in the thief trees that give that kind of bonus (it's been a long time since I played the game but there is a backstab skill with passive upgrades and another one in the scoundrel tree that gives a bonus to attack against stunned targets).

Imho, the CCC sytem is a cool and interesting concept that feels underdeveloped on the long run (once you reached level 14-15 or so). Honestly I don't understand your position about the effect being the same. The status is just the trigger. The difference come from the power you use to exploit the trigger and every power have different effects and different tactical purposes. The point of the system is that every creature have different probabilities of being effected by the trigger ability and different resistances to each kind of elemental damage.

For what I've seen and read so far, DA3 will be a more polished and bigger/richer/epic version of DA2 in most ways with DA:O's flavour C&C put in the mixture. So, if you hated the concept of DA2 and not just the execution then DA3 is not the game you should be looking for and there's not a lot of reason to complain about it. Just don't buy it. Let's give for granted all the usual complains about DA2 and its mediocre execution. The game was rushed and for sure I won't buy the sequel at release if DA3 is rushed too. Personally, I believe that after DA2 the setting is going in a more interesting and "original" direction with the Mage/Templar/Qunari civil wars as a background. At least, more interesting than yet another Blight or Hawke's adventure in Kirkwall. Must say that act. 2 in DA2 was actually quite interesting and fresh, storywise. If DA2 had just been a bigger version of that part of the game, with a little bit of branching and less heavy handed questing in the same environments, it would have been quite a better game, if short. Gameplay wise, I don't know what to expect honestly. Imho, DA2 suffered from a lack of vision. They wanted to mix two different styles (action and tactical) and the end result is mediocre any way you look at it. The nearly complete removal of most non combat gameplay impoverished the game. If they just try to polish DA2 gameplay, I'm not sure that it's going to work that well. If they return to DA:O's gameplay and just try to improve it, there are more chances that the game will be well received.

I agree, the rule system is a problem no matter how you put it... I understand that there are time constraints for BG1 and that the team is too small to overhaul the game to that extent. But since they allready have a deal with Atari, why do not use the 4th edition rules for BG2 EE? Or wait for the 5th edition rules that should be published next year and then upgrade the whole game? That operation could draw the new D&D players to the table and offer something really new to the old BG fanbase.

As I said before, I will buy the EE because I hope that it will cause a return of of RPGs in the spirit of the IE ones, even if on a Indie/Kickstarter level. For what I've seen (and I've checked all the avaible sources) the devs have not a lot to add to the GoG+mods combo for PC so in that sense the critics are right and Trent Olster should be more clear on the meaning of "Enhanced" for the PC players. But the critics forget that only a minority of the potential customer base (big, average or small... it remains to be seen) actually use mods. For most gamers, having a game that works out of the box, without having to sort the good mods from the bad ones, download, install, and double check the potential conflicts between them, could be a big plus. I don't even understand all the hate toward the Ipad port. Maybe it will sell, maybe not, but it won't change my enjoyement of the original and AFAIK BG1 was allready developed for PC & Mac like most classical CRPGs. Ok, they won't update the graphics because Bioware have lost the original art assets. It sucks but it's not a deal breaker in my view. If they will use BG2 engine, the game allready look quite good: I've replayed BG2 last year and it's still enjoyable. It's not like playing the 3D games of the age like Deus Ex. In term of constructive support, that's what I'd like to see (it's not a lot but imho if you use BG2 engine there's not a lot to add to BG1): - An adventure to be played after you finished the game that works as bridge between BG1 and BG2. - More background and ambient sounds and more variety in terms of soundtracks, all depending on the situation. There are points where the game feel a little bit "aseptic". - No romances.

In my opinion, BG3 should not be necessarily a direct continuation of the Bhaalspawn story. It could be the story of his son. It could be an unrelated story that just take in to account the aftermath of ToB. It coult be settled in the new "post-apocalypse" Forgotten Realms. The possibility for a continuation are endless and it's not something like "Bhaalspawn or nothing". The game is called Baldur's Gate and not The Bhallspawn Saga. Having said all of that, call me a cynic but I don't believe that Beamdog has the strenght to develop a BG3 that makes justice to his predecessors. It won't probably happen. Still, I will support the EE relase. At least because a success would proove that such games have still an audience and that they could be profitable.

I would love Obsidian to explore some fresh and grand ideas without the pressure of a publisher. A game concept I would love them to develop would be an hurban fantasy RPG with action and adventure elements. Imagine something like Neil Gaiman's American Gods meets Grand Theft Auto, with less shooting and more branching. A spiritual successor to Vampire Bloodlines... Unfortunately I don't believe that Kickstarter is the right place to fund such a project. So, what about an IWD3?

Thanks! Maybe on a second playthrough I will give it a try.

Just one question: I played the arena demo some time ago and I do not like the combat that much. Is it possibile to play the game diplomatically from start to finish?

I think that I won't buy it: I could not care less about the IP. The only episode I saw in the last years is "Make love not Warcraft" wich was pretty funny... but no other episode in 8 years or so. I think that the IP is very US centric and does not says a lot to us in Europe. But generally it has lasted even too much for its own good and the jokes weren't funny anymore when I stopped watching it. Then if reviews state that it's the best thing since PS:T I could change my mind. But I doubt so...

Maybe we should wait and see the sale data of Bioware's C&C before we judge the merit and implication of the whole "let's put a Bioware logo on it" business. EA could think that Bioware logo helps games to sell and that the name alone estabilish a good reputation for those games, but the "succes" of the Warhammer MMO seems to proove the opposite. For what is worth, I'm a long term Bioware fan. I've bought and played all their games except Sonic and enjoyyed most of them to different degrees with the exception of DA2. I will never buy a C&C game since I could not care less about MP. You seem to be in the same camp. What else to say... EA is not known for its insight on gamers.

I'm not denying that they have a large follower base and I've allready said without a single problem that I'm a Bioware fan and that I follow their games. I simply do not believe that their logo sells on its own. Look, it's not only anedoctal evidence. It's just the consistency in terms of numbers and "typical fan" between the different Bioware's franchises. You look at ME sales and DA sales and you see a huge gap. Read the boards of both game and you can see a loto of differences too. You look at RDR or LA Noire sales and you see that sales are close in terms of number. There are tons people willing to pass from a Western shooter to a Noire adventure because it's a Rockstar game. The same is not true for Bioware games. Bio brand will help the game gathering attention from the chore audience of Bioware and the press and grant some minimum sales of 1/1,5+ million copies. That will help off course. The rest is on the game behalf: word of mouth and reception from the gaming community. And it's not the same effect of popular brands developing a new IP. If Blizzard would announce a new IP in 6 months it will sell 3-4 million copies on PC only, just because it's Blizzard. You are right: Bioware's chore audience is a niche. And niches are not brand, that's my point. They can become brands but they are not. Then, everything can change in the following year.

That's true but look at LA Noire. The game is mediocre at best and the sandbox is purely aestetic but it sold better than any Bioware game ever made. And RDR is truly a great game, so it's hard to discuss "if". But as DA2 sales seems to show, if the reception of one of their title is controversial, it won't sell that much just because it's developed by Bioware. 2+ million copies and most were DA:O fans. That's the distinction I'm trying to make. Bioware have fans of their singular franchises. Not "Bioware" fans in the same way as Valve or Blizzard does.

Yes, the "nobody" is a generalization. I'm simply saying that Bioware is not a recognized brand. There are lots of people who buys Valve's, Blizzard's or Rockstar's games simply because the name of those companies is on the box. Just look at LA Noire. I'm not sure that the Bioware logo has the same effect. I'm a Bioware fan, not a critical one, but I've not bought NWN, ME and Kotor at the time of their publishing because I wasn't interested in those project and/or I do not own an Xbox. I bought them cheap many months after. I will follow the new franchise but if I'm not hooked by the concept, I will wait to read some reviewad buy it on some kind of sale. So, maybe it's just me, but the new franchise won't sell because there is a Bioware Dublin logo on the box, but only if it reaches the interest of old and new players becuase of its features. Having said that, there is no harm in trying to become as popular as those other companies. But as it is now, I believe that Bioware may have popular games but it's not a popular brand. To discuss that topic, we should find a common definition for the term RPG first. Since I'm pretty sure that we will never reach a common ground, it's hard to reply. Having said that, imho, in term of freedom/exploration, economy, customization and stat based rules/combat (wich are typical elements of an RPG), BG I is more RPGish than most Bioware's games of late. It's less rpgish in term of dialogues and in depth interactions with the NPCs but I'm not really sure that it's a good thing for Bioware or that the focus on writing has improved their games a lot. While playing BG 1, many players were writing their version of the story, their romances and so on. There was a lot of space to fill with your imagination. With their last titles (DA:O excepted) there is little and less space for that kind of spontaneous and emergent storytelling.

Maybe you are right, but Rockstar and Blizzard seems to proove the opposite. Imho, the great problem is that Bioware is not recognized as Rockstar or Blizzard. I mean, no one buy a game because it has the "Bioware" logo. Most buy them because they like they like Bioware RPG style but that's all. I mean, Bioware is not a brand that sells on its own. Having said that I don't know why most of you are allready deducing that it's a straight action game and not (maybe) an action RPG-light like most Bioware titles in the last years. The image does not say anything about the kind of game is going to be,

Red Dead Redemption is better than both, imho. If only for the atmosphere.

Congrats! Glad my vote helped Obsidian gaining some deserved praise!

Honestly, I only read praise and good things about Obsidian in the Bioware forums. I quote Nepenthe on the issue. PS: After DA2 debalce, there where a lot of people on the BSN who actively requested that Bioware let Obsidian develop DA3.

I don't believe they are going to make an Alpha Protocol clone . Just joking: if you are interested, in that video Laidlaw explains briefly the general direction they are going to take for DA3 in the various areas of design: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjexkoGVKlY The general direction seems interesting. But Laidlaw allready prooved to be unreliable, so make what you think best out of it.

I play on PC for 90% of my time and having Steam salses and such, there is no point in buying used. I own a PS3 that I've used for the very few titles I'm interested in that do not get a port. I've buyed Red Dead Redemption used at my local Gamestop (it's the only game I've buyed used ever) last october/november and payed it 30 euros. But I live in Italy, I do not know what happens in the US.

I understand your point but you can do things in many ways. It's a matter of scale and good sense. With DA2 they have exagerated and they lost a part of the chore audience without convincing anyone to give the new game a try. Result: the game have sold less than the previous one and PC sales were abysmal. You can do it like ME2 where the marketing basically aknowledged the shortcoming of the shooter part of the game and promised improvements. That's cool and it has worked (but I admit that I do not follow ME development that closely). But you cannot pass from "back to the roots" to "button and awesome combined" without looking ridiculous and loosing credibility. The fanbase of each game is a vocal minority off course. But they are the ones who can advertise the game for free or bash it anywere on the web. Word of mouth is one of the the key of the success of every game.

Everyone seems to play at friend's house nowaday... and people claim that they do not like MP in RPGs If you have really disliked DA2, there is no way to save the DLC. But it's objective that the DLCs are an improvement over DA2 most glaring shortcomings (recycle, variety and encounter design).

This. Moreover, it's easy to be popular bashing DA2 related products, like it's easy to be popular praising TW2 (in a post on the BW board there was a guy that said something like that "I've not played TW2 but I will vote it as RPG of the year because everyone say that it's good"). Why? I don't know for sure and I could be wrong but I see those reasons: - Bioware completely missed the comunication with the existing player base. I mean, Silvermann should be fired on the spot for what he has done to the franchise's image. DA2 marketing was a complete disaster. Fight like a spartan? Button and awesome? Really? You should never advertise a game bashing its prequel. - Then, because it's fantasy, it's an RPG (more: it's the last party based and stat based AAA RPG in the market, like it or not) and it looks and plays a litte bit clunky (like the classical geek who wants to be cool, while DA:O was a geek who was happy to be a geek). It's the perfect target and it does not have the protection of the grognard like me anymore . - What is true for the critics is true even for many players. DA2 has many flaws and it's the Bioware title I enjoyed less beside JE but it's not that pile of crap (and DA:O is not that perfect and imparable gem). It's easy to look intelligent, smart and cool bashing DA2 (repeating the same obtuse criticism). And maybe, the popularity of DA2' bashing explains the moderated reaction here and in other places that are not that affectionate to Bioware.