Niten_Ryu

I've been playing a lot of Dawn of War 2. I was thinking about doing "Let's play" on Primarch and get 5 stars on speed, but I've found out that for some levels, it seem really hard to do (especially with my rahter limited MPS). For example early mission "The True Enemy" seem to require sub 6 min run (as I got 4 stars for 6 min run). Combine this with horrible save system and I think you'd actually have to be speedrunning in order to complite 5 stars. I don't think I have patience or the skills for that.

Where's the youtube videos ?

Company of Heroes, Total War games and Dawn of War series all use squad based units. For old skool RTS it's always individual units, who can form a squad. I just played Dawn of War 2 on Primarch difficulty and it's sometimes really painful to get squads to move fast enough where you want 'em (especially in boss fights). While my micro skills are abysmal, I'm not sure if moving to squad based units is improvement in the genre.

That's why I said "Even giants like Blizzard are feeling the pressure and it comes mostly from their own old games.". If we're talking about RTS, nothing that Relic or Creative Assembly have done surpassed Blizzards Starcraft. So obviously Blizzard ain't gonna start ripping of those games, when they can just continue where they left with their own game. Same for Diablo series. We don't have that many successful AAA genres left in game biz anymore so yes, to use 10+ years old game mechanics probably would be terrible for any other company then Blizzard (and all those JRPG developers who continue to abuse same formula over and over again). We have first person shooters, sport games, action adventure games, sandboxes... and CRPGs (and MMOGs + social worlds). In all those genres we have seen some changes (evolution or de-evolution? ).

Blizzard definately can't do whatever their designers want. Their last original IP was 12 years ago. Last spinoff 6 years ago. Last sequel is very much alike as the original game 12 years ago. Also Diablo 3 will be very much like previous games in that series. This is not because their designers are out of ideas, it's because of financial realities. Every minor change that they make for the World of Warcraft is ultimately based on financial realities. Sure, they have tried all kinds of crazy things but always ended up fixing 'em later on. Even storyline is constantly being adjusted to fit the current trends. Blizzard has extremely talented designers but even they have to think how the majority will react to their work.

That was an truely amazing replay. I've seen countless of replays of different games but I don't think I've ever seen ending like this.

That is absolutely true. Financial realities make sure that certain design choices just can't be done. Actually since more and more design choices go the the"no no" category, soon there might be only "the one correct way

Noober in Baldurs Gate

I have to say I've grown to like Warhammer universe. Especially how every race is more or less bastards. From caste system communist utilitarians Tau to xeno hating mankind. There's Chaos, Nekros, Dark Eldar who have no redeeming qualities at all. Then there's force of nature type of races like Orks or Tyranids (although I kinda dislike how similar their zerg rush tactics are). I've always loved settings where knowledge is lost and modern day is way less technologically advanced then eons ago. Like Warhammer 40k or Star Wars. Also the fact that scale is just right, a galaxy (it's huge, but not infinite). I recently bought Dawn of War games from Steam holiday sales and just finished last game, expansion for the Dawn of War 2. I really liked the campaign, and with few changes it could have been pure CRPG.

They chose to go with the year 1912... Red Dead Redemption was 1911 (but obviously complitely different area of the US) but otherwise that time period is rarely seen in games. Great american isolation (but still many armed conflicts in central america) and Taft as president I'm looking forward to this.

Given how popular GTA games are, I'm really suprised none has bothered to try modern day sandbox CRPG. I mean GTA San Andreas with few minor changes to stat system, conversation options and less linear main storyline and that would have been enough for me. Modern Warfare 2 is one of the most popular games of this generation and it only reached that level of popularity then it moved away from WW2. Nowadays even vampires are set in modern day environment. Twilight movies, True Blood, Vampire Diaries ect ect are very popular. Troika was few years too early for the trend

Accurate sales data is really hard to find. In company quaterly result sheets there's usually shipped number (as it's obviously better number then games sold in retail or in digital download). Steam numbers are impossible to get and even NPD report only US numbers. Generally US numbers (shipped or sold in retail) might be 30% to 100% higher then in rest of the world. Then add games sold on consoles and games sold on PC. Ugh... getting very complex. If Bioware say that console DA sold much better then PC version, I'll belive 'em as second hand data like VGcharts support it. Speaking of VGcharts, they rank ME sales higher (both US and worldwide) then ME2. Maybe ME2 sold about 500k more copies on PC then ME, as it'd make ME2 more popular overall. My guess was that PC version of DA would sold about 750k, but it might have been bit lower or higher, depending on digital version sales. I can't find any info where it's said that Mass Effect 2 has sold more then Dragon Age. Numbers from VGchartz (consoles, both US and worldwide) Mass Effect: 2,26 million Mass Effect 2: 1,88 million Dragon Age: 2,57 million Dragon Age is said to be sold (or probably shipped) 3,2 million units, thus PC sales would have been about 630k. For ME2 to beat DA, PC version of ME2 sales should have been 1,32 million copies. Possible, but that number is probably too high.

Axing toolset makes sense. Easier to sell DLCs (for those who are stupid enough to buy 'em) when community can't create content or balance fixes.

65% rounded up is 7 / 10 and that's the same score I'd give to the game after 4 full runs and rest of origins done. A solid 7 / 10. Cut encounters down to 1/2 or 2/3, fix balance issues and do few storyline changes I'd give it 8 / 10. Personally I'm not too worried about losing top down view, as Dragon Age ain't most tactically challencing game. For it to be the console game first and PC game distant second, also means that difficulty curve is tuned to minium.

700k units shipped to retailers. AP hit bargain bin few weeks after release and was even on Steams holiday sales. Still, it's sad that game industry is in such shape as it is. Generation ago 700k shipped would have been ok sales and sequel probably in development (also good way to fix problems of the first game or in general make improvements).

I'm not sure about that. Plot holes are essential part of the Blizzard experince. That and retcon

Morgoth is right about this. They recycle their story elements but only because they have found out that majoirty of their potential customers don't care about that, or might even prefer the same ol' storylines kinda like in JRPGs. They have guts to do all game mechanic changes that seem stupid at first (like removing jump) but in the end they know their customers. They are generally really bad players and thus removing something like jump might even make the game batter for 'em. And at the same time save a lot of level designers time and other resources. Just about every change Bioware make, can be justified by being cost effective versus something they did in the past. We players might not like it but they have figured that it don't hurt the sales too much. Bioware ain't immune. With some game they might make a huge mistake, that majority of the gamers hate (especially since they have to release games much faster then Rockstar, Valve or Blizzard). They have resources to survive from that and maybe then they take few steps back and research again what worked in the past.

Personally I like the redesign of the qunari model, as it was obvious that first Dragon Age used unibody system and thus it would have created too much work to make personal set of helmets for the Stern only (or the few mercs we saw in game). And I'll accept "Wizard did it" reason for it

I'd say they don't need to cut sex, babies and families. They need to cut the "romance" part. Well, maybe not cut down complitely as romances are very popular among the Bioare fans but... Heroes of these CRPGs are prime alpha males (or females). GTA San Andreas and GTA4 get this. The Witcher get it. Bioware don't, as you end up chasing some tail untill the end of the game like in some pathetic harlequins books. Let the "hero" have his legion of the bastards or force him into loveless shotgun wedding (if the daddy is more powerful then the player character). I'd take that over cheesy romance

These days I play RTS singleplayer only. I just don't have skills, the time (to train) or the APM to be any good in multiplayer. Sure, I used to think I was "good" in Dune2, Warcraft or Command and Conquer days, but in reality I was only playing against my friends, who were just worse then me I can (usually) beat computer on hardest difficulty but that don't help at all against human opponents.

Bah, Bioware continues to design encounters where players position is about the worst possible and enemies have the superior advantage that would make Sun Tzu proud. It gets old really fast to be tactical idiot after dialogue or moving into new area. It also creates huge balance issues. Mages, followed by ranged have huge advantage in situations where players position terrible. And it's not likes mages needed more advantages over rest of the classes.

It's not being cool or uncool but the basic design issue. If designers wanted, they could call Rogue class Shadowhumper but that probably wouldn't change the fact that class would play the same as all the other rogue classes. It's same with darkspawn - They are very similar to orcs. I'd say they are extremely similar to LotR orcs, the setting that made 'em popular.

I chuckled when I saw that. Dude writes on a gaming site about video games, and he's trying to make himself out to be "cool" because he doesn't know the difference between ogres, orcs, or goblins? Who's he fooling? I don't wanna defend the current garbage state of game journalism, but ain't that IGN dude just there just to report on Comic Con in general. Thus might not even played the original Dragon Age at all. To be honest, I couldn't tell the difference between generic orc and darkspawn if I wouldn't have played the game. Heck, I can barely tell the difference now.

Gromnir is correct about the differences. My first run was on hard difficulty (PC version), Rogue main character and Morrigan had minor healing spell. Redding swarm was the most difficult battle in the game for me on that run. Next run I had Mage main character, went to Mage Tower first and thus had 3 mage party. On hard difficulty Redding was a joke with that party setup.

After spending millions, MicroSoft finally find the obvious answer - Mouse + Keyboard is much better for FPS then console controllers Duh! This was one of those "sky is blue" studies.