Dragon Age Discussion

Deadly_Nightshade · February 7, 2009

No it's not. CD-check? That can be easily bypassed by a Nocd-Crack.

Well, technicaly, it came with a "crack" as you could install it any play it without installing/triggering SecuROM.

Starwars · February 7, 2009

Combat looks pretty much like NWN2 as far as I can see. It also seems to suffe89r a bit from the same thing (which Chris Priestly kinda confirmed on his report after playing the game over Christmas) which is that it mostly seems to be balanced towards having the AI (which is generally el stupido in these types of games) controlling your party members. Chris said something like "sometimes the game is so challenging that I had to take control of my party members", which is not exactly a good sign as far as I'm concerned.

Will this lead to every battle being a cakewalk for us people who like to micromanage the party? I hope not, but I really won't be surprised if that is how it turns out.

Pop · February 7, 2009

Is there an action queue? I didn't see one. Without one it would be sort of difficult to micromanage combat without it slowing to a crawl.

aries101 · February 7, 2009

:blink:

Having the sex - ehm - romance - scenes in DA: Origins be so that certain aspects of the romances in Jade Empire will look tame

:blink:

How would they do this?

A foursome?

Btw, here are the thread from the Bioware forums that Aria Leonsbane started:

http://dragonage.bioware.com/forums/viewto...um=135&sp=0

And apparently Lacia de Lammermoor is an opera written by Donizetti about a women who is forced to marry a man that her brother wants her to marry, then stabs him in the back on their wedding night and go mad; thereafter she sings an aria known as 'il suono dou' (thanks to google and wikipedia for this info)

On a somewhat more serious note; I like what I am hearing --- 80-90 hours long...bad thinhs happen...choice and some consequence is in

And this Lucia di Lammermoor is apparently one of the Orgin stories for the female elves --- yes, some origin stories will be different if you play as a man or female in this game...

Yet more

edit:

Did you know that you can speedrun through Fallout, the first one, in under just 10 minutes or so ??

Edited February 7, 2009 by aries101

Tigranes · February 7, 2009

Did you know that you can speedrun through Fallout, the first one, in under just 10 minutes or so ??

Well known fact, but surely irrelevant to the general lengths of games.

aries101 · February 7, 2009

Did you know that you can speedrun through Fallout, the first one, in under just 10 minutes or so ??

Well known fact, but surely irrelevant to the general lengths of games.

Yes, I know. It probably is.

However, people always seem to complain about gamelength. For Mass Effect (1) the main story takes about 2 hours to complete, I think? if you do a speed run. The point I'm trying to make is that if you want to do so, you can finish Mass Effect (1) in 2 hours -- or just play the main story for about 10-12 (or 15) hours.

For DA: Origins, I will probably play through the game - all 80-90 hours of it - while other will play maybe half that time or even a 20-30 hours...

Moatilliatta · February 7, 2009

Will this lead to every battle being a cakewalk for us people who like to micromanage the party? I hope not, but I really won't be surprised if that is how it turns out.

I'd say it obviously will since the general opinion is that combat is boring and people shouldn't have to be interested in it. I do seem to remember the devs talking about potentially having quests that aren't critical to the plot be more difficult than the plot critical ones, which potentially could lead to decent fights.

Purkake · February 7, 2009

Will this lead to every battle being a cakewalk for us people who like to micromanage the party? I hope not, but I really won't be surprised if that is how it turns out.

I'd say it obviously will since the general opinion is that combat is boring and people shouldn't have to be interested in it. I do seem to remember the devs talking about potentially having quests that aren't critical to the plot be more difficult than the plot critical ones, which potentially could lead to decent fights.

Yeah I had the same problem with MotB, there were so many cool spells to use, but the enemies would either die from a few hits or not be worth the trouble. Why can't anyone do it like in BG2? It was so much fun to figure out what defenses a mage/cleric had and use the proper spells to remove them. A single Finger of Death could kill anyone if you didn't have the proper defenses and most enemies played mostly by the actual rules.

Starwars · February 7, 2009

Here's a report from someone who got to play the game a bit: http://dragonage.bioware.com/forums/viewto...um=135&sp=0

He has more posts throughout the thread, so it's not just the first post.

The injury system sounds all-right I suppose, though I still find the lack of a real death system extremely disappointing. What is a bit worriesome is that the guy only had one character "death" throughout the demo despite never having played the game before. Still, I suppose the difficulty could be tweaked since it's a demo, but... eh.

Seems to play quite a bit like NWN2 judging from this guys impressions.

Edited February 7, 2009 by Starwars

Slowtrain · February 8, 2009

since the general opinion is that combat is boring and people shouldn't have to be interested in it.

Of whose general opinon do you speak? Is this what the devs have said?

Slowtrain · February 8, 2009

lack of a real death system extremely disappointing.

Death systems are very difficult to implement in any game that allows one to save anywhere, at any time, with no penalty. I'm not saying the one is DA is going to be great or even good, but I can't fault developers for trying to come with some sort of system that works.

Save points or XP penalties would be an easy fix, but most CRPG developers probably don't want to annoy fans with that sort of solution.

I would support either one, personally. I think XP penaties for saves would be great.

Purkake · February 8, 2009

since the general opinion is that combat is boring and people shouldn't have to be interested in it.

Of whose general opinon do you speak? Is this what the devs have said?

Yeah, that's stupid. The combat will be boring if they think that it is boring and don't make it challenging, Catch-22 I guess.

lack of a real death system extremely disappointing.

Death systems are very difficult to implement in any game that allows one to save anywhere, at any time, with no penalty. I'm not saying the one is DA is going to be great or even good, but I can't fault developers for trying to come with some sort of system that works.

Save points or XP penalties would be an easy fix, but most CRPG developers probably don't want to annoy fans with that sort of solution.

I would support either one, personally. I think XP penaties for saves would be great.

I think that every PC game should have quicksave, not having it to make games more difficult is pretty much like gimping the controls in RE5 or Dead Space to make the games more "scarey". I think a good idea would be to have the age-old Infinity Engine can't-save-in-combat thing. That worked pretty well IMO.

As for death, I think that Xp-penalty and not readily available resurrection(not having raise dead coins or rods given to you) is good enough.

Edited February 8, 2009 by Purkake

Slowtrain · February 8, 2009

I think that every PC game should have quicksave, not having it to make games more difficult is pretty much like gimping the controls in RE5 or Dead Space to make the games more "scarey". I think a good idea would be to have the age-old Infinity Engine can't-save-in-combat thing. That worked pretty well IMO.

As for death, I think that Xp-penalty and not readily available resurrection(not having raise dead coins or rods given to you) is good enough.

I didn't mind the IE system personally. But I understand the thought that simply having to save right before a battle and then reload that save over and over again until your party doesn't die, isn't particularly challenging or interesting and is msotly just an exercise in tedious repetition.

The tradtional save/fight/reload when die system has worked in many great crpgs and tactical combat games like XCOM and Jagged Alliance, so its not something that bothers me. But I do think other systems could probably work better, since there really is no great significance to a battle that you can just fight over and over again simply by quick-loading a save until everything goes your way.

Purkake · February 8, 2009

I think that every PC game should have quicksave, not having it to make games more difficult is pretty much like gimping the controls in RE5 or Dead Space to make the games more "scarey". I think a good idea would be to have the age-old Infinity Engine can't-save-in-combat thing. That worked pretty well IMO.

As for death, I think that Xp-penalty and not readily available resurrection(not having raise dead coins or rods given to you) is good enough.

I didn't mind the IE system personally. But I understand the thought that simply having to save right before a battle and then reload that save over and over again until your party doesn't die, isn't particularly challenging or interesting and is msotly just an exercise in tedious repetition.

The tradtional save/fight/reload when die system has worked in many great crpgs and tactical combat games like XCOM and Jagged Alliance, so its not something that bothers me. But I do think other systems could probably work better, since there really is no great significance to a battle that you can just fight over and over again simply by quick-loading a save until everything goes your way.

I agree that is is far from ideal, but having to reload from a save point 30 minutes before the battle and play through all the same stuff again isn't better or more challenging it is just more time-consuming and frustrating.

Another system is the one in NWN2, where all your "dead" teammates just pop back to life after the battle. I find that system to be worse, because dieing looses it's impact.

Maybe a death's door system could work. Basically your guys would have "extra" hitpoints after they "die" and if they aren't healed in time or receive more damage they will die and have to be resurrected. This is pretty much the system in X-Com and Jagged Alliance, now that I think of it.

Slowtrain · February 8, 2009

I agree that is is far from ideal, but having to reload from a save point 30 minutes before the battle and play through all the same stuff again isn't better or more challenging it is just more time-consuming and frustrating.

heh. I agree, but it does give the concept of party death a entirely new level of sigficance.

Another system is the one in NWN2, where all your "dead" teammates just pop back to life after the battle. I find that system to be worse, because dieing looses it's impact.

My guess would be that the devs would argue that it is just a more convenient way of repeatedly quick-loading your last save.

Maybe a death's door system could work. Basically your guys would have "extra" hitpoints after they "die" and if they aren't healed in time or receive more damage they will die and have to be resurrected. This is pretty much the system in X-Com and Jagged Alliance, now that I think of it.

You're right. It is. And it led to some pretty dramatic rescues in Jag 2, let me tell you. Nothing worse than being halfway through a tough battle and suddenly have Scope exposed by a break light and shot full of holes. Its actually pretty cool some of the rescues my teams have been able to pull off of critically wounded mercs.

In XCom it wasn't such a big deal since the squaddies were all nameless cannon fodder for the most part. Except of course the ones with 60 bravery that you had carefully nurtured for thirty missions.

Killian Kalthorne · February 8, 2009

Some people, like myself, would like to see dead means dead. That is why IE games are pretty much still tops my list. I can play BG1, and whoops Khalid dies, and I can't raise him. Well, strip him of his gear, ditch the body, and move on. That was my choice to play like that. If I wanted to keep him alive I would reload. The system in current games like NWN2, the KotORs, and the like are just lame. It removes the choice from the player.

Purkake · February 8, 2009

I agree that is is far from ideal, but having to reload from a save point 30 minutes before the battle and play through all the same stuff again isn't better or more challenging it is just more time-consuming and frustrating.

heh. I agree, but it does give the concept of party death a entirely new level of sigficance.

Another system is the one in NWN2, where all your "dead" teammates just pop back to life after the battle. I find that system to be worse, because dieing looses it's impact.

My guess would be that the devs would argue that it is just a more convenient way of repeatedly quick-loading your last save.

Maybe a death's door system could work. Basically your guys would have "extra" hitpoints after they "die" and if they aren't healed in time or receive more damage they will die and have to be resurrected. This is pretty much the system in X-Com and Jagged Alliance, now that I think of it.

You're right. It is. And it led to some pretty dramatic rescues in Jag 2, let me tell you. Nothing worse than being halfway through a tough battle and suddenly have Scope exposed by a break light and shot full of holes. Its actually pretty cool some of the rescues my teams have been able to pull off of critically wounded mercs.

In XCom it wasn't such a big deal since the squaddies were all nameless cannon fodder for the most part. Except of course the ones with 60 bravery that you had carefully nurtured for thirty missions.

You really like Scope, don't you? I like Raven more

Are there actually any other options for death mechanics? Other than dead=dead.

Some people, like myself, would like to see dead means dead. That is why IE games are pretty much still tops my list. I can play BG1, and whoops Khalid dies, and I can't raise him. Well, strip him of his gear, ditch the body, and move on. That was my choice to play like that. If I wanted to keep him alive I would reload. The system in current games like NWN2, the KotORs, and the like are just lame. It removes the choice from the player.

Yeah, being able to ditch characters should always be an option. I get way too attached to the characters to let them die, but I can see why some people would prefer it.

Killian Kalthorne · February 8, 2009

If you get attached to a character that makes the death even more dramatic and good role playing. WHen Imoen was killed in BG2 when I shifted into beast form that had a lot of impact on me. I wasn't able to raise her either so it even had a deeper impact which made the story of the Bhaalspawn even more dramatic and tragic. I loved it. You just do not see that in today's games. It seems to me that the developers don't have the balls to allow for such consequences any more. No offense, but it seems to be all mainstreamy and spoonfed.

Edited February 8, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

Purkake · February 8, 2009

If you get attached to a character that makes the death even more dramatic and good role playing. WHen Imoen was killed in BG2 when I shifted into beast form that had a lot of impact on me. I wasn't able to raise her either so it even had a deeper impact which made the story of the Bhaalspawn even more dramatic and tragic. I loved it. You just do not see that in today's games. It seems to me that the developers don't have the balls to allow for such consequences any more. No offense, but it seems to be all mainstreamy and spoonfed.

That's kinda like the make your own story. For me it's not dramatic and good role playing, but "damn I lost Imoen, I kinda liked her" *reload*. Or on a good day I'll drag her body along with me to a cleric and get her resurrected.

I guess I'm sad like that, but that's what most people are like AFAIK. I have nothing against them being able to die, though.

mkreku · February 8, 2009

I can't believe people seem to like those videos. I was certain everyone would be like "That looks like CRAP!", but you guys don't seem to be disturbed at all?! Personally I thought it looked absolutely horrible. Bad animations, bad camera angles, atrocious combat, even the interface looked like a complete World of Warcraft-ripoff!

I must be really starved for a RPG since I'm still hoping this will be playable.

Purkake · February 8, 2009

I can't believe people seem to like those videos. I was certain everyone would be like "That looks like CRAP!", but you guys don't seem to be disturbed at all?! Personally I thought it looked absolutely horrible. Bad animations, bad camera angles, atrocious combat, even the interface looked like a complete World of Warcraft-ripoff!

I must be really starved for a RPG since I'm still hoping this will be playable.

If you can zoom out a fair bit then it shouldn't look so bad. It's no worse than Neverwinter Nights 2, right? I can put up with bad animations and graphics if the story is good.

Maria Caliban · February 8, 2009

They have posters for each of the six origins. Another BioWare forumite at NYCC took pictures of them:

Human Noble

Elf Mage (can be elf or human mage)

Dwarf Noble

Dwarf Commoner

Alienage Elf

And there's the Dalish Elf one on the website itself.

since the general opinion is that combat is boring and people shouldn't have to be interested in it.

Of whose general opinon do you speak? Is this what the devs have said?

The developers have said nothing like that.

Edited February 8, 2009 by Maria Caliban

WILL THE ALMIGHTY · February 8, 2009

I can't believe people seem to like those videos. I was certain everyone would be like "That looks like CRAP!", but you guys don't seem to be disturbed at all?! Personally I thought it looked absolutely horrible. Bad animations, bad camera angles, atrocious combat, even the interface looked like a complete World of Warcraft-ripoff!

I must be really starved for a RPG since I'm still hoping this will be playable.

I didn't have much interest or hope for this game anyways. And you have to expect the bioware fanboys will be all over it for no goddamn reason.

Maria Caliban · February 8, 2009

I didn't have much interest or hope for this game anyways. And you have to expect the bioware fanboys will be all over it for no goddamn reason.

Hmm.. I disagree. I enjoy BioWare games. BioWare is coming out with a new game. My interest seems quite reasonable.

If one of your favorite developers announces a new game, don't you get excited?

WILL THE ALMIGHTY · February 8, 2009

Just doesn't seem like my type of game. Looks so generic. :/

... and they're pulling the Jedi/Spectre/whatever was in JE or BG/Grey Warden **** again, but I think we've discussed this enough.

Same thing happened with Fallout 3. I just looked at the game and thought "I don't get it. What's so awesome about it?".

Dragon Age Discussion

Recommended Posts

Deadly_Nightshade

Starwars

Pop

aries101

Tigranes

aries101

Moatilliatta

Purkake

Starwars

Slowtrain

Slowtrain

Purkake

Slowtrain

Purkake

Slowtrain

Killian Kalthorne

Purkake

Killian Kalthorne

Purkake

mkreku

Purkake

Maria Caliban

WILL THE ALMIGHTY

Maria Caliban

WILL THE ALMIGHTY

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Forums

Activity