BioWare Dev Explains Why Dragon Age II Is Easier Than Origins

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
Kheapathic said:
I'm also willing to bet a lot of the people who are complaining are also PC elitists who enjoy micromanaging every character. This group only ups the difficulty to enlarge their epeen, they'd rather be catered to and keep everyone away, those unwashed masses would only cheapen their experience.
I certainly liked that the game was difficult but not for any of the silly reasons you present. Given how much of the game revolved around combat, if the game did not ensure that it was possible in most battles to actually fail then what purpose did said battle serve but to waste my time between cutscenes?

And, with respect to the game series billed as DA:O's spiritual predecessor (Baldur's Gate), this game is a cakewalk. At least you never have to resort to trial and error, or reload a game so you could stick new spells in your spellbook so you could counter the one off murder power of some run of the mill grunt that just wiped the party. And at least in DA:O, if a character dies but you win the battle they can just get back up rather than having to march to a temple to find a healer to revive them.

As far as I'm concerned, DA:O found a happy middle ground. Difficult enough that combat was actually a threat but not maddeningly so like in Baldur's Gate (A game I literally only slogged through because of the story).

Kheapathic said:
I find it refreshing, it's nice having an actual Backstab command which puts me on the enemies back instead of me working my way through 10+ darkspawn to hopefully get on someones back. I also bet most of the whiners don't play DMC or Ninja Gaiden, they're probably too busy using their graphics card as an epeen pump.
I find it strange that you would so dislike a move called "backstab" because it forces you to maneuver. More to the point, it wasn't even remotely difficult to move to a flank in order to perform the backstab actions unless the enemy was incredibly tightly bunched (in which case the response is "pick a better tactic rather than trying to force an obviously unsuitable one to work").
 

TheMadJack

New member
Apr 6, 2010
111
0
0
I don't care and the difficulty settings. I'll "fix" that as I'll play to suit my need. I played, actually trying to finish the first installment, at normal and it's not that bad. But the AI is so bad that you -have- to micromanage. Although I usually hate that, I can cope.

What pisses me off though is the terribly dumbed down GUI. Am I the only one thinking that? It's ugly, simplistic, and... ugly. This look more like a hack & slash interface than RPG to me. Mana/health/stamina "buttons" to mash to heal!? Come ON!

I will wait for bargain before buying.

Is this what happens when you get bought by EA? I guess so. Dumb it down for the mass... *sigh*
 

Darkauthor81

New member
Feb 10, 2007
571
0
0
Do.... want....

Must... resist urge.... to buy from corrupt money hungry EA....

;_;

Why? Why does it have to be the company that's bringing me the two games I want most.
 

voetballeeuw

New member
May 3, 2010
1,359
0
0
Well, that's nice to hear. I started DA:O on normal, got raped and had to put the difficulty down. My next playthrough though was on normal, which I completed. My whole problem with the game's difficulty was the brutality of the learning curve (which some people may enjoy). I'm happy that they eased up though, and anyone can always up their difficulty. The whole micro-managing part of DA:O is nearly impossible for me since I play on the 360.
 

Drake_Dercon

New member
Sep 13, 2010
462
0
0
I think that really makes sense, though the question remains: what does that make casual? Your character can be incredibly poorly built and still win most of the time? Enemies will walk up and politely grasp the sharp end of your sword, placing it over their hearts?

I probably shouldn't grief about this. I enjoyed DA:O for the story, world, interactions, immersion and atmosphere. If that's a game's theme, then everyone should be able to enjoy it sans obstruction.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Eclectic Dreck said:
I tend to think that the most obvious cause of difficulty in the game is the fact that a player can walk into an encounter incredibly ill prepared for it. Right after Ostagar, I gathered the elves as allies. Without a dedicated healer, my tank was constantly forced to consume healing items thus making it difficult for him to actually hold the attention of the enemy. Once I got a healer, the game became remarkably easy.

Another problem is that, for some classes at least, it takes quite awhile for them to be legitimately useful in combat. A low level tank has a hell of a lot of trouble holding aggro simply because their damage is garbage and they don't have many options for crow control. It isn't until level 8 (if memory serves) that you can even get an AOE taunt!
Consider that this game is supposed to be the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. In that game, mages are fairly useless for the first few levels, and even then, they are only truly powerful in short bursts before having to rest for 8 hours. Not only that, you have to chose what spells you think you're going to need, not all of which are equally useful in all situations. Additionally, your mage was always vulnerable because there was no such thing as taunting.

If an NPC gets killed, you have to drag all of his equipment and inventory (oh yeah, every character has his own inventory and can get weighed down for carrying too much) till you get to the nearest town and then pay to have him resurrected. If a character gets hit for too much damage, he turns into chunky salsa and you lose him permanently.

An encounter with a high level mage can leave your party time stopped, magically imprisoned for eternity, and outright slain by magic before you can even do anything unless you properly prepared for the fight.

Dragon Age is not hard.
 

Phoenix14

New member
Jul 5, 2010
125
0
0
Yeah I found that I couldn't just have a group with the characters I liked... I ALWAYS had to take Wynne and I ALWAYS had to take Alistair because you needed tank+healer combo to do anything...and honestly Wynne was the most boring character I had ever seen in any game.

Ultimately I ended up just making a healer character and I enjoyed the game significantly more.
 

AlternatePFG

New member
Jan 22, 2010
2,858
0
0
At first I thought Dragon Age was difficult. The first Ogre boss was a pain in the arse for me, and I ended up having to do a different character because I messed up so bad. After playing Baldur's Gate though, I thought Dragon Age was pretty damn easy on Normal.

Doesn't really matter to me though, I'll just start off on Hard.
 

Kiefer13

Wizzard
Jul 31, 2008
1,548
0
0
I didn't find Origins all that taxing on normal difficulty. There was occasionally the odd fight that was slightly tricky and required more than one attempt at it, but for the most part I didn't think it was difficult. Then again, mages were pretty OP in Origins, and I'd consider myself fairly competent at party-style RPGs anyway. Hard it is for DA II, then.
 

SageRuffin

M-f-ing Jedi Master
Dec 19, 2009
2,005
0
0
Eclectic Dreck said:
SageRuffin said:
I find it refreshing, it's nice having an actual Backstab command which puts me on the enemies back instead of me working my way through 10+ darkspawn to hopefully get on someones back. I also bet most of the whiners don't play DMC or Ninja Gaiden, they're probably too busy using their graphics card as an epeen pump.
I find it strange that you would so dislike a move called "backstab" because it forces you to maneuver. More to the point, it wasn't even remotely difficult to move to a flank in order to perform the backstab actions unless the enemy was incredibly tightly bunched (in which case the response is "pick a better tactic rather than trying to force an obviously unsuitable one to work").
Uh, I didn't say that. Someone else did.

And even if I did, we'd still have to agree to disagree. You liked the combat mechanics in DA:O, I didn't. I like the combat mechanics as demonstrated by, uh, the demo, you don't. I agree the character models look a little bixarre and some of the animations are wonky, but I'll take the combat schemes of DA2 over DA:O any day.
 

lightning38

New member
Jul 14, 2009
95
0
0
Greg Tito said:
"To me, that's a fair expectation for 'normal,' it presents the player with difficulty to keep them interested but without it being frustrating and fist punching our controllers."
is there really any other kind of punching?
 

cystemic

New member
Jan 14, 2009
251
0
0
i have no problem with playing on casual, i know i suck at video games. on the contrary, its a sign of a challenging game that I seem to die every few minutes
 

CoverYourHead

High Priest of C'Thulhu
Dec 7, 2008
2,514
0
0
My only issue was that on consoles in the first there was no way to reliably control your party; you couldn't queue attacks or give them a set amount of actions to accomplish, so you had to micromanage everything in real time, which made me put it on casual so I wouldn't have to give a crap. Hopefully they'll fix that in DA II (haven't tried the demo yet).
 

Klepa

New member
Apr 17, 2009
908
0
0
Having grown up playing Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, and pretty much every Bioware RPG to date, I was pretty happy playing Dragon Age: Origins on Nightmare. The fun for me in the above-mentioned games, was arranging your characters and carefully aiming your CC and AoE spells, trying to beat impossible odds with nothing but tactical superiority.
Without a top down camera, I feel playing the game like that will be more annoying than anything else, so I'll probably go 'normal' and chop shit down with a big axe.
 

Slycne

Tank Ninja
Feb 19, 2006
3,422
0
0
I have been playing Orgins on hard to make it a more fulling experience and I was disappointed when I couldn't adjust the difficulty on the Dragon Age II demo when I noticed I hadn't needed to even touch potions.

However, I'm also aware enough to understand that my single experience does not a overall total make. Everyone who is posting to the effect of "I didn't think it was hard" should try and understand that as well. Gamers are not a single entity and neither you or I represent everyone.

So as long as high difficulty options are available(I really hope friendly fire isn't gone on higher levels too), I'm sure I'll still have fun with it.
 

Kilgengoor

New member
Sep 7, 2010
176
0
0
I didn't find Dragon Age: Origins difficult. Oh no sir, the difficulty was something I kinda expected. Every death made sense to me in the game world.

And that's my problem with Dragon Age: Origins. Its design. Some deliberate choices and some things that were plain wrong.

I come from Mass Effect, mind you, and I was frankly hoping to play something more Mass Effect-y than KOTOR-y. Seems like I was wrong. I don't like playing a "coral game" in which I can't rely on the orders I give to my group of heroes, moreso when ME did demonstrate you could stop the game, tell people where you want them to stand and they'd understand it. I don't like having to choose a Tank character or having to control one because the AI tank character isn't capable of properly directing a battle. I don't like having to stick to prefab characters or redirecting some of them to very specific tech trees so I can rebalance their skills and turn them into something actually useful so I can have the people I like in my squad. I don't like not being able to go back and do something that for some reason or the other forgot to do or did wrong and which cost me a powerful ally. But most of all, I didn't like how broken everything felt.

Look, Mass Effect didn't feel unbalanced in that every character could more or less stand their ground on their own. Maybe some were better in some situations, but you could always struggle yourself free from most situations. Your character could heal, so you wouldn't have to depend on the ONLY specialized healing character of the game that appears halfway an event which is in a series of happenings that you can tackle in whichever order you want without any clue whatsoever about which one could contain said character. Also, Mass Effect didn't have a class that was heavily handicapped in most of the game, which as luck would have it, was the archer class, the one I inadvertently picked.

Moreover, the general strategy mechanics was excessively literal and simple in my opinion. I remember one mission in which you had a wall of fire in front of you and there was a horde of zombies heading your way. You could tell your characters to stay in position, which would make them attack ONLY in case a zombie went for them, or allow them to charge at the zombies THROUGH THE FUCKING FLAMES. There wasn't a middle point. I also remember taking on a dragon where I couldn't just take my character and fire away at it while avoiding flames because the healer ran directly to its fiery breath, the Paladin did nothing to avoid the flames either, and unless I specifically told him to do so, my other ranged character would also ran right below its sharp claws. It wasn't difficult goddamit! It was simplistic! I could virtually think of a million ways to tackle any situation that I couldn't do unless I painstakingly controlled each and every character, moving them one step at the time and absolutely controlling every move. Not because the game wouldn't do anything on their own, but because they'd move like retarded sandbags just waiting to die.

You could argue it's a more KOTOR-ish game, but that's beside the point. Yes, I also had a hard time playing a ranged character in KOTOR, but that's because I didn't choose the right class once they gave me that shiny lightsaber. I don't know, what's the point of creating a character the likes of you and delicately crafting them to your liking if sooner or later you'll just have to control it like in a glorified strategy-RPG hybrid?

So, don't make it less difficult. Make it tighter. That's what I think.
 

Fearzone

Boyz! Boyz! Boyz!
Dec 3, 2008
1,241
0
0
Heh, yeah, as soon as they started talking about revising the difficulty levels for DA:2, I started wondering if that was the right marketing strategy. Reading through these comments confirms my doubts.

Basically BioWare is saying they are making the game easier so noobs will like it better.

It irritates the pro's and still doesn't really sound welcoming to casual's. The harder BioWare tries, like calling the lowest difficulty "casual" rather than "easy," the worse they make it.