"Dragon Age II is not a brand new game; It's a better, more-refined version of Dragon Age: Origins," explained executive producer Mark Darrah during a recent press event at BioWare's Edmonton studio. Darrah's take on Dragon Age II should be heartening for anxious fans of the first, yet his take -- thus-far consistent with the larger marketing push -- seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
Since it was announced Dragon Age II has come under fire from ostensible fans for its changes to combat, player agency, dialogue, and continuity. "It's extrapolation to the worst possible extreme," a bemused Mike Laidlaw, lead designer, explained to me in a later interview.
For my money, insofar as my time with Dragon Age II, Darrah's assessment is apt. Four hours isn't long enough to make a judgment call on what will probably be a sprawling narrative, but the basic mechanics are as sound as, if not better than, their predecessors.
Dragon Age II begins with an interrogation: Varric -- dwarven crossbowman, entrepeneur, ne'er-do-well -- is being rough handled by Cassandra, a seeker looking for information on the Champion of Kirkwall. This Champion is Hawke, an attractive female rogue with red hair and emerald eyes, and Varric supposedly knows where she is. The dwarf begins his testimony:
Hawke and her family are fleeing the destruction of Lothering but find themselves cornered by darkspawn. They cut down the darkspawn lines easily, stopping only to make grandiloquent speeches to reaffirm their determination. Hawke and her sister slaughter wave after wave of darkspawn and easily butcher an ogre before unleashing a dragon to destroy the rest of the hor--
"Bullshit!" Cassandra rudely interrupts. "Tell me what really happened."
Varric restarts his story.

Better killing through holistic design
Varric's hyperbolic account of Hawke's escape from Lothering functions in two ways -- it serves as the game's tutorial while establishing Dragon Age II's narrative conceit.
In Varric's version of events Hawke is decked out in impressive armor, carrying what look like a pair of bat'leth. She and her sister face three distinct waves of darkspawn, and their respective skills get more impressive after each wave. Neither Hawke nor her brother, Bethany, can die during the introduction, and there are plenty of enemies to go around -- the result is a safe arena for new players to explore different skills and familiarize themselves with the basics of tactical pausing, camera operation, and hot-keyed abilities.
You'll notice, perhaps, that the fundamentals of combat in Dragon Age II haven't changed much vis-a-vis their Origins counterparts. Mark Darrah's go-to comment on the combat has been that, "When you push a button, something awesome happens." But Darrah needs clarification: the presentation layer has changed, but the mechanics haven't. Dragon Age II is still a stat-driven, Dungeons and Dragons-based game -- replete with inventory screens, if-then tactical Rube Goldberg machines, and little numbers coming out of heads.
Standard melee attacks trigger a little bit faster -- thanks in large part to smoother animations -- and while it looks like a kind of combo, there's nothing mathematically different than four straight melee attacks from Origins. However, the combat has changed somewhat: BioWare has added a layer of spatial awareness to each character's skillset, which the team call "closing attacks."
David Gaider, lead writer for Dragon Age II, describes the problems they wanted to fix with closing attacks:
The combat was fun, but, it wasn't responsive. Especially, I think what was bothersome was how slow it was, in terms of you doing something and finally executing it. For instance, the Shield Bash. When you SB somebody, you knock them down, and if you then try to attack them while they were down, by the time it sort of lined up the animation and you shuffled into place and finally swang your weapon ...
Q: They were back up?
A: They were back up.
Dual-wielding rogues and warriors will find these types of movement-based skills especially useful, allowing them to close down gaps between enemies and allies. Another similarly useful addition is that characters can now turn and attack in the same animation. The result in a more kinetic and spatial experience built on top of Dragon Age's RPG foundations. Complimented by the colorful new art direction, Dragon Age II's combat offers the visual rewards of an action game but without being mindless or mealy-mouthed.
That's not to say that some other writers at the event didn't try to Dynasty Warriors their way through the first few hours of the game, but they saw the game over screen a lot more often than I did.

The Quartermaster
If you look at Dragon Age II's combat and still can't contain your apoplexy, take a deep breath and open your character menus. Marvel at how clean and intuitive they are, spend a minute experimenting with your equipment, and watch as the game automatically derives your damage-per-second. With the power of math behind you, I'm sure you'll find the strength to admit that there isn't much hack-and-slashing going on.
Perhaps the truly hardcore like doing their own calculations, but Dragon Age II is full of small design changes that make the user-experience a lot smoother and clearer, including (perhaps most importantly) an overhauled skill tree.
Several familiar abilities make the cut from Origins, but the new focus on spatial relationships calls for new skills to take advantage of them. The new skills -- in conjunction with melee options for ranged attackers -- make, say, a rogue archer build useful for the first time. There are also warrior skills that, for example, get stronger when your tank is surrounded by enemies. It's obvious that BioWare took time looking at different builds and playing to their strengths.
I also particularly like the new skill trees because they're so much more flexible than the Origins tables. Very few of the skills have prerequisites, and you can choose to spend points improving your useful skills -- make them faster, or cost less -- instead of wasting them on skills that don't fit into your build or play style.
The last major improvement in user experience includes crafting -- instead of collecting individual ingredients, Hawke has access to resource deposits that any craftsman in Kirkwall can use. Natural resources -- elfroot patches, lyrium veins -- can be found in the caves and hills surrounding Kirkwall, which gives players an extra incentive to explore and complete quests that they might've otherwise ignored.

In medias res
What I particularly like about Varric's introduction of the game is the neat way that it locks his perception into the gameplay -- Varric already knows that Hawke is the Champion, and it makes sense that he would present her as a devastating warrior. It's convenient that being a devastating warrior is a nice, safe way to introduce complex ideas to new players without scaring them off. "We give the player a chance to just bust out for a minute," Laidlaw told me. "Here you go; here's two minutes, go nuts. Cone of Cold, Fireball, rain fire down on your foes. That's cool, that's the mage experience in terms of combat."
But the frame narrative -- the hoity-toity name for "a story within a story" -- does more than set up a tutorial. It sets up a certain amount of narrative distance and flexibility that isn't possible in what writer David Gaider calls "walk and talk" RPGs: "You're in every step that the player takes, talking to every person that the player talks to." Gaider continues, "And, I mean, that's cool. A lot of RPGs do that. But ... it also limits the types of stories you can tell."
Gaider described a more novelistic approach to Dragon Age II, with Varric serving as unreliable narrator, playing fast and loose with chronology. Varric glosses over Hawke's first year in Kirkwall, for example -- it's simply not important to him. These moments create a certain amount of distance between the player and Hawke as player-character: Hawke greets players as old friends even though the player has never seen them; supporting characters develop their own nuanced relationships with Hawke that the player is left to parse.
The result is two fold: relationships feel organic and natural because they aren't saddled by long, overblown exposition; and Kirkwall feels immediately more reactive to Hawke's presence. Instead of a text box or an epilogue detailing the consequences of your choices, the extended timeframe gives Hawke enough time to see them first-hand. When one of your followers loses a loved one, you see it in her body language and her dialogue with Hawke, not forty hours later. Dragon Age II manifests the "show, do not tell" adage of storytelling.
I mentioned earlier that I only played about four hours of Dragon Age II -- I only experienced one timequake -- but a bit of hard thinking leads me to believe that the benefits of the frame narrative are bountiful indeed. Keeping the narrative locally focused but chronologically expansive allows BioWare to limit the number of active quests. Gone are the doldrums of constantly shuffling between Denerim and Orzammar for this or that fetch quest -- BioWare promises a focused narrative with an equally focused gameplay arc.

Dragon Age II is refined, polished, and clean, the result of a unified vision focused on reaping the intangible benefits of tactical planning and deep thinking -- it simply feels good to see your team cinematically executing your vision. The same compulsion I felt to buy Awakenings is at work in Dragon Age II: namely, I get a deistic kick out of tinkering, experimenting, and setting my creation loose. And the Dragon Age franchise -- with its labyrinthine systems and mechanics -- simply enables me to do so better than any game in the past several years.
Bait and switch? I mean, I'm GLAD it's still very mathmatically heavy, but this is an ENTIRELY different tune than they were singing for DA2's announcement. I'm pretty sure they said something like "forget all the comparisons to Dungeons and Dragons style combat" - then a dev in this playtest says "the presentation layer has changed, but the mechanics haven't. Dragon Age 2 is still a stat-driven, Dungeons and Dragons-based game"
Weird.
I am more than okay with massive overhauls in all of these departments. So far, I'm still unconvinced. It's very possible this franchise just isn't for me but as a huge Bioware fan since I started gaming (they got me into it after all) I want to believe otherwise.
(PS--I am talking about the camera there.;)
BUT MY GUT SAYS IT WON'T BE GOOD! And how can I not trust my gut!? My gut knows when I should have a sandwich, and then it knows when I don't need to eat a sandwich. Surely it's the smartest organ in my body.
I mean sure, we know next to nothing about the game. I mean, SURE we haven't worked on it, and have only seen a bit of footage. And sure, catering to nostalgic fan's memories of old PC games are BIOWARE'S TOP PRIORITY, (instead of, ya know, streamlining it to allow it reach a more accessible audience, thus improving revenue).
But if I'm not pausing the game every 4 seconds to issue commands, how do I know if I'm having FUN!?! I SIMPLY CAN'T DEAL with change! ALL CHANGE IS BAD, FOREVER. As an internet user, I'M ENTITLED to say it's shit, just because I HEARD OTHER PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET SAY IT WAS GOING TO BE SHIT! I, I, I mean.... COME ON - THAT'S LOGIC 101 RIGHT THERE!
I know you're makin' a point bro, and it's good it's good, but it's dangerous out there. Take this.
Cannot wait for DA2.
One thing I don't understand in the article is that it states that some relationships are already formed when you see them for the first time like Hawke greeting someone you just saw in a friendly manner. The article said that this is better than a long, drawn out relationship that you build up like in DA1. I don't see how that is the case. How is being presented with a relationship that is already made without any of the player's input more natural than allowing the player to build it up from the first meeting to the endgame screen?
@Joemonoe: I didn't mean to suggest that you don't get to explore your relationships with other characters. But having some of the groundwork laid down makes things smoother and more organic, in my opinion. It takes out a lot of expository dialogue and replaces it with actual conversations between friends.
BTW, the doctor said I needed moar Leray, this helps.
Cool story bro.
<a href="http://www.simplypleasure.com">sex toys</a>
http://www.simplypleasure.com
This is a sentiment that's cool to throw around; partially shown by Korolev's comment as well as the quote. Really though, what "streamlining" means is taking responsibility away from the player. I'm sure an AI could kick the game's arse in the hardest mode but then I wouldn't be playing it...
Don't get me wrong, I know that companies shouldn't block chances for a bigger player base and maybe some people would like to watch a 100 hour game-film but maybe some options would be nice for those who want to play a game.
Why aren't there more options in games? Option screens can't be the hardest things to code can they? Worms 2 had good options.
And, honestly, I played DA2 the same way I did DA:O -- lots of pausing and setting traps. I *really* don't think its streamlined to the point that "responsibility is taken away."
If the game auto-deriving my PPS is "streamlined," then I think we're on two totally different levels.
The combat was not one of those respects.
After dying a hundred times on one fight, I switched to Easy and never looked back. I loved KOTOR's combat, and in a lot of respects, DA:O had a better version of that. But I did not love DA:O's combat, because it never felt like I was really in control. I could have learned how to program the AI just so (and work around its ridiculous lack of a simple "if-then" system, which even FFXII had - PLEASE, GOD, BIOWARE, PLEASE FIX THAT OVERSIGHT), but that would have defeated the purpose of playing the thing, because I like to learn what works when I play.
I suppose that was my biggest issue with the combat, really: there was no way to tell what worked best. It was kind of... Things either died or they didn't. Purposeful occlusion of feedback can be a very effective tool in the game designer's arsenal, but when the game is a tactics-heavy RPG that relies on careful preparation and planning, it's important that players be given some clue as to how to proceed. Otherwise, we'll just spam the few attacks that seem to work well without a second thought.
Awakening was much smarter about presenting information to the player and making all classes feel relevant, but I still used five percent of the abilities ninety-five percent of the time, because there was no incentive to branch out.
My point is, if DA2's combat can succeed in viscerally engaging me, then I'll be very pleased. It looks awesome, but more importantly, they seem to understand the two things I hated most about DA:O's combat, which were the failure to let me successfully adapt to the changing conditions of the battles and the failure to let me really cut loose on the bad guys without having to babysit the AI. I might just play this one on Normal again.
@Ffordesoon - "I switched to Easy and never looked back". "I still used five percent of the abilities ninety-five percent of the time". Hmmm. I played through on hard first time and found the first ogre to be the biggest ball-ache. I killed those dick elves too.
@Ffordesoon - "I switched to Easy and never looked back". "I still used five percent of the abilities ninety-five percent of the time". Hmmm. I played through on hard first time and found the first ogre to be the biggest ball-ache. I killed those dick elves too.
No, Bioware, you've already lost me.
- People who hated DA:O combat, people who accept the changes : Console Gamer
- People who liked DA:O combat, people who reject the changes : PC Gamer
Am I right here, or is there something I'm missing?
As a person who played the PC version (aka the FAR superior version) all I want DA 2 to be is
- be a lot bigger and longer than DA:O (teehee thats what she said)
- Have a toolset for modding (one that actually works)
- Have the isometric tactical camera (Ala baldur's gate)
different tune than they were singing for DA2's announcement. I'm pretty sure they said something like "forget all the comparisons to Dungeons and Dragons style combat" - then a dev in this playtest says rental cars
"the presentation layer has changed, but the mechanics haven't. Dragon Age 2 is still a stat-driven, Dungeons and Dragons-based game"