Again, PC version will remain the same, both tactically if you so wish or more actiony.

The console version, according to Bioware, has gotten a new combat system, but I personally dont see it.
But watching that video of the 360 footage of both Dragon Age and Dragon Age 2, both seems to play the same, only thing different is that Dragon Age 2 looks faster and more stylish in the attack animations, thats it.

What gamble?

Nobody is saying the combat will be insane like Gaiden good is it?

You guys seemed all worked up or something for things we didnt said.

We are happy that the option to play it like an action RPG is there not that there will ZOMG amazing.

Jeez relax.

I think Kenshin summed it up perfectly; there's a real feeling that the game doesn't know what it wants to be. It's got no personality in my opinion.

I get the impression that, in trying to appeal to gamers like you and Sath, it's going to end up doing a lot of things averagely rather than focus on what actually made the first game - specifically on PC - so good. I could be wrong, but that's simply what I've concluded thus far based on everything I've seen and read. No more to it than that, really.Who's getting worked up? The only guys in this thread who are anywhere close to 'getting worked up' are you two. I don't care nearly enough about the franchise to get worked up over the changes being made; I just think it's a bad move on Bioware's part.

If it was up to me, I would have actually scrapped the console versions and made it solely for the PC as a tactical RPG. Like that would ever happen.

Well I have been playing Dragon Age on PS3 now for a few hours, and I love it.
Easier to target enemies and fight them, and faster to attack...only issue is that not all abilities are infront of you like PC version.

I am enjoying the combat alot, and if Bioware can polish it more and make it more as a console version to fit the controls more and not try to mimic PC version alot, I am sure its gonna be good.

Then again, I am a guy who enjoyed ME2 much more than ME1 in the gameplay department, but thats just me.

But, after playing Dragon Age on PS3 with a controller, for me I dont mind if Dragon Age 2 is the same (which it seems to be so but faster), but if they can make it more accessable and comfortable for consoles and polish it up, the better.

The game is out in March so I am sure we will be seeing some console versions very soon.

Good thing is not up to you then.

Because thats a terrible idea.

It is not just you, the gameplay in ME2 is miles ahead of the one in ME, that the game is better well that's subjective, I said its miles better too.

LOL I agree.

Sure, PC will always have the advantage in RPGs, thats mostly because of the hotkeys of the abilities and talents.

But again, from what I played on PS3 and PC, I have no problem with the controller.
Sure it takes more time to change stuff and navigate, but thats why I say Bioware should make a change to polish it up to fit the controller and consoles more.

They should have tried to find a way to effectively implement the tactical aspects of the game on the console version(s). Instead they've gone for flashy animations and stylistic combat.

Well better animations and stylistic combat don't hurt anybody on the contrary it seems to look better more visceral and overall animates better, so I dont see the problem here.

You're missing my point. There's nothing wrong with it per se, but it shouldn't have been their focus; rather than placing an emphasis on such things, they should have tried to make the console version as tactical as the experience is on PC. Instead, they're going for flashy animations to compensate for the fact that the console version lacks the depth of its PC component. Of course it's great that it feels more visceral and has better animations, but they could have done all that and made it more tactical - because that's what made DA1 what it was, on the PC at least. I've already stressed this point but, as Kenshin points out, the sequel just doesn't know what it wants to be.The shooter aspects were a lot better, but the RPG side of things - and ME2 is meant to be an RPG first and foremost - took a hell of a knock. That's why some people were disappointed with it in comparison to ME1.

It looks like DA2 is potentially going down that very road. Let's not forget that this is also meant to primarily be an RPG.

RPG is a RPG as long as you keep leveling up, increasing stats into your weapons, armor, character, interacting with people.
As long as stats take a big part of the combat in armor, weapons, character...etc. its an RPG, along with character interactions, character customization...etc.
Just because you dont have tons of micromanaging stuff in the game doesnt make it less of an RPG game.

Also, Bioware has said you can play it tactically or as an action RPG, and on PC, I rarely used the pause and play unless i was into deep trouble.
I kept using the auto attacks and kept using the special attacks and abilities as soon as possible when the cooldown was over, so it looked like an fast action RPG.

PC has more advantage considering you can zoom out with the camera, see more of the battle and the enemies coming towards...etc.
DA isnt meant to be "tactical RPG only", it was meant to be both so more gamers who are into the seperate styles to enjoy it.

Its hard to do all the tactical stuff you can do on PC to work on a controller, it has to suit the controller and shouldnt feel tedious when doing so.

It seems you want less action and more tactical thinking in DA because thats how you keep playing it, while thats not how I played it, so I want more polished in the combat for real time but still play as the first Dragon Age, and they seem to do just that...and still kept the "tactical pause and play" in it.

But whatever, I cant keep going on saying the same thing over and over again, I got my point across a few times now.

I think the point that blmbox, grift amd kenshin are trying to make that sath and raptor don't understand is that this game is made to be a tactical rpg, not a tactical actiony rpg, and they will like it (including myself) to stay like that and even improve from that. The great tactical rpg gameplay was that make the first DA such a great game, and that was what establish it's fan base from players like blm and grif, and they will hate if that got change on the second one trying to be more actiony mainstream.

Look it like this way. Imaging if the next bayoneta or ninja gaideng start to add rpg elements and making it a bit more tactical. This will lead to make the game much less actiony, and them grif and blm go to the thread about that game and say how happy they are for been more tactical and that there aren't that much tactical games and that is way bayoneta should be more tactical bla bla bla. I bet 1 million bucs that sath and raptor will be the first complaining on how this is going to ruin the action gameplay.

If raptopr and sath want more actions games, them they should be completely new games. Not the games that are already great rpg base and have a fan base for it because, I can tell you, as there aren't that much action games this generation, there isn't that much tactical rpg as well, so don't cripple our tactical rpg games just to make it more actiony.

I hope I make my point clear :)

Ehm, I played it on PC and I am playing it on PS3 now...I am not using pause-and-play technique that often.

On PC you have more tactical gameplay thanks to the mouse, more micromanaging the view of the camera...etc, but I hate the point and click during combat.
But on consoles, it has more "action" vibe in it considering all you have to do is keep pressing the default attack button to go from one enemy to the next and press the other interface buttons to do special attacks but you still can pause-and-play just like the PC version for a more thought out attack plans.

And the game wasent meant to be a tactical RPG only, it was meant to be both so different RPG fans could enjoy, thats why they kept showing different version of playing DA same goes to DA2.
But one thing you guys dont seem to understand what me and Raptor is talking about is we dont want action gameplay in DA (such as Bayonetta, Ninja Gaiden...etc.), far from it (atleast I dont LOL).
We are just saying it should be a bit more cooler during combat, when they attack they do "action oriented" attacks instead of just move their arms around to swing their attacks, and that is exactly what Dragon Age 2 is doing while keeping the original gameplay style attached with all the default attacks and cooldown special attacks they added a bit more stylized combat animation to it to make it look more cooler on screen.
But in no way it is a action game, that is why I am happy about it.

I for one love Dragon Age on PS3, just because it is more comfortable to play it with a controller during combat and moving around and I am sitting on a couch LOL

I hope I made myself clear because I dont know how to explain it any better than this :)

Excellent post thank you, you made your point very clear but the only difference is that I would not get mad if say Bayonetta added a RPG element, hell I would be happy as hell, thats the real difference here, some dont like change while I embrace it, just look at ME2 is the same deal, some hated it because it was more actiony and I loved it.

As for the first point I still dot get why the big deal if the Tactical Element is "STILL" there if you want to play it like that, they didnt remove it.

Because I don't want to see it get dumbed down to accomodate people who thought the first one didn't have enough 'action'.

But its NOT going to be dumbed down, why do you keep saying that?
If they dumbed it down it would be because they didnt develop it good, I dont think they will change a whole combat system, especially when so many fans enjoyed DA1.

I have played the PC version and PS3 version of DA and seeing DA2 combat video it looks EXACTLY like DA1, only thing that is different is the animation, its faster and more stylized thats it.

I don't know where is getting that either.

Its just Paranoia or something.

I haven't read anything remotedly suggesting that the game will be dumbed down, only that there will be another option more actiony if you want to play it like that, thats it, every other facet of DA:O will be in here too, Tactical and stuff like that.

Maybe blmbox knows something we don't.

Why do you keep assuming it won't be? We've had little information about the game thus far, with the exception of a couple of short gameplay videos and dev diaries. I know as much about the combat as you do - fairly litle. In any case, the fact is that they're trying to share the focus between the game being played tactically and more action-oriented for DA2; contrastingly, there is no doubt that DA1 was meant to be played tactically (at least on the PC).

The fact that they're trying to expand how the game is played may please gamers like you, but to those of us who acknowledge that the tactical approach was what made DA1 a good game, it's a shame. Let me ask you this: does the tactical approach look any more improved in comparison to the first game at this moment in time? It does not (and let's remember that this is a sequel). I'm willing to bet that it has much to do with the fact that they're vehemently promoting the action side of things.

You halt one thing to progress another. It's almost always how it goes.Paranoia? I'm not even going to buy the bloody game when it comes out - which sort of makes my appearance in this thread somewhat pointless. I just think it's a poor move on Bioware's part with regards to the direction they're taking the sequel in, and I find it equally frustrating that people like you think those of us who do think it's a bad decision have no grounds for such thoughts.

Then with this part your whole argument is irrelevant as is ours, the only diference is that Bioware as said and showed that it can be played tactically with pause and all like DA:O and so far they havent said nor showed the suposed dumbed down thing you said.

So as things are our ssumptions carries more weight than yours.

Are you aware how stupid that sounds?

I don't care how it sounds I just care what the facts in the table says.

So far you are only bringing assumptions and stuff nothing concrete or nothing said directly by the devs or by people that played.

Cant wait for this game to land, the devs have stated this game will have the same tactical depth of the first so it's all sounding great to me.

i cant be arsed to read most of the walls of text in here, but i can auto assume that sath and raptor are preffering the way the game has gone combat wise and everyone else disagrees?

same as ME2, you guys are more action orientated where as other people are more RPG ME1 fantastic, ME2 more action/shallow i can imagine the fans of DA are feeling the same pain for DA2 as what i felt for ME2
Simple as this did sath and raptor enjoy Lost Odysey? did not think so... but i bet you would of loved it if it played like say... gaiden?

I PREFER real time combat yes, but after MANY days, weeks of playing Dragon Age on PS3, I dont mind if they kept the same combat system, I am loving Dragon Age at the moment.

I played Lost Odyssey, combat is turn based, its nothing like Dragon Age.
Turn based combat is like chess which is boring as hell IMO, you attack/heal then you have to wait for the enemy to do so...etc. until you win or lose, I hate turn based combat.

With Dragon Age its more semi real time, you can keep doing any attack at any moment as long as you got stamina.
I could pull off like 3-4 special attacks with a sword and shield like if it was real time, but when stamina was drained I had to do regular attacks until the cooldown and stamina would charge again, I really enjoy it!

Yes, I would have loved it if it played like Ninja Gaiden, but then again the RPG "feeling" wouldnt just be there IMO and I dont want that.
I wouldnt mind games like Oblivion, Fable, Demons Souls were its all real time.

Thing is, nobody can say DA2 is going more actiony, nobody has seen proper long game or even played it, I dont know why they are keep saying its going to be more actiony when its not.
It is exactly the same as the first Dragon Age, but more stylish combat that LOOKS exciting when you do them, thats it...for now.
Bioware showed the combat walkthrough and IMO it looked like DA, but only with more exciting animations during combat thats it.

Sorry for the long post :)

Did not mean DA1 was turn based, i was mearly pointing out its a type of play style you and raptor do not like.