Dragon Age II "more tactical" than DA

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 22 February, 2011

"It's time we learned from action games."

BioWare has moved to calm concern that it has dumbed down the Dragon Age experience with the second game in the series, insisting combat is more tactical this time around than it was in the first game.

"There's always a danger of alienating the hardcore when you change anything – they wouldn't be the hardcore if they didn't truly love what was already there, lead designer Mike Laidlaw told The Guardian.

"But we wanted to make sure that we held onto the elements that made Dragon Age: Origins strong – party-based, tactical – even going so far as to replace spell-combos with cross-class combos so that now, when a mage freezes someone, a mage can't blow up that guy like you could in Origins; now a warrior or rogue has to get involved.

"So the whole party becomes part of this concert of death, which makes the game even more tactical.

"But the fact that now, you charge into combat and swing, rather than shuffling awkwardly into position, to me takes care of a convention we could do without."

Sprawling fantasy role-player Dragon Age II follows Hawke, a human hero. Mass Effect's dialogue wheel makes an appearance, and combat is more action-oriented.

All this has caused some fans to cry fowl, but BioWare is confident its design philosophy is sound.

"There was even some initial backlash," Laidlaw said, "with people asking: 'What, have you made it an action game?' The answer is, frankly, action games have been stealing from RPGs for the past five years – levelling up, and getting a badge so that you can get a new weapon, that's an RPG mechanic.

"So it's time that we, as a genre, took a look at some of those elements that action games have done exceptionally well and asked what we can learn from them."

Still not convinced? A Dragon Age II demo is out now.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (56) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Eraysor #1 1 year ago

    Your own demo suggests the exact opposite...

  • tomkuryakin #2 1 year ago

    Did you mean cry foul? Or is it meant to be some terrible pun to do with the main character being called Hawke?
    Edited by tomkuryakin at 22/02/11 @ 16:56

  • Moonprince #3 1 year ago

    So the producer I just watched on xbox live vid who said that pressing one button does 'cool stuff' and that because of this you don't have to worry about tactics was bs'ing?

    ok.

  • Zephro #4 1 year ago

    "So it's time that we, as a genre, took a look at some of those elements that action games have done exceptionally well and asked what we can learn from them."

    No it isn't, get back in your box.

  • Daeltaja #5 1 year ago

    Seems like an attempt at pleasing everyone, in one way or another.

  • butler` #6 1 year ago

    Why do I get the feeling I'm going to be horribly disappointed by the demo?

  • Apaar #7 1 year ago

    This game will with very high likelihood be my personal GOTY for this year.

  • Murton #8 1 year ago

    "Seems like an attempt at pleasing everyone, in one way or another."

    Except hardcore RPG fans who haven't had a new game for years. I wish the head guys Bioware and Bethesda (the last of the great RPG creators) would admit that they've left their roots and now make action games, the fact that action game developers have adopted some minor RPG mechanics is no excuse to kill what's left of the RPG genre. For example, the inclusion of that BS conversation wheel is a major negative to the game in my opinion, roleplay is flat out impossible if I don't know what my character is going to say until after he's said it and affects both the immersion and my enjoyment of the game.

    Also the weak AI in DA:o requiring me to constantly switch to controlling my party members so they we worked together was an annoyance and something I could do without, the concept of having to do this even more to ensure that the team hit these "combos" in order to win battles isn't winning me over either.

    RPGs are usually strong contenders for a day one purchase with me, but based on what I've seen and heard from DA2 so far I won't be impressed so I'll wait for a price reduction if I go for it at all.

  • Xardan #9 1 year ago

    I say skip the demo. It will only ruin your enjoyment of the full game when released. Just wait for reviews.

  • Hunam #10 1 year ago

    It's not more tactical in the slightest to be honest. But what it does it does well, despite the fact that it's not what I wanted after Origins. I'm sure people will like the Mass Effect with swords game it is, and it does have a stronger RPG element than mass effect as you can swap controllable character and set tactics, but don't try and claim it's more tactical than DA because it's not.

  • arcam #11 1 year ago

    I say skip the demo. It will only ruin your enjoyment of the full game when released. Just wait for reviews.

    Normally I'd agree, but I suspect most reviewers are going to be out of step with me on this game.

    If DA2 is to Dragon Age what ME2 is to Mass Effect, most reviewers will praise the advances while I'm left wondering why everyone seems to be cheering the removal of the most interesting parts of the game.

    For me this is one where feedback from players matters more than professional reviews.

  • suicidal_penguins #12 1 year ago

    Should read: Dragon Age II "more tactical" with its advertising this time. Overall, I think their main aim is for that odd sector of the market that finds Fable too hardcore.

  • bratmandu #13 1 year ago

    Folks, 'hardcore' does not mean keeping a genre in the 90s. The reason 'hardcore' rpg fans haven't had a decent game in years is partly their refusal to accept that modern hardware and software conventions must evolve a genre. Believe it or not, you CAN still have viceral combat in an rpg, and still have it affected by all the stats and nuances that make an rpg an rpg. These 'hardcore' snobs need to realise you don't need to be spending half the game in a pause menu to have fun.

  • yoomazir #14 1 year ago

    HAHAHAHAHAHA

  • suicidal_penguins #15 1 year ago

    Nor three quarters of the game yawning through FMV

  • SvennoJ #16 1 year ago

    But don't you just control 1 character in a fight in the console version? How are those spell combos going to work when my ai companions are stuck on a piece of grass. More tactical means you spam one button and hope the ai does the rest?
    Or can you program your own ai like FF12?

  • Sonic_D #17 1 year ago

    If you want to know how the combat should work in an action RPG (particularly melee) have a look at Demons Souls.

  • Aretak #18 1 year ago

    SvennoJ: You can both take control of any party member on the fly during battle and micro-manage them all, or set instructions via a system which is basically an exact copy of Gambits from FFXII. Or you can just let the AI go about its business, although in the demo at least it seems to be dumb as rocks.

  • Velvetmeds #19 1 year ago

    Combat is better now.

  • CaptainKid #20 1 year ago

    That must've been the most boring game video I've ever seen.
    Boooring uninspiring cut scenes and scenery.
    Hurray for brown empty hills.

  • kraenk12 #21 1 year ago

    i just played the demo and i don't know when i was ever THAT disappointed of a game :'(

  • dagas #22 1 year ago

    Tried the demo. It handled better than DA1 I think. DA1 was more geared towards playing with a keyboard and mouse and it was not very good on 360. this feels a lot better playing on the 360.

  • Apaar #23 1 year ago

    Overall higher speed of un-paused gameplay, stricter potion system, more varied encounters, more intelligent/flexible enemies, companion specific unique skills, more involved spell/skill combo-system, melee AoE damage - those are all things that I expect will increase the tactical depth and demand of the game in comparison to its predecessor. I've yet to hear of changes that would lessen the tactical depth from the level it was in Origins.

  • metalangel #24 1 year ago

    Hey, you are the one they call The Hero Of Kirkwall!

  • DrMGinius #25 1 year ago

    @tomkuryakin Yes, it's a fowl pun... and what a fowl pun!
    Edited by DrMGinius at 22/02/11 @ 20:44

  • Collymilad #26 1 year ago

    ME2 was faaar better than ME.

    What are all these "interesting" things that they supposedly removed? I loved ME but all they removed from it for 2 were things that were clunky, didn't work, or that were boring/useless.

    If this is anything like ME1-ME2 I'll be very happy.

  • Lord_BeeJee #27 1 year ago

    Not sure what this will do until i see it in action, I didn't really enjoy the original(pc) that much so I don't need this on release. If it turns out well I'll get a compilation one with dlc somewhere down the line.

  • Dizzy #28 1 year ago

    I liked the demo... looked good as well, but, as a warrior, it felt a bit like dynasty warrior TBH. I hope higher level stuff will add more combat options.

  • mrpsb #29 1 year ago

    Combat feels much much quicker than DA:o

  • defdaz #30 1 year ago

    @TonyCorleone Maybe you should try eve online ;)

  • login_name #31 1 year ago

    Having played the pc demo, I think that's the version to go for again. It doesn't feel that much different. A little bit quicker perhaps but the stop/start tactical gameplay is still there. No overhead view, which is a shame. Not keen on the new convo wheel, doesn't fit as well here as it did in ME. Also not keen on Hawke either. Both the acting and script seem a little off.

  • TitusCrow #32 1 year ago

    How did we get from BG 2 to here... are they trying to go for GOW rpg lite? WTF just happened?

  • dirtysteve #33 1 year ago

    Finished the demo, seems pretty mindless, the bulk of the attacking is just mindlessly hammering A, while waiting for special attacks to recharge. I'm sure the cross-class combos are there, but how often will you be switching characters to use them, when the pace of combat doesn't really seem to encourage it.

  • Nameless-001 #34 1 year ago

    Pls don't spread this marketing-bullshits, It's bad enough that a lot of people will buy this garbage of a game only thanks to its name.
    After what hey've done, I'll never buy another Bioware game starting today.

  • kaya08 #35 1 year ago

    I'm guessing the combat in the demo wouldn't be representative of the whole in fairness.
    Its probably early game before a lot of the options are available.

    Pity about the conversation wheel, always thought that was one of the weaker parts of ME.

  • DjFlex52 #36 1 year ago

    "Don't you get it? Contemporary gaming is for the mindless."

    @TonyCorleone

    Or maybe you're just getting old and cranky...j/k

    Why do hardcore gamers (as you claim yourself to be) act like all games should cater to ONLY their current preferences.Your preferences have evolved from too many years of gaming and you've become jaded. There are gamers who were born in the 80's, 90's and difficult games aren't what they want. I've been playing games as long or maybe longer than you. It seems like you are overpraising the games of yore. There were fun mindless games then as there are now. And we hardcore gamers were playing them without all the current " casual gamer" backlash. The same goes for difficult games...then and now (tried playing Demon's Soul?) Do you not know that game companies need to make a profit from games with so much competition in the industry? Marketing & selling a very difficult game is not conducive to developer survival in these times.

    Hey, I got an idea! Throw away all your cellphones and electronic remotes and start finger dialing...remember the good old days? You do like things difficult, right? Oh...and don't forget that now you have to remember all your friends' phone numbers again and you have to get your lazy ass up off the couch to change channels ;-)

  • fredrikpj #37 1 year ago

    I tested both the xbox and pc versions. Found it better on pc due to the fact that the character automatically hits the enemy, no need to spam a button, leaving you time to issue orders to the other members. Overall, at least on pc it feels like an improvement? Still not sure I like the new "dark" look though..
    Edited by fredrikpj at 23/02/11 @ 06:05

  • Dizzy #38 1 year ago

    "I tested both the xbox and pc versions. Found it better on pc due to the fact that the character automatically hits the enemy"

    BTW you can set that on the 360 version as well, it is just off by default.

  • Miths #39 1 year ago

    I loved the PC demo - I've been through with a rogue archer, rogue dual-wield and mage so far, going to try a warrior today.
    Based on that brief experience the game does feel decidedly less tactical than DA:o (which I played mostly in isometric view with liberal use of the pause button), but combat was such a fast and fluid blast - even though I did pause on occasion to get an overview of the battle - that I really didn't care that I was putting more brawns than brains into it.

    Whether that will remain satisfying through an entire game I'm unsure, but then the demo also only offers around 45 minutes of combat against fairly basic enemies (although the ogre was a pushover compared to the first ogre encounter in DA:o), so I'm not going to make any final assumptions based on that.

    I used to love the slow, tactical pace of the old Infinity Engine games and similar RPGs - even fully turn-based ones - but these days I must admit that I'm partial to faster combat, perhaps simply because I play a lot more action games these days than I did a decade ago. And with that said, I'm off to pick up Killzone 3 :p.

  • Murton #40 1 year ago

    "Folks, 'hardcore' does not mean keeping a genre in the 90s. The reason 'hardcore' rpg fans haven't had a decent game in years is partly their refusal to accept that modern hardware and software conventions must evolve a genre."

    Nobody said that RPGs had to stay in the 90s, that would be horrible. I refer you to Neverwinter Nights, and its sequel, NWN2, which was probably the last "proper" big name RPG. It had properly deep RPG mechanics and shit loads of options for advancing your character, compare this to the recent Mass Effect, which has a fraction of the classes and skills available and very limited options for advancement as every class contains redundant skills, be honest why would you waste skill points on a secondary weapon type? Then of course there's the removal of inventory/gear management in ME2, which is the core of RPG gameplay.

    The reason that RPG fans haven't had a new game in years is because nobody has made one. Elder Scrolls is a shadow of its former self, look at Morrowind compared to Oblivion, loads of skills removed/merged, less varied gear, enemy level scaling that forces you to level up you character a certain way to survive, then there's Skyrim which is doing away with even more skills and ditching the link between ability scores and stats like HP and MP in favour of direct advancement.

    Most worrying of all though is that everyone who makes RPGs has forgotten when RP stands for and are making games where roleplaying is impossible. How can I roleplay my character if I can't choose what he says or how he behaves towards NPCs? How can I roleplay if I'm forced to level up in a particular way just to continue playing the game? How can I roleplay if I have to be constantly switching to characters other than my own to pick locks, remove traps, craft items and survive battles?

    I'm all for adding the best that action games have to offer to enrich my RPG experience, but why should we have to sacrifice everything that makes RPGs special in order to do that? Surely it's not beyond the talents of Bioware to keep the richness of Neverwinter Nights while giving us the gunplay of Gears of War that clearly inspired Mass Effect's combat or the MMO like combat that features in Dragon Age. At the end of the day it boils down to interest, and it would appear that RPG makers aren't interested in making RPGs anymore and someone doesn't come along and pick up that torch one of the oldest genres in gaming may die out, and whether you like what I would call "proper" RPGs or not you have to admit that it would be a damned shame if they simply didn't exist any more.

  • abigsmurf #41 1 year ago

    Lots of Early reviews, all of them are at least 8/10 . Smells like a "if you want a pre-launch review, you must give it..." type deal. The lack of ethics in the gaming press continues to be depressing.

    Eurogamer, you probably can't say if there's an embargo on non-glowing reviews. Will your review be on or after the release date though?

  • immateriaux #42 1 year ago

    @Murton.

    That's too narrow a definition of rpg, it shouldn't be just how many this or that, it is the world that is being presented to you and the challenges and sense of immersion it provokes. Witcher is a fantastic rpg, not because of the vast range of options available to your character but because(once you get into the city section anyhow), how much you care about the character, his decisions which feel like your own, and the sense of moving through a real world. The Bioware games in contrast herd you from tableau to tableau, press a few buttons in between. There's no living world just those constant movies to try pretend there is. They are the embodiment of trivial, lightweight games. Someone earlier mentioned throw out mobile gaming if you don't like this kind of approach but that's just it, that segment is already well catered for. It will be a real travesty if you lose genuine, deep, complex games and are left with just Bioware style pap everywhere.
    Edited by immateriaux at 23/02/11 @ 08:42

  • Gunship #43 1 year ago

    Well I was expecting this to be a complete hack and slash ... although in fairness, it isn't. But it is waaaay too fast paced to be tactical. Battles are over in a short chaotic flash, mostly involving manically rotating between your party members and spamming whatever available power is not on cooldown. Lack of proper overhead tactical view is bad. You can't see what's going on at the other side of the battle without selecting all the party members in turn to find out who is closest to that side, and then attempt to pan around from their position. Oh and completely over the top cinematics - even silly conversations about where to go have to have them.

    That said, I reckon anyone who was OK (or less) with DA:o but loved ME2 should be happy with this new title. If you were a fan of Origins, then I'm afraid the franchise has been terminated. As we all feared ever since the first dribs and drabs of information have been trickling out of EA.

  • SFG_Clan #44 1 year ago

    mash the buttons kill teh bad guyz
    Tactics? really?

  • Rack #45 1 year ago

    I'm not sure what the furor is about here to be honest. The combat in Dragon Age could scarcely be more simplistic, if this is less tactical then it's the difference between mindlessly smashing keys and mindlessly smashing keys. Sure it would be nice if it was significantly more tactical but that's an unreasonable expectation in this day and age.
    Edited by Rack at 23/02/11 @ 13:00

  • lafery #46 1 year ago

    Imo BioWare is being pressured by EA to make more games faster.

    Thats why they're going with the ME2 model: they force you into a mold (3 classes / good or evil type) offer a much narrower variety of options - and a single short (even if good) story line. As opposed to DA1 where you could play one of 4 classes with 4 different possible spec + 3 races and with 3 different background available, each with their own storyline.

    ME / ME2 = much cheaper to make, much faster to sell even if the game is a lot shorter.

    Even though the mechanics and the game was damn easy, I still enjoyed DA for the rich story lines and the variety. I tried all classes, races and all backgrounds - easily spent over 100 hours playing it.

    How long did ME2 last? Probably in the 20-30 hours - and I don't see the point in playing through it again with a different class. No replay value. This is what they will do with DA2. Make it a 20-30 hours game, with probably a good story but no replay value.

    When they announced DA2 (without any details), I would have pre-ordered it without thinking. But then luckily it wasn't for sale before they announced the changes they had in mind and I knew it was going to become a ME2 clone set in medieval times.

    I will not be buying it.
    Edited by lafery at 23/02/11 @ 16:08

  • Seoh #47 1 year ago

    Playing a mage is tactical ( and awesome) playing a warrior is stull pretty dull

  • Gunship #48 1 year ago

    @Rack (re both DA1 and DA2 being simplistic). Yes, the mechanics of both appear a little similar. But DA2 is designed to work without pause. If you try to play DA1 without pausing (on the PC - not console, on hard or above) you will, no question, die. Repeatedly and horribly and frustratingly. The pause is there because without it you will be overwhelmed, and so need time to think. Now they have made that 'time to think' part 'optional'. How this mean anything other than 'less strategic' is beyond me.

    Also DA2 has no tactical view by design, this is so that you are always confused as to which enemies are streaming from where, and what your companions are doing. This is fog of war chaos, where you muddle and button mash through to victory, as opposed to the orchestra of control that was DA1.

    @lafery - brilliantly put, I take my hat off to you Sir +1.

  • geeza2020 #49 1 year ago

    Well, the demo was fucking awful IMO, whats with this hammering the A button crap? And the landscapes had to be the most boring brown and grey shit piles I have ever seen in an RPG. It got slightly better in Kirkwall but the whole intro was boring shite.

  • tyrant1 #50 1 year ago

    Yeah, that also lied- I mean said with ME2 that "just because were improving the shooter combat doesnt mean the RPG will be worse."

    Game gets realised, and every bar paid off video game journalists and Bioware fanboys and girls can plaintly see the RPG is worse, because the shooter combat was "improved" at its expense.

    Bioware is now so greedy that they will not only dumb down their games to try and appeal to the masses of COD morons, but they even have the nerve to lie to their loyal customers faces telling them what they see with their own eyes isnt true.

  • Bluetooth #51 1 year ago

    Demo plays like any other generic RPG. Zzzzz

  • Sevens #52 1 year ago

    "(...) when a mage freezes someone, a mage can't blow up that guy like you could in Origins; now a warrior or rogue has to get involved.

    Right, shattering frozen opponents with a physical attack wasn't possible before. Ah, wait, it was. By limiting options (which seems to be the point here) you don't necessarily make combat more tactical. That being said, one tiny example hardly is convincing anyway.

    With excessive DLC, "accessibility" and "flashy" style, they seriously compromize what defines (complex/core) RPGs.


    P.S.:

    "What are all these "interesting" things that they supposedly removed? I loved ME but all they removed from it for 2 were things that were clunky, didn't work, or that were boring/useless."

    Uh-huh, like the relevance of talents as an equivalent of magic. That was a bad move. They focused on shooting and cut down (on) active tech/biotics.
    Edited by Sevens at 23/02/11 @ 22:16

  • chrisola #53 1 year ago

    i bet the same hardcore gamers who are above mindlessly mashing the A button on the DA2 demo will have a collective nerdgasm at the thought of mindlessly mashing the left mouse button for 40hrs + when Diablo 3 comes out :p

    The idea of the conversation wheel is to act passive, neutral or aggressive (for example) -- so in effect you ARE role playing your characters attitude \ values \ general disposition rather than choosing from a specific selection of lines to say.

    I don't think you can count 'oh how can i role play if i can't choose what i want to say' as being a major flaw when you can't do that anyway -- you can only choose from a list of lines the game designers want you to speak in order to advance the game, which will be either an aggressive \ passive \ netural etc response anyway -- it's the same thing! Maybe it's not as 'flowing' as the pre written responses as you have to wait to hear what your character will say, but it's the same thing at the end of the day.

    I thought the demo was ok, much better than my experience with the first game - it was nice having an AI mage who stayed back and i could switch to for area effect spells when needed, but could happily plug anyway on her own otherwise without being mullered within 10 seconds of not 'tactically pausing the game 3 times a second to tell her to attack and not get melee'd in the face'. The environments weren't anything special but then it was a linear demo which didn't even let you use your inventory so...
    Edited by chrisola at 23/02/11 @ 22:29

  • Reaver_v1 #54 1 year ago

    I think its very interesting how Dragon Age "fans" are so quick to condemn DA2. These are probably the same people who were complaining about stagnant conversations or auto-gameplay in Origins. Many of bioware's games have used the same converastion system as origins but never have I felt so disconnected to the main character. Origins was all about the support characters and that is wrong. Still a great game that I loved, but even I am not so blind that I will say it was perfect. The demo showed pepped up gameplay and a better conversation system which allows your character to actually speak. Wait for the game and decide whether you will or won't play it for yourself, but don't come on here trying to make everyone conspire against the game before its even out. After all, if they had delivered the same game with a new story, you'd be complaining about that.

  • Reaver_v1 #55 1 year ago

    Whether it's FPS's (Call of duty etc), RPG's (Gothic, Oblivion, etc), RTS (SupCom 2, World in Conflict, etc), racing games (NFSPD etc).

    COD4 was one of the biggest breakthrough games ever. It introduced millions of people to a genre and gaming in general. While I believe the series has rapidly declined, COD4 was still one of the genre's finest hours, no pun intended.

    Bioware alone has produced some of the most epic RPG's ever and they still continue to do so. Just because they utilize the technology they have nowadays to make a more realistic and less dice-roll dictated game does not necessarily mean it is dumbed down. Would you genuinely be happy with a modern Baldur’s gate that is as heavily reliant on stats and dice rolls as the originals? Great as they are, they were great in their day. Bethesda also may be leaning further into action orientated games but the thing that has held back their games lately is dated engines. Again, enter better technology. RTS has had a strong showing in the last decade starting with C&C, Company of Heroes and Age of Empires, moving all the way through to the recent StarCraft II. As for racing games, between Forza, Gran Turismo and F1, racing has never been so realistic, but maybe you would like a 2D car or some classic Mario kart?


    The fact of the matter is, gaming has moved on. The audience is wider and the cost greater and as such, the designers have to make games geared towards the mainstream. The majority of the market is clogged with simple, fast-tracked games that people love to spend their cash on, but without them the industry wouldn't have had the money or the technology to make any of the truly great games of the decade. If you haven't experienced any of them and are so detached from the industry that those are the games you name for the corresponding genres, then you are definitely not worthy of calling yourself a hardcore gamer.

  • geeza2020 #56 1 year ago

    damn, not worthy of calling myself a hardcore gamer, I was just about to go and announce that at the pub too :D