I think what some people have missed is ME1 was pre EA era bioware, it was devolved by them and published by Microsoft. Me2 was already on the drawing board before EA got the company. So both of those titles really fall into a time before EA because EA wasn't there from the start of the title. With dragon age they were making a successor to NWN and BG, why? Because Atari holds all the game rights to D&D, and will not let other publishers touch it. This is why Atari gave NWN 3 over to cryptic.

Secondly Classic RPGs are not really rpgs in the truest since of pen and paper rpgs, they are more along the line of movies you play. An rpg is a role playing game, you assume a role, play that role, and decide everything for that role. This was biowares bread and butter, the walking and talking rpg where you named your guy or girl, picked the class, and followed through from there. DA:O is very much that type of game, where DA2 isn't. Streamlining it for the consol is one thing, they went ahead and decided to take away the feeling of the character is me, I am playing the role of this character with the frame narrative they set it up with.

Why do I harp on this, it is because the guys over at BioWare are focusing to much on the story, and less on the idea of playing it. It's easier to write a story for one person, no matter the class, then for a mixture of races from which the story can come. There are less options to have to program in. Less lines to write, which is perfect if the game starts off that way. I.E. KoToR or ME. But when a game starts off with six different choices, and has a whole lot of options in leveling as well as skills, then gets stripped down and made into your choice is x or y then one of three classes it isn't as nice. In some respects it would be like playing Baldur's Gate then in Baldur's Gate two you had to be a human no matter what.

It's fine to change writing style, narrative style, even what choices we have from one title like ME to the next title as they did the DA:O. Doing it within the same title on it's sequel would be like a writer who has written every book in a series as third person omniscient, suddenly changing the story to first person singular. It's a good way to make a whole bunch of readers mad at you, unless you have a damn good reason to do it.

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Originally posted by Scorchien

The Bioware we all embraced no longer exists , the one we have now is just cheap EA bride ,and as soon as EA is done with them they will dismantle whats left like the many other Devs they have purchsed over the years , None of them have survived , why would anyone think Bioware will be differnet they are the next vicitm of EA , probably will completly be dismantled in 2-4 years max..

Is this some kind of wishful thinking, just because they make games that aren't in the genre you like, classic RPG?

 

The fact that all their last games sold magnanimous and that they have 3 big titles this year proves enough that they won't be gone within the next 4 years. Besides, at least they have the guts to try different things, in contrast to other big game companies who after their big first success keep making sequels within the same franchise: Halo, Call of Duty/Modern Warfare, Starcraft, Diablo, to name a few.

 

Bioware could have made easily a BG3 or NWN3 or KOTOR 3, and they would've sold gold.

Instead they made KOTOR after BG.

With NWN they went into making one of the best world creator tools around, which resulted into fantastic player made MORPG worlds.

Then they went onto a completely new track with Jade Empire, away from high fantasy and scifi into an original Asian themed fantasy setting.

After that, they again didn't make a sequel, but launched 2 new franchises, with intriguing worlds, and in the case of ME/ME2 with different game mechanics, more action RPG and shooter oriented instead of the BG style of play.

Now, with DA2 they're trying some other changes in the gameplay again.

 

Sure, not all their adventures into new territories are equally successful, as Jade Empire proved, but at least they have the guts and take risks, of trying new things, mechanics, IP franchises and settings with each new game they make, instead of making safe sequels of their former successes as other companies do.

I wish they'd make a BG3, or NWN3 with an even more advanced world creation toolset. But I can understand and respect that they're trying different paths all the time. Whether they'll be successful with it, we'll see.

Not wishful thinking at all, the only wisful thinking i may have , is that EA had never purchased BIoware and turned them into just another Craptastic Console Pumping Game Pimp,the rest is only the truth EA has been devouring dev teams since the 80s none have survived there influence , so i dont expext BW  to , its only the truth up to you if ya wanna subscribe to it.

DA2  the combat was changed, the pc version is one click and the first is on against mob X, the consol version is a button masher you have to hit the button for every swing.

I also am waiting to see how, or if this shift will effect the green ronin table top version of dragon age, if it doesn't then I think I'll be spending my money on the pen and paper version of DA. Because there, on the page before me, my warden is still plugin along and EA can't do jack about it.

Originally posted by Ragnaven

I think what some people have missed is ME1 was pre EA era bioware, it was devolved by them and published by Microsoft. Me2 was already on the drawing board before EA got the company. So both of those titles really fall into a time before EA because EA wasn't there from the start of the title. With dragon age they were making a successor to NWN and BG, why? Because Atari holds all the game rights to D&D, and will not let other publishers touch it. This is why Atari gave NWN 3 over to cryptic.

Secondly Classic RPGs are not really rpgs in the truest since of pen and paper rpgs, they are more along the line of movies you play. An rpg is a role playing game, you assume a role, play that role, and decide everything for that role. This was biowares bread and butter, the walking and talking rpg where you named your guy or girl, picked the class, and followed through from there. DA:O is very much that type of game, where DA2 isn't. Streamlining it for the consol is one thing, they went ahead and decided to take away the feeling of the character is me, I am playing the role of this character with the frame narrative they set it up with.

Why do I harp on this, it is because the guys over at BioWare are focusing to much on the story, and less on the idea of playing it. It's easier to write a story for one person, no matter the class, then for a mixture of races from which the story can come. There are less options to have to program in. Less lines to write, which is perfect if the game starts off that way. I.E. KoToR or ME. But when a game starts off with six different choices, and has a whole lot of options in leveling as well as skills, then gets stripped down and made into your choice is x or y then one of three classes it isn't as nice. In some respects it would be like playing Baldur's Gate then in Baldur's Gate two you had to be a human no matter what.

It's fine to change writing style, narrative style, even what choices we have from one title like ME to the next title as they did the DA:O. Doing it within the same title on it's sequel would be like a writer who has written every book in a series as third person omniscient, suddenly changing the story to first person singular. It's a good way to make a whole bunch of readers mad at you, unless you have a damn good reason to do it.

Actually they wanted to move away from D&D based games because they felt it wasn't good for a video game conversion and they wanted to try to make their own system. They had the license for D&D but chose to release it to Atari.

I agree with you for the most part here. Even in DA:O the choices were limited, but it still had that classic RPG feel and sense of immersion. I believe it truly was the spiritual successor to the Baldurs Gate series. After playing the DA2 demo, I don't feel that it has that.

I totally agree with you here. It's not that DA2 will necessarily be a bad game, it's just that it's such a departure from the original. The playstyle is so different and the sense of immersion just isn't there. It's not the classic RPG that DA:O was, it's more in line of what we see in Diablo 3. Despite the story it's devolved into a simple action RPG. If that's what we wanted, we have Blizzard for that.

Originally posted by pauly6478

I want the old days of a good Turn based RPG.

 

Final Fantasy Tactics but no now they all are made for PSP and DS. 

Same here. I just recently discovered Dragon Quest which has made this old Wizardry fan a happy camper.

RPG- Role playing game, you are taking on a role of a character with an established back story and you are playing through a storyline as if you are acting in a play.

So yes, DA2 does fit RPG EXACTLY to a T.

Please stop trying to redefine things.

Edit: After reading the article I begin to wonder how long the reviewer has played RPGs, back when the genre was first getting its major titled like Final Fantasy 7 and Chrono Trigger you didn't get to create your own character or get to make many decisions on how the storyline played out.

Sounds like someone's crying wolf while screaming about the sky falling.   Goodness...

Originally posted by BarakIII

I totally agree with you here. It's not that DA2 will necessarily be a bad game, it's just that it's such a departure from the original. The playstyle is so different and the sense of immersion just isn't there. It's not the classic RPG that DA:O was, it's more in line of what we see in Diablo 3. Despite the story it's devolved into a simple action RPG. If that's what we wanted, we have Blizzard for that.

I wouldn't go that far regarding your last statement.

The Diablo games were fun but I never could get through them as they were just waves of mobs to kill one after another.

I like the whole Storty concept of DA:O 2 and don't mind the more action type of combat.

The again I played DA:O on easy and seldom used the pause button. Reason being is that combat should be fun and exciting from my vantage point, not a series of pauses and breaks only to then do it all again for more pauses and breaks.

Given an example that the Bioware people had shown (not the demo) I can still see where stopping and "setting up your shots" can be very viable.

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by BarakIII

I totally agree with you here. It's not that DA2 will necessarily be a bad game, it's just that it's such a departure from the original. The playstyle is so different and the sense of immersion just isn't there. It's not the classic RPG that DA:O was, it's more in line of what we see in Diablo 3. Despite the story it's devolved into a simple action RPG. If that's what we wanted, we have Blizzard for that.

I wouldn't go that far regarding your last statement.

The Diablo games were fun but I never could get through them as they were just waves of mobs to kill one after another.

I like the whole Storty concept of DA:O 2 and don't mind the more action type of combat.

The again I played DA:O on easy and seldom used the pause button. Reason being is that combat should be fun and exciting from my vantage point, not a series of pauses and breaks only to then do it all again for more pauses and breaks.

Given an example that the Bioware people had shown (not the demo) I can still see where stopping and "setting up your shots" can be very viable.

Perhaps I can't speak for others, tho I think there are many who feel as I do, but for myself I stand by my statement.

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

I don't know who you're referring to, but I've never said it wasn't an RPG, I'm simply saying it isn't a classic RPG in the style of it's predecessor. Instead it's an action RPG and in my own opinion, that is indeed a decline...not in the genre since we've always had action RPGs, but in the DA series and perhaps in Bioware itself. Tho I guess we'll have to wait and see on that last bit.

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

I don't know who you're referring to, but I've never said it wasn't an RPG, I'm simply saying it isn't a classic RPG in the style of it's predecessor. Instead it's an action RPG and in my own opinion, that is indeed a decline...not in the genre since we've always had action RPGs, but in the DA series and perhaps in Bioware itself. Tho I guess we'll have to wait and see on that last bit.

Saying its a decline implys that its following some sort of pattern, Action RPG's are not a new thing, and infact the style they represent has been around for a long time.  The reason I disagree is because I see no trend, I don't see Action RPG's starting to take over the genre and traditional RPG's being pushed aside, game makers are making both types of games.

Originally posted by Laughing-man

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

I don't know who you're referring to, but I've never said it wasn't an RPG, I'm simply saying it isn't a classic RPG in the style of it's predecessor. Instead it's an action RPG and in my own opinion, that is indeed a decline...not in the genre since we've always had action RPGs, but in the DA series and perhaps in Bioware itself. Tho I guess we'll have to wait and see on that last bit.

Saying its a decline implys that its following some sort of pattern, Action RPG's are not a new thing, and infact the style they represent has been around for a long time.  The reason I disagree is because I see no trend, I don't see Action RPG's starting to take over the genre and traditional RPG's being pushed aside, game makers are making both types of games.

You're totally missing the point, are you reading what I'm saying at all? I haven't said anything what you're saying. Please read what I'm saying and stop trying to infer your own meaning onto it. I am stating a simple opinion, DA:O was a traditional classic RPG in the spirit of Baldurs Gate. DA2 is a departure from that and like someone else said, switching styles like that in the same series is jarring at the least. I'm not talking about the genre. I'm not talking about trends. I'm talking about DA and also what we've come to expect from Bioware.

In most ways i find myself agreeing with the OP,and rather pleased someone brought this out,as i didn't want to start a thread over it,though had been tempted..I found DA a toning down,just as previously [i never tried either of the Mass Effects] i found Neverwinter Nights a joke..remember the stupid camera angles? The ones reminding hack n slash games? Which despite this,were somehow meant to 'impress'? the overly light settings? the cartoonish approach to charcters leaving out that baroque style of Baldur's gate toons? The slow but constant walking away from hit dice mechanics? You didn't have to understand DCs to play NWNs..and i could go on,and on..yes considering what trash had been out i guess they were good in themselves,but had not with them 2 Bioware already dumbed a genre down? Next time i bothered with them,it was DA..i stopped in the 3 rd area,where you get to 'meet' that redhead,i forget her name now. Totally uninspiring..what story? a linear walkthrough it was,nothing else..they stole Bethesda's 'trick' of allowing players to add modules to make it the extra semester in the grind of time and thats it..even more bright cartoons,even more light colours,even less gloominess..what the happened to RPGs that were glomy,spooky and a pain in the butt to navigate when in tight places? What happened to a game feeling it took a new twist because you took a chaotic allignment? Why leaving those out? Why fooling me by insinuating i could pick a class and reroll when i could have all classes in my group from the first time,and nothing would change? With no allegiances,no personal character hero stories,no choice to deviate from the Bioware's idea of linear story (and we chain you to it), did it matter if i did a tutorial as mage or scout? By the time i was at that first area camp,i could have all classes in my group,play as each..a one time,one way attempt at making some money,no more. Tbh, the more time goes by,and info keeps coming in,the more i feel inclined to edit previous statements i've made in this forum,as i doubt i will be holding my breath for SWtor..especially since that last dev comment someone linked here,regarding how one "must be stupid not to follow Blizzard's example"..right..add this to what in their lack of imagination in what they want to call "story", [wanna see you all enduring the vid scenes every 5 mins in your 3rd and 4th alts,stories as linear and as unchanging as in previous games they made] and i'm already running away..DA2 falls exactly in that same category,havent even bothered,neither will i. It was in fact the combination of DA news and SWtor news that showed me this was a road they meant to have taken,no accident or delineation,and a road leading to even 'less'. Couldn't care less for their 150 million was it? project, if all it means is extra shiny wrapping on yet more of their past ways.

Originally posted by bansan

FYI, console game piracy is at least as big as PC game piracy.  Many, many business have been borned out of the modded consoles.

Not really. I can't be bothered to look it up right now, but there have quite some articles and news items over the years that console games of the same games sell a lot better than their PC version. For the gap between PC and console games, piracy is named, which is far larger and more widespread for PC than for console games.

Originally posted by Laughing-man

RPG- Role playing game, you are taking on a role of a character with an established back story and you are playing through a storyline as if you are acting in a play.

So yes, DA2 does fit RPG EXACTLY to a T.

Please stop trying to redefine things.

Edit: After reading the article I begin to wonder how long the reviewer has played RPGs, back when the genre was first getting its major titled like Final Fantasy 7 and Chrono Trigger you didn't get to create your own character or get to make many decisions on how the storyline played out.

Sounds like someone's crying wolf while screaming about the sky falling.   Goodness...

I'm willing to bet that those who dislike action RPG's also dislike J-RPG's as the Final Fantasy series.

Seems to me that just as it is with MMORPG's, the taste and preferences of those people only contains the subgenre of classic RPG's and want to declare this one as being THE one and only RPG genre, while in truth there are various subgenres of RPG that are all still RPG games.

Limited preferences, and an unwillingness to accept other sub genres of games within 'their' genre.

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

redefine? isnt it your definition that is at fault, RPG  is not a limited choice linear game, its about role playing, not following a prescripted pathway. the more a game takes away freedom of choice, and the less able you are to enact a role that YOU define, the less the game is a role playing one, and the more it becomes just an interactive story.  quite frankly im getting sick and tired of games that continually push out more and more cutscenes, their immersion breaking, and they add nothing in terms of role playing. so, do i think DA:2 represents a decline in the RPG game...  YES.  and i for one won't be buying it or any more of that kind of rubbish.

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

I don't know who you're referring to, but I've never said it wasn't an RPG, I'm simply saying it isn't a classic RPG in the style of it's predecessor. Instead it's an action RPG and in my own opinion, that is indeed a decline...not in the genre since we've always had action RPGs, but in the DA series and perhaps in Bioware itself. Tho I guess we'll have to wait and see on that last bit.

Saying its a decline implys that its following some sort of pattern, Action RPG's are not a new thing, and infact the style they represent has been around for a long time.  The reason I disagree is because I see no trend, I don't see Action RPG's starting to take over the genre and traditional RPG's being pushed aside, game makers are making both types of games.

You're totally missing the point, are you reading what I'm saying at all? I haven't said anything what you're saying. Please read what I'm saying and stop trying to infer your own meaning onto it. I am stating a simple opinion, DA:O was a traditional classic RPG in the spirit of Baldurs Gate. DA2 is a departure from that and like someone else said, switching styles like that in the same series is jarring at the least. I'm not talking about the genre. I'm not talking about trends. I'm talking about DA and also what we've come to expect from Bioware.

Yes... let me highlight what you said since you apparently don't remember saying it.

Now, do you see how what I said directly responds to what you said?

No?

You later talk about how you are specifically speaking on Bioware, just now, how am I suposed to comment on things you have yet to say?

Bioware has made another game that is VERY similar to KOTOR 1 and 2, extremely similar, this is NOT unusual for them the game they made is exactly on line with what they have been making since 2003.

Edit: Again the game plays identically to games they have made for over 8 years now, if that is a decline I'd love to see how you define Decline.

Originally posted by Laughing-man

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Laughing-man

The problem is you are all arguing semantics, fact of the mater is that DA2 IS an RPG, and it IS NOT a decline in the genre or anything new either.

If its not an RPG then neither is ANY game made by Square, Enix, or any other company that makes games resembling them, you seriously cannot argue that RPG's require meaningful desision making because almost no RPG does.  You also cannot argue that RPG's require a character maker, because that too would exempt several that won RPG of the year titles.

I'm sorry if you guys think you can redefine what the term RPG means but you can't.

I don't know who you're referring to, but I've never said it wasn't an RPG, I'm simply saying it isn't a classic RPG in the style of it's predecessor. Instead it's an action RPG and in my own opinion, that is indeed a decline...not in the genre since we've always had action RPGs, but in the DA series and perhaps in Bioware itself. Tho I guess we'll have to wait and see on that last bit.

Saying its a decline implys that its following some sort of pattern, Action RPG's are not a new thing, and infact the style they represent has been around for a long time.  The reason I disagree is because I see no trend, I don't see Action RPG's starting to take over the genre and traditional RPG's being pushed aside, game makers are making both types of games.

You're totally missing the point, are you reading what I'm saying at all? I haven't said anything what you're saying. Please read what I'm saying and stop trying to infer your own meaning onto it. I am stating a simple opinion, DA:O was a traditional classic RPG in the spirit of Baldurs Gate. DA2 is a departure from that and like someone else said, switching styles like that in the same series is jarring at the least. I'm not talking about the genre. I'm not talking about trends. I'm talking about DA and also what we've come to expect from Bioware.

Yes... let me highlight what you said since you apparently don't remember saying it.

Now, do you see how what I said directly responds to what you said?

No?

You later talk about how you are specifically speaking on Bioware, just now, how am I suposed to comment on things you have yet to say?

Bioware has made another game that is VERY similar to KOTOR 1 and 2, extremely similar, this is NOT unusual for them the game they made is exactly on line with what they have been making since 2003.

Edit: Again the game plays identically to games they have made for over 8 years now, if that is a decline I'd love to see how you define Decline.

Geez, how many times do I have to say it, I wasn't talking about the whole darn genre! I'm talking about a single series and a company, where yes they do have a certain pattern of giving us good quality classic RPGs!

Edit: Perhaps you TOTALLY missed the very next phrase after the one you highlighted. Here I'll highlight it for you in orange.

Edit 2: Also, if you can't tell the difference between the gameplay of the two games, then I don't know what to make of it. Clearly I'm not the only one to notice and to comment on it.

All these people whining about DA2, and not a single one of them has actually played through the game.

Get over it, people dont want to play bloated and overly complicated games, thats why the RPGs you love are "dumbed down" compared to the games that came before them.

Want to play D&D? well better go playu the very first release, since everyone after that has been "dumbed down".

Originally posted by BarakIII

Geez, how many times do I have to say it, I wasn't talking about the whole darn genre! I'm talking about a single series and a company, where yes they do have a certain pattern of giving us good quality classic RPGs!

Edit: Perhaps you TOTALLY missed the very next phrase after the one you highlighted. Here I'll highlight it for you in orange.

Edit 2: Also, if you can't tell the difference between the gameplay of the two games, then I don't know what to make of it. Clearly I'm not the only one to notice and to comment on it.

First off I just wanted to say my first post was not speaking directly to you, it was actually directed at the OP and the article.  

I know you were not talking on the whole genre, I listed off other games that Bioware has made back in 2003, Bioware, the makers of DA:O.  The reason I mention that specific series of games is because they are extremely similar in their gameplay apsects. 

If you are saying that the gameplay degraded in some way from DA:O to DA:2 then my point in bringing up KOTOR 1 & 2 is because they have extremely similar gameplay elements to the series.  If you are speaking specifically on the things the OP is, the fact that you are playing a character that is set in stone what you are and the game is linear and the choices don't seem to really effect the outcome, well he might as well be speaking on KOTOR 1 & 2, they had the same problems. 

Bioware has a trend in their new RPG's to make them this way, I'm not sure why the person who wrote the article was suprised by these game elements.

As for the gameplay combat changes, if the removal of auto attack and addition of hitting A to attack is game breaking then I don't know what to say, but it doesn't change the nature of the game, nor does the talent trees, or the fact that you spend a lot of time in one spot in the story line.  I just do not find anything you have said to be game breaking or game changing, I've read all of your posts several times now and I honestly think you are just crying wolf, the game play is the same.

Edit: added color.

Edit 2:  I forgot to cover the redux on casting time and the speed up of combat pacing by making your character jump at a monster rather than sluggisly walk up to them, turn, face them, and then start auto attacking.  Fantastic changes that ultimately improved the pace of combat, but  yet did not change the dificulty or nature of it.

Originally posted by BarakIII

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by BarakIII

I totally agree with you here. It's not that DA2 will necessarily be a bad game, it's just that it's such a departure from the original. The playstyle is so different and the sense of immersion just isn't there. It's not the classic RPG that DA:O was, it's more in line of what we see in Diablo 3. Despite the story it's devolved into a simple action RPG. If that's what we wanted, we have Blizzard for that.

I wouldn't go that far regarding your last statement.

The Diablo games were fun but I never could get through them as they were just waves of mobs to kill one after another.

I like the whole Storty concept of DA:O 2 and don't mind the more action type of combat.

The again I played DA:O on easy and seldom used the pause button. Reason being is that combat should be fun and exciting from my vantage point, not a series of pauses and breaks only to then do it all again for more pauses and breaks.

Given an example that the Bioware people had shown (not the demo) I can still see where stopping and "setting up your shots" can be very viable.

Perhaps I can't speak for others, tho I think there are many who feel as I do, but for myself I stand by my statement.

I just don't see how Dragon Age Origins 2 is like a Diablo game other than the combat is more action oriented.

And if it is then they are doing something better than Blizzard as I will not be buying Diablo III but have preordered DA:O 2