This post is spot-on, i agree with every point you have made.Chairman Yang said:DAO's combat is some of the best in the genre for a long time--mostly because of the difficulty level and because party-based combat will almost always trump single-character combat--but I still don't like it as much as BG2's. Why? Because:
* there's much less enemy diversity (being set exclusively in Ferelden and with Bioware going for a dark/low fantasy tone this was likely to happen, but it's disappointing nonetheless)
* the mechanics are much less transparent. Apparently Bioware didn't want it this way but they couldn't keep the in-game documentation up-to-date quickly enough
* the combat moves so fast (even with frequent pausing in between) that lots of the subtleties of your party's various abilities are basically irrelevant. This is an inherent limitation of real-time combat, but BG2 managed to transcend it to some extent by having pen-and-paper mechanics that were easier to process mentally
* there are four-character parties instead of six-character parties, and the characters are less distinct from one another as compared with the characters in BG2
The enemy variety is definitively a big problem with the game, i feel like for the majority of the game. 80% of the time, i've fought either darkspawn or humans. They need to improve this in the sequel.
A 6-party limit instead of 4 would be wonderful, didn't NWN2 have a mod that added this? i wonder if the same will happen with DA. Though they'd need to re-balance the entire game in addition.
I've noticed, that pretty much every party-based w-rpg post-kotor has had a limit of 4-party members. Is there a reason for this like - it's easier to program / balance the game for 4-party members instead of 6?