124 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

This has got to be one of the stupidest threads to yet grace this forum. And yes, I'm including "I want to romance Flemeth/Bethany."



I wonder how long the "Why is Dragon Age 2 called Dragon Age 2?" topic can continue.

[Davasar]

It's not a sequel.

Ever if they did say the game would be the "Spiritual successor to the Baldurs Gate series"....

Which incididently lets you keep playing the same character over a few games...

Those were sequels.

This is not what they are doing.

It's a new game. So what?

Don't buy it if you don't like it. This is meant with the best of intentions.

Modifié par Davasar, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:03 .

[Nerivant]

Davasar wrote...

It's not a sequel.

Ever if they did say the game would be the "Spiritual successor to the Baldurs Gate series"....

Which incididently lets you keep playing the same character over a few games...

Those were sequels.

This is not what they are doing.

It's a new game. So what?

Don't buy it if you don't like it. This is meant with the best of intentions.

Look up the definition of sequel before you post what constitutes a sequel or not.

If you're too lazy to do that, here's the condensed version. Your post is wrong.

[Darkhour]

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
No it isn't. The first game is about the Blight.  Sorry, but taking place on the same planet or continent does not a sequel make.

In a game where the planet or continent is made up, it does.

You lose.

Press F1 to start a new game.

I see you're out of arguments.  Thanks for playing.

You still haven't provided proof that DA2 is not a sequel to DAO. And since it follows the definition of a sequel to the letter, there isn't proof. Your argument is invalid. Good day.

That's like saying I haven't provided proof that water is wet.  It is not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins.  It is the next installment in the Dragon Age saga, but not a sequel to Origins. How hard is that you wrap your head around?

How many ways can I say this?

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron is NOT a sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Return of the Jedi is NOT a sequel to Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Ironman is NOT a sequel to Spiderman 3. They ARE both part of the Marvel Universe.

Superman Returns in NOT a sequel to the Batman Begins. They ARE both part of the DC Universe.

Get it now?

...who am I kidding. Of course you don't.

[Davasar]

Darkhour wrote...

That's like saying I haven't provided proof that water is wet.  It is not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins.  It is the next installment in the Dragon Age saga, but not a sequel to Origins. How hard is that you wrap your head around?

How many ways can I say this?

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron is NOT a sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Return of the Jedi is NOT a sequel to Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Ironman is NOT a sequel to Spiderman 3. They ARE both part of the Marvel Universe.

Superman Returns in NOT a sequel to the Batman Begins. They ARE both part of the DC Universe.

Get it now?

...who am I kidding. Of course you don't.

This.

[Morroian]

Davasar wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

That's like saying I haven't provided proof that water is wet.  It is not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins.  It is the next installment in the Dragon Age saga, but not a sequel to Origins. How hard is that you wrap your head around?

How many ways can I say this?

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron is NOT a sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Return of the Jedi is NOT a sequel to Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Ironman is NOT a sequel to Spiderman 3. They ARE both part of the Marvel Universe.

Superman Returns in NOT a sequel to the Batman Begins. They ARE both part of the DC Universe.

Get it now?

...who am I kidding. Of course you don't.

This.

...is wrong.

[Nerivant]

Darkhour wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
No it isn't. The first game is about the Blight.  Sorry, but taking place on the same planet or continent does not a sequel make.

In a game where the planet or continent is made up, it does.

You lose.

Press F1 to start a new game.

I see you're out of arguments.  Thanks for playing.

You still haven't provided proof that DA2 is not a sequel to DAO. And since it follows the definition of a sequel to the letter, there isn't proof. Your argument is invalid. Good day.

That's like saying I haven't provided proof that water is wet.  It is not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins.  It is the next installment in the Dragon Age saga, but not a sequel to Origins. How hard is that you wrap your head around?

How many ways can I say this?

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron is NOT a sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Return of the Jedi is NOT a sequel to Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Ironman is NOT a sequel to Spiderman 3. They ARE both part of the Marvel Universe.

Superman Returns in NOT a sequel to the Batman Begins. They ARE both part of the DC Universe.

Get it now?

...who am I kidding. Of course you don't.

As someone who loves stories in all their forms, I just died a little inside. The fact that you actually believe the nonsense you are spouting is just... incredible.

[Davasar]

Right....because Friends is the sequel to Sienfeld because they both occur in New York.

[Nerivant]

Davasar wrote...

Right....because Friends is the sequel to Sienfeld because they both occur in New York.

No, because they're not in the same fictional universe.

Seriously, either arrange to take a literature class next year at whatever school you attend or go to your local community college and take a class there.

[Davasar]

Looks like you learned to obtuse in school.



Good job.

[Nerivant]

Davasar wrote...

Looks like you learned to obtuse in school.

Good job.

Uh, you should take an English class too, I guess.

[Darkhour]

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
No it isn't. The first game is about the Blight.  Sorry, but taking place on the same planet or continent does not a sequel make.

In a game where the planet or continent is made up, it does.

You lose.

Press F1 to start a new game.

I see you're out of arguments.  Thanks for playing.

You still haven't provided proof that DA2 is not a sequel to DAO. And since it follows the definition of a sequel to the letter, there isn't proof. Your argument is invalid. Good day.

That's like saying I haven't provided proof that water is wet.  It is not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins.  It is the next installment in the Dragon Age saga, but not a sequel to Origins. How hard is that you wrap your head around?

How many ways can I say this?

Star Wars: Rogue Squadron is NOT a sequel to Star Wars: A New Hope.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Return of the Jedi is NOT a sequel to Ewoks: The Battle for Endor.  They ARE both part of the Star Wars saga.

Ironman is NOT a sequel to Spiderman 3. They ARE both part of the Marvel Universe.

Superman Returns in NOT a sequel to the Batman Begins. They ARE both part of the DC Universe.

Get it now?

...who am I kidding. Of course you don't.

As someone who loves stories in all their forms, I just died a little inside. The fact that you actually believe the nonsense you are spouting is just... incredible.

So you think Ironman is a sequel to Spiderman?

If so,  at you!!!

If not, thanks for admitting defeat with your lack of counter-argument.

Let me make something else clear.  Even if DA2 was a continuation of the Warden's story and the Warden was the one rising to power I would still rather it be called "Dragon Age: Rise to Power". This one sided argument that I am winning rather handily is occuring only because some people seem to think that DA2 not being a sequel to Origins = BAD.  And therfore they must defend its honor by erroneously asserting it is a sequel, which it clearly is not.

Modifié par Darkhour, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:24 .

[cmathews03]

Utoryo wrote...

"Names are pretty, but useless. The Chasind folk call me Flemeth; I suppose it will do." --Flemeth.

Such silly pedantics. The name of the game is Dragon Age. Repeat after me: Age. Not Warden, not Blight, not even Flemeth. It's pretty clear that the series is the story of the Age and the great events of the era as told by the great heroes involved (aka Varric). So if you define a sequel as 'a novel, play, etc., that continues a previously related story' (as per the Collins English Dictionary) and you define the story of Dragon Age as a series as the story of the Age, Dragon Age 2 is certainly a sequel even in the strictest sense.

If that is not enough for you, and it appears it isn't, I suspect you have too much time on your hands, and you'd easily make a mockery of even the time I wasted writing this reply.

[Atakuma]

Davasar wrote...

Looks like you learned to obtuse in school.

Good job.

Nice platitude. is there a reason you're being so confrontational?

Modifié par Atakuma, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:24 .

[Nerivant]

Darkhour wrote...
So you think Ironman is a sequel to Spiderman?

http://en.wikipedia....Marvel_Universe

If Ironman's and Spiderman's stories take place in Earth-616, then technically, yes.

Modifié par Nerivant, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:26 .

[Davasar]

Atakuma wrote...

Davasar wrote...

Looks like you learned to obtuse in school.

Good job.

Nice platitude. is there a reason you're being so confrontational?

Thank you

Initiatally I was trying not to be.

Because when making a point that people disagree with and then I get flamed seems a little confrontational too.

[Slayer299]

Khayness wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Darkhour: Short of the Baldur's Gate series, I cannot think of a single rpg sequel that actually fit that defintion.

Baldur's Gate 2:SoA Doesn't have anything to do with Baldur's Gate, therefore it's not a true sequel.

I don't see your reasoning, wasn't BG2 a continuation with the same main char's?? And neither story ws about the city of BG beyond minor setting in the last fraction of the game.

[Davasar]

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
So you think Ironman is a sequel to Spiderman?

http://en.wikipedia....Marvel_Universe

If Ironman's and Spiderman's stories take place in Earth-616, then technically, yes.

Well technically with theoretical physics an elephant can hang from a cliff with his tail tied to a daisy no problem.

But everyone knows it's impossible. 

Sequels involve the same characters and continue their story.

[Sneelonz]

I'll just throw my opinion in:
Since each game is more it's own unique story, I feel like each one should have it's own title and should be independent from the others. Really though, it hardly matters.

Modifié par Sneelonz, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:32 .

[Nerivant]

Sneelonz wrote...

I'll just throw my opinion in:
Since each game is more it's own unique story, I feel like each one should have it's own title and should be independent from the others...

For them to not be sequels, they would have to create a completely different fictional universe for each one. If they all take place in the same one, it's impossible for them to be independent.

[Davasar]

Sneelonz wrote...

I'll just throw my opinion in:
Since each game is more it's own unique story, I feel like each one should have it's own title and should be independent from the others. Really though, it hardly matters.

Agreed.

[Nerivant]

Davasar wrote...

Nerivant wrote...

Darkhour wrote...
So you think Ironman is a sequel to Spiderman?

http://en.wikipedia....Marvel_Universe

If Ironman's and Spiderman's stories take place in Earth-616, then technically, yes.

Well technically with theoretical physics an elephant can hang from a cliff with his tail tied to a daisy no problem.

But everyone knows it's impossible. 

Sequels involve the same characters and continue their story.

What? No. It's not a requirement for it to be a sequel.

[Atakuma]

A sequel is a work in literature, film, or other media that portrays events set in the same fictional universe as a previous work, usually chronologically following the events of that work.

[SirOccam]

Much ado about nothing. Seriously, who cares if they put a 2 there? Like it affects anything ever.

[Nerivant]

Atakuma wrote...

A sequel is a work in literature, film, or other media that portrays events set in the same fictional universe as a previous work, usually chronologically following the events of that work.

The keyword is "usually." As long as it takes place in the same fictional universe, it's a sequel. Nobody seems to be able to understand it.

The connotation of sequel has changed so much that people don't even realize what it means.

Modifié par Nerivant, 22 novembre 2010 - 05:37 .