8659 réponses à ce sujet

[Riceyy-]

The only problem i had with this demo was the anime fighting style..

The fact my rogue could just a solid five meters in and out of combat just didnt seem right

[Kanten]

Rowlf wrote...

I have to wonder whether the majority of people complaining had much of an inclination to actually buy this game in the first place. I really enjoyed the demo. It's a very unique story style that they are adopting which hopefully will make this game really stand out. Bioware aren't happy to just churn out a same old sequel and they should be applauded for sticking their neck out in this respect.

I did. In the space of one year I went from a guaranteed preorder on DA2 to just not caring. The demo didn't help its case at all, I also have to question the wisdom in releasing an apparently antiquated build of the game as a marketing tool.

How did Bioware stick out their necks anyway? If anything they retracted their necks by making an overly agreeable "mow through darkspawn as ninja jesus" game to attract all of the testosterone-overloaded adolescent crowd.

http://www.nowgamer....-dutys-audience

^^ This did not inspire me with confidence.

[Shadow of Sparta]

RyuKaiser wrote...

... I'm going to ask. Did ANYONE here actually play Devil May Cry? Honestly? In Devil May Cry, you run at the nearest enemy, and each attack you may you have to actively swing. You can jump, or change the combo up in different ways by firing guns, charging your attacks, and using different weapons. Platforming was also a big deal about Devil May Cry. I am not seeing ANY of this in this game. You click an enemy, you click an attack button on a hotbar, and they do it. If anything, the game feels more like an MMO, I just wish it had Tab targetting so it'd be easier to find enemies in a crowd.

Even then, the demo was mostly to show off the action bits. I have never seen an RPG demo really give you huge chunks of story, as that's why you buy the game. Perhaps they'd be better off making a demo dropping you off in a section of town with a few quests to do. I know, however, that I greatly appreciate the speed of the game. I'm actively involved in combat, rather than sitting and eating popcorn while my team does all the work. Still, there really should be 2 types of demons for a game like this: Short exploration and some quests for the RPGers, and the action segments that we got for the action lovers.

I'm just thankful we even got a flipping demo. A lot of times we get kicked back for the demos, never receiving them, or getting them much, much later. Now all I see are rolling complaints that it's not DAO, it's not DAO. That's fine. But I liked the game, and it left me very interested in the series as a whole, willing to buy the game at release rather than wait for the Ultimate Collection, and that is no small feat.

i totally agree.i'm very annoyed by the constant comparisons to god of war and devil may cry.the combat is totally different.even demons souls has more combat than this but i love the way bioware have done it.they changed it but didn't completely overhaul it.advanced it whilst keeping the basic DA:O feel.i just don't understand the hating on the combat but i guess it's cause i'm a rpg noob and obviously don't know the classics.my opinion obviously

Modifié par Shadow of Sparta, 25 février 2011 - 01:50 .

[Deadmac]

It looks like many-many more people are picking up on the Asian style fighting. How does Asia fit into the whole European-Dark Fantasy atmosphere?

[Ambushbug]

Just my two cents, but I loved the demo. I can see where some people wouldn't like the changes, but for me personally they were all spot on.

[semtex86]

I'm sorry about the dice rolling part. I wasn't thinking. I'm sorry about that.

[Deadmac]

Ambushbug wrote...

Just my two cents, but I loved the demo. I can see where some people wouldn't like the changes, but for me personally they were all spot on.

^^^^^^^^^
Thats cool.  I can respect that. Even though I disargee with your perspective, I can understand that this game speaks to you on some level.

[T-Rock1209]

Yeah, by their reasons for not liking it are fairly bogus. They are complaining about difficulty... despite the fact that the difficulty is locked on normal. All of these RPG snobs are getting buttsore because Bioware is trying to appeal to casual gamers a little more. What they don't realize is they are not, in my opinion anyway, removing any of the tactical nuance from the game. Combat looks and plays a little faster but when push comes to shove it is practically identical. 

Only valid complaints I've seen are about art direction. Complains I share. I am a traditional LOTR type fantasy guy and was incredibly bummed at the new stylized look they were pushing. However, it really isn't a big enough change to turn me off of the series. Besides bigger swords and spikier armor not a lot has changed for the worse. Bar the Darkspawn. They're just bawlz. 

[HawXV2]

Deadmac wrote...

HawXV2 wrote...
Ok, what should they fight like then? The only thing even close to Mortal Kombat is the mid-air twist at the combo's end. And I guess you didn't complain when the enemies randomly disappeared in Origins. I don't think they're teleporting tbqh. I think it's more of an illusion of them moving really fast.

Rouges/Assassins are both rough and quiet. They don't move at light speed, but they sneak up on their victims. Once they get a hold of you, rouges use every tool at their disposal to kill off their target. You wouldn't see too much of the fast action blade fighting. It would be hands on with knives and small blades, but in a sneaky and quiet (cunning) manner. Very-very close combat.

Stealth movements.

But that wasn't how they did it in Origins, either. Once again, same game, just sped up.

[cstasynwn]

Salaciouschicken wrote...


Most of the negative opinions seem to be coming from people who really like the first one and the Bioware brand in general. Therefore they probably have been very dissapointed by Bioware who decided to take what was good about the first one out instead of fixing the issues that people had. Sequels should be about refinement, not selling the game to a different base halfway through a series. Seriously, the people who like the demo seem to be far more zealous than those who dislike it, 

QFT.

[BelgusTradis]

Salaciouschicken wrote...

Seriously, the people who like the demo seem to be far more zealous than those who dislike it.

Really?!  I would be shocked if was the
other way around.

[Carmen_Willow]

Rowlf wrote...

I have to wonder whether the majority of people complaining had much of an inclination to actually buy this game in the first place. I really enjoyed the demo. It's a very unique story style that they are adopting which hopefully will make this game really stand out. Bioware aren't happy to just churn out a same old sequel and they should be applauded for sticking their neck out in this respect.

As I had stated, I had already preordered my copy and will still get it.  I loved Origins.  I played it so many times I had to create extra accounts on this network to hold all my characters.  It is a great game.  I am a huge Bioware fan.  Even when I saw those first stills that they published for this game, and knew that I really didn't like the art style, I held on...because I am a fan. Even as disappointed as I am with the Demo, I will still play the game because I am fervently hoping for a great tale! 

If the game is a success, the Bioware is going to look at these forums to figure out what worked.  If it's a failure, they are going to look at these forums to figure out what went wrong.  That's why we need to let them know what it is that we liked and didn't like.  I don't expect Bioware to make the game to suit me.   I expect them to make a game that will make a profit for their company.  If they go in a direction I don't care for and it works for their company, then so be it.  They have the right to build their games as they see fit.  Just as I have the right not to purchase future games if I don't like their new direction.  No harm. No foul.

[Deadmac]

HawXV2 wrote...

But that wasn't how they did it in Origins, either. Once again, same game, just sped up.

Untrue, "Dragon Age: Origins" did have stealth and cunning as the focus for rouges.

[wrdnshprd]

one thing regarding the difficulty.. i encourage everyone to watch the gamespot demo. in case you havent seen it, its about 30 minutes if footage. they said in that demo, that, yes, on the PC, normal difficulty has been toned down a bit.. they said its really is designed for you to get used to your abilities and to allow you to tweak your character the way you want. if you want more of a challenge, they recommend hard, as that is supposed to encourage you to use all your characters and not just hawke.

[ajohnny50]

I dont know if I was the only one who felt this way - but playing as a 2H warrior, combat seemed extremely artificial compared to DA:O. I thought it played as more of an action arcade game than an RPG.



In DA:O, I enjoyed watching the fights. The auto-attack allowed it to be watched like a movie, as a character would swing and miss, or the target would block. Talents would be activated at opportune times to make best use of the situation, and you could watch your warrior swing this way and that with his sword then his shield and knock the enemy out. It was beautiful.



Thus far in DA:2, I feel like all that beauty is lost in a frenetic melee. I hate having to mash A all the time, and am constantly left without a target because I have landed a killing blow and have to search for one. There seems to be no auto-attack or auto-move to the target. Both of the talents that I used as the 2H warrior seemed to essentially useful for the same thing, and the animations were very fast. The one of Hawke jumping into the air and slamming his sword on the ground sort of broke the suspension of disbelief for me - I can see a powerful war cry, or a magic ward pushing enemies back, or a shield check - but why in the world would an experienced warrior bash his sword against the ground with all his might? Doesnt he know that swords break that way? There is way too much going on in the screen to notice any single thing.



Even with a 2H sword - I would hit the enemy and take away only a small sliver of his life. I would be hitting people 10-15 times before they would drop, with none of the lead up that DA:O had with its elegant combat.



I think the automation of the character in DA:O combat lent itself to the RPG feel - even controlling a character, the character still had some base reactions that anyone would have. You didnt just sit there and take hits because you don't know in-game to turn around and hit the guy behind you. You have to initiate that out of character for the in-character to do it.



I was really looking forward to the game - the BG series and DA:O are my favorite games of all times, but I just really feel like I have played the DA:2 demo before - when I played the Ninety Nine Knights 2 demo.

[Yrkoon]

Edit:  redundant post removed.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 25 février 2011 - 02:04 .

[Brimleydower]

Rowlf wrote...

I have to wonder whether the majority of people complaining had much of an inclination to actually buy this game in the first place. I really enjoyed the demo. It's a very unique story style that they are adopting which hopefully will make this game really stand out. Bioware aren't happy to just churn out a same old sequel and they should be applauded for sticking their neck out in this respect.

I had the highest hopes possible for this sequel.  If the demo is anything to judge by, however, the sequel is going to pale in comparison to the original.  I'm not real sure why people keep insinuating Bioware has to do anything in regards to making a game stand out.  Are they trying to distance themselves from their own formulae?  All of the Infinity Engine Games, the NWNs, KOTOR, and so on... these are all very distinctive games that stand out above other RPGs on the market.  In fact, most of the changes made between Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2 are accomplishing just the opposite: generic action-fantasy combats for the console, the abandoning of player-created characters in favor of cheesy voice actors, crude/bland/boring dialogue mechanics, and a portrayal of women that rivals DoA volleyball.

I just hope that Bioware analyzes more than the income generated by DA2.  At this point, the game's title alone will generate some sells, thanks to how amazing the first Dragon Age was. 

[Sidney]

Landerk wrote...

I see alot of people complaining that their are not enough options on the chat ball thing, really in any game how many chat options do you need, I have played BG series, NWN, all the old rpg games and yes DA:O / A and sure their are times I would like to respond in a way that is not available, but have always found a choice I could deal with, I am sure it will be the same with DA2.

Well and there "limit" isn't all that. Play BG2 or FO or any of those again and dear god it isn't like each dialog tree has 10 options. You have around 4 most of the time so the wheel can easily replicate that variety.

[ransompendragon]

Carmen_Willow wrote...

Just got finished playing the demo on PC. Playing a fem-mage. I'm usually an Xbox player, but I don't want to spend the money to get Gold just to play a demo, so.....anyway.

1. The combat. You call that combat? On the second Ogre, with everyone down except Aveline, she and the Ogre stood in the same positions for at least 2 minutes with her stab, stab, stab, stabbing away and the Ogre grunt, grunt, grunting.. It was a contest to see if her health was going to run out before his. Hers lasted longer. Gee, that was fun, about as much fun as major dental surgery.

In the fight in the Chantry, it was once again Aveline (Why in the Maker's name does the heal spell take so darned long to cool down? That's just STUPID!!!. Must have been sold to me by Edgar-Mr. Cheap Spell himself- in the Imperial City --oh wait,different game.) stab, stab, stabbing away with Isabella, stab, stab stabbing away (Oh Maker, save me from the princesses stabbity!) I'm sorry, there was nothing realisitc or scary about the combat. I would take the Ogre fight in the tower ANY DAY.  Now that was scary!  The combat felt like going backwards to KOTOR.  At least in origins, it sometimes felt real.  I actually didn't mind moving to a target. IRL, that's what you have to do.

2. The art style. Boring. Forgetable. Ignorable. Dull. Meaningless. Cartoonish.

3. The boobs. I want to know who Isabella's plastic surgeon is. He/she should be sued...

4. The come-on....oh pullleeezzzeee, give me a break! Save me from propositions a mere five seconds after I've met someone.  I may be HOT (my avatar that is) but not THAT HOT.  Isabella should have more self-respect.

5. Can't speak to the story.  Didn't see enough of it to Judge.

There was one bright light on the video gaming scene today.  The Skyrim Trailer.  Now there was a universe I remembered....there was a place I wanted to visit right now....a more beautiful Tamriel with what appeared to be improved combat...can't wait.

Oh, back to DA:2.  I'll buy the game.  I've already bought the game.  But I won't preorder DA:3 if there is one.

[The above is my personal opinion.  I do not expect anyone to agree with me.]  Edited because I hit the wrong button and posted too early.

LoL. I just had that stab-stab-stab experience with Aveline after fem-mage-hawke croaked. But ogre lasted longer.
( I don't usually play female characters and won't be in this game. They way they swing their hips almost threw MY back out.)

Anyway, I do agree on all points (your review reads like mine only better). Not un-pre-ordering but really hoping the story gets around the other issues.

[TheSarex]

Shadow of Sparta wrote...

RyuKaiser wrote...

... I'm going to ask. Did ANYONE here actually play Devil May Cry? Honestly? In Devil May Cry, you run at the nearest enemy, and each attack you may you have to actively swing. You can jump, or change the combo up in different ways by firing guns, charging your attacks, and using different weapons. Platforming was also a big deal about Devil May Cry. I am not seeing ANY of this in this game. You click an enemy, you click an attack button on a hotbar, and they do it. If anything, the game feels more like an MMO, I just wish it had Tab targetting so it'd be easier to find enemies in a crowd.

Even then, the demo was mostly to show off the action bits. I have never seen an RPG demo really give you huge chunks of story, as that's why you buy the game. Perhaps they'd be better off making a demo dropping you off in a section of town with a few quests to do. I know, however, that I greatly appreciate the speed of the game. I'm actively involved in combat, rather than sitting and eating popcorn while my team does all the work. Still, there really should be 2 types of demons for a game like this: Short exploration and some quests for the RPGers, and the action segments that we got for the action lovers.

I'm just thankful we even got a flipping demo. A lot of times we get kicked back for the demos, never receiving them, or getting them much, much later. Now all I see are rolling complaints that it's not DAO, it's not DAO. That's fine. But I liked the game, and it left me very interested in the series as a whole, willing to buy the game at release rather than wait for the Ultimate Collection, and that is no small feat.

i totally agree.i'm very annoyed by the constant comparisons to god of war and devil may cry.the combat is totally different.even demons souls has more combat than this but i love the way bioware have done it.they changed it but didn't completely overhaul it.advanced it whilst keeping the basic DA:O feel.i just don't understand the hating on the combat but i guess it's cause i'm a rpg noob and obviously don't know the classics.my opinion obviously

LOL

It's not like devil may cry,  it feels like devil may cry, like bioware said it's instant action in a can... You guys take things too literally...

[DJBare]

cstasynwn wrote...

Salaciouschicken wrote...
Most of the negative opinions seem to be coming from people who really like the first one and the Bioware brand in general. Therefore they probably have been very dissapointed by Bioware who decided to take what was good about the first one out instead of fixing the issues that people had. Sequels should be about refinement, not selling the game to a different base halfway through a series. Seriously, the people who like the demo seem to be far more zealous than those who dislike it, 

QFT.

+1, there is a definite feeling of the "faithfull" here, but then extremism is on both sides.

[ransompendragon]

Sidney wrote...

Landerk wrote...

I see alot of people complaining that their are not enough options on the chat ball thing, really in any game how many chat options do you need, I have played BG series, NWN, all the old rpg games and yes DA:O / A and sure their are times I would like to respond in a way that is not available, but have always found a choice I could deal with, I am sure it will be the same with DA2.

Well and there "limit" isn't all that. Play BG2 or FO or any of those again and dear god it isn't like each dialog tree has 10 options. You have around 4 most of the time so the wheel can easily replicate that variety.

for me it isn't the number of choices it is having no clue what the choice actually consists of. "We need to move on" comes out as "are you two for real?" or something like that. I want to read a meaningful choice of how my character will respond. They could save the $$ and shorten the voice over -- or put in a toggle for "long" vs "short" dialogue options like there is an option for sub titles for the voice overs.

[HawXV2]

Deadmac wrote...

HawXV2 wrote...

But that wasn't how they did it in Origins, either. Once again, same game, just sped up.

Untrue, "Dragon Age: Origins" did have stealth and cunning as the focus for rouges.

...You've confused me.

[errant_knight]

ajohnny50 wrote...

I dont know if I was the only one who felt this way - but playing as a 2H warrior, combat seemed extremely artificial compared to DA:O. I thought it played as more of an action arcade game than an RPG.

In DA:O, I enjoyed watching the fights. The auto-attack allowed it to be watched like a movie, as a character would swing and miss, or the target would block. Talents would be activated at opportune times to make best use of the situation, and you could watch your warrior swing this way and that with his sword then his shield and knock the enemy out. It was beautiful.

Thus far in DA:2, I feel like all that beauty is lost in a frenetic melee. I hate having to mash A all the time, and am constantly left without a target because I have landed a killing blow and have to search for one. There seems to be no auto-attack or auto-move to the target. Both of the talents that I used as the 2H warrior seemed to essentially useful for the same thing, and the animations were very fast. The one of Hawke jumping into the air and slamming his sword on the ground sort of broke the suspension of disbelief for me - I can see a powerful war cry, or a magic ward pushing enemies back, or a shield check - but why in the world would an experienced warrior bash his sword against the ground with all his might? Doesnt he know that swords break that way? There is way too much going on in the screen to notice any single thing.

Even with a 2H sword - I would hit the enemy and take away only a small sliver of his life. I would be hitting people 10-15 times before they would drop, with none of the lead up that DA:O had with its elegant combat.

I think the automation of the character in DA:O combat lent itself to the RPG feel - even controlling a character, the character still had some base reactions that anyone would have. You didnt just sit there and take hits because you don't know in-game to turn around and hit the guy behind you. You have to initiate that out of character for the in-character to do it.

I was really looking forward to the game - the BG series and DA:O are my favorite games of all times, but I just really feel like I have played the DA:2 demo before - when I played the Ninety Nine Knights 2 demo.

This is exactly what I was trying to say about the differences in combat last night, but being less than sucessful. This is why I used to love playing a sword and shield warrior and found it so immensely disappointing in the demo.

Modifié par errant_knight, 25 février 2011 - 02:03 .

[Brimleydower]

Sidney wrote...

Landerk wrote...

I see alot of people complaining that their are not enough options on the chat ball thing, really in any game how many chat options do you need, I have played BG series, NWN, all the old rpg games and yes DA:O / A and sure their are times I would like to respond in a way that is not available, but have always found a choice I could deal with, I am sure it will be the same with DA2.

Well and there "limit" isn't all that. Play BG2 or FO or any of those again and dear god it isn't like each dialog tree has 10 options. You have around 4 most of the time so the wheel can easily replicate that variety.

It's not just the reduced number of options, it's having a clear-cut "Good Guy, Funny Guy, Bad Guy" label slapped onto each of the three decisions.  Once more, this boils down to character investment.  RPGs should make you care about the decision your making, the answers you're giving, and the choices you're facing.  "Good Guys pick #1" is terribly unimaginative and basic.