184 réponses à ce sujet

[v_ware]

Sounds like this game could be the first drop in quality of Bioware till now pretty flawless produce. Hope this doesn't become a recurring theme.



And I hope EA isn't making Bioware another one of it's gold farms.

[Chaia]

v_ware wrote...

They will probably release a ****ton of DLC after the release to increase the length of this game. Not that this is a good thing.

In the Swedish review floating around said that they "express fears about future DLC" that might be why their a bit fearful of any DLC, I just hope they don't do what happened with Fallout 3 and the Broken Steal DLC which charged people for the better ending.

[SolidSolidino]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...
Unsatisfying ending. .

Of course my dear... ^___^
have u ever heard of DLC? XD

[Dubya75]

I have to say I'm also having trouble accepting the level recycling thing. A weak ending is acceptable, providing that means the probability of an expansion.

Weak and recycled level design can't be fixed however - there's no cure for it.

But it may not be Bioware's laziness but instead pressure from EA with limited budget and time given to Bioware to complete the game that forces them to make choices like this.

[Covi]

Chaia wrote...

v_ware wrote...

They will probably release a ****ton of DLC after the release to increase the length of this game. Not that this is a good thing.

In the Swedish review floating around said that they "express fears about future DLC" that might be why their a bit fearful of any DLC, I just hope they don't do what happened with Fallout 3 and the Broken Steal DLC which charged people for the better ending.

Broken Steel was a bit annoying, but If DA2 dlc is on the same level as most Fallout 3 dlc, I'll be happy. It's just that most Origins dlc reused old enviroments, added some enemy spawn points and a few lines of dialogue.

[HolyAvenger]

Actually with regards to the unsatisfying ending...you kinda have a hint of it already. Because the game ENDS with the world on the brink of war and Chantry broken. This makes me think that DA2 is purposefully left with a semi-cliffhanger ending and that DA3 will be about said war.

[Chaia]

Not too bothered about the map not being open world, I'm not playing a Elder Scrolls game, am bothered about the city being empty (the one thing that irritated me about Denerim) and the environments being copied and pasted though; kinda wondering if this is because of a short production period.

Covi wrote...

Broken Steel was a bit annoying, but If DA2 dlc is on the same level as most Fallout 3 dlc, I'll be happy. It's just that most Origins dlc reused old enviroments, added some enemy spawn points and a few lines of dialogue.

True, say what you will about Fallout DLC but they were good quality and added something new to the game, but as most of DA2 is taking place within Kirkwall I'm just wondering if most of the DLC will take place there; well I suppose we'll get a good indecation in Sebastian's DLC.

[SolidSolidino]

HolyAvenger, but it's obvious!!!

The reviewer wrote "absolute unsatisfying ending"

not "bad ending" (personal opinion)

this means others DLC coming in future, to explain what they've left unexplained.

DLC that they have ALREADY developed, but cuts from the game. (imho)

[JulianoV]

Jesus Christ people, both parties, regardless of it being the ruthless defenders of the game and the negativity vortexes seem to be taking this a bit too serious, If the game was named Dragon Age:hawke there wouldn't be so much hostility. They ARE changing things around. Adapting, if you will, much like they did beetween the available Mass Effect entries.



The difference was that Mass Effect 1 used an experimental, original, charming yet flawed mechanic. Mass Effect 2 went for a more established set of mechanics while retaining some of the original. Dragon Age 2 is doing the exact opposite, It's leaving safe ground and entering the difficult one, the one of multi-character tactical action-RPG. The problem is in the ACTION part, that renders the whole thing a bit oxymoronic. It's explainable if it doesn't feel as tight, but if it works, heck, I'm fine.



Besides, the reviewer never said BioWare was AIMING for a classical RPG experience, only that se somewhat regrets finding that good old tactical RPG conventions seem to be disappearing, what with the action-based influence of MMOs.=or hack-n-slashers. Witcher 2 is presenting the same thing as Dragon Age 2, both being sequels to incredible games, the difference being that Witcher 1 was already trying to break such mold, so the blow's not as tough.



About a below satisfactory ending, well, I'd expect such. DLC is BioWare's new model and, you know what, I actually prefer future journeys than the usual retrofitting. Loading a previous save to access some content knowing you'll have to replay a lot of stuff is kind of bothersome. Besides, while engaging, I really didn't think the ending of Origins was all that great. It felt a bit dettached, I guess. I had no trouble choosing beetween my mute, will-less, dumb-staring warden and a great friend and



(SPOILERS COMMENCE)



A war hero trying to right his wrongs



(SPOILERS END)



What worries me is bad level design. It's like back in the day, joining a new group for table RPG and find out that the DM just never cares about mentioning or positioning furniture, buildings or terrain on the grid. I mean, I understand it can be annoying to prepare all that, but come on, if I went "Oh, ok, we're not doing that? Ok, sure" with a poor guy that had a week to LIVE and prepare all this stuff, I believe it's within my rights to be a bit let down by people that work on rendering those encounters fun and strategic. From the demo it seems what we're getting is a succession of corridors and arenas, which is a shame.

[SolidSolidino]

Another question bad for me is this:
You can't speak with your companions during a mission, only a few line of dialogue when you clicking on them...bad very bad.
Seems the've cut everything in this game.
Level design, menu style very poor, ability tree, and so on...

Dragon Age Origins = Developed in 5 years
Dragon Age 2 = Developed in 1 year.
That's all.

Modifié par SolidSolidino, 26 février 2011 - 11:09 .

[v_ware]

JulianoV wrote...

What worries me is bad level design. It's like back in the day, joining a new group for table RPG and find out that the DM just never cares about mentioning or positioning furniture, buildings or terrain on the grid. I mean, I understand it can be annoying to prepare all that, but come on, if I went "Oh, ok, we're not doing that? Ok, sure" with a poor guy that had a week to LIVE and prepare all this stuff, I believe it's within my rights to be a bit let down by people that work on rendering those encounters fun and strategic. From the demo it seems what we're getting is a succession of corridors and arenas, which is a shame.

Did you even play Dragon Age?

WORST LEVEL DESIGN EVAAAAAH!!!

(Awakening was a better though)

[Stardusk78]

v_ware wrote...

JulianoV wrote...

What worries me is bad level design. It's like back in the day, joining a new group for table RPG and find out that the DM just never cares about mentioning or positioning furniture, buildings or terrain on the grid. I mean, I understand it can be annoying to prepare all that, but come on, if I went "Oh, ok, we're not doing that? Ok, sure" with a poor guy that had a week to LIVE and prepare all this stuff, I believe it's within my rights to be a bit let down by people that work on rendering those encounters fun and strategic. From the demo it seems what we're getting is a succession of corridors and arenas, which is a shame.

Did you even play Dragon Age?

WORST LEVEL DESIGN EVAAAAAH!!!

(Awakening was a better though)

Bioware isn't famed for level design; Bethseda is more into that.

Btw, your English is very good.

[Purgatious]

So much of that was in origins though, the bad level design, corridors and no open world at all, citys not being filled with people.

[Duncan Anderson]

Looks promising, the pros are all improtant things done well, the cons are all really minor, anoances at worst.

Modifié par Duncan Anderson, 26 février 2011 - 11:33 .

[schnitzeljaeger]

I'm waiting for a 4players.de review :-) I advise everyone who speaks a bit of German (or trusts the google translator) to look up their reviews - they give the games the ratings they deserve. No developer bonus like the "normal" pc mags (Germany: PC Games, PC Action, Gamestar) give out freely. On their site a 85% is equal to awesome...

[v_ware]

Purgatious wrote...

So much of that was in origins though, the bad level design, corridors and no open world at all, citys not being filled with people.

I agree, DAO apperently had some redeeming quality that DA2 lacks, like: longer, choices,  and a more RPG like approach.

I think that DA2 will be quite well recieved, now everybody is just panicking and focusing on the negative. I played the demo and honestly, I liked it (apart from the awfull view and enemies appearing mid air and some of the problems that DA0 had too)

Stardusk78 wrote...

Bioware isn't famed for level design; Bethseda is more into that.

Btw, your English is very good.

Thanks, I think they did a pretty good job in KOTOR and Mass Effect though. Dragon Age just really sticks out.

Modifié par v_ware, 26 février 2011 - 11:38 .

[KLUME777]

"Bad ending", "bad level design". Doesn't sound too good. And i hated the demo.

[MortalEngines]

SolidSolidino wrote...

Another question bad for me is this:
You can't speak with your companions during a mission, only a few line of dialogue when you clicking on them...bad very bad.
Seems the've cut everything in this game.
Level design, menu style very poor, ability tree, and so on...

Dragon Age Origins = Developed in 5 years
Dragon Age 2 = Developed in 1 year.
That's all.

Dragon Age Origins = Developed in 7 years. 
Dragon Age 2 = Developed in 2 years.

Lest to mention Dragon Age Origins developments time mostly (like 70%) consisted of creating an entirely new engine and not to mention all the time taken to make the console ports (5%?). DA2 already had a well-worked with engine to work with, meaning that they only needed to add a few tweaks, hence the development time can be cut down dramaticly. Quanitity /= Quality.

[AkiKishi]

I'm still trying to work out how the review leads to that score.. I'd really love to stick the fraud squad on some of these reviewers.

Saw some levels in the Silverman interview made feel ill. Not as Ill as listening to his crap though.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 26 février 2011 - 11:44 .

[Almahnsor]

In the demo the level cap is 15. I hope it will be higher in the game or at least increased through expansions. I would find disturbing that the champion of Kirkwall, over a span of 10years, is much weaker than the warden who had only 1-2 years at disposal...

[Johnny20]

Well, that is depressing...

Modifié par Johnny20, 26 février 2011 - 12:01 .

[ViSeiRa]

15? without using the console you can't reach higher than 6, with the console I tried as far as 45, and I could have reached 50... but I'll have to agree with you on the weakness part, if I can't get more than 25 abilities out of 80 that'd be a little messed up, considering we can't even take advantage of CCC without upgrading.

Anyway, as to the review, bad level design? I can connect with that, enemies spawning in the middle of the fight is really a big part of that, at least for me... as to the story I'll wait and see for myself but I already don't expect DA2 to be as fun as Origins for me or as immersing for that matter.

Modifié par ViSeirA, 26 février 2011 - 11:55 .

[Nerevar-as]

Duncan Anderson wrote...

Looks promising, the pros are all improtant things done well, the cons are all really minor, anoances at worst.

A bad ending can ruin very good stories, hardly a minor point. Can´t be worse than the original Divinity 2 ending I hope.

With so many talent trees and a level cap of 50 I think Hawke will probably be the star of DA3, despite the comments of changing main characters. Either that or several expansions, which is also a bit annoying.

[Johnny20]

Well, that is depressing...

Bioware must have known this game would pale in comparison to Origins. Why have they stripped out these features? They should stop looking to Mass Effect and use the identity they created with Origins.

Origins was a rich, personal RPG with
memorable characters, solid story and people liked it. Dragon Age 2
feels like a reboot of a dying franchise, yet Dragon Age was fine, there
was only one game out and it did well.

I don't know why they rushed this out the door. It is getting mediocre to good reviews, yet it's getting (pretty much) universally trashed on most gaming forums and communities. I am truly dumbfounded at the change, really. This game is quite obviously not finished, a year or two more in development would have probably been a good idea.

It is really rather upsetting.

(I'd just like to state I'm not a troll, or trying to
coax a reaction. I still enjoyed the demo and have pre-ordered the
signature edition and will gladly pay full price for it. I also
understand I cannot truly judge the game until I have played it
thoroughly. That said, however, I cannot get the feeling out of my mind
that Bioware have wasted this, they had something good going and it is
such a shame.)

Modifié par Johnny20, 26 février 2011 - 12:02 .

[Garlant]

Why would they mess about with changing the way you can equip your allies? Isnt the game supposed to last "10 years" - Are our allies really going to be wearing 2 sets of clothes that entire time?



For me one of the fun things about Dragon Age, and most rpgs that havent been ruined, is collecting lots of useful equipment and kitting out characters in certain ways. If its literally going to be just the main character that you're collecting equipment for (questing for allies 2nd equip) then that side of the game is going to be over quick.