519 réponses à ce sujet

[ManiacalEvil]

87 is a great score. Not every game will score a 90+-

[AustinKain]

Joined date of Original Poster is all i am going to say.

[Demo-Mike]

"87 is a great score. Not every game will score a 90+"



Yes but they bring up a lot of negative comments.



This sucks, that sucks, it isn't better than origins but it's good.



Why 87?



Why TC don't post positives?

[AkiKishi]

Demo-Mike wrote...
Again, DA:O was not lifeless.

Ostagar, Dwaren City, Town Centre (of town, don't remember name) Dalish Camp, others, were full of life.

Static life but life

Ok, but if you spend too long around that "static" life it does feel lifeless. Don't get me wrong DA did what it needed to do with cities, they were hubs you visited. Spending the majority of the game in a city though would need more effort to make it feel "alive".

[Anathemic]

AustinKain wrote...

Joined date of Original Poster is all i am going to say.

2009-10-14

What's your point?

[Fishy]

thatguy212 wrote...

It really depends on who is playing the game, i've been able to beat mass effect and do every quest (other than mineral collecting ones) in about 8 hours

ME was actually a very short game .Shorter than ME2
FOR ME (geez i`m not trolling)

[blubbolo]

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6164550

now you can stop whining.

[Demo-Mike]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Demo-Mike wrote...
Again, DA:O was not lifeless.

Ostagar, Dwaren City, Town Centre (of town, don't remember name) Dalish Camp, others, were full of life.

Static life but life

Ok, but if you spend too long around that "static" life it does feel lifeless. Don't get me wrong DA did what it needed to do with cities, they were hubs you visited. Spending the majority of the game in a city though would need more effort to make it feel "alive".

Two Worlds II was beaming with life. I don't understand how small poland developer can put more effort than masters Bioware.

I gave Two WOrlds 2 8.5

[Anathemic]

makalathbonagin wrote...

Demo-Mike wrote...

Brawne wrote...

In six months the game will probably have tonn of dlc to lenghten this number.

that is not cool and acceptable. this is an RPG. Two Worlds 2 is a poor RPG by polish developers and offers more. How is this possible.

troll detected

How? it's an opinion, a biased one, but still an opinion. He didnt' say DA2 sucked outright. What's with the cosntant people of declaring "TROLL" when their game is criticised?

[Demo-Mike]

makalathbonagin wrote...

Demo-Mike wrote...

Brawne wrote...

In six months the game will probably have tonn of dlc to lenghten this number.

that is not cool and acceptable. this is an RPG. Two Worlds 2 is a poor RPG by polish developers and offers more. How is this possible.

troll detected

No, just Two Worlds 2 i played at Euro release date and it's poor RPG budget, but long.

[Boss Fog]

Demo-Mike wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

junte86 wrote...

Well even in DA:O cities felt lifeless, and it seems Kirkwell where we spand 90 percent of our time ingame also seems to have the same problem

Thats the thing. A lifeless city you just pass through barely registers one you spend most of the game in certainly does.

Again, DA:O was not lifeless.

Ostagar, Dwaren City, Town Centre (of town, don't remember name) Dalish Camp, others, were full of life.

Static life but life

So you consider ppl standing around, hearing a VO here and there to be bustling and full of life? Compared to what?  We haven't even seen Kirkwall yet so how do you even know what it's is going to be like, we played a small portion of Kirkwall in the demo which was at night time which explains why no one was around. 

[Amioran]

Demo-Mike wrote...
that is not cool and acceptable. this is an RPG. Two Worlds 2 is a poor RPG by polish developers and offers more. How is this possible.

More of what? Only the DA2 demo offers more than the full TW2, imo.

Now, if you're one of those that likes to do the same things over and over and over, no matter how many times, just to say you have a 100+ hours game and then exchanging the same with "content" more good to you.

Just, for me, real content is another thing.

Modifié par Amioran, 26 février 2011 - 08:12 .

[Typical Forum Sycophant]

not liking what i'm hearing about clone cave and clone house AT ALL...and i did notice that Kirkwall seemed a little "ghost townish" from several videos i've seen.



either way, i'm not too shocked since I've always felt that DA2 is merely setup for DA3's story

[Duros]

You don't give a game an 87 until its good, very good even.



Yet no posting the good points that had to have been written up with that score.

[TheCreeper]

game length is one of those Big Your mileage may very things, and reviewers tend to rush through things.

[Purple People Eater]

How is combat in Two Worlds 2?....Oh dont tell me, ive played it. It BLOWS!!!

[Perfect-Kenshin]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

87 is a great score. Not every game will score a 90+-

I don't think there's any way they would be willing to give the game anything below an 80. It's just like IGN with their reviews of DC Universe Online and Final Fantasy XIII. The negative facts they were listing about the games were pretty deal breaking, but both mediocre games still got high scores anyway. It's how the industry works. Alot of these reviewers would get fired if they gave certain games low scores.

[Fidget6]

Anathemic wrote...

How? it's an opinion, a biased one, but still an opinion. He didnt' say DA2 sucked outright. What's with the cosntant people of declaring "TROLL" when their game is criticised?

In my humble opinion, going on the boards of the company who MADE THE GAME just to bash it is a bit trollish to me.

[JrayM16]

BobSmith101 wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Seriously ?

I see a snowjob in the works.

Or an attempt at argumentative reasoning.

THere are multiple factors in my opinion which affect playlength.  I will use DA:O as my example:

1. Side-quests:  These can take so much time if all are done that a game playthrough could be cut down by more than 1/3 if side-quests are not done. 

2.  Skipping through VO: A lot of people do this and those minutes add up.

3. Platform: I have a theory that PC takes longer to beat because PC offers more tactical options to pause and micro-manage.

And so on.

Thinking more about this.

-EA did not let them use their own screenshots for the article without
explicit approval, even though they were given the final version. The
reviewer calls this "inexplicable". Hence, the article uses a few stock screenshots and
generally shows nothing even remotely new.

One reason is that maybe they don't want spoilers. Another is maybe they don't want people to see the other areas of the game are just like the demo.

Hey if you want to pay $60 for a sub 20 hour RPG, that's entirely your choice. They are just giving you a "warning".

Whatever.  I was just saying my bit.

[Demo-Mike]

Amioran wrote...

Demo-Mike wrote...
that is not cool and acceptable. this is an RPG. Two Worlds 2 is a poor RPG by polish developers and offers more. How is this possible.

More of what? Only the DA2 demo offers more than the full TW2, imo.

Now, if you're one of those that likes to do the same things over and over and over, no matter how many times, just to say you have a 100+ hours game and then exchanging the same with "content" more good to you.

Just, for me, real content is another thing.

Two worlds 2 took me 50 hours with side-quests.

It's a pretty world, full of life, and not bored because i was mage and warrior at same time. I think Two WOrlds 2 underrated people should try. 

but I'm saying it looks better visually and it's longer (crap story but thats writting department), why is DA II look like less effor game when it's made by RPG masters, big budget stuff.

[Black-Xero]

Machines Are Us wrote...

Sounds worrying overall with what they say, although I no longer take game magazine reviews particularly seriously, not after GTA4 was given 10/10.

You're right,they should have given it a higher rating.Breaking the limits is what it did.

Modifié par Black-Xero, 26 février 2011 - 08:13 .

[Perfect-Kenshin]

blubbolo wrote...

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6164550

now you can stop whining.

I think you misunderstand. If one person says they can beat it in less time than the other person and we are to assume that both reviewers are telling the truth, that simply indicates that one reviewer spent far more time on it than the other reviewer. Nonetheless, it's very well possible for a person with little to no knowledge of the game mechanics and with an interest in seeing the story, can beat this game in a small amount of time.

[AlanC9]

Suprez30 wrote...

thatguy212 wrote...

It really depends on who is playing the game, i've been able to beat mass effect and do every quest (other than mineral collecting ones) in about 8 hours

ME was actually a very short game .Shorter than ME2
FOR ME (geez i`m not trolling)

ME1's length is very variable depending on how much time you spend on collection quests, fiddling with inventory, driving the Mako around for trivial stuff, and collection and FedEx quests.

All that stuff generates a lot of gameplay hors for little development time. All that stuff also went away in ME2. the conclusion I drew from that is that Bio doesn't think length, per se, is valuable.

Easy for me to say since I didn't like any of those elements in the first place.

[Duros]

People also fail to remember that 10-15 hours of origins was just boring, nothing of any interesting happening and tedious to play through.