204 réponses à ce sujet

[Felene]

I like how people complain about a game that they think is dumb down.

Too much irony for the smart guy.

Modifié par Felene, 27 février 2011 - 10:14 .

[MorrigansLove]

Saibh wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

Your opinion, mate. The combat may be better but, seriously, that will turn out to be nothing if the dialogue isn't at least endurable. The demo showed that dialogue was... sub-par to say the least, especially from Bethany. Also the ending of the game is said to be fairly disappointing which could affect the views of this game to a lot of gamers, including myself. If the game makes me care, i'll care. But improved gameplay won't be enough, i'm afraid.

Your opinion, mate.

Yes, indeed.

[Saibh]

Filament wrote...

The combat in ME2 was changed a lot more than the combat in DA2 is, by my reckoning.

Indeed.

Not that it wasn't for the better, I thought. Still some improvements to be had, but ME2 combat was a lot more enjoyable.

[dreamextractor]

Smertnik wrote...

I should go.

I think you should leave.

[Drax_Lyonsbane]

Merced652 wrote...

The RustMonster wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

It is Dragon Effect. Why are people still debating this?

How about because it's not? And because it's ridiculous to think that it is?

Explain how it isn't, because as you've no doubt seen, read, and cired about; there have been a million topics on why it is.

Explain how it is, because you've no doubt seen, played and have knowlwdge of the game that no one else has, correct?

[AddictedRebel72]

SammyJB17 wrote...

It takes away from your message when you have horrid grammar in your title.

Awwwww, it's only the "to" that's come to play, where it's not wanted.  Naughty "to"!

[slimgrin]

Filament wrote...

The combat in ME2 was changed a lot more than the combat in DA2 is, by my reckoning.

When it comes to combat mechanics, I agree. ME2 made bigger changes. Thing is, they were all basically improvements. The limited camera, broken UI, and poor AOE targeting in the DA2 demo aren't improvements.

More troubling are the stylistic and writing changes in the DA2 demo. I was appalled by the lack of drama, the cliche dialog between Varric and Cassandra. And Varric dressing like a pimp in battle; its too much on the side of cool. We all get it. Bioware wants to make hip and cool characters, but they also must look the part of a fighter.

Modifié par slimgrin, 27 février 2011 - 10:34 .

[Darji]

grimgim wrote...

Darji wrote...

]It does makes sense.

- The story is more focused on on hero character just like shepard.
- The combat is more action oriented to please the console and Mass effect crowd.
- Die dialoguesystem was dumbed down to the same Mass effectsystem. You dont need to think anymore about your answers. If you wnat to be bad choose the read answer if you want to be good choose the blue one. Also in the demo these answers were not really different from each other.  Again you dont need to think anymore.
- Also its a shorter game and the same length as Mass effect. German reviews are talking about 12-15 hours  for the main campaign. And this is reeally short  for a RPGon your first playthrough.

It is cleary dragon effect and that is exactly what Bioware wanted.  People may not like it (myself included) but they dont care anymore about the old fanbase. Instead they focus on he console crowd. If you really dont like this. Stop supporting Bioware especially on the PC. Show them that people wont buy it anymore only because it comes from Bioware.

And if you like it. Be happy and play it in a few weeks. But also accept the fact, that it is no Dragon anymore it is Dragon Effect. You still can like it^^

- The combat is the same, just with faster animations. It still remains tactical.
- The dialogue system has a new interface, how is that "dumbed down"? How did you have to think in the "old dialogue system", when you know exactly what you are going to say? <_<

Ahh I love these biowarefanboys^^

First of all Reviews say the same. Its less tactical and also the dialogue option are very streamlined and dumbed down. I am not talking like that only because of the demo. Also i could only play it on normal on the demo.

But I on the other hand read reviews and they state the same complaints I have. 2 german ones also saying again. It is a good game but its no Dragon Age. And thats not because of the lack of warden or the different design. But because of the mecanics, the dialogues and so on. Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change. 

Look guys I have never said that its a bad game its just not a Dragon Age game. Its the same as it was with Gothic 4 or Fallout 3. these maybe good games but they doesnt deserve the name Gothic or Fallout.

Modifié par Darji, 27 février 2011 - 10:32 .

[Pauravi]

slimgrin wrote...

The criricism is this: Bioware is bending over backwards to cater to popular taste. It's painfully obvious by now they want to be 'relevant' in the entertainment industry, rather than forging their own, unique visoin. They lift so much from film and other games it's no longer possible to ignore how derivative they have become.

Wow, you're hilarious.

Mass Effect was the most innovative game in ages, and somehow DA2 is derivative because it borrows from this innovative game that Bioware made.  Bioware invented the new concepts that have gone into DA2, and they have used them sparingly.  If they're catering to popular taste, it is a popular taste that they introduced.

Yet DAO, which uses an unvoiced protagonist, simple list dialogue trees, an isometric camera, a very standard swords-sorcery-and-dragons setting, and has exactly the same sort of slow, abstracted turn-based combat system that has existed since NWN or earlier, is somehow less derivative and imaginitive, or what?

[Saibh]

slimgrin wrote...

When it comes to combat mechanics, I agree. ME2 made bigger changes. Thing is, they were all basically improvements. The limited camera, broken UI, and poor AOE targeting in the DA2 demo aren't improvements.

More troubling are the stylistic and writing changes in the DA2 demo. I was appalled by the lack of drama, the cliche dialog between Varric and Cassandra. And Varric dressing like a pimp in battle; its too much on the side of cool. We all get. Bioware wants to make hip and cool charcaters, but they also must look the part of a fighter.

Pictured:

Realistic Battle Gear



DAO had its issues with armor, too. Also, I didn't see the dialogue cliche. The character screen could use some touch-ups.

Hated the AoE targeting. Good god.

But I still find that the combat looks better, plays better, the skills are more useful, the controls more reponsive, the classes more balanced (while still all being pretty fun), and the combat just as smart.

Modifié par Saibh, 27 février 2011 - 10:33 .

[AddictedRebel72]

JohnEpler wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The fact is, Bioware dropped their original vision for DA like a bad habit. It's staring everyone square in the face, yet most here are denying it.

I guess I didn't get that memo. What was their original vision?

Insectile cowboys.

I like this!

[PrinceOfFallout13]

Darji wrote...

grimgim wrote...

Darji wrote...

]It does makes sense.

- The story is more focused on on hero character just like shepard.
- The combat is more action oriented to please the console and Mass effect crowd.
- Die dialoguesystem was dumbed down to the same Mass effectsystem. You dont need to think anymore about your answers. If you wnat to be bad choose the read answer if you want to be good choose the blue one. Also in the demo these answers were not really different from each other.  Again you dont need to think anymore.
- Also its a shorter game and the same length as Mass effect. German reviews are talking about 12-15 hours  for the main campaign. And this is reeally short  for a RPGon your first playthrough.

It is cleary dragon effect and that is exactly what Bioware wanted.  People may not like it (myself included) but they dont care anymore about the old fanbase. Instead they focus on he console crowd. If you really dont like this. Stop supporting Bioware especially on the PC. Show them that people wont buy it anymore only because it comes from Bioware.

And if you like it. Be happy and play it in a few weeks. But also accept the fact, that it is no Dragon anymore it is Dragon Effect. You still can like it^^

- The combat is the same, just with faster animations. It still remains tactical.
- The dialogue system has a new interface, how is that "dumbed down"? How did you have to think in the "old dialogue system", when you know exactly what you are going to say? <_<

Ahh I love these biowarefanboys^^

First of all Reviews say the same. Its less tactical and also the dialogue option are very streamlined and dumbed down. I am not talking like that only because of the demo. Also i could only play it on normal on the demo.

But I on the other hand read reviews and they state the same complaints I have. 2 german ones also saying again. It is a good game but its no Dragon Age. And thats not because of the lack of warden or the different design. But because of the mecanics, the dialogues and so on. Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change. 

Look guys I have never said that its a bad game its just not a Dragon Age game. Its the same as it was with Gothic 4 or Fallout 3. these maybe good games but they doesnt deserve the name Gothic or Fallout.

you dont decide what is a dragon age game or not get of your high horse

[Darji]

Pauravi wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The criricism is this: Bioware is bending over backwards to cater to popular taste. It's painfully obvious by now they want to be 'relevant' in the entertainment industry, rather than forging their own, unique visoin. They lift so much from film and other games it's no longer possible to ignore how derivative they have become.

Wow, you're hilarious.

Mass Effect was the most innovative game in ages, and somehow DA2 is derivative because it borrows from this innovative game that Bioware made.  Bioware invented the new concepts that have gone into DA2, and they have used them sparingly.  If they're catering to popular taste, it is a popular taste that they introduced.

Yet DAO, which uses an unvoiced protagonist, simple list dialogue trees, an isometric camera, a very standard swords-sorcery-and-dragons setting, and has exactly the same sort of slow, abstracted turn-based combat system that has existed since NWN or earlier, is somehow less derivative and imaginitive, or what?

what the hell is innovative in Mass effect? It is a normal cover based third person shooter with RPG elements. If you want innovation play Magicka or also Two worlds. Both of these games have a very innovative magicsystem for example.

Also the ME2 like dialoguesystem was much better executed in Alpha Protocol. There you actions and also answers and choices really mattered.

[Saibh]

Darji wrote...

Ahh I love these biowarefanboys^^

And I love you too, snookums.

First of all Reviews say the same. Its less tactical and also the dialogue option are very streamlined and dumbed down. I am not talking like that only because of the demo. Also i could only play it on normal on the demo.

I haven't seen any reviews that say it's less tactical?  And, yes, they streamlined the experience but none of them have said dumbed down.

But I on the other hand read reviews and they state the same complaints I have. 2 german ones also saying again. It is a good game but its no Dragon Age. And thats not because of the lack of warden or the different design. But because of the mecanics, the dialogues and so on. Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change. 

None of them said it doesn't feel like Dragon Age. They all say it's a good game. They all like the combat.

And, no you can have up to five choices plus investigate.

And did not play the DAII demo if you think they're all "good", "bad", and "sarcastic".

Look guys I have never said that its a bad game its just not a Dragon Age game. Its the same as it was with Gothic 4 or Fallout 3. these maybe good games but they doesnt deserve the name Gothic or Fallout.

Yes, yes, nostalgic fanboys are the best fanboys, we get it.

[Darji]

Saibh wrote...

Darji wrote...

Ahh I love these biowarefanboys^^

And I love you too, snookums.

First of all Reviews say the same. Its less tactical and also the dialogue option are very streamlined and dumbed down. I am not talking like that only because of the demo. Also i could only play it on normal on the demo.

I haven't seen any reviews that say it's less tactical?  And, yes, they streamlined the experience but none of them have said dumbed down.

But I on the other hand read reviews and they state the same complaints I have. 2 german ones also saying again. It is a good game but its no Dragon Age. And thats not because of the lack of warden or the different design. But because of the mecanics, the dialogues and so on. Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change. 

None of them said it doesn't feel like Dragon Age. They all say it's a good game. They all like the combat.

And, no you can have up to five choices plus investigate.

And did not play the DAII demo if you think they're all "good", "bad", and "sarcastic".

Look guys I have never said that its a bad game its just not a Dragon Age game. Its the same as it was with Gothic 4 or Fallout 3. these maybe good games but they doesnt deserve the name Gothic or Fallout.

Yes, yes, nostalgic fanboys are the best fanboys, we get it.

ty reading the german ones. Gamestar and PC games for example they basicly say the same.

[falconlord5]

Darji wrote...



ty reading the german ones. Gamestar and PC games for example they basicly say the same.

Read 'em. They don't say half the things you seem to think they do.

Modifié par falconlord5, 27 février 2011 - 10:41 .

[Stardusk78]

Darji wrote...

grimgim wrote...

Darji wrote...

]It does makes sense.

- The story is more focused on on hero character just like shepard.
- The combat is more action oriented to please the console and Mass effect crowd.
- Die dialoguesystem was dumbed down to the same Mass effectsystem. You dont need to think anymore about your answers. If you wnat to be bad choose the read answer if you want to be good choose the blue one. Also in the demo these answers were not really different from each other.  Again you dont need to think anymore.
- Also its a shorter game and the same length as Mass effect. German reviews are talking about 12-15 hours  for the main campaign. And this is reeally short  for a RPGon your first playthrough.

It is cleary dragon effect and that is exactly what Bioware wanted.  People may not like it (myself included) but they dont care anymore about the old fanbase. Instead they focus on he console crowd. If you really dont like this. Stop supporting Bioware especially on the PC. Show them that people wont buy it anymore only because it comes from Bioware.

And if you like it. Be happy and play it in a few weeks. But also accept the fact, that it is no Dragon anymore it is Dragon Effect. You still can like it^^

- The combat is the same, just with faster animations. It still remains tactical.
- The dialogue system has a new interface, how is that "dumbed down"? How did you have to think in the "old dialogue system", when you know exactly what you are going to say? <_<

Ahh I love these biowarefanboys^^

First of all Reviews say the same. Its less tactical and also the dialogue option are very streamlined and dumbed down. I am not talking like that only because of the demo. Also i could only play it on normal on the demo.

But I on the other hand read reviews and they state the same complaints I have. 2 german ones also saying again. It is a good game but its no Dragon Age. And thats not because of the lack of warden or the different design. But because of the mecanics, the dialogues and so on. Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change. 

Look guys I have never said that its a bad game its just not a Dragon Age game. Its the same as it was with Gothic 4 or Fallout 3. these maybe good games but they doesnt deserve the name Gothic or Fallout.

In Dragon Age the Warden was mute and retarded with no tongue whilst everyone else around him could speak. It was utterly retarded.

[didymos1120]

pumpkinman13 wrote...

Zalocx wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The fact is, Bioware dropped their original vision for DA like a bad habit. It's staring everyone square in the face, yet most here are denying it.

No they haven't

Darkspawn are still evil
The Qunari are still an expansionist "Foerign and Exotic" power
Ferelden still stinks of Dog
Elves are still living in Gettos
The Dalish are still outcasts
Templars still hunt. . .
. . . Apostates who are still mages outside Chantry control
Flemeth is still an enigma with multiple byzantine plots in motion

The original vision is still there, visual and gameplay tweeks do noting to the lore. And I care more about lore and plot than any flashy combat animation

Slim obviously meant their artistic vision/aesthetic vision.

Darkspawn look totally different.

No, they don't.  Both have somewhat different skin tones, the Ogre more so (but purple's still in there, BTW).  The gear they wear is somewhat different, and the faces have been tweaked (e.g. less jagged hurlock teeth, hurlocks actually kinda have noses now).  That's it.  I don't like every modification myself, but core design of Hurlocks and the Ogres has not changed.

Qunari look very different.

As far as the horn thing goes, and the attendant differences to facial structure for those who do have horns, yes.  Other than that we're talking superficialities, like body paint and variation in skin tones.

Ferelden... well, it's not really there.

And in DA:O, Orlais, the Free Marches, Antiva, etc. were "not really there", but they were still part of the world and stuff was still going on there offscreen.  Same with Ferelden in DA2.  It's really no different than Awakening, where suddenly the rest of Ferelden was "not really there" and you were in a part of it only mentioned on occasion in the base game.  The only difference is that in this story, we've switched nations instead of regions.

Elves look slightly different (thinner, more lithe, more elfine).

Again, superficialities. The core design is unchanged, and all the lore about them is intact.

Templars armour has been redesigned.

Really?  This is an example of "abandoning" their vision. Tweaks to an armor texture? Nevermind that said original Templar armor was just a tweaked version of pretty much all the other armor in that size class. I.e. pure copy and paste design, from which DA:O suffered a lot.  But OK, let's take a look: 




OH NOES! What has thou done Bioware!

Flemeth has a new appearance.

Flemeth is an ancient and powerful shapeshifter. Why fret about about something Morrigan clearly implied was within her abilities in DA:O?

In case you forgot:

Morrigan: "'Tis not inconceivable that she could capture a Chasind man, or perhaps change to a more attractive form to attract him willingly. I find it more difficult to imagine her with child."

Modifié par didymos1120, 27 février 2011 - 10:41 .

[Darji]

[quote]falconlord5 wrote...

[quote]Darji wrote...



[/quote]ty reading the german ones. Gamestar and PC games for example they basicly say the same.
[/quote]

Read 'em. They don't say half the things you seem to think they do.

[/quote]I did and because i am german i know exactly what they wrote. Again they dont make the game look bad they just say its no dragon age game.

[DPB]

Darji wrote...
Especially with the dialogues. Its not because of the wheel its because of these stupid symbols which tells you exactly what this answer will cause. Again in Dragon age you needed to think because the answers were very different from each other. In Dragon effect you only have 3 choices. Good , bad , sacastic and that will never change.

Please read some of David Gaider's posts here and here. Then you'll understand how the dialogue system works.

[Aigyl]

*pokes in through the door*

Just to say, dialogue options are not Good, Sarcastic, Evil. They are Diplomatic, Sarcastic/Joking, Aggressive.



Being Diplomatic could mean Hawke is agreeing to sell slaves.

Being Aggressive could mean cutting down the slaver, freeing the slaves, and have them run through the streets singing cumbaya.



*pokes out again*

Modifié par Aigyl, 27 février 2011 - 10:45 .

[falconlord5]

Darji wrote...

falconlord5 wrote...

Darji wrote...

ty reading the german ones. Gamestar and PC games for example they basicly say the same.

Read 'em. They don't say half the things you seem to think they do.

I did and because i am german i know exactly what they wrote. Again they dont make the game look bad they just say its no dragon age game.

Actually, they don't. Those are words that you put in the reviewer's mouth.

What they say is that they like most of the changes, and have some concerns. Like every other review on a game sequel ever. Wanna talk generic? Talk video game reviewers, they haven't said anything new since KOTOR 2.

No where do any of the reviews we have say that this game is not a Dragon Age game (which they cannot actually say, seeing as what consitutes a Dragon Age game is entirely up to the studio, not you, me or the reviewers).

[In Exile]

Merced652 wrote...

Explain how it isn't, because as you've no doubt seen, read, and cired about; there have been a million topics on why it is.

You mean it has the dialogue wheel, so obviously it has to be Dragon Effect?

[Saibh]

Darji wrote...
ty reading the german ones. Gamestar and PC games for example they basicly say the same.

Yeah, none of them seem to say anything like what you're saying. They're saying they really liked the game. Dialogue was great, choices were difficult, combat was balanced, boss fights were really fun. Gamestar gives combat a 10/10, saying it's tacitical but not too complex, there are many options during dialogue, the characters were well developed, and so on.

The most common complaints seem to be repetitive level design and the ending.