I don't really write reviews.. I'm not good at it. But I feel so strongly about the DA franchise that I want my voice to be heard, even if I'm just affirming things that others may have said before me (I haven't read anyone else's review so my apologies for any repeated complaints/opinions). So, I'm writing this in hopes that something I say might be useful in making DA3 (I know it hasn't been announced.. but it's inevitable) a great game.
When I first played through DA2, I had a lot of fun with it. The combat looked and felt a lot better (I played it on Xbox so I got lazy tactically and played it more hack-and-slash..) and was definitely more fun. The story was good, definitely dramatic and interesting. The frame narrative felt refreshing.
I did enjoy playing through DA2, and I even beat it twice. But once I put it down for a month and forgot all about it, when I eventually thought about it again I realized I just don't feel at all compelled to play it again. In fact, I don't just feel indifferent toward it... I really don't want to ever play it again.
Looking back, it feels like none of my decisions mattered much... whether I had a good relationship with the Arishok or not didn't matter at all. Whether I supported the mages or the templars didn't matter. It's the same outcome either way. This game doesn't seem to have the dozens of endings that DA:O had.. no ultimate sacrifice vs. reigning on the throne vs. remaining a grey warden. It's basically just different journeys to the same destination.. which was very disappointing.
However disappointed I am with DA2 as a game, I think DA2 has AWESOME potential in terms of setting up a KILLER DA3. One where the world is in turmoil, and maybe in addition to the political tumult there is a greater threat looming. It could be REALLY awesome.. so many possibilities. In that respect, I really like the concept of DA2 as a kind of "transition" between the amazing DA:O and a great, great DA3 that is kind of a return to the roots of the franchise. But as a standalone game, I think DA2 is just "okay." It was a fun game to play at the time, but looking back there's nothing that sticks with me.. not the way elements of DA:O have.
Here's a more specific break-down of my pros and cons....
DA2 likes:*
Combat *Better talent system (non-linear)
*No more useless skills
*MUCH better class differentiation (rogues vs. warriors)
*Every class is equally fun to play.. even each specialization (archer vs. dual-wield, 2h vs. s&s etc) is equally fun
*I kind of liked fights like in the deep roads, where you needed to interact with the environment to succeed, and
fights had different "stages." It made things interesting, at least. I could take it or leave it.
*To me, combat is EASILY the greatest achievement of DA2. It made the game playable to me, despite a minimally compelling story with uninteresting characters... which is exactly the opposite of how I felt for DA:O.
*
Voiced Hawke *I liked that Hawke was voiced, although in some ways I also liked that the Warden was not voiced. I can take it or leave it
*I was worried that once I heard FemHawke's voice on my first Hawke, it would be weird hearing that voice coming from a completely different-looking Hawke. I was wrong, it sounded completely natural coming from both Hawkes. I attribute this to a well-chosen VA.
*
Characters *To me, the most fleshed out character (taking into account how long he was in the party) was Carver... on one hand he respects Hawke ("But you're a talented warrior" "I'm not my brother/sister") and even looks up to him/her. On the other hand, he feels jealous and pushed aside. He cares for him/her, but also resents him/her. I really liked his character a lot, I wish he would have stuck around!
*The Friendship/Rivalry system is a BRILLIANT concept. I was happy not to have to suck up to my followers just to keep them around!
*
Story *I LOVE the plot line with Hawke's mother towards the end. Easily the best and most moving part of the game for me.
*I like that you could play through the game quickly, only doing the "bare bones" quests, or you could explore everything for a deeper experience
[EDIT 5/16]*I feel that I should talk more about the story itself. I liked the general concept for the story, a lot. Placing us in the highly politically-charged atmosphere of Kirkwall gives us as much information about Thedas as putting us in the middle of a blight (or possibly even more). It is a great way to continue fleshing out this world. The conflict between mages and Templars was really interesting in Origins, and I think that while both sides weren't always represented perfectly (for instance, it seemed that there were no mages in Kirkwall who, even though they faced extreme injustice, absolutely refused to turn to blood magic. Surely there had to be SOME amongst the mages in Kirkwall who would rather die unfairly than prove the Templars right by turning to blood magic [e.g. a martyr]... but I don't remember any), the feeling of tension and build-up of tension was mostly good. While some aspects could have been better executed (EVERY MAGE is a blood mage/abomination waiting to happen, some things re: the final bosses at the end came WAY out of left field [the mages and, to a much lesser extent, the sword] and should have been either foreshadowed somehow or more fleshed out, respectively, to avoid the WTF moment. Also, almost EVERY character [even Hawke] could have been fleshed out a LOT more, etc.)
[EDIT 5/16]*In short, I think that the story itself, at its core, is a good story. What I take issue with is the fact that none of my big choices seemed to matter at all (more on that later). I know you had a very specific story to tell, and didn't have a good way to give multiple endings/scenarios reflecting different player choices... but in that case, I (as a gamer) would rather play through that rather linear story in a DLC or even expansion leading up to a different DA2, one that takes place immediately after Hawke disappears... think Mass Effect 3 with the Mass Effect 2 "Arrival" DLC. Overall, it just didn't seem as fun knowing what happens is gonna happen regardless of what I do to either prevent it or hurry it along. If I want to sit back and simply be told a great story, I'll go back to playing Final Fantasy. I understand the "illusion" of choice, but here there's barely even any illusion. I saw a review that compared it to being able to choose between door A, and door B. Picking either means you fight Person X, but picking door A means you wanted to. That's how I felt playing DA2. I want to have a noticeable effect on the world around me, and I was hoping you would take a step forward from Origins in that respect.. not three steps back.
DA2 dislikes:
*
Combat *Healing (magical and potion) was nerfed... hard. I wish that cooldowns varied with the difficulty you were playing... i.e. easy has a very short/no CD, and it goes up from there.
*I don't at all like that you took away companion armor customization.. so much good equipment was wasted!
*I REALLY don't like that enemies keep coming in waves... fights lasted way too long and got really boring/tedious. Especially when I was just trying to pass through an area at night and I kept having to fight a crap ton of enemies that I accidentally aggro'd because I didn't know where they were. I guess that's more realistic (except that they come wave after wave after wave.. after wave..), but I much preferred DA:O's system of having x number of enemies in each place, and you can see them ahead of time (and therefore, avoid them in some cases).
*
Voiced Hawke *The system for Hawke's personality was a double-edged sword. It was cool that if you chose mostly sarcastic remarks, Hawke's non-chosen dialogue would reflect that. However, it also meant that Hawke really only has 3 rather basic personality possibilities... it was more challenging to make a nuanced PC.
*Although there were still a pretty good amount of dialogue options, I felt that there were a lot less than in DA:O. I also felt that they were more polarized, like Mass Effect's Paragon/Renegade system. Sometimes my nice Hawke had to take a stand, but she couldn't do it without suddenly sounding like a ****. It was a little jarring...
*Sometimes what Hawke actually said (compared to the summary) was not at all what I thought would happen. I know that it might get old/repetitive to have players select the response from a list (like DA:O) and then have it read verbatim by a voice actor... but there has to be something in between that and DA2's system. If it comes down to it, personally I'd prefer having more control over exactly what my character says than hearing an actor say it aloud.
*
Characters:
*When I heard that you could steer the NPC's one way or another in regards to their personal quests (i.e. telling Fenris to pursue his master or to move on) I thought that sounded like a great way to demonstrate Hawke's influence over the people around him/her. However, no matter what you picked the outcomes seemed to end up the same (e.g. when you tell Sebastian to reclaim his place as king and nothing happens). Just seemed like an empty gesture from Bioware.
*I can't name one character that I felt/feel attached to. Not even Hawke. That is a problem.
*DA2's characters are just nowhere near as well-developed and compelling as DA:O's characters. Not by a long shot. Easily the best part of DA:O to me is the characters (not just Party NPCs, but people like Loghain, Eamon, Irving etc.). In DA2, this is one of the biggest let-downs for me. Meredith, Orsino, Gamlen... they all seem like 1D stock characters with basic motives and shallow personalities. I miss Loghain, where you could make equally compelling arguments that he was an evil, scheming mastermind and that he was just a man gripped by paranoia, trying to do what was best for the country he loved. What a complex character. With Meredith, yes she feels conflicted about her stance towards mages... but only very slightly. And we never get any real insight into her (or any other) character.
*About the romance. As a disclaimer, I have to say that I only romanced Anders. That said, it felt really sudden and shallow. One thing I loved about DA:O is that there were so many conversations building up to a romance, and each one meant something. Each one felt necessary, and like it added something significant to your relationship with that NPC. I have to say that at least with Anders, it felt like almost immediately after you meet him you can trigger the
romance, and then the next thing you know he's living in your house. I understand that in "reality" this takes place over the course of a few years, but since we don't get to see what goes on for those years in between the acts, it ends up feeling very rushed. Or, at least it did to me. One of the drawbacks of a storyline that jumps ahead 3 years at a time, I guess.
*Even relatively minor characters in DA:O had depth and felt alive. In DA2 they just felt like characters.
[EDIT]*One thing I will say regarding the party makeup. My first playthrough, I accidentally skipped Isabella and Fenris. I thought I had done all the side quests... turns out I was wrong. I was frustrated that they were so easy to miss, and looking back I'm also frustrated that many of the other companions are almost mandatory. I remember a playthrough of Origins (my "evil" character) where I had killed Zevran, told Morrigan to leave, told Leliana to get lost, left Sten to die, killed the dog, confronted/killed Wynne... you get the picture. If I wanted it, it could have literally been Alistair and me, against the world. He was the only character that would have followed you anywhere, no matter how low his approval (up to a certain point in the game, ahem). And while you had the choice to turn any and all of these characters away from your party (even Morrigan, a huge part of the game), it was pretty damn hard to miss any of them. Again... there was a huge degree of CHOICE, and of control, in Origins that you just don't get in DA2. All the player's control/choices are left up to Bioware to dole out as they see fit. I did not enjoy this aspect at all.
*Story *I was very disappointed at how little the choices from DA:O matter. VERY disappointed. Basically it felt like
the only thing that matters is who you put on the throne, and even that only matters for what cutscene you will get in Act 3 or whatever. I know that you were trying to make it so that you don't have to play DA:O first, but shouldn't your priority be to make DA:O players feel like they didn't waste their time carefully making their canon playthroughs? We're the ones who spent the time (and money, buying all that DLC) into developing our Warden with the expectation that it would mean something later on. If some schmoe off the street wants to play Dragon Age starting with the sequel, that's his problem.... lol. He should have a good experience, of course. But I think this could have been accomplished by having the 3 "stock" DA:O stories, which essentially assumed that a player would have made mostly good, mostly neutral, or mostly bad choices. If playing from these 3 stock stories feels shallow compared to the experience of someone who played DA:O and shipped in their games, it should just serve as motivation for that person to play through Origins so they can experience a fuller, more satisfying DA2.
*The frame narrative idea was innovative and has potential, but I don't like it for DA. I think that all the skipping ahead felt, to me, like parts of the story that are forever lost to me as a player. Like things happened in Hawke's life that I had no influence over.
*In my opinion, a good idea for DLC for this game would be focused on events that take place in between the acts of this game. Something to explain what went on that was skipped over, and which might help to make up for the fact that I feel like I was deprived of important character/plot development
*
Setting *FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, AND ALL THAT IS HOLY... please, please don't create such a limited setting for any other game you ever make, ever ever again, ever. EVER! Please!! It was SO boring to be exclusively in/around Kirkwall the first playthrough... it made subsequent playthroughs almost unbearable... which is the big reason I only played through twice (I'm currently on my 6th DA:O playthrough and it STILL hasn't gotten old!)
*Recycled areas.. 'nuff said
*I understand and appreciate that DA is about a time/place and not a person, but I think that DA2 and DA:O just feel disjointed.. like two different games entirely. I wish there was a strong common thread between the two games. They don't even feel like they're in the same world to me. The first was all about the blight and Ferelden, the second is just about Hawke and Kirkwall... with the Blight being extremely briefly mentioned and having seemingly no impact on Kirkwall (besides some refugees, big deal).
[EDIT]*Day vs. Night in Kirkwall seemed gimmicky.. I would have much rather had a different place to go than a different time of day to go to the same old places over and over.
*
General *From everything everyone was saying about this game, Hawke is supposed to be someone who changed the world. But from playing, I got the distinct feeling that Hawke is a reactive figure, rather than a proactive one... rather than causing change, s/he just happened to be in the right/wrong place at the right/wrong time and just reacted as any capable person would. Whereas with the Warden, I felt totally in control of his/her destiny and the destiny of those around him/her, and truly felt like I was what was driving the story forward. That, to me, is a much more compelling reason to play than to simply discover what, in theory, has already happened.
From the first time I played DA:O, I literally couldn't put it down. I would wake up around 7 or 8am (I was on winter vacation at my parent's house, sleeping on the couch because there aren't any extra beds there.. they are SO LOUD in the mornings I could never sleep past 8), start playing, and keep playing until it was literally 4am... and even then, I would only stop playing because I knew I probably should get at least a couple of hours of sleep. Then the cycle would start over again the next day at 7 or 8am. I would save the game before all the major conversations, and I would reload just so I could see all the different outcomes. Sometimes it would take 45 minutes (it drove my sister CRAZY!!!
). I was obsessed.
When I first played Dragon Age 2, it was enjoyable but I would only play for a few hours, then go maybe a day without playing and eventually come back to it. I don't know if it's that it's "too different" from the first or what, but I do know that it's just not the same. Whatever drew me into DA:O is just not present in DA2. I do have very high hopes for DA3, though, as mentioned above
One thing I will say, as an aside... it would be nice if, in DA3, one of your companions is a childhood friend that is romanceable. Something like the Ser Gilmore mod, I guess.
Overall, if I had only one sentence to summarize this game, it would be:
"Dragon Age 2 is a pretty good game that is not NEARLY as good as it could have, or should have, been."
Modifié par Freckle Face, 16 mai 2011 - 02:01 .
Retour en haut
:wizard:
No need to wonder how much money it would bring in cause its all junk!
