212 réponses à ce sujet

[JamesX]

Quite a few people actually just played Origins recently.

I spent last week and the weekend getting through Origins from scratch to Witch Hunt to recreate my save which I lost.

At least for some it is not memory but very very recent memory.

DA2 is really Mass Effect: Origins, and not Dragon Age - at least in the first year of the story, that is as far as I gotten before sleep became more preferable.

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

Bigdoser wrote...

Sooooo when has an 8 out of 10 been bad?

For a Bioware game it's bad. Bioware should cancel the expansion and rethink what are they going to do with this franchise.

P.S. - I'm sure the game will be "great" but I was expecting amazing from a Bioware game.

[Morning808]

Daidoji Tangen wrote...

1. I think this reviewer is comparing DA2 to the memory of DA:O rather than DA:O. Often times, things are better than you remember. I have no concrete proof, but I get that feeling.

2. Often times, the person complains about something only to go on to say the exact opposite. Like the dialogue. THe reviewer complains that it is many times a "false" choice (which is not true since you affect your general personality) but then goes on about how you get to make greater game-altering decisions than in DA:O.

3. The character complaints.... this is one of the big reasons that I get the "simply loves the original so much" feelings. I honestly want to know how many times the person played Origins compared to 2. Spending more time (ie more playthroughs) can easily affect how much you like someone. And Oghren? He was comic relief. Really not comparable to Varric other than being a male Dwarf (at least as far as I seen, I just got Varric before I had to quit). Maybe it was just me, but I never thought Oghren was a super awesome character. Amusing? Yes! On par with Alistar or Morrigan in personality? No. He was pretty paper thin as far as depth goes. Especially in Awakening.

3. I have no problem with this new gift-giving system. Was it super complex or satisfying in the original? I would rather have a stripped down version where I give only the personal stuff (like Zeveran's Dalish gloves or Morrigan's mirror) than a bunch of meaningless items (sure, alchohol means a lot to Oghren, but all I get is a +6-10 and seeing a bar move up).

4. I do consider less time hassling with inventory a good thing. A real good thing. And I like keeping unique looks for my characters rather than having everyone in the same bland armor.

5. Skills. Well, let's talk about the non-crafting and non-stat boosting skills, since one is still there if different and having more health/mana/stamina really isn't a skill. I miss Coercion. I loved bending people to my will. I often forgot about Stealing. And while Survival... I really don't know what to say about Survival. I wish they could include it, but with changing the crafting skills, I can see how there would not be much room to support it.

6. I support the new combat system, but fully understand people who prefer DA:O.

7. My TV is **** so I hate the new graphics. Only because now I have to sit up close if I want to read anything.

8. I don't think everything is simplified as it is streamlined. THere is a difference. Steamlined gives the player less control in order to focus on the important things (ie the new gift system) and hopefully provide a tighter narrative.

9. The reviewer says the story is unfocused. I haven't played enough either way. But it is possible. Not many games take place over such a long time. It is a risk and may not have paid off as much as Bioware wanted.

Sir you have a better review then almost all the other reviewers! +1

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Rann wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Rann wrote...

I think the reviews are simply indications of the obvious -- there are games that are just "good" -- not stunningly great, and not fatally flawed, but worthwhile to play and replay nevertheless, and hopefully the devs take what they've learned from the feedback and build something better next time. I'm at least glad that they are experimenting -- there's been a nice progression from BG all they way through DA:O, but not every one of those steps was a superlative difference.

While I personally dislike the non-tactical nature of combat in DA2 (at least as far as the demo showed me -- my game doesn't arrive until tomorrow), I have no problems playing a game that's just "good." I really can't wrap my head around the bipolar postings on this board (or, truth to be told, any feedback area on the 'Net for any subject). "Importing my DA:O game doesn't work, so the game is A TOTAL FAILURE and I won't play it because 0.0005% of the game won't reflect my personal reality." "This game is AWESOME and all of you people concerned about tactics are just whiners." The most enjoyable postings have, as usual, taken the more thoughtful road which leads through the middle -- just like all of the reviews I've read thus far at (for example) IGN, G4, and GS.

But of course, I've just made myself part of the problem, haven't I? Intolerant about intolerance -- too zen for me...

Please. EA told them to make their games for the 15-17 year old console players and dumb them down in the process to make people that dont play rpgs play rpgs. Why? Because Bioware sold their soul to EA to make TOR which is going to fail to WoW and end up destroying their reputation in the process. This isnt hard to figure out.

Ah, another black & white bit of viewpoint on a thoroughly grey subject... I didn't see that one coming... 

Yes, a multinational merchant of video games in a down economy would definitely want to deliberately alienate a well-established (and paying) demographic, one that already shows inclination to shell out more on their preferred platform (i.e., generally PC) and that therefore might be somewhat liquid with regard to other transactions. Makes total sense now; thanks for the, um, explanation.

Did I ever say it was deliberate? No, this is what these people honestly think sells and it does when you put out 15+ games a year like EA does. It helps EA not Bioware and in exchange for their virtually endless funds to throw into the bottlemless pit that is TOR (that will fail as all other mmos have when they stack against wow) this is the content EA will let Bioware produce.

[LenaMarie]

Everyone with even a half functioning brain knows EA is behind Biowares new direction of dumbing down for console users, The worst thing bioware ever did was get Souled-out to EA.

[Impresario]

People divide themselves into camps when for the most part we all want the same thing--a quality RPG. We can differ on what that is but the desire to be immersed in a fantastical psuedo medieval setting is somethng that we all share in common.

Some of the outrage is because this particular genre has quality precedents in literature, film and gaming and many of us are well versed in those works. Consequently, we have high expectations.

When ME2 came out there was quite a lot of vocal dissaproval w/ the changes. If it did bring in the Gears crowd it somehow worked, because the canon/genre was more adaptable to shooter friendly changes.

However, the fantasy genre when tampered w/ in a similar way becomes too prone to becoming a parody of itself. At its heart the notion of staffs, magic and dragons are all a bit silly and maintaining the suspension of belief (I think) entails using a much subtler brush than was used in ME2. 

That game (ME2) sold very well and clearly the new additional fan base was being courted to try this effort. After all, the marketing slogan clearly foreshadowed what we should expect--"press a button and amazing things will happen."  I'll play the game tonight but I venture that the way to approach it is to appreciate it for what it is and not for what it isn't. It isn't the game that many of us wanted but it's the game that we got.        
  

[rob_k]

JamesX wrote...

Ecaiki wrote...

I didn't think it was possible to pack that much ignorance into so little text, but you sir have done it, I award you one internet.

Sounding like a true 4chan-er  

If you think MMO is tactics, go play chess with a chess master, or play something like Dawn of War 2.  MMO Boss Fights are predictable and formulated.  It is about tactics for the first group that solves it.  After that everyone just follows a set formula.  It is mind numbingly boring, once you done it for few times.  It requires about as much intelligence as a child.  Because the Boss are not human nor are they intelligent.  Once you figure out the rules they are predictable and idiotic.

Haven't played MMOs for several years for reasons I shan't get into. But there's more to beating a boss battle (in WoW at least) than just looking up tactics or a guide on how to beat bosses/mobs in raids.

Even when you know the tactics, you still need to perfect the actual encounter.

Now, with this aside and because I'm getting pretty fed up of bringing EA into practically everything, do you folks remember Jade Empire?

I'm not saying it's a poor game by any means but that was a game made before EA. It was also a game without much inventory management and it was quite action based. As far as I remember, the only inventory management was gems that were slotted into an amulet, correct?

And while you levelled up styles, you still had to dodge and attack manually. (I remember dodging at least) It was several years ago though since I played it, so I could be remembering things wrong.

Regardless, if I'm correct, maybe keep that in mind before bringing up the ol' EA thing. I'm not saying EA haven't had a hand in this in the changes either, but history shows BioWare has made similar decisions with JE before EA. (Also, did you dislike the game because of the inventory being dumbed down and the action like feel?)

Also, I'm not going to get into the whole inventory thing here, but I'd like to say that I've watched a lets play on hard of Dragon Age 2 and the user was pausing quite often to get through the fights. So yes, beyond normal, I would say it looks like you may have to pause etc.

But you know, disregard what I said here and also disregard the positive points of the reviews coming in. Just focus on the negative and the score.

Me? I think I'm going to enjoy going through the game multiple times and seeing the different ways I can shape the story and see the branching paths.

By all accounts, it seems they've pulled that aspect of roleplaying off. And for me, that's what one of the main elements of roleplaying games is. The ability to play a character and influence how the story pans out. The Witcher and AP did this well. I'm sure DA 2 does as well now judging by what I've read.

Modifié par rob_k, 08 mars 2011 - 07:15 .

[haberman13]

LenaMarie wrote...

Everyone with even a half functioning brain knows EA is behind Biowares new direction of dumbing down for console users, The worst thing bioware ever did was get Souled-out to EA.

I couldn't agree more.  By some of the posts here apprently part of the community supports 'dumbing down".

Meh, saved me $, I'll wait for a Steam sale.

[miltos33]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Combat would have probably been ok, had they not forgotten to put the Autoattack option in (speaking of console versions here).

Hammering X once a second, really not my idea of fun.

I guess they did it on purpose to make sure that unlike on the pc something awesome always happens on the console versions.

[Aurgelmir]

Morning808 wrote...

thrashmental wrote...

The things it said about the story... that scares me, the story is really important

Story is just a opinon, Some people think Twilight has the one of the best storys and some people down right hate the series. Don't judge on other people's opinons judge for yourself

My mate who completed it today said that he finshed it while having absolutely no Idea what he was supposed to be doing. He just kept bouncing around side quests until the ending.

Also, apparently, 'the story telling is so linear that I may as well have just read the book'.

I'm still hoping for an 'above average' game when I get it this Friday though, I would still consider that a small victory.

[Lacan2]

It's clear that this will not be one of Bioware's highly rated games.

If this causes weak sales, someone on the DA team will pay for it.

[Morning808]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Sooooo when has an 8 out of 10 been bad?

For a Bioware game it's bad. Bioware should cancel the expansion and rethink what are they going to do with this franchise.

P.S. - I'm sure the game will be "great" but I was expecting amazing from a Bioware game.

You are holding BioWare too highly! I love BioWare but as with everything else I expect nothing from them but a fun game.

And in your sense the only Amazing game that come from BioWare for me was ME2. Then other games are great. Now if I though like you then every other company just came out with games that deserve to be throwen in the same pit as the E.T. game.

Modifié par Morning808, 08 mars 2011 - 07:14 .

[JamesX]

Ecaiki wrote...
Knowing the strategy and actually pulling it off are two totally different things.  Otherwise, for example, everyone who went into Icecrown Citidel in WoW would have beaten all 14 hardmodes every time.  Belittle it all you want, but getting people to work together, and utilising their strengths properly to achieve a goal still falls under tactics.

Oh, just for clarification, I'm assuming we're going to gloss over the fact that all mobs in Origins were preprogrammed AIs, that always reacted in a predictable manner, right? 

Oh you are thinking I am defending DAO?  If you read my original post I was simply pointing out talking about Tactics in an RPG is pretty moot.  It requires as little tactics as what a kid is capable of.  This applies to all RPG, and yes DAO included.

As for MMO tactics, like I said before it is formlatic and requires very little intelligence.  You get a bunch of 14 year olds with a mediocre of team work ability into WoW and give them a guide and 9/10 they will suceed.  If you feel that MMO tactics is worth to be called such then more power to you.  

Tactics is really about adjusting to every changing situtions and making the right call on the fly.  It is not about following a set formula and a set path to success.  Which unfortunately are what most MMO fights become. 

It is about the same as calling a Spreadsheet Gamer tactical.  Number crunching and statistics is not tactics.  If it where then Chemical Engineering becomes ultimately tactical.  So would astrophysics.

But to be clear, some do consider number crunching tactical.  Because all things can be boiled down to numbers - just look at the chess playing super computer.  But that is an entirely different level of number crunching than MMOs.

[Amioran]

Haexpane wrote...
Baldur's Gate 2 says hi.   being a sequel is not why I like full party control and inventory control.  It's one of my favorite parts of RPGs, and games like BG2 made me LOVE the aspect of a full party I had control over.

Have you read anything at all of what I wrote? I love BG2 too, it's one of the best cRPGs ever made, however that game just expaned BG, it didn't change almost nothing, for this the better reviews all along.

If instead you try to do something different with a sequel it seems you always fail, just because you dared to change (apart some "strange" exceptions). If you read the review of GS this is obvious. 1.5 points less just for one/two things "worser" vs. all the things they mention that are "better" is not fair, no matter how you put it

Do you have a different opinion? Fine. However we are talking here about the GS review, not yours. Sorry to dissapoint you.

Haexpane wrote...
They gutted it, exactly like they gutted ME2 to be a "gather your friends and fight the boss" ADD game.

Yes, yes. Again, we are talking here about GS, not YOU.

Modifié par Amioran, 08 mars 2011 - 07:21 .

[EzFlyer]

http://www.gameinfor...the-middle.aspx

Dragon Age: Origins was one of my favorite games of 2009 – as long as we’re talking about the PC version. On consoles, the game was a diminished port of the original, offering only a shadow of the tactical combat that made the PC release so satisfying. With Dragon Age II, BioWare has turned the tables. The sequel’s action-oriented battle system is clearly tailored to accommodate Xbox 360 and PS3 gamers, and the hardcore PC faithful (at whom the original title was explicitly targeted) get snubbed with an inferior adaptation.

Despite what you may have heard, Dragon Age II on PC does not have the same tactical pause-and-play combat as its predecessor. The battle system is essentially ported straight from the console iterations. I won’t rail against Dragon Age II’s shift to fast-paced fighting just because it’s different; as I said in my review of the console versions, the combat is well suited to the new action/RPG style. Though battles are not as rewarding as the previous entry’s strategic encounters, faster and more responsive combat isn’t inherently bad. The problem is the PC version’s inability to deliver the intended action at the heart of the new mechanics.

With its third-person camera and button-mashing attacks, the combat system in Dragon Age II is designed with a controller in mind, but BioWare doesn’t offer native gamepad support, restricting you to mouse-and-keyboard controls on PC. This approach may have worked well in Origins, but it doesn’t transition well to the new system. Movement feels clumsy, and pausing to readjust the camera and select targets for your abilities just muddles the flow of combat.

Maybe this decision was made to retain a shred of the tactical combat that distinguished Origins, but if that’s the case, the attempt is meager and insufficient. You have no zoomed out isometric view, and the waves and waves of filler enemies that pad out encounters make strategy futile. Yes, you can pause and issue commands, but this maneuvering is pointless when you never know how many more bad guys will jump from the rooftops, rise from the ground, or simply materialize out of nowhere. Even with more foes, the fights are considerably easier (unless you really crank up the difficulty), so planning is a waste of time. You can win most fights without worrying about strategy, so why invest unnecessary time and effort in the tactical approach? This conundrum creates a combat system that does not convey the thrill of controlling an unstoppable hero, but also doesn’t accommodate the strategy that is supposed to serve as an alternative.

While Dragon Age II on PC fares poorly in most comparisons, it isn’t all bad. It has a leg up on the console versions in the graphical department, with noticeably better textures and support for DirectX 11. The performance is also better, including a better framerate, shorter load times, and less pop-up objects in the distance.

Apart from combat issues, the highlights from the console version make a seamless transition. The cool quests, solid writing, and interesting characters are enough to make Dragon Age II worth checking out as long as you keep your expectations in check.

On all platforms, Dragon Age II caters to an audience that didn’t connect with Origins, while alienating those who did. This may result in a better console experience, but considering that Dragon Age: Origins was a love letter to old-school PC RPGs, BioWare’s neglect of the sequel’s PC release is tragic. I appreciate the technical refinements, but improving the polish doesn’t do much good when the basics still need work.
--

:*( :*(

i'll still make up my own mind tonight and all week, but lowered expectations..

[Mick301981]

Sabiancym wrote...

 An actual review of Dragon Age 2 instead of just a review based on the history of the company and the first game.

http://www.gamespot....alclk;gamespace

8/10.  The way it should be.  It's a step back.

Hmm, I felt a little gloomy when I read the OP:crying:

Then I actually read the review.

The Good
Player choice manifests itself in interesting ways   
Spectacular writing and voice acting bring each character to life   
Fascinating world characterized by moral ambiguity   
Combat is fun, fast-paced, and colorful   Great symphonic soundtrack.




[/list]The criticisms, I was already aware of, though I am a little concerned about the Main story lacks focus and drive
comment.  Then again, that didn't stop me from having a blast with ME2.:happy:

Well, I guess I'll find out for myself later this afternoon:) 

 

Modifié par Mick301981, 08 mars 2011 - 07:22 .

[Capt.Dave]

Really? Rofl im having fun like hell playing i dont know what the **** you people are playing...

[Haexpane]

Daidoji Tangen wrote...

 

4. I do consider less time hassling with inventory a good thing. A real good thing. And I like keeping unique looks for my characters rather than having everyone in the same bland armor. 

8. I don't think everything is simplified as it is streamlined. THere is a difference. Steamlined gives the player less control in order to focus on the important things (ie the new gift system) and hopefully provide a tighter narrative.
 

See that is the divide right there.  Many RPG fans do not consider inventory management "Hassling" and we don't consider "streamlined" to be "better" because we don't believe the boring videogame RPG stories are "more important" than the gameplay.

"Streamlined" is business speak for cutting features.  We do this all the time at my company.  We tell users things are being "unified, streamlined, globalized" when the reality is we are just dumbing down the applications to be less customized and more out of the box.  We get rid of the "convoluted comlicated options that are not truly value"  so they can "focus on the core business tasks at hand"

It's 100% spin

This pleases less interested users, but users who are more "into" the application are bummed out.

[Graunt]

EzFlyer wrote...
Despite what you may have heard, Dragon Age II on PC does not have the same tactical pause-and-play combat as its predecessor.

What a misrepresentaion.  It should read like this: Despite what you may have heard, Dragon Age 2 on PC does have very similar tactical pause-and-play combat as seen in the predecessor, albeit sped up after you unpause.  The lack of an isometric camera also gives the illusion that you now no longer require any thought behind your actions. The difficulty has been scaled down across the first three difficulty levels to allow "easier access" to the mainstream, while Nightmare has been significantly scaled up to appease the more hardcore crowd who want more of a challenge.

You can win most fights without worrying about strategy, so why invest unnecessary time and effort in the tactical approach?

:lol: That's exactly how Origins was on any difficulty below Nightmare, and even that didn't require much in the way of "strategy". Some of you must really have struggled with that game to think it was tactical.

Modifié par Graunt, 08 mars 2011 - 07:35 .

[Capt.Dave]

PLAY THE GAME OR SHUT UP... its that simple you dont like it? go cry a river in your moms basement and burn all you bioware games.

[Duncaaaaaan]

F this. I'm gonna buy KOTOR 2 for xbox.

£5 preowned. Its everything veteran bioware fans would want. Huge story, massive amount of dialogue, no effort on the graphics, and the tactical pause and play. Shame its not in a fantasy setting, but hey thats what BG2 and Neverwinter nights is for.

[Amioran]

Haexpane wrote...

See that is the divide right there.  Many RPG fans do not consider inventory management "Hassling" and we don't consider "streamlined" to be "better" because we don't believe the boring videogame RPG stories are "more important" than the gameplay.

Judging things without context is never the best thing.

Haexpane wrote...
"Streamlined" is business speak for cutting features.  We do this all the time at my company.  We tell users things are being "unified, streamlined, globalized" when the reality is we are just dumbing down the applications to be less customized and more out of the box.  We get rid of the "convoluted comlicated options that are not truly value"  so they can "focus on the core business tasks at hand"

Having more options is not always the best thing, either for complex applications. If you can do thing faster with less gimmicky then I don't see how that's a wrong thing. But maybe you are one of the little loners that thing that Borland C++ is better than Visual C++.

Haexpane wrote...
It's 100% spin

No, it's not. It's 100% spin for you just because you voluntarily focus only on a part of it, discarding the rest. In this way what you think "matters" is always the 100%. A shame that things are not so simple...

Haexpane wrote...
This pleases less interested users, but users who are more "into" the application are bummed out.

While I replied to you on those points I still don't get how this should have to do either minimally with the GS review. It seems like you just want to post your opinions of the game, but this thread is NOT about your opinion, but the one given by GS.

[Haexpane]

rob_k wrote...
 

Haven't played MMOs for several years for reasons I shan't get into. But there's more to beating a boss battle (in WoW at least) than just looking up tactics or a guide on how to beat bosses/mobs in raids.

Even when you know the tactics, you still need to perfect the actual encounter.

Now, with this aside and because I'm getting pretty fed up of bringing EA into practically everything, do you folks remember Jade Empire?

I'm not saying it's a poor game by any means but that was a game made before EA. It was also a game without much inventory management and it was quite action based. As far as I remember, the only inventory management was gems that were slotted into an amulet, correct?

And while you levelled up styles, you still had to dodge and attack manually. (I remember dodging at least) It was several years ago though since I played it, so I could be remembering things wrong.

Regardless, if I'm correct, maybe keep that in mind before bringing up the ol' EA thing. I'm not saying EA haven't had a hand in this in the changes either, but history shows BioWare has made similar decisions with JE before EA. (Also, did you dislike the game because of the inventory being dumbed down and the action like feel?)

Also, I'm not going to get into the whole inventory thing here, but I'd like to say that I've watched a lets play on hard of Dragon Age 2 and the user was pausing quite often to get through the fights. So yes, beyond normal, I would say it looks like you may have to pause etc.

But you know, disregard what I said here and also disregard the positive points of the reviews coming in. Just focus on the negative and the score.

Me? I think I'm going to enjoy going through the game multiple times and seeing the different ways I can shape the story and see the branching paths.

By all accounts, it seems they've pulled that aspect of roleplaying off. And for me, that's what one of the main elements of roleplaying games is. The ability to play a character and influence how the story pans out. The Witcher and AP did this well. I'm sure DA 2 does as well now judging by what I've read.

Jade Empire was an amazing game no doubt.  But a totally different beast. Jade Empire was "Hey guys, we are going to try something TOTALLY DIFFERENT NOW"   not "Spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate 2"

I would buy Jade Empire 2, 3, 4, 5 etc... tomorrow if they made it. and I HATED the "inventory" and lack of JE party.    

But JE also had mini games, talking to companions, side quests, diff weapon styles, martial arts styles etc.. it was an amazing first attempt.

Dragon Age was the last great standard bearer for BG2 "style" games. And with Dragon Age 2, Bioware has officially declared BG2 style games dead and done.  they've given up on that style.  I understand why ($$$$ from Gears and Call of Duty players)  but it still bums me out.

[Targas]

Oh, the game is a riot. Get the 'Bad Boy Special from the brothel sometime.