212 réponses à ce sujet

[Haexpane]

Bigdoser wrote...

Honestly I can't see why people see 8/10 as something bad? I wonder what is happening with gamers these days if a game does not get a 9 or a 10 it failed? eeer wut?

I personally don't care about the numeric score.  Some of my favorite games get 7s etc...  GTA4 got a 10/10 and I found it lacking compared to GTA3, SA.

What matters to me in the GS review is the removal of features they discussed.  The actual content of the review is what I read and ponder.  

Now I will finish DA2 myself to decide for myself.  I was a HUGE fan of Awakenings when a lot of people hated on it.  In fact I thought Awakenings was much more enjoyable than Origins, but that puts me in the minority for sure.

[Josef bugman3]

They said origins was. I have yet to see anywhere where they said that 2 is a spiritual succesor to Baldurs gate.

And as a secondary thing? The sheer PC elitism around here is so thick you could punch it.

[rob_k]

Rotlex wrote...

Really hoping anyone on the fence doesn't
read these threads and get discouraged from buying the game. My
favorites of old from Bioware include the Original BG, all expansions
all the way through Origins. Been playing DA2 for a bit now, and am
thoroughly enjoying it. But, then again, I loved ME2 as well. I'm not
normally one to post, or complain, but I really am wondering what all
the negativity is from.

Great game so far........

People looking at the negative points and scores, not the positive points I wager. I mentioned earlier in the thread Gamespot's thoughts on the choice and consequences etc. of the game and only one person picked up
on it again, Taleroth.

So, we're again back to focusing only on negative points. I should be able to give my own thoughts from Thursday onwards.

And Haex, thankyou for the reply.

I would counter that by asking a simple question. Does the loss of things from DA: O automatically make DA 2 a bad game?

You said you liked JE, despite the inventory etc. So, is it not possible you could also like DA 2?

(I don't know how conversations are handled in DA 2 however. By all accounts, it seems they're still in but they're triggered by plot progression, gifts and are accessed via their house. To be honest though, having recently gone through DA: O as in today, I don't think this is as big a deal as people make it out to be. Once you exhausted the options with Allistair etc., you couldn't really go through the dialog again unless it's to kiss him or something. So, once you exhausted the dialog, you basically have to wait to get his approval up and complete the next main quest.)

Edit: And Haex, it's good to see you still plan on giving DA 2 a go. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Also, is anyone finding the formatting of their posts being messed up? Alongside being logged out constantly and getting restricted area messages.

Modifié par rob_k, 08 mars 2011 - 08:04 .

[SorrowAndJoy7]

Dragon Age 2 is more tactical on Nightmare than Origins was... That is to say, they have pumped up the hardest difficulty to a higher level than it was... I beat Origins on Nightmare, it wasn't anything special, just because your character moves slow as a snail doesn't make it more tactical game, there was no point in Origins where you needed to do things like party movement to avoid a bosses attacks. The most you had to do in Origins was get in position and pound away with incredibly overpowered spells such as cone of cold.

[Sabiancym]

Josef bugman3 wrote...

They said origins was. I have yet to see anywhere where they said that 2 is a spiritual succesor to Baldurs gate.

And as a secondary thing? The sheer PC elitism around here is so thick you could punch it.

You know why we PC players look down on the consoles?  Because console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an opinion, it's obvious.

Origins was made for the PC.  The developers said PC came first and that Origins was a classic RPG game.  DA2 was made for the console and removed so much of what made Origins a great PC game.

Sorry, but the number of great games ruined by the simplified console control layout, casual nature of console players, and just general style of gameplay suited for consoles is getting old.  The die hard fans of games get shoved aside in favor of the people that game only a couple days a week.

I'm sure console players would be pissed if they took the game and added an insane complexity and control scheme that was much more geared towards the PC users.

[el-jasho]

Sabiancym wrote...

Josef bugman3 wrote...

They said origins was. I have yet to see anywhere where they said that 2 is a spiritual succesor to Baldurs gate.

And as a secondary thing? The sheer PC elitism around here is so thick you could punch it.

You know why we PC players look down on the consoles?  Because console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an opinion, it's obvious.

Origins was made for the PC.  The developers said PC came first and that Origins was a classic RPG game.  DA2 was made for the console and removed so much of what made Origins a great PC game.

Sorry, but the number of great games ruined by the simplified console control layout, casual nature of console players, and just general style of gameplay suited for consoles is getting old.  The die hard fans of games get shoved aside in favor of the people that game only a couple days a week.

I'm sure console players would be pissed if they took the game and added an insane complexity and control scheme that was much more geared towards the PC users.

Your console racism hurts my feelings

[WalterSobchack]

Haexpane wrote...

Josef bugman3 wrote...

You can shove this "spiritual successor" gumf where the sun shineth not. I am getting absolutely sick of hearing how a game HAS to be a spiritual succesor to a past game in order to be any good.

Umm Bioware are the ones who called it "spiritual successor"  but now you blame the fans?

Game, set, match.  This is the point I think a lot of people are missing.  DA2 will be a reasonably solid experience for a lot of gamers, but in no way is it even close to spiritual successor of BG anymore.  The people who enjoy the complexities and even some of the more "mind-numbing" tasks are no longer the target audience.  In this sense, it isn't in the classic RPG style.  I don't see how this is debatable.  What the GS reviewer did was point out where complexities had been removed, and in his opinion, these removals aren't justifiable.  People are entitled to disagree about whether it's justifiable, but the facts are just facts.

I recognize that Bioware is not bound until the end of time to make continuous DA sequels in the spirit of BG. However, it was Bioware's own stated intention to make the DA series a continuation of the BG-style.  That they abandoned it so quickly is disappointing to a lot of gamers, the majority of which are probably PC gamers. 

I think it is now fair to say that Bioware is not the gold standard of a "classic" RPG style game anymore.  Has the nature of the RPG evolved? Definitely.  Bioware is certainly a standard setter for the evolved version.  I still think there is room for a developer to come in and enhance the classic style using the greater computing capacities that we now have. It's just that Bioware is not that developer.

I still find it weird that this kind of opinion is treated as pissing in someone's Wheaties. If you're all for the new style of RPG, that's awesome.  You'll truly have fun with this game, and that's a great thing.  Let the rest of us discuss the drawbacks that other gamers of our style might like to know about.

[Top Gun volleyball]

There are exceptions, but mainly console gamers are ADD ****tards.

[Xrissie]

Sabiancym wrote...

You know why we PC players look down on the consoles?  Because console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an opinion, it's obvious.

Yes, it is an opinion. What you might consider a 'ruined' game, others might consider a great game, just look at DA2.

Sabiancym wrote...
Origins was made for the PC.  The developers said PC came first and that Origins was a classic RPG game.  DA2 was made for the console and removed so much of what made Origins a great PC game.

Not true. DA2 has been developed seperately on PC and console. Origins was just a really bad port.

Sabiancym wrote...
Sorry, but the number of great games ruined by the simplified console control layout, casual nature of console players, and just general style of gameplay suited for consoles is getting old.  The die hard fans of games get shoved aside in favor of the people that game only a couple days a week.

Could you give me some examples of these games that have been ruined? You keep mentioning it but never try to give any examples.

Sabiancym wrote..
I'm sure console players would be pissed if they took the game and added an insane complexity and control scheme that was much more geared towards the PC users.

Now what would be the point of that? There's a limited number of buttons on a controller, you know.

Modifié par Xrissie, 08 mars 2011 - 08:08 .

[Graunt]

Josef bugman3 wrote...
And as a secondary thing? The sheer PC elitism around here is so thick you could punch it.

It makes no sense either, other than some people seem to have ego problems and have to puff out their chests as though playing on a PC somehow means you're more endowed than someone who plays on a console, just because you're playing on the PC.  It doesn't matter if you're actually any good at the games you're playing.

You know why we PC players look down on the consoles?  Because
console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an
opinion, it's obvious.

Try not being so ignorant.  The reason games are "dumbed down" is because more people play on consoles and they have to be more accessible to a much wider audience.  The fact that developers are catering to a SWEEPING GENERALIZATION does not mean that those playing on a console actually have anything to do with the changes at all other than the fact that the audience is more diverse.

Modifié par Graunt, 08 mars 2011 - 08:11 .

[Static Jak]

Heh, we've got one side that's going on about how this is a major disappointment and how Bioware has fallen and all that malarkey and the other side is calling out Gamespot in any way they can since this is somehow a review tearing apart the game (hint: it isn't) while taking pot shots at those who have anything negative against the game.

Both as bad as each other.

I'll go with the Neutral choice me thinks
Honestly, not a bad game at all. And does improve on areas. Both story wise, it feels weaker and is just not as fulfilling imo. It's like in ME2 as well. The story is downplayed in the sequel from a big grand storyline that involves the galaxy to more of a skirmish in the sequel. DA2 is going through that same step.
Again, before some tries to tear my face out mentally from fan-rage, it's not a bad game, it's just more of a hit and miss overall for me.

Modifié par Static Jak, 08 mars 2011 - 08:11 .

[Samurai_Fiction]

First off, I absolutely LOVE,
I mean LOVE
No seriously
ADORE

How ANY TIME something NEGATIVE ABOUT THE GAME IS SAID, a defense force is ready to move out.

Gamespot gives it an 8.0, states it does not exceed Origins. RATED THE ORIGINAL AT A 9.0.
PFFF, "Gamespot". Did I forget to mention they were bought out by activision for bribed reviews?

Not only do you fail to remotely acknowledge anything that is said positively about the game, you dismerrit it just like critics who will say Bioware paid them for that review too.

So you can either say,
BIOWARE PAID GAMESPOT FOR THIS REVIEW
Not only placing dishonesty on Bioware, but stating the best they can get is an "8.0"
or
"GAMESPOT GAVE THEIR HONEST OPINION...and it has some negatives to it."

Someone mentioned Metacritic, in the vein of Adam Sessler,
F* Metacritic.
And if you think an "84" means "OUTSTANDING GOTYAY" I have some bad news for you.

WAIT FOR REVIEWS TO COME IN THAT ACTUALLY DO AIM TO TAKE FREE STABS AT ONLY THE NEGATIVETY 

Edge, Destructoid and the like are not going to be passing out free "10/10s" for your inflated averaging either.


Seriously, nobody so far is denying the game is good, but very few are denying It takes a very negative standpoint towards the consumers/fans who helped make the original game successful.

No, I don't speak for everybody in saying so. Just keep in mind those of you feeling "pained" by these reviews need to realize you are not sole owners of Dragon Age.

I by no means think a company's job is to cater to a single fanbase, by so far DA2's technical problems (see the DX11 issues) and the overall feel of the game is nothing compared to Origins.

"This means you have nostalgia goggles."
This game came out in 2009, people.

[WalterSobchack]

Static Jak wrote...

Heh, we've got one side that's going on about how this is a major disappointment and how Bioware has fallen and all that malarkey and the other side is calling out Gamespot in any way they can since this is somehow a review tearing apart the game (hint: it isn't) while taking pot shots at those who have anything negative against the game.

Both as bad as each other.

I'll go with the Neutral choice me thinks
Honestly, not a bad game at all. And does improve on areas. Both story wise, it feels weaker and is just not as fulfilling imo. It's like in ME2 as well. The story is downplayed in the sequel from a big grand storyline that involves the galaxy to more of a skirmish in the sequel. DA2 is going through that same step.
Again, before some tries to tear my face out mentally from fan-rage, it's not a bad game, it's just more of a hit and miss overall for me.

Your attempt at putting forth a reasonable position for your opinion insults the internets.  Mods please ban.

[Sabiancym]

Sabiancym wrote..
I'm sure console players would be pissed if they took the game and added an insane complexity and control scheme that was much more geared towards the PC users.

Now what would be the point of that? There's a limited number of buttons on a controller, you know.

.....way to miss the point.



A developer taking a console game like Halo, pumping up the depth and adding a crazy control set and then putting it on PC would be the same as what happened with dragon age, except in reverse.

Would you not be upset if they took one of your favorite games and changed the great things about it?



It's amazing the hypocrisy here.  Apparently my opinion is "wrong" because I don't worship the game.  Yet your opinions are perfectly valid because you....well you have a legion of fanboys behind you.

[Sabiancym]

You know why we PC players look down on the consoles?  Because
console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an
opinion, it's obvious.

Try not being so ignorant.  The reason games are "dumbed down" is because more people play on consoles and they have to be more accessible to a much wider audience.  The fact that developers are catering to a SWEEPING GENERALIZATION does not mean that those playing on a console actually have anything to do with the changes at all other than the fact that the audience is more diverse."

I didn't say they did have anything to do with the changes other than just buying into the games.  It's not that I personally hold each console player responsible for the development of the game, but it's hard to smile and agree with people who advocate the exact opposite of what I see as good gaming.




Take your favorite hobby or line of products.  Now have it changed completely based on a bunch of new people who have come in, and for the worse in your opinion.  You're going to be upset.

I don't know what you guys expect me to do.  Just say

"Oh hey, they ruined one of my favorite games...guess I should just leave and never play again instead of making my opinions heard in hopes of getting a better game later on"

Yea, no thanks.  I'm going to voice my criticism.  That's all I was doing at first.  Then I started to get attacked for my opinion.  I didnt say a thing about console gamers until people started calling my opinion invalid.

Modifié par Sabiancym, 08 mars 2011 - 08:25 .

[Graunt]

Sabiancym wrote...
Because console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an
opinion, it's obvious.

I didn't say they did have anything to do with the changes other than just buying into the games.

Clearly.  You also aren't simply "stating your opinion", you're acting like a spoiled child.

Modifié par Graunt, 08 mars 2011 - 08:29 .

[Eclipse_9990]

 Okay I've been reading this for a while, and I have to wonder. Why does any of you care so much? What is the point of all this arguing? Do the supporters want the OP to suddenly change his mind and be like "Oh you guys are so right! I was being a total douche, and Dragon Age 2 is teh best vidya game EVAR!", and OP was the point of this thread to get people to start hating this game, and bioware, and start agreeing with you?

The venom I've seen in this thread really makes me wonder of some you guys really have nothing better to do than ****** off, and insult people you don't even know. You don't like the game? Trade it in for another, or sell it. You like the game? Buy it, and try not to give a rats ass if a few people you don't even know don't like the game that you like. Is this topic really worth arguing about for 7 pages? 

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 08 mars 2011 - 08:31 .

[AlanC9]

WalterSobchack wrote...
Game, set, match.  This is the point I think a lot of people are missing.  DA2 will be a reasonably solid experience for a lot of gamers, but in no way is it even close to spiritual successor of BG anymore.  The people who enjoy the complexities and even some of the more "mind-numbing" tasks are no longer the target audience.  In this sense, it isn't in the classic RPG style.  I don't see how this is debatable.

Well, I could debate what "spiritual successor" means in the first place. Does it really mean all the traditional RPG elements, mind-numbing tasks, pointless complexity, and so on? I like BG2 despite that stuff, not because of it. (Then again, I also consider BG2 to be a pretty simple game once you sort through all the noise in the bloated spell lists)

That's the problem with "spiritual successor." It sounds good because it lets everyone believe that whatever they liked about the first game is going to be in the successor.

However, it was Bioware's own stated intention to make the DA series a continuation of the BG-style.

Did they actually say that? I remember hearing that only about DAO.

[el-jasho]

Samurai_Fiction wrote...


First off, I absolutely LOVE,
I mean LOVE
No seriously
ADORE

How ANY TIME something NEGATIVE ABOUT THE GAME IS SAID, a defense force is ready to move out.

Gamespot gives it an 8.0, states it does not exceed Origins. RATED THE ORIGINAL AT A 9.0.
PFFF, "Gamespot". Did I forget to mention they were bought out by activision for bribed reviews?

Not only do you fail to remotely acknowledge anything that is said positively about the game, you dismerrit it just like critics who will say Bioware paid them for that review too.

So you can either say,
BIOWARE PAID GAMESPOT FOR THIS REVIEW
Not only placing dishonesty on Bioware, but stating the best they can get is an "8.0"
or
"GAMESPOT GAVE THEIR HONEST OPINION...and it has some negatives to it."

Someone mentioned Metacritic, in the vein of Adam Sessler,
F* Metacritic.
And if you think an "84" means "OUTSTANDING GOTYAY" I have some bad news for you.

WAIT FOR REVIEWS TO COME IN THAT ACTUALLY DO AIM TO TAKE FREE STABS AT ONLY THE NEGATIVETY 

Edge, Destructoid and the like are not going to be passing out free "10/10s" for your inflated averaging either.


Seriously, nobody so far is denying the game is good, but very few are denying It takes a very negative standpoint towards the consumers/fans who helped make the original game successful.

No, I don't speak for everybody in saying so. Just keep in mind those of you feeling "pained" by these reviews need to realize you are not sole owners of Dragon Age.

I by no means think a company's job is to cater to a single fanbase, by so far DA2's technical problems (see the DX11 issues) and the overall feel of the game is nothing compared to Origins.

"This means you have nostalgia goggles."
This game came out in 2009, people.

While reading your post all I could think was ANGER RAAAAAGGGGEEEE
- It made me laugh

[_LordKain_]

All this whining from PC gamers is making me embarrassed to be one. (Even though I also play on console).

You people knew for months what kind of game DA2 was going to be. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Simple as that.

Witcher 2 is coming out soon.....go play that. (Which I also intend to play. Imagine that!)

[Nic-V]

Gamespot is not what it used to be. It's not a very credible reviewer IMHO.

[Sabiancym]

Graunt wrote...

Sabiancym wrote...
Because console players are the reason PC games get ruined.  That's not an
opinion, it's obvious.

I didn't say they did have anything to do with the changes other than just buying into the games.

Clearly.  You also aren't simply "stating your opinion", you're acting like a spoiled child.

Console players buying the games are the reason I was getting at....you said that I said specifically that console gamers have a hand in developing the games for them.  As if they're suggesting the things that should be put in the games.  I did not say that. 


So stfu.  The only reason I even said any of that in the first place was because of the massive amount of flaming I got for simply stating my opinion of the game.  Hard to just sit there and let people call me arrogant just because I say I'm a PC gamer and I dislike the direction of the game.

[Sabiancym]

_LordKain_ wrote...

All this whining from PC gamers is making me embarrassed to be one. (Even though I also play on console).

You people knew for months what kind of game DA2 was going to be. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Simple as that.

Witcher 2 is coming out soon.....go play that. (Which I also intend to play. Imagine that!)

No...it's not as simple as that.  We want to play more of the game we loved.  Simply ignoring this game is going to do nothing but ruin any chance of an Origins type game every happening again.

That's the reason for the criticism.

[Graunt]

Sabiancym wrote...
No...it's not as simple as that.  We want to play more of the game we loved.  Simply ignoring this game is going to do nothing but ruin any chance of an Origins type game every happening again.

That's the reason for the criticism.

No one is stopping you from playing that game again.

[craigdolphin]

Oh for pete's sake. I'm a PC gamer, and I'm mightily displeased with many of the changes to DA, but enough with the 'consoler gamers are dumb' and 'pc gamers are elitists' already!

Game developers should design games for the strengths of each platform they're released on. It's absurd to suggest that PC games should be designed for console controllers in mind, and vice versa. Unfortunately, it seems that this is precisely what Bioware have done for DA2. That's their bad. Bad ports are bad, wherther they're ports from pc, or ports from console. That's not the fault of gamers who prefer other platforms, it's just an unfortunate side effect of trying to minimize development costs and time, and taking longtime loyal customers from one platform for granted.

Personally, I hope that Bioware receives a strong signal from the market that this change in emphasis was a strategic error. But who's to say that they might not get the opposite signal? If so, good luck to them. If Bioware decide to permanently abandon the CRPG then I'm sure other developers would LOVE to fill that void in the market. We may be a minority compared to the COD-legions, but we're still a large minority and we are still plenty profitable to develop games for. And hopefully if Bioware sees other companies coming in to target their once-core customer, they'll think better of writing us off in the future.