111 réponses à ce sujet

[Wolfva2]

I think the biggest problem this game faces is Origens. I mean, seriously! That game was, in my opinion, epically awesome. When it was over, I sat there with my jaw hanging all through the epilogue and credits. So, how do they top that? Well, it's looking like they don't top it with DA2.

But, who knows? Maybe DA2 is just the start. After all, they keep talking about 'The CHAMPION!!!", as if this guy does something that would put the 'hero of Ferelden' to shame. Really, in the 10 years the game covers does he do ANYTHING that comes close to slaying an archdemon and ending a blight? If not, then bleh. Some champion. But....what about what happens next? Maybe they're planning a sequel to this game where the Champion actually becomes a Champion, fighting a super powerful enemy (the Architect?) to save the world. I dunno. I'm just speculating. I think it'd be nice though.

[Timocy]

I expected our champion to be somehow related to DAO, so I can get some more answers about Flemeth or what Morrigan said in DAO and the Witch Hunt or at least something about Eluvian.

But guess what. Our champion was nothing but a local hero.
He had nothing to do with DAO without some unnatural and accidental happenings. (Like Flemeth, Zevran etc.)
Well maybe another DLC will make him more formidable, but so far not that impressive.

Anyhow I liked the visual of the Kirkwall, I enjoyed combats, and I think overall this is a nice piece.
But just not great.  For me, DA2 feels like a gigantic DLC.

Modifié par Timocy, 10 mars 2011 - 07:14 .

[Pamine]

As someone who just finished the game I have to say I kinda agree, the plot seems rather weak from start to finish to accommodate whatever gameplay elements they wanted to put in.

[Safernya666]

Oh well, I will say it: play it entirely, and you will (or may) talk differently after that. The first act is not the most 'active' one, but after it becomes pretty more active.

I never cry in sad movies, even less in video games, but at some parts, the story was very very heartbroking me. I will not spoil, but let's say emotions and complexity is way more present then in DAO. It's not a 'let's save the world for a brighter future' story. It's more personnal. More... political. More... emotionnal. I liked this game even better then DAO (and trust me when I said I did it a LOT of times).

I smiled. I cried. I raged too. DA2 is more a... realistic 'thing' if I can put it like that. You're someone like another that tries to make a new life in a new town, by all means you can. And the choices... oh the damn choices! 0_0 In DAO I never really had to wonder about it, but in DA2 I was able to take like 5 minutes to decide what would be 'best' to do, and the consequences of the choices seemed more 'active'. You did something and you were sure the act after, that you would heard of it (I still blame myself for not having this elf goes on his research about the 'white lilies murderer'...).

And that's what I liked.

[Extacykillz]

Hmm a few hrs in.. i just hope theres more to it than just getting money to do the deeproads.. i did like anders involvement. and how the hell did u get the prince to join i did his **** and that was it

[burb2500]

I'm 17 hours in (just finished the Jack the Ripper quest) and am thoroughly underwhelmed by the story. As so many others have said, it's not epic like the first one. I don't care about my family members (or their forced deaths) and don't give a crap about any of the characters. Isabella is a caricature that is more often than not embarrassing to listen to, and somehow the elves have voices that remind me of leprechauns. I went in realizing that this game would be short, but had hoped that the story would still be strong. I now dread ME3.

Also, I am really jarateed off that no actually ages/changes between time periods. All it would have taken to create the illusion is some texture work and some slightly modiefied models.

[Marcy3655]

I am actually not too surprised about what I've seen after about 12 hours in; I knew I would not like this one as much as DA:O, afterall how do you compete with a masterpiece like that? Obviously a lot of time and serious effort went into creating DA:O... Also I pretty much figured they would want to take it in a totally new direction because sometimes that can make a big difference but I think it fell a bit short overall...

Mind you, I am not bashing bioware here I am only trying to give my honest opinion of this new game, which for me anyway is my favorite game series along with ME... I am disappointed a bit yes, but not totally surprised as I've seen it happen again and again, think about movies for example, how many times have you seen an incredible classic made with the first film, only to have several rather disappointing sequels one after the other?

But I'm still enjoying the game because for me bioware games are better than most, I have been a fan of their games for a long time and still love them... There are some good things about this new episode in the Dragon Age saga; some of the vistas are rather breathtaking, some of the anims are a bit better, I really like the city adventure (one thing I used to love about playing pencil and paper D&D), and I like the PC from a tweakable standpoint and voiced is really nice...

However, the story is lacking... but perhaps that is due to it being a middle episode in the series, don't know, but it certainly does not have the completeness and depth of DA:O.. also I am already frustrated by being unable to equip my followers, I miss that a lot since it's something I've always loved about fantasy rpg games...

Anyways, I just think it's because of the scope of DA:O that makes the new game seem sort of hollow and lacking... I don't think there's anyway anyone could compete with such a work of art... and if it's act 2 in a series of 3 games who knows what's to come....

M

Modifié par Marcy3655, 12 mars 2011 - 03:10 .

[Taritu]

I've hammered the game for a number of issues (most notably the spawning) but I actually think this is an excellent story and better than DAO's. It has real tragedy, complicated politics and some ambiguity. The story is excellent, the gameplay I find lacking. (DAO was better at subplots, I'm judging the throughline.)

[fantasypisces]

Taritu wrote...

I've hammered the game for a number of issues (most notably the spawning) but I actually think this is an excellent story and better than DAO's. It has real tragedy, complicated politics and some ambiguity. The story is excellent, the gameplay I find lacking. (DAO was better at subplots, I'm judging the throughline.)

Act 1: the longest part of the game consists of you doing nothing but side quests to get enough money to go on an expedition.

Act 2: The side story (yes I say side story, because the connection between act 1 to act 2 is really thin at best) is incredibly short and has you playing mediator/ambassador to the qunari. Qunari attack, you defeat the Arishock, you are champion of kirkwall.

Act 3: mages vs templars, the shortest act of the entire game, and what ends up being the real story. Wait, what did this have to do with the Qunari? That you became champion so they take your advice?

Honestly, the game was nothing but side quests so you could gain fame. After gaining said fame the powers-that-be ask for your opinion, but ultimately your choice of opinion has no bearing on how the story turns out


The story was bad, in my opinion, really bad. It was incredibly slow, half way through the game I still had no idea what the point of the game was besides killing bandits and becoming a noble. When there was finally a semblance of a story (final 20% of the game) it came so late I just didn't care, or was confused as to why my choices mattered, since my choices make no difference in the final "story" of the game.

Edit:

Lets compare:
Dragon Age Origins: The story is you need to stop the blight. Seems a little forced and simple, but it becomes very complex. How do you go about stopping the blight? By being considerate and helpful, or ruthless? How do you kill the archdemon? Self Sacrifice, fellow warden sacrifice, dark ritual. These were big choices, in what originaly seemed like a simple narrative. These choices affected how the world turned out. You knew what you had to do in the beginning, you knew there was a path you had to follow, you knew who your friends and enemies were so you could react accordingly to how you wanted to play your character.

In Dragon Age II: The story is how do you become the Champion of Kirkwall. Well, first you spend half the game getting money. Then you stop the Qunari which you have very little choice over how you do it. Well, you can duel, group fight, or give up Isabela, but in the end it doesn't affect anything. The outcome is the same, you are champion. The world doesn't change because of it. You are given the illusion of choice, but in the end there is no difference.  Honestly, how you become champion is not a story. Because no matter which character you play, which personality you play, almost every situation ends the exact same way, so essentially everyone becomes champion through the same means. The only thing you have control over is your personality. And personality does not make a story. Your choices when faced with a problem equel a story.

Then act 3 hits and it's mage vs templars. Oh wait I can choose? Cool. Oh wait, the epilogue is the exact freaking same no matter what I did? Lame. Wait, this ended up being the real story, but was the shortest act in the entire game? Lamer.

Modifié par fantasypisces, 12 mars 2011 - 03:49 .

[SnakeSNMF]

Yes. I agree.
Short and said to the point. :;/

[MerchantGOL]

the side Quests ARE the main plot

They Are the Colors that paint the main picture, They all ether end up playing a part in the story or gets mentioned or end up helping out at some point later.

story wise its one of the most complex games i can think off

[fantasypisces]

MerchantGOL wrote...

the side Quests ARE the main plot

They Are the Colors that paint the main picture, They all ether end up playing a part in the story or gets mentioned or end up helping out at some point later.

story wise its one of the most complex games i can think off

Yes, and in my opinion, that is really freaking lame. Fractured side stories that last no more than minutes (in terms, of problem, solution, resolution) that end up having very little, to absolutely no connection to each other does not make a good story. Because it is not a story. Side quests are called SIDE quests because they are SIDE STORIES.

[MerchantGOL]

fantasypisces wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...

the side Quests ARE the main plot

They Are the Colors that paint the main picture, They all ether end up playing a part in the story or gets mentioned or end up helping out at some point later.

story wise its one of the most complex games i can think off

Yes, and in my opinion, that is really freaking lame. Fractured side stories that last no more than minutes (in terms, of problem, solution, resolution) that end up having very little, to absolutely no connection to each other does not make a good story. Because it is not a story. Side quests are called SIDE quests because they are SIDE STORIES.

Then they arent Side Quests in the Traditnal sense, cause they  are important, and Fractured? hardly

fractured is what id callt he usual side quest set up

[Marcy3655]

The story is nothing compared to DA:O, agreed.. it's hard to compete with the sheer volume of information being presented to the player in that game, it takes hours upon hours to read about all the history and backstory going on around you, and the plot was interwoven with many smaller side plots that make a big difference, not as far as the endgame but more in the way you feel as you get to the end sequence after all that history you feel like you've really taken a journey..

not so with the new one... but I'm thinking every story can't be like DA:O, some stories are about one character with one problem they are trying to overcome and everything that happens while trying to overcome it... and that seems like what this one is trying to be more than anything else.. those stories can be just a good, but I think there's just not enough backstory being presented here to give the player that connection with the first game and a sense that the only place their character could be is exactly right where they are here and now... without that, you feel disjointed and kind of lost without a foundation for what you are trying to accomplish..

M

[fantasypisces]

So gathering all ingrediants for an herbalist relates to you rescuing a captured women, or klling qunari who rebelled, or helping your companions with their own problems. Yeah, those sound really connected.

This was the story for each act, plainly obvious, since you know, they were listed under "Main Quests" in the game.

Act 1: Gather money, this is the only time I would say that side quests are part of the story. But it is weak, Act 1 is nothing but gather 50 gold. That is a terrible way to design a game.

Act 2: The Qunari. At this point I was thinking oh cool, here we go, this is the story. End of Act 2 Qunari leave.

Act 3: Mages vs Templars. Wait, so the Qunari weren't the main story?

The Main Story was hawkes rise to power. But everything was so disjointed that it does not make a good story. A story needs a protagonist and either an antagonist or some sort of problem that has a crisis moment. Act 1 had no antagonist and no problem. Act 2 and 3 both had different antagonists, different problems.

But in my opinion, for a story that revolves around an action game, there was no urgency until the last 20% of the game.

[fantasypisces]

I just want to clarify, I'm not trying to be a complete hater.

I'm not trying to be like "Oh Dragon Age II is a horrible game" because it wasn't a horrible game, but in no way did I think the story was good.

[MerchantGOL]

fantasypisces wrote...

So gathering all ingrediants for an herbalist relates to you rescuing a captured women, or klling qunari who rebelled, or helping your companions with their own problems. Yeah, those sound really connected.

This was the story for each act, plainly obvious, since you know, they were listed under "Main Quests" in the game.

Act 1: Gather money, this is the only time I would say that side quests are part of the story. But it is weak, Act 1 is nothing but gather 50 gold. That is a terrible way to design a game.

Act 2: The Qunari. At this point I was thinking oh cool, here we go, this is the story. End of Act 2 Qunari leave.

Act 3: Mages vs Templars. Wait, so the Qunari weren't the main story?

The Main Story was hawkes rise to power. But everything was so disjointed that it does not make a good story. A story needs a protagonist and either an antagonist or some sort of problem that has a crisis moment. Act 1 had no antagonist and no problem. Act 2 and 3 both had different antagonists, different problems.

But in my opinion, for a story that revolves around an action game, there was no urgency until the last 20% of the game.

First No A Story Dosent Need an antagonist, especaily not in a story like this

Second almost all of the Compaing quests conected to the main plot, its not Disjointed, It just dosent follow a linear straight line like most stories in video games do, it wasnt like the first one  were  they  go, "Here these guys are evil fo kill them", this is a story about people, people and their lives are what drove the plot.

[Riloux]

I agree. Cliche stories are the fun ones. If you try to wildly rock the boat, your story will either not make any sense or be dull and drawn out. Stick to your winning formula, next time.

[Marcy3655]

a story has to have a series of escalating problems for the PC to face and overcome.. the roadblocks in his/her way become worse and worse as the story moves forward, but I don't see that happening at all in act 1 or 2 and that's why I think it falls a bit short in the story department...

M

[Marcy3655]

but I don't hate the game at all, I'm enjoyin it, it's just that it would be that much more enjoyable if it had a better thought-out story is all...

M

[YooperLaw]

I agree that Origins had the better story and companions overall, but I think this game had some strong points as well. The Champion's story lacked the epicness of Origins, which while cliché, was still very compelling and made you think you had accomplished something great at the end of the story.

In comparison, the sequel didn't really have any epic moments to it. Lore says that the Champion is the most important figure in Thedas but I didn't get that feeling; slaying the Qunari leader pales in comparison to the Warden's killing of the Archdemon and ending the Blight, and you don't really get to experience the Mage revolt in Thedas, you just listen to Varric and Cassandra discuss it.

Still, this game had a few things going for it. It was a very personal story which had some very unexpected turns. I was completely shocked when I finished the Deep Roads and discovered that Bethany had been corrupted. Same deal with finding out what happened to your mother. I think those were very deep moments and the game delivered big time. And what about Anders' little act with the Chantry? I don't think anyone was expecting that!

And there were some very interesting characters here as well. Varric was great (particularly when he was recounting to Cassandra his confrontration with his brother and the exagerated portion came into play again), Merril was charming, I enjoyed Cassandra (she was horribly underused), and the humor between Aveline and Isabella was great. Overall, there was some fantastic banter between all characters and made me wander aimlessly in Hightown just so I could listen to it.

TLDR; not as good as Origins, but still had some wonderful moments that made the experience worthwhile.

Modifié par YooperLaw, 12 mars 2011 - 04:18 .

[fantasypisces]

MerchantGOL wrote...

fantasypisces wrote...

So gathering all ingrediants for an herbalist relates to you rescuing a captured women, or klling qunari who rebelled, or helping your companions with their own problems. Yeah, those sound really connected.

This was the story for each act, plainly obvious, since you know, they were listed under "Main Quests" in the game.

Act 1: Gather money, this is the only time I would say that side quests are part of the story. But it is weak, Act 1 is nothing but gather 50 gold. That is a terrible way to design a game.

Act 2: The Qunari. At this point I was thinking oh cool, here we go, this is the story. End of Act 2 Qunari leave.

Act 3: Mages vs Templars. Wait, so the Qunari weren't the main story?

The Main Story was hawkes rise to power. But everything was so disjointed that it does not make a good story. A story needs a protagonist and either an antagonist or some sort of problem that has a crisis moment. Act 1 had no antagonist and no problem. Act 2 and 3 both had different antagonists, different problems.

But in my opinion, for a story that revolves around an action game, there was no urgency until the last 20% of the game.

First No A Story Dosent Need an antagonist, especaily not in a story like this

Second almost all of the Compaing quests conected to the main plot, its not Disjointed, It just dosent follow a linear straight line like most stories in video games do, it wasnt like the first one  were  they  go, "Here these guys are evil fo kill them", this is a story about people, people and their lives are what drove the plot.

Read my post again, I said an antagonist OR some sort of problem that has a crisis moment

[Verenti]

This topic is funny. I think the completely opposite thing. Origins was so bland, about half way through I literally said to my brother "Ugh, Is there no way to just skip to the end?" The characters in DA:O just made me want to kill them all off, especially Allistar. But other than Morrigan and Ogrim (/n?) and the Dog, I was actually looking for opportunities to off my companions because they were so hollow.

All those complaints levied at the Characters and the Story of DA2, are things I've been saying the negative versions of to complement the game. The Characters are more well rounded, the story is better, because it doesn't have the "save the world" crutch to lean on, and the progression feels a lot more convincing.

[Darkannex]

I thought I heard Bethany and Hawke mention that to keep Bethany safe from the Templars they needed to have influence and that meant having money.

...which made less sense in act 3 when you realize that even the monied people lost their children to the Templars.

Naive? Or just an inane dropped plotpoint?