303 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

Painronamic wrote...

DA2 should not have been marketed as the spiritual succesor to Dragon Age: Origins. People would have gotten the message and left. Yet people like to lie

Um, it wasn't marketed as the sprititual successor to DA:O?  It's marketed as, you know, the sequel?  I think you're getting confused with DA:O being marketed as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

[CubbieBlue66]

sirianb wrote...

Dear Bioware:

If you had just given us the same gameplay as Dragon Age Origins, similir quality level of story, and upgraded graphics for Dragon Age 2, I would have been happy with that. What you released is pure BS to milk the franchise. This game is nothing more than a 3D Diablo 2. CLICK CLICK CLICK it's completely mindless, and we all know you rushed this game to milk the franchise because of EA.  I'm just going to rush through the game as fast as I can to see the ending, but I am not buying any of your Dragon Age 2 DLC or expansion packs, because the game is garbage, and it's to late to patch it and salvage the game.

So in conclusion if you had just given us the same gameplay of Dragon Age Origins, and updated graphics most of your fans would have been happy. Yet this bastardized game is passed off as Dragon age 2, when it is clearly not a sequel, it's just a poorly rushed game to milk the franchise. PLEASE DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES FOR DRAGON AGE 3.

I wouldn't certainly have not been happy had they recycled the atrocious gameplay from the first game.

Moving slower is not the same thing as requiring more strategy.

[Velesfray]

Very sad...it makes me laugh at how ignorant some people are *sigh

Point 1 Combat

IS THE SAME... wait what? Yes It is the same, except now its faster, better animated and smoother... and no you don't have to click to win, you have a choice to do so, you also don't have to play this game on an easy difficulty. I really don't see why people are complaining, since it pretty much impossible to win just by spamming on any difficulty above normal...

Point 2 Story

No its not SAVE THE WORLD... I do agree Bioware messed up on this part because apparently as soon as the story is not plain, overused, and obvious...the mice get confused and cry about it Y_Y But bad humor aside, the story is more about character development rather then SAVE THE WORLD through these 3 easy steps...

Point 3 Environments

K Many games especially ME franchise reuse levels and maps...true its more obvious in DA2 but nothing changes...you just notice it more thanks to the graphics update making everything look much clearer

Conclusion

This game is not like DMC, or Diablo. It is a perfectly good sequel expanding the lore and story the the DA world. While there are bad changes, the game is worth the $60 and no its not worth $30 cause anyone with half a brain would clearly see a difference between $30 and $60 dollar games

Also the DLC was a treat for pre-orders... not some way to cash in. I am sure everyone would be happier if EA only let pre-orders have it and not let anyone else buy it....right? or if the studio had to have layoffs due to not having funds



Sorry for the bad grammar its late and I don't like proof reading Y_Y
Also in my opinion DA2 is just as dull as DA:0 with a ton of repetitive combat but its about the world and story so +1 for DA2

Modifié par NetherWitch, 11 mars 2011 - 08:02 .

[archurban]

wow, you expect DA 3 when DA 2 is failed? that's absurd. Bioware shouldn't make more sequel. it's ruined, failed everything. they even shouldn't make any DA after dragon age origin. period.

[Vengeance of the Grave]

there wont be a dragon age 3

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

I always find it funny that people say "Diablo 2 is all click, click, click, click, click..." You can HOLD down the mouse button you know...

Anyways... DA2 is far broken broken...

[RGDekta]

NetherWitch wrote...

Very sad...it makes me laugh at how ignorant some people are *sigh

Point 1 Combat

IS THE SAME... wait what? Yes It is the same, except now its faster, better animated and smoother... and no you don't have to click to win, you have a choice to do so, you also don't have to play this game on an easy difficulty. I really don't see why people are complaining, since it pretty much impossible to win just by spamming on any difficulty above normal...

Point 2 Story

No its not SAVE THE WORLD... I do agree Bioware messed up on this part because apparently as soon as the story is not plain, overused, and obvious...the mice get confused and cry about it Y_Y But bad humor aside, the story is more about character development rather then SAVE THE WORLD through these 3 easy steps...

Point 3 Environments

K Many games especially ME franchise reuse levels and maps...true its more obvious in DA2 but nothing changes...you just notice it more thanks to the graphics update making everything look much clearer

Conclusion

This game is not like DMC, or Diablo. It is a perfectly good sequel expanding the lore and story the the DA world. While there are bad changes, the game is worth the $60 and no its not worth $30 cause anyone with half a brain would clearly see a difference between $30 and $60 dollar games

Also the DLC was a treat for pre-orders... not some way to cash in. I am sure everyone would be happier if EA only let pre-orders have it and not let anyone else buy it....right? or if the studio had to have layoffs due to not having funds



Sorry for the bad grammar its late and I don't like proof reading Y_Y
Also in my opinion DA2 is just as dull as DA:0 with a ton of repetitive combat but its about the world and story so +1 for DA2

Very good post as to the story I agree I mean alot of gamers have a OMG Save the World mentality yet personal stories have been some of the greatest stories in history like a few small stories like Gone with the Wind and Romeo and Juliet.  If there are some people that don't understand what an old foggy like me is saying Pick UP a Book.

The inventory overall was a let down but I notice nobody mentioned what I felt was the only bright spot of the new inventory the junk catagory.  It is nice to right click on something I want to sell (yes this is on a pc) and say move to junk then later go to a vendor and sell all junk.

[the_esherick]

Seriously, people are still complaining about the game? If you
find the game too easy crank up the difficulty. The devs have already said that
on "normal" you only need focus on your own character. On hard
tactics kick in and must take control of your whole party (more like origins).
I can personally attest to this. I find hard perfect for my play style. But if
you still find it too easy, crank it up further. 

Graphically its been overhauled to look better but, it nowhere near CG quality.
I'm not sure what people are expecting these days graphically. Real time
rendering is never going to be good or as smooth as prerendered CG.

The UI is cleaner than Origins, more streamlined yet its core still remains (at
least on the PC)

Inventory: Personally, i like the new inventory system. Sometimes do I wish
that I could equip Armor X on character C, sure. However, I much prefer having
to only worry about one characters full set (from helm to trinket) For the most
part you can still equip weapons, neck pieces, belts, and rings on each of the
characters. You just can't fully trick out your chosen party in epic gear
(which can be frustrating, i agree). The addition of the junk category is
welcome. Makes selling useless items all the easier.  

Storyline: Its a different game. You can't really judge this game by Origins.
From what I have played so far this game is about a singular character and
his/her story. Origins was an epic about a threat to the world and the process
of saving it. Yes, the two relate. The events in Origins kind of shape the
world of DA II. However, they are two completely separate (but interlaced)
stories.

Talent Trees: I think this was a nice rework. I'm a visual person so being able
to lay out, see, and plan what I'm going to do ten lvls down the road is nice
for me. Its also nice that its no longer A leads to B leads to C. To a point
you can pick and choose what you want to have. This is a minor point as Origins
did this well too.

The one gripe real gripe about the game that I have is that bioware restructured
how lock picking and disabling traps works. Other than the obvious I can no
longer tell if I can unlock a chest. If I can't I know have to at most put 10
more points into cunning. I honestly liked simply to throw a talent point into
unlocking in Origins.

I think that about sums up my argument.

Modifié par the_esherick, 11 mars 2011 - 10:16 .

[Vpsycho]

well at amazon.com the ratings are not well. Especially at pc. any way ı just want to say that, come on guys we all knew this game would suck. Ea bought bioware and ea only thinks money. They dont care your fun or opinions..Only money. Dragon age 1 completed in 7 years, this crap took only 2 years. Yes, Bioware could do better this game but they didint. So they deserve to damaged their name and losing money on dragon age franchise..

[DarthAndr1us]

I HATE THE REPETITION visiting the same places with different names. kinda feels bioware just wanted to make quick bucks and did not take their time to give variety, the story is not as immersive as dragon age origins I got bored in the 3rd hour and now just playing for the sake of it. sure nicer graphics and better movement but without good storytelling and a better more interacted group its blaah. if i wanted a city to walk in and kill id play assassins creed. somewhat disappointed but anyway it was a great "classic rock" game that became just a "pop" game. my opinion

[Lord Drakkul]

While we're all being brutally honest about our feelings towards the games I'll say this about DA:O...

-Well Told yet Generic Story
-Lackluster Graphics outdated by 5 years at minimum at the time of its release
-Combat was tactical but oh so slow and drawn out
-Dance Dance Shuffle Master footing during combat
-Your party members apparently didn't like your leadership skills and would outright ignore you for lengthy periods of time when assigning commands.

To make a direct sequel of that would have been their biggest mistake in my opinion. I finished DA:O, but it was mostly pushing on with the hope that the game would get better at the end. It had its shining moments, but to me, it is hardly worth the pedestal people put it on. I was extremely disappointed with how unpolished the game was despite its development cycle. I think people just so desperately wanted their Baldurs Gate successor that they put their blinders on to make the game look a little better than it was. Same can be said about Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, which roped you in with great looking videos and screenshots but promptly stomped on your face once you had a taste of the combat mechanics.

DA2 is far from perfect, but to this gamer, has fixed just about everything that was wrong with DA:O. So like others have said, you do not speak for me. =)

[Revelo]

I'm just going to say this:

Bioware, I like how you understand that the combat in games like Mass Effect 1 and DA: Origins needed to be better, but I don't recall people asking you to sacrifice so much of the RPG elements just to fit it in? Why can it be a good balance of both? Why go so overboard on fixing that at the cost of the ammount of immersion and depth that makes your games very memorable?

Modifié par Revelo, 11 mars 2011 - 11:10 .

[the_esherick]

I have a theory on the repetitive nature of the areas. This game mainly takes place in one city and a few surrounding areas, unlike origins which took place over an entire continent. Of course Origins is going to be more varied in locations. Because of the "limited" (I use that term loosely) scope of DAII there are going to be areas (caves and such) that are going to be repurposed depending questline. The thought is "player defeats one group of enemies and a second group comes in and takes over the same area, renaming it as their own."

That may seem a little bit far fetched to some but, it makes perfect sense to me. Some may see it as a cop out on biowares part. I believe someone said that bioware has been "reusing" areas in most of their games for years. They have. It is simply more noticeable now because of the advancements in graphics technology.

Anyway, thats my logic.

[Visamon]

RGDekta wrote...

Visamon wrote...

wny people keep saying that combat is better? as far as ive seen its just press R till mob dies, if its stronger use random skill, then press R again. No friendly fire so you can spam aoe spells to kill 123123 random mobs that appear from nowhere. Then every enemy you kill explode in pieces, even if you kill it with an arrow.

Why dragon age 2 is so bad compared to origins? its simple. DAO was released nov 2009 if i remember well, 4-5 months later it already had an expansion pack, and 1 year later comes a sequel that shouldnt be called sequel. We all know EA is behind this, and im sorry because bioware has lost it soul.

If you really think DAO combat was slow, you should not play a rpg and go back to call of duty. DA2 is neither a rpg nor an action game, its a Press R for WIN and press 1 for good, 2 for retard and 3 for bad.

PD: THANKS GOD i played DA2 on my cousin house, now i can save my money

First you obviously playing on a Console and even bioware said the combat is different on consoles then the version I play PC and if you up the difficulty you will see a difference at least I do DA 2 combat on Hard is harder then DA:O on hard.  As to the console vs PC combat from what I understand they are different so apples vs oranges and in the case of the console you might be right as I only have the PC combat as a measure.  BTW don't think I am a pc vs console person I think PC and Console are fine it all depends on your style I don't think one is better then the other I am just a PC gamer because that is what I prefer.

Obviously if i say PRESS R im playing on pc, its faster to press R and autotarget than select target manually, anyway anything will die in 2 hits and explode

[TheLastAwakening]

the_esherick wrote...

Seriously, people are still complaining about the game? If you
find the game too easy crank up the difficulty. The devs have already said that
on "normal" you only need focus on your own character. On hard
tactics kick in and must take control of your whole party (more like origins).
I can personally attest to this. I find hard perfect for my play style. But if
you still find it too easy, crank it up further. 

I find this to be true, after playing DA 2 on hard I'm actually liking DA 2 even more. My opinion of the game is starting to change. Unfortunately, I am afraid of going into nightmare mode because I've gotten owned a couple of times on hard. I also don't think the combat is too fast anymore. While there are somethings missing, I don't think DA 2 is a failed game and I also think that listening to the fans was actually good and that the real fault is that the game was rushed.

Here is my 2cent for fixing DA 3

--Get rid of the ME style UI it has no place in the DA universe
-- Keep Cross-class combo's 
-- Reintroduce Spell combo's like Grease + fireball and expand 
-- Don't overdue the ME quest style which revovles around companions, Bring back DA:O quest style which revovled around the world that was being built for the character (player) > companion fetch quest.
-- Longer story or more in depth story
-- Being able to order a drink does nothing for game play... This is DA  not ME. That whole Shepard thing killed me.
--Do I really need 50 shops on every street corner? or just a few shops with a story behind each one and the characters and items.
-- Last but not least, you have 2 target audiences both console (which I am) and PC.

DA 2 is a very good game on harder difficulty, I love me some well placed glyph of paralysis + pull of the abyss () and casting chain ligthing simultaneously with two mages (of course, I'm doing more role-playing for the second)

[ErebUs890]

DA2 did not fail, but this thread does.

[Teh Chozen Wun]

I don't see how this game is mindless??? It's practically the same system and interface as DA:O but with a more simple access structure.

[sirianb]

Read it and weep fanboys yes it really was rushed by EA


music.ign.com/articles/115/1154594p1.html
"EA really wanted to capitalize on the success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released now"

[the_esherick]

sirianb
wrote...

Read it and weep fanboys yes it really was rushed
by EA

music.ign.com/articles/115/1154594p1.html

"EA really wanted to capitalize on the
success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released
now"

What publisher doesn't push to get a game
released? EA is notorious for that? Doesn't mean that the game is sub par. Companies
like bioware and blizzard don't truly release a game unless the feel its ready.
They have earned the reputation. 

just a side note for all who don't want to read
this article, It was an interview with the composer for the Dragon Age series
and was miss quoted here. In the context on the interview he was talking about
bugs in the score only. It is noted at much a few lines after the quoted sentence.
 The actual quote is this:

"EA really wanted to capitalize on the
success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released
now. So I'd like to know if there are bugs, or if there's anything we could
patch or fix. [Editor's note: Zur is speaking about bugs in the score only; he
had no involvement with the rest of the game's development.]"

Please don't miss quote simply to make a point.

Could the game have been better? Sure. Does the
game have bugs? Yes. But what game doesn't? Every game that I know these days
needs to be patched at least once. This game is no different.  Anyway, my
point is this. I'm sure that EA did push to get the game released but, if
Bioware didn't think the game was ready it wouldn't have gone gold.

I digress, this thread is not about EA it's about
DAII and the things that we as the gamers felt like they could have done
better. Bottom line, the game is not perfect but, it is far from a failure.

Modifié par the_esherick, 11 mars 2011 - 06:56 .

[Getterray]

1. Get rid of the conversation wheel.
2. Multiple endings
3. Add choice again. I know this is a non spoiler forum so I can't spoil anything but things happen in DA2 no matter what you choose. Someone asks for your help (they *need* you) and if you say no they somehow do it anyway.
4. More than 2 options to solve things please.
5. Stronger enemies, less waves of reinforcements. The mobs should be threatening on their own, not merely thrown at you until you get tired.
6. Unique, hand made dungeons. NOT ONE SINGLE REPEAT. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. If a game of Skyrim's scale can do it then a linear adventure game like DA3 should be able to do it as well.
7.More than 2 years of dev time

That fixes it.

[Lord_Valandil]

Longer development time.
Drop the conversation wheel, it's far too simple (Good, funny, baddie).
Test the game before releasing it...it's getting ridiculous now, with all the bugs and patches...there are other games without a single patch (Alan Wake for example).
Keep the combat system.
Keep the day/night cycle.
Improve the romance scenes...we passed from diapers and gigantic bras to fully clothed chars, a step back I say.
Please, stop with the recycled environments. This game screams for more variety.
No multiplayer, please.
Less "cartoony" designs.
Improve the customization, and allow to customize the followers. All in all, drop the ME style.

[Lord Coake]

Much like the last game to market itself as an action epic with an engrossing storyline and massive player options to fall flat on it's face, there is no saving DA2.

DA3? Maybe. If Bioware has any credibility left after this fiasco.

What game am I speaking of in the beginning of this post? Hellgate: London. And it was better at map randomization. Better at PR too, since after it was almost universally panned and it's legion of bugs became public knowledge, Bill Roper came right out and effectively said "Yeah, we done ****ed up."

Compare that sentiment to that seen in the recent interview with EA's lapdog Mike Laidlaw, and it's a grim precedent.

[Joan Moldovia]

I love the game myself please don't presume to think we all agree with the OP.

[Purple People Eater]

The title of this thread is so stupid. "I think Dragon Age 2 failed" would have been a more appropriate title for the OP, because I dont think its failed at all. Im having a blast, and while I do miss a few things about Origins, the improvements that have been made are far exceeding them.
Dont make a thread with a title as if its a definitive statement.You just make yourself sound like an ass.

[Vollkeule]

I think Dragon Age 2 failed because it did not meet the expectations of a sequel of Dragon Age Origins. If you want a neutral statement about this just look at the tests and media. Sure, could be worse but why should I be content with a sequel, that did not have a third of the developement time of its predecesor and feels shallow for me? I think that could be called failed in most cases....
Its not a bad game but it is not great either... as expected by many from bioware and the dragon age series. The longer I think about this the more fail springs in your eye. Do you belive that Biowares management thinks that this game was a success? I do not think so... despite what they might say

Modifié par Vollkeule, 11 mars 2011 - 07:25 .