903 réponses à ce sujet

[Zanallen]

DA:O was better executed and that is about it. Makes sense for a game with more than twice the development time.

[VKmasa]

Origins is 1000x better than DA2.

I mean DA2 was just a lazy piece of garbage and a
way to make a quick buck from origins success.

[Raice]

This is a great example of a list of non-issues mixed in with one solid complaint.

Lookupatme wrote...

 Dragon age Origins is by far the better game on pratically every conceivable measure.

[*]DAO has a better and more involved storyline and the sidequests are more enjoyable. This is a non-issue because this is an opnion.  I think the storyline of DA2 is far better because a) it's original and it is more personable about my character and not everone who isn't my character.

[*] The game has a greater replay value due to all the different story strands and initial character origin quests, there is also a ton of DLC which DA2 doesn't have.  DLC?  DA2 has been out - what - 3 months?  Give me a break.  As far as DAO's replay value - the only things that were different were the origina quests... which lasted maybe an hour a peice.  Non-issue because this is again, an opinion.

[*]The characters are better developed in  DAO and they interact with each other more effectively. The only truely memmorable characters in DA2 for me are Isabela and Varric; whereas in DAO I especially liked :Morrigan, Leliana, Sten, Alistair and Oghren.  Opinion = non-issue.  I liked all the characters in DA2.  Actually, I liked them all better than I liked any of the characters in DAO.  I'm not saying the characters in DAO were bad - but I am saying I think all the ones in DA2 were better.

[*]Romances in DA2 are not a patch on DAO.  I don't even know what this means - non-issue.

[*]Conversation options have been dumbed down.  You mean like how they were in Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 - which seem to be one everyone's "Best RPG EVER!" list?  How exactly have the options been dumbed down?  Instead of the clear cut "This is bad" "This is good" "This is neutral" selection we normally get, we get to control the behavior of what is being said.  I don't know that it was taken advantage of completely, but it certainly isn't "dumbed down" and you really have no evidence to this claim.  Non-issue.

[*]DAO has multiple locations,maps and cities to explore in DA2 everything is confined to the one city KIrkwall and the maps are continually spammed.   The only solid complaint anyone has, and I wholeheartedly agree.

[*]Combat has junked out on amphetamaine sulphate. Too much leaping and jumping about,very hack and slash. The more strategic combat which I prefered has been chucked out of the window.  This one baffles me.  It really does.  I loaded up DAO last night just to make sure I wasn't forgetting some important detail in the gameplay that made it at all differet than that of DA2.  What did I find?  They work exactly the same in both games.  I click once on a dude with RMB and Auto Attack ensues.  I press 1-0 to select a power, and then select the target.  It works exactly the same in both games.  In DA2, it is visually faster and more fun to watch.  That's.... that's it.  This isn't just a non-issue.  This is a flat out lie.  The only thing I can figure is that this complaint stems from the XBOX360 version.  On the PC, it plays exactly the same.

[*]Enemies constantly exploding into buckets of gore is too mangaesque.In DAO you would sometimes get some neat decapitations, which were at least more realistic looking.   Flavor differences.  I can appreciate the gravity of this issue.  I will say it is a solid complaint, but not a major, gamebreaking issue.  It can easily be turned down or off.  In fact, they released a patch that did exactly that.

[*]DAO has the better and more varied abilities,talents and spells. The spell effects look better and more realistic in combat  aswell I don't like the ability tree format.   I could write essays about this.  Someone please exaplain to me in detail how DAO's skill progression was so much more complex and awesome?  Again, I loaded up DAO last night to give myself a refresher.  You know what I found out?  There really was no complexity to the skills/ability selections.  If you were a Fighter - you basically put everything into Strength and Con.  A Mage - Magic and Willpower.  Rogue's were screwed because they had to worry about Dex Cunning and Strength.  Picking your skills was pretty unexciting too.  As a Warrior I had a lot of stuff to select from, but I knew that whatever I started in, I had to finish - because putting a little into Sword/Shield and a little into Two-Handed is pointless.  It took a lot of the guess work out of making a character.  The other classes functioned pretty much the same way.  In DA2 - "the level up" is probably one of the coolest parts of the game, because you literally can make your warrior however you want.  You don't have to be a meat shield and use Sword/Shield.  You can be the meat shield and still use 2H weapons.  Rogue's don't have to be sneak attack chumps.  They can be Tanks or Crowd Controllers.  Mages are all over the place.  In DAO, there was none of that.  So as far as I'm concerned, the complaint that DAO has better skills and such is just fanboy raving.  Non-issue.

[*]Herbs,poisons and grenades have been simplified to their detriment.  I assume you are talking about how they are crafted.  If you ask me, they weren't simplified for the worse.  If I remember correctly, in DAO there was at least one vendor for each ingredient somewhere in the world that would sell an unlimited supply.  All you did was roam around to each one of those, and buy up some stuff.  DA2 pretty much does the same thing without all the leg-work.  Non-issue.

[*]The lack of customisation of characters armour and equipment is a big miss. Once again simplified for the casual gamer.  That really has nothing to do with casual gamers.  What it has to do with is Bioware didn't want the supporting cast to look like they were built on a standardized mesh and 3d modelling of a generic female_human or whatever.  They wanted these characters to look special - because they are.  I can sort of see how this is a major turn off to people, but then again... it's kind of a non-issue.  Why?  Because my character has all the customization in the world, I can still affect the bonuses applied to the other characters, and no one looks the same or generic.

[*]Some of the monster appearance changes have taken a step back the Darkspawn just look less menacing and pure ugly to look at, with no differentiation between Hurlocks and Genlocks. The Qunari looked better without horns.  This is just getting ridiculous, people.  This is probably the biggest nitpick on this list.  NON-ISSUE.

[*]The Codex,Journal and Character info has been once again simplified. In DAO interesting info like most powerful foe slain by each character was available to view.  I stand corrected.  Why do you need to know what the most powerful foe slain is?  Why is this information important?  It's the same foe every time you play the game.  There's no surprise.  The most powerful foe is the final fight.  There - I saved you the guess work.  NON-ISSUE!

[*]Trash - I don't want to be collecting and selling it.  I can agree with this.  Its a meritted complaint.  But, it's nothing gamebreaking.

[*]Restrictions on healing spells meaning you can't cast straight after offensive spells without activating a sustained mode.This is a pain in the arse to put it bluntly.  Never ran into this situation.  I didn't try to build characters that could do anything and everything.  I have a team for a reason.  Actually, I played most of the game without heals.  Not because the game was on easy, but simply because I spent time understanding the abilities, the tactics, and how to build an effective team.  People would appreciate the depth of the game more if they did more of that an less complaining about non-issues.  In DAO, if you didn't have a healer... you were dead.  There was no way around it.  You had to have a healer and a million POTs.  In DA2, If I can build a solid team and play the game smartly and with proper tactics... I don't need a healer... ever.  Maybe a POT if there's a dragon.  This is a non-issue because you just simply need to learn how to play the game.

[*]I think I've pretty much summed it up  despite just slagging DA2 big time I actually enjoyed the game to a certain extent, but to me it doesn't hold a candle to DAO and the way in which core fans have been abandoned in order to attract the casual gamer that lacks the patience to deal with the intricacies and customisation of rpgs is a really poor show.  I don't thnk DA2 was designed for the casual gamer in particular.  I think it was designed very well.  I also think the production of it was cut a year too short.  All of the major complaints of DA2 would have been completely non-existent had the team had another year to build the assets they needed so that they wouldn't have to recycle so much stuff.  DA2 is nearly perfect mechanically.  It is far and away a better game mechanically.  And to me, that means a lot.  Story-wise.... I won't say either one is necessarily better.  They both are great.  I prefer DA2 because... well... it was something different and I enjoyed the characters a lot more because of the decisions they made to make the characters more visually unique.  The things most of you complain about are.... well... they're fluff really.  I can appreciate that you like the fluff.  And yeah - sure - the game is less for not having it.  But fluff doesn't change the fact that DAO was not this great game everyone is making it out to be.

[Realmzmaster]

Most of what is being written about boils down to opinion. There are a few issues most if not all can agree on.

1. Recycled elements
2. Lack of development for Act 3 in DA2, but the final act in DAO does not win a prize either.
3. Enemies dropping from the sky for no apparent reason.
4. Wave combat frequency

Everything else is mostly likely opinion with its supporters and opponents.

[csfteeeer]

Raice wrote...

This is a great example of a list of non-issues mixed in with one solid complaint.

Lookupatme wrote...

 Dragon age Origins is by far the better game on pratically every conceivable measure.

[*]DAO has a better and more involved storyline and the sidequests are more enjoyable. This is a non-issue because this is an opnion.  I think the storyline of DA2 is far better because a) it's original and it is more personable about my character and not everone who isn't my character.

[*] The game has a greater replay value due to all the different story strands and initial character origin quests, there is also a ton of DLC which DA2 doesn't have.  DLC?  DA2 has been out - what - 3 months?  Give me a break.  As far as DAO's replay value - the only things that were different were the origina quests... which lasted maybe an hour a peice.  Non-issue because this is again, an opinion.

[*]The characters are better developed in  DAO and they interact with each other more effectively. The only truely memmorable characters in DA2 for me are Isabela and Varric; whereas in DAO I especially liked :Morrigan, Leliana, Sten, Alistair and Oghren.  Opinion = non-issue.  I liked all the characters in DA2.  Actually, I liked them all better than I liked any of the characters in DAO.  I'm not saying the characters in DAO were bad - but I am saying I think all the ones in DA2 were better.

[*]Romances in DA2 are not a patch on DAO.  I don't even know what this means - non-issue.

[*]Conversation options have been dumbed down.  You mean like how they were in Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 - which seem to be one everyone's "Best RPG EVER!" list?  How exactly have the options been dumbed down?  Instead of the clear cut "This is bad" "This is good" "This is neutral" selection we normally get, we get to control the behavior of what is being said.  I don't know that it was taken advantage of completely, but it certainly isn't "dumbed down" and you really have no evidence to this claim.  Non-issue.

[*]DAO has multiple locations,maps and cities to explore in DA2 everything is confined to the one city KIrkwall and the maps are continually spammed.   The only solid complaint anyone has, and I wholeheartedly agree.

[*]Combat has junked out on amphetamaine sulphate. Too much leaping and jumping about,very hack and slash. The more strategic combat which I prefered has been chucked out of the window.  This one baffles me.  It really does.  I loaded up DAO last night just to make sure I wasn't forgetting some important detail in the gameplay that made it at all differet than that of DA2.  What did I find?  They work exactly the same in both games.  I click once on a dude with RMB and Auto Attack ensues.  I press 1-0 to select a power, and then select the target.  It works exactly the same in both games.  In DA2, it is visually faster and more fun to watch.  That's.... that's it.  This isn't just a non-issue.  This is a flat out lie.  The only thing I can figure is that this complaint stems from the XBOX360 version.  On the PC, it plays exactly the same.

[*]Enemies constantly exploding into buckets of gore is too mangaesque.In DAO you would sometimes get some neat decapitations, which were at least more realistic looking.   Flavor differences.  I can appreciate the gravity of this issue.  I will say it is a solid complaint, but not a major, gamebreaking issue.  It can easily be turned down or off.  In fact, they released a patch that did exactly that.

[*]DAO has the better and more varied abilities,talents and spells. The spell effects look better and more realistic in combat  aswell I don't like the ability tree format.   I could write essays about this.  Someone please exaplain to me in detail how DAO's skill progression was so much more complex and awesome?  Again, I loaded up DAO last night to give myself a refresher.  You know what I found out?  There really was no complexity to the skills/ability selections.  If you were a Fighter - you basically put everything into Strength and Con.  A Mage - Magic and Willpower.  Rogue's were screwed because they had to worry about Dex Cunning and Strength.  Picking your skills was pretty unexciting too.  As a Warrior I had a lot of stuff to select from, but I knew that whatever I started in, I had to finish - because putting a little into Sword/Shield and a little into Two-Handed is pointless.  It took a lot of the guess work out of making a character.  The other classes functioned pretty much the same way.  In DA2 - "the level up" is probably one of the coolest parts of the game, because you literally can make your warrior however you want.  You don't have to be a meat shield and use Sword/Shield.  You can be the meat shield and still use 2H weapons.  Rogue's don't have to be sneak attack chumps.  They can be Tanks or Crowd Controllers.  Mages are all over the place.  In DAO, there was none of that.  So as far as I'm concerned, the complaint that DAO has better skills and such is just fanboy raving.  Non-issue.

[*]Herbs,poisons and grenades have been simplified to their detriment.  I assume you are talking about how they are crafted.  If you ask me, they weren't simplified for the worse.  If I remember correctly, in DAO there was at least one vendor for each ingredient somewhere in the world that would sell an unlimited supply.  All you did was roam around to each one of those, and buy up some stuff.  DA2 pretty much does the same thing without all the leg-work.  Non-issue.

[*]The lack of customisation of characters armour and equipment is a big miss. Once again simplified for the casual gamer.  That really has nothing to do with casual gamers.  What it has to do with is Bioware didn't want the supporting cast to look like they were built on a standardized mesh and 3d modelling of a generic female_human or whatever.  They wanted these characters to look special - because they are.  I can sort of see how this is a major turn off to people, but then again... it's kind of a non-issue.  Why?  Because my character has all the customization in the world, I can still affect the bonuses applied to the other characters, and no one looks the same or generic.

[*]Some of the monster appearance changes have taken a step back the Darkspawn just look less menacing and pure ugly to look at, with no differentiation between Hurlocks and Genlocks. The Qunari looked better without horns.  This is just getting ridiculous, people.  This is probably the biggest nitpick on this list.  NON-ISSUE.

[*]The Codex,Journal and Character info has been once again simplified. In DAO interesting info like most powerful foe slain by each character was available to view.  I stand corrected.  Why do you need to know what the most powerful foe slain is?  Why is this information important?  It's the same foe every time you play the game.  There's no surprise.  The most powerful foe is the final fight.  There - I saved you the guess work.  NON-ISSUE!

[*]Trash - I don't want to be collecting and selling it.  I can agree with this.  Its a meritted complaint.  But, it's nothing gamebreaking.

[*]Restrictions on healing spells meaning you can't cast straight after offensive spells without activating a sustained mode.This is a pain in the arse to put it bluntly.  Never ran into this situation.  I didn't try to build characters that could do anything and everything.  I have a team for a reason.  Actually, I played most of the game without heals.  Not because the game was on easy, but simply because I spent time understanding the abilities, the tactics, and how to build an effective team.  People would appreciate the depth of the game more if they did more of that an less complaining about non-issues.  In DAO, if you didn't have a healer... you were dead.  There was no way around it.  You had to have a healer and a million POTs.  In DA2, If I can build a solid team and play the game smartly and with proper tactics... I don't need a healer... ever.  Maybe a POT if there's a dragon.  This is a non-issue because you just simply need to learn how to play the game.

[*]I think I've pretty much summed it up  despite just slagging DA2 big time I actually enjoyed the game to a certain extent, but to me it doesn't hold a candle to DAO and the way in which core fans have been abandoned in order to attract the casual gamer that lacks the patience to deal with the intricacies and customisation of rpgs is a really poor show.  I don't thnk DA2 was designed for the casual gamer in particular.  I think it was designed very well.  I also think the production of it was cut a year too short.  All of the major complaints of DA2 would have been completely non-existent had the team had another year to build the assets they needed so that they wouldn't have to recycle so much stuff.  DA2 is nearly perfect mechanically.  It is far and away a better game mechanically.  And to me, that means a lot.  Story-wise.... I won't say either one is necessarily better.  They both are great.  I prefer DA2 because... well... it was something different and I enjoyed the characters a lot more because of the decisions they made to make the characters more visually unique.  The things most of you complain about are.... well... they're fluff really.  I can appreciate that you like the fluff.  And yeah - sure - the game is less for not having it.  But fluff doesn't change the fact that DAO was not this great game everyone is making it out to be.

[*]I'm going to continue xkg's Work and tell you, you keep refering the Opinions as "Non-issues",  they weren't issues to YOU, But they were issues to someone else, Moron
[*]and another thing, if you didn't liked Origins as much as a lot of people did, that's perfectly fine, but YOU don't get to put it as a FACT, again, Moron, because it's subjective, objectively a game can have flaws, and obviously Origins had them, but subjectively you can ignore those flaws if they don't bother you.
[*]i would also like to repeat what xkg already said:
[*]DA2 has worse critical Reception than Origins, and in fact, is the least critically aclaimed game by BioWare if we remove Sonic and the dark brotherhood.
[*]DA2 has worse sales
[*]DA2 has worse user scores and Word of Mouth.
[*]Also, i know, i am SURE, that DA2 will NOT win any Goty or Rpg of the year award, unlike Origins or Mass Effect 1 and 2, because there are already better RPGs out there this year (The Witcher 2) and many more on the way(Skyrim), and this will make DA2's BioWare's second game to not receive ANY awards, since they were invented, that is (the first one would be Sonic and TDB)

Modifié par csfteeeer, 28 juin 2011 - 09:34 .

[alex90c]

You don't think DA2 was designed for the casual gamer? Then how come in an interview David Silverman said that if people want to just be able to mash auto-attack then they should be able to do that if they want to?

[csfteeeer]

alex90c wrote...

You don't think DA2 was designed for the casual gamer? Then how come in an interview David Silverman said that if people want to just be able to mash auto-attack then they should be able to do that if they want to?

are you talking to me? cause i'm not the one who said it, it was this Raice user.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 28 juin 2011 - 09:36 .

[jmp0505]

Everyone has their own opinion.  For me, DAO was better by such a long shot as to leave DA2 invisible in the distant dust. Why?  Because although they told a traditional fantasy story, they told it well, and the writing for the characters, including your own, was among the best I've seen in a video game.  DAO had heart and soul- the player character, although unvoiced, was more involving to me than the voiced character whose responses... aren't what is on the screen and often at odds with the paraphrase I selected.  The characters of Morrigan and Alistair anchored the DAO story, it had some emotional oomph.   And I am not talking about the cute little romance stuff.

I am not sure what happened to the writing team for DA2 - did they mostly quit? were they working on other projects?  But the writing in DA2 basically flattened the story for me - a story that tried to hard to be "edgy" and was instead rather dull and careless of plotting.  Worse than a rather dull political story with a forced set-up (omg, mages hate templars, everyone hate Qunari... rumble!) was the fact that the party characters were so much more limited than they had been in DAO.   The interaction and banter was much more forced and lacked much in the way of wit. I never really got interested in the party members, didn't care whether they tagged along with me or not.  In DAO, I played through several times, just to have different party members.  It was a great experience, to actually enjoy the party members, as opposed to just having to deal with them. 

There were points where DA2 could have been interesting and strong and it almost felt like they went "eh, lets not go any further with this", so things felt short or  truncated.  Perhaps it was all too rushed, perhaps there were other development considerations.  Either way - for me - it was a major disappointment.  I played through DAO four times, and played through all of the origins to see how they flowed.  Loved every minute of it.  I have yet to finish DA2. Got to the chapter after the badly plotted Qunari denouement and started the next chapter but by then was too dis-engaged to complete it.

As always - your mileage may vary.

[Raice]

csfteeeer wrote...
[*]I'm going to continue xkg's Work and tell you, you keep refering the Opinions as "Non-issues",  they weren't issues to YOU, But they were issues to someone else, Moron
[*]and another thing, if you didn't liked Origins as much as a lot of people did, that's perfectly fine, but YOU don't get to put it as a FACT, again, Moron, because it's subjective, objectively a game can have flaws, and obviously Origins had them, but subjectively you can ignore those flaws if they don't bother you.
[*]i would also like to repeat what xkg already said:
[*]DA2 has worse critical Reception than Origins, and in fact, is the least critically aclaimed game by BioWare if we remove Sonic and the dark brotherhood.
[*]DA2 has worse sales
[*]DA2 has worse user scores and Word of Mouth.
[*]Also, i know, i am SURE, that DA2 will NOT win any Goty or Rpg of the year award, unlike Origins or Mass Effect 1 and 2, because there are already better RPGs out there this year (The Witcher 2) and many more on the way(Skyrim), and this will make DA2's BioWare's second game to not receive ANY awards, since they were invented, that is (the first one would be Sonic and TDB)

How is it even appropriate for you to call me a moron?  Is it making you that upset that I think your complaints are non-issues?  I'm going to warn you here... and then I'm going to report you as soon as I've finished writing this reply.  As funny as it may seem, I've kept a pretty level head about everything I've said, and I haven't insulted anyone.  I have zero tolerance for people like you.  Moving on...

The only thing I keep hearing is that these are issues.  All I want to hear is someone actually explain to me how anything I have pointed out is false.  I don't want your opinion.  I want your evidence.  I have provided tons of evidence for my claims.  You can't just say "I don't like it." and expect that to fly.  There is only one complaint valid - it's repetitive maps are repetitive.  Everything else is completely made up subjective fanboy banter.

The game plays exactly like the first game.  I don't care if you say you don't llike it.  The fact that it plays exactly the same, and you still don't like it proves that you have no idea what you're talking about.  Maybe the game feels too hack-n-slash on the XBOX360.  Well... tough ****?  Buy a PC and play the tactical pseudo-RTS/RPG with a mouse and keyboard and you'll see.  DAO and DA2 play exactly the same way.

The skill trees in DA2 are WAY more complex than they are in DAO.  This is a fact.  There is no opinion in that statement.  It's a fact, because I can prove it.  In DA2 as a Warrior, I can select between 6 trees of skills.  Each tree is categorized in some degree that makes my character behave differently.  Each tree has at least 2 different paths for me to branch into, again, each branch gives my character a different flare.  The best part is, I don't have to devote myself all the way into any of them.  On top of that, I get 3 Prestige Trees that function the same way.  And guess what?  I don't have to devote myself to any of those either.  I can literally make whatever I want, just the way I like it.  Plus, each of the trees has built in flavor that synergizes with different trees of other classes.  Which means my team can be built to work with one another as a whole unit, instead of as individual pieces.  DAO did none of this.  The closest you got was with the Mage class.  Unfortunately, it was also the one class that could allow you to solo the entire game.

The story being liked/disliked is completely subjective and is not really something you can merit on a critical level.  What you CAN grade is whether the story was told well.  And... in typical Bioware fashion - it was.

Now... let's talk about DAO for a second.  It got RPG of the year in 2009.  That's great!  Maybe that proves a good point from your perspective.  Then again... the biggest (and practically only) competitor in 2009 was Alpha Protocol.  Woohoo... Dragon Age is better than Alpha Protocol.  Woopie....  Let's write this down in the books as one of the closest calls ever....  Give me a break.  Excuse me if I don't accept that as a very reputable accolade to brag about.  And besides that, DA2 had pretty decent critic scores.  They were all at least 80%.  Which, I know it's not the "ZOMG NEAR PERFECT!" score than DAO got, but again... it's not the end of the world like most people make it out to be.  They blow non-issues out of proportion.  Are some of these things bothersome and lacking?  Sure.  Are they ruining my game experience to the point that I feel like maybe DAO was better?  Not even close.

DA2 is going up against The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.  And I'm sure those will turn out to be the better RPG's of the year.  CD Projekt and Bethesda are no slouch developers.  I'm not saying DA2 is the best RPG ever made.  I'm not saying DAO was a terrible game.  What I am saying is people blow the problems DA2 has way out of proportion and tend to look through rose color glasses when comparing it against DAO.

DAO had serious, seirous problems.  But it seems like no one remembers those when they talk about DA2.  I remember very well the problems.  They were problems that made the game near unplayable.  The biggest issue was the fact that most of the classes were broken.... in a bad way.  They were useless.  The game was just not fun when you played one of these classes.  So.... the mod community came to save the day and sort of fixed these issues.

Officially, every single one of those problems were fixed in DA2.  Unfortunately, DA2 slacked up on the stuff DAO did right.  But at the end of the day - when it comes to pure enjoyment... my hand goes in favor of DA2.  Why?  Because it doesn't frustrate me with poor mechanics and design.  Offering up the argument that DAO has won all these accolades of "Best of 2009" are irrelevant, because DAO had ZERO COMPETITION.  It practically won by default.  Dog-**** sandwiches are probably pretty tasty if you are starving and the only thing left in the world to eat are dog-**** sandwiches.

Now, you can call me moron all you want for arguing my point - very civilly I might add.  I gather you somehow feel like you need to overemphasize that I must be stupid since I don't "get" your point of view.  Trust me.  I get it.  I understand your argument clearly.  And I'm calling it BS.

Regardless, calling me a moron because I disagree with you and I actually have solid arguments  is something I am not prepared to let happen.

Good day.

[Morroian]

jmp0505 wrote...

I am not sure what happened to the writing team for DA2 - did they mostly quit? were they working on other projects?  But the writing in DA2 basically flattened the story for me - a story that tried to hard to be "edgy" and was instead rather dull and careless of plotting.  Worse than a rather dull political story with a forced set-up (omg, mages hate templars, everyone hate Qunari... rumble!) was the fact that the party characters were so much more limited than they had been in DAO.   The interaction and banter was much more forced and lacked much in the way of wit. 

The writers were largely the same, maybe you just didn't put the right characters together because there was plenty of witty banter. The interaction with Hawke was more controlled than in DAO but I understand why they did that, to stop people running out of interaction less than halfway through the game as happens in DAO.

[xkg]

@Raice :
Dear, oh dear. You haven't provided any evidences for you "CLAIMS" - only bunch of opinions again and again.

What you really provided is a good laugh - i'am sure that many here are laughing they asses off - i do.
But you are now so ridiculousy amusing that please keep going.

Do you want some of my popcorn ?

Modifié par xkg, 29 juin 2011 - 12:18 .

[erynnar]

Morroian wrote...

jmp0505 wrote...

I am not sure what happened to the writing team for DA2 - did they mostly quit? were they working on other projects?  But the writing in DA2 basically flattened the story for me - a story that tried to hard to be "edgy" and was instead rather dull and careless of plotting.  Worse than a rather dull political story with a forced set-up (omg, mages hate templars, everyone hate Qunari... rumble!) was the fact that the party characters were so much more limited than they had been in DAO.   The interaction and banter was much more forced and lacked much in the way of wit. 

The writers were largely the same, maybe you just didn't put the right characters together because there was plenty of witty banter. The interaction with Hawke was more controlled than in DAO but I understand why they did that, to stop people running out of interaction less than halfway through the game as happens in DAO.

Because people are too dim witted not to control how often they have interaction? I mean seriously, how much friggin' hand holding do we need?

Thanks but no thanks. I want control over where, when, and how often I talk to my companions. If I want to run out of convo before Act 3 then so be it. I would still have them talking to each other to listen to. But I don't like having my hand held because some players couldn't stop using up all convo before the end.

[xkg]

@Raice :
Oh and one more thing. Stop forcing your opinions on others.

What you are doing here is basically:
"Nanana i can't hear you all. I like it so this is non-issue. Everyone with different opinion is wrong. lalalala"

So don't be surprised that people start losing their temper like csfteeeer did.
Not everyone have the patience to deal with brick heads like you.

Modifié par xkg, 29 juin 2011 - 01:10 .

[csfteeeer]

Raice wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...
[*]I'm going to continue xkg's Work and tell you, you keep refering the Opinions as "Non-issues",  they weren't issues to YOU, But they were issues to someone else, Moron
[*]and another thing, if you didn't liked Origins as much as a lot of people did, that's perfectly fine, but YOU don't get to put it as a FACT, again, Moron, because it's subjective, objectively a game can have flaws, and obviously Origins had them, but subjectively you can ignore those flaws if they don't bother you.
[*]i would also like to repeat what xkg already said:
[*]DA2 has worse critical Reception than Origins, and in fact, is the least critically aclaimed game by BioWare if we remove Sonic and the dark brotherhood.
[*]DA2 has worse sales
[*]DA2 has worse user scores and Word of Mouth.
[*]Also, i know, i am SURE, that DA2 will NOT win any Goty or Rpg of the year award, unlike Origins or Mass Effect 1 and 2, because there are already better RPGs out there this year (The Witcher 2) and many more on the way(Skyrim), and this will make DA2's BioWare's second game to not receive ANY awards, since they were invented, that is (the first one would be Sonic and TDB)

How is it even appropriate for you to call me a moron?  Is it making you that upset that I think your complaints are non-issues?  I'm going to warn you here... and then I'm going to report you as soon as I've finished writing this reply.  As funny as it may seem, I've kept a pretty level head about everything I've said, and I haven't insulted anyone.  I have zero tolerance for people like you.  Moving on...

The only thing I keep hearing is that these are issues.  All I want to hear is someone actually explain to me how anything I have pointed out is false.  I don't want your opinion.  I want your evidence.  I have provided tons of evidence for my claims.  You can't just say "I don't like it." and expect that to fly.  There is only one complaint valid - it's repetitive maps are repetitive.  Everything else is completely made up subjective fanboy banter.

The game plays exactly like the first game.  I don't care if you say you don't llike it.  The fact that it plays exactly the same, and you still don't like it proves that you have no idea what you're talking about.  Maybe the game feels too hack-n-slash on the XBOX360.  Well... tough ****?  Buy a PC and play the tactical pseudo-RTS/RPG with a mouse and keyboard and you'll see.  DAO and DA2 play exactly the same way.

The skill trees in DA2 are WAY more complex than they are in DAO.  This is a fact.  There is no opinion in that statement.  It's a fact, because I can prove it.  In DA2 as a Warrior, I can select between 6 trees of skills.  Each tree is categorized in some degree that makes my character behave differently.  Each tree has at least 2 different paths for me to branch into, again, each branch gives my character a different flare.  The best part is, I don't have to devote myself all the way into any of them.  On top of that, I get 3 Prestige Trees that function the same way.  And guess what?  I don't have to devote myself to any of those either.  I can literally make whatever I want, just the way I like it.  Plus, each of the trees has built in flavor that synergizes with different trees of other classes.  Which means my team can be built to work with one another as a whole unit, instead of as individual pieces.  DAO did none of this.  The closest you got was with the Mage class.  Unfortunately, it was also the one class that could allow you to solo the entire game.

The story being liked/disliked is completely subjective and is not really something you can merit on a critical level.  What you CAN grade is whether the story was told well.  And... in typical Bioware fashion - it was.

Now... let's talk about DAO for a second.  It got RPG of the year in 2009.  That's great!  Maybe that proves a good point from your perspective.  Then again... the biggest (and practically only) competitor in 2009 was Alpha Protocol.  Woohoo... Dragon Age is better than Alpha Protocol.  Woopie....  Let's write this down in the books as one of the closest calls ever....  Give me a break.  Excuse me if I don't accept that as a very reputable accolade to brag about.  And besides that, DA2 had pretty decent critic scores.  They were all at least 80%.  Which, I know it's not the "ZOMG NEAR PERFECT!" score than DAO got, but again... it's not the end of the world like most people make it out to be.  They blow non-issues out of proportion.  Are some of these things bothersome and lacking?  Sure.  Are they ruining my game experience to the point that I feel like maybe DAO was better?  Not even close.

DA2 is going up against The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.  And I'm sure those will turn out to be the better RPG's of the year.  CD Projekt and Bethesda are no slouch developers.  I'm not saying DA2 is the best RPG ever made.  I'm not saying DAO was a terrible game.  What I am saying is people blow the problems DA2 has way out of proportion and tend to look through rose color glasses when comparing it against DAO.

DAO had serious, seirous problems.  But it seems like no one remembers those when they talk about DA2.  I remember very well the problems.  They were problems that made the game near unplayable.  The biggest issue was the fact that most of the classes were broken.... in a bad way.  They were useless.  The game was just not fun when you played one of these classes.  So.... the mod community came to save the day and sort of fixed these issues.

Officially, every single one of those problems were fixed in DA2.  Unfortunately, DA2 slacked up on the stuff DAO did right.  But at the end of the day - when it comes to pure enjoyment... my hand goes in favor of DA2.  Why?  Because it doesn't frustrate me with poor mechanics and design.  Offering up the argument that DAO has won all these accolades of "Best of 2009" are irrelevant, because DAO had ZERO COMPETITION.  It practically won by default.  Dog-**** sandwiches are probably pretty tasty if you are starving and the only thing left in the world to eat are dog-**** sandwiches.

Now, you can call me moron all you want for arguing my point - very civilly I might add.  I gather you somehow feel like you need to overemphasize that I must be stupid since I don't "get" your point of view.  Trust me.  I get it.  I understand your argument clearly.  And I'm calling it BS.

Regardless, calling me a moron because I disagree with you and I actually have solid arguments  is something I am not prepared to let happen.

Good day.

[*]Ha hahahahahah, you sir, are hilarious
[*]no competition? if i recall correctly there was a little game called Demon's Souls, that received critical acclaim, or Mario and Luigi, or Torchlight....oh it must have been my imagination.
[*]And i Believe Alpha Protocol came out in 2010.... again, i'm just crazy!!
[*]
[*]and this doesn't change the fact that DA2 is (after Sonic and the Dark Brotherhood) the WORST Reviewed BioWare game,MUCH Worse word of mouth, lower sales (even though they made their money given how quick DA2's development was), lower user scores..... keep denying it all you want, THAT it's a fact.
[*]oh, and btw, you STILL keep refering to people's opinion as "Non-issues" and "Blown out of proportions", you still don't get it do you? this is an Opinion, you don't get to say what's truth or not, Unplayable?
[*]HAAAAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH
[*]you're also a Drama Queen, if you make such a huge Deal out of someone calling Moron, then let me Welcome you to the world!... if it bothers you so much that someone calls you that, then i cannot even imagine what happens when someone calls you worse.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 29 juin 2011 - 01:19 .

[Morroian]

xkg wrote...

@Raice :
Dear, oh dear. You haven't provided any evidences for you "CLAIMS" - only bunch of opinions again and again.

What you really provided is a good laugh - i'am sure that many here are laughing they asses off - i do.

Fron what I can see he's backed up his claims enough, what evidence do you want say for skills being more complex, the evidence is in the skill trees. And he's got insulted for no reason. So you disagree with him, so what, he acknowledged the game had flaws .

[Morroian]

csfteeeer wrote...

[*]no competition? if i recall correctly there was a little game called Demon's Souls, that received critical acclaim, or Mario and Luigi, or Torchlight....oh it must have been my imagination.

Demons Souls which was console only and Torchlight which while enjoyable was hardly a GOTY candidate and I don't even think it was out on consoles at that point anyway. 

Modifié par Morroian, 29 juin 2011 - 01:40 .

[billy the squid]

@ Raice
You do realise that the consumer's opinion of a game, however subjective it may be, will largely deterime whether it is sucessful or not. The list of so called Non-issues you have provided will in one form or another feed into whether people will buy a future game, for instance I won't buy games I don't like or which doesn't contain aspects which appeal to me, no matter how many times the removal of these aspects are termed as non issues, innovations, streamlining etc..

There is obviously the realisation that we will never get a game that caters to every individual's desire, it is a pipe dream, and I think most people have resigned themselves to this, as we know no one will ever agree on development direction universally, so there has to be some give and take, but by and large DAO appealed to me and I enjoyed it a lot, despite some short comings.

On the other hand DA2 didn't, and unfortunately even if it has been claimed that the changes were for the better or DA2 is largely the same as DAO, but has been tweaked. It still doesn't make me like it any more than I did before, even if I understand that other people did like the design direction, I don't and I still think it was wrong.

So calling things non issues is largely a waste of time.

[xkg]

Morroian wrote...

xkg wrote...

@Raice :
Dear, oh dear. You haven't provided any evidences for you "CLAIMS" - only bunch of opinions again and again.

What you really provided is a good laugh - i'am sure that many here are laughing they asses off - i do.

Fron what I can see he's backed up his claims enough, what evidence do you want say for skills being more complex, the evidence is in the skill trees. And he's got insulted for no reason. So you disagree with him, so what, he acknowledged the game had flaws .

Maybe read all his posts here first - then write your comment.
He got flamed and there were many reasons - if you can't see them that is your problem not mine.

And what evidences.Do you want evidence (cold hard fact with numbers - not some opinions) ? OK.
For example: In DAO i had 85 spells/abilities for mage (over 100 with Awakening).
In DA2 i have 47. Can you see the difference ? Not to mention that spells like "Dispell" are now completly useless.

Modifié par xkg, 29 juin 2011 - 02:02 .

[csfteeeer]

Morroian wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

[*]no competition? if i recall correctly there was a little game called Demon's Souls, that received critical acclaim, or Mario and Luigi, or Torchlight....oh it must have been my imagination.

Demons Souls which was console only and Torchlight which while enjoyable was hardly a GOTY candidate and I don't even think it was out on consoles at that point anyway. 

[*]yes, Demon's Souls was on consoles only, So what? that's no good example cause for some reason pc games are taken with less consideration (that's why i'm sure The Witcher 2 will not win any GOTY, appart from the fact that Skyrim is coming out this year)
[*]Torchlight and Mario & Luigi received critical acclaim, i was talking about the Reviews, and i didn't even mentioned Borderlands, although many people didn't even considered it an RPG, it was still placed among the rpg section by many critics.
[*]anyway what is your point? it is very rare for RPGs to face a strong competition in the same year, but there are always at least 2 RPGs that go toe to toe, and DS and DAO were those too (also the spike VGA awards, despite them being, is after all decided by votes, and DAO won so...), and either way, DA2 had a MUCH worse critical reception(82 points for ps3 and pc, 79 for 360),especially compared to other bioware game, Origins included (Origins: 91 on pc, 87 on ps3, 86 on 360, Mass Effect: 91 on 360, 89 on pc, etc...) so by Default is not gonna win anything.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 29 juin 2011 - 02:12 .

[csfteeeer]

double post.

[xkg]

Morroian wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...




[*]no competition? if i recall correctly there was a little game called Demon's Souls, that received critical acclaim, or Mario and Luigi, or Torchlight....oh it must have been my imagination.

Demons Souls which was console only and Torchlight which while enjoyable was hardly a GOTY candidate and I don't even think it was out on consoles at that point anyway. 

Again Learn some facts before posting. Demon souls have won one of the GOTY awards from Gamespot.

Console only ? ok. Go here :

http://en.wikipedia....ame_of_the_Year
And count how many GOTY awards "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves" (game for PS3 only) have won., then return so we can discuss more.

[Morroian]

xkg wrote...

And what evidences.Do you want evidence (cold hard fact with numbers - not some opinions) ? OK.
For example: In DAO i had 85 spells/abilities for mage (over 100 with Awakening).
In DA2 i have 47. Can you see the difference ? Not to mention that spells like "Dispell" are now completly useless.

Thats very close to being a strawman by counting the upgrades in DAO as separate spells and discounting the upgrade system in DA2.  And thats not even counting the fact that DA2 gives more options for warriors and rogues in its skill trees than DAO did.

And the system itself is better with the multiple paths in each tree. It is possible to build several very different types of mages all viable. 

[Lord Coake]

Origins is an awesome RPG that I will replay until the CD wears out, at which time I'll find a new one.

DA2 is a [censored] abortion of a game with the one good point being the pretty sparks the disc puts off when put in a microwave.  Excuse me, it also makes a fine coaster and paperweight.  These three things are the only things DA2 does well, and a 4mm cork square makes a better coaster.

Modifié par Lord Coake, 29 juin 2011 - 06:49 .

[xkg]

Morroian wrote...

xkg wrote...

And what evidences.Do you want evidence (cold hard fact with numbers - not some opinions) ? OK.
For example: In DAO i had 85 spells/abilities for mage (over 100 with Awakening).
In DA2 i have 47. Can you see the difference ? Not to mention that spells like "Dispell" are now completly useless.

Thats very close to being a strawman by counting the upgrades in DAO as separate spells and discounting the upgrade system in DA2.  And thats not even counting the fact that DA2 gives more options for warriors and rogues in its skill trees than DAO did.

And the system itself is better with the multiple paths in each tree. It is possible to build several very different types of mages all viable. 

You must be joking right ?

"fact that DA2 gives more options for warriors and rogues" ?

I can no longer use daggers or bows on my warrior nor i can use sword/mace/shield etc on my rogue.
I'am not going to comment on this because i really don't know what are you trying to prove here. Your so-called "FACT" is as far from truth as it can be.

ehhhh. Have fun anyway.

[Firky]

I miss being able to equip ranged on warriors. That comes in useful sometimes.

But, I am finding that the way the stats and abilities are organised in DAII has dramatically enhanced my enjoyment of the classes, and how they work together.

My one criticism there would be that strict prerequisites do limit early choice. In Origins, there was a long column of first things in a line you could pick. In DAII there are much less. But this improves dramatically (IMO) by the time you get to about level 7, then again at about 12.

I started Awakening thinking "Wow, look at all these cool new abilities to try out" but there were just so many, and it was easy, so I stopped caring about any of them.

Modifié par Firky, 29 juin 2011 - 07:55 .