506 réponses à ce sujet

[Sundance31us]

It's not so bad...if you side with the Templars and tick Anders off whenever the oportinity arises.

[Thoth_Amon]

To me, absolutely. I think it's an unfinished, sloppy mess and frankly, I feel like a sucker for paying any amount of money for it. It's the worst game I've bought in at least a decade.

If you enjoyed it, more power to you and I wish I did, too. Nothing stings more than coming around to the changes and the hype only to have your faith in a studio all but erased.

[Lucrece]

The people more bothered by it seem to be the micro-loving RPG folks that got mad because the game went action RPG as opposed to staying a slower paced "preparation is the game" style. I want to play the game, not have to spend more on pre-battle preparations than doing actual battle.

I'll play an RTS if I want to manage resources and constantly hunt down upgrades. The partner armor for me was a good improvement that didn't force me to veer off and hunt additional equipment for each character lest they become radically inferior in performance. I want to take care of my character, not babysit the progress of others in addition to my own.

There were some truly shoddy aspects of the game, like blatant dungeon recycling, and what was most offensive to me was the letter font. Text was plain unreadable, especially when in color red. Too blurry and small.

Rogues got skimped as well on promotional items and armor relative to warriors and mages; it was unfair.

The depth of characters is purely personal opinion. I found Anders pretty well nuanced, the weakest links being Varric and Merril. Varric because he was too caricature, Merril because there simply was no way of shaping her actions reasonably without ever earning her ire.

The combat is MUCH improved over DAO, fun and dynamic. I really enjoyed my rogue's Vendetta skill, though I wish archery had been viable instead of subpar due to only having one archery tree with mediocre skills to begin with while all the specializations for the most part synergized with dual wield.

[lobi]

"Good heavens!" I cried. "Who would associate crime with these dear old homesteads?"
"They always fill me with a certain horror. It is my belief, Watson, founded upon my experience, that the lowest and vilest alleys in London do not present a more dreadful record of sin than does the smiling and beautiful countryside."
"You horrify me!"
"But the reason is very obvious. The pressure of public opinion can do in the town what the law cannot accomplish. There is no lane so vile that the scream of a tortured child, or the thud of a drunkard's blow, does not beget sympathy and indignation among the neighbours, and then the whole machinery of justice is ever so close that a word of complaint can set it going, and there is but a step between the crime and the dock. But look at these lonely houses, each in its own fields, filled for the most part with poor ignorant folk who know little of the law. Think of the deeds of hellish cruelty, the hidden wickedness which may go on, year in, year out, in such places, and none the wiser."
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1892)

Modifié par lobi, 03 janvier 2012 - 11:36 .

[Gnarlesee]

jcainhaze wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Jimuth wrote...

Found it really noticeable how differences between ME1 + ME2 were very similar to differences between DA:O and DA2. Some of these good, some bad: I prefer ME1 to ME2, but enjoyed playing DA2 over DA:O -

I agree I've always been somewhat bemused by the different reactions to ME2 and DA2 because to me ME2 simplified the mechanics and almost completely removed the role playing whereas DA2 simplified the mechanics but kept the role playing. 

That's what I hated about ME2.  Although I enjoyed ME2 more than DA2. 

ME1 and DAO were like a 1-2 punch that snapped my focus on Bioware.  I was like "Woa!".  2 awsome games.

I don't understand why they went and changed the basic gameplay of both.  I like ME1 and DAO way better then their sequels

ME2 have a much more streamlined and better combat system. Lorewise ME1 was better, but ME2 have better combat, and the abilities are much more balanced and visuals are nice too.
ME2 also have some pretty good scenes here and there, some good cutscenes and while not sick plotwise
(ME1 was better story wise, because it was new i think, so they could bring more on the table) the ME2 is superior for me in the end.

If they added more space to walk on,  like the citadel in ME1, then ME2 could be a real beast.

[Rogue Eagle]

It is painful to play.

You pretty much spend a whole game in one city, combat gets boring and repetitive (their idea of ramping up difficulty is to throw more guys at you), dungeons are recycled.

Play it once, don't play it again.

[werejohnny]

I've played through it twice and it definitely has its ups (narrative style, Varric, makes you feel more involved in the city/story than DA:O did, fun combat) and downs (recycled maps, lazy crafting system, limited world to explore), but I enjoyed it overall.

Combat may get boring for some people after awhile, but I respeced both my Hawke's halfway through the game so I didn't have that issue. DAII also made mages way more fun to play. They were really powerful in Origins but dreadfully boring (until the new specializations in Awakening). I also liked the potion cooldowns and how you couldn't just chug Lyrium until you were drunk with magical rage like in Origins. 

Modifié par werejohnny, 10 juin 2013 - 10:18 .

[Ninja Stan]

Unnecessary thread resurrection.

End of line.