506 réponses à ce sujet

[Bathead]

Nicely put. Let's see how long it is before someone calls you either a fanboy, a sheep or an EA corporate shill.

[PurpleJesus]

 

this .... exactly this ... i Just can't say how much this summarized my opinion . Perfect ....

[Selectric]

 On its own, DA2 is not a bad game.  It is pretty good, in my opinion.

Against DA:O, DA2 is a bad game.  No question.  DA3 inspiration should be 80% DA:O and 20% DA2.

[yesikareyes]

@Athro

You just took the words right from my mouth. I completely agree to everything you said and I do hope Bioware would not be discouraged with what 'haters' say. I think they are trying to make their games more personal wherein we create a character to our own liking and yet have their own personalities with spontaneous dialogue as well as in relationships with the characters.

DA 2 for the win.

[yesikareyes]

@Athro

I agree with you completely, I just hope Bioware would still continue to make games that have more soul despite recent backlash from fans.

[LilBudyWizer]

My only complaint is they put too much into the eyecandy. Without the toolset it's hard to say, but it looks like that one cave took so much labor they had little choice but to use it over and over.

[Junri]

Game is good despite the fact that we face a lot of recycled environments and the game takes place in a small area. I was actually hoping for Kirkwall to actually change physically as a I progressed through the acts but it pretty much stays the same. The game is much more personal, and its something I like for sure. I loved DA:O and I played it pretty hardcore on PC and I've played BG2 when I was young (so I did not really understand the depth of it and I had to reduce the difficulty settings etc). DA2 is a good game, I really enjoy it. The game is also longer then I thought too. Everyone is saying its shorter than Origins, but my playthrough is getting pretty close to the time I spent in my Origins game.

[kww75]

If you look at DA2 as a stand alone product it is rather good. Graphics are nice, combat is smooth and the gameplay is surprisingly tactical. However if you put it in as a sequel that's when you start seeing cracks. One thing people seem to forget is humans being what we are "we hate change" We find security amongst what is familiar.

Probably one thing most people expect from a Bioware product is a KICK ARSE story. In a way when you look at DA:O and DA:2 it kinda reminds me of the TV series Heroes. Awesome first season and a painfully slow start to season 2 then downhill all the way after that.

I've not go much further than ACT 1 and have tried my best to avoid reading up on what happens next, but I can tell people who ask me. Is unlike DA:O where you knew where its story was going fairly early on. After Act 1 in DA2 I'm still utterly clueless to where this story is going that's after about 16 hours of game play. This fact alone has put off three of the five people asking me whether they should buy the game or not. I do tell them the game itself is nice and all the other nice things about the game but the bottomline is the story just isn't engaging within the first 16 hours of playing. This for those that asked is the make or break point for whether they go out and purchase the game.

One other question people have asked me is whether the game feels rushed. My answer "compared to DA:O and what I have seen of the story so far, then yes" I do tell them bear in mind I've only played maybe a third of the game so far...

Technical aspects of the game are great, but what BIOWARE are known for (good story lines) was rather disappointing.

[Dimak22]

@ Kww75, I feel almost exactly the same. BIOWARE has a tendency to mess with stuff that works. It was similar with ME and ME2 as well. I've always felt like sequels are supposed to be BETTER than the original and it just never happens that way.

DA2 was sadly lacking in direction and purpose.

[Rheia]

I personally loved it.

Sure, I could stand more companion interaction (but who doesn't always want more? ) but I enjoyed my first play-through very, very much despite running into a combat speed slow down bug towards the end.

I daresay it'll remain a favorite of mine for a while

[Seekirus]

should of named it something else and not stuck it in the DA series.
The game play, story and such are all good... but I dunno... I was expecting more DA.. it's hard to explain
but my thought while playing was "WTF I wanna know what happened to Morrigan"

Modifié par Seekirus, 13 mars 2011 - 10:36 .

[yesikareyes]

Well, both sides so make a point and it seems that one half of the fans hate it while the others completely love it. Who will Bioware listen to now?

[Sidney]

cosgamer wrote...

I want a little more from a game than what DA 2 offers for $60.  I expect enjoyment, not a dumbed down, stripped down game

Other than re-using the areas what is stripped down and what is dumbed down?

1. Combat. Mechanically the same no matter what the animations looks like.
2. Character development. SAme if not better because the webs are moe interesting and varied than the linear paths.
3. Inventory - ok, BIG loss putting armor on people but other  than that dead things still sparkled and all you losers get to click on them.
4. NPC's - are the same depth as DAO. You might not like them as much but pound for poiund there's no less depth to them.
5. Dialog. There are the same set of options as in DAO the Yes and No options on help and then a bunch of interrogatives. The addition of the tone indicators is helpful since even with full wirtten responses it wasn't always clear what those words were meant to convey.
6. Setting/Plot: I love DAO but the plot was stopping the world killing monster in a generic Merry Old England that never was location basically. It wasn't a brilliant concept just very well executed. DA2's maps for Kirkwall are uninspiring (I've said before Bioware has no idea how to do urban spaces - streets) but the city itself is a great settting and the more intimate plot line is a risk because it isn't some dumbed down generic stop the huge baddie plot that had been done to death. Face it, DAO plays in a megaplex, DA2 plays in an arthouse theatre - and wins an Oscar if only Hawke stuttered.
7. Information delivery. DAO was a frustrating mess of a black box in terms of what the heck of these stats meant. DA2 has improved on all of that so it is muc more clear what skills, stats and items mean. You might think that is dumbing down but edxplaining the mechanics of your game world to the pays isn't dumb, it is good design. Even things that actually are complex like Civilization bother to tell you what the effect of buying a granary is.

[jbanchiere]

Yes.

[rft]

The only problem I had with the game was that the game was set in the same place the entire game.....and the fact that there was not a real point to the story untill Act 3.

[Akka le Vil]

It's not "that bad".
It actually has quite a bit of good things in it. Story is pleasant, dialogues are good (sarcastic Hawke is really well written to be honest).

But... it's a gutted and rushed game. It had the potential, it had been wrecked by dumbing it down, making it a caricature of consolization (boom boom zap zap derp derp !), and twisting it from a RPG to a beat-them-all with dialogue.

If it had been developped for one year more, with a less childish design, it could really have been great.
Wasted potential, that's it, and that's probably why there is so much vitriol. A potentially good game using one tenth of its potential maybe technically better than an average game using its full potential, but it's also incredibly frustrating.

[Darth Obvious]

Story is completely lame and anti-climactic. At the end I was extremely disappointed.

[scq]

Isn't the dumbed down argument the same thing that happened to Mass Effect 2? There are obviously still diehard fans of ME1 that hold the same opinion of ME2 being a stupid console port, but in general, I think most people (and I mean most as in most human beings who play games and not just diehard fans) think that the second game much benefited from the streamlining.

I will agree that they are different games, and there certainly parts that I missed, but I think people are being overly harsh. The repeated environments are terrible, but the environments themselves look amazing. Thinking about it, I'm not sure that DA:O actually had that much more environment. A lot of DA:O was repeated. If you're going to tell me that those miles upon miles of dwarven caves were not repetitive, you're just kidding yourself. I guess it's just more explicitly repetitive in DA2 and I hope they fix that in the next installment.

The idea that because the entire game is set in one city as a flaw is ridiculous. The narrative is meant to take place in one place. It's a different story, that's all. If you think about it, isn't Lowtown the same size if not bigger than Denerim? The city is explored much more in depth in the fact that there are districts which are about the same size as the explorable areas in towns and villages in DA:O. Would it have been better if it was called a kingdom as opposed to a city?

It's not perfect, and there are many points from DA:O that shouldn't have been so quickly abandoned, but there's a lot of good and it's unfortunate that so many people are quick to dismiss it.

[Kogaion]

the problem is that DA2 it's named Dragon age Two...but this game is a totaly different game ..with allmost no conection with DAO...it's a different game ...it's a very good game ..it's not a exploration game and never ment to be and the characters are ok (ofc not as nice as Morrigan and Oghren but still) bottom line is good game on PC too (since i'm playing PC version) and i allways wonder what goes in haters mind when they go bash some product with so much hate ...i think they feel all important and pro

[SnowHeart1]

yesikareyes wrote...

I've read most of the reviews here in the forum and I know that there were some things left undeveloped by Bioware but I actually enjoyed the game. I was attached to my companions such as Bethany, Aveline and Sebastian. I really liked the story and most of the improvements made to the game.

I never played origins because I found it hard to play it in the console version but in DA 2 the combat was faster and it was simplified. It did not feel like a total loss to me that you could only be human but if there was a sequel I wouldn't have anything against having other races but hopefully Bioware makes them have equal opputunities to weave their own story but with extremely unique playthroughs for players (and not just some differences in dialogue).

I do hope that they make a sequel to DA 2 despite the negative feedback. Maybe they could keep the premise of DA 2 but improve on the technical stuff fans are crtical on. 

I am enjoying the game, too. I really am. But there are also a lot of problems with it, and while I completely respect your own feelings on DAO v. DA2, I am finding DA2 to be an inferior product. Not a terrible or a bad product but, yes, an inferior one. I would also like to see a sequel, but after this experience I doubt I'll be preordering it or even buying it during release week.

[GreenSoda]

Athro wrote...

 Most of the people criticising the game are disliking it because it breaks the mould of traditional fantasy RPGs.

You know - isometric view, must fight a big bad monster threatening the world etc...

DA2 is more like a literary fantasy - it focuses on one city, one family and the people around them and how they become part of a growing conflict within the city.

For the most part, this is done really well and the game isn't about exploration and levelling up - it's really about developing relationships, immersing yourself in the Dragon Age mythos and picking a side.

The combat is frentic, and at lower difficulties it's more a pacing mechanism to break up the storyline. At higher difficulty, you cannot beat the game without thinking tactically.

For me, the roleplaying aspect is one of the best I have ever come across. As you play, your dialogue choices define Hawke - and he begins to default to the personality that you set for him - so in moments where he needs to say something but doesn't necessarily need you to make a decision - he will respond based on the personality you have allotted him. This is kind of difficult to explain rather than show - but it means that in different playthroughs scenes can play out very differently based on Hawke's defined personality.

This also stretches to his allies - they are not passive dolls you follow you around and let you do all the talking. Depending on who you bring with you, they can sometimes interrupt conversations and open up new plot paths for you. (For example, one ally ended up being fluent in Qunari and thus helped me out when dealing with one of them completely without requiring my asking them to.)

While the broadstrokes of the story are linear, the actual details are defined by the player and can go all manner of directions based on who you have in your party, whether they are a friend or rival and what kind of person you have decided to play Hawke as.

Only a few of the criticisms I've heard seem to come from people who have actually played the game. Most of them are just catchphrase dismissals that show a lack of knowledge about the game.

I do think that some of the streamlining has taken away the resource management that some RPG gamers love - inventory isn't quite as detailed as it was in DA:O. I do think that if people play on normal, they will find the combat simpler than DA:O and marrying friendly fire to Nightmare mode rather than making it a toggle was a bad choice.

I don't think removing auto-attack was the big betrayal others have painted it up to be.

Overall - I like DA2 over DA:O. It actually feels more polished to me than DA:O did. (Shock!) 

But it is certainly not a traditional fantasy RPG - and that may be a big UNsell for you. Personally, I think as others have said - it has much more soul than DA:O and is a great game. YMMV.

C.

This. 100% this...though I don't think I'd say DA2 is better than DA:O. It's just different. Imo both games are equally good in different ways.

The game sure does seem to polarize the community, though. Some very volatile negative posts on the game.

[Malevz]

The original was really great. DA2 really wasn't.