855 réponses à ce sujet

[Reinveil]

Today's tally (discounting double posts/votes or non-answers):

171 users answered "yes"

448 users answered "no"

76 users had mixed reviews or felt it was on par with Origins

[Canadish]

Reinveil wrote...

Today's tally (discounting double posts/votes or non-answers):

171 users answered "yes"

448 users answered "no"

76 users had mixed reviews or felt it was on par with Origins

Ouch
Remember when Sequels used add depth to a game? Those were the days...

[daemon1129]

No
PC

[Dasher1010]

Can I say both yes and no?
360

[ElectricPhase]

NO!

PS3

[SilentK]

Yes

PC

[Mrbananagrabber]

Hell no. On PC.

[Meltemph]

No
PC

They made improvements


But for everything they did right in DA2 either the short dev cycle showed itself or you see how they made parts of it worse(AI is just as dumb and fights are just as uncreative, but with a more silly way of setting up fights, for instance).

Modifié par Meltemph, 03 avril 2011 - 12:02 .

[Melca36]

No...  PC User

There were things that I did like that I do hope they bring to DA:3 but there were a great many things that seemed to be done to pander to the certain sect of gamers who are lazy

Modifié par Melca36, 03 avril 2011 - 12:27 .

[mysamuraiFIGHT]

jbanchiere wrote...

 Please answer "yes" or "no" and then platform.

It's not a question that can be answered with a simple yes or no.  It's also completly subjective.  Why do we try and boil everything down into  bianary, black and white terms.  Nothing is ever that simplistic.  There where plenty of problems with DA2, but DA:O was not without its faults.

Then there are the general complaints.  Reuse of dungeons was cheap.  The stated reason being less development time for art assets and more for content,  However aside from the main quest line, which wile some parts are well done.  I had problems with it, but I'll get to that.  Also in my general complaints I have to include the junk loot.   It was basicly like saying, "here throw this away for me".  The Find a random item and take it to a random dude was just plain ridiclous, and a waste of time.  What it was not was content.

I sort of liked combat better in DA2.  However it was to easy.  You can turn the difficulty up, but then its no longer the same fast paced fun it was designed to be,  It then becomes a wash with DA:O, which was a more deliberate, tactical type of combat.  Add in the wave spawn.  Boss fights that are boring, and it shapes up to be completly mediocre combat.  If they want to break into the action game genre they should have done just that.  It felt like they where trying to serve two masters, and i can't really say they ended up pleasing niether,  Because there are people who genuinly like the game.  However if they wanted faster, more visceral combat, I would rater have seen them realy go for it.  Something like God of War, or The Force Unleashed.

Then there's the story.  The premise is great.  The execution however....not so much.  Lets ignore the fact that my warden was a mage.  Lets ignore the fact that the Ferelden circle was, according to my DA:O playthrough.  Freed.  Thats right.  Did they even consider this?  The entire central conflict is negated because there is an entire circle of freed mages, and its completly ignored.  But like I said lets ignore that little tidbit.

The cental point of contention is the Chantry/Templars VS the Mages, who want freedom.  But we are never realy shown the struggle of the mages.  Sure there are some throw away lines that elude to it.  Sure you are either are an apostate, or related to one.  But its never conveyed in any convincing way,  The first thing writers are told is, "show dont tell".  In essence that's one of the major problems.  We never see anything.  We are mostly just supposed to assume that there are grave injustices occuring.

Then there Is the issue of Bloodmagic.  You would think that in a game where magic is a pivitol theme the practice of Bloodmagic would be a central focus.  However it's never expounded on.  Why do mages turn to it?  Why is it any more powerfull than regular magic?  In fact we learn no more about it than we did in DA:O,  Why is every mage we fight a Bloodmage?  How are they conected to deamons?  Raising corpses?  Anders expresses a hatered for Bloodmages throughout the game.  How then does he come to his decision?  Shouldn't he be glad to be killing them?  If he blames the Templars for thier use of blood magic, why isnt that expressed more clearly?  But these are other problems I will get to.

The characters.  I never felt conected to any of them.  All of thier actions, dialouge, every interaction felt a bit contrived.   Lets take Varric for example.  Our meeting colored my entire preception of him.  So I had supossedly been in the city for a year.  Never meet Varric.  But he saves us some coin and all of a sudden we are the bestest of buddies?  His deep road expedition is my only means of escaping poverty?  In the entire city, collecting money for this expidition is my only choice?  Moreover why do I care?  Because mommy wants to be rich?  It's ridiculous on its face. 

Anders......Anders, Anders, Anders.  They took an established character and drasticly changed him with a lame plot device.  I said before that he was very Monty Pythonesq, and I still hold to that.  The entire game he is screaming "HELP HELP, IM BEING REPRESSED"!  But we dont realy see that repression.  It mostly happens off screen.

Merrils naivete could have easily been confused with retardation.  All in all in never cared about any of them.  Which may explain why halfway through my second play through. I simly pick a random dialouge option, then skip past it.  But then the game can't stand on combat alone.

Then at the very end they go Deus Ex Machina.

All in all DA2 piles up all these things until I can no longer suspend disbelief.  That dosen't mean
it's a bad game.  It's just very, very mediocre.  That is also not to say DA:O is perfect.  Which is why I'm not answering your question.  There are things that I do like about DA2.  There are things that could have made it work better.  It's not a simple yes or no question. 

[vantick]

Um... why are there only two options? It's a yes/no for me.

Standing on its own, it's a good game. Standing as a sequel to Origins, it's alright. Combat felt better, inventory and loot seemed simplified (read: worse), story was fine. Characters/companions were fantastic. I was disappointed by the lack of morally 'grey' decisions one could make. Environments could have been worked on a lot more. Overall, DAII made steps forward and steps back.

Xbox 360

Modifié par vantick, 03 avril 2011 - 12:49 .

[DA Trap Star]

No
Only thing that improved is the battles, everything else is worse

[Nemis-Roidsavelt]

 No ps3

[Johnsen1972]

no (PC)

[thebatmanreborn]

mixed. some areas, yes. other areas, no. xbox 360

[Sphynx118]

No. PC

[Psython]

No. PC

That said its still a fun game.

[Zjarcal]

Zjarcal wrote...

With no middleground to discuss, this thread is rather pointless.

Yes and no. 

That's my answer.

I'm gonna change my position a bit...

Taking into consideration the direction the series was taken into and ignoring the faults the game had due to the shorter development time...

Yes, it is an improvement.

PC by the way.

[LiquidGrape]

Canadish wrote...

Remember when Sequels used add depth to a game? Those were the days...

Yes, and let us consider how those sequels haven't aged at all since.
But seriously, I would argue that DA2 added plenty of depth.
Depth in its theme and characters. Depth in its evocation of the world it inhabited.

Modifié par LiquidGrape, 03 avril 2011 - 02:13 .

[axl99]

Yes.

PC.

Because it's nice to see Bioware breaking out of the story/gamedev formula so many other people are condemning them for. DA2 was an unpolished experience, but I see lots of potential for growth.

Art-wise, DA2 is a huge improvement. DAO was drab and visually uninspiring. Shame they had no real art direction at the time.

The last thing I want Bioware to do is become another Koei. Pumping out the same kind of games every odd year and trying nothing new.

Modifié par axl99, 03 avril 2011 - 02:05 .

[dujh]

yes 360
the only thing i would change is to be able to talk to my companions fully

[Killer3000ad]

No.
PC.

Whilst the combat system and talent system were improved, everything else, from immersion, companion writing, dialog, overall storyline, ENEMY WAVES, lack of overhead camera were a big step backwards.

Modifié par Killer3000ad, 03 avril 2011 - 04:32 .

[Grimzkhul]

No, PC

Why? Dumbed down gameplay, example: No genlocks/shrieks, cut and paste locations (I saw the same cave 15 times... really bioware?) simplified character design for console gamers.

The conversation wheel, stuck to human and updated look... fine with it. Taking us for idiots... not so much.

[Savber100]

No
PC

[kisuke28]

Hell No!!
I play the console version