444 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-The whole game takes place in one city.
-Enemies have tons of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
-Inability to customize companions allows you to skip designing different armor models.
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.

--Reuse...bad on them and awfully lazy.
-- That is the point. That'd be like saying DAO cut corners by doing generic fantasy setting #1.
-- Ummm, that's not new. That's the same as DAO or did you skip that game?
-- Framed narrative: How else do you suggest covering a decade of time? You can't show everything.
-- Half as much dialog. Umm, not that I've noticed. Dialog seems to be about the same and since I can hear the other half it doesn't sound like an old Bob Newhart routine.
-- Stupid side quests - -Really did you even play the first game? There were 4 quests that were plot related and the rest were all stupid side quests except in DAO it made no sense you were taking time out to do any of them when the blight was threatening you.
-Dull environment. I guess if you just say something it is true but the environments here are no more bereft of life than DAO. Go wander the Denerim markets and see the same people in the same places and a handful of interactive merchants. Seriously, did you even play the first game?
-Inability to customize companions - Oh booh-flippn' hoo. You can't put armor on them. Cut corner or a good design element. I'd say you deicde but you can't think clearly so I'll tell you - good idea. Can all of you who want to play Barbie dress up just go buy that game and shut up about this?
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items: Again, did you PLAY the first game where you were buried in vendor trash so badly that you had to leave the Roads and Brecillian Temple to sell crap.
-Poor character development - Personal taste but you are wrong.
-Lack of any substantial choices - untrue
-Generic UI  - Seriously, the UI is 100X better and shows info in a clear and meanignful way. That is what UI's do not look pretty.

Basically you didn't play the first game or don't recall it because many of the "flaws" are the same as DAO and most of the rest barely rise to the level of personal taste or are just plain wrong. The only legit gripe you've got is that they badly and ham-handedly re-used environments.

[Taxonomical]

Basically you didn't play the first game or don't recall it because many of the "flaws" are the same as DAO and most of the rest barely rise to the level of personal taste or are just plain wrong. The only legit gripe you've got is that they badly and ham-handedly re-used environments.

Wow.

I keep hearing this from the inexperienced CRPG wannabes every 3-4 posts and it's getting old.

I played throguh DA:O 4 times, check my profile if you don't beleive me. Guess what? I agree, the game has flaws that were not in any way shape or form within the first game.

[fallingseraph]

Warrior Archers
Arcane Warrior Melee Mages
Strength Rogues
Dual Wield Warriors

All my favorites are gone.

[untoldsarcasm]

I can't argue with the majority of the OP's criticisms. There are things I like in this game (the characters and the talent trees being the main things) but I really hope Bioware don't make the same (lazy imo) mistakes if the make another DA. I'm enjoying DAII despite many of these changes. There's issues with even the changes I like (the lack of a mage healer beyond Anders if you are not a mage yourself is a big one for me). Then there's the fact that we have had things taken away that help as to play with variety, like switching weapon sets... huge negative for me. 

Basically, I greatly prefer Origins and it's not simply that I hate change. I just don't like change that strips away things that made something great. 

Modifié par untoldsarcasm, 13 mars 2011 - 09:50 .

[AFCommando]

Sidney wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-The whole game takes place in one city.
-Enemies have tons of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
-Inability to customize companions allows you to skip designing different armor models.
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.

--Reuse...bad on them and awfully lazy.
-- That is the point. That'd be like saying DAO cut corners by doing generic fantasy setting #1.
-- Ummm, that's not new. That's the same as DAO or did you skip that game?
-- Framed narrative: How else do you suggest covering a decade of time? You can't show everything.
-- Half as much dialog. Umm, not that I've noticed. Dialog seems to be about the same and since I can hear the other half it doesn't sound like an old Bob Newhart routine.
-- Stupid side quests - -Really did you even play the first game? There were 4 quests that were plot related and the rest were all stupid side quests except in DAO it made no sense you were taking time out to do any of them when the blight was threatening you.
-Dull environment. I guess if you just say something it is true but the environments here are no more bereft of life than DAO. Go wander the Denerim markets and see the same people in the same places and a handful of interactive merchants. Seriously, did you even play the first game?
-Inability to customize companions - Oh booh-flippn' hoo. You can't put armor on them. Cut corner or a good design element. I'd say you deicde but you can't think clearly so I'll tell you - good idea. Can all of you who want to play Barbie dress up just go buy that game and shut up about this?
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items: Again, did you PLAY the first game where you were buried in vendor trash so badly that you had to leave the Roads and Brecillian Temple to sell crap.
-Poor character development - Personal taste but you are wrong.
-Lack of any substantial choices - untrue
-Generic UI  - Seriously, the UI is 100X better and shows info in a clear and meanignful way. That is what UI's do not look pretty.

Basically you didn't play the first game or don't recall it because many of the "flaws" are the same as DAO and most of the rest barely rise to the level of personal taste or are just plain wrong. The only legit gripe you've got is that they badly and ham-handedly re-used environments.

so your saying because they did it in a game 2 years ago that its all cool to do now?


Biodrone much?

[Jallard]

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-The whole game takes place in one city.
-Enemies have tons of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
-Inability to customize companions allows you to skip designing different armor models.
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.

You lose! Good day, serrah. 

This game is a far greater source of embarassment for your company than it is a disappointment for us.

My sentiments exactly. I was stupid to have pre-ordered DA2, but i am not buying it: nor, am I going to pay the $10 restocking fee to GameStop. Let EA and Bioware pay the $10. They are the one's who conned us all. Eat this Bioware!

[Hreterus]

Ah, I see someone else already debunked this point by point...

Modifié par Hreterus, 13 mars 2011 - 09:30 .

[LifePincher]

Clint Eastwood needs to get involved........ Hang 'em High! j/k
*LOL*

[Ylvena]

I agree with OP, nothing more to say for my part.

[Giantdeathrobot]

-Map reuse is rushed, lazy, and the game's biggest flaw, completely agree.
-No, really? It's not like it's the friggin point of the game. And since Kirkwall is artistically far more interesting that the land of mud some call Ferelden, it's actually a plus as far as I am concerned.
-Increased difficulty, and people still whine about DA2 not being tactical. Whatever. But I do agree the wave mechanic is overused.
-Do you really want to live 10 years of a person's life? At least it's a departure from going to absolute nobody to hero of the millemium in a few months.
-Outisde I kinda agree but Kirkwall is much better than Denerim in that regard.
-Like in every single RPG that ever existed, including oh so perfect BG series? At least it's not ''bring me X of Y'' job boards like in Origins.
-Skip designing different models? are you kidding? they could just have made everyone but Fenris, Merrill and Varric use the same body type and armor mesh as Hawke and be done with it. Instead they gave everybody a unique look, like was made in Torment, pretty much the holy grail of RPGs, it takes a lot more work.
-At least junk items are clearly labeled as such and can be sold in bulk this time. Origins also had heaps of useless emeralds and blank vellums.
-Thats subjective, I cared about Aveline, Varric and Bethany more than any Origins character save maybe, and just maybe, the Sten.
-It's not like a child you rescued in Year 1 returns to give you a quest that has lots of character developpement for your party in Year 3 if you do a certain action. Or the Arishok shows you respect or distrust based on past dealings with his people and who you bring with you when you meet him. That was just my imagination. Very few other games ever made that, and it's one of DA2's strongest points actually.
-That's pretty true, in fact. Along with the events just before the ending. Another signed of the game being rushed.
-I thought it was clean, readable, and most of all useful. The talent trees in perticular are far better organized (not to mention designed) than in Origins, having (Maker's Breath!) actual and useful tooltips.

I also love how you completely ommit to mention the improved combat system, the more personnal and unusual story (that does have it's low points, admitedly, but is far better than saving the world from evil dragon generic quest of boringness), the improved relations between party members (a two-way system? yes please), and the fact that at least there's no friggin DLC salesman sitting in your camp.

For the record, I do think DA2 is, in the end, inferior to Origins, and they did cut some corners, unfortunately. But calling it bad is hyperbole to me, especially when the examples given are easily refutable. And stop with all this PC vs Console BS, as if we didn't have enough of that already.

[Adugan]

When you reply with a list, at least have the decency to quote the OP. I did not memorize HIS list, so I dont know which line you are replying to with your line.

[Hreterus]

Adugan wrote...

When you reply with a list, at least have the decency to quote the OP. I did not memorize HIS list, so I dont know which line you are replying to with your line.

Wouldn't that be dumbing down?

Modifié par Hreterus, 13 mars 2011 - 09:54 .

[PirateT138]

I felt the ending was lame and unsatisfying as well.

Even Mass Effect which, from the get-go, was stated to be a trilogy, never had such empty endings.

You finished s*** and then it gave you a look ahead, not just a, "Herp derp, dunno what happens after the story!!"

The epilogue in long RPGs is important.  It's a ****g slideshow you can make with Excel, but it's important.

Modifié par PirateT138, 13 mars 2011 - 09:58 .

[Trumwulf]

BeljoraDien wrote...

A quote from a year ago:

David Gaider wrote...
Incidentally, I find it interesting that everyone compares DA:O almost exclusively to BG2. The better comparison would be BG1. BG2 was an iteration of an exisitng engine we already knew how to use and could simply tweak and add content for, a situation we haven't been in since -- not until ME2, really. Or any potential full sequel to DA:O.

Does this not imply that DA2 will essentially be developed that way? I took it that way and even replied to that comment with enthusiasm for what DA2 was going to be.... So ironic.

I'm still in the first act of the game, wrapping up the final sidequests before continuing with the main plot, but I've been thinking about this exact thing.  There isn't anything in the new "features" so far that I can't do without.  I would much rather have them use the exact same engine and art assets as DA:O and actually develop a new story.

[Antaress]

sad but true >_>
Hope they will not make same mistake in DA:O2

[Ramtaku]

I'm in complete agreement with the OPs points regarding issues with DA2.

What I haven't seen in the responses is any reference to the reality that this is all about corporate culture and not game development.

The game was "streamlined" for mass launch on all popular game platforms in order to maximize profits and reduce costs (Development time = costs, restructuring a PC game for consoles = time).

Corporate entities (EA - Laidlaw) don't care about the quality of your experience, whether or not this is a worthy successor to DAO or whether or not you can put armor on your companions. EA cares about profit and Bioware is now a wholly owned subsidiary of EA.

Laidlaw's interview wasn't "Laidlaw" - it was his communication of the corporate talking points developed by a staff in response to reported issues with DA2.

There are bar charts at EA tracking sales by platform and that's all they care about.

Nothing said here is going to change the development cycle timeline that they're now forcing the Bioware staff to follow.

EA: We've got to get the revenue for DA2 into the books for the first Quarter, when can you have it done?
BW: "Ummm, we've finished a lot of the dialog sequences and the character models are awesome, but we've only finished 10% of the content.
EA: Are you saying you need more time *disgust*, we need to get it out there NOW and if you can't do it I'll find someone else who can!!!
BW: I guess we could use the content we have over and over again and limit armor modifications to the main character...
EA: Perfect!


If you reduce development costs to a great enough extent you can release crap and still make a profit.

I always liked Bioware, but that's just a name now and obviously has no relationship to the quality of the product. Bioware = EA.

It would be false to say I'll never buy an EA game again; however, I will never buy one at launch again and without reading a lot of consumer reviews. I also will tell people that haven't bought DA2 yet not to buy it because it's way not worth the money.

EA got me this time because of my previous experiences with Bioware, they won't get me again because I don't and will never again trust their products or their statements about their products. Only time will tell whether or not losing that trust was worth getting the $60 out of us.

[Destrega]

The 10 year narrative thing didn't bother me much.
What did bother me about it was that apparently your character did absolutely nothing in between these years that you didn't have control over him.
No extra gold, or a new paintjob on his estate... anything?? Really? Companions hint at things they did, but they didn't even bother to attempt to fill in these gaps for the sake of keeping the consistency of the story going.

It really did feel more like 3 parts of a DLC/Smaller game campaigns slapped together, which to be honest might have been a better idea to go with than this.

Modifié par Destrega, 13 mars 2011 - 10:48 .

[Sidney]

Taxonomical wrote...


Wow.

I keep hearing this from the inexperienced CRPG wannabes every 3-4 posts and it's getting old.

I played throguh DA:O 4 times, check my profile if you don't beleive me. Guess what? I agree, the game has flaws that were not in any way shape or form within the first game.

...and I keep hearing this same drivel from ignorant wannabe elitist snots and it is getting old. I played through 3 full times all the way into Witch Hunt and several other jaunts just through DAO and "inexperienced" for me goes all the way back to Wasteland whippersnapper so that won't fly.

It does have flaws that weren't in game #1:
1. Obvious re-use on enviroments in a horrible way - really if they'd just not had doors with a wall in them it wouldn't have been nearly so bad/obvious.
2. Magical spawning baddies although DAO did a fair share of this but it wasn't quite as blantant about slapping you in the face or at least it was more explainable - spiders or shades "appearing" was almost tolerable but not bandits.

...but that is really about it. Most of the other criticisms are things that are a part of the series or are just mind bogglingly wrong.  DA2 isn't perfect - I mean I think Bioware can't do an urban setting and yet they set the game in an urban space that doesn't feel real but then again Denerim didn't feel any more real so that isn't unqiue to DA2 but it is clearly a flaw in the game that the strutcure magnifies for example.

[Zalman1337]

I loved the sidequests. Those lost and found ones never got old...

[Sidney]

AFCommando wrote...

so your saying because they did it in a game 2 years ago that its all cool to do now?


Biodrone much?

Well since the gripes from most folks are that they changed too much you have to decide what you want to argue - does it suck because it is too much like DAO or too little because it really can't be both. If vendor trash was acceptable in DAO then it should be fine in DA2 especially since they made it less troublesome. Unrealistic environments are a problem since BG for Bioware (Bethesda does worlds, Bioware does stories), it ain't new so if that was cool in DAO and you didn't shred that for not getting better in a decade since BG2 why should DA2 make a big leap over DAO?

[Giantdeathrobot]

Sidney, that's obviously because DA2 is a dumbed down shooter for console kiddies with ADD that removed inventory and RPG elements.

Wait, I got my catch phrases all wrong...

Anyways, my gripes with DA2 are more about the lack of quality with it as a game, not the general direction it is taking it terms of design or if it's ''consolized'' or whatever.

@ Beljora: SO many shades of brown! Surely this is the pinnacle of art in RPGs!

Modifié par Giantdeathrobot, 13 mars 2011 - 10:25 .

[BeljoraDien]

Damn it, people, open up the DAO toolset and look at those environments. That is digital art.

[darklordpocky-san]

toggled wrote...

Brenus wrote...

You pretty much summed up every criticism that people have about this game, yet no, Bioware refuse to comment or acknowledge them, and the herp derp blind sheep that follow the game keep on saying that no valid criticisms are being raised as to why this game is bad.

Both bioware and their newfound fans have gone completely blind and senseless to video game quality.  

Bioware has commented on the criticism - see the Eurogamer interview:

http://www.eurogamer...ge-ii-interview

Mr. Laidlaw circles the wagons and claims that anyone who doesn't like Dragon Age 2 simply hates change. He also justifies recycling areas with the 'less is more' argument.

reminds me of how George Lucas called Star Wars: Episode I "artistic", after he had just realized he had make a crap movie.


Cognitive dissonance at it's finest

[voad]

Emerald Melios wrote...

AJRimmsey wrote...

Emerald Melios wrote...

This whole forum is a trainwreck, between the wangsting elitists and image spammers.

Now, I'm sure Bioware knew they had a limited time frame to develop DA2. They probably weren't trying to make an "OMGepic masterpiece" like DA:O or BG2; they wanted to make a decent game with the resources they had. I think people should just appreciate what they have get rid of this entitlement complex.

if you read a bit more than the hate threads you`ll see bioware had little to do with the end result sold at stores,and as for entitlment complex,well thats just a natural reaction to people taking money for a product.

you see when people earn thier money they tend to put value on it,and where it goes,and when someone picks thier pocket by any means,even if its just by mislabeling a game,they get angry.

sorry but thats just the real world we live in when we leave our parents safe zone behind and venture out into the world.


ps..thanks to the OP for listing the problems,now if everyone can link this thread when those claiming theres no problem,we can stop the argueing,as its pretty hard to hold a point when a list like thats in plain sight.

No, gamers have way too much of an entitlement complex. They can't even be happy with what they are given.

Whaat they are GIVEN? GIVEN huh? I think you meant to say PAID for.