444 réponses à ce sujet

[Upset Goldfish]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I am rather pleasantly surprised by the debate in this thread. Please keep it up, and let's please not allow name-calling, swearing, or insults to ruin what I consider to be one of the more reasonable threads in this forum. THank you, everyone.

Thank you for dropping in and giving the time to take a look at the fanbase criticism.

We don't hate Bioware, and to be honest, I don't hate DA: II. I just found it didn't  live up to the expectations that had been set by Origins, and they were pretty hefty with a 7 year dev time.

Also thanks for not dropping in, freaking out and locking the thread, which seems to keep happening to some of the other threads.

[JoKeRpHaN]

2Hard2C wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Enemies have a ton 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 allowed 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.

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

U just totally got OWNED riloux!

[Dajiaocookie]

I agree with OP on all points. And may I add that the characters in DA2 are as fugly as ever.

On another note, I'm now a proud owner of ME2 (thank you Steam X'mas Sale! - though i've yet to blow through ME1) and seriously ME is the better franchise. The DA franchise is just fugly, hilarious at times (when you're having conversations while covered in blood).

Though from what I gather DA1 had the better storyline. DA2 just doesn't look compelling. Meh..well maybe when Steam has it for 1.99 i'd consider getting the WHOLE SERIES.

Whereforarthou Baldur's Gate....

[Sleek]

I just came back from my sisters house ,her 12 year old , my nephew was playing DA2 and was loving the big boobs and chopping darkspawn into dust. I thought to myself , was this the age that the game is marketed too. WoW ! What going on with rpgs .

[_Cheveyo]

Cheveyo wrote...

Upset Goldfish wrote...

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.

We hate change? Oh my. 

Mr. Laidlaw, people can hate change. But you have to remember, change is like a coin, it has two faces. One face is good, whilst one face is bad. This time around, you lost the coin toss.

I for one, am not opposed to change if it BENEFITS the player experience. For example, the fact you can delete all your junk in one go, as opposed to manually removing each individual piece. THAT IS GOOD CHANGE.

But removing the voiceless character to bring in the Mass Effect-style dialogue wheel was not a beneficial change, and hampered my playing experience. 

In addition, a sequel should build on the strengths of the original. DA:O was a tactics-oriented homage to older RPG's like Baldurs gate, and having a voiceless protagonist allowed you to place yourself in the role of the hero, as opposed to Hawke, who is just another character. Since DAII is a sequel to this, the same formula should have been applied. Instead, you now have Dynasty Warriors Dragon Age. In essence, you have almost changed the game genre.

Imagine the outcry that would be had if Mass Effect 3 had no voiced Shepard, no dialogue wheel, and the ability to switch between party members. People enjoy Mass Effect for the way it is already built. In ME2, you built upon the same structure, and it worked well (with the exception of thermal clips). Just because one style of gameplay is good for one series, doesn't mean it's good for another.

And if future "change" means re-using environments, bland textures, a jumpy narrative which leaves the player almost confused, poor customisation and an ultimately shallow RPG experience, then I feel that I can say definitively that I dislike change.

I like what you say, at first I liked the idea of the voiced character. Then I played the game I get your point.

For the 10 year past for Hawk they could have had a three choices for use to choice from like in MassEffect 1. Then shown a animated view of what we did during the same time your grey warden was saving Ferelden. Flash backs of you past hero could have been re animated for our viewing. 

[General Flynt]

Please stop with these pre order "dlc" and "bonus items"

lets go back to *i buy the game for $60 release date or 2 weeks later and I get what I paid for.*

and if the dlc was not in the original game disc then release it as a patch for god's sake cause the game i bought was broken

[_Cheveyo]

Just my point read Unhappy with Bioware & EA are you? Teens and kids pay these game no matter mature label. They just need to make conversation better.

[Upset Goldfish]

2Hard2C wrote...

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

I kinda disagree with some of these points. The following is just my most humble of opinions. 

Point 1: Repeated maps can be done well in some instances. For example, the Sword Base levels in Halo: Reach were both the same map, but with the environment changed etc, which led to a fresh experience in a familiar setting. In some situations, like cities in RPG's, this isn't possible. You still, however, need a way of keeping the city fresh and exciting. In my opinion this was unavoidable in a game that was mainly about Kirkwall, but at the same time, that means the main city needs to be enjoyable to be in from the start.

The other more bland locations would have benefitted from a change in the colour palette every so often,

Point 2: The majority was set in Kirkwall, I agree, not the whole game. You are valid on this point. But I still refer to my first point: It needs to constantly be fresh to enjoy it. Reward your player.

Point 3: I agree, enemy health wavered from large to small. The waves, however, were ridiculous. The enemies would appear out of thin air, literally in some cases, and it seemed like it was just to lengthen missions.

Point 4: Yes, there were large blank spaces of time. Even so, a framed narrative was probably not necessary. If you look at another example, Fable 1 and 2, the narrative is not framed, but time is still able to pass in an interesting fashion. Whilst the whole "Hero's tale" was a clever way to design the game, It left me as a gamer feeling unrewarded by my actions, because in the end it was all just some story being retold to this lady.

Point 5: The dialogue wheel was a negative aspect. I would comment saying it took me out of the RPG experience of placing myself in the hero's shoes, but I wasn't in those shoes from the beginning, as I wasn't playing a nameless character, I was playing a defined one.

Point 6: Side quests could have been cut down, but I agree that some of them were very fun. As to whether they carried as much weight as the ones in DA:O is yet to be known. DA:III would answer this.

Point 7: I believe Origins had a far more lively setting. Kirkwall is meant to be some huge city, but instead there were dead end roads, and seemingly abandoned streets. In Origins, each area in cities had it's own unique feel. The alienage, the market, the taverns, each felt alive in their unique differences.

Point 8: Regardless, there was far less customisation than in DA:O

Point 9: You should probably have given that elfroot and deathroot to your elven assistant in the camp, that goes to the war effort you know Or you could have sold it. Or just not picked it up in the first place. I do agree that the junk sorting system is far better now though.

Point 10: DA: O's characters, IMHO, seemed deeper, although some of them (meaning Zevran) Had som frustratingly flirty conversation options. I JUST WANT TO TALK, I DON'T LOVE YOU.

Point 11: This is more something that can be judged with a DA:III, but some decisions did seem irrelevant.

Point 12: The ending was a let down, but I agree about the DLC. For me, Witch Hunt was rather disappointing.

Point 13: Simplified helped, IMHO, as did the nice structuring of the skill trees.

These are all my opinions though. Don't flame me too hard.

[Uhh.. Jonah]

This game had potential. It could have been something so much greater. I wish they spent more time on it, but I don't know if they could have because of money problems.

[akekahn]

blacqout wrote...

Especially the custom armour each party member had. It made them look much more distinctive... and i'm sure that hardly anyone changed Morrigan out of her default robes for anything other than the identical looking one you acquired on her mission.

My Morrigan instantly chose to wear the Juggernaut Armor, in order to have the best protection available at the time. Running around in airy cloth when chasing an arch demon does not seem to be very healthy, methinks.

And it is really visible or sometimes even audible how corners were cut, when some of the Mass Effect tunes are played in Thedas, I always look up to the sky, to see if the Normandy's landing somewhere. I also liked sorting through the inventory in order to see what to keep, what to sell. Now everything is pretty much defined by default. You choose your class and then 2/3 of the useable items you find can directly be sold as only you can wear them. And it does not really matter if you loot a chest full of diamonds, an ancient book about elven magic or if you loot a dirty piece of cloth, it is automatically looted and placed in "trash" and can then be sold with one click. You can't even be bothered to care about those things anymore. Therefore it was not necessary to create graphics that distinguish them from eachother.

Additionally there are a lot of bugs, especially in combat, ranging from infinite health regen (impossible to die save for oneshotting backstabs) to tactics not working at all and party characters just running around doing nothing. Not to mention getting kicked through walls and stuff.

I really would have rather played another game with the DA:O engine instead of one with the ME engine, so to say.

[Persephone]

JoKeRpHaN wrote...

2Hard2C wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Enemies have a ton 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 allowed 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.

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

U just totally got OWNED riloux!

Agreed. Well said. A rarity on this forum as of late. BRAVO!

[JuggyGales]

Ramtaku wrote...

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.

This dude gets it.  How many of us work in the corporate world.  I go through this crap (different industry) all the time.  It is the truth and the only post that needs to be here other than the OP. 

[Zocat]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I hate the lost and found side quests. For sure, I wouldn't mind them AT ALL if you were ASKED to look out for these lost objects and didn't just "happen" upon them AND the owners as well. A little preliminary dialogue goes a long way you know.

Well there's our answer to what Hawke was doing during the downtime
Talking to all  those guys / groups and they told him he should go looking for their stuff.

I'm personally not that far into the game yet (stupid birthdays & weekdays!) so I  cannot comment on the overarching story. But I dont really care that much that the game only takes place in one city.

But I have some criticism:
When I first started DA2 and got to the char creation screen, "Oh she has nice hair, but I want to tweak her appearence". 1hour later, after reading forums & installing mode I was finally able to customize the preset character. That just sceams "rushed".

I also dislike waves of enemies being present all the time. In some cases it is logical - but it's almost everywhere and too often used. "Oh 2/3rd of my bodyguards arent around atm, they'll join us later!"

Overall I'm having fun in combat (on Nightmare with Tactics off) but I do miss weapon swap, an option to toggle off the AOE lock, the old "Hold position" command (not one that breaks after 10meters and effects everyone/noone) and I really really really hate those "sprinter/speed" mobs who suddenly slow down once they're close enough.  And I fear it might become a bit too easy once I can switch out certain partymembers & more combos will be available.

Dialog wheel -  I'm torn. It has advantages (better flow of conversation) and theoretically also a good amount of options (8 "investigate" options and 3 "decision" options) but some of it is just badly implemented.
When I met Merrill she was nervous, and I had 3 investigate options and one nice "Hey, I'm Hawke, dont be nervous". So I wanted to be nice and introduce myself first before asking her questions but BAM done.


And on a more personal note:
I hate the redesign of the Qunari & Elves. It just goes against every canon until DA2 (DAO, books, RPG). I honestly dont see how Maric could've fallen for Katriel when she would've looked like the DA2 elves....

[The_Eejit]

Well I for one have been burnt enough times by the large Corps like EA and Activision to never want to purchase another product from either of them again. Dragon age is dead to me, its just the name on a money pot in the EA office. I pray you guys won't fill the money pot for them again.

[kingjamesjr1]

JoKeRpHaN wrote...

2Hard2C wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Enemies have a ton 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 allowed 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.

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

U just totally got OWNED riloux!

  Omg some people just don't get it  riloux review  hit rite on.  There is no need to take ur  time with the game . at what point in the game does it get better. This games is severly lacking it don't matter if u do the quest or not  it's lacking but i see  people love idiotic games that have no plot and/or a real story 
this is to the people that let other think for them = You need more education just stop posting cuz it's clear u really have no clue.

[xYOSSARIANx]

Maderas_ wrote...

I'm sick to death of seeing whiny console users ..... blah blah blah..... So please, spare us your console whinging. blah blah blah.... you all want live in a bubble and delude yourselves .  blah blah blah.......You know consoles are crappy.... blah blah blah.... Jealousy.

There is ONE reason DA2 is no good compared to DAO which was also on consoles and it has NOTHING to do with consoles but EVERYTHING to do with DAO having a 6 year cycle and DA2 having an 15 month cycle.

You seem to forget DAO was other than a camera angle and some low quality textures identical to the PC version, so how DA2 faults can be blamed on being developed with consoles in mind make absolutely no sense.

You talk about delusion and living in a bubble, consoles are here to stay and the development costs of games these days mean that just about every game will be made to run on a console,  so please stop deluding yourself and step out of your bubble.

Jealousy of what ?, I have the same game as you and it plays on my huge TV while I sit on my sofa, I think it's probably you that's jealous, you don't want to share your toys, tough for you because we all get to play it, grow up and learn to live with it.

[MonkeyLungs]

Maderas_ wrote...

The only difference between my rant and the rants of console defenders is that mine can actually be backed up by logic, since I'm not willfully ignorant and I do not choose to believe that consoles using 5 year old hardware are somehow just as powerful as a modern PC.

In depth gameplay, systems with layers of complexity, large gameplay spaces and satisfying stories are not dependent upon the superiority of technology. 

Nobody in their right mind will argue that a 360 or a PS3 is as powerful as a properly built gaming PC. However, to have a truly in depth non dumbed down gameplay experience requires the will of the developers to create such a thing. It does not require immense computing technology.

Games becoming simpler and less in depth is a result of the consumer not the hardware.

The general public does not want hardcore games. Hardcore gamers do and we are woefully outnumbered and almost ZERO developers make games for us anymore.

[johannes1212]

Well DA2 is definitely the Jade Empire of this generation, a good game by its own standards, however judging it from "Bioware standards" renders it sub-par

[BeljoraDien]

Zocat wrote...

But I have some criticism:
When I first started DA2 and got to the char creation screen, "Oh she has nice hair, but I want to tweak her appearence". 1hour later, after reading forums & installing mode I was finally able to customize the preset character. That just sceams "rushed".

I also dislike waves of enemies being present all the time. In some cases it is logical - but it's almost everywhere and too often used. "Oh 2/3rd of my bodyguards arent around atm, they'll join us later!"

Overall I'm having fun in combat (on Nightmare with Tactics off) but I do miss weapon swap, an option to toggle off the AOE lock, the old "Hold position" command (not one that breaks after 10meters and effects everyone/noone) and I really really really hate those "sprinter/speed" mobs who suddenly slow down once they're close enough.  And I fear it might become a bit too easy once I can switch out certain partymembers & more combos will be available.

Dialog wheel -  I'm torn. It has advantages (better flow of conversation) and theoretically also a good amount of options (8 "investigate" options and 3 "decision" options) but some of it is just badly implemented.
When I met Merrill she was nervous, and I had 3 investigate options and one nice "Hey, I'm Hawke, dont be nervous". So I wanted to be nice and introduce myself first before asking her questions but BAM done.


And on a more personal note:
I hate the redesign of the Qunari & Elves. It just goes against every canon until DA2 (DAO, books, RPG). I honestly dont see how Maric could've fallen for Katriel when she would've looked like the DA2 elves....

I agree with you on the constant mobs... Where are these things coming from? How are you supposed to consider a strategy when enemies can appear out of thin air? It creates a scenario where you just have to hack away, hope for the best, and reload if you die.

I'd actually be a little harsher than you about the dialogue wheel. I felt like I had absolutely no control over what was about to come out of Hawke's mouth. It was just frustrating and not something I looked forward to as I usually do conversations.

I agree about the elves... but I have to say, the Qunari really work for me. They always seemed the most human of the 3 non-human races in DAO and further looked absolutely nothing like the Ogres they are corrupted into. It was a surprising realization in DAO when I read that Ogres were the darkspawn Qunari... and even then, I couldn't quite see it. I see that now.

[Persephone]

kingjamesjr1 wrote...

JoKeRpHaN wrote...

2Hard2C wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Enemies have a ton 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 allowed 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.

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

U just totally got OWNED riloux!

  Omg some people just don't get it  riloux review  hit rite on.  There is no need to take ur  time with the game . at what point in the game does it get better. This games is severly lacking it don't matter if u do the quest or not  it's lacking but i see  people love idiotic games that have no plot and/or a real story 
this is to the people that let other think for them = You need more education just stop posting cuz it's clear u really have no clue.

Education? No offense, but reading through your assassination of grammar and punctuation tells a different tale.

[DTKT]

Here is my issue with the combat/endless waves:

Part of the issue is that positioning is now largely ignored. This is due to two things.

1) Movement across the battlefield is extremely fast. Most of the time, you can run right through a pack of mobs without any issue. Coupled with skills that make you "clip" through anything, nothing has weight. Most mobs are "filler" or "minions". With minimal HP, one AOE attack can easily take them down.

2) The waves, which can come from anywhere, really prevent you from holding a position and shaping the battlefield around that spot. When the game keeps throwing minons at you, it get's boring. The combat scenario lack variety. I would have wished for more mages, more "special" mobs.

Area Recycling:

This is what broke the game for me. I cant stand just retracing my steps over and over. I want to explore, discover secrets. Oblivion had largely the same issue. Random dugeons tiles that were largely the same and just bored you out of your mind. You knew that they were randomized but way too similar to each other.

DAII just went the "easy" and copied the areas for everything.

Kirkwall feels largely lifeless. Again, model recycling everywhere.

[2Hard2C]

kingjamesjr1 wrote...

JoKeRpHaN wrote...

2Hard2C wrote...

Riloux wrote...

-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Enemies have a ton 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 allowed 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.

Let's go point by point:
-Reusing the same four maps 500 times.
1. I agree the maps repeated quite a bit, but it was more like the same 7 maps 100 times. Bad, but not as bad.

-Setting the whole game in one city.
2. The majority is set in Kirkwall, but to say the whole game is a lie, unless you rushed through and didn't do anything.

-Enemies have a ton of HP and come in waves so the game feels longer.
3. Some have really small HP, and it varies quite a bit. You also attack faster in this game.

-Frame narrative to avoid being too descriptive about what happens between large periods of time.
4. Over 10 years, there are large periods of time of boredom or unimportance, so it makes sense in the context of the story.

-Half as much dialogue, more passive interaction.
5. False. You can't open up a dialogue wheel everytime you talk to somebody, but there is as much dialouge in the game. Also, if you completely beat Origins dialouge runs out after quite a while.

-Millions of stupid side quests that have nothing to do with anything.
6. Somebody didn't pay attention at all during Origins. Even random side-quests carry more wait than most/all of the Origins quest. One of the better changes in DA2.

-Dull environment bereft of life and matter.
7. Again, somebody wasn't paying attention during Origins. The Deep Roads looked the same, the woods looked the same, and everything was brown.

-Inability to customize companions allowed you to skip designing different armor models.
8. You can upgrade them. Look around, they are there for those who look.

-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
9. At least the junk items are marked as such. In Origins, you picked up bad loot right and left, and carrying around Deathroot and Elfroot was a pain.
-Poor character development, so you hardly care about your companions by the end of the game. 
10. Talk to them. And explore.

-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
11. Out and out lie. Beat the game, there is at least one, not none.

-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC
12. Except for Awakening and Shale, all the other DLC for Origins was sub-par. Moot point.

-Generic UI showing a lack of creativitiy and effort.
13. They simplified it. Deal.

You obviously rushed through the game(or have yet to beat it), and much of your criticizism is unnessesisary if you took your time with the game. It has it flaws, but it is NOT bad.

 

U just totally got OWNED riloux!

  Omg some people just don't get it  riloux review  hit rite on.  There is no need to take ur  time with the game . at what point in the game does it get better. This games is severly lacking it don't matter if u do the quest or not  it's lacking but i see  people love idiotic games that have no plot and/or a real story 
this is to the people that let other think for them = You need more education just stop posting cuz it's clear u really have no clue.

Alrighty. Everyone is entitleted to their own opinions. What I am saying is that if you REALLY quest and play the game as it was ment to be played, i.e. complete every quest that comes your way, talk to all your companions frequently, switch around your party, and actually explore the world, most/all of the points the OP raised can be addressed. Also, not comming into the game expecting Origins 2.0 helps. Again, take your time with the game and you'll find Bioware really didn't do so bad of a job after all.

[Drew_Weidner]

I understand many of the complaints people have for DA2. However, the most effective way of expressing your dislike of certain aspects of the game is to handle it in a mature manner, rather than attack the people who worked on the game with insults and crude behavior. You can express your opinion (however hatefully you want) by at least being civil to a point. Most people don't respond well to being insulted about a project they were involved with over a long period of time.

On topic, I feel that the game was somewhat rushed, certain plot points feel under-developed, and a general sense that i was fairly uninvolved in many of the quests. I enjoyed many of the characters, but i feel the interaction of the characters amongst each other was done far better than their interactions with Hawke. The inventory management underwent an unnecessary make-over, and a few bugs (such as importing) really soured part of the experience for me.

I thoroughly enjoyed the game in it's own right, but i felt as a sequel it didn't move in the direction i had been hoping for.

[TehPear]

Sleek wrote...

I just came back from my sisters house ,her 12 year old , my nephew was playing DA2 and was loving the big boobs and chopping darkspawn into dust. I thought to myself , was this the age that the game is marketed too. WoW ! What going on with rpgs .

I betcha they'd enjoy  Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect. Doubleyouteeef is going on with RPGs indeed? Also, why is a 12 year old playing a game like DA2? :|

[Viper371]

Riloux wrote...
-Setting the whole game in one city.
-Collecting hundreds of-- literally, junk items-- to create the illusion of immersion and depth.
-Lack of any substantial choices that have lasting effects.
-Contrived ending, that tells you nothing, and leaves a huge gap for sub-par DLC

I agree with most of your points, save those I listed

I don't think it matters that much that it is set in one city only.  I would have preferred more than one locations, but I can live with that, it's not what makes the game boring imho.

The junk items, I really thought they would be of some use somewhere... I tend to agree with you if they really serve nothing.

There are choices however, with lasting consequences, I believe.  Taking your sister in the Deep Roads, i assume the Templars won't come for her later.  And a little things here & there.  It's hard to tell on one playthrough.

I haven't reached the ending yet, don't know if I will, so I can't tel!