168 réponses à ce sujet

[enrogae]

I'll have to disagree with you about Uncharted showing nothing special. I think the writing for those games is phenomenal. It's the biggest selling point of them, in my humble opinion. I also think they are more well-done than DA:2. I think the issue is that Bioware wants an Uncharted style of narration and action, but as you said (in different words)... that will never work in an RPG.

But I do agree... it's far too late for argumentation and debate. Rhetoric and opinion is all I have left, heh.

[Iron---Man]

Ive never really posted on Bioware forums, but for DA2 ill make an exception, because i really thought DA:O to be the ''spiritual successor to Baldurs Gate''. I even bought quite a few dlc packages. Sadly, i think Dragon Age 2 falls short. (playing on PC)

(Btw, i think theres a grand difference between someones feeling of enjoyment and an expert judging the works of others, but i digress)

When i played the demo, and later the full version, there were several things i did not like:

1) The speed of combat is fast in such a way, that the force of weapon blows dont have that '' oomph '' for me. For example, with Mighty Blow in DA:O, you saw the character wind up and put all his/her weight in the blow. Shield Bash was like a left handed back hand. First wind up towards the body, then swing off to the enemy. I -loved- Shield Bash. It really had a feeling of *wham*, In DA2, Shield Bash is merely a quick squat with the shield throwing someone back way too far than physically possible. I dont feel like there is a real '' force '' behind the blow, it doesnt feel natural.
(maybe we should have several variations on the Might Blow animation?)

2) The combat is also too fast for me to really enjoy the fights, and to see the bad guys or the good guys (me) on the verge of winning or losing the fight because a key player of one side goes down (say, a mage), and that side struggling to make up. The combat is too fast to enjoy this. (maybe a slider for speed of combat, so that everyone can enjoy their own pace?)

3) The mage combat animations are a yes and a no to me. I love that the mage now utilizes his staff in more ways than in DA:O and i like the close up combat with the sharp part of the staff, but i dont like the twisting and turning while s/he does it. Id get a backache in no time like that. It looks too '' sensational ''.

4) The Darkspawn all look the same, and they look more like undead than '' mutated '' dwarves,elves, and humans (according to DA:O lore). They also seem more mindless and like cannon fodder. Which to an extent they were in DA:O aswell, but to me, in DA:O the Darkspawn where more menacing and cunning than they are in DA2.

5) The respawning waves of enemies coming out of thin air isnt -that- bad. Sometimes i can imagine them jumping off ramps or building a bit higher up, and i can understand the engine not being able to render that whole animation. BUT, this spawning is done too frequently, too predictable, never introduced by a cutscene and in places where i cannot excuse it (ie places without elevated areas or with ceilings). Ive been a DM on persistent worlds, and spawning enemy NPCs out of thin air right in front of players is imo a big no-no and a huge immersion breaker. Youre really asking alot of players power of immersion when you do things like this.

6) I liked Flemeth more as an old hag in worn clothes like in DA:O. Why? Well, because it gave her an even bigger air of mystery. She looked so incredibly dead common, but we learn and see that shes much, much, much more than that. It makes people speculate about her. Like in Battlestar Galactica - is Starbuck a Cylon? (or Alma in F.E.A.R. - she looks so innocent, yet shes incredibly dangerous though the player rarely if ever really gets to see it personally which makes our own imagination work and i think that is a very powerful tool of a storywriter) With Flemeth in DA2, a part of that mystery vanishes as shes clearly made to look grand and more voluptuous, a change i certainly do not welcome (although much kudos to her voice actor whom many of us probably know from another series) and imo is a detriment to the character.

7) Indeed, spending most of the time in Kirkwall, it should have been imperative to have this experience have as much variety as possible. As another poster said, different seasons alone could make for many new ideas, quests and conversations.
There should have been more bustle, i think thats quite obvious to many.

8) One thing that really was apparent immediately, is the visual look of the ui et al. DA:O had these books, and bloodied letters, scrolls etc when you got a codex entry or a quest. It really gave the game atmosphere. DA2s visual ui just doesnt fit with the genre. The health and stamina/mana bars look more practical than aesthetical.

9) The re-use of areas has already been mentioned, so i wont go into that.

10) I really think the teleporting enemy mages is a shame, seeing as DA:O has lore that says that teleporting (as done by enemy mages in DA2) is not possible, short or long distance.

Mind you, i like the graphics, i like the spells, i think the companions are not that bad. The story is passable, and i do like the option of day or night selection. I can forgive quite alot in games, i certainly dont see myself as overly critical. But in the end, there are too many minor things that all come together and more or less make DA2 a less of a fun experience than DA:O was. In my humble opinion.

Modifié par Iron---Man, 14 mars 2011 - 09:04 .

[Axis Swordarm]

Jaduggar wrote...

Axis Swordarm wrote...

There's a slight disconnect there.

You've been trying to argue for the sake of arguement this entire thread.  I can understand it, you like the characters and you don't like someone saying that they're badly thought out and explaining it in a way that sounds like I'm disparaging people who enjoy said characters.

The thing is the reasons you mentioned for liking them are very bare reasons for enjoyment.  They should be better and Bioware should, with their claims of the best writing staff on the planet, be working every game to improve their presentation.  Dragon Age 2 showed that they're not bothered about that and that perhaps they shouldn't improve because some people are happy with what they get.

I don't believe that's a good way for things to go.

I've actually got a post at the top of this page that you have yet to respond to.
Don't try to make an argument on the side seem like the main one.

Also, a couple of notes:

-You never explained why the characters were bad. You used exaggerations to declare your nature towards it.
(Don't explain why the characters are bad. As of now, it's totally subjective as we don't have any layout of standards on which to base anything that could possibly resemble a rationale argument).
-"Best writing staff on the planet?" Why? Why do you seriously do this to me? You're showing off. I know what you mean, but you still want to show off. This isn't poetry. It's an argument.
-I'm only arguing because you are unclear. Once you clear your thoughts, I'll be out of your hair.

EDIT:
In fact, you're the one that had flat-out asked me for my opinion on the characters. Before that post, I never once declared my stance on anything

...You know what? It's 5:00 in the morning.
I'll just pick my order up cold.

I've already explained in great detail my point of view, and in gaming terms it really isn't as difficult to point out flaws as you believe with such a wealth of characters available for comparison.  Hawke is a character with no motivation and his actions are those of someone forced to do so not by any drive or ambition but pure plot.

His actions at the end of Act 1 are utterly lackluster and not character driven.  The scenes in Act 2 during a major family quest (you know the one) was so bad that I actually laughed.  Hawke is not a character with any personality, progression or goal.  Hawke just exists.

This makes him a bad character.

Isabella, is a pirate wench in a pub.   You go off and murder people with her, it's utterly random (and bizarre in context if you do her quest right after Anders) because you just met this woman in a bar and now you're in a church murdering people for her as she makes the worst double entendres this side of the Carry On films.  She's a bad character because she has more reason to just go than anyone else and have nothing to do with you.

She'll sit at the bar for 5 years rather than just get on a boat and go away which is the logical step for her.  I've seen people call her a strong female lead using her sexuality for empowerment, this just isn't true on any level.

Anders is the worst of the lot.  You start flirting in a hilariously awkward way the moment you meet, straight after his spiel about the pain within.  His actual character progression start to finish is nothing short of painful to watch because nothing he is doing makes sense for either him or the story he's been shoe horned into except as a plot device.

The Tranquil Solution was, above all else, the worst thing I've heard uttered in a game.

I am not showing off anything, this is just how I write and I'm being as clear as possible and you're being obtuse with each post.  Animations had nothing to do with my enjoyment of Uncharted, though they were fantastic.   This is specific to the writing of each character and their motivations, I showed you two videos that displayed writing from both on display to help you better understand that. 

Perhaps using Mass Effect would be easier.

EDIT:  Misused subjective in the first line

Modifié par Axis Swordarm, 14 mars 2011 - 09:22 .

[Jaduggar]

You know, I was sort of hoping you would pay a little bit of attention to my other post as well.

I said not to explain to me why you don’t think they are good or bad characters, and I said exactly why. There’s no workable argument here. Is motivation what makes a good character, then? Personality? I don’t know—sure? I mean, they are a least valuable to some degree; but we can’t argue these things without such undefined, unlisted, and un-operational definitions.

I could write a ten page document on why I think 90% of the characters in The Wire are bad, but if I hand it to random people on the street, no proper consensus would be created.

Now, if you would. Pay some attention to my post that I told you to pay attention to. That’s where our argument is.

Also, this is your daily reminder to stop using hyperboles.

[DownyTif]

I'm not really far in the game (well I hope not), and so far I must say I agree with the OP. I'm playing it because I bought it, not because I feel I need to play. The attracting effect is not there so far for me, I just hope it will appear. And I highly suspect the OP to be the reason.

Sandy2009 wrote...

DA2isBad wrote...

@Sandy2009 According to Mike Laidlaw in his post release DA2 defence interview yes, they expected the game to be recieved much better. He also went on to say he beileved all criticism was from... of all things... 4Chan. Google eurogamer to see the review. It's quite disturbing.

This more like a political defence. Mike is lead designer and probably finds it easier to blame the evil 4chan instead of placing the responsibilty where it belongs.Very few people are good at introspection.

I believe at least some people in company should have been able to predict the fans reaction. That's why they put out the demo (don't buy if you don't like the demo) .

Indeed. Laidlaw made a political appearance.

I agree with you there completely. But the demo was locked a lot (like inventory). Maybe I should have read a lot before, but when I found out that there was no 2nd weapon set, I was angry (because of my play style). When I found out there was a lot of copy-paste, I was angry. When I found... I could continue here. Demo gives a feeling and it's crafted to please as many people as possible, to sell more. And they succedded here hehe

[DownyTif]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Believe me when I say that we do look at many different threads in our community, and unlike some of the threads we've been reading, we don't automatically dismiss opinions and thoughts that disagree with ours. We are human, however, and we can only take so much "sensationalist hyperbole" with the criticism. Well presented thoughts and opinions like this thread and a few others I've been reading are a good way to present your likes and dislikes.

We believe many of the concerns are legitimate. We would prefer to hear them without the conspiracy theories, name-calling, insults, spam, and posturing. Thank you for presenting yourselves and your opinions well. We appreciate it.

EDIT: I would also prefer good threads to not be hijacked or sidetracked by internet memes and folks who think the posted forum rules do not apply. Again, thank you.

I'm really happy to see that you read and take into consideration all that is said (good and bad) except trash talking of course. You mentionned the thread I started some time ago as a good one (constructive) and thanks for that.

I will post a personal review (constructive), when I finish the game. Hope to have at least one Dev (or you) that will read it.

PS: the thread I talked about above, which kind of died now: 
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6430395

[Funkjoker]

Iron---Man wrote...

4) The Darkspawn all look the same, and they look more like undead than '' mutated '' dwarves,elves, and humans (according to DA:O lore). They also seem more mindless and like cannon fodder. Which to an extent they were in DA:O aswell, but to me, in DA:O the Darkspawn where more menacing and cunning than they are in DA2.

A few moments ago I saw the battle of ostagar scene. The darkspawn are 1000x times better, more scary etc. than the darkspawn-abominations you see in DA2.

Oh, your other points are also valid. BioWare, for DA3, give us: The Warden but in a DAO style. If you go on further with the DA2 style/story whatever, let the Warden rest in peace, as he shall only be used by masterpiece games like DAO.

Modifié par Jean-Funk Van Damme, 14 mars 2011 - 04:38 .

[Cajeb]

The beginning of the game was a big mistake. Thrusting us into a situation and just telling us, "This is your family," only to have one of them ...well yeah doesn't evoke an emotional response. It would have been much better to start off in the King's Army before fleeing the battle to Lothering to gather your family. Perhaps then there would be some emotional impact in the early game.

To contrast with this, when I played Dwarven Noble in DA:O, the events that happened in the beginning affected every decision I made from then on. The events gave me a shape to my character and motivations.

Even the beginning of Mass Effect had more impact. Why does a nothing grunt have more impact than your brother? Because ME didn't reach too far. DA2 introduced a huge event before we were even situated. By contrast, ME dealt with a grunt eager to go into his first battle. We felt some foreshadowing and could actually relate to him. He was a trope we've seen before. I wanted to warn him to be careful and when a random soldier dies, well that is exactly what happened in Shepherd's eyes as well. The character and the player have a 1:1 emotional connection with the NPC. In the case of Bethany or Carver Hawke cares about them a lot and we barely know them. The character and the player have a 100:1 disconnect and so it falls flat.

[locolazy]

Those fingers scared me too the first time I saw them. Must be all that magic coming out of them

[rezman]

Dragone Age 2 is the worst bioware game ever :-/. I miss the responding characters in the menu, i miss the book styl menu, i miss consequence's that affact me. This game has no soul :-(

[rezman]

DP

Modifié par rezman, 14 mars 2011 - 05:12 .

[Oliver Sudden]

Sandy2009 wrote...

If you think of this game as written by teenagers, designed by teenagers, programmed by teenagers for teenage audience, then everything makes sense. Obviously most people complaining in this forum are not the target audience. 

This is never more evident to me than then when I see posters confusing "mature" with "adolescent fantasy" when talking about sex.

[aknightofni]

OP did a very good job of explaining why I found this game lacking.

I never though I'd have to force myself to finish a Bioware game before, but half way through the third act I just couldn't bring myself to care.

The story felt flat, I had no motivation for what I was supposed to be doing, and even less for the hundredth "fetch" quest in my journal. "You are at point A, X is at point B, go bring me X. Also... several waves of people who for some reason decided they really do not like you are between A and B. Good luck."

The whole story felt like something that could have been explained in an intro movie to the next game... or a cutscene with Wynne explaining what was going on... or a codex entry... I don't feel like I needed to be there, or know what really happened, or experience it at all.

The characters this time round were unimpressive. Merrill was the only one I found interesting, but she was written to be borderline moronic. I get that she needed the power for her little personal quest, but every other time I run into it being used she automatically dislikes me for denying it. Even when she says she knows it was dangerous and only used it becuase she had no other option... then I'm supposed to act sympathetic when it bites her in the ass? Isabella made me want to hit her with my sword even before she starts talking in Act2... she had no reason to stay and I had no reason to want her there.

The dialogue from Origins was a perfect way to get to know the companions you are traveling with. They all had interesting stories, opinions, thoughts... you felt like you were getting to know them better and got the sense that they were evolving as you progressed. This was completely lacking in DA2. "We've talked like 3 times! Please come help me on my personal quest, you're the only person I trust!" - "um... will there be XP and loot?" - "Well... probably... but lots more of those stupid wave spawning faceless bandits too..." - "ughhh.... fine....". I practically sprinted to go do Leliana and Morrigans quests in DA:O... DA2 best I could mange was "next time we end up out that way".

Romance is same as above, but replace personal quest with "get my pants off".

I wasn't a fan of the combat either, it just got draining. There was nothing challenging outside of the sheer number of mobs you had to fight, and the neutered spell trees and cooldowns made it feel like I wasn't given enough tools for the job. After playing most of the way through Act3 on nightmare, I finally just gave up and turned it to Casual so I would actually finish the game. I felt no accomplishment whatsoever for playing with the difficulty high. When a pack of archers appears where my mage was standing and pincushions her, thats not a "Tactical Error" thats the game jerking you around.

To sum it up: OP is much better at saying what I'm trying to... and my favourite part of the whole game was a 3 second cut-scene after the ending, because it had a character I actually liked show up and name drop the warden. It was just enough to remind me what it felt like to be engaged in the game.

[Beerfish]

Re: Critiques of writing. You really have to take into account a few things in this regard. One, there are multiple writers on a project, thus the natural flow from character to character you may have with one writer is going to be a bit impeded no matter how hard they try. Two, the writers are very much constrained by high level game decisions and game design choices. They can't take things in the direction they want at times because of that. Three, it is very very tough to make characters as engaging as you would like as a writer because you are constrained by word counts and the physical process of the game.

One thing is for sure, writing in video games should never be compared to writing in books, they are entirely different. The best way to see this is to create a module with a toolset and see the difficulties you face.

Now people may or may not like how a game is written which is fine, choice and opinion is good but people also have to realize that the writers are like Qunari mages, chained and muzzled by certain aspects of game design.

[sophie22]

with response to original post
i liked the dialogue. i thought in alot of ways it was better than DAO. especially isabella. she was great with her comments with aveline.
i would have liked the convos you had with party members at set points to have been longer though. it was like a reward but just not a proper one!
i agree with the re use old backgrounds when you are setting a whole game around one city. it didnt bother me that much though, i liked teh stroy enough to not be over bothered by it. it just seemed a bit lazy

[Obro]

One of the things that bothered me is the lack of choice.We have YES,YES with a joke and YES with a threat.And sometimes it's even worse!

Like that one lady that asks us to get her child back.You tell her "if I find him I DECIDE do I kill him or do I hand him over" and then she proceeds telling use where to find him.
That's....just....nonsense.

[Venefica]

rezman wrote...
...
I miss the responding characters in the menu, i miss the book styl menu, i miss consequence's that affact me. This game has no soul :-(

I'm not that far into the game yet (just started Act 2), but so far I have to agree.

Sadly I'm not nearly as eloquent as many of you here and feel as if any response I'd make...well, quite frankly, has already been posted many times in much better ways than I could do myself.  Therefore I remain quiet and inside yell out "Yeah!  Same here!", and I feel that the developers probably can care less about fangirls no longer squeeing over their products as long as they have already received their cash in their pockets.

Anywaz, I've been a casual female gamer who's always loved rpgs...my top two favorites were Daggerfall and FF6 until I played DA:O.  I have to say it became my favorite. True rpgs have gone downhill and almost disappeared until DA:O.  It has a compelling story, characters you truly care about, and therefore it's easy to get lost in the emersion.  I am one who never finishes games (I can probably count on one hand how many) but in my first playthrough, I was so engrossed that I didn't sleep for two days in order to finish it.  I have -never- done that for any game.  And this from a casual gamer.   

I was worried when DA:A came out since it changed a few things.  Now I know change is good, don't get me wrong, but I also know that if something's not broke, don't fix it.  It seemed the game toned down the rp and made it more fragger-friendly.  The story wasn't as well defined, yet I did realize this was only an expansion and much shorter.  All in all it was ok, (tho minimizing the warden's decisions in the first game by not doing more with them in the expansion was extremely disappointing).

Now I'm finding with DA2 more of the same.  The characters' stories aren't nearly as in-depth as in Origins, they have no real reason they're with you, there is no romance (heart icons and pick-up lines don't make a romance, it makes for a one-night stand which would probably end with them never seeing each other again). 

The "world" feels stale and Hawke feels as if they're running around without any real purpose ("Oh, you need help?  Ok."  "Hey, what's that?  I guess I should hang onto it in case someone in town wants it."). 

To me, the battles feel they were specifically made to accomodate fraggers...fast action and lots of explosions.  Half the time I don't even know what's going on due to all the flips and body parts flying all over the place. 

There's no reason for the cut-and-paste levels.  I mean, Daggerfall had cut-and-paste dungeons, but it wasn't full levels...it was parts of one, parts of another, etc. and they had hundreds of dungeons (no exagerration).

There's tons of frag-fest games out there already.  Bioware should stay with what they're best at...rpgs.  God knows they're rare and believe it or not, there's a few people out there who miss them.  Plus DA:O was a game that many games have never really had before...a large female following.  This is a huge market Bioware could tap into that many other game companies would love to have.  Yes, there -are- female gamers out there and some of us would like to play games other than Sims or Farmville. 

I guess the bottom line is unlike in DA:O which kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time, DA2 is just....meh.  And if DA3 continues to go down this path, not only will I not be buying it but I won't be recommending it to my friends either. 

Modifié par Venefica, 14 mars 2011 - 06:47 .

[Impresario]

You know that a Bioware game has problems when you care less about the story/characters and the only thing that holds your interest is improving your build. I agree entirely w/ the OP.

The combat isn't the problem (IMO) it's the static bland re-used environments coupled with shallow characters/quest givers that feel more like templates/placeholders rather than intriguing elements in an engaging game-world.

First, there are too many indistinguishable quest-givers in the game, operating on a bland playing field. To care about these quests, one needs to be interested in the nexis between, the story, characters, quest-givers and game-world. Here, it just isn't happening and the result  is that it all winds up blending into a sea of sameness. That is a huge motivation killer because the quests are at the heart of the game.

Second, the main characters and subordinate characters lack suitable depth and come off more like templates than interesting parts of an intriguing whole. This problem occurs because not enough time is spent fleshing out these characters via more extensive dialogues and you're thrown right back into the action/quests before you even care about the characters or quest-givers. This contributes to the overall feeling of being alienated/uninvolved in the game-world or story. For example, the codex updates you about changes to the characters after Dark Roads yet the in-game feeling of change doesn't have adequate impact on the player.

For example in "Red Dead Redemption" when John Marston finally finishes his epic quest and comes home you really want him to enjoy his well deserved peace. You care about his wife and son. You've gotten to know these people and their land. You feel a sense of beng invested in his fate. I dont feel that way about Hawke or the land that he inhabits at all. The theme of templars vs mages isn't the problem-it's that I just don't care enough about any of these characters   to be invested in them. 

For example, in a low budget game like "Deadly Premonition" I came to know and care about York and Emily to a much greater degree than in this game. The townspeople in that game were so quirky, charming, unique and interesting. How is it that a game on such a limited budget can achieve that but this big budget title falls so short?

I don't know why such a disjointed and uninspiring approach was taken in this game but the net result is that the story and characters are forgettable. The action (IMO) is engaging but when it subsumes what Bioware is most famous for something has gone very wrong.                 

[EccentricSage]

DA2isBad wrote...

@Sandy2009 According to Mike Laidlaw in his post release DA2 defence interview yes, they expected the game to be recieved much better. He also went on to say he beileved all criticism was from... of all things... 4Chan. Google eurogamer to see the review. It's quite disturbing.

Aparently he missunderstands the motto 'we are all anonymous'. 

I go to 4chan.  That does not mean that 4chan decides how I view the world.  I hope he'll come to his senses and not just write off every Origins fan who doesn't buy DA2 (that would be me, from the looks of things) or any critic of DA2 as some how the shadowy work of the evil Anonymous, which would just be silly.  I mean really, talk about conspiracy theories.  He could send that one to Fox News.

Modifié par EccentricSage, 14 mars 2011 - 06:38 .

[RicAlmighty]

Jaduggar wrote...


I could write a ten page document on why I think 90% of the characters in The Wire are bad

Please please do this. I could use a laugh. If you honestly believe that, then you simply have no idea what good writing is, period. No wonder you're arguing this point, you clearly do not know any better!

[Axis Swordarm]

Jaduggar wrote...
I could write a ten page document on why I think 90% of the characters in The Wire are bad, but if I hand it to random people on the street, no proper consensus would be created.

Now, if you would. Pay some attention to my post that I told you to pay attention to. That’s where our argument is.
.

I'm afraid our discussion ended the moment you dropped this gem.  

[Meytiuy]

Personally, I didn't have much of a problem with the overall story, or even with the characters. I enjoy the limited time I have to talk with my companions, and the best writing in the game is probably the little snippets of conversation they have amongst each other on the field. But -dialogue-. Oh dear sweet lord, the dialogue.
DA:O's dialogue writing was superb. There was subtlety and depth to the interactions I had with nearly everyone in the world. The romances -blossomed-, slowly, from the things that were said and the events that we were forced to weather together.
Noooot so much DAII. In comparison to the other Bioware games I've played, the dialogue in this one felt like I got a sledgehammer to the face instead of a feather tickling the nose. The subtlety in decision-making is weak, making it difficult for me to even pin down -who- Hawke is in my mind. The romances feel incredibly shallow, what with the sexy-talk right from the moment you meet the companions. Where before, I would honestly feel myself gravitating towards one character or the other, this game all but -requires- you to choose who you're going to sleep with right from the get-go, making the experience that much less immersive and seamless.

I'm (mostly) enjoying the game, don't get me wrong. But when you have a franchise built on its interactions.... ball = dropped.

/writing two cents.