224 réponses à ce sujet

[SupR G]

derprimus wrote...

Hreterus wrote...


I think most people will still buy their games.
Even the ones that are saying that they won't now.
You bark alot... but rarely bite.

One can always download games. For free, for console and for pc. Especially one who was gravely dissapointed by certain product of certain video game developer.

Yeah, promoting piracy is a great way to contribute to this thread.

[SupR G]

BlackFriar wrote...

SupR G wrote...

blah, blah, blah....

In short, you're mad you wasted $50 on a second-tier game that is, by both professional and fan ratings, the worst game BioWare has ever made.  But, rather than man-up to the colossal disappoint vis the hype for this second-tier game, you made a vanity thread to tell us we're all wrong.

Here's the deal, BioWare has EIGHT games rated in the Top-20 of all CRPGs (GameSpot) released in the past 12 years.     This one doesn't even make the GameSpot Top-50 with an 8.0 rating (and 6.9 from the fans at GAMEFAQs and 7.2 from the fans at GameSpot).  Heck, this one isn't even as highly rated as many of the DLC and expansion packs.  

So deal with it.   It was a mistake.  It was a BAD mistake.  It was an OBVIOUS cash in and no matter how many Fanboi vanity threads you start, DA2 will remain the Spore of CPRGs.  Mkay?

I'm mad I wasted $50? Did you read a word of anything I said? I'm not mad at the game at all, I'm annoyed at the few dozen people on forums who feel they represent the entire fan and consumer base and go as far to demand free DLC and to have DA:3 made back into DA:Origins. I'm quite happy I bought the game and I am enjoying it. And if an 8.0-8.5 average rating makes it the "worst game Bioware has ever made", then you have truly high standards indeed.

[flipperwhipper]

SupR G wrote...

BlackFriar wrote...

SupR G wrote...

blah, blah, blah....

In short, you're mad you wasted $50 on a second-tier game that is, by both professional and fan ratings, the worst game BioWare has ever made.  But, rather than man-up to the colossal disappoint vis the hype for this second-tier game, you made a vanity thread to tell us we're all wrong.

Here's the deal, BioWare has EIGHT games rated in the Top-20 of all CRPGs (GameSpot) released in the past 12 years.     This one doesn't even make the GameSpot Top-50 with an 8.0 rating (and 6.9 from the fans at GAMEFAQs and 7.2 from the fans at GameSpot).  Heck, this one isn't even as highly rated as many of the DLC and expansion packs.  

So deal with it.   It was a mistake.  It was a BAD mistake.  It was an OBVIOUS cash in and no matter how many Fanboi vanity threads you start, DA2 will remain the Spore of CPRGs.  Mkay?

I'm mad I wasted $50? Did you read a word of anything I said? I'm not mad at the game at all, I'm annoyed at the few dozen people on forums who feel they represent the entire fan and consumer base and go as far to demand free DLC and to have DA:3 made back into DA:Origins. I'm quite happy I bought the game and I am enjoying it. And if an 8.0-8.5 average rating makes it the "worst game Bioware has ever made", then you have truly high standards indeed.

Um, I'm pretty sure that was his point - that they do have a high standard considering at Gamespot (a fairly conservative rater) DAO2 didn't break the Top 50 when they dominate nearly half of the Top 20 with their other titles.

I'm glad you're happy and all but I think you need to realize the intense irony of making a thread calling Origins a failure and DA2 a sucess, while simutaneously claiming that you're annoyed at people doing the same thing but with an opposite opinion.

[SupR G]

Cobrawar wrote...

If they wanted it to be just about hawke then why call it dragon age 2? Op is clueless. Streamlined is a BS marketing term, it means absolutely nothing. DA2 is a sub par game in almost every aspect to the original game. DA2 is an action adventure game not an rpg and people who like Da2 just like action adventure genre hack and slash more then rpg.

Okay well "Dragon Age" doesn't represent the Blight, Archdemon, Wardens, or any events that transpired in Origins. It is the Age in which the games take place. If you really played Origins, and paid attention, you would know exactly why the series is called Dragon Age. If anything it was properly named because if it had anything to do with Origins, it would have been called Dragon Age: Origins 2. Also, your definition of RPG is flawed. There are many types of RPGs, not just the ones that fit your likes.

[SupR G]

flipperwhipper wrote...

SupR G wrote...

BlackFriar wrote...

SupR G wrote...

blah, blah, blah....

In short, you're mad you wasted $50 on a second-tier game that is, by both professional and fan ratings, the worst game BioWare has ever made.  But, rather than man-up to the colossal disappoint vis the hype for this second-tier game, you made a vanity thread to tell us we're all wrong.

Here's the deal, BioWare has EIGHT games rated in the Top-20 of all CRPGs (GameSpot) released in the past 12 years.     This one doesn't even make the GameSpot Top-50 with an 8.0 rating (and 6.9 from the fans at GAMEFAQs and 7.2 from the fans at GameSpot).  Heck, this one isn't even as highly rated as many of the DLC and expansion packs.  

So deal with it.   It was a mistake.  It was a BAD mistake.  It was an OBVIOUS cash in and no matter how many Fanboi vanity threads you start, DA2 will remain the Spore of CPRGs.  Mkay?

I'm mad I wasted $50? Did you read a word of anything I said? I'm not mad at the game at all, I'm annoyed at the few dozen people on forums who feel they represent the entire fan and consumer base and go as far to demand free DLC and to have DA:3 made back into DA:Origins. I'm quite happy I bought the game and I am enjoying it. And if an 8.0-8.5 average rating makes it the "worst game Bioware has ever made", then you have truly high standards indeed.

Um, I'm pretty sure that was his point - that they do have a high standard considering at Gamespot (a fairly conservative rater) DAO2 didn't break the Top 50 when they dominate nearly half of the Top 20 with their other titles.

I'm glad you're happy and all but I think you need to realize the intense irony of making a thread calling Origins a failure and DA2 a sucess, while simutaneously claiming that you're annoyed at people doing the same thing but with an opposite opinion.

Maybe read my post, and not just the title. Then maybe you'll understand my point? No? Guess not. Read every other word and every other line and make a quick reply. That's how winners do it!

[flipperwhipper]

SupR G wrote...

flipperwhipper wrote...

SupR G wrote...

BlackFriar wrote...

SupR G wrote...

blah, blah, blah....

In short, you're mad you wasted $50 on a second-tier game that is, by both professional and fan ratings, the worst game BioWare has ever made.  But, rather than man-up to the colossal disappoint vis the hype for this second-tier game, you made a vanity thread to tell us we're all wrong.

Here's the deal, BioWare has EIGHT games rated in the Top-20 of all CRPGs (GameSpot) released in the past 12 years.     This one doesn't even make the GameSpot Top-50 with an 8.0 rating (and 6.9 from the fans at GAMEFAQs and 7.2 from the fans at GameSpot).  Heck, this one isn't even as highly rated as many of the DLC and expansion packs.  

So deal with it.   It was a mistake.  It was a BAD mistake.  It was an OBVIOUS cash in and no matter how many Fanboi vanity threads you start, DA2 will remain the Spore of CPRGs.  Mkay?

I'm mad I wasted $50? Did you read a word of anything I said? I'm not mad at the game at all, I'm annoyed at the few dozen people on forums who feel they represent the entire fan and consumer base and go as far to demand free DLC and to have DA:3 made back into DA:Origins. I'm quite happy I bought the game and I am enjoying it. And if an 8.0-8.5 average rating makes it the "worst game Bioware has ever made", then you have truly high standards indeed.

Um, I'm pretty sure that was his point - that they do have a high standard considering at Gamespot (a fairly conservative rater) DAO2 didn't break the Top 50 when they dominate nearly half of the Top 20 with their other titles.

I'm glad you're happy and all but I think you need to realize the intense irony of making a thread calling Origins a failure and DA2 a sucess, while simutaneously claiming that you're annoyed at people doing the same thing but with an opposite opinion.

Maybe read my post, and not just the title. Then maybe you'll understand my point? No? Guess not. Read every other word and every other line and make a quick reply. That's how winners do it!

Nah, winners make excuses and snarky replies when they can't think of a reasonable one.

Cheers 

[SupR G]

flipperwhipper wrote...

SupR G wrote...

flipperwhipper wrote...

SupR G wrote...

BlackFriar wrote...

SupR G wrote...

blah, blah, blah....

In short, you're mad you wasted $50 on a second-tier game that is, by both professional and fan ratings, the worst game BioWare has ever made.  But, rather than man-up to the colossal disappoint vis the hype for this second-tier game, you made a vanity thread to tell us we're all wrong.

Here's the deal, BioWare has EIGHT games rated in the Top-20 of all CRPGs (GameSpot) released in the past 12 years.     This one doesn't even make the GameSpot Top-50 with an 8.0 rating (and 6.9 from the fans at GAMEFAQs and 7.2 from the fans at GameSpot).  Heck, this one isn't even as highly rated as many of the DLC and expansion packs.  

So deal with it.   It was a mistake.  It was a BAD mistake.  It was an OBVIOUS cash in and no matter how many Fanboi vanity threads you start, DA2 will remain the Spore of CPRGs.  Mkay?

I'm mad I wasted $50? Did you read a word of anything I said? I'm not mad at the game at all, I'm annoyed at the few dozen people on forums who feel they represent the entire fan and consumer base and go as far to demand free DLC and to have DA:3 made back into DA:Origins. I'm quite happy I bought the game and I am enjoying it. And if an 8.0-8.5 average rating makes it the "worst game Bioware has ever made", then you have truly high standards indeed.

Um, I'm pretty sure that was his point - that they do have a high standard considering at Gamespot (a fairly conservative rater) DAO2 didn't break the Top 50 when they dominate nearly half of the Top 20 with their other titles.

I'm glad you're happy and all but I think you need to realize the intense irony of making a thread calling Origins a failure and DA2 a sucess, while simutaneously claiming that you're annoyed at people doing the same thing but with an opposite opinion.

Maybe read my post, and not just the title. Then maybe you'll understand my point? No? Guess not. Read every other word and every other line and make a quick reply. That's how winners do it!

Nah, winners make excuses and snarky replies when they can't think of a reasonable one.

Cheers 

Congrats on being a hypocrite?

[ftg]

SupR G wrote...

If anything it was properly named because if it had anything to do with Origins, it would have been called Dragon Age: Origins 2.

As asked before on another thread, where's Dragon Age 1 then?

[derprimus]

SupR G wrote...

Yeah, promoting piracy is a great way to contribute to this thread.

I'm sorry, great one, i saw few people who can troll as awesome as you do, and i'm definetely not one of them. If it will please you, i will depart from this thread. I just wanted to point out that there are other options for dissapointed gamers except angry rants and if bioware will loose its customers trust, these options will become somewhat more popular.

[CroGamer002]

Finally some threads being positive about DA2.

[bEVEsthda]

SupR G wrote...

It's pretty common for gamers to so easily and aggressively turn against a popular developer when something doesn't go their way. You might call them names, hell I can think of a few, but really what's the point. Lemmings come and go.

Honestly, Dragon Age 2 is no innovation, it's really just implementing many of the streamlining changes that Mass Effect 2 improved on it's predecessor. So we can hardly call it revolutionary. But is it an improvement on DA:O? Absolutely. DA:O had a great story, almost too great, and barely left any room at all for a proper sequel. At least Mass Effect was written to be a trilogy.

A story doesn't need to end with the slaying of an Archdemon to be great. Dragon Age 2 isn't about saving the world, it's about Hawke and the events that surrounded his rise to become the Champion. Bioware has spoiled you QQbears into believing the only good story is one that involves some seemingly unstoppable supervillain, and now you can't settle for anything less.

So story aside, Dragon Age 2 redesigned Thedas with far more imagination then it's predecessor. Qunari and Elves have a defined look, Flemeth looks spectacular, armor and clothing looks amazing and more detailed. Companions feels like actual people instead of tools for Hawke to use. They have their own unique armors and you can't force them to be something outside their character. For example, making Wynne into a Blood Mage Arcane Warrior with plate armor in DA:O. It made no sense. Complain about freedom of control all you want, but then don't complain the character's don't add up. You can't have it both ways.

As for stats imbalance, just wait for a patch will you?

The simple fact of the matter here is, there is very little wrong with DA:2. It is a worthy successor, and fixes many of the issues DA:O had. Cherry picking little problems and annoyances, stating obvious changes you knew about for months, and then claiming all the fans hate DA:2 and that it failed is a great way to sound like an ignorant lemming. And before you continue your senseless ranting, keep in mind if they had made DA:O Part 2, there would be just as many, if not more people QQing.

Changes were made. Many, many of us love them. Deal with it and move on. DA:O is over and done with.

Edit: Yeah, I edited.

Is this sarcasm?
Unlike some hilarious other posts I've read on the forum, I kinda doubt it is.
If it isn't, I can't respond to this   ...if it is, then it's too subtle for me.

[Francofone]

ftg wrote...

SupR G wrote...

If anything it was properly named because if it had anything to do with Origins, it would have been called Dragon Age: Origins 2.

As asked before on another thread, where's Dragon Age 1 then?

Swish!

[Nathan Redgrave]

SupR G wrote...

Honestly, Dragon Age 2 is no innovation, it's really just implementing many of the streamlining changes that Mass Effect 2 improved on it's predecessor.

On this point, I do want to say something:

I don't really view the specific changes Mass Effect 2 made in the way of "streamlining" as improvements, more as omissions. Mass Effect 1's RPG elements and sidequests were very, very badly executed, but had good ideas behind them. It would have been more effective if, say, ME2's weapons remained as they are, but you were given the option to attach custom parts in much the same way as ME1, only with ONE kind of every item instead of ten. The armor pieces you could equip also showed promise, but there were too few and their effects were too insignificant. The towns, also, were simply mini-malls. Actual town sections with substance would have been preferable. Not to say what was there wasn't worth having, there just wasn't quite enough.

Dragon Age: Origins, on the other hand, handled its RPG elements quite well, and despite some streamlining elements in DA2, the sequel actually does a fair bit to expand on that aspect. Comparing to ME2, which had very little town interaction, DA2 is a horse of a different color--the town practically is one REALLY BIG town section, for good or ill. It maintains the same sort of inventory and stats/abilities system Origins had, albeit it's simplified in certain regards. It's not always an improvement, but it's not as far off from the original as ME2 was from ME1. This fits fairly well, as Origins did what it did better than ME1 did what ME1 did.

Not a one of the Mass Effect or Dragon Age games is without notable fault. Dragon Age 2 does some things better than Origins, admittedly, but Dragon Age: Origins does some other things better than Dragon Age 2. Arguing over which one succeeded and which one failed is kind of pointless, since it has more to do with which one succeeded in whichever aspects you personally find more important in a game. That goes for Mass Effect as well as Dragon Age (although I would argue that Mass Effect 1 has more problems than most of its proponents give it "credit" for).

Modifié par Nathan Redgrave, 15 mars 2011 - 08:49 .

[Aesieru]

This thread craves attention, and it gets it...

Sigh.

[Gvaz]

Dragon age 2 is a few steps back, with some interesting good things.

If bioware follows suit with what they usually do, they'll throw out the good things from both DA2 and DA:O and try to put all that together into a mess of goo.

Seriously, just make a DA:O-2, with DA2's combat. THATS IT. I'LL BUY A HUNDRED COPIES

Modifié par GvazElite, 15 mars 2011 - 08:53 .

[Rafe34]

I liked the twitch combat in DA2 better than DAO: personal opinion, of course. It was far too easy, however. That was about the only thing better in 2 than in 1. DAO is so much a better game than DA2 that I honestly fail to see how anyone could say otherwise. Normally I can see both sides of the view- but unless someone just loves twitch combat to death...

The story in DA2 fails, it comes down to one, predefined ending, whereas Origins had... geez, like a dozen endings. 3 main ones, (Warden is dead, Warden is commander of the grey, Warden is ruler of Ferelden), with several spins off of each that you could see would really affect any future adventures in Ferelden.

I liked the companions in DA2, not better than the ones in Origins, for the most part, but they were made fine. The only flaw there was the lack of conversations unless they had something for me to do.

Huge recycling of maps, not even an attempt to disguise it as a different map, just flat out recycled it. The way the mobs spawn in battles is just stupid, I can't set up a tactical strategy when mobs spawn randomly in waves. If I drop everything on wave 2, there might be a wave 3, and then I'm screwed. It's just stupid. They drop out of the sky in the middle of a huge flat area, somehow managing to get that close without being seen. Spirit Healer is just too ridiculously powerful. I cannot die or be knocked down with Force Mage as well. (This may have something to do with the fact that I somehow have all 3 specialization points in mage.)

There is continued disconnect, as there was with Origins, with the main character using Blood Magic and simultaneously having everyone tell Merrill its a bad thing, while ignoring the fact that the PC uses it in nearly every battle. They could have fixed that, at least.

DA2 is a rush job. It's a "good" game, yes, with many, many flaws. It is not up to Bioware's normal standards for its cRPGs.

Modifié par Rafe34, 15 mars 2011 - 09:03 .

[Gvaz]

I really don't have the energy to explain this over and over but for me:

DA2 is filled with nice things, some of them being an improvement over the first game (such as the combat) but almost everything else is filled with issues.

Bugs (merill's quests locking or appearing out of order, cutscenes repeating themselves, leaving an area sometimes pops open the LEAVE? popup again on load or before load, memory leaks, not importing characters properly, tooltip errorts like Bianca's multishot thing), horrible mechanics that make sense on the consoles (spawning enemies to get around the memory limitations of the consoles, no auto attack but with long cooldown abilities to try and make the combat more interactive), some things that reek of "well we don't have much dev time so lets cut some things people wont care about" only to find out those aspects we LOVED or they were just areas that needed more attention, (equipping party members with items, being able to interact anywhere instead of being stuck to a specific area to interact with them, loading screens, intentional cinematic close ups of things with low textures, even more railroaded levels than before, characters are less likable or ruined those that used to be (anders for example), etc etc)

The point I guess I'm trying to make is that I loved DA:O and I played it for the PC. This isn't about dumbing down per se, but rather trying to appeal to a crowd that wouldn't have been interested in DA:O to begin with, while still trying to appeal to the original fans. You certainly accomplished something, you ticked off the fans who wanted DA:O-2 with better combat, and the people who wouldn't have played your game anyways or thought it was poor on the console, think it's better now or aren't even satisfied with the product you came up with.

While DA2 is not a bad game, it has a lot of charm and potential, but it fails to meet anything. The things that hurt it the most without going into lots of detail would be:

- The story. It's horribly disjointed and flimsy, and I'm constantly going "who is this again?" for any of the numerous side quest characters. At least the developers know this because in the game itself they have a guy making fun of it.
- the sidequests. People complained they were too long, so you made tons of 5-30 minute quests. talk about polar opposites.
- Certain combat mechanics make it tedious, and less tactical than the first game, especially when you have mobs spawn randomly in and then target the closest thing, your mage, in seconds.
- can't equip or customize your party members
- animations
- suffers from ME1->ME2 save import where nothing you do really matters, except for one quest like Nathanial or Conrad (which isn't even fixed after all this time iirc)
- the conversation wheel. First: it's not paraphrased properly, what's said only relates in a general sense. The tone icons don't help, and frankly I never had a problem with finding out what kind of response I was going to say in DA:O. What, you're telling me that this statement that ends in a question mark, that has a tone ? means the statement is a question? Holy moley thank you bioware I would have never have guessed because I lack first grade reading comprehension.
- voice acting. At times it was really bad. The inflections were sometimes wrong. Both male and female hawke were rather lame.
- theres only like 20 maps in the whole game. Come on, entering the same dungeon is BORING and repetitive. Much like all the fedex quests and five minute sidequests you have to slog through + the loading screens for tiny maps. UGH.

things that were good without going into too much detail:

- combat. However, it didn't actually fix the shuffling, but instead sped it up so they wont spend much time shuffling because everyone moves at lightspeed.
- the abilities
- the graphics, were better but still had muddy textures. The high res ones are required and don't hinder performance too much even on 512MB cards. Otherwise it looks awful. I still think the art style is overall awful but has a few shining moments that only barely drag it above the bad parts. You can tell they did pretty good work on some parts, and just totally slacked off on others. Oh well, at least it doesn't have a filter on everything like DA:O. Speaking of which, why is King Allistair's armor literally imported from DA:O? It's not even high res or anything, it looks like crap
- NPC conversations are actually entertaining. I personally don't approve of a voiced main character, but even with his rather bland expressions and voiced lines, it makes it feel more cinematic than anything really.

If i had to give it a number having played both games, I'd be inclined to give DA:O a 8.5/10, and DA2 a 6/10.

Modifié par GvazElite, 15 mars 2011 - 09:41 .

[astreqwerty]

made my day op honestly

[Docjam]

Honestly, honestly, honestly, I just do not get the accusations of "hack and slash" combat. It feels almost identical to Dragon Age: Origins, pause, micromanage, and play combat, with the only differences being cross class combos, which were a POSITIVE addition to the combat, and reduced cooldown time on skills so you weren't just standing there autoattacking all the time, but 10-20s cooldowns are still enough that you can't just button mash them.

I don't defend most of what was in Dragon Age II, I found it to be a very disappointing game and I'm glad I borrowed a friend's copy before committing to buying it, but the combat I thought was one of the only improvements made.

What killed the game for me was sub par graphics (this is DX11, yet it looks cell shaded because the textures are so bad and stiff), a story that just doesn't grip you and compel you to finish (you just lose interest in it because it's NOT a doomsday event you're racing against, I almost didn't finish it and was considering dropping it for another playthrough of either origins or Mass Effect 2), and dialogue writing that just fell flat as often as it succeeded.

Then there were minor things like Anders being the only possible healer unless you made a mage and then were a healer yourself (and to use spirit healer skills you had to give up the ability to use offensive spells, very boring, only combat related complaint I have), both the warriors in the game being mage haters, so you constantly lost friendship with them.and having a balanced party that actually got along with each other and agreed on things was nearly impossible. I personally didn't like Anders, but had to keep him just for healing.

But the absolute main thing that killed Dragon Age II for me.. was that the game's conclusion was not an end, but a beginning, a setup for more DLC. The game was very short for an RPG, and they are charging you more money for less game, with plans to milk fans for even more money. I understand it's a business and they're trying to turn a profit, but within reason guys, within reason.

[JaegerBane]

SupR G wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

... For one thing, stated one has been designed with more imagination is a little difficult to justify. What do you think needed the more imagination - the design of an epic quest into the bowls of the earth to find what happened to a huge dwarven expedition, or the fact that the qunari have all sprouted horns? Setting the entirety of the game in a city that is about as distinct as slice of bread isn't an example of 'imagination', it's an example of overlooking what made the first game great.

... A lot of what people enjoyed about the first game was modified and changed for apparently no other reason than the developers felt like doing it. To assume that everyone will be perfectly accepting of such major changes is foolish at best and downright idiotic at worst.

Well argued. Though you might want to know that DA:2 had a different Lead Designer then DA:O. In fact, the DA:O Lead decided to quit because he didn't like some of the gameplay changes made to DA:2. Sounds noble, but really it's a little brash to quit on a series because it's not exactly what you want. It's also very unprofessional. He could have found something to like and designed it in a way he preferred. I hope he finds work somewhere.

Thank you. Without wanting to sound overly harsh to Mr Knowles however, I don't think it's really the concern of the fans if the lead designer quit. That isn't an explanation for why so much stuff was changed for the sake of it. One man do not maketh the game, as demonstrated by Romero/Daikatana and Roper/Hellgate: London fiascos.

And it's irrelevant anyway, as according to his blog he didn't like how the game was heading in the 'Mass Effect' direction. Regardless of his reasonings, I actually preferred the move to Mass Effect territory - as I mentioned initially, my problem is to do with the relatively lower impact story and characters, neither of which are hallmarks of the MAss Effect series. So it's likely his departure had nothing to do with the issues I have with DA2.

This shows, very profoundly, in DA:2. Flemeth didn't inhabit a new body, she was redesigned. Almost everything was, from face and body models to armor, clothing and weapons. Qunari have also always been horned, Sten was simply "hornless"... but really, what was Sten? He was just a bigger human-looking species in the end. Where was the imagination there?

This is what I was getting at previously. Regardless of your feelings about the design of the qunari in DA:O, simply sticking horns on them doesn't exactly require a feat of imagination on the part of the developers, so I'm not sure what your point is.

Personally I found the addition of the horns to be one of the more pointless and goofy changes they made in development - akin to the whole klingon situation in Star Trek but without the excuse that the makers didn't have enough money to make a proper design in the beginning. I kinda wish the developers spent less time indulging in pointless rubbish like this and spent more time making sure the actual important parts of the game - like the story - worked properly. Same goes for the needless redesign of the Darkspawn.

Of course I agree that more settings were needed. The game does have flaws, but does that make it a horrible game? No. Does it mean we're all entitled to free DLC and to have DA:3 remade into what Origins was? No. The game was rushed... and let it be known I have NO love for EA (their fault) and the duopoly that EA and Activision have over game publishing is absurd.

Right. It isn't a horrible game. The issue the forums have is that games are all or nothing - they're either the best things to have ever been developed in the history of the human species or they're horrific examples of how Bioware have all sold their souls to demons/satan/facists/Weyland-Yutani Industries (delete as applicable). There's not enough granularity on the forum to describe DA2 as it is -  a very good but ultimately flawed RPG.

That doesn't, however, function as reasoning for why DA:O 'failed'.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 16 mars 2011 - 04:01 .

[Johnson45]

DA2 is a good game, but not as good as Origins imo. And DA:O did not "fail" in any sense of the word.

DA2 did a lot of things right, with the improved combat, use of framed narrative and companions interactions with each other, but it also has as many if not more problems as Origins did.

[Tripedius]

Again someone who thinks his opinion should be everyones opinion. So your a kid, you shouldnt be playing this game in the first place as it is 18+. I really don't care if you liked it or think it's GOOD (dead give away your a kid) cause I don't. Also your reasoning fails (again dead give away) knowing what changes are ma'de months in advance don't make it good changes some months later. The game is a consolegame and thus destroyed many of the things that we're good on the PC. That you might think the twilight series is good and awesome doesn't actually make it good movies. Same goes for this, DA2 is the twilight (or transformers 2) of the gaming industry. But kids will be kids.

[E_O]

SupR G wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

SupR G wrote...

Gaius Octavian wrote...

SupR G is either a sub-par intellectual or a troll.

Obvious troll is obvious.

Please stop using terms incorrectly, your first post was flame-bait and opinions which is fine (not the bait), but this one is just immature, and using the term "troll" incorrectly, which is not just a term to identify anyone who disagrees with you or calls you out for what they think you are.

Humm, do you not know what a Troll is? Off topic, inflammatory responses that offer nothing to a topic is trolling. I created an argument with points. That isn't being a troll. Maybe if he followed insults with an argument... oh wait, nope. He didn't.

No, that isn't being a troll. Trolling is doing or saying something specifically to incite a emotional response. Plain and simple. Someone being a d*** to you is not "trolling".


In addition, you actually didn't have any valid arguements in your OP. You want to back up your opinions with facts, not... more opinions.

[Saerin]

Dragon Age 2 is a good game. Dragon Age Origins was an amazing game. Really. how could anyone expect DA2 to be better than Origins? Accept their differences and you can enjoy both games.

[MonkeyLungs]

iinfinity wrote...

WhiteThunder wrote...

I prefer an empty forest to an empty city, but again, that's just me

fair enough, but you cant tell me denerim was any better can you?

Denerim was horribly designed. If Kirkwall isn't orders of magnitude more 'city-like' then there is a severe problem.