2797 réponses à ce sujet

[nicethugbert]

I don't like BG very much. I find it clunky through and through. In so far as DAO reminds me of BG, I don't like it, otherwise I do. I'm mostly an NWN2 player on hiatus from it. NWN2 is also clunky. But, it's saving grace is that it has a Toolset with plugins and Persistent World Multi-player. So, people can mod the game to get rid of some of the clunkiness if they want. If NWN2 had DA2's fast attack and response speeds, I wouldn't have bothered with DA2, or a lot of other games.


In some ways the game is superlative, in other average, in others worse. To me DA2 is about three things: combat, cinematics, story. They are not perfect, but, largely very good.

DA2 did something right that is critical to my enjoyment of the game, fast response, attack, and closing speeds and combat acrobatics. Without that, I would find the game average at best in a crowded field. With it, it stands out as a positive playing experience that I can point to as an example. DAO is a good game too. But, it's slow and clunky. Considering how much combat there is in DAO, it's a constant stream of slow and clunky thereby annoying me all the way through.

The voiced protagonist is also a big plus  Cinematics without it is half baked. DAO feels dead without it.

Cinematics adds a lot to the game and it's done well. I strongly prefer the cinematic story telling style over the old fashioned rap sheet style of story telling ala BG.

The dialog wheel with implied instead of actual dialog is better for me than having everything spelled out and goes great with the cinematics.

Things that detract from the game are repeated use of the same lairs, Mage Hawke's maginess ignored, and the barrage of quests.

New quests should roll out as you complete old ones at a managable rate. Having a laundry list of chores to do detracts from the immediacy of the story. Everybody's problems needed solving yesterday. Being able to do all sorts of things in the middle of a mission breaks that sense of immediacy thereby breaking immersion. I'm not saying that you should have one and only one quest to do in your journal at all times. But, the visible pending quest queue should be limited to something managable that doesn't interfere with the sense of immediacy. This can probably get a quest visible queue size option. You know people will disagree about everything, therefore options are crucial.

I don't miss clunk like inventory tetris, irrelevant classes, and broad deep skill and talent trees full of trivial and useless selections, etc. That has it's place in a game with a toolset where the player can manage that as he wishes and make his own adventures. But, in a game where you cannot make your own adventures then focus on the core of the game is important. Do it right, or don't do it at all.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 08 juillet 2011 - 03:30 .

[Hayllee]

Alright. I feel like I have to do this, considering how much I loved Dragon Age Origins. I would first like to give my demographic, which BioWare is keen on expanding. I am a teenager, and a girl. Many of my gripes are story based rather than graphically. I've played DA with the DLC and expansion, DA2, ME, and ME2. All of them I was at least above pleased with except for DA2, which was average. I also use a quest that happens in Act 2 as an example in a few things, so if you're a fellow player and haven't reached that part yet, don't read this.

Pros:

- PC combat animations for mages. The combat was reletively the same on the PC, and I felt the combat wasn't as slow. More on combat in gripes section.
- Unique companion clothing. I feel that they should have more options considering the game spans about 9 years with them, but it's nice to have a set look for each one. Perhaps allowing you to change the outfits along with giving them their unique armor (like Morrigan in DA) would solve a lot of people's gripes.
- Camera angles and a more alive Player Character. There are issues with the dialogue wheel, but a voiced PC that is not constantly staring at the person they're talking to like they're about to suffer a heart attack was a step in the right direction.
- Addition of family. Anyone in future games that is with you until the end (well, sort of) is a good addition. I personally felt extremely protective over Bethany. More interaction with them would have been nice, but more interaction with everyone would have been nice.

Cons:
- Reused areas. There is seriously no other excuse than "We rushed the game and didn't have enough time". It's not artistic. Nothing is off limits to be reused, including the player's first home. *spoiler* Your mother has a particularly bad experience in a typical loot dungeon with a painting. *end* There aren't even that many areas, and perhaps the worst part is the "maybe they won't notice" aspect of it all: Starting you in different parts of the area. We're intelligent, we can tell.
- 3- personality dialogue. We have a choice between kind, diplomatic, slightly annoying Hawke, LAWLZ Hawke, and **** you Hawke. The icons giving you the intention of the dialogue was more annoying than helpful in that it gave no hard thought on what to say. Mass Effect has a better dialogue system and this game was accused of being too set on one personality of Shep. The personality of Hawke is extremely limited, and so are her his/her actions. For instance, the quest involving your mother. You have the option to calm her, crack a sad joke, or tell her to STFU. You cannot, say, break down in tears telling her not to leave you. You could do this with Origins' dialogue system and with a little tweaking can do this with the dialogue wheel. It's okay to simply be more descriptive on the wheel and add more options than what you can fit on the right side.
- Stretching a little dialogue for companions over 9 years. This was the thing that bugged me the most. I expect this in Mass Effect, not Dragon Age. In 9 years, you speak with your companions about 5 times each, maybe 7 if you romance them. You have to wait until the game tells you you're aloud to speak with them, which I imagine is a safeguard so we don't run out of dialogue. People truly care about talking to their followers. If your new target audience does not, they don't have to.
- Romance. Clicking a heart <3 does not give me the same fuzzy feeling as flirting with followers in Origins. Once you click this heart about five times, you have fade-to-black sex and then you're done with them. In Mass Effect this was okay. Dragon Age has more of a story focus (or was supposed to, anyway) so it's not okay.
- Kirkwall. I don't give a crap what happens to those people. Why? I don't know. Many people don't. I know this sounds extremely rude of me, and I don't mean it that way, but the writers need to figure out what happend. There's a certain "alive" feeling that is lacking in the game. Considering this is apparently the only place you had time to work on, it should have at least had better quality.
- Combat. Okay, except for the comically exploding enemies that fall from the sky and the fact that I cannot see my Hawke move her arm from one area to the next. The only combat animations done well were the mages. The warriors felt sort of clunky-but-quick and rogues moved like they were on drugs and coffee.

As many "cons" as I put, I still feel that Dragon Age 2 was a good game. It simply didn't give the same feel as Origins did. Overall, I've been slightly dissapointed in the "You just can't handle the epicness of this awesome game" attitude towards improvement. The people who bought and played Origins first are why you were given the opportunity to make DA2, and should be treated with at least the same respect they give you (not including some who can't properly articulate their nerd rage). Just remember that you don't have to rush. It only took BioWare a year and a half to make the game, only around twice as much as it took you to make Awakening. There's somethig wrong there. We would be happy if we got a promise to be heard, that's all it takes. I'm looking forward to the new DLC, and DA3. I trust that you all will listen to feedback. Remember, we're not going to lose interest if it takes 2 or 3 years to make a quality sequel.

Didn't mean to type that much.

Modifié par Hayllee, 09 juillet 2011 - 01:14 .

[jmadsen]

late to the party but here it goes

pros:

a protagonist that talks.
your family. (carver was really good as a sibling)
the new style.
better graphics.
the new companions. (varric anybody)
the combat.

cons:
the recyled maps
only being in kirkwall (most of the time anyway)
that both orision and merrith turned insane (dont know why but i didn't like it)



things i hope to see in a coming dragon age titel.

a dragon as a pet.
special weapons or items (dragon age 2 didn't have alot of these)
more consequences when you become a bloodmage (much needed in Dragon age 2)
a qunari as a follower.
getting a child with a romanced follower. (this would be more than awesome)

after 4 playthrouges of dragon age 2 i can say its a good game and yes i plan to play it many more times.

overall
dragon age origins was 18/20 (for me anyway)
dragon age 2 is a 16/20 (once again my opinion)

[Silenzeone]

PLEASE READ: I love DAO bought all the DLC but for Dragon Age 2 I cant even finish the game because its so disappointing and I gave it a chance over and over, I even put it on easy to blow through it.People say the new combat system is good or bad but to me its boring and bad. Tanking is worthless and you have to have Anders in your group if you put it on nightmare because he the only one with aoe heals etc.The unrealistic super fast marvel vs capcom combat for melee is not good at all but I love the mage spell animation and range(Varric).I will buy DAO 3 but I hope its something way better than 2 but anyway here are my pros and cons

Pros:
- Graphics

Cons:
- Reused Maps
- Companions not being able to wear armor HAWKE Is a greeting armor hoarder
- Darkswanp are crappy looking, remind me of lvl 1 undead on World of Warcraft
- Companions story I didn't really care for like DAO, miss campfire could of put everyone in a inn
- Exploding bodies WTF? Want real finishing moves like the first one
- Tanking sucks
- Healing cooldown
- I dont believe hawke when he is mad booo at his voice
- So so many waves of non stop enemies, I miss DAO when I use to see them on my mini map far away with the survival talent
- I miss traveling BioWare and every area in DAO made me feel there, for DAO2 I felt like when I went to the mountains I just took a step in Kirkwall backyard

Im pretty sure bioware got all there need from the 103 pages of criticism but if you want to keep the fans please listen, they will come and stay if you do.If not I think everyone going to flock to LOTR War of the North. I'm not talking crap just being honest. I never go on forums or but I love and care for dragon age so much I just had to let you all know.

[Sinuphro]

i know that i'm responding late to this but i must get these thought off my chest. When I bought dragon age ultimate edition; it was the first time i got introduced to ea and bioware games. i mainly thought of bioware and ea as sport game makers and shooting games but dragon age blew my mind away. it was the best rpg game I have ever played since xenogears, ffvii, and ffviii. In short, I still have the copy I bought; I was so impressed with it that I would never trade it. The price for the first dragon age game that came on the consoles should never go down. Ultimately, I believe all rpg makers should strive to follow these standards. Sorry for drifting off topic.
Anyways, the game was so good that I had played it up to 13 times trying different scenarios and picking the right race, gender and story line that I hoped to transfer to dragon age 2; but this is where the problems start arising.....
First off all, dragon age 2 is race and story locked! What the heck? Then 2 potentially good characters get killed off at the beginning...that pissed me off alot. If that was not bad enough; the changing of scenarios which made dragon age origins the best rpg game got removed and then we got stuck in kirkwall all through out the game. What about our grey wardens in dragon age origins? What about the grey warden that uses blood magic in grey warden's keep that I spared his life? What about the elf clan in the ferelden area? What about King Allistar and the deceased King Cailian's Wife? What about the state of Orzammar after my grey warden chose a king for them? What about the Qunari in my party in dragon age origins? What about Flemmeth's Daughter; she was supposed to bear my grey warden's kid. What about the other cast of characters in dragon age 1? There were a lot of other things that bothered me while I played dragon age 2 and ultimately, I realized that bioware rushed production of dragon age 2 only to give its fan base a skeleton of what the game was truly supposed to be. After playing dragon age 2 several times, I realized the story was made rigid. Why could you not take your time to make dragon age 2? We were all psyched when we heard dragon age 2 was coming only to bring your customers a faulty game that broke their spirits and was greatly below expectations. I feel dragon age 3 should be put on hold and dragon age 2 needs to be redone because right now the story is messed up. Instead of making dragon age 3; fix dragon age 2. I know people would buy it if it was completed properly. As regards the former dragon age 2 you could make the purchasers of the previous dragon age 2 get special items and some sort of achievement from the completion of the previous dragon age 2. If things are left in the terrible state they are, I would likely not buy dragon age 3

[DahliaLynn]

The Chain Reaction of paraphrasing:

I realize BioWare is intent on keeping the Dialogue Wheel and Voiced Protagonist, so I
would like to add how I feel about this issue, and what it may have lead to in other aspects of the game.

There is no doubt that regardless of having a wheel or not, you will always have the gradient attitudes associated with whatever line you choose, be it dialogue wheel or actual lines.

The issue with paraphrasing is, that it causes the player to play Hawke's "conscience" in guiding ('her' in my case) towards her next reaction. I found that Hawke knows a lot more than I do, before she speaks, and am learning more about the plot through her, rather than driving the plot forward by having the ability to read a possibly surprising accurate sentence (as in DA:O) thinking about it, then choosing it rather than listening to Hawke after the fact, tell characters things I am completely unaware of. I tell her how to feel, and she does the talking. This creates a distance between her and I. In essence, I control her mood rather than what she actually says.

This distance in turn, leads me to feel less of a connection to the NP Characters themselves causing a lack of personal emotional connection to what is for the most part deep and meaningful personalities. They are communicating with my friend Hawke, rather than "me". They are romancing her, hating her, etc. Basically I am watching them interact, and feel hardly in control. I felt the same thing in ME2 for example, where I knew so little of what Sheppard was talking about that I let her do the talking and I simply guided her through. It was her, not me.

This extends to the feeling of hardly having control over the outcome of Kirkwall, becoming the hero, etc. I see many posts about people feeling they do not have much control over the situation around them, and although that is an issue in itself, the paraphrasing imo makes a substantial contribution to that.

Personally, I prefer to know exactly what Hawke is talking about by the game giving me that knowledge beforehand, and not telling me more about the plot after I had made a choice. This would require more involvement in a (possibly deeper) quests perhaps by extending them more, so that I could fully understand the next decision I am about to make, dialogue-wise. And even if I am not fully aware of certain plot choices and decisions, reading about it as an option to tell it, word for word, will help me understand further, therefore feeling more connected to the choice I had just made. If I am surprised *after* making a "mood/style" choice for Hawke's reaction, I
completely lose the punch of the NPC's reaction, again leading me to watch things happen before me rather than controlling them.

This isn't to say that I am consistently clueless to what's going on, but I did find that many times I had no clue what Hawke was about to say, or moreso, was surprised at how well she replied, and how much more information she provided over my own knowledge, as opposed to what was expected from the simplicity of the paraphrase.

I can understand, that if you were to add the exact line as a choice with a Voiced PC, many will complain that they didn't say it like they would have liked, and the only solution I could come up with for that would be to include those icons along with the lines, so that the general attitude is understood from the getgo.

Once I know what's going on, I can guarantee that I will feel more connected to the NPCs and story progression regardless of "sheer amount of dialogue", or opportunities to talk to them. More opportunities would of course help, but knowing what Hawke is going to say beforehand, along with teaching me more about what's going on in the story by action and experience, may improve things overall.

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 10 juillet 2011 - 04:45 .

[Saberchic]

What I loved about DA2:

1) The battles are way less boring. They’re actually fun! In DAO, I could not even look at the screen and just occasionally hit the attack button and still get through my battles if my tactics were set right.
2) Lessjunk loot. (Thank the Maker!) :happy:

3)Connections. I loved my family, especially Carver. <3

4) Interactive party banter with Hawke and each other. This made it feel more alive.

5) The dialogue wheel. I liked having a voiced PC.

6) The changed art style. While I had no problem with DAO’s art, the redesigns are pretty awesome. Now, instead of just looking like a really tall dude (Sten), I can see why the qunari are so feared. Elves look drastically
different now from humans, which is a good thing. Kirkwall looked good as well. (The only negative about the art was the cameos, except for Nathaniel and Cullen; they were the only ones to look good.)

7) The talent trees were pretty cool. I could custom my battle skills much better than DAO.


Would like improved from DA2:

1) Reused dungeons. Boring and, in some instances, confusing when I’d look at my map.

2) The story was too dark. Hawke’s story is so depressing that I don’t really play DA2 anywhere near as much as DAO. (I’ve got 2.5 games on DA2 vs. 10 with DAO). I don’t necessarily need fluffy bunnies and unicorns, but I’ve
got to end the story with something positive.

3) Interactions with companions. I know they don’t have quite as much dialogue, but I miss the days from DAO when I could walk up and talk to them whenever I wanted.

4) There weren’t a lot of options. I feel that one of the themes of this game was that sometimes things are beyond your control and you have to deal with it. I totally get that, I do, but there were instances when I felt that I was being smacked down back into a specific storyline. It was jarring.

5) Family- you giveth me a family and you taketh them away. I didn’t like that, at all. I’m not mad about the mother. I’m pissed about the siblings. I understand that Hawke needed to be somehow invested in the events that
were going on, but I just didn’t like this particular plot device. It just felt like it was in there because it was something mean to do to Hawke to make the story darker.

6) Companions. It was like I was constantly fighting my party. Don’t get me wrong, I liked my companions having their own minds, but the constant bickering sometimes made me want to just do solo. This group is so dysfunctional I don’t understand why some of these people stay near each other at all. Now, I meta-game like crazy to keep my sanity. I know which companions I’ll take on what quests and with whom to pair them with.

7)This leads me to the rivalry/friendship gauge. I feel like I'm being forced to play a certain way--forced to an extreme and not able to stay neutral when I want to. For example, I can be against slavery but pro-magic. This means through different dialogues with, say, Fenris, I get nowhere. I get friend points for being anti-slavery with him but rival points for being pro-mage. This is frustrating.

8) The dialogue wheel was a good addition. The differing tones are a bit much though. These dialogue choices are so set that if I choose the more aggressive line when I usually choose charming (or any other combination,
this is just an example) it’s like the PC has multiple personality disorder. I shouldn’t feel like I need to pick the “nice” option or “charming” option all the time to have a consistent character.

9) You went backwards on the romance scenes. I guess I’m one of the few that
really liked the scenes in DAO, underwear and all.

Overall, I liked DA2. But I think I liked DAO more because I was able to roleplay more openly and had the freedom to talk with my companions when I wanted. It still felt like I had some control of the story and wasn't just reactive to events around me.

Edit: format

Modifié par Saberchic, 10 juillet 2011 - 10:52 .

[Wolf]

 I understand them wanting to not make inventory less clutter-y but I want the crafting system from Origins back. It just felt like it was more meaningfull than going home and using money for potions.
Loved DA 2 btw 

[Big_Chief]

 I've been thinking about the dialogue wheel, and how it was implemented in DA2, and I have some critiques. The main problems are that it's a bit of a shot in the dark, and that the three tones feel forced.

To start with, there's the idea that there will always be exactly three dialogue responses, no more, no less. Even in situations where it might call for more, or where one of the tones just doesn't work. There are definitely  more than three ways to respond to any given situation, and there are situations where one or another of those three don't really fit the context. The three tones feel forced. For instance, if your in a romance scene, how do you sarcastically or angrilly admit to caring about someone? And if you pick comedic, will it be a lighthearted joke, or it be jerkish and inappropriate (which is another problem I'll get to in a minute)? There are a lot more tones you can take in a given conversation than just three, and limiting yourself to those makes Hawke look like he or she has the emotional range of a teaspoon.

That, or you end up putting more tones than just diplomacy onto the diplomacy icon. In that case, diplomacy could mean you are just being diplomatic, or it could mean you are being happy, kind, accepting, loving, etc. Any number of similar but distinct emotions tied to the same icon. Which they seemed to do sometimes in DA2, but that leads to its own problem, where you're never entirely sure what the icons mean, because they could actually mean any number of things. Does that red fist mean that you will express mild annoyance with a situation, or does it mean you are going to threaten to kill someone? You don't know. You don't know what joke a sarcastic Hawke will crack. It could be something lighthearted and fun, or you could be being wildly inappropriate for the situation. (As a sidenote, having to force a sarcastic response for every potential situation leads to a lot of them coming across as forced or lame, or else Hawke is just a colossal jerk. Sometimes they're funny, but without actually knowing what Hawke's going to say beforehand, it's a bit of a crapshoot.)

Which leads me to my second complaint. You are left to deal with these personalities one of two ways. Either you pick one personality type all the time, or you try to mix and match for what would be the most appropriate for the situation. The first option makes Hawke consistent, but an incredibly shallow character. At no point does a diplomatic Hawke show any humor or any sign of being annoyed. Sarcastic Hawke does nothing but use one wisecrack after another. They're not characters, they're caricatures. The other option, picking whatever seems most appropriate, is a better option, and the one I usually take, but even it has its problems. Hawke seems more like a character and less like a stream of endless one liners, but the lack of information rears its ugly head again. Every so often, the summary and tone icon will fail you, and Hawke will get in someone's face when you meant for him to just be annoyed, etc. It is even affected by the voice actor's delivery. While Hawke can usually switch between tones without sounding like a schizophrenic, every so often there's a jarring shift where he goes from pleasant to threatening growl with little to no reason for why. We have no way of knowing that either. So, at its most extreme examples, Hawke will either come across as boring and one-note or as a bipolar lunatic.

Admittedly, these are just the extremes, and the problems don't come up all that often, all things considered. Again, the voice actors generally do a good job of making the tones distinct while still being close enough that switching between them can seem natural. It's just that the times when this fails can stand out, and are sure to be jarring. You're left to either accept that your character behaved weirdly in that situation, or reload to make the character more consistent, at the expense of inconveniencing yourself and becoming an OCD lunatic. Which I've done more times than I care to admit.

Additionally, this could just be my imagination, but needing the character's lines to be restated in a few words on the wheel seems to lead to them having less subtlety or nuance. In essence, Hawke can't really express anything too complicated, because it has to be paraphrased in a couple words. There isn't really an option to sound intelligent or complex. There's no room for interesting dialogue. Hawke doesn't  feel as much like a character with any layers. But at the same time, to borrow an idea that some others have brought up, they don't really feel like an avatar of ourselves in the game, because our control of them is inherently limited by the dialogue wheel. We can't really project personality, emotions, or intentions onto them, but they don't have much of those for themselves, either. They're stuck in some limbo, where they can't reach either peak.

I do think that the wheel and the voiced protagonist have some benefits. In Origins, your character not having any expressions at all or any voice led to him feeling boring, and standing out among all the other characters that were capable of expressing basic human emotions. I'm not sure what to do about the problem. Maybe work on the wheel, help it overcome its weirder limitations? Anyway, hopefully that all makes sense and isn't as ranty as it seems right now.

Modifié par Big_Chief, 11 juillet 2011 - 01:54 .

[Augoeides]

The most glaring pros and cons for me were:

1) Tiny tots text, I'm sorry but I am NOT a hawk, not even in this plot line.

2) Sometimes the text on the dialogue wheel was way off from the actual statement, thankfully the icons at least let you gauge the tonality successfully.

3) The plausibility of a certain elven mage's mind-snapping late game. Honestly, there had to have been a better way of inserting a boss there. There HAD to be.

4) Location based characters chats, these would have been better had they not been the only way to talk with companions. A mix of talking at any time, talking about other things only in their homes and surprise dialogue like Fenris at the gallows was nice. Banter was good as always.

5) FedEx quests, other quests were fine, generally on par with DA:O. Main plot quests were a little too spaced at times but none were as mind-numbing as say DA:O Deep Roads or Fade Sequence.

5) Weapon restrictions are a personal peeve of mine, take that as you will.

7) Talent tree/webs so much better than the linearity of DA:O's talent lines

That;s all that comes to mind. I'll keep you posted if anything new comes up.

[Spell Singer]

I'm going through time two with a mage, using 1.03 and with a DX11 compatable video card.

The visuals are really amazing. It is not the case that I think DA:O looks bad but I'm really impressed with the look of the backgrounds and such.

I have to admit that the changes in 1.03 helped a lot in combat. It is also possible that simply playing a mage helps as well. By definition you tend to have a better overview of the combat situation when you are a caster/archer then when you are doing mellee. I played longer on nightmare before the annoyances got me to drop down again to hard. So far I only dropped the difficulty for 2 encounters and one of those was just to get it over with (the rock wraith) without a few retries. The other was the "barracks" and there was just too many high hitpoint&armour value targets for the damage the group could do.

Some comments related to sword and shield. The damage done by that style is still pathetic. There is no reason the damage for two daggers should exceed that of a sword (regardless of if you have a shield or not), and carrying a shield does not reduce your damage any in reality. In my typical party mage (me), Carver, Avaline and Verric it was a bit crazy that Avaline could not kill a single target in the time it took any of the others to kill 2 or 3. I was seeing her do 1, 8, 5, 10 damage with basic attacks while my staff was doing 50+. Take the trinity and stick it in the garbage can where it belongs. Avaline was wonderful for fixing things (in the sense of find'm, fix'm, fork'm), it seems to work even though her damage is completely a joke. Her only advantage is she staggers them and my mage hits them with chained lightening (with the upgrade), but by herself she can barely harm a fly. Except against shades when I give her fadeshear. But sword and shield needs that damage reduction from running shield wall removed.

Two handed weapon in either DA:O or DA2 has the opposite problem, and that is survivability. Carver and Fenris have pretty pathetic armour values, and neither of them can seeming get a good defence rating, even running turn the blade or lyrium ghost. Oghren in DA:O has the same sort of issue (largely due to a lack of dexterity hence defence). The hardest thing to keep alive is a two handed sword warrior in the early stages of DA:O and this seems to be the case in DA2 as well. Fenris does better than Carver in general (due to the big bonuses from lyrium ghost and related talents) but he is still pretty squishy for someone who has to stand in the middle of combat.

In general most of the time people die it is due to being feathered by arrows till they look like a pin cushion and then getting hit in mellee. Additionally I've found NPC mages this time around vastly more troublesome. And how exactly to use dispel magic to deal with them, or even to write a good tactic for the NPC mages to use that spell is not so obvious to me. An arcane horror killed my character while casting tempest due to maybe an arura as I think that was the same one that killed Isabella in seconds. But again this is the real problem with not having a log, you can't check and see what happened. I can't be sure in many case what it was that I was doing wrong so improving is very much a case of trial and error and when that takes 6 tries, it become tedious.

I also find the healing available to a base line mage pretty pathetic. While playing DA:O my creation focused mage had nothing much in the way of direct damage but I could still do lots of interesting things with glyphs, and later with the line from entropy that gives you horror and sleep. But even with only the basic 2 healing spells I could do a lot to keep the party running. In DA2 the single heal spell doesn't recharge fast enough. In most encounters you can cast it no more than once, very rarely twice. The upgrade could do with knocking 5 seconds off the recharge time.

Also the glyph of repulsion doesn't seem to work that well against shades and any number of things (in particular non normal NPCs) just waltz through it. Given it only exists for a short time it would be nice if it at least worked properly. [added in edit]  I should revise this as last night the glyph worked good.  Even in DA:O it was a bit hard to tell what it would stop and what not.  Spiders and Dogs/wolves/bears used to go right through it in DA:O.  Last night it was doing a good job on corpses and skeleton archers.   It is probably worth saying that either it works good or it doesn't work at all, and the player has little to guide him in knowing which extreme the spell will fall in this time.  Changing that would help a lot I think. [end edit]

I also noticed that the gylph of paralysis doesn't trigger against giant monsters where the glyph was there untriggered even though the creature was standing on it.

I am also finding that encounter triggers need some work. While doing the "Suspicious Lady's" quest I triggered by accident a spawn of the Redteeth Reavers. This same thing happened a few other times when going through cave systems in my first play through. This sort of thing just should not be happening. There was 15 or so NPCs on the battlefield when the party wiped for example trying to fight both the smuggler captains and crew plus the reavers and reinforcements. Largely what triggers this is my party members moving around, something which is not always possible to control. For other players make sure you have the dock gang out of the way before you do the quest for the suspicious lady or you may end up fighting a lot more than you can easily handle.

A last thing which is really glaringly obvious this time around. In DA:O it was nice to upgrade weapons and armour but after a while things worked anyway. In DA:O I finished even awakening able to still use the Cousland Family sword. My mage only had 2 staves after lothering (one I bought in lothering and the other I bought in Amaranthine). In DA2 I am constantly changing weapons, and items to keep up with the item decay. This built in obscelence is a tad annoying when you find the look doesn't appeal to you or you want to use a certain damage type staff (Merril gets nature, I wanted cold and give Anders spirit). Also why can't you not carry a staff? I tried to walk around without a staff but the game puts one on your back regardless.

Modifié par Spell Singer, 13 juillet 2011 - 08:37 .

[Thessair]

I'd also like to add a point I forgot in my initial post, in the 'Pro' column: The fact that not all mage armor looked like robes in DA2. I generally tend to play mages more than anything else and running around in sack cloth dresses all the time was kind of 'meh'. I greatly enjoyed the variety of options we had in DA2.

[AstoundingArcaneArcher]

I will just use a simple analogy to express my views: Dragon Age 2 was a half baked cake, taking only 18 months to go from development to store, I'm sure that if Bioware had more time that they would be able to put the most delicious icing on that cake (properly baked as well.) as the mouth-watering Dragon Age was. Just make sure you have put all you can into a game you're making Bioware, and I'm sure that it'll be fine. You may have used improved ingredients in the Dragon Age 2 cake but it was half baked.

[Savber100]

Another tip?

Try and bring back the isometric view from DA:O.

Hell.. I played DA:O half the time with that view.

Honestly, DA fans don't care about graphics just give our beloved camera back!

[Ukillwegrill]

Pros -
The character models were improved.
The story was interesting. If not, very restrictive
Cons -
The combat was far too fast and flashy.
Character classes were too restrictive.
Many talents missing
No weight to the attacks
Great Swords looked like something from some weird Anime
Kirkwall is rubbish, and tiny.
Darkspawn looked like something the Power Rangers would fight.
Companion armour
Enemey's magically appearing, ALWAYS behind your mages/archers
Couldnt care less for a voiced character if it means we can't pick a race.
Conversations were typical dull, incorporate the Alpha Protocol conversation style

I miss Dragon Age Origins firm homage to Bioware titles of old, whilst still looking towards the future, I miss the rule set and the depth of the game. It wasn't as deep as previous Bioware titles, but it had enough to keep me entertained. DA2 does not. It feels like "My First Bioware RPG" an entry level title for kids, even the nickelodeon art style supports this.

[GithCheater]

In enjoyed DA2, but it certainly could have been much better … I got somewhat bored in my 2nd playthrough ...

DA2 Major Positives:

· Companions – Fit well into the story, well-written, excellent banter.

· Combat – Being able to react and avoid opponent’s telegraphed moves (like ogre charge).

DA2 Major Opportunities for Improvement:

· Recycled maps / exploring areas multiple times. It is mind numbing to wander through areas you’ve seen multiple times (no surprises and no sense of exploration). Worst example - visiting the Docks during daytime in Act 3 is almost pointless: Only one amulet, several junk items, some gold, and visiting one merchant.

· Errand boy quests. Why should I care about returning a random hat to a random someone?

· Completely unrelated side and 2ndary quests. For example, the Bone Pit quests seem to be a series of hack/slash dungeon crawls with no major apparent goal in sight. Also the extermination of countless thug gangs at night seems to be solely hack/slash with no connection to the main plot.

· Junk Items. Why would a merchant want to buy torn trousers, a moth eaten scarf, or a dull shiv?

· Hawke’s major choices usually do not matter. Mother’s fate is always the same after a series of quests, the Qunari always say goodbye, and the same Kirkwall VIP’s always die.

· Hawke seems to be a wandering nomad with no ultimate purpose after the 1st year in Kirkwall. Hawke goes to the deep roads for no apparent reason other than to get rich, Hawke waits for the Qunari to strike, and Hawke waits for Kirkwall to implode.

· Other than reclaiming her nobility, my Hawke did not achieve much emotional investment in Kirkwall. For example, DAO’s Orzammar NPC’s, politics and society are much more intriguing than Kirkwall.

· Parachuting waves of enemies and longer drawn out battles tended to make combat tedious for me.

· DAO quests (including side quests) generally seem more developed and complex than DA2. DAO quests often had more than two outcomes, generally tied better into the world of Thedas, and were more than killing a mostly faceless enemy. DAO seemed to have more intriguing enemies like Jarvia, possessed Conner, Witherfang, Howe and of course Logain.

· Other than the tone of the dialogue, the dialog was rudimentary with all options available and without “branching” conversation. For example, in DAO, I can get that poopy key from the Ostagar prisoner only if I ask the right questions, and I can get Felsi to give Oghren a 2nd chance only if I choose the right responses in the right order.

· No puzzles in DA2 like “kitty” in Shale’s quest, the rotating monument in the deep roads, or the shape-changing “puzzle” for getting through the Fade in the Circle mage tower quest.

· Environments are less memorable and immersive in DA2 compared to DAO’s Dalish forest, Haven, Orzammar or even the hilly caverns of the Deep Roads. On a 2nd play-through of DAO (or was it DA-W?), the steep rise of an ordinary cavern corridor followed by its gradual descent, reminded me that the spider queen was coming up soon.

DAO quests seem more "epic" than DA2. In DA2 you save individual peons (like Fenreyel), whereas in DAO you effect the fate a whole dwarven city (kings of Orzammar, and the fate of the Anvil), the survival of an entire Dalish clan, or even the fate of the Blackstone Irregulars.

Modifié par GithCheater, 14 juillet 2011 - 02:54 .

[Spell Singer]

In a change from making comments on the combat system I would like to comment on two points that became very obvious after playing Alpha Protocol inbetween my two sessions of DA2.

The first is character acting. In Alpha Protocol not always was the conversation spoken, often a lot was conveyed by the acting of the characters including facial expression. This seems missing from DA2. I'm not sure if this is for technical reasons, but it strikes me as something that could really use work. It is an important part of communication and it would compliment the voice acting and writing. Especially in cut scenes this seems a point where a little (I hope) goes a long way.

The second point was choice. I hate to say it but Alpha Protocol handled this the best I've seen in a computer role playing game. Bloodlines came second, but any Bioware game ranks well at the bottom of my personal list. I'm not speaking about sand box type games, personally I got bored with Morrow wind after 16 hours of aimless and pointless wandering which reminded me of playing alone on the avlis server cluster. What I mean is that the game acknowledges in someway your choice and that you have different ways to accomplish the missions. The later is probably easier to do in Alpha Protocol or Bloodlines since you don't have companions to deal with but it must be possible to implement it in bioware style games I'd think.

The first point is best illustrated by KotOR. There are 3 planets to go to but you can do it in any order, that is good. What isn't good is it doesn't change the game which way you do it. ABC is the same as BCA, is the same as CAB is the same as CABACBCA or whatever combination you do. The game does not react your choices by even mentioning that you went to another planet first. For me anyway to have a choice that has no in game consiquence or even get a passing mention by NPCs means that you have removed the value of the choice. In Alpha Protocol the oder you do the cities is mentioned by the NPCs and impacts at least your conversations if not game play itself. As a DM I view what my "job" is as giving the players a situation to deal with and then giving them the consiquences of their choice in how they dealt with it. Admittedly you can overboard a bit like in the witcher where I ended up as a friend to the order of the burning rose for reasons I still can't fathom given I thought they were a bunch of murdering fanatics as bad as the squirrils they were fighting and I was waiting for my chance to tell the king to shut them down. But this is what comes from judging things solely based on the action rather then the intent.

The second point of choice is best illustrated by Bloodlines. In that game although it is "linear" it feels different when you play a different vampire clan because how you go through the encounters changes with the type of vampire you are. Take the club in china town for a good example. My toreador smoozed and snuck his way through in and out. My Tremere seduced, snuck, then blood bolted/shot on the way out. My ventrue smoozed, snuck and katanaed the gang. My malkavian snuck in with invisibilty and then more or less ghosted out if memory serves (may have this and the toreador play through mixed up though). My gangreal had war form...and there were bodies everywhere. Same encounter...many different ways to play it through.

I loved that in ME2 you dropped xp for killing things and purely went to mission accomplishment. This was also in Bloodlines and frankly the hardest thing to stop myself doing in Bloodlines was killing everything just because it was what I had gotten used to. The choice to kill or not seems like a basic one. In Alpha Protocol I killed only as a last restort and mostly used tranq and Hand to Hand combat. This again doesn't fit into DAx but it is worth looking into how you can make the adventures/quests/missions different. Things like having them be solo, or use fewer or specific companions (a stealth quest or something).

Although I appear to be the only person who doesn't take you task excessively for re-using maps it is worth pointing out that Alpha Protocol never did, each mission had its own unique map. I don't have a problem with the re-use in DA2 but playing on PW and in MMOs you get use to using the same terrain in multiple different adventures. I was also a DM/Area builder so I have feel for the work involved and the desire to get the most bang for the area buck. But I think because of that there should have been much more NPC interaction to build up a feeling of belonging in Kirkwall to counteract seeing the same thing again. I can't see how you can otherwise draw the players into the city without making it live through the NPCs they encounter.

[Uccio]

The likeness of Awakening and DA2 in the character interaction was the reason I did not play DAA again for the DA2 base story but stopped playing after witch hunt. I didn´t realize DA2 would have the same lame interaction until I bought the game and started to play it because I thought the expansion was the reason for it. I was so wrong. Also the same illusion of change was there in both games. You think you can have effect on the things happening but actually what ever you choose has no effect at all.

This is why I will not buy the new dlc but just wait and see what other think about it. It will also determine weather or not I will buy DA3.

[Oddeyee]

Things i liked

Improvment in graphics ( dont usualy care but this was a clear improvment )
Varic
Learning more of the lore of the world ( Quin )
Having more romance options
Enviroment detail

Things i disliked

Whiney companions ( Anders and Fenris )
Lack of emotion with thats happens to hawk ( i wont spoil )
Re-used envirmoments
Not enougth customising

Main things I would love to see changed


Please try to keep it more realistic , and not to much like a childrens comic. Less backfliping and more real combat. Im sure if you see a sword master or a master archer who have been training for years their techneque would look extreamly impressive.

And please change the hurlocks back to their original skins , They are ment to be a force to be feard and the sight of them is supost to spread terror !

Also dont lose the emotion of the story , with many of the things that happend in hawks story where litteraly ignored straight after they happend,  Im sure no one wants to see an emo main char , but a little sure , if something like that happend it would change you mind forever.

[Dubya75]

 Having now played through the game 5 times as warrior, rogue and mage (and some other games in between) I think my opinion of DA2 has settled. So without further adue...

Pros:

- Art direction. Much improved over Origins.

- Animation is generally much improved. Still room for improvement of appearance and movement of hands for example, but character movement is much better.
Walking and running is better than in any other game I've played. Feels very realistic and steps really seem to connect with the ground, unlike some games in which it is more like ice skating.

- Combat is some of the best I've seen in RPGs. I love it. Except for Rogue which is a bit too much over the top ninja style.

- Voice acting is brilliant

- Environments are great (getting to recycling in Cons)

- Difficulty levels seem to have hit that sweet spot. Feels well balanced.


Cons:

- NPCs standing around doing nothing. Always in the same place. Breaks immersion.

- Recycled environments.

- Environments too small and too few.

- Day/Night. Would much prefer a dynamic day/night cycle. Something like 30 minutes day, dusk 5 minutes, night 30 minutes, dawn 5 minutes...

- Decisions have no impact whatsoever and some quests can't be refused even though the illusion is given in conversation that it can be refused.

- Inventory has been simplified too much. Still prefer the Origins inventory. Items were much easier to identify with levels.
The star rating system makes no sense.

- Character creator is appalling. Much worse and more restrictive than Origins. Hair and beards in particular needs some serious work.

- Too hard to accumulate coin. Or some items are way too expensive. 

- Champions Armor obtained too late in the game.

- Unable to customise companions' outfits.
I agree with the fact we can no longer choose armor pieces for them, but there should at least be 3 choices of outfits unique to each companion that can be changed at any time.

- Too few weapon and shield models. Shields in particular.

-Graphical clipping! Much worse than it was in Origins. Lion of Orlais and Rosamund's Bulwark being the worst.

- Meaningless side quests/fetching quests. Giving a man the skeleton of his dead wife just to have them say "oh I was wondering where this was" is simply unacceptable!!! 

- Achievements are way too easy to achieve. I've pretty much achieved the bulk of it in my first playthrough.
The badges also look horrible.
Where are the lovingly crafted badges from Origins?
There is no sense of achievement whatsoever in gaining these "achievements".
I loved having to work hard to get them in Origins. There were so many of them to get, roughly double the amount we have in DA2?


This is however a game I keep coming back to and still enjoy playing.
It is just a shame to see it being such a rushed job. With the proper care and dedication this could have been RPG of the year. The potential was there. The opportunity was there. It was wasted.
Hopefully you (BioWare) will make good of your promises and address some of the main issues with this game. Not for DA3, but fixing DA2. IMHO the only way this franchise is going to have continued success is if THIS game gets fixed.

Modifié par Dubya75, 14 juillet 2011 - 09:59 .

[Negative City]

There were a lot of things I disliked about DA2 and few that I did like.

Pros:

I'll get back to them later, once I find a couple.

Cons:

The Dialogue Wheel and voiced main character:
The dialogue wheel and the voice PC completely ruined the experience for me because it made it so that I never considered Hawke to be my character. That's what was fantastic about the Origins experience, I could completely imagine my Warden saying everything that was displayed on the screen with ease. No matter what way I look at it, Hawke seems like the developers character. And if I wanted a protagonist like that I would go play JRPGs, which would generally offer a story that you played along with, like DA2, rather than actually playing the story like in Origins.
And the main problem with the dialogue wheel is that you have a very restricted choice on what to say, and you have no idea what Hawke was actually going to say. There are three main choices, the most I got at any point in the game was five, and they are all Good-Neutral-Evil. There was no grey at any opportunity. For example: In Feynrials Fade quest, you can do the evil thing and hand him over to the abomination, the more neutral stance to make him tranquil, or the good stance to free him. It would have been easy to give Hawke the opportunity to kill Feynriel in the real world, (a bit like Conner) to hand him over to the templars after they returned, or to outright refuse to do the quest. I broke into my problem with the story there a bit but the general idea was there. It was also annoying that Hawke kept a constant personality for the whole game, If he's as good as Bioware made him out to be, he shouldn't be shouting at the Viscount, or threatening the Arishok. Or making jokes in extreme life or death situations. There's a time and place for everything, and those weren't it. Threaten the local barman by all means but don't have a go at the war leader of a powerful, battle hardened religion.

The Voice Acting:

I ended up skipping through most of the cutscenes in the second half of the game becasue I couldn't stand the voice actors. They sounded like they were being paid to put no emotion into anything and to make an event sound completely different from what it was. For example: Hawke finding out about the white flowers his mother got. In a game with good voice acting and dialogue, he should have freaked out completely not gone "wait a minute, I think I recognize those, Oh yeah! It's the trademark of a deranged serial killer. I sure mothers alright though."
Another example is with Aveline at the end of act 2, The highly dangerous warlord has broken the law and now were going to ask them to give them back shouldn't be spoken of as it it were no worse than a slight overcast. The Viscount and the Arishok were the only people I didn't mind listening too. Aveline in particular had a poor voice actor. In Origins I played through the game seven or eight times before I skipped the same percentage of cutscenes that i did in my first( and only) playthrough of DA2. And I still played Mass Effect three or four times before I skipped cutscens like that.

The Combat:

The combat in DA2 was ridiculous to the extreme, I'm not saying we should go back to turn based combat; but when you start moving at supernatural speeds wielding a sword larger than some of your companions while your rogue stabs at someone and they explode followed by watching an older mage perform advanced karate, I think that is far to excessive. The Hack and Slash combat was also very annoying, because I never, at any point while playing through Hard mode, had to open the radial menu for anything other than a potion. Just repeatedly press X and keep an eye on your health and you were set to go through the game without consequence.
I thought the waves were a very poor way to increase difficulty. But they, along with a severe lack of available tactics, caused me to give up trying to use tactical gameplay and to just mash X.

The Story:

I thought the story felt disconnected and poorly narrated. Varric should have shot by Casandra with his own crossbow after he finished the story. Just an opinion there.
Jokes aside, the story felt like it could have been three completely separate stories. A bit like a compilation of short stories in a book, you always pick them up and read them separately rather than reading through the whole book. One of the largest problems in the story is the severe inability of Hawke to affect anything more than a few lines of dialogue. Hawke was marketed as being the most important person in all of Thedas: HE DOESN'T DO ANYTHING, HE JUST STANDS THERE AND WATCHES. Essentially, Hawke is like an eyewitness at a court session, he tells a bit about what happened, then he leaves and is never heard of again. Anders was more important than Hawke, so Hawke was just a witness to everything bad Anders did. Well the blowing up of the Chantry at least.

Those were my main gripes with Dragon Age 2, I could go on but I won't.

Negative City

[csfteeeer]

Positives:

-The Combat is Faster and more fluid.
-Isabela and Varric<3
-The Graphics are improved ( oh yeah,what a surprise...)
-It's a Good Value
-The Idea is Incredibly interesting, and if that alone engages you, then you will love this game.
-The Companions are good enough, but they lack evolution and maturity through out the years, i mean, their opinions and Ideas don't change AT ALL if you don't do their quest, which doens't seem very natural and human, it gives a kinda rushed feel.... oh wait.
-Talking Protagonist, because people is unable to use imagination and they need someone to do everything for them.

Negatives:
-The Art Design is Silly and it actually works against the game.
This is afterall supposed to be a Dark, Mature and Gritty game, but it looks so... Clean? so cartoony, and doesn't feel serious at all.
here's a tip: Atmosphere is a big deal, and it might make a great experience,even if doesn't need it, Amazing.
also, it could help the narrative style of the game, games suck as Metro 2033 or BioShock would be Disaster, Narratively speaking, if it weren't for their atmosphere, speacially because they were filled with detail and realism.
this art design is so bland, weird and removes the supposed "serious" aspect of the game.

-The Story
ok i'll say it here, there IS a larger story Arc, the problem is the game doesn't care about.
the larger story arc is the story of Kirkwall, and the evolution of this one through the eyes of those who would be considered citizens(Hawke in this case), and eventual fall of this one.
this is more of a Chronicles Story.
but heres the thing: the story doesn't present itself as such, was not marketed as such, and the game never even has decensy to even sugest as such, and it's the reason as to why many people are unable to understand it, and it even over my head at first.
the problem is not really the story itself, is the fact that is unable to present itself as it should, and the story drags excesively, with a lot MAIN quest that add to nothing to anything , they are just there*cough*Long Way Home*cough*.
another problem is this, the lack of evolution in KirkWall, this is suppose to take Place in a period of Ten years right?
so what the hell, the city doesn't change in the slightest, except for the position of the sun, a statue in the docks and the Qunari section closed.
That's It.

Enemies Spawning out of Thin Air.
....
Are you Serious?

Re-used Maps.

Do i need to explain?

The Lack the deminish of the Character interaction.
makes the characters feel less human.
it's like they're just check list, that you have to care every once in a while.

Constant Wave System (in addtion to the enemies appearing out of thin air)

Again, Are you Serious?

Suggestions:

-The Combat must be fluid and flashy, but the over-the-topness stupidity is a complain among many people.
including me.
What a lot people don't seem to notice is that Origins wasn't slow in that sense of the word, it was incredibly mechanic and robotic.
that's the thing, the combat should be fluid and dinamic like DA2, but more realistic like DAO(which was also slightly unrealistic, because it was unrealisticly slow, when it came to the swings at least).
if you don't mind the suggestion, The Witcher 2 is a good example of what i mean.
it's Fluid, it's not DA2 over-the-top fast, but it's DAO not slow, and it doesn't feel mechanic at all.
 i love it, hopefully someone can agree.
i seriously think that it would perfectly(imagine yourself playing TW2, then imagine that you directly choose which enemie to attack with your mouse, unlie the horrible aim in TW2... it would work, believe me.)
-The Story shouldn't take place in such a small city the hole time.

a lot of other suggestion, but i'm tired, but i will say this, and this is the most important one:
Don't Rush it!!!!

my main complains are the over-the-top and draining Battle system, the Art Design and the re-used maps.

if DA3 has any of those things, then i'll just read the wiki telling the story(which im still interested in), and just wait for something else.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 17 juillet 2011 - 10:20 .

[Uccio]

In the end I really don´t care about anything else but more meaningful choises, deeper relations and free discussion option with characters. These were lacking from DA2.

[princekai13]

I'm sure this will get lost in the shuffle, but oh well.

(these are coming from both my wife and I by the way, so sorry if any contradictions pop up)
What we LOVED

• The redisgns on characters/races- Isabela and Anders look great, so do the tweaks to the dwarves.  But far and away, by a mile, the Quinari take the cake here.  You guys really out did yourselves.
• Battle- It's has a more interactive feel now.  The Mages aren't just in the back for support, they can get right in there.  The archers having daggers for Close quarters is a welcome addition.  really the only down side I see here is the kill animation.  I prefer the decapitations and impaling I had in Origins to the exploding bad guys.  (also raining bad guys, almost forgot)  but altogether battle comes out a plus.
• class specific weapons-  I'm sure this opinion might be divisive, but I liked that only rogues could use daggers, only warriors could use shields, etc.  It made sense.  Origins had you able to equip anything, but that seemed like a waste since I would never have a rouge using a shield.
• possibilities galore-  I loved that this story opened up a little possibilities for DA3 rather than limit them.  Maybe my warden and Hawke end up teaming up, maybe flemeth finds Morrigan, Will the Quinari retaliate?  Will Anders look like regularly takes showers next time?

But then there are things we didin't like

1.  Sorry for this, but I have to say it, repetitive areas.  There, done,  talked about enough, but still my main complaint.

2.  Story-  This is more a marketting issue than anything else.  Hawke is supposed to be the greatest champion in the dragon age universe, yet I'm left unimpressed by his story and less than thrilled about Kirkwall.  The city of chains left me feeling chained down.  Undertsand, we're coming off of Origins, where there was practically a world to explore and we were only in one country.  Now Yes, we were told that we'd be the champion of Kirkwall, and that's fine.  But Knowing that I was going to be spending about 40 hours of gameplay in one city, I expected it to be bigger with lots more to do.  Unfortunately the reused areas further constricted the size that Kirkwall felt. 

3.  scope-  spoilers in here, sorry.  I read a review somewhere that hit the nail on the head for me.  This should have been called Dragon age: Kirkwall.  I hate to keep going back to Origins, but I want to make this point.  When you're planning on a series of games, movies, televison shows, what have you, things always build up to one grand conclusion.  I saved the world from the greatest evil ever known in Origins, and then in the follow up, I get to sit on the sidelines while a mage blows up a chantry not matter what i do.  I understand the repocussions are what's important, the turmoil of mages rebelling against the circle all over the world will have hopefully have major concequences in DA3, but DA2 feels more like a prequel or an expansion as opposed to a true sequel.

4. Pacing- The story would have worked better if we had a main villain sooner.  An old writers technique that I know of involves talking about a character but waiting to have them actually appear in the story.  It builds up expectations, makes the character larger than life and all that good jive before you even see him/her.  But what happened in DA2 was I was left wandering around town waiting for the story to pick up.  To put this more... simply, Even the main story line felt like a bunch of side quests thrown together for the first half of the game.  All this, i must point out, does not apply to the arishok.  That portion of the game was masterfully done.

and those are the major points.  nick nacks like the character portraits and such I was able to look past.  so i'll leave it there.  plus i'm tired.

[Ferretinabun]

I have to say I think all my complaints about DA2 can be summed up in one word - immersion.

In an RPG, immersion should be king. You have to feel like you're in the world of the game, interacting in a way you choose with believable characters. It's what DA:O got so right.

Reusing the same map for half a dozen different 'cave' locations breaks immersion. Having waves of enemies literally teleport out of the sky mid-battle breaks immersion. Wandering around with mage companions casting spells in front of templars who totally fail to notice breaks immersion. Having background NPCs not only fail to react to the fight you're having in the city streets but to literally walk through them too breaks immersion.

The many niggles which ruin immersion show a total lack of care on the developers' part. It kicks the gamer out of the world of the game and back into the real world where they are merely playing what is basically a (admittedly pretty) hack-and-slash arcade game, laced together by tenuous bits of plot. Which is fine if you like that sort of thing. But it is not what many core RPG fans expect from Bioware.