2797 réponses à ce sujet

[Lionrise]

Finished my first playthrough as a 2h warrior on Nightmare. 58 hrs.

Combat
- Combat is an overall improvement, despite some flaws. My main gripe with this system is that every fight features the same formula: clear a room, prepare for another wave. It made sense in some instances, and it was a challenge to adjust tactics mid-fight to avoid being flanked by enemy reinforcements. However, when every fight goes the same way it feels contrived and breaks immersion. 

Part of tactical gameplay means being able to assess the situation at hand (no. of enemies in a room) and devise a plan accordingly. I instead found myself preparing for the predictable next wave, even before the first threat was eliminated.

- If predictable waves broke immersion, it was only made worse by having said waves frequently appear out of nowhere. Tactics go out the window here, as you hope the skydiving assassins dont happen to land next to your mage. Even General Patton himself wouldnt have been so successful if German Tiger tanks were dropping out of the sky. 

It goes from tactical challenge (eliminate the opposition using your head), to arcade challenge (you won, but now survive this!)

Progression
- I know BioWare wanted companions to have a have a unique visual style which corresponds to their character, but companion customization is an integral aspect of a party based RPG. The game felt smaller, because the focus of progression seemed to be placed solely on Hawke. To make matters worse, item requirements forced everyone to build their Hawkes the same way. If we as players decided to go an unconventional route, we'd lose access to equipment.

Exploration
- Between having the game take place primarily in Kirkwall, having Kirkwall remain the same over the course of seven years, and any exploration outside of Kirkwall take place in a recycled cave, I would conclude that there simple wasn't any sense of exploration.

Story
- In retrospect I liked the story. The problem is, the story feels absent during actual gameplay, at least until the third act arrives. 

- Our choices didnt change anything. Even the ending is pretty much the same.

- The ability to spontaneously interact with companions means a lot in terms of player involvement, as well as potential character development. As Laidlaw said, maybe asking someone about what it's like to be an elf while in the middle of the deep roads doesn't exactly fit, but because of this very feature Origins' characters felt more alive and a part of the story.

Assassins / Templar Hunters on Nightmare
- Really?

Modifié par Lionrise, 21 mars 2011 - 05:43 .

[Cybermortis]

TurianRenegade wrote...

After reading some of these, I'm a little worried about Mass Effect 3 as I don't want it to be as linear or as lacking in certain areas as Dragon Age 2.

Mass Effect 3 has had a considerably longer development cycle that DA2. The story for ME3 follows directly on from ME2, so in effect it will have been worked on and deveoped since they started work on the second game.

Bioware also stated that work had started on ME3 before ME2 was released - I'd assume because they already had the story and because they had planned on having three games to finish off the series.

In effect a fair chunk of the game had been worked out before any official work had started. This plus the longer development cycle and (I would assume) no need to significantly change the designs of the ME universe makes me far more confident that they have had the time needed to do a good job.

I'm not saying ME3 will be a world beater - it is impossible to state that without having played it - just that it is more likely to be one.

EA seems to have messed up by not understanding the RPG market, what Bioware fans want and expect from these types of games and by not being capable of understanding that such games need much longer development times than a FPS or even a RTS. RPG games need longer times, at least 2 years or so, and can get away with this as the games themselves are less about cutting edge graphics and more about the story and characters - which in turn should be seen as an advantage as you don't need a top end machine to play such games, so more people can potentially play such games without trouble. 

If EA wants a game a year they will need to understand this, and work out development cycles that are realistic for such games. The way too do this is to have stagered development cycles of two years, with maybe expansions being given a year. I can understand EA wanting to make a 'fast-buck', but if they continue to make Bioware develop titles with unrealistic development times ME3 is going to be the last Bioware game people buy in any numbers.

[Everwarden]

You forgot to mention the complete lack of choices that affect anything in the world at large or even the outcome in Kirkwall specifically. Complete failure to deliver something expected in a Bioware game. 

[Jaulen]

Lionrise wrote...

Finished my first playthrough as a 2h warrior on Nightmare. 58 hrs.

Combat
- 
It goes from tactical challenge (eliminate the opposition using your head), to arcade challenge (you won, but now survive this!)


Story
- In retrospect I liked the story. The problem is, the story feels absent during actual gameplay, at least until the third act arrives. 

The ability to spontaneously interact with companions means a lot in terms of player involvement, as well as potential character development. As Laidlaw said, maybe asking someone about what it's like to be an elf while in the middle of the deep roads doesn't exactly fit, but because of this very feature Origins' characters felt more alive and a part of the story.

Good point about the combat and tactics issues....comment about it becoming an arcade game are spot on IMHO.  I find myself switching down to casual a lot just because some of the fights just ****** me off so much.

And the Story.....felt like there should have been more of a build up in Act 2 for Act 3.....and seeing a little more of the breakdown of Meredith....I mean...would be pretty easy to sympathise with the tamplars since blood mages are EVERYWHERE....but you get a much dimmer view of the decent into madness/irrationality of the templar stance.

I'd like the ability to both have the scripted conversations, and some of the sontaneous 'get to know you' conversations.

[Jaulen]

Everwarden wrote...

You forgot to mention the complete lack of choices that affect anything in the world at large or even the outcome in Kirkwall specifically. Complete failure to deliver something expected in a Bioware game. 

Well you can't really effect the outcome overall anyway....since we're playing through history. Really in DA2, all we'd be effecting was Kirkwall and how mages/templars viewed the Champion. And our companions.

But in DA:O what we could effect was grander since we interacted with MORE groups than we did in DA2.

[Cybermortis]

Thinking on the conversation wheel a little, I'm not sure that the Mass Effect wheel is quite right for a full RPG. I love having a main Character with a voice - in fact I wanted this in the Star Wars games years ago.

The problem is that the wheel as is just doesn't give enough options. Maybe the circle should be an oval, with one or two extra tabs options being able to be added. (Five speech options should be more than enough for a RPG). This might also allow it to be designed in a way that visually matches the world setting.

It might also be interesting if future games keep track of what options you usually take, and how you usually deal with conversations and quests. Basically a form of reputation system in the game. If you usually work though conflicts through diplomacy and keep your word afterwards - or try to - then it should be easier to walk some people down. After all you *should* get a reputation as being fair and trustworthy if this is how you play. Likewise if you usually try to solve problems by hitting people you should get a reputation for that.
Such a system could result in some quests being available for having some reputations, a trustworthy person is more likely to be asked to deal with, say, a diplomatic problem - or someone may try to trick them into taking some quests. While a more aggressive player is more likely to be asked to deal with, say, bandits and the like. Your reputation might also allow conversation options at times, or allow you to ask questions.
This would take a fair amount of careful thought to get this to work, but potentially it could give games vast re-playability.

[Furtled]

Atian wrote...

Romances:

No offence to anyone, but the idea of making every romaceable companion bi-sexual is just plain silly. I can very well understand that it suits the backstory/personality of certain companions for an example Zevran and Isabela, but how does it fit into the backround of Merrill?

I think the idea there was more the companions are people and aren't defined by their sexuality, so Anders is Anders the mage, not Anders the gay/bi mage, which is a more realistic reflection of sexuality in real life imo. There's another thread in the companions topic that goes over it more throughly though. 

Modifié par Furtled, 21 mars 2011 - 06:14 .

[Furtled]

I wonder if it would be possible to approach this the way CDProjekt did with Witcher and release an Ultimate edition some time down the road (after the additional content that I'm guessing is already in production) that addresses the major points made in this thread and some bonus content?

Also on the mage thing, would it be possible to limit the animations or restrict the player to magic melee/more subtle attacks when a Templar NPC is within a certain area? It did feel a bit daft given the story when my mage opened up with the fireballs in full view of certain characters on some quests without consequences, yet when they argued with them other companions would try and stop me for fear I'd get arrested. 

Modifié par Furtled, 21 mars 2011 - 06:43 .

[wildannie]

On my second playthrough, still love the game but there are things I would hope could be changed for DA3 or expansions.  

Not keen on spawning waves of enemies, especially when they spawn from thin air rather than through a door.  As others have said, this is immersion breaking and messes with the tactics.

Another point was that i could start a dungeon mission, find myself struggling, and be unable to leave and come back later, so I'd end up having to turn down the difficulty, or reload an earlier save.

I would really like the option to engage party members in some sort of conversation at their homes.  I was happy that there was some pacing with the converstations but I think some short friendly convos that could be initiated by the player would improve immersion a great deal.  It's quite annoying when you go up to them in their home base and they just spout 'we should move on' or tell you about a good shop.

Example: I liked how in ME2 there was some repeatable small talk conversations with Shep and Thane when in a romance.  

Bugs - Bugged romances from DAO - please please please fix. There are other bugs (revival causing immunity being one I've come across) but it is the import ones that have bothered me most as I can't work around them.

reused environments - doesn't bother me that much, although more variety would have been better.

I Loved:
Story - more personal and engaging than origins (IMO)
VAs - excellent as ever
New crafting system
Skill trees & cross class combos (would be even better/more useful if tactics were not being compromised by spawning enemies)
The look of companions - I'm happy to just upgrade them with runes.  It's weird for your friends to dress you up, no?

I know that this has all been said before but i just wanted to put my tuppence worth in all the same. 

[Patriciachr34]

I finished my first play through as a 2H warrior and have just finished Act 1 of my mage and have the following comments. First, I really do like the character redesigns. The seem to fit with the story. Each NPC's story is complete and compelling. I really love the new animations and quicker combat. Finally, the mage revamp made me want to play a mage. Thanks for that.

That being said, there are some things I'm not fond of. First, I miss being able to explore NPC personality and background through dialog. For example, the pc could learn a lot about Alistair or Sten by simply casually chatting with them. We developed a relationship with them as well as learned about their background, personality, etc. Because this is absent in DA2, I'm not as emotionally connected to my people. I would like to have learned more about Anders as a child, Sebastian before the Chantry, Isabella while still innocent, even snatches of Fenris past that may surface, how he ended up in Kirkwall, and/or the places he has seen/people he met as he ran from the hunters. After 8 years together, it seems that this information would have eventually come out.

Second, I really did not use any of the warrior specializations. From an RPG perspective, I could embrace blood magic and become a reaver or I could sympathize with the Templars and use the Templar specialization. The only middle ground is Berserker. I spent one point in this and found that it totally sucked away my stamina, leaving nothing for the 2H skills or Vanguard skills. I only spent one point in Berserker early on and really never activated it for combat for the rest of the game.

Also, the 2H warrior is not nearly as powerful as the mage. My mage is easily taking down opponents that required careful management by my warrior at the same level. I'm not sure if this was intentional, but it kind of blows since I really enjoy playing a warrior.

Anyway, this is my 2 cents. Take it for what it is worth.

[payroo]

Combat:
I was perfectly happy with the mechanics of combat. However, I feel the game has an over-reliance on combat. When you're starting to wonder why there are random waves of enemies attacking you, there's a problem. Call me old-fashioned, but I need some kind of emotional/plot-wise motivation to fight.

This is a digression, but I sorely missed having the [Persuade] option. For me the persuasion option is a staple of RPGs and what differentiates them from more purely action-oriented games. There were definitely many instances in DA2 where I thought it would be logical to be able to talk before launching into battle (and no, I don't mean allowing the enemy to shout a line that Hawke can't respond to before starting combat).

There were parts in the game where I was actually frustrated because it was so stupid to be slaughtering the very people I wanted to side with without getting a chance to explain myself. It was very immersion breaking how even after such a pointless slaughter the side in question might still accept/welcome my help.

The lack of a persuade route took away a lot of the option of choice and role-playing (would this character really choose the slaughter-them-all route?). In many classic RPGs, my most memorable moments are the quests that didn't end in combat. I probably couldn't recount the battles I went through in the original Fallout 1 & 2, but I can still remember convincing the guy in the Arroyo temple not to fist-fight me in my trial.

In Dragon Age Origins, the most amazing gameplay parts weren't about "epic battles" but about the choices. Do I sacrifice Connor, Isolde, or neither? Do I side with the Dalish, the werewolves, or let them sort out their differences? Do I take the ritual or not?

In DA 2, I unfortunately often felt that combat was the be all end all. There weren't nearly enough quests that involved talking and thinking about making decisions - the sidequests in particular suffered from this. Most of the sidequests mentally blur together into "go to place X, kill Y waves of enemies, get Z coins as reward." I think this is part of what makes the world feel so much less alive than the DAO setting, as I've seen many people note. The interaction with non-companion NPCs usually boiled down to "do I kill this one or is it a piece of furniture."

By the end of the game, I was starting to wonder if Kirkwall was going to have a population problem after the hundreds of able-bodied people Hawke inevitably butchered.

Characters
While I think the companions were well generally well-concepted and I
was genuinely fond of them, I thought the player connection with them
suffered on account of not enough front-loading. Act 1 was disappointing in that it introduced all these interesting people to me and then proceeded to only give floaty dialogue after one short post-recruitment conversation.

I dreaded seeing the floaty line of dialogue above the character's head. It seems like such a small thing, but being able to enter into a proper dialogue screen when I click on my companion makes me feel that much more connected to them, even if there are only throwaway dialogue options ("I should go.") Hawke felt somehow dismissed by the companions, who would only have two conversations every three years.

For that matter, I thought the companions needed more of a stake in the proceedings. Their motivations for following Hawke around were never made clear (other than Varric going with you into the Deep Roads). And sometimes the incongruity of companions' actions were really immersion-breaking, as when Aveline, the captain of the guard, helps me wholesale slaughter Templars in the streets.

I liked the concept of the new rivalry/friendship system, but thought it could have been better executed. It was somewhat incongruous to be a total dick to someone and end up having his/her respect. I think there needed to be more opportunities for respectful disagreement rather than the generic closed-fist offensive dialogue option.

I think the characterization suffered from a lack of direct interaction/face-time with your companions. I loved the banter, but in all honesty I think the player ended up relying too much on the banter to get to know the companions. In a zero-sum game of resources, I would have preferred more of the traditional ask-your-NPCs-a-bunch-of-questions. That makes the difference between role-playing and just watching a movie.

As for the romances, I liked what was there but was left wanting too much more. I went with the Fenris rivalry-mance and I felt like there were a total of three romantic conversations - one with the initial encounter in Act 2, one after the companion quest in Act 3, and one at the end. I enjoyed all the characters, but I didn't feel like I got to know them as well as Alistair, Zevran, Leliana or Morrigan. I never got a chance to just ask about their lives, or to hear them tell little anecdotes ala Zevran. Most of the dialogue seemed to be them asking me to do stuff for them.

Also, I wish there was a more organic way to start the romances. So many of the flirt lines were just flat-out inappropriate!
Anders: I have a spirit in my head.
Hawke: So that explains the sexy tortured look!
Me: *facepalm*

Story
I appreciated the risk taken by going for a more personal story rather than the archetypal rallying armies to defeat an ancient evil. However, like so much else in DA2, the execution was left somewhat wanting.

Act 1 was really quite disastrous in terms of pacing, and I honestly can't say that I would have gone through it if I wasn't a fan of the franchise. I would have preferred fewer but more meaningful sidequests, and in all honesty I found the gathering money quest quite bizarre. Gathering X amount of sovereigns is a dull grind of a quest, and to have that as the first major one boggles the mind. Such grinding quests seem better placed further down the story, if at all, as they are off-putting.

The motivation for Hawke was rather problematic; for the majority of the game it seemed all Hawke really wanted to do was get rich. Hawke reacted to the events unfolding rather than driving them, a far cry from being the "most important person in Thedas."

Quality Control
I appreciate that Dragon Age has hundreds of complex plot flags and whatnot, but honestly the bugs seriously detract from the quality of the game. Merril's companion quest in Act 3 was ruined by her giving me the closure conversation before I even did the quest! Nothing shatters immersion quite like that.

I find it inexcusable that less than 2 weeks after the release of the game fans are already releasing bug-fixing patches when the BW QA team couldn't be bothered. It's just plain sloppy, and I'm sure it's frustrating for the devs too when content that they worked on doesn't make it into the game on account of silly bugs.

Miscellany
Partially because of the many import-related bugs, the cameos felt more like fan-disservice at times. They were very shoehorned-in and gratuitous. I almost wish the characters from the previous storylines would just be left alone so as not to cheapen their interactions and relationships from the previous game.

A more serious concern I have with the direction of the franchise right now is the trend of products to keep "leading-in" to the next one. DAO wrapped up its own self-contained story very nicely. Awakenings too, despite some off-putting epilogue slides in regards to the fate of the Warden. Witch Hunt had this going very bad, to the point where the entire DLC felt like a commercial for DA2 with some Morri-mance fanservice thrown in. And at the end of DA2, I was left astonished and more than a little angry at how much was left unresolved.

I can understand having to leave interest open for the next game in the series, but when there's so many questions unanswered that at the end of the game it feels more like I've played a commercial for the next game, something's wrong. At some point, BW will have to deliver, and I'm worried that there'll come a point where it can't possibly wrap up everything from the previous games in a satisfactory manner.

I think a lot of these problems boil down to the rushed development time. I would have been willing to wait another 2 years or more if it meant that DA2 would have been closer to DAO in quality. As Shigeru Miyamoto (creator of Mario/Zelda, famed Nintendo dev) said,

"A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever."

I hope that BioWare keeps that in mind as the next Dragon Age title is developed.

All that being said, I did enjoy the game very much and I do plan to replay it several times to experience all the choices. This is a constructive criticism thread, however, so I won't go in depth about the many things I did like (and this post is way too long already). Kudos to any feedback-gathering devs who actually read this.

Modifié par payroo, 21 mars 2011 - 07:57 .

[Corto81]

I'm on my 3rd playthrough atm, and yes, I find the game fun.

However, to use an MMO parallel, if DAO was Everquest, DA2 is WoW.

To explain...
Where DAO was deep and sandbox-style, and would completely immerse you into the world and the characters that could be explored, DA2 caters to the non-HC-RPG crowd.
It's trying to do what WoW did, make non-MMOers play MMOs.

Don't get me wrong, I love the combat.
It's the most exciting I've seen in an RPG.
No friendly fire is a severe detriment to learning strats and setting up perfect combos... It's just sorta... Easy.

Companions...
I miss the immersive factor a LOT, it's just not the same.
Also, the armor runes and upgrades are nice, but if you're doing Hard/Nightmare, having a PC Warrior makes things so much easier it's not even funny.
You can get multiple armor pieces and have multiple runes. You just have the ability to tank and DPS so much better than Aveline/Fenris, without ever delving into the Tanking/Hate trees.

As for DA3, I really really reallly hope they go back to a proper single-player RPG.
Voice-overs are nice. But they're severly limiting.

And oh... The rehashed caves and every Act having the same areas?
Please no more of that, that's just really insanely lazy.
Not to mention Fenris hasn't removed the (apparently non-decaying) bodies from his house in 10 years.


Summary:
I like the new class system.
I like the combat.
I like the graphics.
I like the voice-overs.
I liked the story... Problem is, you gotta concentrate to remember it, it's so spread out, bit chaotic.


Implementing THAT into a proper, deep, immersive game like DAO would be a complete success.

This way? It's still the best out there right now, but it doesn't compare to DAO or BG1/2, Planescape Torment, etc.

My biggest fear is that Bioware will go the Bioware road and cater to non-RPGs (or MMOers in WoW's case).
Making things shiny and stuff explode in pretty graphics and cater to new console players while ignoring the so-called old-school RPG crowd that basically made them great in the first place.

[Any0day]

Cybermortis wrote...

I think it is about time I tried to be fair to the developers, or at least the poor souls who had the job of putting the game together. It is very easy for an 'outsider' to be critical of what was or was not done, not realising the pressures or limitations the people involved were under. What makes this worse for DA2 is that many of the problems don't come from the development team, but are a result of PR and Marketing decisions based on money rather than common sense.

I'm sorry, but first of all you really couldn't be more wrong. I'll say it again: rationalization is not a valid argument. "Please like my game because we as a development team were under lots of pressure." - I'm a developer in real life, and while I don't do games, trust me when I understand the 'political' pressures of designing something.

You inevitably have a board of directors breathing down your neck - because all they care about is money. Which is partially why EA bought them out, not for the great games they make (I think I threw up in my mouth), but for whatever money that came with them. It's a bit funny actually - because dealing with EA is infact like dealing with a corporate devil of sorts. They offer you a buy out deal too tender to refuse (some cases it's 100% markup of stock price) - they buy all your assets with promises of a sympathetic relationship between producer and developer, when the reality is once they take over they demand sorter development cycles and streamlined game play. The reason they offer such a good price is because they usually buy out before a major game release, effectively regaining all they lost plus sale profits.

So - yeah, I understand the pressure they're under. Unfortunately if I pay good money, I expect a good game.

[Jenova65]

JohnEpler wrote...

Hey folks!

Just wanted to say that you've given some excellent feedback so far - the vast majority of you have given clear answers as to what you liked/disliked, as well as the reasoning behind those thoughts.

Everything's still being read! It's a long thread, so it's going to be a lengthy process, but thanks again for the great feedback. And keep it up!

Don't you worry, John, I keep coming back every time I think of something new  Still a good game imo, just could have been an amazing game.
Origins worked so very well for those of us who love inventory sorting, detailed levelling and so on. I miss being able to use a persuade skill rather than being judged on things I have mostly said. Sometimes I want to be the nicest person you ever met and then still lay the smack down on some folk who need a kicking.
Also, just wondering................ ummmm.............any reason we can't *Al Jilani punch* Hubert? 

[TEWR]

wildannie wrote....

It's quite annoying when you go up to them in their home base and they just spout 'we should move on' or tell you about a good shop.

what's even worse is when they should have some sort of comment regarding a situation, but just say something that just doesn't fit. Example: During the final quest of Act 2, instead of Aveline making a comment regarding the situation, she says "My term as captain hasn't been met with respect down here in Lowtown. And that's fine with me." or something to that effect.

[ToJKa1]

To sum this game up in one word compared to Origins: "less".

Less of everything, less monster variations, less unique locations, less characters you can interact with, less armors and weapons (though the ones there are are more varied in appearance) less choices, less consequences, less of pretty much everything. Though more enemy reinforcements. And then some. And then some more. In Act 3 that just gets ridiculous, like in Fallout 3 there are more raiders than people living in the city

On the positive side, i like the combat changes made for archers and mages, but 2h warrior in DA2 just isn't fun. Origins' animations were slow but looked powerful, whereas in DA2  Hawke might aswell be wielding a styrofoam sword seeing the speed and damage the weapon does (possibilty of FUBAR'd character build exists).  However the new and reworked specializations are great.

Story is interesting enough, and the emotional impact of certain scenes were huge, nice job there, though i have to say Hawke's motivations with certain possible events and outcomes are a bit unclear, but i guess that's where the "Role Playing" steps in. Hawke as a person (especially sarcastic personality ) is much better than i initially feared, but please bring back race selection for DA3

An enjoyable game on it's own merits, but compared to Origins, less of a game. Feels like about 0.75 x Origins to be exact

And i know i'm pretty much alone here, but i miss the huge dungeon crawls that were Origins' Deep Roads and the Fade. Both of them are too short and unimpressive in DA2. The Bownammar fortress ruins in Origins (or "Dead Trenches" was it?) alone was more impressive to me than those two put together (though i'm a sucker for ancient ruins ).

In my humble, non-professional opinion this game could've used another year in deveploment.

Modifié par ToJKa1, 21 mars 2011 - 09:06 .

[Funkification]

We need some warden. Plain and simple.

[TEWR]

The Dead Trenches and Bownammar are the same thing.


And I don't want to always have games where I can pick my own race, but neither do I want games that restrict me to one race. I think it should be every now and then we get a Dragon Age game with one of the two. Because there are going to be humans, and only humans, who make a profound impact on the world. The same thing with elves and dwarves.

[Costello_Anasazi]

I agree I want to play my Warden!

Back to the Criticism I will keep it short. Nothing you did seemed to change anything. The ending was a major point of this but all through the game, years past and at best you got a letter thanking you but other than that it made no difference. I can't hoestly see much reason in replaying as I did everything first time through and very little difference. Perhaps worse given this is DA2 most things done in DA:O were ignored. That you freed shale ment a one line rumour, that you burried the King you can purchase some armour the King of the Dwarves is.... lead to a quest. You get the idea.

So for DA2 expansion bring back my Warden!

I must admit this does have me wondering about Star Wars the Old Republic I am starting to wonder if for whatever reason Bioware have opted to move away from RPGs or forgotten that the story and being able to effect the world around you is what makes a good RPG an amazing RPG.

[nacho66]

I'm trying to figure out what was the real idea behind Dragon Age 2. It clearly looks like a different game that should get a different title. I mean, KOTOR and Force Unleashed are both set in Star Wars universe but there is no problem there as they are both different franchise. Controversy would start if Force Unleashed was named KOTOR3. That's just example but I think it represents what I mean about Dragon Age. DA2 is different (and worse) in almost every aspect when compared to DA:O and looking at all posts it's pretty clear how. I wonder if Bioware even cares about user's bad reviews and if they consider getting DA3 back closer to the first game or just stick to the idea and destroy the franchise completely

[Ultor84]

It would have been nice to let the team that created it actually have more than 12 months to make it, which is the current rumor/conjecture making the rounds. I think what they did make was remarkable though if it's true that this was a one year job, even if I didn't agree with every design decision or point of the story.

[DSGrant]

Guess I'll add my thoughts here, but before I do, let me just say for the record that overall I LOVED this game. The story was well written, the dialogue choices made sense and presented me with appropriate options, the combat was fun, and the Origins/Awakenings cameos were awesome!

1. I really like the evolving companion armor idea because I didn't need to sell myself for sex at the Blooming Rose in order to raise money to buy everyone new armor. However, I would have liked to seen this concept extended to their weapons and perhaps to at least one of their accessory items as well. Varric's crossbow was a perfect example. I always knew his weapon was level relevent and encounter appropriate because it levelled with him. It would have been nice to see this applied to other companion weapons, such as Sebastian's bow and Fenris' sword (if you choose to give it to him, that is), all of which could involve companion quests as it did for the examples above. This would have allowed me to spend more of my hard earned gold on all those really cool purple items that I would drool over because I didn't have enough gold typically to buy them. It would also make it much more obvious that the stuff sold by vendors is for Hawke, not for Aveline cuz she needs a better shield or for Anders because his staff is too old and weak.

2. There needs to be better accessory itemization. Calling the randomly generated gear ring, amulet, and belt felt really lazy and fabricated by the time I got into Act 3. Yes, you could get a "Greater Dalish Ring" as opposed to just a "Ring", but for baseline stuff, a little more in the description would have been nice. Some random synonym generation in your code would have gone a long ways to add to the immersion to make the randomly generated items feel, less generic and generated, such as "loop" or "band" or "circle" or "hoop" or "knot" or "ring".

3. Junk needs to be more valuable if it's going to be kept in the game. Dropping something worth 3 coppers isn't worth coding, in my opinion. Vendor items become very expensive very fast as you progress through the story, and yet even in Act 3 I'm still finding "torn trousers" or a "moth eaten scarf" which aren't worth the effort to loot and sell. I understand the purpose of including junk items, but they need to be more value appropriate for the Act we are in.

4. More armor sets please, and weapon sets. I finished the game at level 27 and my Champion armor was fairly obsolete by then. Yet I had no other real armor choices beyond that. My only option was to farm vendors like the Nexus golem for higher rated armor. The same with weapon sets, or the lack thereof in this game. I really enjoyed the weapon + shield sets and twin rogue dagger sets from Origins. There wasn't anyhing like that in this game however. The closest thing was the Carta daggers, which didn't give you a set bonus for getting both of them (and they should have considering their history). I also think that if you're going to feature twin Finesse-style daggers in the introduction, you should have them available in the game. Everyone playing a Rogue was looking for a twin to Finesse, but there is none (the closest thing to it was Spider's Heart and the Dalish daggers). So please bring back the weapon sets please! They made the game that much richer and more enjoyable.

I could add more, but that was the feedback at the top of my list. Hope you guys are giving us some DLC soonish, since I'm about to finish my 2nd playthrough!

[Relshar]

reused maps
lack of inventry choices for compainions
lack of race choices for main character and the ability to name them how I wanted
Storyline very weak and dissconnected
Pointless side quests where you had to collect x number of items, if I wanted to play WoW i wouldn't be playing this.
Crafting is non existant as you still need cash to make the items.
Couldn't gain any connection to the companions as I couldn't talk to them or learn about them like i could in DA:O.
My character felt out of place within the story as nothing seemed to revolve around her no bad guy trying to kill her, no archdeamon trying to destroy the world. She just happened to be in Kirkwall and stuck her nose into others bussiness.
Game was to short and felt rushed just to cash in on DA:O sucess.
Weak ending to the storyline also.
The loss on fatigue stats on armour and the fact you only had two stats for the characters to concentrate on made it silly. The loss of skills also like lockpick meant you had to put half your points into cunning just to open the chests. Meaning you ended up with 40 in the stat and was lacking in constitution.

Nothing much I can say good about the game to be honest everything that was good in DA:O does not exist in DA:2.

[ToJKa1]

And the exploding enemies are stupid (already modded them away), Origins' special finishers were far better. I suppose they're required for the faster combat, but i still say they're stupid.

[TEWR]

Relshar wrote...


lack of  ability to name them how I wanted

not sure if you mean first name or last name, but either way this part of that point isn't exactly a good point. You could customize your first name in DA:O, while you had a set last name. Same deal here. Even some characters in DA:O would call you The Warden or your last name.

Crafting is non existant as you still need cash to make the items.

Origins had this too, though I'm not sure which version's was better. Personally I feel we shouldn't have to spend money just to craft.

The loss of skills also like lockpick meant you had to put half your points into cunning just to open the chests. Meaning you ended up with 40 in the stat and was lacking in constitution.

.

Agreed. My rogue hawke had to have 40 in cunning, then on my warrior hawke playthrough I wasted too many attribute points on Isabella for 40 cunning, because a lot of good loot is in fact in locked chests