There were many aspects of DA2 that I really enjoyed or considered innovative. The companions' friendship/rivalry system was a cool idea, as well as the way the game tracked Hawke's personality and used the dominant dialogue style to select cut-scene dialogue.
Generally, I thought the characters were very well-written, although I think they could have benefited from having more interactions with Hawke outside of their homebases. The romances often felt very rushed, especially when compared to how well-developed they were in Origins, where you could at least initiate side dialogues/actions with companions away from personal quests.
I think the Act structure with all the time lapses really exacerbated this too, because as a player, it's hard to come back in with the understanding that three years have passed and yet everyone seems to have been on pause. It was a clever device, but it sometimes felt implausible and broke immersion. The interactions with party members would have made more sense if the plot had been compressed into a shorter time span.
While the story arch could have been better paced and more cohesive, I liked that it deviated from the typical formula of collecting plot coupons to complete some huge main quest. The strength of the writing and some of the immersive, atmospheric elements of the world helped to shore up the fact that the game didn't feel nearly as epic or as high-stakes as DAO.
I liked all the changes to the combat animations and the skill trees. The set-ups for battle were an area that could be improved, however, since, IMO, DA2 felt jumbled with waves of enemies rather than deploying battlefield lay-out that might require real tactics.
Aside from the obvious criticism regarding recycling the cave maps, it would have been nice to see more variety and visual distinctiveness in the Wounded Coast, Sundermount and the many Kirkwall street scenes. The steep staircases and competing graffiti were nice touches in the city, but since Hawke spends so much time in Kirkwall and its environs, it'd be nice to have more diversity in scenery.
In terms of tone, I liked that the game contained darker elements and political ambiguity, but at times, it was almost painfully bleak and the piling of one unpreventable tragedy onto another started to feel manipulative and almost absurd.
The 'disappearance' of Hawke and the Warden at the end of the game was particularly frustrating, especially for KOTOR fans who've become wary of their player characters getting exiled to the Unknown Regions once it seems they've outlived their immediate usefulness. I really, really hope that the choices that Hawke and the Warden have made (both politically and personally, in terms of LIs and friendships) won't be invalidated in future games, even if they don't return to play a direct part in the story.
.
In any case, I consider DA2 an enjoyable, if somewhat flawed, game and I appreciate the fact that the developers tried to do something bold and experimental with the franchise rather than simply resting on their (well-earned) laurels. I do hope that a future installment will receive the time and funding to be a bit more polished and to incorporate the kind of innovative player choice that has been one of the principal appeals of the series.
Constructive Criticism
Débuté par
HawXV2
, mars 15 2011 06:50
Retour en haut
#2202
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 03:43
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
vilnii wrote...
I will keep saying this...
The Witcher 2 Assassins of Kings
Bioware should get rid of their pride and study that game carefully.
1. The way they handle political intrigue
2. The way sex and romance is handled
3. The way real human beings have conversations especially when reacting emotionally
4. Stories that are not left hanging, plots that lead somewhere
5. Meaningful PC choices and consequences
6. Available selection of gear and upgrades
7. Do not reuse locations
8. Thing big, Think big, Think big again. Make something awesome happen to the world
9. Bring the RPG back into the franchise. Skill checks and Stat checks
You want them to study a game that is not even released until May 17? And we have no idea how good it is? I am playing the Witcher 1 now and it does not hold a candle to DA:O. The story is not that great even compared to DA 2.
#2203
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 04:30
cimerians412
-
- Members
- 26 messages
Private conversation with a friend on Dragon Age 2 I want to post a few items of note here. The main theme? Lets make it a true RPG, one in which we have our own character:
- Nerd talk: They break the fundamental law of RPG's. Its supposed to be YOUR character not the Dungeon Masters.
- Bioware needs to understand comparisons WILL be made to the first game. With that out of the way: In DA:O I had loads of fun playing different races. This is the biggest problem I have with DA2. The only things allowed to change is to be female\\male and change your FIRST name (last name is theirs). They are basically forcing you to play the guy on the box cover which I resented from the start. I wanted my OWN character in THEIR story. Not THEIR character in THEIR story.
- My big thing was....besides the rolling looping Flinstones backgrounds....the Darkspawn look less fearsome. Actually not at all. More like mindless cartoon cannon fodder.
- "Your character" now talks.... repeats or re-words the lines you select. Thanks but my imagination still works fine. I liked imagining how MY character sounds like when I picked a line. Again...its THEIR character your playing. Not yours.
It sounds like a flame war against DA2 and I guess it is but I thought I would post it here in case Bioware seriously reads this forum and takes all our hundreds of comments to heart. The main issue me and my buddy have is that the game...in the end...felt like we were simply playing an action\\adventure game not an RPG. Thanks for listening guys. We get pissed but we care, so we post on your forums.
- Nerd talk: They break the fundamental law of RPG's. Its supposed to be YOUR character not the Dungeon Masters.
- Bioware needs to understand comparisons WILL be made to the first game. With that out of the way: In DA:O I had loads of fun playing different races. This is the biggest problem I have with DA2. The only things allowed to change is to be female\\male and change your FIRST name (last name is theirs). They are basically forcing you to play the guy on the box cover which I resented from the start. I wanted my OWN character in THEIR story. Not THEIR character in THEIR story.
- My big thing was....besides the rolling looping Flinstones backgrounds....the Darkspawn look less fearsome. Actually not at all. More like mindless cartoon cannon fodder.
- "Your character" now talks.... repeats or re-words the lines you select. Thanks but my imagination still works fine. I liked imagining how MY character sounds like when I picked a line. Again...its THEIR character your playing. Not yours.
It sounds like a flame war against DA2 and I guess it is but I thought I would post it here in case Bioware seriously reads this forum and takes all our hundreds of comments to heart. The main issue me and my buddy have is that the game...in the end...felt like we were simply playing an action\\adventure game not an RPG. Thanks for listening guys. We get pissed but we care, so we post on your forums.
#2204
Guest_vilnii_*
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 05:23
Guest_vilnii_*
Guest_vilnii_*
-
- Guests
Realmzmaster wrote...
vilnii wrote...
I will keep saying this...
The Witcher 2 Assassins of Kings
Bioware should get rid of their pride and study that game carefully.
1. The way they handle political intrigue
2. The way sex and romance is handled
3. The way real human beings have conversations especially when reacting emotionally
4. Stories that are not left hanging, plots that lead somewhere
5. Meaningful PC choices and consequences
6. Available selection of gear and upgrades
7. Do not reuse locations
8. Thing big, Think big, Think big again. Make something awesome happen to the world
9. Bring the RPG back into the franchise. Skill checks and Stat checks
You want them to study a game that is not even released until May 17? And we have no idea how good it is? I am playing the Witcher 1 now and it does not hold a candle to DA:O. The story is not that great even compared to DA 2.
Why not pretend I never mentioned The Witcher II. Then read my comments again...
"Stories that are not left hanging, plots that lead somewhere"
There are too many hanging threads in the franchise...in DA 2 particularly plotlines seemed to lead nowhere (Flemeth in DA2 for instance)
The Witcher never fell into this trap...
Modifié par vilnii, 09 mai 2011 - 05:24 .
#2205
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 07:18
ReiSilver
-
- Members
- 749 messages
I think someone said it best but I'm going to appropriate their saying;
I am in a rivalmance with DA2
One thing I'd really like to stress as bad is massive character development/change happening off screen. I'm mainly referring to Merrill and Anders. Arguments can be made about how a humorous but irresponsible free-spirit becomes a humourless, bogged-down, whiny romantic or how a serious minded, responsible, by-the-rules, big sister becomes Luna Lovegood with next to zero self confidence about anything but one dangerous issue.
But if we don't see it happen we're not going to want to accept the sudden change, especially if we liked them the way they were before or like both characters but can't reconcile them as the same person.
Either let the big change happen on screen or make this new personality a new character. Otherwise it just seems like playing of the audiences desire to see old characters again only to be disappointed.
I am in a rivalmance with DA2
One thing I'd really like to stress as bad is massive character development/change happening off screen. I'm mainly referring to Merrill and Anders. Arguments can be made about how a humorous but irresponsible free-spirit becomes a humourless, bogged-down, whiny romantic or how a serious minded, responsible, by-the-rules, big sister becomes Luna Lovegood with next to zero self confidence about anything but one dangerous issue.
But if we don't see it happen we're not going to want to accept the sudden change, especially if we liked them the way they were before or like both characters but can't reconcile them as the same person.
Either let the big change happen on screen or make this new personality a new character. Otherwise it just seems like playing of the audiences desire to see old characters again only to be disappointed.
#2206
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 12:16
Furtled
-
- Members
- 426 messages
I'm not sure how to frame this without referring back to Origins (apologies for that) but here goes:
Feeling like you're creating/driving the story through your PC
I may be misremembering, but a quick skim through the wiki confirms that there's a sizeable number of quests in Origins that have three or more ways to finish them, Redcliffe springs to mind (even discounting the 'soft' option of schlepping around the lake), also crowning the new Dwarven king, the Landsmeet and the Sacred Ashes. With all these choices (especially when combined with coercion skills) it's possible to do a lot of playthroughs and come out with a very different story for each one; despite it being the same end result of killing the giant dragon.
That sense of freedom/control just isn't there in DA2 where the predominant way of solving a problem is to hit people/demons/spiders repeatedly with pointy things/magic until they fall over/explode. In part I get why there's less god-like player control over plot in DA2 because it's a different type of character, but reducing the ways a player can get to the same end result so sharply is possibly why some people felt so railroaded through the game.
Being challenged
The above point sort of carries over to the lack of bigger non combat quests, there's nothing remotely close to the Guardian's gauntlet (the fade barrels don't really make the same impact or require the same amount of thought), the demon puzzle in Shale's recruitment quest, Caridan's gauntlet etc. - in short there's no sense of challenge, especially when combined with the loss of the tactical camera and the waves that (initially) unexpectedly appear behind your carefully arranged party and wipe out the squishies. I'll freely admit though I haven't played on upped difficulties because the waves thing/giant health bars made fights a smidge tedious on casual and I didn't fancy making it more so.
Keeping the above sort of things in the gameplay would have given DA2 a much richer feel (for me anyway) and made it more replayable.
Quest specific
When you recruit Archangel in ME2 the game manages to create a genuine sense of urgency for the player, I was expecting something similar in 'All that Remains' - instead the very well scripted quest looses a lot of the emotional impact/momentum for me because the PC is still being distracted by looting boxes/barrels, reading papers etc. It might have helped to lose the side loot on that one and possibly add some sort of hidden door to give the player a reason to stop and look through the area prior to the final confrontation room.
Usual caveat of personal preferences/opinions applies.
Feeling like you're creating/driving the story through your PC
I may be misremembering, but a quick skim through the wiki confirms that there's a sizeable number of quests in Origins that have three or more ways to finish them, Redcliffe springs to mind (even discounting the 'soft' option of schlepping around the lake), also crowning the new Dwarven king, the Landsmeet and the Sacred Ashes. With all these choices (especially when combined with coercion skills) it's possible to do a lot of playthroughs and come out with a very different story for each one; despite it being the same end result of killing the giant dragon.
That sense of freedom/control just isn't there in DA2 where the predominant way of solving a problem is to hit people/demons/spiders repeatedly with pointy things/magic until they fall over/explode. In part I get why there's less god-like player control over plot in DA2 because it's a different type of character, but reducing the ways a player can get to the same end result so sharply is possibly why some people felt so railroaded through the game.
Being challenged
The above point sort of carries over to the lack of bigger non combat quests, there's nothing remotely close to the Guardian's gauntlet (the fade barrels don't really make the same impact or require the same amount of thought), the demon puzzle in Shale's recruitment quest, Caridan's gauntlet etc. - in short there's no sense of challenge, especially when combined with the loss of the tactical camera and the waves that (initially) unexpectedly appear behind your carefully arranged party and wipe out the squishies. I'll freely admit though I haven't played on upped difficulties because the waves thing/giant health bars made fights a smidge tedious on casual and I didn't fancy making it more so.
Keeping the above sort of things in the gameplay would have given DA2 a much richer feel (for me anyway) and made it more replayable.
Quest specific
When you recruit Archangel in ME2 the game manages to create a genuine sense of urgency for the player, I was expecting something similar in 'All that Remains' - instead the very well scripted quest looses a lot of the emotional impact/momentum for me because the PC is still being distracted by looting boxes/barrels, reading papers etc. It might have helped to lose the side loot on that one and possibly add some sort of hidden door to give the player a reason to stop and look through the area prior to the final confrontation room.
Usual caveat of personal preferences/opinions applies.
Modifié par Furtled, 09 mai 2011 - 06:25 .
#2207
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 03:13
grumpyboobyhead
-
- Members
- 33 messages
Well there's only a couple of things that really matter to me and these are it.
1. Variables:
Cons:
In general DA:O gave great stories and all origins gave that unique touch of being an entirely different game, however.
Since this was removed a lot of the unique dialogues and great interaction between the characters has been removed making class selection the only thing keeping it fresh after 1 playtrough.
However in reality it's only 2 stories we truly get and specializations chosen by the player is underused.
Pros:
Despite all of the above, it does make the game less addictive and the 2 stories are rich enough as they are without all the hassle to reload the game regularly to inspect other responses.
And the game does make references to your specialization which is to say the least better than nothing and the most, more of it please!
2.Segue between chapters:
Cons:
I really must say that I enjoy most of the story except the segue between the chapters, looking at the pictures instead of following Hawke in his in-between heroics is undermining.
Despite this being a story read from a book Varric still explains the game that is being players as a real life person, yet the segue makes him seem like a fictional character.
Pro:
It does ensure that there are little to no plot holes and keeps the player guessing of possible external affairs in the game.
I must admit these are the only things bothering me but in all fairness I feel most has been said,
hope this is somewhat constructive and farewell.
1. Variables:
Cons:
In general DA:O gave great stories and all origins gave that unique touch of being an entirely different game, however.
Since this was removed a lot of the unique dialogues and great interaction between the characters has been removed making class selection the only thing keeping it fresh after 1 playtrough.
However in reality it's only 2 stories we truly get and specializations chosen by the player is underused.
Pros:
Despite all of the above, it does make the game less addictive and the 2 stories are rich enough as they are without all the hassle to reload the game regularly to inspect other responses.
And the game does make references to your specialization which is to say the least better than nothing and the most, more of it please!
2.Segue between chapters:
Cons:
I really must say that I enjoy most of the story except the segue between the chapters, looking at the pictures instead of following Hawke in his in-between heroics is undermining.
Despite this being a story read from a book Varric still explains the game that is being players as a real life person, yet the segue makes him seem like a fictional character.
Pro:
It does ensure that there are little to no plot holes and keeps the player guessing of possible external affairs in the game.
I must admit these are the only things bothering me but in all fairness I feel most has been said,
hope this is somewhat constructive and farewell.
#2208
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 03:13
Spell Singer
-
- Members
- 247 messages
I have to admit to a love hate relationship with the game.
I played the prologue under nightmare since I think friendly fire is critical to any combat system but it was too annoying and the friendly fire applied to far more things than it should. So I dropped down to Hard for most of the game (with some reductions here and there due to extreme annoyance).
I played a sword and shield warrior and did not get any "agro" management skills, as I think agro is an unprintable obscenity.
Firstly the sword and shield tree is gimped badly. Your damage output is pathetically low. This leads to two issues. The first is it makes any solo combat extremely long and tedious but it also means you can't hold "agro" since your damage is eclipsed by the others in the group. Also you lack any way to exploit a mage's brittle (either assault or scatter should interact with brittle, while the other interacts with dissoriented). It seems clear that "sword and shield" is relegated to NPCs. My solo duel took, half on normal and half on casual, 11 regular healing potions, 2 life wards, 2 restoration and 1 elf-whaever potion. Not to mention other times I fought alone (due to all the NPCs going down) a fight dragged on for ever.
After the first few fights the way the fight would go was utterly predictable. But where the enemies would show up was not. This leads to your back line being clobbered bad if the new NPCs ninja arrive on top of them. Also the fact there was no collision meant that you could not hold down a choke point. Several times I had the enemy run right through my "line" and then the whole plan goes to pot. Fighting in a fluid battle situation where the NPCs behave according to some AI thing is frustrating rather than fun.
The ability of the enemy assassins to kill the bulk of your party in a single hit, with no defense possible is vastly annoying. You can't stop it happening and killing these characters as opposed to your rogues is not easy. They can't be shield bashed even by a strength 40+ character where as your rogues and mages get "knock back locked." "Knock Back Lock" is when the character is pinned against something and hit by enemy's that knock back. When this happens the soft squishy character dies...again there is nothing you can do about it. They basically are at that point locked into a "recovery from knock back" loop that gets them clobbered.
I ended up playing Isabella for most of the last half of the game in fights. I would leave my character to follow my tactics settings (which worked ok) and used her to inflict grevious body harm to the NPCs. The problem is that rather invalidates the fact that I want to actually play my character not an NPC. But she was critical to terminating the enemy so I had to control her. Making the PC irrelevant to the fight is not good.
The "Battlemaster" skills Rally and Synergy need serious work. Synergy in particular is well neigh useless due to the range requirement. I don't really want the squishies within 10 m of my warrior thanks. Also for 30% of your stamina you should get something better than what you do. Rally is only good to boost their regen...but if you are running Synergy, Turn the Blade and Shield Defense you can hardly afford to activate it. Also the 50% transfer so far as I could see doesn't work.
The later game swords are no where near as nice as the early ones. Shaarash, Fade's Fury, and Red Iron all look absurd. I ended up using the guardsman blade simply because it looked like a sword not some fantasy joke. Also the insta gibbing was really unnecessary and childish.
While the cross-class combo is a good idea it doesn't work so well in practice. It requires too many skills taken only from specific trees.
I would summarize the whole thing about the combat as:
1. It lacks "tactics" since you can't take advantage of terrain due to the enemy running through you.
2. It is tedious (at higher difficulty levels) due to the absurd hit points the enemies have. I saw NPC elves with more hits then the entire party, demons with over 10,000 hit points etc. This is not fun, it is just tedious.
3. It is predictable since every fight is exactly the same. Kill the first wave and the second wave shows up, kill that an the third and so on. Get the "boss" down half hits and a bunch of "adds" show up. Get the boss down to a third hits and another "add" wave shows up. Been there done that.
4. It is annoying. I found myself cursing my NPCs, and the enemy NPCs. The combat is too fast, and the battlespace too fluid to exert effective control. There is no log, so you can't see what went wrong or right in a battle. Popping into one character to get them out of a danger may mean another one is near death. Telling them to go someplace and then having them turn around and run back etc. All of this adds up to making managing the battle far more annoying then fun.
Why did you change the character statistics from Origins? That was a game system where munchkins were not rewarded. Instead you went to "one stat that rules them" min-maxer munchkin stuff. Can't say the "simplified" system appeals to me.
Now then what I liked about the game system.
The skill trees I thought were a good change. They need to be looked at seriously to make them more balanced but the basis is a good one.
The art. I liked the look, I don't think it actually better than origins but it is not worse and it didn't offend me. Also for the most part the armour looked like armour, unlike in Origin's were a lot of the heavy armour looked like some fantasy crap. The various setting were well done and so forth.
The story and NPCs were very well written. The role playing aspects of the story really got me hooked. I even enjoyed the character of Isabella something I had originally not thought I would. Basically the story, the NPCs and so forth were compelling enough to make me tolerate the combat system. I actually cared about the various NPCs (not all of them since a number of them sat out the side lines), and took some time thinking about what Hawke might do. I enjoyed the voiced cinematic look. I didn't find the changes to the inventory so bad, though I have to admit that when talking to Aveline it was a bit odd when she said "You sold Wesley's shield..." uhm no actually it and his sword are sitting in my storage chest...I kept Aveline using those two items long past when it was sensible. But my lvl 32 warden still uses the Cousland Family Sword... It was the story and the NPCs that kept me playing when I wanted to throw the game off a cliff due to the frustrating combat system.
I'm a grognard (I have played war games for over 30 years) and I am a role player so my views are probably not standard.
I played the prologue under nightmare since I think friendly fire is critical to any combat system but it was too annoying and the friendly fire applied to far more things than it should. So I dropped down to Hard for most of the game (with some reductions here and there due to extreme annoyance).
I played a sword and shield warrior and did not get any "agro" management skills, as I think agro is an unprintable obscenity.
Firstly the sword and shield tree is gimped badly. Your damage output is pathetically low. This leads to two issues. The first is it makes any solo combat extremely long and tedious but it also means you can't hold "agro" since your damage is eclipsed by the others in the group. Also you lack any way to exploit a mage's brittle (either assault or scatter should interact with brittle, while the other interacts with dissoriented). It seems clear that "sword and shield" is relegated to NPCs. My solo duel took, half on normal and half on casual, 11 regular healing potions, 2 life wards, 2 restoration and 1 elf-whaever potion. Not to mention other times I fought alone (due to all the NPCs going down) a fight dragged on for ever.
After the first few fights the way the fight would go was utterly predictable. But where the enemies would show up was not. This leads to your back line being clobbered bad if the new NPCs ninja arrive on top of them. Also the fact there was no collision meant that you could not hold down a choke point. Several times I had the enemy run right through my "line" and then the whole plan goes to pot. Fighting in a fluid battle situation where the NPCs behave according to some AI thing is frustrating rather than fun.
The ability of the enemy assassins to kill the bulk of your party in a single hit, with no defense possible is vastly annoying. You can't stop it happening and killing these characters as opposed to your rogues is not easy. They can't be shield bashed even by a strength 40+ character where as your rogues and mages get "knock back locked." "Knock Back Lock" is when the character is pinned against something and hit by enemy's that knock back. When this happens the soft squishy character dies...again there is nothing you can do about it. They basically are at that point locked into a "recovery from knock back" loop that gets them clobbered.
I ended up playing Isabella for most of the last half of the game in fights. I would leave my character to follow my tactics settings (which worked ok) and used her to inflict grevious body harm to the NPCs. The problem is that rather invalidates the fact that I want to actually play my character not an NPC. But she was critical to terminating the enemy so I had to control her. Making the PC irrelevant to the fight is not good.
The "Battlemaster" skills Rally and Synergy need serious work. Synergy in particular is well neigh useless due to the range requirement. I don't really want the squishies within 10 m of my warrior thanks. Also for 30% of your stamina you should get something better than what you do. Rally is only good to boost their regen...but if you are running Synergy, Turn the Blade and Shield Defense you can hardly afford to activate it. Also the 50% transfer so far as I could see doesn't work.
The later game swords are no where near as nice as the early ones. Shaarash, Fade's Fury, and Red Iron all look absurd. I ended up using the guardsman blade simply because it looked like a sword not some fantasy joke. Also the insta gibbing was really unnecessary and childish.
While the cross-class combo is a good idea it doesn't work so well in practice. It requires too many skills taken only from specific trees.
I would summarize the whole thing about the combat as:
1. It lacks "tactics" since you can't take advantage of terrain due to the enemy running through you.
2. It is tedious (at higher difficulty levels) due to the absurd hit points the enemies have. I saw NPC elves with more hits then the entire party, demons with over 10,000 hit points etc. This is not fun, it is just tedious.
3. It is predictable since every fight is exactly the same. Kill the first wave and the second wave shows up, kill that an the third and so on. Get the "boss" down half hits and a bunch of "adds" show up. Get the boss down to a third hits and another "add" wave shows up. Been there done that.
4. It is annoying. I found myself cursing my NPCs, and the enemy NPCs. The combat is too fast, and the battlespace too fluid to exert effective control. There is no log, so you can't see what went wrong or right in a battle. Popping into one character to get them out of a danger may mean another one is near death. Telling them to go someplace and then having them turn around and run back etc. All of this adds up to making managing the battle far more annoying then fun.
Why did you change the character statistics from Origins? That was a game system where munchkins were not rewarded. Instead you went to "one stat that rules them" min-maxer munchkin stuff. Can't say the "simplified" system appeals to me.
Now then what I liked about the game system.
The skill trees I thought were a good change. They need to be looked at seriously to make them more balanced but the basis is a good one.
The art. I liked the look, I don't think it actually better than origins but it is not worse and it didn't offend me. Also for the most part the armour looked like armour, unlike in Origin's were a lot of the heavy armour looked like some fantasy crap. The various setting were well done and so forth.
The story and NPCs were very well written. The role playing aspects of the story really got me hooked. I even enjoyed the character of Isabella something I had originally not thought I would. Basically the story, the NPCs and so forth were compelling enough to make me tolerate the combat system. I actually cared about the various NPCs (not all of them since a number of them sat out the side lines), and took some time thinking about what Hawke might do. I enjoyed the voiced cinematic look. I didn't find the changes to the inventory so bad, though I have to admit that when talking to Aveline it was a bit odd when she said "You sold Wesley's shield..." uhm no actually it and his sword are sitting in my storage chest...I kept Aveline using those two items long past when it was sensible. But my lvl 32 warden still uses the Cousland Family Sword... It was the story and the NPCs that kept me playing when I wanted to throw the game off a cliff due to the frustrating combat system.
I'm a grognard (I have played war games for over 30 years) and I am a role player so my views are probably not standard.
#2209
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 04:03
Kissing the pink
-
- Members
- 13 messages
No, there was very little in DA2 that was good, you have been sold a half completed game that is now been designed for the console only. Its whole look feel and size along with repeated areas, its fighting, is for the console numpties. DA2 as a pc game is an utter disgrace, the only thing I can say looked better was the quanari...big deal.
#2210
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 04:56
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
vilnii wrote...
Realmzmaster wrote...
vilnii wrote...
I will keep saying this...
The Witcher 2 Assassins of Kings
Bioware should get rid of their pride and study that game carefully.
1. The way they handle political intrigue
2. The way sex and romance is handled
3. The way real human beings have conversations especially when reacting emotionally
4. Stories that are not left hanging, plots that lead somewhere
5. Meaningful PC choices and consequences
6. Available selection of gear and upgrades
7. Do not reuse locations
8. Thing big, Think big, Think big again. Make something awesome happen to the world
9. Bring the RPG back into the franchise. Skill checks and Stat checks
You want them to study a game that is not even released until May 17? And we have no idea how good it is? I am playing the Witcher 1 now and it does not hold a candle to DA:O. The story is not that great even compared to DA 2.
Why not pretend I never mentioned The Witcher II. Then read my comments again...
"Stories that are not left hanging, plots that lead somewhere"
There are too many hanging threads in the franchise...in DA 2 particularly plotlines seemed to lead nowhere (Flemeth in DA2 for instance)
The Witcher never fell into this trap...
No the witcher falls into other traps like re-used models of people for different characters instead of re-used maps.
It falls into the trap of playing the Dungeon Master,s character which is Geralt and not giving me the ability to create my own. But since it is based on a book's character so I will give it a pass. DA 2 does the same thing with Hawke.
Stories are left hanging in the Witcher bacause some quests cannot be completed depending on your action. Hot Potato comes to mind. The whole of Act I with the village lacks polish and rambles in direction. The comabt is not realistic you have three different stances depending on the enemy you face and can do none of them unless you use a witcher sword. Did the witcher forget the stances. when using a different weapon? Which limits the use of weaponry. Combo attacks are not realistic.
There are problems with all CRPGS. I will wait to see if Witcher 2 has a demo. I am not impressed with Witcher 1. It is a decent game.
#2211
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 08:52
Kissing the pink
-
- Members
- 13 messages
What a croc of xxxx! DA2 is not a great accomplishment! Being called Dragon age 2 supposes it ties in and improves on the original game! it does neither! Its more like a console game add on pack! Your stuck mostly in one area Kirkwall, and if you venture out, omg the caves are all the same! oh, no, sorry its different, you have a stone slab covering a doorway. Constructive criticism? this game is totaly rotten to the core! its whole construction is to make money via consoles and damn the quality, playability, and longevity that DAO has. Stop talking twaddle on 'oh I liked that bit, but not that bit' the whole damn thing is awful and Bioware should be ashamed.
#2212
Posté 09 mai 2011 - 11:36
bossk-office
-
- Members
- 157 messages
Here are two pieces of constructive criticism:
Bring back a more tactical camera. While map recycling sucks, I can understand it to a degree if it was brought about by constraints – there’s a reason for it. But the limited camera just feels like someone wanted to ruin Dragon Age for no good reason. It has a real big negative effect on the otherwise great gameplay.
Don’t dumb things down to get console players on board. Console players don’t want to be told they’re dumb.
Bring back a more tactical camera. While map recycling sucks, I can understand it to a degree if it was brought about by constraints – there’s a reason for it. But the limited camera just feels like someone wanted to ruin Dragon Age for no good reason. It has a real big negative effect on the otherwise great gameplay.
Don’t dumb things down to get console players on board. Console players don’t want to be told they’re dumb.
Modifié par panchamkauns, 09 mai 2011 - 11:46 .
#2213
Posté 10 mai 2011 - 12:46
PSUHammer
-
- Members
- 3 302 messages
Realmzmaster wrote...
No the witcher falls into other traps like re-used models of people for different characters instead of re-used maps.
It falls into the trap of playing the Dungeon Master,s character which is Geralt and not giving me the ability to create my own. But since it is based on a book's character so I will give it a pass. DA 2 does the same thing with Hawke.
Stories are left hanging in the Witcher bacause some quests cannot be completed depending on your action. Hot Potato comes to mind. The whole of Act I with the village lacks polish and rambles in direction. The comabt is not realistic you have three different stances depending on the enemy you face and can do none of them unless you use a witcher sword. Did the witcher forget the stances. when using a different weapon? Which limits the use of weaponry. Combo attacks are not realistic.
There are problems with all CRPGS. I will wait to see if Witcher 2 has a demo. I am not impressed with Witcher 1. It is a decent game.
You make great points. I am not sure why some people have turned The Witcher into this deity-like game. It was ok. I played it and enjoyed it...but only after they fixed it with the Enhanced Edition. I, too, am looking forward to seeing what part 2 is like, but I will reserve judgement until it is released. Some on here are jumping the gun, a bit.
I don't think it is fair to compare the two series as they both have their strengths and faults...so far.
#2214
Posté 10 mai 2011 - 08:38
NoAngel89
-
- Members
- 832 messages
Kissing the pink wrote...
No, there was very little in DA2 that was good, you have been sold a half completed game that is now been designed for the console only. Its whole look feel and size along with repeated areas, its fighting, is for the console numpties. DA2 as a pc game is an utter disgrace, the only thing I can say looked better was the quanari...big deal.
well said ouch, and the dog, that was awesome lol....... man why did I preorder this, I probably should of preordered the first game, or better off buyin the ulitmate DAO edition
Modifié par NoAngel89, 10 mai 2011 - 08:39 .
#2215
Posté 10 mai 2011 - 09:48
0x30A88
-
- Members
- 1 081 messages
DA:O + more realistically propotional animations + modern graphics = awesome.
#2216
Guest_f_b_*
Posté 10 mai 2011 - 04:23
Guest_f_b_*
Guest_f_b_*
-
- Guests
Not a DA2 hater. It was OK. But compared to Origins... it was weak. Here's what I'd like, BioWare, if you ever read these boards:
•Take longer developing it. There was a four-year gap between ME and ME2, and I'd say ME2 was awesome. Between Origins and DA2? 18 months - 2 years. Shortcuts were taken.
•Give mages back armour and traditional weapons. I like playing as a mage, and I miss greatswords!
•Bring back that thing where people's mouths do that weird flappy, noisy thing... oh yeah, talking! Talking that has an impact on people and places, and isn't just two minutes of excuses for the next fight. The conversation wheel only gives you 3 options - take that out and find a better interface, even if it means going back to the old one.
•More novel-worthy characters. Why is there so much fanfiction? Because the characters are so well-fleshed out! I only liked Anders and Varric in this one, whereas the assortment of princes with bad jokes, Orlesian spies and ****y Wilds witches in Origins were what made the game for me. Forget about the combat - work on the relationships again. Get rid of Friendship/Rivalry and bring back plain old approval.
•Sort out graphics, and stop making enemies explode. That just looks ridiculous in a "mature" game.
•Remember that Dragon Age and Mass Effect are NOT the same!
P.S:Hear hear, panchamkauns! (360 player)
Do the rest of you agree on this?
Sorry, forums always make me a bit ranty. (-: *Wipes brow, exhales*
•Take longer developing it. There was a four-year gap between ME and ME2, and I'd say ME2 was awesome. Between Origins and DA2? 18 months - 2 years. Shortcuts were taken.
•Give mages back armour and traditional weapons. I like playing as a mage, and I miss greatswords!
•Bring back that thing where people's mouths do that weird flappy, noisy thing... oh yeah, talking! Talking that has an impact on people and places, and isn't just two minutes of excuses for the next fight. The conversation wheel only gives you 3 options - take that out and find a better interface, even if it means going back to the old one.
•More novel-worthy characters. Why is there so much fanfiction? Because the characters are so well-fleshed out! I only liked Anders and Varric in this one, whereas the assortment of princes with bad jokes, Orlesian spies and ****y Wilds witches in Origins were what made the game for me. Forget about the combat - work on the relationships again. Get rid of Friendship/Rivalry and bring back plain old approval.
•Sort out graphics, and stop making enemies explode. That just looks ridiculous in a "mature" game.
•Remember that Dragon Age and Mass Effect are NOT the same!
P.S:Hear hear, panchamkauns! (360 player)
Do the rest of you agree on this?
Sorry, forums always make me a bit ranty. (-: *Wipes brow, exhales*
#2217
Posté 10 mai 2011 - 06:38
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
f_b wrote...
Not a DA2 hater. It was OK. But compared to Origins... it was weak. Here's what I'd like, BioWare, if you ever read these boards:
•Take longer developing it. There was a four-year gap between ME and ME2, and I'd say ME2 was awesome. Between Origins and DA2? 18 months - 2 years. Shortcuts were taken.
•Give mages back armour and traditional weapons. I like playing as a mage, and I miss greatswords!
•Bring back that thing where people's mouths do that weird flappy, noisy thing... oh yeah, talking! Talking that has an impact on people and places, and isn't just two minutes of excuses for the next fight. The conversation wheel only gives you 3 options - take that out and find a better interface, even if it means going back to the old one.
•More novel-worthy characters. Why is there so much fanfiction? Because the characters are so well-fleshed out! I only liked Anders and Varric in this one, whereas the assortment of princes with bad jokes, Orlesian spies and ****y Wilds witches in Origins were what made the game for me. Forget about the combat - work on the relationships again. Get rid of Friendship/Rivalry and bring back plain old approval.
•Sort out graphics, and stop making enemies explode. That just looks ridiculous in a "mature" game.
•Remember that Dragon Age and Mass Effect are NOT the same!
P.S:Hear hear, panchamkauns! (360 player)
Do the rest of you agree on this?
Sorry, forums always make me a bit ranty. (-: *Wipes brow, exhales*
Longer development time is not just Bioware's call. Bioware is a division of EA therefore it answers to and receives orders from higher ups. One of the reasons was long development time that sapped resources (ie money) that Bioware did not have and could no longer raise through traditional means. Bioware needed a cash infusion and EA provide it by acquiring Bioware.
In most CRPGS mages do not have armor, nor weild traditional weapons outside of staves and daggers. The Dragon Age IP allowed for the acrane warrior specification. If you want that spec back I can agree with that.
I want the archery ability to be available for the warrior class.
I like the new Friendship/Rivalry system. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Sort out the graphics? What do you mean? I agree with the exploding body part.
Different people like different characters in DA 2 and not every one like the characters in DAO. I happen to like Aveline, Fenris and Varric.
The talking aspect would have to fit the story and setting. The talking in DA works because the companions and Hawke are not together 24/7. The camp conversations worked in DAO because they were together 24/7.
Combat I was happy with. Some of the enemies dropping out of sky in plate armor was over the top. Certain creatures not all appearing from the ground was wrong.
#2218
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 12:14
sagmann20
-
- Members
- 17 messages
This game was rushed and it shows. reused maps?! Only 1 main location/city...really harms replay value. Choices are too black and white, need to blur the lines a bit more, and make them matter. The "frame narrative" structure of the story attempts to conceal the extremely linear nature of the plot.
Jumping forward 3 years breaks immersion. 3 years is a long time...The combat is incredibly exciting and greatly improved, but at times it is extremely aggrivating and inconsistent. getting stabbed by a rogue causes you to stagger as if u were hit with a warriors sword... oh also a rogue stab sometimes causes you to fly bakward 10 feet...strong rogue? these are just a few...unecessary waves. and units spawning from thin air removes some of the tactical nature of combat.
Characters were handled well, party banter, great, voice acting was great, character dialogue was done well...for me the characters, dialogue, and the combat was the only thing thats held me for this long, and just barely. I really wanted to love this game, but the mroe i play the less satisfied i become.
Game was definitely rushed...bad move, do better bioware
I know theres more i can say, but i dont feel like it...this game could have been much much richer
Jumping forward 3 years breaks immersion. 3 years is a long time...The combat is incredibly exciting and greatly improved, but at times it is extremely aggrivating and inconsistent. getting stabbed by a rogue causes you to stagger as if u were hit with a warriors sword... oh also a rogue stab sometimes causes you to fly bakward 10 feet...strong rogue? these are just a few...unecessary waves. and units spawning from thin air removes some of the tactical nature of combat.
Characters were handled well, party banter, great, voice acting was great, character dialogue was done well...for me the characters, dialogue, and the combat was the only thing thats held me for this long, and just barely. I really wanted to love this game, but the mroe i play the less satisfied i become.
Game was definitely rushed...bad move, do better bioware
I know theres more i can say, but i dont feel like it...this game could have been much much richer
#2219
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 02:46
hugafella
-
- Members
- 44 messages
I would like more talking to the other team members. I really enjoyed that in Origins. In DA2 with there being less of it I didn't feel attached to my characters and I felt it weakened the story telling.
#2220
Guest_vilnii_*
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 03:50
Guest_vilnii_*
Guest_vilnii_*
-
- Guests
I hope EA will allow the Bioware team make the game they really want to make
Very good games take a while to develop and I am hoping EA underderstands they need to leave Bioware alone to work.
I almost wish Bioware was still a standalone private company
Very good games take a while to develop and I am hoping EA underderstands they need to leave Bioware alone to work.
I almost wish Bioware was still a standalone private company
Modifié par vilnii, 11 mai 2011 - 03:53 .
#2221
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 05:28
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
vilnii wrote...
I hope EA will allow the Bioware team make the game they really want to make
Very good games take a while to develop and I am hoping EA underderstands they need to leave Bioware alone to work.
I almost wish Bioware was still a standalone private company
Unfortunately if Bioware were still a standalone company we might be talking about the great games the company use to make before its demise.
#2222
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 06:11
Lumikki
-
- Members
- 4 239 messages
I think resistances as total immunity was not good idea. Basicly immunity just does that player is not able to use talents what player has. That's not really good, because it reduse player action variety.
Example resistance of 50% would still allow talent to be used, but less effective. Full immunity just restrict players gameplay. Same problem was in Jade Empire, where support skills where allmost useless because half the enemies in game where immune to them. Point is resistance as redusing effect is fine, but a lot of enemies having full immunities, doesn't make players gameplay better, it reduse the variety of players choises.
In DA2 we talk mages and they spell choises.
Also manually changing staff based enemy resistances doesn't really make gameplay better. I mean, you look what enemy you have, then go character sheet and change weapon in hand. What's the point of it? Make more challenge? More like waste players time to do something very stupid. Does warrior or rogue need to change they weapons based EVERY combat situation. Point is, it doesn't improve gameplay.
Knock back. I think it's good idea for higher difficulties, but you over did like allways. NEVER have these 100% success rates. No immunities or 100% success knock backs. I'm sure enemy should also fail sometimes when they hit.
In general Bioware as company seem to over do pretty much everyting. Like "cool" graphical effects. I'm sure other have allready sayed exploding bodies and so on.. Those things doesn't make it better when they are over used. Try to learn to have something else than 0% or 100% options. Like something happens only 10% of times. I know it takes effort to make them, but don't over do stuff. Cool isn't cool if it's common (over used).
Example resistance of 50% would still allow talent to be used, but less effective. Full immunity just restrict players gameplay. Same problem was in Jade Empire, where support skills where allmost useless because half the enemies in game where immune to them. Point is resistance as redusing effect is fine, but a lot of enemies having full immunities, doesn't make players gameplay better, it reduse the variety of players choises.
In DA2 we talk mages and they spell choises.
Also manually changing staff based enemy resistances doesn't really make gameplay better. I mean, you look what enemy you have, then go character sheet and change weapon in hand. What's the point of it? Make more challenge? More like waste players time to do something very stupid. Does warrior or rogue need to change they weapons based EVERY combat situation. Point is, it doesn't improve gameplay.
Knock back. I think it's good idea for higher difficulties, but you over did like allways. NEVER have these 100% success rates. No immunities or 100% success knock backs. I'm sure enemy should also fail sometimes when they hit.
In general Bioware as company seem to over do pretty much everyting. Like "cool" graphical effects. I'm sure other have allready sayed exploding bodies and so on.. Those things doesn't make it better when they are over used. Try to learn to have something else than 0% or 100% options. Like something happens only 10% of times. I know it takes effort to make them, but don't over do stuff. Cool isn't cool if it's common (over used).
Modifié par Lumikki, 11 mai 2011 - 06:44 .
#2223
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 06:29
Realmzmaster
-
- Members
- 5 510 messages
Lumikki wrote...
I think resistances as total immunity was not good idea. Basicly immunity just does that player is not able to use talents what player has. That's not really good. Example resistance of 50% would still allow it to be used, but less efective. Full immunity just restrict player gameplay as use of talents. Same problem was in Jade Empire, where suport skills where allmost sueless because half the enemies in agem where immune to them. Point is resiatance as redusing effect is fine, but alot of enemies haveing full immunities, doesn't make players gameplay better, it reduse the variety of players choises.
Then we must also remove the player''s ability to make the Hawke chracter and his companions 100% resistance. For example I have a sheild that has three rune slots. I put in three runes of Fire warding and the character is over 90% closing in on 100% immunity to fire. Makes fighting certain monsters much easier.
So it would have to work both ways when it comes to resistance.
#2224
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 06:47
Lumikki
-
- Members
- 4 239 messages
Of course... player or enemies should not have 100% immunities. Like I sayed resiatances are fine, but not extreme onesRealmzmaster wrote...
Then we must also remove the player''s ability to make the Hawke chracter and his companions 100% resistance. For example I have a sheild that has three rune slots. I put in three runes of Fire warding and the character is over 90% closing in on 100% immunity to fire. Makes fighting certain monsters much easier.
So it would have to work both ways when it comes to resistance.
#2225
Posté 11 mai 2011 - 07:24
Paeyne
-
- Members
- 255 messages
Few things I would like to add.
Skill trees: I understand why upgrades are tied to their respective skills but I would like to see active, passive and sustained skills independant of each other. The way the current trees are tied together it does take away a lot of flexibilty of play style. You end up having to take quite a few skills you may not want. (I understand that which skills those may be is dependant on the individual player.)
Item restrictions: The item restrictions in the game seem excessive. A rogue can only use daggers (or bows). A warrior can use plate but not leather. This also removes flexibility of play.
Companion armor: I get that you want the companions to look they way you want them to look. (I don't necessarily agree with it but I understand it.) Just hard code the way you want them to look graphically and let us equip them however we may want.
Inventory control: It really annoys me that I have to keep switching companions in and out of the party in order to manage their items. Go back to DA:O where we could manage all companion items at once.
Skill trees: I understand why upgrades are tied to their respective skills but I would like to see active, passive and sustained skills independant of each other. The way the current trees are tied together it does take away a lot of flexibilty of play style. You end up having to take quite a few skills you may not want. (I understand that which skills those may be is dependant on the individual player.)
Item restrictions: The item restrictions in the game seem excessive. A rogue can only use daggers (or bows). A warrior can use plate but not leather. This also removes flexibility of play.
Companion armor: I get that you want the companions to look they way you want them to look. (I don't necessarily agree with it but I understand it.) Just hard code the way you want them to look graphically and let us equip them however we may want.
Inventory control: It really annoys me that I have to keep switching companions in and out of the party in order to manage their items. Go back to DA:O where we could manage all companion items at once.
