178 réponses à ce sujet

[Ad Dugg]

Lee337 wrote...

What I'm saying about metacritic isn't that it should be used when making a desicion to buy the game, I'm saying that it shows that it wasn't very well received.

Fair point and even though I'm defending the game, I think the devs have alot of feedback to make improvements on any sequels planned.  So I hope they take notice (which I'm sure they are) of all the average to bad scores.

[Riloux]

Sorry, I can't take you seriously on the 'best game to date' front, especially when talking about Bioware. I will, however, say that in the context of the time they were given to make a psuedo-RPG, they did an okay job.

Real RPGs take a lot more time and need more TLC than any other genre and trying to rush one out in order to capitalize stinks of EA.

[Rockpopple]

All this EA hate. I guess you never played NHL '94. =)

[Legbiter]

Lee337 wrote...

What I'm saying about metacritic isn't that it should be used when making a desicion to buy the game, I'm saying that it shows that it wasn't very well received.

Another poster did what we were too lazy to do. He went and looked at the other user reviews on the other big gaming sites.

Gamefly:  8.4
Gamespot:  8.3
IGN:  7.6
Gamestop:  8.4
Planet Xbox 360:  7.4
1Up:  A

So, I'd not put too much stock in just random people on metacritic. Or any site for that matter.

Modifié par Legbiter, 17 mars 2011 - 07:34 .

[mereck7980]

Legbiter wrote...

Lee337 wrote...

What I'm saying about metacritic isn't that it should be used when making a desicion to buy the game, I'm saying that it shows that it wasn't very well received.

Another poster did what we were too lazy to do. He went and looked at the other user reviews on the other big gaming sites.

Gamefly:  8.4
Gamespot:  8.3
IGN:  7.6
Gamestop:  8.4
Planet Xbox 360:  7.4
1Up:  A

So, I'd not put too much stock in just random people on metacritic. Or any site for that matter.

IGN gave the game an 8.5...

Mispost...Opps!

Modifié par mereck7980, 17 mars 2011 - 07:43 .

[HarlotsLoki]

I disagree with the OP, I believe this game could have been great, but it was rushed too much, too much content cut and too much recycled to give it a semblance of longevity.

Too much faith was placed in the default Hawk character creation. The creation options in this game are actually worse than origins, they should have expanded on this, but chose not to, to tell the tale of their default character instead.

The combat in DA2 is a double edged blade, they made improvements, but at the same time made it feel less visceral and believable. The speed of the combat is better, although enemies move too fast for an element of realism, enemies imploding randomly instead of executions, in my opinion was a horrible idea. This removed the visceral bloodthirst that satisfied us in origins, it made the combat too comical. Executions were added into the game, but were worked on haphazardly at best. Respawning waves of enemies dropping from thin air, you call that an improvement?

The story and character development again is a double edged blade, act 1 sees the development of the family, we don't much much time to learn or see them grow before sympathy is forced upon us, and ends up having the opposite effect than intended. It would be like playing the human noble story in origins, only the game beginning when the Howes attack. There is no time to build up any sort of relationship here.

The second act is where dragon age 2 really shines, fantastic character development, good pace and tension. The third act reverts to act 1's problem of lack of character development, and forcing decisions that the player simply doesn't care about because it's rushed too much.

We also have the use of recycled environments here, this was way too overused in an area so small! I certainly understand time constraints and budgeting but recycling the environment to this extent certainly leads to the impression that there isn't much to this game without the tedious revisits to sundermount or the wounded coast, to step into the same cave a hundred times over. The fact is, that if they hadn't recycled the environments so much there would not be much playing time in this game at all. The main story pales in comparison to Origins introduction of the races and land.

[bluecapsule6]

Legbiter wrote...

Lee337 wrote...

What I'm saying about metacritic isn't that it should be used when making a desicion to buy the game, I'm saying that it shows that it wasn't very well received.

Another poster did what we were too lazy to do. He went and looked at the other user reviews on the other big gaming sites.

Gamefly:  8.4
Gamespot:  8.3
IGN:  7.6
Gamestop:  8.4
Planet Xbox 360:  7.4
1Up:  A

So, I'd not put too much stock in just random people on metacritic. Or any site for that matter.

These scores seem fair, but it's also pretty mediocre and lower than every other Bioware RPG (quick glance through IGN shows 8.7/8.8/9.2 for NWN/DAO/ME2). By these scores, DA2 would be "worst" Bioware RPG ever made (not counting Sonic).

[TileToad]

..Say what you will about Baldur's Gate, at least the combat worked much better than DA:O.

[Lee337]

It depends on how many reviews are on those sites. Metacritic is also used for the industry standard.

[CaptainVanguard]

Reviews mean little, so what, you'll take the words of a professional critic because he has a job and hes paid to say what someone wants him to?

You may be forgetting the important part.

Critics are paid to do a job, more than often, they are bribed to hate things.

Thats why I tend to ignore the beliefs of a majority in favour of what "I" personally enjoy, and if others didnt enjoy the game thats fine, but to say that the game is bad simply because everyone else does is simply fear of being picked on by a peer group.

Well given the fact I dont fear that, I can safley say "and" stand by my view that Bioware made a great game, and I have little ill to comment on it, which I will repeat, anything I did have bad to say about DA 2 can be countered by various points made in other posts.

There will always be a lack of content towards something no matter what it is, I suggest you accept what you did enjoy rather than trying to feed on what you didnt.

[Psearo]

TileToad wrote...

..Say what you will about Baldur's Gate, at least the combat worked much better than DA:O.

As much as I love BG..... the combat was simplistic. Really simplistic.
Fighter:
click on target, fight, move on to next target.
Cleric:
Buff party members, cast heal/cure spells when required.
Thief: Detect & disarm traps, pick locks, stealth & backstabbing.
Minsc:
Focus buffing on him, berzerk, sit back and watch him munch through Gnolls, Goblins, Kobolds, with a two-handed sword, whilst you have a couple of party members supporting from range.

[Lee337]

CaptainVanguard wrote...

Reviews mean little, so what, you'll take the words of a professional critic because he has a job and hes paid to say what someone wants him to?

You may be forgetting the important part.

Critics are paid to do a job, more than often, they are bribed to hate things.

Thats why I tend to ignore the beliefs of a majority in favour of what "I" personally enjoy, and if others didnt enjoy the game thats fine, but to say that the game is bad simply because everyone else does is simply fear of being picked on by a peer group.

Well given the fact I dont fear that, I can safley say "and" stand by my view that Bioware made a great game, and I have little ill to comment on it, which I will repeat, anything I did have bad to say about DA 2 can be countered by various points made in other posts.

There will always be a lack of content towards something no matter what it is, I suggest you accept what you did enjoy rather than trying to feed on what you didnt.

It's not the professional reviews but the user reviews. Theres so many negatives and that magnitude of negative feedback doesn't occur because of petty problems or ME2 would have suffered the same. Instead ME2 has only 20 or so negatives while DA2 has 700+.
I can't understand what the people who liked it can possibly like about it, so for me looking for the good stuff in DA2 would be like getting excited about finding a cherry in the bottom of a bucket of sewage water.

[DariusKalera]

Psearo wrote...

TileToad wrote...

..Say what you will about Baldur's Gate, at least the combat worked much better than DA:O.

As much as I love BG..... the combat was simplistic. Really simplistic.
Fighter:
click on target, fight, move on to next target.
Cleric:
Buff party members, cast heal/cure spells when required.
Thief: Detect & disarm traps, pick locks, stealth & backstabbing.
Minsc:
Focus buffing on him, berzerk, sit back and watch him munch through Gnolls, Goblins, Kobolds, with a two-handed sword, whilst you have a couple of party members supporting from range.

And that differs from DA2 how?  Or for that matter, DA:O? 

It's the same basic combat for all three.  Differences being in the style and what was able to be produced on the hardware at the time.

[ScotGaymer]

bluecapsule6 wrote...

Legbiter wrote...

Lee337 wrote...

What I'm saying about metacritic isn't that it should be used when making a desicion to buy the game, I'm saying that it shows that it wasn't very well received.

Another poster did what we were too lazy to do. He went and looked at the other user reviews on the other big gaming sites.

Gamefly:  8.4
Gamespot:  8.3
IGN:  7.6
Gamestop:  8.4
Planet Xbox 360:  7.4
1Up:  A

So, I'd not put too much stock in just random people on metacritic. Or any site for that matter.

These scores seem fair, but it's also pretty mediocre and lower than every other Bioware RPG (quick glance through IGN shows 8.7/8.8/9.2 for NWN/DAO/ME2). By these scores, DA2 would be "worst" Bioware RPG ever made (not counting Sonic).

Yup that was exactly my point.

It isnt the best RPG Bioware have done, its the worst. But it isnt bad. Had it been another other company or another title it wouldnt have recieved anywhere near the level of bashing its gotten on this site and elsewhere.

[Asch Lavigne]

I agree, not their best game but not their worst either. There is plenty to like on both ends of the spectrum for DA2. For me, more falls on the positive side. IMO, Bioware's best game was the first Mass Effect.

Sometimes critics play a few hours of the game before reviewing it (or at least it seems like they do) Or they have someone else play a bit of it then tell them what they think and they write a review based on one lowly interns point of view.

Modifié par Asch Lavigne, 18 mars 2011 - 12:01 .

[hawat333]

OP said it himself. Two key phrases.
"Less than a year" "Quickly"

That's the main problem with the game. Design changes are okay, it's up to personal taste.
I like the game, it brought me a great deal of enjoyment. I found myself following the chantry sister in Lowtown to hear her chatter, the same with the barmaid in the Hanged Man. It has lot of features that improved, like the companion relationships with each other, the dominant personality system, and such, which little things made me admire some aspects of the game.
But it also has severe limitations and lost details which was forced by the time restraints, we cannot ignore that. Or we can, but I do hope, some of the constructive criticism reveals that the "BioWare experience" game takes more time to make.
I don't envy the development team, being pushed as they were, Six more months wouldn't have hurt, that's what I was thinking when I played.

It's nowhere near terrible or utterly messed up, but nowhere near perfect either. In my opinion, at least.

[CABAL_Prime]

I loved Dragon Age 2, the only thing I didn't like too much was the re-used maps

[EnchaJini]

ive just completed the game, and definately say if i get the time to reroll another class i would gladly do it again...

[kozzy420420]

I enjoyed the game alot myself. Its nto as good as origins in some ways, but in other ways it is better. Not perfect but I though ****** was better hten Jade Empire (which I liked) and ME2(which I also liked alot).

Not as good as Origins, KOTOR or Baldurs Gate, but still very fun! The writing, dialogue, combat and voice acting is very good. It just sucks that they had to reuse so many of the levels and took away beign able toe custimize your teammates. Overall I liked it though! 8.5/10 for me! WHile Origins was 9.5/10.

To me its a bit more arcadey like Jade Empire and ME2 were, but still very good games, just a little bit more streamlined theb some of there previous ones.

Modifié par kozzy420420, 18 mars 2011 - 01:33 .

[CaptainVanguard]

Well there you have it, and im glad you do like it .

[Myounage]

Lol. The worst Bioware game I've ever played. Opinions are subjective.

[Ravenvolf]

Loved the game, keep up the good work.  I was sad when the end credits rolled.  Looking forward to more great games from Bioware.

Come on Baldur's Gate 3.  Yeah I know that wont happen, haha.

[SilentK]

Having a ton of fun =) wish I had more time to play. I'm really looking forward to making a comparison between the mage-Hawke and non-mage-Hawke when I'm finished with the current one.

[lisakover]

that welsh bint who voices merrill needs to get that huge gap in her teeth fixed

[Psearo]

DariusKalera wrote...

Psearo wrote...

TileToad wrote...

..Say what you will about Baldur's Gate, at least the combat worked much better than DA:O.

As much as I love BG..... the combat was simplistic. Really simplistic.
Fighter:
click on target, fight, move on to next target.
Cleric:
Buff party members, cast heal/cure spells when required.
Thief: Detect & disarm traps, pick locks, stealth & backstabbing.
Minsc:
Focus buffing on him, berzerk, sit back and watch him munch through Gnolls, Goblins, Kobolds, with a two-handed sword, whilst you have a couple of party members supporting from range.

And that differs from DA2 how?  Or for that matter, DA:O? 

It's the same basic combat for all three.  Differences being in the style and what was able to be produced on the hardware at the time.

I'm guessing you've never actually played Baldur's Gate, then played the sequel with Throne of Bhaal expansion installed.
If you had, you'd realise the changes between the two games (signifigant change with ToB), and that BG has a primitive combat system compared to DA:O and DA2.

Literally, that's about all there was to BG's combat, up until the final battle. In that, you couldn't just send Minsc off to chew up everything by putting him into berzerk (losing all control of him whenever he's berzerk), or the enemies would turn him into a gibbed and chunky, messy stain on the floor of the temple, whilst you have to have your party survive all the Arrows of Detonation being fired at them before you can even drop Tazok or get to Angelo.

lisakover wrote...

that welsh bint who voices merrill needs to get that huge gap in her teeth fixed

Uhm.... what, if anything, does Eve Myles' gappy teeth have to do with liking DA2????

Modifié par Psearo, 21 mars 2011 - 02:08 .