184 réponses à ce sujet

[Aenima82]

ReavousX wrote...

Aenima82 wrote...

very interesting or weird post, not sure which. the goods and bads of this game are definitely not connected to hardcore/casual. 

If you think the whole point is finding the "goods and bads" of the game, then you missed it.  It's just two different perspectives on the same game.  One from an RPG junkie, the other from a very casual gamer.  Obviously, these two different perspectives will agree/disagree on various aspects, the point was seeing what those aspects were.  

Your entire post was pretty much exactly pointing out goods and bads of the game from two perspectives rather than one.  If you dont wanna call it finding the goods and bads then thats your problem really.

However if you want further clarification. I was trying to point out that its not about casual or hardcore gamer or rpg fan or whatever you wanna call those people in your own lingo, there are some fundamental goods/bads in the game that you cant just attribute to certain gamer stereotypes likes/dislikes. good luck and dont ever get off that high horse. we always need people there.

EDIT: I was also curious about this whole hardcore/casual thing anyway . wth is hardcore and wth is casual. you made this post a few days ago and you said your wife whom you claim is the casual gamer example here is on her second run. that is definitely not casual in the conventional sense since that shows she actually played 25-50 hours of 1 game( not even considering the reloads or whatevers) in less than a week and started a new playthrough. so if i have to do my own presumption she is a fairly dedicated gamer but plays on casual/normal difficulties ( i was gonna include hard too but wasnt sure if that had friendly fire or not someone enlighten me(. Keeping in mind the dangers of assumption i will still go ahead and say you are comparing 2 very similar gamers opinion. anyway im glad we had this talk. have a great day.

Modifié par Aenima82, 19 mars 2011 - 03:02 .

[ReavousX]

Aenima82 wrote...

ReavousX wrote...

Aenima82 wrote...

very interesting or weird post, not sure which. the goods and bads of this game are definitely not connected to hardcore/casual. 

If you think the whole point is finding the "goods and bads" of the game, then you missed it.  It's just two different perspectives on the same game.  One from an RPG junkie, the other from a very casual gamer.  Obviously, these two different perspectives will agree/disagree on various aspects, the point was seeing what those aspects were.  

Your entire post was pretty much exactly pointing out goods and bads of the game from two perspectives rather than one.  If you dont wanna call it finding the goods and bads then thats your problem really.

However if you want further clarification. I was trying to point out that its not about casual or hardcore gamer or rpg fan or whatever you wanna call those people in your own lingo, there are some fundamental goods/bads in the game that you cant just attribute to certain gamer stereotypes likes/dislikes. good luck and dont ever get off that high horse. we always need people there.

EDIT: I was also curious about this whole hardcore/casual thing anyway . wth is hardcore and wth is casual. you made this post a few days ago and you said your wife whom you claim is the casual gamer example here is on her second run. that is definitely not casual in the conventional sense since that shows she actually played 25-50 hours of 1 game( not even considering the reloads or whatevers) in less than a week and started a new playthrough. so if i have to do my own presumption she is a fairly dedicated gamer but plays on casual/normal difficulties ( i was gonna include hard too but wasnt sure if that had friendly fire or not someone enlighten me(. Keeping in mind the dangers of assumption i will still go ahead and say you are comparing 2 very similar gamers opinion. anyway im glad we had this talk. have a great day.

Hardcore and casual are two relatively broad terms, she rarely finds games that she enjoys, but when she does, she's plays the hell out of them.  I guess what I'm getting at is that you couldn't pay her to sit through an older RPG like BG, BG 2, or even Neverwinter Nights.  

Now, on to your point that there are "fundamental good/bads" dealing with the game...well, that's a given.  There are also a great deal that are disagreed upon depending who you ask (look at this thread, or anywhere else on the forum).  Some people loath the combat, others love it.  It's all objective.  Obviously, these are just two peoples' opinion, and two separate perspectives.  We did a lot of discussing before writing, so what you read here is the end result, thus is why we agree on some points, or bring up different points all together...because had we just went through every little bit we went over on this end...it'd be a terrible read.  

Last, the time put into the game over a period of time holds no effect on the way "hardcore" and "casual" were used in this piece.  I call my wife casual, because she doesn't care too much about details, doesn't care for sidequests, and just wants the meat of the story, companions, and to kill stuff.  I myself, am a completionist, I read through each codex, and try to immerse myself in gameplay as I can.  So no, maybe she doesn't fit your usage of "casual gamer", but in the context of my post, she does, or at least dubbing her "casual" is the best way to put it without having to explain...but...here I am anyways.

Thanks for the comments regardless, although I'm not sure where you get that I'm on a "high horse".  If anything you've come across as aggressive and antagonistic in both of your posts, for whatever reason.  But thanks, I will have a good day. =)

[Mooh Bear]

AllThatJazz wrote...



@ Mooh Bear

Because the PC is a person of increasing influence in Kirkwall who, unlike most other people of influence in Kirkwall, has already had dealings with the Qunari and for whom the Arishok has at least a marginal amount of respect (or lack of disgust)? They aren't calling her out of the blue. Did you not do the Seamus sidequest in Act One? Did you not meet the Arishok during that Gunpowder quest? Did you not meet the rogue Saarebas (sp?) or come up against the Tal Vashoth? Hawke is pretty much the only person in Kirkwall who it makes any sense to ask to help with the Qunari issue, if you're trying, as the Viscount is, to avoid a bloodbath. And there were a whole bunch of different reasons why my Hawke was concerned, or why any Hawke could be.

1) Kirkwall is now her home (or at least the place where she lives) - in my case, Hawke's sister belongs to the Kirkwall Circle, her best friend is captain of the city guard, and her mother is attempting to rebuild her life in the city of her ancestors. Family and friends are my Hawke's main motivation for everything throughout the game, and Hawke wants to protect them - allowing a potential Qunari invasion force to just sit there when Hawke can do something about it is dangerous and irresponsible.

2) Self interest. Solving the Qunari problem one way or the other will bring a huge amount of political power Hawke's way. As someone not native to Kirkwall, Hawke, like other former Fereldan refugees, faces prejudice, and one of the best ways to consolidate a still somewhat fragile position of influence in society is surely to make yourself indispensable to the people who matter.

3) History tells us that the Qunari have a reputation for particularly brutal conquest and occupation. How long did it take to get them to go away the last time? More than a hundred years? If they get a real foothold in the Free Marches then Ferelden is in terrible danger, as is the rest of Thedas. This on its own is reason enough for Hawke to have some concern about the situation, surely.

4) As it turns out (although of course this only becomes clear at the end of the chapter) it's one of Hawke's friends who's actually caused this entire mess. 

And as for the other big intrigues - again, you've been doing small bits and pieces for the various factions since the beginning of the game, building up an opinion of what's going on and who is in the right. You aren't just flung in to the centre of the storm.

In addition, your father was an apostate mage, your sister is/was a mage, your brother has anti-mage tendencies, your mother lost everything because she eloped with a mage. If you're romantically involved with any of your companions, there is a good chance that they are a mage, and a decent chance (Seb or Fenris) that they are anti-mage (or at least pro chantry/Templars). And even if you're not having sex with any of them, they are still your friends who, by this time, you've known for three years.

How can none of these things be giving you a vested interest in what's happening?   It seems to me that one kind of has to make a deliberate decision to not give a crap about anything that's going on, because there are personal stakes here, there and everywhere!

Edit: Eh, didn't mean to get so riled up :happy: It's just that I find this aspect of the game (personal motivation) to be far more convincing than Origins with it's 'look a big monster. Kill it before it destroys the world!'. I personally found it very easy to care about Hawke/the Hawke family/ all her friends and they were the driving force behind caring about the world, I'm sorry you didn't feel that way:(

I'm sorry, but I disagree completety. Ok, after Act 1, Hawke is "made". He's got a mansion, a title and a little reputation. And now, he's still called right and left to fix everybody's problems. Sure, he might agree, but he might as well turn sollicitors down, right? Except, he can't. The motivations or potential gains are never exposed. The PC Hawke has seemingly no plans or goals. Sure, he may benefit one way or another, later, of his "generosity", but how, when or even if the PC cares is never explained. The story is poorly designed is that you're given a series of mostly petty tasks that don't fit in any defined personal agenda. The PC should have clear goals, and the actions taken should further those goals. Again, what are Hawke's goals? He doesn't have any. You can make them up the way you did. But, this is just you metagaming, it has no consequence story wise. Bioware's PC is not out to achieve anything in particular and the plot is set in stone. That might be good enough for you, but not for me.

[Cyocide]

"I'm the Champion of Kirkwall, and this is my favorite post on the Bioboards."

(Sorry if someone beat me to it, 8 pages of replies, yikes)

[mojojojo37]

I have to agree with Mooh Bear about the PC Hawke/companions and their lack of goals for this story.
If you consider the plot from DA:O, pretty much every person was their to stop the blight.....hell even tho Morrigan had the make a old soul/god baby motive, she still needed to kill the Archdemon to do it. The only time I felt that Hawke had a goal is the very beginning when he's trying to out run the darkspawn. The rest of the time it felt more like fixing my companions overly dramatic problems. Hawke was like the stable, functional person on a reality show and everyone else has some issue to deal with. And don't get me wrong, i like the personalities of most of the companions but am I the only one who thinks that if you roll a Mage Hawke then you probably shouldn't get Fenris to pal around. I swear it was like if Hawke were Jewish and he had Glenn Beck following you around everywhere. There was nothing to keep Fenris following you if you played the mage. The same could be said if you wanted your Hawke to be a templar warrior and you had Anders hating on you thru out the game. The goal's of the companions and Hawke could have had a stronger link to connect them, especially since they stayed together for 10 years.

[HTTP 404]

As flawed as DA2 may be, I think bioware is on to something great even though the change may not be agreeable to some. Hopefully they use the blueprint of DA2 and expand on things to make it better in DA3 such as greater environment detail (adding more people walking the streets and so on), options for complexity of combat tactics(auto-attack), and most importantly the STORY (choices making an impact).

[Barefoot Warrior]

Very good review and I appreciate the time it took to write it up. I can't agree with all the points, but I do agree with 'change'. I knew that DA2 was going to a different storyline then Origins and that was expected. I love Origins but for me, I could not get into DA2. Once I got into act 1 and then act 2, it just dragged on and on, and I started to loose interest. Anyway, thanks for the review, good reading.

[Count Viceroy]

The games main story while bareboned, feels just fine in my book. It's all the stuff around the main story that bothers me. Companions, locales, side quests are the main bits that are lacking. There's simply not enough content, and enough variety in the content we have to justify a 10 year long story. It ends up feeling copy pasted. Looking at the 1 cave, 1 warehouse and 1 mansion we visit on a regular basis, I suspect they were in fact copy pasted. 

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 20 mars 2011 - 07:22 .

[Mooh Bear]

skylr616 wrote...

misterdde wrote...

i had translate a review and edit my last post to put it in. But all in all i agree with you, the game is better than the test say. But the reviewer meaned what alot of people said : we thought the change would be more origin oriented. So the review is not a review of da2, it's a comparaison between origin and it's sequel.

To link the subject and my previous post :french have an hardcore gamer point of view IMO ^^

It sounds similar to many of the lower reviews from other sites outside of France...  the points are all correct for the most part but it comes down to how much weight you give each point based on your own personal preferences. (e.g. while the plot is certainly less "epic" than in DAO I was not really disappointed by this myself...).

It seems that those French reviewers gave some of the negatives much greater weight than a lot of other reviewers. They aren't wrong... they are entitled to their opinion. Its probably highly relevant to their readers in particular.

First, I picked French reviews because, well, I'm French, so I know the sites, I can read the reviews and comments. I haven't gone to check Italian or German reviews as I don't speak the language. So, I was not cherry-picking.
Second, for the cultural differences, there are some. I've been living is North America (US & Canada) for a while now and people have different expectations and behaviors. I think the French outfits are being blunt but honest. No sugar-coating, no excuses, no "kudos for the effort". They don't give a damn about "effort" or "intent". They care about end results. What the player will see. I think US websites tend to be more forgiving. To me, it feels like leniency. We pay good money for those games, we have the right to expect the best quality. When corners are cut, when design is weak, when quality suffers, developpers should be called on it. 5/6 out of 10 sound right to me: the game is not a train-wreck, but it's certainly deeply flawed.

PS: Watch out with the biggotry and stereotypes, the stinky-cheese-eater-surrender-monkey wasn't too far in your posts. <_<

Modifié par Mooh Bear, 20 mars 2011 - 01:22 .