Aesieru wrote...
AtreiyaN7 wrote...
Captain Sassy Pants wrote...
HawXV2 wrote...
I'd at least give it a 93. Just because you don't like a great game doesn't mean BioWare did anything wrong. It's just not to your taste.
And conversely, just because you like a game it doesn't make it "great".
Just because you like like a terrible game, it doesn't make it good. Good for you, maybe.
And just because you think it was terrible only means it was terrible for you. We could all go back and forth all day over that one.
I generally agree or at least respect your posts, but this...
I know you're not an idiot or a juvenile, so how you can say that Dragon Age 2 was even worth an "80" is beyond me... You know yourself that it had repetitive environments, less polish, and story-holes or issues or retcons...
Even the art-style is... less ingenuious.
I'm sorry, but is that directed at me or Hawke? If that was directed at me, then I'll respond (and this will be exceedingly lengthy). First of all, I read a lot, and I mean a tremendous amount. Not only do I have an abiding personal love of reading, it's also part of my job. I've read Shakespeare, I've read Stephen King, and I've read everything else in between those extremes in multiple genres, though I favor sci-fi and fantasy.
In my estimation, this is far, far from the worst story I've ever experienced (that honor goes to a recent sci-fi novel I had to format). I liked the DA2 story and characters because the game successfully moved me on an emotional level, and in terms of storytelling, that's what an author is always hoping for I expect. Otherwise, what's the point in telling the story? To show off that you have a giant vocabulary and can successfully string together multiple multisyllabic words in a single sentence? Furthermore, the story touched on themes I don't often see explored that deeply in games
like poltical tensions, extremism, oppression, zealotry, betrayal, etc. It was dark and grim, and I liked it because my character was at the heart of a catclysmic change that affects the world in a lasting and profound way - more profound than slaying some stupid dragon or one evil wizard or one archdemon. I saw poltiical/religious institutions shaken to their core by the end of things.
Regarding the "ret-con," are you referring to things like Leliana or Zevran coming back from the supposed dead? If so, then I will point out that a
game is a complicated piece of interactive media. In a book, the author gets to make a decision to kill a character, and it's solely the author's story at the end of the day. You might not like it, and you can complain all you want, but you have no right to dictate to the author how their story should be written (unless you're their editor I suppose
). All decisions are final - or do you think Harlan Ellison would have taken it well if you complained about the ending of
i Have No Mouth and I Must Scream because you thought it was a gigantic downer? From what I know of him, I think it's quite likely that he'd punch you in the mouth (I watched a documentary about him, and he acknowledges that he's hot-tempered).
In games like DA:O or DA2, the developers are attempting to do something no author of book ever can or will do, they're giving the player an opportunity to be an active participant and shape the story to the extent that they can feasibly manage. They have clearly tried their best to accommodate all the possible outcomes in games like DA:O or ME and keep people happy, but at the end of the day, it's still not truly "your" story. It's the writer's story, and it always will be. They're the ones with the vision of how tell their story. Now you can follow along and enjoy the fact that they're allowing you to participate on a level that you can't even remotely do in other games and books, or you can spend the rest of your life griping about how Leliana suddenly isn't dead. If she needs to NOT be dead from a story perspective, then I don't give a flying fig because I truly believe that it's the writer's call.
I have also played cRPGs for approximately as long as they have existed. Over the last 30-odd years, I've seen the same stale plot repeated ad infinitum in both books and games. I never minded that the story of becoming a mighty hero and defeating a great evil was formulaic because all I was looking for was a good, enjoyable time in which I could live out whatever fantasies I had of being a mage, etc. in <x> realm and being a champion for justice. It's fine, it's great, but even I have gotten a little bored with that. Usually, it doesn't bother me if the story is told well and if I like the characters. DA2 may not be what you wanted, but I found it quite refreshing. As for plot holes, maybe there are some, or maybe it's just a matter of some people wanting things fleshed out more as a matter of personal taste. All I can tell you is that I personally don't want every single thing spelled out for me. I don't want my hand held. That's because I enjoy putting together clues and feel that I'm capable of making the necessary inferences, etc. I like to engage in a little thinking, a little theorizing, etc. That's just me however.
While I myself have issues with overuse of recycled maps and FedEx quests, I do not believe that they overshadow the story and the storytelling. I live on a bloody island in the Pacific, and I've only been out of my state a handful of times to visit the mainland. Honolulu's gone through changes over the years, but a lot of places here remain totally the same - like Iolani Palace and the facade of the Hawaii State Library, etc. You think anyone's complaining to the mayor because it's boring to see the palace looking exactly the same as it always did??? I think that
some places remaining the same in the game are okay. It's valid to me for Kirkwall to essentially remain unchanged, and I certainly wouldn't expect a strip mall to pop up on the Wounded Coast. The interiors? Yes, I certainly think they should have done more work to make them unique, but that doesn't take away from my enjoyment of the story.
As for the visuals, uh-oh, let me whip out my art background here. I studied art for a couple of years, and I have a great appreciation for basically every art period in history, including Western and Eastern art. Oh, and if you want to see snapshots of my own work, I'll be happy to e-mail you a picture of one of my drawings as proof that I'm not talking out of my rear regarding my own artisitic abilities and sensibilities. Now I enjoy the realism of Renaissance works - something like
La Pieta (the Michelangelo version) is a powerful sculpture and very "realistic" (I use quotes because the proportions mean that it isn't technically realstic). I can still appreciate Monet's
Haystacks because he was exploring light and not going for some sort of photorealistic, exact depiction of his subject. Let me ask you this: is
A Starry Night by van Gogh a piece of crap because it's not photorealistic, or is it genius BECAUSE it's not a slavish photorealistic representation of a night sky?
I
also have an appreciation for Japanese artists in particular - and I do
not mean
anime. From studying prints and ink paintings, I learned to appreciate the use of negative space. You can look at a folding screen like Maruyama Ookyo's
Pine Trees in Snow to see what I mean.The background is largely flat and somewhat abstract with suggestions of snow. The pine trees are dramatic and provide movement, balanced against all that negative space. You can see it in ink paintings of landscapes as well. Now I am not even remotely saying that DA2 is some sort of work of artistic genius, but given my wide-ranging tastes, I can appreciate the style. Maybe it's not to your tastes, but c'est la vie. I'm sure that some people hate Gaudi's
La Segrada Familia, whereas others think the use of organic forms is genius. Still, I can't believe that you're actually saying that something is less "ingenious" just because it doesn't match your (apparently) rigid expecations of what's "right" in terms of art direction for someone else's world.
And there you have it - I'm someone with extremely broad interests and tastes, atypical from most people I'm sure, but it's why I like DA2 and why I feel that it
is worthy of an 85 (or so). I look at it from what's probably a vastly different perspective than your average player. *shrug* It doesn't make me more right than someone else. I'm fine (for like the ten millionth time) with those who don't like it, but I seriously believe that some people need to maybe get a grip, take a step back and/or get some perspective of their own. You hate it? Great, it's not going to be for everyone, but the fact that you do hate it doesn't render my opinion invalid. It's not as if I'm trying to get people to see things my way. I flat-out don't care if they do. What I care about in this thread is that there are those who are trying to slag people over nothing more than a game that they're unhappy with and that they'll glom on to any little thing that they think can use to twist the knife in as deep as they can.
Retour en haut
