339 réponses à ce sujet

[EmsaFallkin]

Liking the story is perfectly a question of taste. Personally, while I like parts of it, I don't like what I end up with. They are using cheap, melodramatic, badly executed, major plots that completely jerked me out of the game and making the rest of the game feel pointless and a real drag. Defending it with "It's dark fantasy" is just wrong. Fortunatly the worst such moment was towards the end. There are other parts as well which are bad, but they are all mentioned in other threads.

Now, everyone needs to realize that we all have opinions. I didn't need a DA2:O, but people seem to think that all haters expected a "direct" sequel. I didn't. I expected "a" sequel. My opinion is that although DA2 has many good parts for what it's trying to be, and the bad points might not be many, this game is for me an example of where the end result is not the sum of it's parts. I liked parts of it, but at the credits, I did not like the game. Respect that opinion, just as I respect your decision to like the game.

[Thalorin1919]

Officer Nice wrote...

Recycled maps, lulz blood mages are behind everything, more canon then Origins, and it's suffering from a bad and somewhat cliche story.

Do you even know what cliche' means?

I swear, I think people just throw that word around when they don't like something about the story.

It was not cliche. In the matter of fact, it was one of the more original of Biowares stories. Not the typical, "Join fabled order and defeat big evil at the end!" story.

>.>

[Xaenn]

Concept of the story I found good, it makes perfect sense to me as a sequel, the quality of that story, how it was told, how it unfolded, inconsistencies maybe the issue, but over all how the story interacts with the rest of Thedas makes sense, can't really go into details without spoilers.

I do miss being a Grey Warden though, concept was cool, was kinda like a do-good cult drinking blood at an alter, being cursed and blessed, more interesting then a lot of games I've played. I think the only reason people keep really defending DA:O is that they feel the problems in DA:2 overshadowed the ones in DA:O. 

Personally DA:O as an RPG was still lacking compared to its predecessor's, but overall best RPG that was released in a decade.  Hard to live up to that standard so everything made in the future will be tough to beat, especially with a game thats shorter and less places to explore. 

I'm more curious to find out what people think an RPG is, especially the people who defend the game like zealots. DA:2 was a good game, but was it really an RPG? Can people still really claim thats its what I call a 'pureblood' RPG over an Action-RPG. How do they defend switching genre mid-franchise.

The whole 'get over it,' 'you can't accept change,' thing gets as old as the people complaining about it, because it's simply not true.  I feel that DA:2 Can explain the situation here on the forums.

• People who think they messed up the genre and don't like what they've done. - The Mages
• People who are defending the game - Meredith/Templar Zelots.
• People in the middle - City Guard

Modifié par Xaenn, 21 mars 2011 - 06:12 .

[Aireoth]

Down trodden underdog tries to make good but can't? Still kind of cliche, but in all honesty, everything has been done before.

I think the biggest two complaints (both valid) boil down to these two items:

1. Too much deviation from DA:O, which had mislead alot of gamers (myself included) on the type of game we would be getting. While ME1 and 2 did have their differences, it wasn't near as drastic as the change between DA:O and DA2, if they where going to change the formula so much, they should have named it something other then 2 (which implies a sequel, sorry to all those that think it shouldn't.).

2. Lack of ability to connect with plot/characters, which I also experienced, and was a bigger problem for me then point 1. I can get over the changes, even the over simplification, but I could not connect with characters, their struggles, and the events in the game. Having read a lot in the forum, I'm not the only one.

In general I think this game is worse then DA:O and its poor reception reflects that. Had they named it something other then DA2, perhaps DA Champion, it probably wouldn't have drawn the fire it has. I for one am happy it is drawing this fire, people have to hold developers accountable.

[Vicious]

The game was obviously rushed. Had they taken their time it'd be pretty awesome.

[EmsaFallkin]

@Xaenn, I made this post about RPG in another thread:

Ah, the lovely "What is an RPG?" discussion. It can be many things and if you use the very wide definition then it's pretty much all games where you move something, even pacman. Playing a Role.

But does heavy metal only point to one kind of metal? Or is it a genre with subgenres? Progressive Metal, Melodic Metal, Trash Metal, Symphonic Metal, Nu Metal, Industrial Metal, Death Metal, Black Metal. The List goes on. For one, the name of the genre is created and given a meaning. You are free too complain that Metallica does not weigh more than Pink. You wouldn't be wrong if one takes an absolutist dictionary approach to words. But fortunatly few people do.

RPG is a category which was given meaning by gamers and developers long ago, and it has subgenres. There are JRPG(FF, DQ, Persona, SMT, etc etc), SRPG(FFTactics, Disgaea, Tactics Ogre, etc etc), MMORPG(Need I name examples? ), Action RPG(Diablo, Dungeon Siege etc etc), "Sandbox" RPG (Elder Scrolls games etc etc), and Dungeoncrawlers(Wizardy games etc etc)
This list is not complete of course, was just using genres on games I came to think of.

Now, just as in the music genre case, you're free to nitpick on the dictionary definition of Role Playing Game as much as you want, it does not change the fact that it has worked as a category with subgenres for many years, and if the term RPG confuses you when used with a certain game, maybe you should try and get it put into a new subgenre of your own choosing, with your own meaning put into it. If people agree with you, they will accept that definition and you will have created a new subgenre in the category RPG.

Meh, it's an old discussion This post is my opinion on that discussion atleast.

EDIT: Oh, and my suggestion is to put DA2 in the CAARPG(Cinematic "Awesome"-Action Role Playing Game) subgenre. xD

[Xaenn]

I know personally the difference, I was looking for more of the justification of the people who defend the game. personally I believe game such as Dragon Age: Origins falls under D&D RPG, tactical story driven genre, similar to the game it was to succeed from.

It's where people who defend the game trying to claim it's still the genre. How can people be ok with mid-franchise genre switching or even worse how can people still regard it as the same genre as the first one. Baffling, I'm not trying to convert someone I'm trying to understand how people can defend this concept. Just to help me understand them.

Modifié par Xaenn, 21 mars 2011 - 08:10 .

[Glorfindel709]

TcheQ wrote...

Glorfindel709 wrote...


The entire game feels rather rushed, from the sub-par writing.

You obviously don't play many games.  The writing in Da2 compared to anything but a Bioware or Bethesda game is untouchable. 

Here's a suggestion for a fun time:

Play another game that has cutscenes and heavy dialogue (suchas Darksiders), and count how many times you roll your eyes at either the words or the acting, divided by the number of hours of dialogue.

Count: Da2: 0.5, Darksiders: 15

=P

I should probably say "subpar writing compared to what we expect from a Bioware game".

Regardless, the saving grace of the games writing was the witty one liner for party banters, Varric, the tail end of Act 2 (All that Remains, Demands of the Qun) and some of the companion and side quests. The Main Plot of Act 3 specifically was utter garbage.

Modifié par Glorfindel709, 21 mars 2011 - 07:54 .

[Night Prowler76]

Thalorin1919 wrote...

Officer Nice wrote...

Recycled maps, lulz blood mages are behind everything, more canon then Origins, and it's suffering from a bad and somewhat cliche story.

Do you even know what cliche' means?

I swear, I think people just throw that word around when they don't like something about the story.

It was not cliche. In the matter of fact, it was one of the more original of Biowares stories. Not the typical, "Join fabled order and defeat big evil at the end!" story.

>.>

Its a rags to riches story, so its very cliche, just because its not a fight to save the world, doesnt make it less cliche lol

[zsom]

TJSolo wrote...
The "Origins" part is only a subtitle. The sequel would still be called DA2O, although sequel subtitles are normaly changed.
If what you say is true, "DAO was a huge success and had a big fanbase", then where is the rationality in making the next iteration of that game in such a way that many people(even some who like it) "...not a sequel."?
What took place in the few months before DA2 development  to make EA Bioware go "3+ million people are just not enough, let's scrap it and do something completely different"?

If EA Bioware wants to capitalize off of the DA name by calling the product DA2 then they forfeit the right to have such game judged as a standalone product.

Also the Free Marches are in Thedas.
Becareful when using labels as shortcuts to describe people,  derogatory label use tells more about the person using them than the group that is trying to be labeled.

I think the reason they didn't do a sequel is because there was none to be made. The story of DAO was done and finished. The blight was over, the archdemon dead and (most importantly) the warden could also sacrifice himself, leaving some players without a protagonist. I remember a discussion on this very forum a year ago where people were debating what the story of DA II should be about. There were two major factions, one wanted a story with the warden and Morrigan and the second faction was in favour of a different protagonist in a different part of Thedas (Orlais if I remember correctly).

Also every major change in DA II was done in order to address an issue in DAO. The graphics in particular was bashed constantly in DAO, so it is kind of understandable that they upgraded it. The slow passed combat was also mentioned on the forums btw.

The reused maps are kind of sad, I guess they wanted to make to game longer, and it did end up being somewhere between ME 2 and DAO, but to achieve this, they decided to cut corners. This was arguably a bad decision, but honestly, it does not make DA II a complete failure.

And about the derogatory labels.. sorry if I hit a nerve, but childish is precisely what some reactions are. Calling the game DAO for dummies, saying that you need to be mentally challenged to enjoy it, cancelling a preorder for ME 3, and wishing Bioware would go broke is not what you'd call a childish tantrum? And I did stress out that most people criticize in an intelligent manner, and it's just a minority that is in overdrive.

[kreite]

All the people who liked it are playing it they don't have time to post, the minority who did not just want to **** and whine until bioware gives them a cookie.

Such is life.

[ToJKa1]

My guess is it didn't live up to it's marketing hype, like nothing ever does. As such i avoid hype completely; no expectations, no disappointments. For example the only thing i know about Skyrim is that it happens in Skyrim And only because of the name. Damn spoilers!

Modifié par ToJKa1, 21 mars 2011 - 08:26 .

[Odysseyalien]

DAO, with it's flaws, was a landmark game. It got great reviews and a loyal following. Anytime you do a sequel -- computer game, movie, book, or whatever -- and the original started a legend, you have huge shoes to fill. DAO had warm, memorable, catchy music and lovable characters. There was a heartwarming story that everyone could relate to. It's likely that many folks wanted to see these folks again, such as with the Mass Effect series; the "second in a trilogy" if you will. Instead, they got mostly new characters, new settings, and improvements in much of what DAO lacked despite it's legendary status.

I'm enjoying DA2 in it's own right. I'm enjoying it immensely in fact. That doesn't mean I like DAO any less but I'm seeing it as it's own game. While it's not perfect either, Bioware should be proud of this accomplishment.

[Aireoth]

Odysseyalien wrote...

DAO, with it's flaws, was a landmark game. It got great reviews and a loyal following. Anytime you do a sequel -- computer game, movie, book, or whatever -- and the original started a legend, you have huge shoes to fill. DAO had warm, memorable, catchy music and lovable characters. There was a heartwarming story that everyone could relate to. It's likely that many folks wanted to see these folks again, such as with the Mass Effect series; the "second in a trilogy" if you will. Instead, they got mostly new characters, new settings, and improvements in much of what DAO lacked despite it's legendary status.

I'm enjoying DA2 in it's own right. I'm enjoying it immensely in fact. That doesn't mean I like DAO any less but I'm seeing it as it's own game. While it's not perfect either, Bioware should be proud of this accomplishment.

Honestly I don't think most people are missing the grand plot and warm feelings.

They are missing the core game mechanics (which have been ripped out of this game), a sense of control over the character and his/her destiny, and a range of locations to explore. 

[TJSolo]

I think the reason they didn't do a sequel is because there was none to be made. The story of DAO was done and finished. The blight was over, the archdemon dead and (most importantly) the warden could also sacrifice himself, leaving some players without a protagonist. I remember a discussion on this very forum a year ago where people were debating what the story of DA II should be about. There were two major factions, one wanted a story with the warden and Morrigan and the second faction was in favour of a different protagonist in a different part of Thedas (Orlais if I remember correctly).

So some players have a dead Warden. Force a new living one onto the player, it's been done already in Awakenings and ME3 plans to force a new canon Shepard upon those that have dead Shepard save files.
But basically to be Origins 2 it wouldn't even need the Warden. All that is needed would be multiple playable races and multiple ways for the races to reasonably reach Kirkwall. The Bodahn and Sandal made it, hell the entire camp of Dalish elves from that origin made. I am sure the writers at BW are skilled enough to make an epic starting tale just as good as Loethering. But go ahead, continue to believe DA2:O would an impossible story to create.

Also every major change in DA II was done in order to address an issue in DAO. The graphics in particular was bashed constantly in DAO, so it is kind of understandable that they upgraded it. The slow passed combat was also mentioned on the forums btw.

Not constantly it is more so a hindsight complaint that people overly concerned with graphics tend to bring up every time a game gets new graphics, "oh the new shiny is so much better because now the old shiny is busted." When I look at the reviews of the game when it was launch, the graphics are mostly praised.

And about the derogatory labels.. sorry if I hit a nerve..

Nerve, right. I just pointed out that the way you use labels says more about your temperament and perception.

Modifié par TJSolo, 21 mars 2011 - 08:50 .

[zsom]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

The Main Plot of Act 3 specifically was utter garbage.

It's not easy to please the fans. On the ME2 forums the flamewar about the paragade system went on for how long? A year or even longer. Players wanted harder choices, and we (myself included) felt cheated that the suicide mission was so easy to finish without casualties.

Here in act three we have hard choices. We have a complex dilemma, where we don't have a standard black or white side. We have a realistic, tragic problem that cannot be solved by Hawk. And yet you say, that saving:
- Fereldan from a dragon
- the jedi from the sith
- the elves from a monster without a soul
- the Sword Coast from war
- Neverwinter city from giant, ancient lizardmen
is so much better.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this. The third act had in my opinion a fantastic story.

Modifié par zsom, 21 mars 2011 - 09:01 .

[TJSolo]

And DA2 is save:
-Kirkwall from *spoiler*.
The difference? I just can't say who Hawke has to defeat in a non-spoiler section.

[zsom]

I can't explain it without spoilers, but your enemies in act three are a lot less evil than in any other Bioware game.

Modifié par zsom, 21 mars 2011 - 09:23 .

[Kendaric Varkellen]

zsom wrote...

It's not easy to please the fans. On the ME2 forums the flamewar about the paragade system went on for how long? A year or even longer. Players wanted harder choices, and we (myself included) felt cheated that the suicide mission was so easy to finish without casualties.

Here in act three we have hard choices. We have a complex dilemma, where we don't have a standard black or white side. Neither faction is a bad guy or a victim. We have a realistic, tragic problem that cannot be solved by Hawk, and yet he has to take a side. And yet you say, that saving:
- Fereldan from a dragon
--- snip---
is so much better.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this. The third act had in my opinion a fantastic story.

And that was more of a dilemma than the decision of whether Loghain would pay for his betrayal or be allowed to live? Or whether Anora should be punished for her father's crimes? The archdemon, even though he was the final encounter in Origins, wasn't the game's true villain.
And to be honest, I consider Loghain to be far more memorable than the opposing faction leaders in DA2.

While I liked the story in DA2, I have to agree with the people saying that act 3 was rather weak. Act 2 was the strongest part of the storyline in DA2 in my opinion and maybe the story should have ended there.

[Blado123]

The reason I don't like it as much is because it is much less of a game. They didn't set out to try and make this game the greatest they possibly could like in dragon age. The biggest killer for me though is that there is no where near the amount of conversations that there are in origins.
It isn't a bad game, but it is disappointing considering what dragon age origins was.

[MajesticJazz]

lazysuperstar wrote...

great movies, music, books, games.. you can always find a few who hate them Not every game can be for everyone

bad movies, music, books, games....you can always find a few who enjoy them

So you can look at it from both ways.

[Count Viceroy]

Dragon age 2 compared to DAO is a massive letdown. But looking at DA2 on its own, as a stand alone game, it's a fantastic title by any standard. It's just that people have trouble staying objective and unbiased. Yes the game has flaws, so does every game. Guess what, so did DAO.

[TJSolo]

zsom wrote...

I can't explain it without spoilers, but your enemies in act three are a lot less evil than in any other Bioware game.

Changing where in the story the "save the city" plot comes in has not removed it from the game as you would have us believe. Your view on the safety of Kirkwell in respect to the ultimate events is debatable.

Modifié par TJSolo, 21 mars 2011 - 09:31 .

[scpulley]

zsom wrote...

I can't explain it without spoilers, but your enemies in act three are a lot less evil than in any other Bioware game.

More than that, in the end you basically end up the same it doesn't matter who you side with. THAT is what killed this game for me, in the end, I felt like my choice really didn't mean anything nor did I care about about the large cliffhanger. I just had a similar feeling of reading a book, I enjoyed it then at the end the last few chapters were just ripped out so I'm left very very unsatisfied. At least with the Warden there was a begining, middle and end. Here? This was just a middle it felt like. No real begining and no real end. I can excuse a lot in a game, but that, especially for a bioware game, I've never seem them cheat a story before like this. Probably it could have been any other developer and I wouldn't care so much. What's worse, I don't think they have anyone to blame but themselves. I don't think this was rushed because of pressure from EA, I feel this was simply Bioware screwing this up all by themselves.

[Glorfindel709]

zsom wrote...

Glorfindel709 wrote...

The Main Plot of Act 3 specifically was utter garbage.

It's not easy to please the fans. On the ME2 forums the flamewar about the paragade system went on for how long? A year or even longer. Players wanted harder choices, and we (myself included) felt cheated that the suicide mission was so easy to finish without casualties.

Here in act three we have hard choices. We have a complex dilemma, where we don't have a standard black or white side. We have a realistic, tragic problem that cannot be solved by Hawk. And yet you say, that saving:
- Fereldan from a dragon
- the jedi from the sith
- the elves from a monster without a soul
- the Sword Coast from war
- Neverwinter city from giant, ancient lizardmen
is so much better.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this. The third act had in my opinion a fantastic story.

In Act 3, we were given the choice between two piles of crap. The only difference between them was that one was hypocritical and insane, and the other was self righteous and insane.

Whoops *removed for spoilers, apologies people* Regardless. Anyone who has beat the game by now should understand what I mean


There was no moral ambiguity in the final choice. Hawke had two options of "Eat Sh!t and die" and that was it. This was poor story telling, poor plot development, and poor character development at its finest. Act 3 was an aberrtion  and abomination that ruined the game. 

So yes, I am saying that saving Ferelden from a dragon is the better ending, because guess what? In that game, while my choices all lead to the final conclusion, there was actual moral ambiguity and tough decisions to make. In DA2, all paths followed the same linear reused dungeon path, and my only options were to be Nice, Snarky, or Rude about it.

Modifié par Glorfindel709, 21 mars 2011 - 09:50 .