339 réponses à ce sujet

[themaxzero]

I have put about 70 hours into DA2 so far but I felt bad that I didn't have a DA1 save to import (due to HD issues). So I decided to go back to DA1 it create the perfect save to import.

First thing I notice was how DA1 was much slower then DA2. Not just in combat but in travel and conversation as well.

The non Mage skill trees were also pretty dull. Not that it matters much since my party runs around with 3 Mages (since Mages pretty much own DA1).

Yes DA1 is longer but a lot of that longer consists of overly long areas. The Mage tower and the Deep Roads being the most common examples. Spend several hours doing the Mage tower and the only memorable fights were the Sloth Demon and Uldred. For several hours work that's a little sparse.

The fact that DA1 still has issues with multi core processors is a pain to boot.

Is DA2 perfect? Of course not. The reuse of terrain is noticeable and rather annoying. I am not a huge fan of the gear system either. Feels a lot like ME1. Basically too much stuff drops and you sell 95% of it. I mean seriously what is the point of the junk tab in your inventory?

I wouldn't mind DA3 having DA1's maps (minus an extremely long Deep Roads thanks) and inventory/items but with DA2's skill trees and combat.

And Varric and Shale.

Just for the record I have over 250 hours player on DA1 (this current playthrough will put me at arround 300) and just over 200 on ME2.

Modifié par themaxzero, 19 mars 2011 - 04:05 .

[DaiBi]

Ajspeed wrote...

Im having trouble comprehending so many peoples deep seeded hate for this game many of whom were judging it before they even played it. Honestly what is wrong with its?
Its like Mass Effect and the changes made to Mass Effect 2 its refined the gameplay making things alot neater and easier to manage and id say it better for it Mass Effect and DAO both had similar problems of somewhat clunky interface but they both have been refined in there sequels due to what the fans complained was wrong with the first game, Bioware Cant Satisfy everyone but they do there best.

i think its because me2 differs from me1 much less then da2 from dao, thats why. Some people just wanted improved and extended dao, but they recived a completely different game. More simple (in a bad sense) and cheap game (reuse of everything that possible many times)

[Phaelducan]

*Stamp*

Pointless discussion. Haters are going to hate, not much else to say.

[FedericoV]

StingingVelvet wrote...

My biggest issue, by far, is the repeated content.  Hightown, Lowtown and Darktown over and over and over again, along with the game literally having 3 dungeons repeated 10+ times each.  That is my main issue with the game. 

It's a fair criticism and I agree with it. There is a point when the recycle of area is not accetable and DA2 have crossed that line. DA:O has more variety but at the same time the design of the "city" sucked and I prefer Kirkwall over Denerim every day of the year. So, for me the ideal would be a game with DA:O's variety and a city like Kirkwall as quest hub. For the side quest and mini dungeoun, honestly, I don't mind the recycle even if they can make something more creative and interesting.

Second to that would be the terrible dialogue system.  Not just not knowing what I am going to say, but also the very simplistic good/funny/bad response system.  I do not think DA:O or Baldurs Gate were that simplistic hidden in dialogue trees, I think DA2 is heavily simplified in the dialogue department.

Imho, Bioware have allways used a simplistic "3 personality" system + interrogations with choices at the end restricted by your personality. Maybe, the simplicity of the dialogue system was hidden by the old wall of text system. But it's more or less the same. Only, in the written format the interrogation were present from the beginning, so it seems to have "moar" options. My critic is that the stress on the personality system at the end make Hawke sound a little bit disjointed when you choose different personality options during the dialogues. I don't know why, but dialogues do not flow as well as ME2 to make an example.

[randName]

Phaelducan wrote...

"Is this biased? well its taste if anything, and I can't stand a story driven game doing something as awful as what DA2 decided to do with resurrections and personality changes to characters you cared for in DA:O."

That says it all Rand, you are lowering the score of the game because you don't like the story (btw it's a spoiler-free forum, and they already edited this thread once, so might want to change your Merrill section).

That's fine to say you don't like something, but it doesn't make it a bad product. I didn't like Kafka's . I also didn't like Sense and Sensibility. Does that mean they were crappy literature? Of course not, and it would be absurd for me to say so.

I get not liking DA:2 as much as other RPG's in recent memory, and I don't dispute anyone's right to their opinion. What I dispute is using unfair criteria to lambaste something to an extreme degree. If you list gameplay, graphics, music, user interface, etc. and give a game 8/10 or higher, then say you don't like the story and drop it to a 5 or 6, that doesn't generate an aggregate score of 60%.

I'm not a DA:2 loyalist, and it's not even in my top 10 this year for games I'm stoked about... but these scores/reviews are ABSURD. 60% is an absolute joke, and to even rate DA2 close to that suggests that the game is borderline unplayable.

That's flat-out untrue, which is why review sites (which btw have DA2 at 80%) use the aforementioned objective criteria to rate games. Some leeway? Sure, but not a full 20% worth.

You know that the median score is a median score of all the lows and highs, and trying to be the median score when you review a game isn't to goal of a review; rather its to express your view of the game.

& You can't point to one review, based only upon score and say that this is blatantly false; for all you know the game was unplayable for that reviewerr.

& Every review is partial to the reviewers opinions, I for one would never give a game a good score based on graphics; or graphics helps a game play well, but if It doesn't play well good graphics will never ever save it.

So I could never with good coincidence say that game X gets a 9, for while the gameplay only deserves a 5, the graphics and sound are both glorious! Well it would help, but I can’t understand how someone could ever value graphics and visual design over the feeling you get when you play said game.

& Its not that I don’t like the theme of the story, in truth I should love the story, because it contains exactly what I should want; the conflict of religion vs. individualism. No, I dislike the story because I find it inconsistent with DA:O and the DA world they created, I found it inhuman were it felt like it tried to be human, and how remarkable silly it got towards the end. Also for a RPG game it lacked options, or all the options you had lead to the same conclusions. Or I found it a compelling story told badly, with a flawed narrative that used for me low methods like returning characters without considering continuity. [talking about the main story]

That said I find that scores are a rough and badly applied tool; I for one would like to sum up DA2 something like this.

A flawed, but beautiful world, with mostly enjoyable milieus, battles and characters; containing gripping and worthwhile adventures set in a framed narrative that sadly often collapses onto itself. There is also a feeling through out the game of it being half done, with sad reminders around every corner, every cave, and every mansion. At point DA2 suffers heavily from story bugs, that can ruin some of its best writing with in time misplaced scenes, revealing the tragic end before its due. But the most gripping flaw for me is the decision to throw out my decisions from DA:O, leaving me, as the credits roll, with an empty feeling, and regrets that I ever decided to play DA2.

& Based on Gamespot/IGN reviews, maybe I’d give it an 7-8 instead of an 6-7, but maybe using Edge and their reviews, maybe a 5-6 is in order.

& I don't hate DA2, far from it; I really dislike parts of the game, and when I say I regret playing it, its because it partly ruined my DA:O experience. & I've clocked 150-160 hours in DA2 so far. I still give it a 6-7. Now if someone would have warned me about the ending, and told me to stop close to the end maybe I could have given the game a 7-8 even.

Modifié par randName, 19 mars 2011 - 04:32 .

[InHarmsWay]

Mass Effect 2 had the exact same rage reactions. I still remember the whole "ZOMG Bioware has killed the Mass Effect series!" threads that popped all over the place. Now look at it now. If I recall it has broken the record for most GotY awards.

[Galad22]

RosaAquafire wrote...

Galad22 wrote...
That is just not fair, I am in these forums
now a little because I didn't like the changes Bioware made to dragon
age 2. Thus I am complaining here so that my voice it at least heard by
bioware, just in hopes they change it to the better next time. I think
it is perfectly reasonable thing to do. And wouldn't you do exactly same
thing if you had problems with some of the changes?

I don't whine in metacritic either, I whine here. Much better change to make some difference.

And this is the first reasonable thing you've said, not relying on metacritic scores and someone else's opinion to prop up your own.

But the fact is, I don't agree with you, and there are lots of other people who don't agree with you. And there are, indeed, lots of people who DO agree with you. So you have your right to sit here and say it's bad in an effort to get things changed back to a superiour precdent, and I have my right to sit here and say that it's good in an effort to have things NOT change back to an inferiour prequel, and we have our right to argue about it.

Your opinion is lazy and lame when your summary is "METACRITIC AGREES WITH ME." Get your own opinion.

I have my own opinion, I just happen to have something that backs it up as well.

This is your first post in this thread.

In a phrase: nerd rage. DA2 is less nerdy than DA:O, nerds are angry and feel betrayed. Yep.

There is no argument here at all, this is impolite, untrue and not very mature.

If you can't argue without calling other people nerds, why would you bother trying to do that at all.

[StingingVelvet]

FedericoV wrote...

Imho, Bioware have allways used a simplistic "3 personality" system + interrogations with choices at the end restricted by your personality. Maybe, the simplicity of the dialogue system was hidden by the old wall of text system. But it's more or less the same.

Well like I said I don't agree with that.  I feel like DA:O and Baldurs Gate had much more nuance and avenues to persue.  Even if that is a placebo brought about by actual dialogue trees, well, that's a good placebo to have.

[Phaelducan]

Agree with FedericoV about the dialog. It's a misconception that Torment or Baldur's Gate had "more" options for dialog. Basically you chose the good, bad, snarky, or plain vanilla response (although it was nice having stats linked into better versions of those same responses).

Just some thick nostalgia goggles on for those that think the ME2/DA2 dialog trees are really any different.

Reusing terrain is irritating, although to some extent most RPG's do that. You end up traipsing across the same maps and textures for a lot of these games (think about Fallout 3 and how similar 90% of the environment was).

There is certainly room for improvement in those areas.

I honestly thought the biggest flaw in the experience for me was that I just didn't care about Hawke. Doesn't make it a bad game, but I definitely would have preferred a different protagonist.

[randName]

Persephone wrote...

randName wrote...

For me its due to DA2 not only being a rushed, fairly shoddy product on its own, its also that BW decided that they could ignore what happened in DA:O; and suddenly DA2 is also destroying what you did in DA:O; ruining both games for me.

How is it "destroying" what you did in DAO? All my imports worked like a charm.

I actually don't mind the bugs that the import created; in one game I both had a drunk Alistair and then later Alistair showed up as the King; he should just have been the drunk.

Same with Zevran, don't mind that in 2 of my imports he is still alive - esp. since these are bugs its all good, even funny to an extent.

The problem is that they have decided to go against your actions in DA:O and ignore what you did. (I normally didn't kill Leliana, in fact she normally left together with the Warden, but seeing her donned in the chantry robes, ignoring the end of DA:O irks me more).

[OmegaBlue0231]

It's like Halo Reach, everyone wanted the same game but with a slightly different storyline, but when they changed the game it upset people. People will either deal with it, complain but still play the games, or move on to another company or series.

Modifié par OmegaBlue0231, 19 mars 2011 - 04:45 .

[Persephone]

Galad22 wrote...

RosaAquafire wrote...

Galad22 wrote...
That is just not fair, I am in these forums
now a little because I didn't like the changes Bioware made to dragon
age 2. Thus I am complaining here so that my voice it at least heard by
bioware, just in hopes they change it to the better next time. I think
it is perfectly reasonable thing to do. And wouldn't you do exactly same
thing if you had problems with some of the changes?

I don't whine in metacritic either, I whine here. Much better change to make some difference.

And this is the first reasonable thing you've said, not relying on metacritic scores and someone else's opinion to prop up your own.

But the fact is, I don't agree with you, and there are lots of other people who don't agree with you. And there are, indeed, lots of people who DO agree with you. So you have your right to sit here and say it's bad in an effort to get things changed back to a superiour precdent, and I have my right to sit here and say that it's good in an effort to have things NOT change back to an inferiour prequel, and we have our right to argue about it.

Your opinion is lazy and lame when your summary is "METACRITIC AGREES WITH ME." Get your own opinion.

I have my own opinion, I just happen to have something that backs it up as well.

What? Metacritic? 

[Persephone]

InHarmsWay wrote...

Mass Effect 2 had the exact same rage reactions. I still remember the whole "ZOMG Bioware has killed the Mass Effect series!" threads that popped all over the place. Now look at it now. If I recall it has broken the record for most GotY awards.

Too true. TOO true. I adore ME2 (Even though I have issues with it too........"The priiiiiiiiiiiiiize". Eugh. Companion interactions is sparse and banter.....there is almost NONE!).

[randName]

Phaelducan wrote...

Agree with FedericoV about the dialog. It's a misconception that Torment or Baldur's Gate had "more" options for dialog. Basically you chose the good, bad, snarky, or plain vanilla response (although it was nice having stats linked into better versions of those same responses).
 

People claiming BG had more dialogue are probably delusional, but PST had tons and tons of dialogue; and they also had more lasting change on your character and the world, at least in part.

On the other hand It was mostly, if not all just text, and they pressed in what are codex entries in DA:O in dialogues, with just pages of information.

You also had less characters, and your main characters was in some ways more restrictive than Hawk, and in some ways the nameless one was more open (as in more dialogue options based upon stats, and a smart and charismatic character could get tons and tons of dialogue). There was also little to do animation and sound wise for PST, so they could throw a book at you in a single dialgue, and somtimes they at least would throw you a short essay, so the comparision bad.

So It wasn't all for the better; and I do like the dialogue wheel in DA2, the only issue with it is that there is little difference playing as kind/humerus and aggressive; you mostly get exactly the same results, and my 3 first characters stayed within their character through out, but the difference between these runs are minimal. & Once they do place ethics in the 3 character options you get problems, like your aggressive warrior/mage might not hate mages, but the aggressive option is some rant about mages and so on ~

It does allow you play as a humerus but kind chap, or a humerus but condemning person and so on; so I do like this part of DA2, and I find that they have improved on the system since ME2.

In general I prefer it over DA:O, and I wish they would further expand it with less ethical/moral choices ingrained in your tone, and instead have these come before/after your humerus or angry remark.

Modifié par randName, 19 mars 2011 - 04:51 .

[Ronin2006]

Phaelducan wrote...

*Stamp*

Pointless discussion. Haters are going to hate, not much else to say.

Pointless? You are the one that asserted that no one could justify giving the game a 6/10 and then started an argument when people disagreed with you.

Then when you figure that people aren't going to simply just share what you believe should be a common opinion about the game you resort to a comeback that my 12 year old cousin would be ashamed of.

Fact is, a lot of people "hate" this game and have given good, logical and sound reasons for doing so.  It's not because we are "haters", in fact I am generally a "lover" of most things Bioware.  But in this instance there are so many glaring faults with this game I can't bring myself to do other than mostly criticise it.

[Phaelducan]

Don't get me wrong Rand, I think a 8 is completely reasonable, maybe a little high in some regards, maybe a little low. I think a 7 is pushing it, but again justifiable in some ways. For what it's worth, I would also have a hard time buying a 9/10 rating as well.

It's the 5/6 rating that I take issue with, based on (ignoring what was said earlier because it's flat-out untrue) industry standards in what gamers can expect from a product.

Look, no one likes crap (I mean literal crap), except corprophages, and that's messed up. We can also point to crap (metaphor) in the industry and quantify it (see aforementioned Big Rigs and Superman). It is completely fair to point out that aligning a game like DA2 closer to Big Rigs on a ratings spectrum is an act of faulty reasoning and judgement.

Again, just because you don't like something doesn't make it literally bad (and yes I know you said you didn't hate it, I read your post, this is more for some of the other posts).

Edit: Format fixed, sorry it got borked when I posted the other one.

Modifié par Phaelducan, 19 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[randName]

Phaelducan wrote...

Look, reformat that text; I don't want to look through a block of text to find what you have written; once you have I'll respond.

[lord micha]

I think there is so much hate because Bioware named it "Dragon Age II" which everyone excepted to be a sequel to DAO.

This is not a sequel, but some sort of relaunch. The relaunch however is hurt by being rushed by EA to "capitalize" on DAO.

See? Fail-fail-situation.

DA2 - while it has its merits - is dumbed-down ("more welcoming"), duller, tamer (see the clothes on nerf now comic...), buggier, more unbalanced than DAO.

I hope Laidlaw will get this someday; maybe when he is finished fueling the hype machine.

Modifié par lord micha, 19 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[Phaelducan]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

*Stamp*

Pointless discussion. Haters are going to hate, not much else to say.

Pointless? You are the one that asserted that no one could justify giving the game a 6/10 and then started an argument when people disagreed with you.

Then when you figure that people aren't going to simply just share what you believe should be a common opinion about the game you resort to a comeback that my 12 year old cousin would be ashamed of.

Fact is, a lot of people "hate" this game and have given good, logical and sound reasons for doing so.  It's not because we are "haters", in fact I am generally a "lover" of most things Bioware.  But in this instance there are so many glaring faults with this game I can't bring myself to do other than mostly criticise it.

Comeback? Troll much?

I said it's a pointless discussion because I referenced industry standards, to which the response was "there aren't any, all opinions are valid, stfu and diaf (paraphrase)."

Have you even been paying any attention? For you to say there are logical and sound reasons to do so (your quote) ignores at this point hundreds if not thousands of words in this thread saying that those very reasons are inherently illogical and unsound.

If you don't like something, that doesn't make your opinion on it valid. To give DA2 a score of 1 (citing user reviews on Metacritic here) is absolutely foolish. You attempted to validate even the concept of giving a game like DA2 a 2% approval rating, which is lower than the agreed upon worse games ever conceived. You aren't logical, you aren't reasonable, and THAT is why the conversation is pointless. 

Again, if you make any attempt to look at what you are saying objectively, you can't honestly be trying to make the argument that if someone doesn't like something, they can equate it with literal garbage (shovelware) based purely on personal preference and no quantifiable (and industry agreed upon standards) examples of failure to meet basic criteria for excellence.

If you don't like Melville, that DOES NOT MEAN MOBY DICK WAS A BAD BOOK. 

You are making the counterargument, and badly, and hence I called you a hater. Why would I bother rehashing the same argument with you? It's pointless, so lets move on.

[randName]

Phaelducan wrote...

Don't get me wrong Rand, I think a 8 is completely reasonable, maybe a little high in some regards, maybe a little low. I think a 7 is pushing it, but again justifiable in some ways. For what it's worth, I would also have a hard time buying a 9/10 rating as well.

It's the 5/6 rating that I take issue with, based on (ignoring what was said earlier because it's flat-out untrue) industry standards in what gamers can expect from a product.

Look, no one likes crap (I mean literal crap), except corprophages, and that's messed up. We can also point to crap (metaphor) in the industry and quantify it (see aforementioned Big Rigs and Superman). It is completely fair to point out that aligning a game like DA2 closer to Big Rigs on a ratings spectrum is an act of faulty reasoning and judgement.

Again, just because you don't like something doesn't make it literally bad (and yes I know you said you didn't hate it, I read your post, this is more for some of the other posts).

Edit: Format fixed, sorry it got borked when I posted the other one.

Yes its unfortunate that it gets low scores; and a 60% is too low for the median score (I worked on Wanted the Game and it was given more, that is a crime; it was more like a 3-4 since it was half prices, 2-3 if fully priced).

But you as a reviewer should dare to give a game like DA2 a 4-5 if you really really dislike it; you should write why, and explain yourself, and not just say "OH this is a horrid game, here is a 2 for you".

& sometimes the reviewer median score gets too high, or too low, based on the expected quality of the game, hype, and due to other various reasons; but even so its only unfortunate if it gets lower than it should, and its lucky if it gets higher. I mentioned Wanted before (based on the movie, that was based on the comic) and I've worked on games that were a lot better than Wanted, but had higher expectations (not a big title as such) and got less; and you live with it.

& I don't believe there is a pact among reviewers to damage BW and DA2, esp. since normally BW are treated more like darlings, and for good reason.

EDIT: clarified the 3rd paragraph, it was horribly written; and still is, but at least its better.

Modifié par randName, 19 mars 2011 - 05:18 .

[Kenaris]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

I've played this for what 38 hours and my opinion is it's still awful, worse than a lot of mediocre rpgs out there, and you can get a measure of what a game is like without playing it, just by watching a youtube vid you can see this is a world apart from DAO.

 

this without a doubt is the dumbest thing i have ever seen posted here.. (no offense just imo it is)

of course it's worlds apart from Dragon age Orgins thats why it's called Dragon Age 2 and not Dragon Age orgins 2...=p

Even if they would have made an exact copy of DA:O for some of you with updated graphics or whatever you would end up ****ing thats the game sucks cause it's not  new or different enough for you.

Just goes to show no matter what Bioware does some of you will never be happy with out having something to **** about.


Is DA2 perfect? no far from it no game is truely ever perfect but it is still a great game and can be very enjoyable. In fact i myself enjoyed/enjoy it more then i did DA:O

Modifié par Kenaris, 19 mars 2011 - 05:17 .

[Ronin2006]

Phaelducan wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

*Stamp*

Pointless discussion. Haters are going to hate, not much else to say.

Pointless? You are the one that asserted that no one could justify giving the game a 6/10 and then started an argument when people disagreed with you.

Then when you figure that people aren't going to simply just share what you believe should be a common opinion about the game you resort to a comeback that my 12 year old cousin would be ashamed of.

Fact is, a lot of people "hate" this game and have given good, logical and sound reasons for doing so.  It's not because we are "haters", in fact I am generally a "lover" of most things Bioware.  But in this instance there are so many glaring faults with this game I can't bring myself to do other than mostly criticise it.

Comeback? Troll much?

I said it's a pointless discussion because I referenced industry standards, to which the response was "there aren't any, all opinions are valid, stfu and diaf (paraphrase)."

Have you even been paying any attention? For you to say there are logical and sound reasons to do so (your quote) ignores at this point hundreds if not thousands of words in this thread saying that those very reasons are inherently illogical and unsound.

If you don't like something, that doesn't make your opinion on it valid. To give DA2 a score of 1 (citing user reviews on Metacritic here) is absolutely foolish. You attempted to validate even the concept of giving a game like DA2 a 2% approval rating, which is lower than the agreed upon worse games ever conceived. You aren't logical, you aren't reasonable, and THAT is why the conversation is pointless. 

Again, if you make any attempt to look at what you are saying objectively, you can't honestly be trying to make the argument that if someone doesn't like something, they can equate it with literal garbage (shovelware) based purely on personal preference and no quantifiable (and industry agreed upon standards) examples of failure to meet basic criteria for excellence.

If you don't like Melville, that DOES NOT MEAN MOBY DICK WAS A BAD BOOK. 

You are making the counterargument, and badly, and hence I called you a hater. Why would I bother rehashing the same argument with you? It's pointless, so lets move on.

Troll much? "Haters gonna hate" has to rank as one of the most troll type of posts I have ever come across.

If industry standards were completely uniform and universal you would see the game scored almost exactly the same across every major industry publication.  What you instead see is quite a varied range of scores and criticism and praise for the game.  This variation indicates that there is diversity in scoring and judging criteria and therefore a range of scores can be reached in judging the game.  I think you will find it was Edge magazine that scored it a 6/10
 but PC gamer gave it a glowing 94%.  Where you sit on the spectrum is up to you, but if you want to give it either a good or bad score you need to justify it with reason and logic.

I have never advocated simple personal preference in equating a game to shovelware, but  instead said that you need logic and reason when assessing the game and giving your opinion on it.  Of course there will always be an element of personal preference, it is virtually impossible to rate Dragon Age without personal preference.  But with consideration to my own personal preferences tied in with some aspects of the game that can be looked at objectively (such as respawning enemies from thin air, reuse of environments, lack of customisation of party members, I will not go on here but you're getting the idea) I can give a weighting to these factors and say yes, Dragon Age 2 is a bad game in my opinion and really, as a gameplay experience I hate it.  There are many parts of the game which can be criticised without being illogical or unsound as you put it.

With regards to the metacritic scores, some of them are disgusting and useless.  Equally however there are (while not in the same numbers) a whole lot of gamers that praise the game giving it 10's when it clearly doesn't deserve it.  10 in my opinion indicates a perfect game, and this should rarely, if ever occur and certainly not for a game that even the most reasonable defenders of the game would say has flaws.  I have never used metacritic as a means of arguing so I don't know why you're bringing it up with me now.

Regarding the 2%  (and I think you need to read it again carefully and consider it in context) is that for all I care, if somebody can justify giving the game such a score with reason and logic, they should be free to do so.  Personally I would disagree with it, as in my opinion it's better than that but still a bad game.

Also, I have never resorted to using STFU or any other slang in my arguments, and I suggest you don't either as it doesn't help you make your point.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 19 mars 2011 - 05:21 .

[randName]

Kenaris wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

 

this without a doubt is the dumbest thing i have ever seen posted here.. (no offense just imo it is)

You truly haven't been around forums much ~

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

"But but but.... this isn't a BG clone anymore? WAAAAAAAAAAH!"