339 réponses à ce sujet

[ragnaven]

yes in the scope part there is a Form that should be a for, I know I have edited it now five times and it won't change.

[Xaenn]

I would say 2 things to keep in mind things like demography's are very, very unreliable for many reasons

1) People have to buy the game ultimately before they can play it and come to the conclusion they're going to like it or did. Because you sold 10 billion copies, 20 people could of actually liked it.

2) Marketing, if you have great marketer's you could market stick figures with only animation was a amazing game and come out with 10 million copies sold.

3) In Sequel's especially you assume the game is going to be similar to the original, where most of the copies sold are not sold because the game is good (refer to #1) It's because people have faith is going to be like the original. This isn't always the case, some people may want the game to be better, but again statement #1.

4) Bioware has been very good to its fan base, even now they're doing their best.  People have a certain expectation when it comes to bioware games, I for one buy most bioware games without even reviews (which is my own fault) because I assume a game despite genre would be amazing by them, Im sure there are others out there as well, which is where a porition of sales comes from as well.

Demography should never be used as a template for success of players enjoying their game.

Onto reviewers

#1) It's their job to be as unbiased as possible with good objectivity, at the end of the day however, it's not in their best interest to put down a games. Even if a game everyone agreed sucked ass, still not in their best interest.

#2) If they put down games like this with big names like Bioware, Blizzard, EA. Could lose their jobs which I'm sure they enjoy. Some may disagree with this statement which is fine, but they may also lose the respect of the company and not be allowed to test further games. Again I'm not saying they can't actually enjoy the game and give it an accurate account and come to 10/10.

My point being, do not use this stuff as an example of the games success and to squelch peoples views, it's incredibly unreliable. I don't believe these people are on their payroles, but I highly doubt the reviewers are being completely honest.

Modifié par Xaenn, 19 mars 2011 - 10:00 .

[Kendaric Varkellen]

Very good points ragnaven, you sum up a lot of things I think are wrong with DA2.

I wholeheartedly agree about the beginning, starting Hawke's journey in Lothering would have created a stronger connection to both Hawke and his family. As it stands, the moment your sibling dies wasn't memorable, it felt more like "hm, some guy I had in my party for about 5 minutes and didn't really know just died".
The death of your parents in Origins if you played the human noble was somehow more intense, I actually hated Arl Howe for what he did and felt satisfying when I faced and killed him. The same with Duncan in Origins, I actually cared about him and felt frustrated by his death.

[Mage One]

When I look at DA:O, I see a lot of problems and outdated mechanics that were in need of repair. (e.g. Silent protagonist with a choice of five lines, only two of which are different in terms of how the game response to them.) Many other people, however, saw some of these same things as features that define what a good RPG should be. Unfortunately for them, the developers agreed with me, not them, and came at DA:O "[bearing] a knife and a clean conscience." Even while I like DAII, though, I think they went too far in some ways. Now imagine how those same changes look to someone who was opposed to the very notion of these changes to begin with. In my opinion, a lot of it is also paying more attention to form than function, but I'm sure they would disagree. When you couple both of these to the agreed upon issues DAII does suffer from, everything bad in DAII gets magnified, and everything good seems either not good enough or not as good as it was before/could have been. All this in the sequel to a game many of them loved and had been waiting years for, then, seems almost like betrayal, and they are angry for it, which doesn't help their opinion of DAII any either.

I can understand their dislike of it even if I think most of them go too far and aren't giving DAII a fair shake. I felt a bit of the same when I saw the first bits of info on DAII emphasizing the changes. What I didn't understand then was they were attempting to promote the fact that they were working hard to fix what was broken. I still feel a tinge of that disappointment when, for example, I'm looking through my inventory full of items with no descriptions. At the end of the day, though, I didn't care about most of the item descriptions in DA:O. I only miss them for the few I though were worthwhile, so I just sigh and let it go, hoping they'll find more of a middle ground in DA3, as I find DAII to be an improvement in almost every respect.

[Well]

Kendaric Varkellen wrote...

Very good points ragnaven, you sum up a lot of things I think are wrong with DA2.

I wholeheartedly agree about the beginning, starting Hawke's journey in Lothering would have created a stronger connection to both Hawke and his family. As it stands, the moment your sibling dies wasn't memorable, it felt more like "hm, some guy I had in my party for about 5 minutes and didn't really know just died".
The death of your parents in Origins if you played the human noble was somehow more intense, I actually hated Arl Howe for what he did and felt satisfying when I faced and killed him. The same with Duncan in Origins, I actually cared about him and felt frustrated by his death.

Wait!I thought rpgs were about how you look(Ninja Flips) when you are in combat?/sarc off .Origins drew you into the game.With a few exception DA2 doesnt.At least for me.

[AkiKishi]

In the end you can succeed in two ways. Be fondly remembered and held up as an example like PST. Or sell scads and stick two fingers up at the "RPG olde guard" like Diablo.

I don't think DA2 is going to do either of those things.

[Dark Specie]

Because ´Dragon Age: Origins + Awakening made our expectations go to epic levels. When those expectations weren't answered even halfway (with variations from person to person), it's to be expected that people would feel disappointed...

Modifié par Dark Specie, 19 mars 2011 - 11:03 .

[rxguy101]

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.

If you played DAO at all on the PC or, if you played Baldurs Gate, the games touted and well deserved predecessor you would understand the problems.  It is not a console game with all the hack and slash etc....  What made the first Dragon Age game so good, the storyline, loot, weapons, skills, they completly left out in this game.  I played Mass Effect 1 loved it and then Mass Effect 2 and its was good, but you cant do the same to this genre or game.  Sorry soo disappointed.

[Shirosaki17]

I think it's all the excess blood and violence. Seeing blood being spilled everywhere and splitting bodies into pieces like paper, has caused people to devolve and have their instincts kick in, causing testosterone and adrenaline levels to rise making people RAGE while playing DA2.

Modifié par Shirosaki17, 19 mars 2011 - 11:04 .

[SirOccam]

I think a lot of it is the fact that the detractors are WAY more vocal. I was getting kind of depressed, honestly, when I came back here after being away for like a month. I was super pumped after playing, and then I get this torrent of nerdrage. As much as I wanted to be able to just shrug it off, it affected me. It made me feel bad for the developers, some of whom I got to meet at PAX and see their enthusiasm for this product, when people started calling for resignations and such. Of all the disrespectful, insolent...ugh, I better not get started. I just hope the devs know there are many of us who thought they did a great job.

Regardless, look around at reviews. Most seem to be perfect or near perfect. The metacritic score says it all, really. Among professional reviewers, 23 positive, 4 mixed, 0 negative. Among users, 262 positive vs. 577 negative. I'm not saying amateur reviewers can't have valid points, but how many of those people are these disenfranchised, elitist "purists" that can't bring themselves to appreciate anything that came out since Baldur's Gate?

You just have to learn to filter out the noise. Listen to the people with valid points to make and ignore those who just want to spew hatred. I'm still learning this myself.

[Persona]

To me this falls under an area I like to call no skill gaming. Now what I mean by that is I told my 10 year old to follow the arrows, and to just push X and other buttons on my ps3. And he was able to finish the game. He was unable to do it with DAO, the sad thing is most games are falling under the no skill area. Because that seems to be what people like nowadays. Which is why I am glad there is still games like the witcher 2 coming out and skyrim. This will be last purchase from Bioware.

[Jonnerz]

Dark Specie wrote...

Because ´Dragon Age: Origins + Awakening made our expectations go to epic levels. When those expectations weren't answered even halfway (with variations from person to person), it's to be expected that people would feel disappointed...

A lot of people were disappointed with Awakening when it came out, especially with the length of it, and the bugs, and so forth. Personally, I played it over and over.

The thing making people angry, I'd say, is the change to the original. DA2 doesn't feel like the same series as Origins. I wouldn't say that makes it bad, I love playing it. It's just not what people expected. Whether people got something better or worse is usually voiced quite loudly.

[TJSolo]

simfamSP wrote...

And to think I liked you!

Anyway, this whole 'dumbing down' business is a whole lot of nonsence, to be honest Dragon age 2 is much darker than DA:O ever was.

The darkness in DA2 overused which lessened the intended impact. The city elf origin alone is darker than DA2 and did not need personal tragedies to happen every quest like a "to do list" of drama in order to remind the player of the tone.

Modifié par TJSolo, 19 mars 2011 - 11:28 .

[SirOccam]

Persona wrote...

To me this falls under an area I like to call no skill gaming. Now what I mean by that is I told my 10 year old to follow the arrows, and to just push X and other buttons on my ps3. And he was able to finish the game. He was unable to do it with DAO, the sad thing is most games are falling under the no skill area. Because that seems to be what people like nowadays. Which is why I am glad there is still games like the witcher 2 coming out and skyrim. This will be last purchase from Bioware.

But RPGs aren't supposed to be about player skill, they're supposed to be about the character's skill. What you define as requiring "skill" in DAO I define as "needless complexity." If you have to decipher complicated rules and such, then does that really add to the game? For some, it may. For me it most definitely does not.

I'd rather jump into the story and experience it all. After all, reading a book doesn't require any skill beyond basic literacy, and I get a lot of enjoyment from those.

Edit: and besides, I disagree that DA2 doesn't require skill anyway. There were several fights I had to re-play a few times on Normal. Maybe this just means your 10-year old is way better at gaming than me. /shrug

Modifié par SirOccam, 19 mars 2011 - 11:30 .

[Persona]

SirOccam wrote...

Persona wrote...

To me this falls under an area I like to call no skill gaming. Now what I mean by that is I told my 10 year old to follow the arrows, and to just push X and other buttons on my ps3. And he was able to finish the game. He was unable to do it with DAO, the sad thing is most games are falling under the no skill area. Because that seems to be what people like nowadays. Which is why I am glad there is still games like the witcher 2 coming out and skyrim. This will be last purchase from Bioware.

But RPGs aren't supposed to be about player skill, they're supposed to be about the character's skill. What you define as requiring "skill" in DAO I define as "needless complexity." If you have to decipher complicated rules and such, then does that really add to the game? For some, it may. For me it most definitely does not.

I'd rather jump into the story and experience it all. After all, reading a book doesn't require any skill beyond basic literacy, and I get a lot of enjoyment from those.

Edit: and besides, I disagree that DA2 doesn't require skill anyway. There were several fights I had to re-play a few times on Normal. Maybe this just means your 10-year old is way better at gaming than me. /shrug

lol well he did replay a few fights espically the high dragon.  I didn't mean like reading a book.  What I mean is things are bascially played out like go here and go that way.  And I dont like button mashing I like it to require more then simple keep clicking the mouse button, or keep clicking the controller and you win.

[Marcy3655]

DA:O was heavy on story, DA2 is heavy on action, that's the biggest difference I can see in the 2 games.. I don't think either one is really better than the other, they're just different...

M

[Tylantt]

My problems with it are small, but still manage to get that best of me.

1) the re-used areas. Itmakes the game feel rushed knowing that every area is basicly the same, just that some parts of it are walled off in that instance.

2) The romances didn't live up to my expectations.. That wouldn't bother most people but thats one of the reasons I really enjoy Bioware, Adds to how well the story grips me.

3) Too action-heavy for me.

[PuppetSoul]

BY-TOR STORMDRAGON wrote...

Playing a game 38 hours? It can't be a bad game, then, can it? I think so many wanted a clone of Origins, they weren't prepared for a story-driven tale that IS what was advertised, a rising Champion of a City from just a bum urchin. I had my doubts. After all, I despise Mass Effect, and games of it's type. Now Mass Effect- I played about 30 minutes and threw it to the bargain bin! I am 60 hours into every nook and cranny of DA 2 and while it's far from the traditional RPG- ultimately the characters, story and incredible sights and sounds won me over. (Actually after seeing the LAME character in the demo, I had my own doubts. He looks like a pu**y!)
The way I see it...the more a game is talked about, the better. I do think it was released with FAR too many issues for some users. My X-Box locked up one time- and that is the only glitch so far.
I will say this as well- if there is a DA 3, and it leans forward toward KOTOR and Mass Effect, I'll stick with the Elder-Scrolls, thank you. While I do like DA 2, it's stepping out of the box, so to speak, and pushing the envelope.
Now...on to Dungeon Siege 3...

Nowhere in the advertisment did it say that the UI would be a hot mess, that one map would be advertised as being upwards of ten unique areas, and that the encounters would be so frustratingly bad*.

*Yes, I'm aware that this is in large part due to the gameplay change from realtime strategy rpg to button mashing, but having every boss REQUIRE you to kite it around in a circle with a mage or archer for an hour while it stutter-steps behind you isn't a challenge: it's pitifully bad game design.  The only boss encounter in the game which isn't a complete joke is the rock: every other boss can be killed via track-and-field without ever getting hit.  Sadly, it seems they were intentionally designed to be that way: to make console Sandals feel more in control of the fights.

[Marcy3655]

Yes, I think the romances were done better in Origins than the new one, but I also thought the same about ME and ME2 as well... I think it's the fact that those games have a different focus and theme compared to the former ones..

I too wish they would have used at least a few areas to give some variety to the areas on DA2, but it's not game breaking for me... I can overlook that type of thing and concentrate on the action which even though most players are saying was overdone, I like the new combat system compared to DA:O, not that I didn't like DA:Os combat, it's just that you have to think a bit more about how to approach different enemies as apposed to using the same attacks, spells, skills, etc... I killed the Archdemon using basically the same 3 spells over and over and over... lol

[Cybermortis]

The most basic reason for the 'hate' is that many feel they were lied to and/or deliberately mislead as to what to expect.

[Marcy3655]

Cybermortis wrote...

The most basic reason for the 'hate' is that many feel they were lied to and/or deliberately mislead as to what to expect.

I can understand what you're saying completely, it's just that what advertising these days is not misleading? 

That's why I didn't watch any of the promos, didn't read any reviews or any other material on DA2 before playing it, I just waited until it was on the shelves and went into the first playthrough cold turkey..   that's how I approach all new games because I just don't trust advertising in general, it's never what you expect...

M

[Shirosaki17]

Just because other advertisers mislead doesn't make it ok. They blatantly lied to consumers. And they are immune to any repercussions because people aren't allowed to return their games.

[Cody211282]

Ajspeed wrote...

yeah true, i just want to comprehend abit better why its hated though cause honestly through and through it feels like what i expected a DA Sequel would be like

See my problem is they did the oposite of what I wanted them to do with a lot of things.

[scpulley]

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.

Eh.....because the changes they made to ME 2? Well, they still remembered to do this little thing like finish telling a story. And...they had planned on a trilogy so there already was an idea when the second game was made how to import the save game and that it would be carrying through all the games. Oh, and the protagionist didn't change. So....yeah it has very little in common with the change made between ME 1 and ME 2 which actually made since rather than DAO and DA 2. DA 2 was rushed and it pretty much crapped on what they did right in the first game, which was tell a good story. They had a good story, they just forgot to finish it in DA 2. We got like half a story So yeah, there is going to be a little hate. I don't mind the changes, I just wanted the game to feel like it was a complete game, not a glorified expansion in terms of quality of story.