594 réponses à ce sujet

[JoshieoPandar]

sleepyowlet wrote...

mr_afk wrote...

I think it really depends on the type of rpg. there are several rpgs out there that focus on cultivating different skills/abilities which allow quest-objectives to be completed in different ways, e.g. vtmb, deux ex. In those type of games the concept of sneaking past enemies, stealth killing etc can be fun. So it could be said that loads of fights after fights isn't necessary.
In dragonage however, lots of the story focuses on the protagonists or "hero"'s ability to kill things - to paraphrase hawke, "you're in luck, I help people and I kill things". If you removed that element, no matter how boring/repetitive you might find it, you would be reducing the game to a movie, with no focus on the character build/equipment/strategy/all the things that make rpgs rpgs.

I think dragonage has a decent mix atm, it uses a strong storyline to tie together lots of violence and amusing video cutscenes so everyone can be happy to some extent. If you really dislike the violence I guess you could always just avoid every single side quest that doesn't involve killing things (wait...that's like every single side quest!) and be so unexperienced/low-levelled that the first enemy along the main plot-line completely destroys you - which could be considered to be realism i guess

Speak for yourself, then. I found the combat boring, because every fight was the same. Start combat, spawn adds. Kill a few things, new adds spawn. Repeat. Booooooring. Strangely enough I didn't mind the combat in Origins quite that much.

And the strong storyline in DA2? You managed to find one? Where? I want it too! Honestly. Act 3 was simply an appalling slash-fest with plot-holes the size of an Archdemon. Ew.

It was still a nice break from having being the chosen to defeat an ancient evil business to politics, and friction between people in their daily lives.

[TMZuk]

Brenus wrote...

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the combat? That is just completely retarded.

Because, even if it seems Bioware has forgotten: An RPG is a hell of a lot more than combat, and when the combat is so awful as in DA2, I need a button to skip it, so I can get on with the story.

Well, I am semi-serious.

Modifié par TMZuk, 20 mars 2011 - 03:08 .

[Brenus]

I'm playing through BG again at the moment, and hell no, would I NEVER want to skip fighting Silke, Daevorn or Greater Basilisks.

Well, I wouldnt mind skipping lousy kobolds and Xvarts, but its easy to do, just run past them

[moilami]

What I have learned is that I wonot buy games anymore just because there is NPC with big boobs and no pants.

Hate to cancel my support for big boobs in games, though, but no can do.

[sleepyowlet]

Brenus wrote...

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the combat? That is just completely retarded.

Seriously, stop buying video games and go and watch a movie or read a book instead.

If the combat in a game is actually so bad that you want to skip it, then maybe you simply shouldnt have bought such a rubbish game like DA2 in the first place.

Bloody lamers.

#

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the dialogue? That is just completely retarded.
Yet the button is there.

And I would appreciate it, if you didn't tell others what they should or shouldn't do do. You are hardly entitled to do that. Name calling is also only a definite proof of immaturity.

Why are you so offended by the idea of a skip-combat-button? You wouldn't need to use it, after all. Or is your way to enjoy a game the only one?

[Il Divo]

moilami wrote...

I registered it because I thought that if I try really hard I may be able to play the game. I was wrong.

According to devs I "hate the change".

I say I know better and I say I hate dumbed down arcade action games where if you press a button something awesome happens. There is though more I hate in DA2, some things I have said in this thread.

What I will do is stop playing it and write a review to metacritic giving a score of 1/10 or 0/10. If it really is unplayable I give it 0/10. But if I manage to play it slowly, like 15 minutes a day, I might give it 1/10.

I'll be honest; I find it hard to judge a review fairly when they hand any game a 0/10. There are more than a few games that I utterly despise, yet given the effort that went into their development a 0/10 is very difficult to justify.

I hate the Fable series, yet I'd still give the games a 6 or 7 out of 10. I prefer Morrowind much more over Oblivion, yet even there I'd give the latter an 8, possibly a 9. Few are the games which have absolutely no redeemable qualities.

[moilami]

Brenus wrote...

I'm playing through BG again at the moment, and hell no, would I NEVER want to skip fighting Silke, Daevorn or Greater Basilisks.

Well, I wouldnt mind skipping lousy kobolds and Xvarts, but its easy to do, just run past them

Lol Xvarts. I still remember the first time I went to Xvart village. Played a ranger and even though it ruled big time to 1shot one by one the horde of annoyingly screaming Xvarts with a bow - talk about hunting - I felt very evil to do it.

[sleepyowlet]

JoshieoPandar wrote...

It was still a nice break from having being the chosen to defeat an ancient evil business to politics, and friction between people in their daily lives.

True. Except that it just doesn't work in DA2. I found myself thinking again and again that I just wanted to leave this awful place. After the expedition I had my pockets full of gold - and I wanted nothing more than to go back to Ferelden, where even Templars are people, where not every mage is a blood mage, and where I'm not jumped by assassins every time I go to Denerim to do a little shopping.

The you-are-not-the-most-important-person idea is a good one, but you need to give the player a reason to follow your story. I didn't feel like I had one. I just wanted to GTFO.

[Warheadz]

The main problem with DA 2's combat was that is was completely mindless. Basically, when you encounter enemies the only thing you can do is rush in, as the spawns will surround you anyways. And when there is nothing else left than rush in/spam skills, there's not much else left than a hack/slash fest. Also, potions were a lot harder to acquire in Origins than in DA 2. You can basically chug your way to victory.

[moilami]

Il Divo wrote...

moilami wrote...

I registered it because I thought that if I try really hard I may be able to play the game. I was wrong.

According to devs I "hate the change".

I say I know better and I say I hate dumbed down arcade action games where if you press a button something awesome happens. There is though more I hate in DA2, some things I have said in this thread.

What I will do is stop playing it and write a review to metacritic giving a score of 1/10 or 0/10. If it really is unplayable I give it 0/10. But if I manage to play it slowly, like 15 minutes a day, I might give it 1/10.

I'll be honest; I find it hard to judge a review fairly when they hand any game a 0/10. There are more than a few games that I utterly despise, yet given the effort that went into their development a 0/10 is very difficult to justify.

I hate the Fable series, yet I'd still give the games a 6 or 7 out of 10. I prefer Morrowind much more over Oblivion, yet even there I'd give the latter an 8, possibly a 9. Few are the games which have absolutely no redeemable qualities.

There are different reviewing philosophies. One is this mainstream way of "judging the game in its own rights" way. Other one is judging the game as what it is for you. If I write a review, I write how I experienced the game.

Reviews or scoring in them is very subjective and therefore I see it is best for me to write a review from absolute expert point of view - that is from my point of view. I am expert in my point of view. I am not expert on your point of view - even if I could try that and begin to think how you would like the game and review it for you.

If the game is unplayable I give it total score of 0/10. What else I could do? Games are meant to be played.

[Warheadz]

sleepyowlet wrote...
True. Except that it just doesn't work in DA2. I found myself thinking again and again that I just wanted to leave this awful place. After the expedition I had my pockets full of gold - and I wanted nothing more than to go back to Ferelden, where even Templars are people, where not every mage is a blood mage, and where I'm not jumped by assassins every time I go to Denerim to do a little shopping.

The you-are-not-the-most-important-person idea is a good one, but you need to give the player a reason to follow your story. I didn't feel like I had one. I just wanted to GTFO.

I agree with you. In my opinion, DA:O was much more sensible, when DA 2 tried to be really "extreme" in everything.

[mr_afk]

sleepyowlet wrote...

mr_afk wrote...

I think it really depends on the type of rpg. there are several rpgs out there that focus on cultivating different skills/abilities which allow quest-objectives to be completed in different ways, e.g. vtmb, deux ex. In those type of games the concept of sneaking past enemies, stealth killing etc can be fun. So it could be said that loads of fights after fights isn't necessary.
In dragonage however, lots of the story focuses on the protagonists or "hero"'s ability to kill things - to paraphrase hawke, "you're in luck, I help people and I kill things". If you removed that element, no matter how boring/repetitive you might find it, you would be reducing the game to a movie, with no focus on the character build/equipment/strategy/all the things that make rpgs rpgs.

I think dragonage has a decent mix atm, it uses a strong storyline to tie together lots of violence and amusing video cutscenes so everyone can be happy to some extent. If you really dislike the violence I guess you could always just avoid every single side quest that doesn't involve killing things (wait...that's like every single side quest!) and be so unexperienced/low-levelled that the first enemy along the main plot-line completely destroys you - which could be considered to be realism i guess

Speak for yourself, then. I found the combat boring, because every fight was the same. Start combat, spawn adds. Kill a few things, new adds spawn. Repeat. Booooooring. Strangely enough I didn't mind the combat in Origins quite that much.

And the strong storyline in DA2? You managed to find one? Where? I want it too! Honestly. Act 3 was simply an appalling slash-fest with plot-holes the size of an Archdemon. Ew.

haha admittedly the combat got rather repetitive after clearing the kirkwall of thugs every single act - you'd think they'd learn. But you've got to enjoy the small things, like the hum of the controller as you release a critical hit (arrow) into someone's face. And then they explode, which may be slightly unrealistic. But try playing dragonage origins again and you'll probably realise that not only its combat is actually rather repetitive but that it's way too slow/boring. DA2 wasn't perfect but it was a lot more amusing for an archer than in Origins.

The storyline for DA2 was pretty much was an expanation for why/how hawke is as famous as he/she was, explaining the events that surrounded the 'rise to power'? So while it may not have been as grand as Origins in the whole save-the-world aspect, to me it felt like you actually had greater control on the storyline and that it was building up towards a truly epic DA3. Plus i forgave bioware for their repetitive hack-and-slashing because they parodied themselves quite often (hawke and co making light of the numbers of people they've killed)

Maybe i'm less critical because i've been deprived from decent games, the last good game i've truly enjoyed would probably still be dragonage origins.

[MDT1]

In DA2 I would clearly prefer a skip combat button over the skip dialog button.

Though it makes me sad to have a Bioware game where I would use any of those buttons.

[Il Divo]

moilami wrote...

If the game is unplayable I give it total score of 0/10. What else I could do? Games are meant to be played.

And a score range is meant to provide an indication of the game's overall quality. That's the purpose of the scoring range (0-10). You say you give DA2 a 0/10. So what's a 2/10? 5/10? 6/10? 

Most reviewers would consider scores like that to still be within 'unplayable range', but still takes into account time/effort put forth. What you are describing as a review scale however is very absolutist. If a game is unplayable, it's a 0/10. If it's playable, it's a 9-10. This removes the purpose of the score.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 mars 2011 - 03:30 .

[MDT1]

mr_afk wrote...

sleepyowlet wrote...

mr_afk wrote...

I think it really depends on the type of rpg. there are several rpgs out there that focus on cultivating different skills/abilities which allow quest-objectives to be completed in different ways, e.g. vtmb, deux ex. In those type of games the concept of sneaking past enemies, stealth killing etc can be fun. So it could be said that loads of fights after fights isn't necessary.
In dragonage however, lots of the story focuses on the protagonists or "hero"'s ability to kill things - to paraphrase hawke, "you're in luck, I help people and I kill things". If you removed that element, no matter how boring/repetitive you might find it, you would be reducing the game to a movie, with no focus on the character build/equipment/strategy/all the things that make rpgs rpgs.

I think dragonage has a decent mix atm, it uses a strong storyline to tie together lots of violence and amusing video cutscenes so everyone can be happy to some extent. If you really dislike the violence I guess you could always just avoid every single side quest that doesn't involve killing things (wait...that's like every single side quest!) and be so unexperienced/low-levelled that the first enemy along the main plot-line completely destroys you - which could be considered to be realism i guess

Speak for yourself, then. I found the combat boring, because every fight was the same. Start combat, spawn adds. Kill a few things, new adds spawn. Repeat. Booooooring. Strangely enough I didn't mind the combat in Origins quite that much.

And the strong storyline in DA2? You managed to find one? Where? I want it too! Honestly. Act 3 was simply an appalling slash-fest with plot-holes the size of an Archdemon. Ew.

haha admittedly the combat got rather repetitive after clearing the kirkwall of thugs every single act - you'd think they'd learn. But you've got to enjoy the small things, like the hum of the controller as you release a critical hit (arrow) into someone's face. And then they explode, which may be slightly unrealistic. But try playing dragonage origins again and you'll probably realise that not only its combat is actually rather repetitive but that it's way too slow/boring. DA2 wasn't perfect but it was a lot more amusing for an archer than in Origins.

The storyline for DA2 was pretty much was an expanation for why/how hawke is as famous as he/she was, explaining the events that surrounded the 'rise to power'? So while it may not have been as grand as Origins in the whole save-the-world aspect, to me it felt like you actually had greater control on the storyline and that it was building up towards a truly epic DA3. Plus i forgave bioware for their repetitive hack-and-slashing because they parodied themselves quite often (hawke and co making light of the numbers of people they've killed)

Maybe i'm less critical because i've been deprived from decent games, the last good game i've truly enjoyed would probably still be dragonage origins.

To me the only improvement in the combat are the mages staff animations and the way the character engages the first enemy in the fight. most of the features are just to unrealistic to take the fighting serious (keyword: to me).
Every thing else I liked more in Origins. (though I am a PC gamer and I guess you play it on console which could explain the different view about DAO combat as I hear it wasn't ported so well).

Modifié par MDT1, 20 mars 2011 - 03:35 .

[sleepyowlet]

mr_afk wrote...

haha admittedly the combat got rather repetitive after clearing the kirkwall of thugs every single act - you'd think they'd learn. But you've got to enjoy the small things, like the hum of the controller as you release a critical hit (arrow) into someone's face. And then they explode, which may be slightly unrealistic. But try playing dragonage origins again and you'll probably realise that not only its combat is actually rather repetitive but that it's way too slow/boring. DA2 wasn't perfect but it was a lot more amusing for an archer than in Origins.

The storyline for DA2 was pretty much was an expanation for why/how hawke is as famous as he/she was, explaining the events that surrounded the 'rise to power'? So while it may not have been as grand as Origins in the whole save-the-world aspect, to me it felt like you actually had greater control on the storyline and that it was building up towards a truly epic DA3. Plus i forgave bioware for their repetitive hack-and-slashing because they parodied themselves quite often (hawke and co making light of the numbers of people they've killed)

Maybe i'm less critical because i've been deprived from decent games, the last good game i've truly enjoyed would probably still be dragonage origins.

Hum of the controller? Sorry, mouse and keyboard here. Critical hits? They were there? Everything was so fast that I never quite noticed. I am playing DA:O again (I don't think I can stomach another playthrough of DA2), and I must say that I enjoy the combat more. Probably because it's not hectic, and there is less of it. Or maybe it doesn't feel repetitive to me because there are different surroundings once in a while...

I felt like I had no control over the storylike whatsoever. Did I have the chance not to go on that expedition? No. Did I have the option to leave Kirkwall (as in go away forever)? No. And I wanted to. Did anything I did change the big nasty in act 3? No. Choices? Yes, I had the choice of which of four equally awful characters I wanted to romance. Bleargh.

And I don't want to play a character that is indifferent about how many people they killed. That's not how I roll. Taking a life is serious business - but to feel like that you'd have to actually role-play. Hundreds of people is different than hundreds of Darkspawn...

[moilami]

Il Divo wrote...

moilami wrote...

If the game is unplayable I give it total score of 0/10. What else I could do? Games are meant to be played.

And a score range is meant to provide an indication of the game's overall quality. That's the purpose of the scoring range (0-10). You say you give DA2 a 0/10. So what's a 2/10? 5/10? 6/10? 

Most reviewers would consider scores like that to still be within 'unplayable range', but still takes into account time/effort put forth. What you are describing as a review scale however is very absolutist. If a game is unplayable, it's a 0/10. If it's playable, it's a 9-10. This removes the purpose of the score.

The scale goes from 0 to 10. That means 0/10 is unplayable. If the scale would go from 5 to 10 then 5 would be unplayable.

Like I said before, games are meant to be played. If I can't play a game then the correct rating for it is 0/10. Good graphics, big boobs, and casual sex doesn't change it.

On scale 0 to 10 an average game would get a rating of 5. It would be a game what I could play for timekiller like I could watch a movie for timekiller.

6 would be something like "meh, boring forums, lets play some game."

7 would be pretty good game. I would spend good time with my GF instead of playing it.

8 would be rather good game. My GF would have to ask me to spend time with her or else I would play the game.

9 would be very good game. My GF would have to ask me to spend quality time with her or else I would play the game.

10 would be an excellent game. I would say to my GF "can't, I need to play this game now" when she asks me to spend quality time with her.

[LegendaryBlade]

sleepyowlet wrote...

Brenus wrote...

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the combat? That is just completely retarded.

Seriously, stop buying video games and go and watch a movie or read a book instead.

If the combat in a game is actually so bad that you want to skip it, then maybe you simply shouldnt have bought such a rubbish game like DA2 in the first place.

Bloody lamers.

#

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the dialogue? That is just completely retarded.
Yet the button is there.

And I would appreciate it, if you didn't tell others what they should or shouldn't do do. You are hardly entitled to do that. Name calling is also only a definite proof of immaturity.

Why are you so offended by the idea of a skip-combat-button? You wouldn't need to use it, after all. Or is your way to enjoy a game the only one?

You can't really skip the dialogue portions in their entiret, as many of them require interction or input from the player, so that entire argument is a logical fallacy. The equivilant would be to skip the animations in combat but go through the motions.

Also, the game is an RPG with combat elements. Don't like combat elements? Buy a game without combat. Really this entire argument is backass retarded. Do you want a button to skip the platforming in the next Jak and Daxter game? I bet you do.

[Il Divo]

moilami wrote...

The scale goes from 0 to 10. That means 0/10 is unplayable. If the scale would go from 5 to 10 then 5 would be unplayable.

Like I said before, games are meant to be played. If I can't play a game then the correct rating for it is 0/10. Good graphics, big boobs, and casual sex doesn't change it.

I'd actually argue that if you can't play it, you shouldn't be the one to review it as you don't have the full experience necessary. I couldn't make it through Fable 3 or Call of Duty: Black Ops, so I left those titles untouched. 

Regardless of how unplayable you find a game, if you want someone to take your review seriously, a 0/10 is not going to cut it in most cases. This isn't pong where you can grasp everything about the game within minutes. 0/10 is not simply 'unplayabe' for most people; you're basically telling readers that the developers put no time/energy into the product.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 mars 2011 - 03:55 .

[MDT1]

LegendaryBlade wrote...



Also, the game is an RPG with combat elements. Don't like combat elements? Buy a game without combat. Really this entire argument is backass retarded. Do you want a button to skip the platforming in the next Jak and Daxter game? I bet you do.

When the combat is a worse experience than the rest of the game and thus diminishes the overall enjoyment why should skipping the repetitive parts of it be retarded?

Ah yes because you fail to realize that your personal preferences are not universal truth for everyone.

Modifié par MDT1, 20 mars 2011 - 04:00 .

[sleepyowlet]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

sleepyowlet wrote...

Brenus wrote...

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the combat? That is just completely retarded.

Seriously, stop buying video games and go and watch a movie or read a book instead.

If the combat in a game is actually so bad that you want to skip it, then maybe you simply shouldnt have bought such a rubbish game like DA2 in the first place.

Bloody lamers.

#

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the dialogue? That is just completely retarded.
Yet the button is there.

And I would appreciate it, if you didn't tell others what they should or shouldn't do do. You are hardly entitled to do that. Name calling is also only a definite proof of immaturity.

Why are you so offended by the idea of a skip-combat-button? You wouldn't need to use it, after all. Or is your way to enjoy a game the only one?

You can't really skip the dialogue portions in their entiret, as many of them require interction or input from the player, so that entire argument is a logical fallacy. The equivilant would be to skip the animations in combat but go through the motions.

Also, the game is an RPG with combat elements. Don't like combat elements? Buy a game without combat. Really this entire argument is backass retarded. Do you want a button to skip the platforming in the next Jak and Daxter game? I bet you do.

Hm... as I wrote earlier, I didn't feel the need for such a button in DA:O. But in DA2 yes. True, combat is the aspect I enjoy least in an RPG, but that doesn't mean that I want to get rid of it entirely. Just when it gets boring. Like it did in DA2. And as I also wrote earlier, I'd rather have diplomacy options instead of said button. Or puzzles. Anything. But I'd like to have a choice, if I want to kill something or not.

Hey, point me to an RPG without combat! Seriously, that I gotta see. Where???

Also, I have no idea what Jak and Daxter is. Will google now. brb.

[moilami]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

sleepyowlet wrote...

Brenus wrote...

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the combat? That is just completely retarded.

Seriously, stop buying video games and go and watch a movie or read a book instead.

If the combat in a game is actually so bad that you want to skip it, then maybe you simply shouldnt have bought such a rubbish game like DA2 in the first place.

Bloody lamers.

#

Why the hell would anyone want to skip the dialogue? That is just completely retarded.
Yet the button is there.

And I would appreciate it, if you didn't tell others what they should or shouldn't do do. You are hardly entitled to do that. Name calling is also only a definite proof of immaturity.

Why are you so offended by the idea of a skip-combat-button? You wouldn't need to use it, after all. Or is your way to enjoy a game the only one?

You can't really skip the dialogue portions in their entiret, as many of them require interction or input from the player, so that entire argument is a logical fallacy. The equivilant would be to skip the animations in combat but go through the motions.

Also, the game is an RPG with combat elements. Don't like combat elements? Buy a game without combat. Really this entire argument is backass retarded. Do you want a button to skip the platforming in the next Jak and Daxter game? I bet you do.

no u

If you really can't understand the novelty of idea of making a button "skip the combat" then it is you whose arguments are "backass retarded".

So instead of touting how much "combat killa" you are give some real arguments why a player should be forced to fight every stupid trash mob fight and how that kind of requirement dumbs down to lowest common denominator RPGs since you can't do epic dungeons what masses would consider "too long".

And on the other news to you: DA2 is dumbed down console button smasher adventure.

[mr_afk]

sleepyowlet wrote...

mr_afk wrote...

haha admittedly the combat got rather repetitive after clearing the kirkwall of thugs every single act - you'd think they'd learn. But you've got to enjoy the small things, like the hum of the controller as you release a critical hit (arrow) into someone's face. And then they explode, which may be slightly unrealistic. But try playing dragonage origins again and you'll probably realise that not only its combat is actually rather repetitive but that it's way too slow/boring. DA2 wasn't perfect but it was a lot more amusing for an archer than in Origins.

The storyline for DA2 was pretty much was an expanation for why/how hawke is as famous as he/she was, explaining the events that surrounded the 'rise to power'? So while it may not have been as grand as Origins in the whole save-the-world aspect, to me it felt like you actually had greater control on the storyline and that it was building up towards a truly epic DA3. Plus i forgave bioware for their repetitive hack-and-slashing because they parodied themselves quite often (hawke and co making light of the numbers of people they've killed)

Maybe i'm less critical because i've been deprived from decent games, the last good game i've truly enjoyed would probably still be dragonage origins.

Hum of the controller? Sorry, mouse and keyboard here. Critical hits? They were there? Everything was so fast that I never quite noticed. I am playing DA:O again (I don't think I can stomach another playthrough of DA2), and I must say that I enjoy the combat more. Probably because it's not hectic, and there is less of it. Or maybe it doesn't feel repetitive to me because there are different surroundings once in a while...

I felt like I had no control over the storylike whatsoever. Did I have the chance not to go on that expedition? No. Did I have the option to leave Kirkwall (as in go away forever)? No. And I wanted to. Did anything I did change the big nasty in act 3? No. Choices? Yes, I had the choice of which of four equally awful characters I wanted to romance. Bleargh.

And I don't want to play a character that is indifferent about how many people they killed. That's not how I roll. Taking a life is serious business - but to feel like that you'd have to actually role-play. Hundreds of people is different than hundreds of Darkspawn...

Obviously some things can't be changed. If hawke never went on that expedition or left Kirkwall in the very beginning he/she would have been in the position that made him/her the Champion. What Varric is doing is telling a story of how it happened - it's already happened, so some choices are limited. But there are several choices along the way which will foreseeably change the landscape of DA3?
And I guess if it makes you feel better, you can imagine that your conscience driven character who feels bad about killing people actually didn't kill THAT many people and that it's mostly just Varric exaggerating everything. That's the beauty of it been a story. The combat doens't need to be realistic.

Origins was amazing, but DA2 isn't Origins and doesn't need to be; If they had made it exactly the same everyone would be raging on about how they hadn't improved/changed anything. Some things truly sucked in DA2; namely the repetitive maps and the lack in companion dialogues but overall it wasn't as bad as everyone seems to be making it out to be. But maybe that's because I played it on a different platform?

[Tirigon]

moilami wrote...

Alright, a few days ago there was a thread discussing an interview of some dev who talked that there should be "skip the combat button". I found it hilarious. However today I understood there seriously should be that kind of button. I found DA2 unplayable because of various reasons, but one of those reasons could be easily fixed with skip the combat button.

This is not trolling. Or if you say this is trolling then you must say the dev trolled too who invented "skip the combat button" idea, which would still not make this posting trolling.

Some fights should be unavoidable if it makes sense story-wise (e. g. Archdemon in DAO).

But overall I very much agree. Especially for those sh!tty dumbf*ck bandits all over the place.....

Suggestion: Every fight starts with a dialogue.
You have 3 options:
1) Kill em all   -> fight starts
2) Super-duper-awesome move: You see a cutscene in which Hawke kills em all
3) super-duper-awesome magic: Same as 2 only you don´t see them getting cut in half but blown up

Depending on your companions: Let them do the sh!t, e. g. Varric shooting them Matrix-style by shooting 100000 arrows at once, or Anders going all REVENGE on them, or Fenris grabbing their hearts like he sooo loves doing and eating them....

Modifié par Tirigon, 20 mars 2011 - 04:07 .

[moilami]

Il Divo wrote...

moilami wrote...

The scale goes from 0 to 10. That means 0/10 is unplayable. If the scale would go from 5 to 10 then 5 would be unplayable.

Like I said before, games are meant to be played. If I can't play a game then the correct rating for it is 0/10. Good graphics, big boobs, and casual sex doesn't change it.

I'd actually argue that if you can't play it, you shouldn't be the one to review it as you don't have the full experience necessary. I couldn't make it through Fable 3 or Call of Duty: Black Ops, so I left those titles untouched. 

Regardless of how unplayable you find a game, if you want someone to take your review seriously, a 0/10 is not going to cut it in most cases. This isn't pong where you can grasp everything about the game within minutes. 0/10 is not simply 'unplayabe' for most people; you're basically telling readers that the developers put no time/energy into the product.

I have seen enough of this game to rate it unplayable. It got that rating as it deserved. Had there been a button "skip combat" I would had given it 1/10 or 2/10 or something based on how the story, boss fights, and other things are. It would had been playable.

Now it is like software what does not work at all or a motorcycle I can't ride. Hence the rating 0/10 carbage.