49 réponses à ce sujet

[Grahagogilala]

************SPOILERS**************

After now having played the game with both the templar and mage endings after deciding to give the game a second chance after remembering what was good about the game, interesting dialogue and choices like all other bioware games, I still feel like I did after completing it my first time.

This is the worst BioWare game I have played.

And Act III also one of the worst RPG stories on top of that.

First of all I would like to make it very clear that I was never a fan of the new JRPG style of the combat but I will not dedicate this to that since this is the story section, but I stil wanted to have that said since I really can't get it said enough.

Now onto why I really did not like Act III, and it can all be summed up as dealing with a far too volatile theme, more specifically; religion. Now one might think that this was a very light version of it with villains and heroes on both sides and a mad-woman powered by a maddening idol, not religion, was the cause of all this.
But I would disagree, and the reason is most simple, it is done in the name of a religious prophet backed up by people who get the right to oppress a group of people and a certain whiny prince starting a war on a single person's death after having complained about not taking the throne for personal wishes.

Please BioWare, if you read this, do not ever give religion a central role in a story!

This just bothers me even more since The Exiled Prince DLC character would start a war after a decision about a compaions's life. So if I happen to not be a religious person in real life and would not support it in games either? I get a war in that game, and a character with incredibly deeply rooted belis which I can not agree with at all.
I mean look at all the other character one can get from DLC, Shale, Zaeed and Kasumi. They do not get involved into politics, religion or anything which is realy a better way of doing it. 
Extra content should not be fixated into a belif which clearly translates into real life!

If anyone actually bothered to read this, I thank you and apologize for the wall of text. I very much doubt I will ever play a Dragon Age game again not only for dislike about the new artstyle but as a boycott against what I think is horribly poor implementation into a game.
Please leave your opinions about this text and I am fully aware that this text might not be 100% neutral in terms of religion or anything but it is the fact that the game and the DLC is not at all that

//A Grahagogilala in religous rant and rage-mode. Wall of text /off

[The Big Nothing]

Guilty.

[Icy Magebane]

I guess I agree with this. I thought Sebastian was a terrible DLC character for exactly those reasons... I mean, DLC (or bonus, Sig ED content) should be something that every player can enjoy, not just those who approach the game with a specific mindset. Sebastian wouldn't stop preaching the whole damn game, and I was fine with just leaving him behind on every mission, but then he shows up at the end and demands that I execute somebody because they attacked his religion? First off, I don't even believe the Chantry is telling the truth about Andraste. Secondly, a DLC char doesn't have any business arguing with the main character to the point that they leave or get themselves killed (this was also a problem I had with Shale). I was going to kill Anders regardless, mind you, but Sebastian sticking his nose into it was unwelcome.

A lot of people seem to like the religious aspect of this game, but to me, it felt one-sided.

[Naughty Bear]

C'mon! The story is atleast decent, not focusing on the stereotypical save the world fantasy story.

[Noatz]

xnoxiousx wrote...

Everyone agrees this is worst bioware game.

Even sonic ds was better.

Yes, everyone agrees. Everyone. Let me just confirm...

*Hello, hello? Is that Jesus? Can I just get you to confirm that DA2 was the worst Bioware game and that even Sonic DS was better?*

*Yes my child, it was the worst Bioware game and even Sonic DS was better.*

There we are. Everyone agrees. Even Jesus.

Modifié par Noatz, 21 mars 2011 - 05:08 .

[jaybee93]

I like religion as a central theme for conflict. It is in real life a lot of the time anyway.

[Casuist]

-Likely that Sebastian is making empty threats. His target is Anders, not a war.
-Narration is 3 years post-ending. No starkhaven-Kirkwall war has happened, and if Anders is out of the city there's no reason for it.
-I'd rather DLC characters have personalities that address in-game issues and conflicts than be blank genlock-fodder.
-I'd rather in-game issues and conflicts create an out-of-game emotional reaction than be personally meaningless.

Or, in summary, "I disagree."

Modifié par Casuist, 21 mars 2011 - 05:11 .

[CrashTagger]

Not everyone agrees... And people should stop using that argument in forums >_> You can say that it's not as good as Dragon Age Origins, but you cannot say it's a bad game.

I agree with the OP, I'm not the religious type either. But I think that it's doing good in escaping the stereotypical "a new threat, let's stop it" RPG theme by focusing on political schemes and distrust between each other.

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

[Arppis]

xnoxiousx wrote...

Everyone agrees this is worst bioware game.

Even sonic ds was better.

NWN was way worse. I enjoyed this more than Jade Empire too. So, no.

[Parrk]

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

[Grahagogilala]

Casuist wrote...

-Likely that Sebastian is making empty threats. His target is Anders, not a war.
-Narration is 3 years post-ending. No starkhaven-Kirkwall war has happened, and if Anders is out of the city there's no reason for it.
-I'd rather DLC characters have personalities that address in-game issues and conflicts than be blank genlock-fodder.
-I'd rather in-game issues and conflicts create an out-of-game emotional reaction than be personally meaningless.

Or, in summary, "I disagree."

On that Sebastian might be making empty threats, that would certainly be a relif, but his  words were, I believe, something like "we will crush this city so there is nothing left to rule". Ture threats or not, I still get worried when it is said by someone who might be in charge.
On the DLC characters having personalities that address in-game issues I would say that I might agree to a certain point. If I would compare it to Shale who feels quite strongly about the golem decision I think is quite fine.
However a DLC character feeling about something like the execution of Loghain and doing so without any way to talk him out of it I would not find ok.
And on the final point I would agree to a certain point, it might be added a little like Orzammar had conservatism vs reform is very interesting, whereas a capitalism vs. communism with DLC (DLC being the critical part) character having very firm belifs for one faction I would not agree with

Thank you for replying and voicing your opinion though!

//Graha

[Grahagogilala]

Parrk wrote...

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

Where else if not the official game forums would you have me discuss the game?

[Parrk]

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

Where else if not the official game forums would you have me discuss the game?

I never suggested that you should not use these boards, or that you should refrain.   You could have appended your initial DA2 hate thread though.

I don't really agree that "I still am unhappy" is a seperate topic.

[Grahagogilala]

Parrk wrote...

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

Where else if not the official game forums would you have me discuss the game?

I never suggested that you should not use these boards, or that you should refrain.   You could have appended your initial DA2 hate thread though.

I don't really agree that "I still am unhappy" is a seperate topic.

If you would have read my previous thread you would have noticed that it covered the drastic change of DA:O to DA2, not the abundance of religion in DA2. Therefore I made a new thread

[Naughty Bear]

jaybee93 wrote...

I like religion as a central theme for conflict. It is in real life a lot of the time anyway.

THIS! The story had alot more realistic conflicts, and shows how everything can quickly escalate to violence.

In Ambassador Udina's words, a political ****storm.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 21 mars 2011 - 05:42 .

[CakesOnAPlane]

People are compaining that Sebastian was too well integrated into the game?

Also from what I saw the Chantry had a very positive impact - it was the only thing keeping peace between Templars + Mages. It gets destroyed, war begins. You could easily interperet that as a pro-religion portrayal.

It has a very practical purpose in the city. So I have no problems with the Chantry, just the zealots and the hilariously named 'Righteous Mob' that attaks you. But then thats the same for the Templars + Mages + everything else in the game...

[Parrk]

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

Where else if not the official game forums would you have me discuss the game?

I never suggested that you should not use these boards, or that you should refrain.   You could have appended your initial DA2 hate thread though.

I don't really agree that "I still am unhappy" is a seperate topic.

If you would have read my previous thread you would have noticed that it covered the drastic change of DA:O to DA2, not the abundance of religion in DA2. Therefore I made a new thread

Perhaps I've mischaracterized this thread.   So you are saying that instead of "I still don't like it", that this thread actually says "hey look, I  was able to find a few more reasons why I  don't like it........ps. I still don't like it."

A complaint thread is never about reasoning and logic, because it is ultimately a statement of the authors opinion based on undefined criteria.  It is ultimately little more than one person's opinion.  I tend to think that if a thread exists already that does the exact same thing (state the same opinion of the same person), then there is strong justification for an op edit over a new thread.

This favors continuity, contributes to a more full account of your reactions and opinions, and also prevents unique topics from falling off of page 1.

It's a win:win.

[Noatz]

xnoxiousx wrote...

Noatz wrote...

xnoxiousx wrote...

Everyone agrees this is worst bioware game.

Even sonic ds was better.

Yes, everyone agrees. Everyone. Let me just confirm...

*Hello, hello? Is that Jesus? Can I just get you to confirm that DA2 was the worst Bioware game and that even Sonic DS was better?*

*Yes my child, it was the worst Bioware game and even Sonic DS was better.*

There we are. Everyone agrees. Even Jesus.

Everyone who is smart and matters.

Well I... no. There's just no arguing with such compelling logic.

[jweath]

I really don't think religion is at the heart of this story. It is about a mad woman using an event, the Qunari fight, to usurp power. I suppose there is a way to avoid that somewhat since there is a trophy for becoming Viscount. It is really about how much power do you give government in the face of danger. In DA2 there seems to be little separation between church and state. However, when you look at Awakenings this is a different system in Kirkwall rather than Fereleden. In the DAO series King Allistair/Queen Anora overrides Templar authority to allow Anders to be conscripted.

The templars/chantry have a seperate authority in which some Templars (The chick looking for Anders in Awakenings) claim the crown has no authority over. So there was conflict between church and state in DAO. In DA2, the problem is Meredith had usurped authority even before the idol. Even before Hawke gets into Kirkwall, he is told Meredith really runs things in the city. Religion is the backdrop because of Chantry authority but the Kirkwall story is about a powerful figure consolidating personal power and how that mess up the whole system in places well beyond her city.

I don't think it has anything to do with religion per se other than ideals about separation of church and state as it does about a divided power non-elected monarchy system which gets blown up when someone over steps their bounds and attempts to take over everything. That was happening before the idol is even found. There is nothing condemning the chantry here per se but there is a story about someone taking too much authority. The lack of separation of church and state may help that.

One can also see that the chantry, at least the grand cleric, does not approve of Meredith and the Templars but seem to have their hands tied due to Meredith's power in the city. You have the evil chantry sister and Templar trying to start a war to give an excuse for getting rid of mages and Templars taking over but overall the chantry disagrees with this. In many ways the story is not about evil religion but those perverting religious teaching to gain power, much like terrorist today. I think this is lost on some just as the radical versus mainstream religion is lost on many today with terrorists of all stripes. For instance the chant says magic should serve man not rule man. That hardly means exterminate Mages.

You simply have a group of people who want supreme authority and are conspiring to make that happen. If war with the Qunari is needed they will cause one. If war with the Qunari does not do the trick, they will silence mages who oppose them. They will usurp power for the proper authority when the Viscount is killed and even kill his son not only to start war with the Qunari but also make sure the Viscount does not have an heir. The sister and the Templars conspiring may be part of the Chantry but remember the Chantry highly disapproved of Patrice when they found out what she was up to.

In short, this is not about religion about it is about conspiracy to gain power. The conspirators are fringe templars and clerics. Again this goes back to my contention this game was heavily influenced by real world terrorism in the false name of religion.

[KirinDave]

So the story provoked a strong response from you and you think that's a bad outcome? I'd argue the story of this game is one of the most compelling and complex of any I've played, period, ever. I've read 6-volume fantasy novel sets with less meat on them bones as this single game.

Sir, a compelling story is not necessarily an agreeable one. I'd argue that your standpoint (i.e., not wanting to be involved but being forced into the conflict) is perhaps the most tragic and moral of any story. In stories and in real life, we often don't get choices in conflicts revolving around polarizing issues.

Modifié par KirinDave, 21 mars 2011 - 05:59 .

[Grahagogilala]

Parrk wrote...

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Grahagogilala wrote...

Parrk wrote...

Is it your intent to roll a new DA2 hate thread every time you take any sort of action from now on?

"Guys, I just had a bacon cheeseburger at 5 guys, and here is my verdict (I like the use of "verdict" here because it properly conveys the writer's intense feelings of self-importance). I don't like the game."

I wonder will you at some point resort to pretending to have done things in order to justify yet another pointless hate thread. Like, will you claim to have just finished shoveling your driveway when in actuality your were finishing up 15th prestige on bops?

What you seem to have overlooked is that you really do not need to conjur up reasons to roll a hate thread, because they are ultimately of no consequence and no one is playing gatekeeper or fact-checking the legitimacy of your claims.

If you are unhappy with the game, then of course you should communicate that its creators. If there is any chance of them caring or acting on your views or advice though, they will do so in response to your first mention of the issue. You gain nothing from additional complaints.

Where else if not the official game forums would you have me discuss the game?

I never suggested that you should not use these boards, or that you should refrain.   You could have appended your initial DA2 hate thread though.

I don't really agree that "I still am unhappy" is a seperate topic.

If you would have read my previous thread you would have noticed that it covered the drastic change of DA:O to DA2, not the abundance of religion in DA2. Therefore I made a new thread

Perhaps I've mischaracterized this thread.   So you are saying that instead of "I still don't like it", that this thread actually says "hey look, I  was able to find a few more reasons why I  don't like it........ps. I still don't like it."

A complaint thread is never about reasoning and logic, because it is ultimately a statement of the authors opinion based on undefined criteria.  It is ultimately little more than one person's opinion.  I tend to think that if a thread exists already that does the exact same thing (state the same opinion of the same person), then there is strong justification for an op edit over a new thread.

This favors continuity, contributes to a more full account of your reactions and opinions, and also prevents unique topics from falling off of page 1.

It's a win:win.

I really do not agree with you there. "A complaint thread is never about reasoning and logic, because it is
ultimately a statement of the authors opinion based on undefined
criteria."
What do you want, scientific proof? I am staing my opinion and since I did not like it that would fall into the complaint categoty, and therefore it is bad? Please tell me what part of "My final verdict" you donot understand.
And also what does "reasoning and logic...undefined criteria" have anything to do with anyones opinion. An opinion is a personal thought which has nothing to do with certaion criteria, the reasoning and logic behind my opinion has been posted in the OP

[Grahagogilala]

KirinDave wrote...

So the story provoked a strong response from you and you think that's a bad outcome? I'd argue the story of this game is one of the most compelling and complex of any I've played, period, ever. I've read 6-volume fantasy novel sets with less meat on them bones as this single game.

Sir, a compelling story is not necessarily an agreeable one. I'd argue that your standpoint (i.e., not wanting to be involved but being forced into the conflict) is perhaps the most tragic and moral of any story. In stories and in real life, we often don't get choices in conflicts revolving around polarizing issues.

Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. You can very well love it and all and I am fully aware about that getting forced into a conflict happens in real life but I do not want it to happen to a DLC character which you would pay extra for.
In other words: I did not mind the sudden events or the choosing between mages and templars, I did dislike that Sebastian got involved as much as Anders did, I would have much prefered it if he had muttered like any other party memeber would have and been done with it.
Also I dislike that the Templars do their oppression thing on a somewhat religious basis, removing that and having them as a knightly anti-mage law enforcement would have been much better in my opinon.

Please notice that what I mean by all this is not "This story is bad!" but "I did not enjoy this story because of..."
I do however think that having a DLC character get as myuch involved in the main plot and taking sides as he did was bad.

//Graha

EDIT: fixed some spelling mistakes

Modifié par Grahagogilala, 21 mars 2011 - 06:09 .