276 réponses à ce sujet

[Pandaman102]

Some people just aren't mentally prepared to accept that they can like a game while accepting it has major flaws, or that others could call something they like "bad". It shorts out their single-track minds in a terrible way.

The reverse is also true, but that's not on topic.

[Taura-Tierno]

Volourn wrote...

So.. I have a question for OP: Whya re people defending DA1 while bashing DA2 even though DA1 was as bad or evenw orse in some of things you are complaining about?

I think a lot of that is because DA:O had the novelty factor on its side. It really was a new type of game from Bioware, since they haven't done an epic RPG in a long time. People were expecting much, yet there was nothing really similar (at least for me) to compare it to when it game out, and as such, its flaws weren't as obvious. And, in some way, those flaws might've been overlooked, since the game itself was so hyped and new and people were all excited about having this really epic and great RPG to play. 

DA2 can easily be compared and contrasted with DA:O, so it's much easier to recognise flaws in the game. Even those that existed in DA:O already. Also, since DA:O was such a success, people's expectations have been high, and we've actually been able to expect really concrete things, since we've got DA:O as a foundation for those expectations. 

[Aratark]

I look at DA2 to DA:O in the same way as I look at FFXIII to FFXII, not a sequel per se, but a continuation of a series. If this had been a sequel, I wouild have expected to see full appearances from at least a couple of the companions and a continuation of the story line with the Warden being the Hero.

As a result, I went in to this expecting a different game from DA:O and as a result, I wasn't disappointed. I tend to take marketing descriptiopns of stuff with a massive pinch of salt, mainly because I've seen marketing from their side, and it's not pretty.

I won't argue, this game has it's flaws, eg recycled areas, but I still enjoyed it. I think the biggest problem was it's name. If it hadn't been sold as a DA game, but had been released as a game in it's own right, I think a lot of the disapponitment would have been lessened.

[HenchxNarf]

A sequel furthers the story, which this does. It explains what went on during and after DA:O, which is a good thing. Yes, there are issues with the game, but the positive aspects far outweigh the negative.

[Aireoth]

Volourn wrote...

So.. I have a question for OP: Whya re people defending DA1 while bashing DA2 even though DA1 was as bad or evenw orse in some of things you are complaining about?

Probably because these people are RPG fans, and DA2 is no RPG. Only 2 stats per class matter, absolutely zero skills outside of combat (such as social skills), lack of companion control, and lack of tactical combat. The saddest part is that dialogue is less immersive then ME1&2, with no social skills to level up, or skill checks (cunning, wisdom etc) all you do is pick between three lines and let Soap, I mean Hawke, talk.

Really this game is a 7/10, but it isn't an RPG, more like Call of Duty with a Dialogue wheel. Levels are the equavelent of unlocking Perks and Weapons. 

[Sioul]

Some people see the glass half full. Others see it half empty

[Lumikki]

Aireoth wrote...

A) Enemies recycled/poping out of thin air.
Recycled Areas. 
C) Average plot : I will quantify this, by plot I mean the wholistic feeling of immersion, freedom to chose (and face consequences), reaction of characters in the world to you (and you to them) as well as your NPC companions stories, the plot was poor/average from bioware. This is better then most other developers, but we hold bioware to a higher standard, otherwise we might as well play Two Worlds.
D) Lack of Replay value : Tied to plot problems.
E) Lack of Polish: ie Lack of Finishers/Silly body explosions, under designed character models (darkspawn), under populated areas (city).

A) I agree
I agree
C) I agree, lack of motive as purpose was missing in story.
D) I disagree, you don't have to replay just for story, but you can also do it because gameplay it self.
E) Little bit yes. How ever, you list has nothing to do with polish, except population, it's more like dislike the design.

How ever, just because game has problems, it doesn't mean everyone has to dislike it. Every game has bad and good points. Just because some game fits better what some else likes, doens't make it bad game. How ever, I do agree that DA2 has alot of issues.

Modifié par Lumikki, 29 mars 2011 - 07:47 .

[wintermonk]

I defend it because it's a game.

I could criticize every fantasy game ever made for the fact that I can get a sword shoved through my character's chest, sometimes many times in a single encounter, and live to talk about it.

I could complain about the fact that most monsters in all RPG's ever made do nothing but sit around and wait for the player character to come and kill them and take their stuff.

I could criticize the fact that characters in all RPG's seem to be able to carry around ten suits of armor and thousands of gold pieces.

I could criticize the fact that a person could make a good living (in most RPG's) by just looking in various barrels and crates.

I could complain about the fact that i could slay a hundred orcs (or some other monster) in one encounter, and the last few monsters still keep coming.  Even when there is only one left, he somehow thinks he can take me.  Is that fake?  Yeah.  So what!

I could complain about a hundred other things. But you know what I have realized? Games have limitations. Those who make them have limitations of time and money. Games, like movies, are NOT realistic, and one is expected to willingly suspend disbelief to get into it. I try to cooperate with movies and enjoy them on the level with which they are presented.  The same must still be done with games.

Some people are too spoiled. They expect computer games, nowadays, to be the equivalent of entering the holodeck of a starship on Star Trek. You must still use your imagination. There are not going to be cities with tens of thousands of people walking around each with their own complex agenda. Vendors will stand around doing nothing. Other characters will too. You must use your imagination a little. Get into the story. If some repetitive caves destroy your ability to enjoy a game, then I'm not sure how some of you are able to enjoy any games whatsoever. Cause i could find a hundred things unrealistic or silly about any game on the market. "Dang it, why doesn't Pac Man ever get full! This is so fake! I hate this. Those dang developers just wanted my money!"

And I have almost disdain for the self-righteous hypocrites who criticize Bioware, and other companies, for wanting to make money.  Your personal fullfillment will not pay their bills.  And deadlines are a reality in this world.  Those of you who have jobs probably realize this.

And if this game left you feeling "empty and unfulfilled" (as I've read on several posts), then I think you are expecting this game to do far more for you than any game ever should.  Get a life.  This game is for entertainment purposes, not for self-realization.

Modifié par wintermonk, 29 mars 2011 - 08:07 .

[neppakyo]

wintermonk wrote...

And if this game left you feeling "empty and unfulfilled" (as I've read on several posts), then I think you are expecting this game to do far more for you than any game ever should.  Get a life.  This game is for entertainment purposes, not for self-realization.

Yet other rpg games have more life in their cities than Kirkwall. Is it not reasonable to expect Bioware to put some effort into a city they lock you into?

*shakes head*

[Everwarden]

Corto81 wrote...

DAO was The Wire. The best TV show ever made, and quite possibly the best single player RPG ever made. Deep and immersive, with repeatability and multiple plot solution, where what you did matterred.

DA2 is Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Shallow, but visually attractive. Bad in almost every single way compared to The Wire but stupidly addictive.

*slow claps*

[wintermonk]

neppakyo wrote...

wintermonk wrote...

And if this game left you feeling "empty and unfulfilled" (as I've read on several posts), then I think you are expecting this game to do far more for you than any game ever should.  Get a life.  This game is for entertainment purposes, not for self-realization.

Yet other rpg games have more life in their cities than Kirkwall. Is it not reasonable to expect Bioware to put some effort into a city they lock you into?

*shakes head*

What city?  I didn't think Ferelden or Redcliffe, or cities in other RPG's had any more life.  They had less, in my opinion.

But my point was, this game is for fun, not to fill some void people feel in their lives!

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Everwarden wrote...

Corto81 wrote...

DAO was The Wire. The best TV show ever made, and quite possibly the best single player RPG ever made. Deep and immersive, with repeatability and multiple plot solution, where what you did matterred.

DA2 is Spartacus: Blood and Sand. Shallow, but visually attractive. Bad in almost every single way compared to The Wire but stupidly addictive.

*slow claps*

so much wrong with this.....

[Mage One]

TL;DR version, Because I don't see the game the same way you do.  Wall of text version follows.
A) Enemies recycled/poping out of thin air.
The recycling is a bit annoying.  In effect, there are only a certain number of set-pieces, and each battle's uniqueness, to the extent that any battle is unique, is dependent on the arrangement of these set-pieces.  At the end of the day, though, this is true in most other games.  It's just less evident.  Even in games with an alleged great variety of enemies, most of them break down into their respective roles pretty easily and add little in the way of new dynamics to combat.  That's probably why the first part of this doesn't bother me as much as it should.  It's a problem inherent to combat in almost every game with combat; though, I wish they had done more to address it.

As for enemies popping out of the air, I like the idea that I don't know for certain when combat will end, and I have to be careful with my resources because not being so could result in defeat in the next wave, were a next wave to come.  I don't find, like many have argued, this makes strategy impossible.  I find that far from the truth, in fact.  I pause, play, and strategize all the time.  To the extent that someone finds it impossible to strategize due to the waves, I would argue that they instead need to formulate more resilient strategies.

Recycled Areas. 
I'll grant you that.  It's annoying and disappointing.  I'm glad the environments look so much better than they did in origins, but it's a shame that so many random caves look exactly like the Deep Roads, complete with dwarven carvings and all.  Who knew entrances to the Deep Roads were so plentiful and easy to find?

C) Average plot :
Well, yes, you would have to quantify this because you're using a precising definition.  In general, I felt immersed.  There'e no way to argue this one way or another, though.  I don't know that there's an objective metric that controls whether or not someone feels immersed.

As a whole I thought the characters and world reacted to me far better than they did before in large part because of my ability to craft a personality they recognized.  I liked the fuller stories of NPCs.  They weren't as epic, but they were more developed, more personal.  A character struggled with his identity as it related to his experience and memories as opposed to as it related to the role of the maker in the world and what that meant for them.  The change in scale isn't a bad thing, and in fact I find it more realistic that most of your compnion's struggles are of that level.

Now, I will grant you the choice issue to a certain extent.  It will be difficult to discuss this without spoilers, but I will try.  I was surprised to find just how little agency I had in some regards.  In retrospect, I notice many of these regards were precisely of the sort we had clear agency in in Origins.  This gets relevant in a moment.  Also, at the end of the day, I didn't realise it at first.  I though that on subsequent playthroughs, if I did something another way, I could change it.  It's a well-crafted illusion, but I am disappointed it is an illusion in the end.  Still, there are certain regards, more personal and less epic, in which I found I had a surprising amout of agency.  It seemed to me that the this chage was reflective of the change in scope of the story.  It's not a perfect compromise, and in fact, I would have rather had both, but it didn't affect my enjoyment of the experience too much in the end except as regards...

D) Lack of Replay value : Tied to plot problems.
I found myself wanting to replay many times to explore the rivalry/friendship/romance options with my companions.  Replaying in other ways, I imagine, will get a bit dull pretty quickly, though.  This is disappointing.  Of this there is no doubt, but as I mentioned to someone else not long ago, my third play through Origins was far more about the Alistair romance than it was about having a different dwarven king.

E) Lack of Polish: ie Lack of Finishers/Silly body explosions, under designed character models (darkspawn), under populated areas (city).

Ugh, yes.  The lack of polish is highly irritating and my biggest problem with the game, but I dont see as lack of polish what you see as lack of polish.  Lack of polish for me is represented in the broken quests, many glaring bugs and glitches, and loot that does the same thing being given different names while frequently loot with different names does the same thing, for example.  This is what made the game seem rushed and sloppy for me to the extent that it felt either.  The body explosions was a throwback to Baldur's Gate, where you "chunked" enemies if you killed them with a critical or sufficiently powerful attack.  The Darkspawn was them trying to create a new, consistent look for the darkspawn that fit with their original concept of them.  These were deliberate design choices, not a result of a lack of polish.  I felt the city's population, with the exception of the markets, was just fine, and no thinner than Origins.

Ultimately, this game is not as bad as many have made it out to be, it's strengths just aren't what many people were hoping they would be or, in some cases, care for.  As for Bioware's proud lineage...it's difficult to think of this in any objective way as not better than Baldur's Gate.  (One, not two.)  In BG you were given virtually no choices about anything as regards the story, limited interaction with your companions, most enemies were palette-swapped renamed versions of other enemies, and just about every outdoor area with trees looked the same.  BGII was much better, but in Neverwinter Nights, we were first given BG all over again in a 3D engine.  It was a game whose solution to every problem was to go kill enough of something so you can continue with the linear story.  The reason I say this is because it seems to me that not all of the games in Bioware's past are as glorious as people seem to remember, and DAII is not as bad as many people have claimed.  There is a disconnect here, and I don't think I am alone in seeing it.

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Because I like the game. Sue me.

[TJSolo]

"Why are people defending DA2 (in particular its short comings)? "

Because some people are treating opinions like a court case. And even the Devil needs a public defender.

[bzombo]

Aireoth wrote...

Volourn wrote...

So.. I have a question for OP: Whya re people defending DA1 while bashing DA2 even though DA1 was as bad or evenw orse in some of things you are complaining about?

Probably because these people are RPG fans, and DA2 is no RPG. Only 2 stats per class matter, absolutely zero skills outside of combat (such as social skills), lack of companion control, and lack of tactical combat. The saddest part is that dialogue is less immersive then ME1&2, with no social skills to level up, or skill checks (cunning, wisdom etc) all you do is pick between three lines and let Soap, I mean Hawke, talk.

Really this game is a 7/10, but it isn't an RPG, more like Call of Duty with a Dialogue wheel. Levels are the equavelent of unlocking Perks and Weapons. 

if this isn't hyperbole, i don't know what is. cod with a dialog wheel? come on! da2 is definitely a rpg.

[TJSolo]

bzombo wrote...

Aireoth wrote...

Volourn wrote...

So.. I have a question for OP: Whya re people defending DA1 while bashing DA2 even though DA1 was as bad or evenw orse in some of things you are complaining about?

Probably because these people are RPG fans, and DA2 is no RPG. Only 2 stats per class matter, absolutely zero skills outside of combat (such as social skills), lack of companion control, and lack of tactical combat. The saddest part is that dialogue is less immersive then ME1&2, with no social skills to level up, or skill checks (cunning, wisdom etc) all you do is pick between three lines and let Soap, I mean Hawke, talk.

Really this game is a 7/10, but it isn't an RPG, more like Call of Duty with a Dialogue wheel. Levels are the equavelent of unlocking Perks and Weapons. 

if this isn't hyperbole, i don't know what is. cod with a dialog wheel? come on! da2 is definitely a rpg.

I am curious. Almost any game can have a story, dialogue selection, and stats but since you can say DA2 is definitely an RPG, at what point for you will an RPG cease being an RPG when various RPG elements get taken out and replaced with equivalents that are from other genres?

[Deified Data]

Aireoth wrote...

Thats my question, we all know that this game has the following massive problems:

A) Enemies recycled/poping out of thin air.
Recycled Areas. 
C) Average plot : I will quantify this, by plot I mean the wholistic feeling of immersion, freedom to chose (and face consequences), reaction of characters in the world to you (and you to them) as well as your NPC companions stories, the plot was poor/average from bioware. This is better then most other developers, but we hold bioware to a higher standard, otherwise we might as well play Two Worlds.
D) Lack of Replay value : Tied to plot problems.
E) Lack of Polish: ie Lack of Finishers/Silly body explosions, under designed character models (darkspawn), under populated areas (city).

I am not going to touch on DAO, or how it differed and thus upset many of us. In reality the big problems are as above. What I don't get is peoples insistance that this game be defended, even upheld, as one of the greats from Bioware:blink:. Sure its fun compared to Two Worlds, but its a load of garbage compared to DAO, ME, ME2, KOTOR, BG, BG2. 

I for one will not, and cannot defend or excuse this game. I know the Short Dev Cycle is to blame, but its biowares fault for trying to reinvent the wheel within that short cycle, rather then reusing resources from DAO. My only option is to try and hold Bioware accountable, and hope they listen to a long time fan (I visited their HQ in Edmonton when they first opened). If I don't, I can't expect them to be any better then every other cookie cutter developer.

:EDIT: pulled from response below because it helps clarify

I understand you enjoy the plot, as I said, I didn't find it bad, just poor compaired to other bioware games. To clairfy, picking up and item and bam, a quest to deliver it. Also having no actual effect on the plot or ending based on my choices. That also leads to only one play thru.

C) You felt that your choices, actions and friendships shapped the game? and thus D you could replay it to experience a different game? I am not trying to hash out the 'big evil' vs 'rags to riches', but the actual effect you had on the world itself through choice and action (thus making it yours). Perhaps I said it wrong in my post.

E) Are you (and others) saying that the city didn't feel empty? That the exploding bodies didn't seem a bit.. .out of place at times?

I am trying to keep opinions out of this, but of course they do factor in, as 'I have no issues with A and B' thats an opinion, it doesn't change the fact that it breaks the realism of the game, you just chose to ignore it. What I'm saying is, why defend it? Do you want your games to be well, better? Can you really say that fixing A & B (which are my biggest problems) would break the game?

I don't defend faults. Some of them I recognize and some I ignore. Copy-pasted dungeons are definitely a fault - fast, fluid combat? Not so much.

The issue with alot of haters is that they take the things DAII got right and turn them into faults for the sake of argument. The combat, the character interactions, and the story are all on-par with or superior to Origins. The story is, of course, subjective - let's call it "unique" among Bioware's offerings, and leave it at that. The replay value is off-the-charts now that all the classes actually have meaningful differences - I'd say it's on par with Origins, and overtakes ME2 is that regard.

Has it ever occured to you that some people are defending this game because they enjoy it? The world can be a scary place when some people actually disagree with you, am I right?

[DownyTif]

wintermonk wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

wintermonk wrote...

And if this game left you feeling "empty and unfulfilled" (as I've read on several posts), then I think you are expecting this game to do far more for you than any game ever should.  Get a life.  This game is for entertainment purposes, not for self-realization.

Yet other rpg games have more life in their cities than Kirkwall. Is it not reasonable to expect Bioware to put some effort into a city they lock you into?

*shakes head*

What city?  I didn't think Ferelden or Redcliffe, or cities in other RPG's had any more life.  They had less, in my opinion.

But my point was, this game is for fun, not to fill some void people feel in their lives!

You probably meant Denerim instead of Ferelden? The problem with Kirkwall is that it's the only city of the game. That's where all evolves (apart from FEW outside places). Yep, Denerim didn't have more life, nor Redcliff... but those are part of a big big map. The action is everywhere, not only there. Also, DAO doesn't play for 10 years. Kirkwall doesn't evolve at all in 10 years. NPCs are at the exact same place, mostly static, saying the same things for 10 years. But, I guess there is a better thread available for Kirkwall no-life analysis:
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/6812629

[HawXV2]

NO ONE is defending recycled areas. Not one person. I defend it because BioWare has released yet another quality product that I enjoy daily.

[LocutusX]

bzombo wrote...

if this isn't hyperbole, i don't know what is. cod with a dialog wheel? come on! da2 is definitely a rpg.

That's the problem isn't it. There's a lot of extremist hyperbole on both sides - it makes it difficult to have meaningful discussions on the pro's and con's of DA2's design approach to its plot/characters/combats/etc.

NO ONE is defending recycled areas. Not one person.

To be fair I think I did come across a post of someone who thought the recycled areas were cool. If I come across it again, I'll post a link to it... in fact, it's probably in my browser history still, mmm....

Modifié par LocutusX, 30 mars 2011 - 12:19 .

[Volourn]

"Probably because these people are RPG fans, and DA2 is no RPG. Only 2 stats per class matter, absolutely zero skills outside of combat (such as social skills), lack of companion control, and lack of tactical combat."

This is so cute.

Can anyone tell me why the quote is laughable when just labeling DA2 'not a RPG'? 'Cause this is so laughable.

HINT 1: How are more than 2-3 stats per class matter in DA1? They don't.

But, hey, how is that archdemon fight going?

[LocutusX]

Volourn wrote...

"Probably because these people are RPG fans, and DA2 is no RPG. Only 2 stats per class matter, absolutely zero skills outside of combat (such as social skills), lack of companion control, and lack of tactical combat."

This is so cute.

Can anyone tell me why the quote is laughable when just labeling DA2 'not a RPG'? 'Cause this is so laughable.

HINT 1: How are more than 2-3 stats per class matter in DA1? They don't.

But, hey, how is that archdemon fight going?

Well Volourn, that poster actually didn't say anything about DAO in his post either... so he could believe "DAO is not an RPG" as well... when I read what he posted I thought he was comparing DAx to some sort of D&D game.

[Kenthen]

LocutusX wrote...

bzombo wrote...

if this isn't hyperbole, i don't know what is. cod with a dialog wheel? come on! da2 is definitely a rpg.

That's the problem isn't it. There's a lot of extremist hyperbole on both sides - it makes it difficult to have meaningful discussions on the pro's and con's of DA2's design approach to its plot/characters/combats/etc.

Not just the hyperbole but there's a whole lot more of people attempting to make themselves out as victims of trolls, fanboys and whatever else people feel like using in pigeonholing others whom disagree with their take on things.

[Volourn]

"Well Volourn, that poster actually didn't say anything about DAO in his post either... so he could believe "DAO is not an RPG" as well... when I read what he posted I thought he was comparing DAx to some sort of D&D game."

So.. with that logic, the BG series are not RPgs either because they have no combat skills and only 2-3 skills are wortwhhile for each class in that game as well.

See how this works? His idea of what a 'rpg' is shows him he doens't really know what a rpg is and hism logic is i like game = rpg, i hate game = not rpg.

I loathe the ES series, but they're RPGs.

I loathe POR2, but it's a RPG.

What is also very funny is people don't even know the hsitory where the modern rpg spits on the history of rpgs where rpgs were usually nothing more than glorified dungeon crawls/world explorers 9noteable exception being Ultima). GB games, Wizardry, M&M series. All RPGs, but if they were made today people would be bashing them for lacking rpg stuff.


So... BG not a RPG? No real C&C, no non combat skills, very little worthwhile dialogue that immerses you into playing your character, railroaded story, etc., etc.