476 réponses à ce sujet

[Warheadz]

AloraKast wrote...

Balerion84 wrote...

Yes, you are right. It's me not liking disjointed, rushed game. Sorry about that.
And you are wrong. I want MORE games where you start as a nobody. But in this case, the story simply fails. Why am I going to Deep Roads at the start of the game? I had like 80 gold by the time I finished everything before going there and I didn't know what to spend them on, so I was buying maker's sigh and just trying different skills. So why am I supposed to go to the Deep Roads again? When I came back I had less money than when I went there.

And what's about the quests? I had no idea what most of the sidequests were about. I just found something, somewhere, when I was doing something completely different and then I saw a new marker on the map. So I went there, and that person took some item from me, thanked me and gave me some money? What? Is this really what sidequests became in rpgs? No background to them, just go there, bring that, get exp? 
Like I said, I didn't even know why I was doing most of the stuff. I found myself running from marker to marker to get exp, never cared why. In DA:O I was reading codex entries to the side quests, they gave me hnts, some nice background, but in DA2 I never did. I never felt the need for it.

As for the battles, sure, they might be fun on the console, but I'm used to more than that. And the battles aren't even my biggest problem with the game, they can be easily fixed. Removing the endless spawning of waves of enemies that took away the tactical positioning of my team from previous games would be a good start.

And don't get me started about the ridiculousness of the way how your companions react when you walk WITH THEM in their house, with the game totally ignoring what happened outside the sequence.

But in the end, DA2 is shiny, so I understand why many people get so easily distracted and don't notice the lack of substance in this game. 
This is not about DA2 not being like BG2. This is about DA2 being rushed and lacking substance. About DA2 being a disjointed experience. Sorry, that my standards are higher than that, it's obviously my fault for wanting quality in these days.

/rant

Snip)

I pretty much agree with this. Simply put, DA2 lacks substance. I have, for now, returned to Origins. Seriously, even now I rate that game ridiculously awesome. It's THE game! But of course, it does have a lot of flaws. But still.
I have even been thinking of drawing one of these:

If there's one good thing DA2 did, it was getting me excited over DA: Origins again.

[ejoslin]

I've noticed in this thread that people start yelling about things that other people never said here. I think reading comprehension has been superseded by preconceived ideas of what other people MUST be saying if they disagree with you.

Either that, or there are some very talented trolls who don't want valid points being discussed.

[Aesieru]

Aesieru wrote...

It's pretty insulting and ignorant that he'd defend his and say "mmm Perfects", knowing that his game is anything BUT (as not even DA was perfect, but it was understandable), but that once the bad ratings come out, OMG it's obviously because it's not a bad game, just that they were too attached to DA-1.

[BlameBot]

Aesieru wrote...

It's pretty insulting and ignorant that he'd defend his and say "mmm Perfects", knowing that his game is anything BUT (as not even DA was perfect, but it was understandable), but that once the bad ratings come out, OMG it's obviously because it's not a bad game, just that they were too attached to DA-1.

Yes, that insults me more than anything. Blame the fans. That always will get you everywhere. I was attached to DA:O, yes. There are a number of changes I personally found appealing in DA2, like the crafting system is something I'd actually use. But there was a ton of things I didn't like, and almost all of them are related to overrushed development.

[Obro]

Whoa what ever he is taking I want some.

[BlameBot]

Obro wrote...

Whoa what ever he is taking I want some.

If you're talking about me, I'm fresh out of samples.

[AlexRmF]

Origins was a great game and a clear successor to BG2 (pretty good at that so), but just as mike pointed out, probably a lot of people that played origins and think they like RPGs didn't like the length of the game or the tacticality behind it's combat system (I know a lot of those people who haven't even played BG1&2 but they say RPGs are their favorite gaming genre), so it's thanks to those people that we get over-simplified games and developers that comply with such demands.
the devs most likely want to get access to as many people as possible since a wider audience means bigger profits and if the hardcore fans do get offended but still buy the games, they have nothing to lose.
I guess the only chance of still getting great RPGs out of Bioware is for some of the "old guys" to start looking closely at what they're putting out and make a stand against this over-simplification until it's too late. RPGs stand for Role Playing Games and they should "act" like such.

[Lord Gremlin]

A strange comment on uncommon feedback. I like both, but strangely both have issues. Common issue is difficulty, which is always either ****** easy or frustratingly hard with NO middle ground at all. DAO combat is slow and boring, DA2 combat introduces enemy spawning and teleporting, which is just as bad. As they say, when fixing something don't forget to break something as well, for balance's sake. What's impressive is that despite glaring flaws in both DAO and DA2 they're still insanely addictive and enjoyable.

[Shirosaki17]

delikanli wrote...

mike laidlaw is "winning"

[BlameBot]

Wider audiences mean wider profits, but you can't oversimplify a game like was done. If you buy an RPG, you should understand what you're getting into. A longish game, with a lot of side-quests, a lot of things to do. RPGs have been evolving and getting more in-depth, not less. Not to mention the sheer number of new games that have successfully blended RPG elements into the games, so you feel like you are driving your character, rather than being driven by your character.

When I say people want more choices in games, I'm not lying. People want, and expect more from their games these days. They expect a certain amount of choice in their games. That's why games like Red Dead Redemption and Fallout were, and are, so successful. They have a broad appeal because of the amount of interesting crap there is to do, not in spite of it.

[supertouch]

they were shortsighted in their decision to swap one demographic for another. why risk the financial and critical backing of a loyal fanbase in attempt to attract a wider audience when most people would have welcomed a continuation of the formula anyway?

Modifié par supertouch, 23 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[BlameBot]

I actually think that DA:O attracted people to the RPG element, because it just looked so cool. I know quite a few people who picked it up that usually hate anything RPG-ey. Because it was approachable, and not overdone.

[supertouch]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

A strange comment on uncommon feedback. I like both, but strangely both have issues. Common issue is difficulty, which is always either ****** easy or frustratingly hard with NO middle ground at all. DAO combat is slow and boring, DA2 combat introduces enemy spawning and teleporting, which is just as bad. As they say, when fixing something don't forget to break something as well, for balance's sake. What's impressive is that despite glaring flaws in both DAO and DA2 they're still insanely addictive and enjoyable.

i liked the tactic-oriented combat of origins. you could always mitigate the tempo of combat by lowering the difficulty. i played on normal because combat was tedious on hard and nightmare. while i enjoyed the combat, my focus was on advancing the plot and exploration. 

Modifié par supertouch, 23 mars 2011 - 05:12 .

[AkiKishi]

I think one of the key problems with DA2's combat, is that in order to get a similiar experience to Origins you have to put up with the over inflated HP numbers and waves of nightmare.

[MonkeyLungs]

I actually thought DA:O combat was a bit on the fast side for the type of game it was trying to be. DA2 feels very spastic to me. I have played and enjoy plenty of action titles as well so I'm not inherently against action gaming.

[Thalorin1919]

Luckily, all you guys are the minority.

Whiners.

[BlameBot]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

I actually thought DA:O combat was a bit on the fast side for the type of game it was trying to be. DA2 feels very spastic to me. I have played and enjoy plenty of action titles as well so I'm not inherently against action gaming.

DA:O combat was fine on the lower levels. It was a bit slow, it felt a little clunky at times, but DA2 was an oversimplification and overreaction to the moderate problem in Origins. Instead of being a little choppy, it's way too fast. Either you're not given enough time to react to a problem, or your combat is over before you can really react. Plus exploding bodies in a game with swords and arrows feels.. silly.

Thalorin1919 wrote...

Luckily, all you guys are the minority.

Whiners.

Yeah, we're all terrible, and not representative of the millions and millions of people who aren't buying this game.

Modifié par BlameBot, 23 mars 2011 - 05:30 .

[supertouch]

Thalorin1919 wrote...

Luckily, all you guys are the minority.

Whiners.

typical tween response. was the 360 your first gaming platform?

[MonkeyLungs]

BlameBot wrote...

Plus exploding bodies in a game with swords and arrows feels.. silly. 

Silly is a very nice way of putting it. It makes no sense in any way at all. It's also a bad implementation of gore anyway. Why do they explode?

It's just laziness.

Instead of exploding when you stab someone in the back why can't the blade just go through them sending blood squirting from the wounds while the victim coughs and spews a litre of blood from their mouth and fall over twitching?

[Balerion84]

MonkeyLungs wrote...


Instead of exploding when you stab someone in the back why can't the blade just go through them sending blood squirting from the wounds while the victim coughs and spews a litre of blood from their mouth and fall over twitching?

Because that requires more time on animations, which they didn't have.

[TheMadCat]

Balerion84 wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...


Instead of exploding when you stab someone in the back why can't the blade just go through them sending blood squirting from the wounds while the victim coughs and spews a litre of blood from their mouth and fall over twitching?

Because that requires more time on animations, which they didn't have.

If they needed more time they could have simply cut back even more on the enviorments, made one enviorment for the whole game and dressed it up artfully for every transition. I mean hell, what's the worst that would happen, people complain about the enviorments being repititive?

[Lord_Valandil]

"Dragon Age II is awesome!"

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
It's like they're trying too hard to cover the sun with a finger.

[Lord_Valandil]

Filament wrote...

And because that's a bit sick and I don't think I'd really care to see that.

I don't really want to see that either...but the exploding enemies are stupid, nevertheless.
I thought they would only explode during the "exaggerated part" in the prologue.

[ObserverStatus]

They must have only been reading their own metacritic reviews.