458 réponses à ce sujet

[The Minority]

I don't give a damn about what some reviewer said about the game. I like it, it doesn't matter if he does.

[bleeeeeh]

I'm afraid I have to go along with much of the reviewer's comments. I'm finding DA2 a huge disappointment, especially after really enjoying Origins. The main problem for me is that it's all just rather dull. I definitely won't be buying any of the add-ons.

[HarradX]

The reviewer is correct in every aspect, though i felt the 2.5 rating is about as appropriate as kicking an injured dog. While DA2 is certainly not a bad game on its own (albeit, as the poster above me pointed out, a rather dull one), it's so ridiculously far below my expectations it's almost a laughing matter.

Modifié par HarradX, 24 mars 2011 - 10:38 .

[jweath]

It really sounds like most complaints are the sequel is not as good as the original. This always happens with epic games and movies. How many people do you know that say The Temple of Doom was as good as Raiders of the Lost Arc? How many would say The Empire Strikes Back was as good as the first Stars or even Star Wars episode 2 as good as 1? I think the game would have rave reviews if there was not such an expectation to be better than origins. I personally think it is close to origins but not as good. I still like the game because I was not really anticipating something better just a different story.

[RohanD]

jweath wrote...

It really sounds like most complaints are the sequel is not as good as the original. This always happens with epic games and movies. How many people do you know that say The Temple of Doom was as good as Raiders of the Lost Arc? How many would say The Empire Strikes Back was as good as the first Stars or even Star Wars episode 2 as good as 1? I think the game would have rave reviews if there was not such an expectation to be better than origins. I personally think it is close to origins but not as good. I still like the game because I was not really anticipating something better just a different story.

I'd say it's more like comparing Star Wars Episodes 4,5 & 6 to Episodes 1,2 & 3.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jweath wrote...

How many would say The Empire Strikes Back was as good as the first Star Wars

Wouldn't everyone say this?  Empire is by far the better film.

And the obvious example is The Godfather Part 2.

[RohanD]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

jweath wrote...

How many would say The Empire Strikes Back was as good as the first Star Wars

Wouldn't everyone say this?  Empire is by far the better film.

And the obvious example is The Godfather Part 2.

I'd say it's more like comparing GF1 to GF3...

[Mossa_missa]

I disagree with the review. Cant be bothered to elaborate now however.

[Vast_Girth]

I fully agree with the review, but it does miss out the good points and the score is clearly only there to make a point.

I would give it 6.5/10

[Lurid Sunshine]

The Minority wrote...

I don't give a damn about what some reviewer said about the game. I like it, it doesn't matter if he does.

I agree completely with this comment. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

But then again, I agree completely with the Reviewer too.

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

[Cybermortis]

Lurid Sunshine wrote...

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

I managed to copy the save games for DAO from my old PC to this one. Then (because I was feeling lazy) decided to boot up DA2 to see if they had been copied correctly. I thought, well since DA2 is on I might as well start another game.

Five minutes later I realised I couldn't take going through the whole Flemeth cutscenes again, turned it off and dug out the disk for DAO. I booted up, loaded one of my save games for Awakening and in less than a minute was talking to Master Wade at Vigils. It then hit me that the 30 second conversation I had with Wade contained more characterisation in it than the entirity of DA2, and that Vigils keep felt more 'real' than everything in DA2 by a huge margin.

This is the point I decided to give up feeling guilty at having stopped playing DA2 after 4 days.

[Reinveil]

jweath wrote...

It really sounds like most complaints are the sequel is not as good as the original. This always happens with epic games and movies. How many people do you know that say The Temple of Doom was as good as Raiders of the Lost Arc? How many would say The Empire Strikes Back was as good as the first Stars or even Star Wars episode 2 as good as 1? I think the game would have rave reviews if there was not such an expectation to be better than origins. I personally think it is close to origins but not as good. I still like the game because I was not really anticipating something better just a different story.

I think the game would be considered mediocre regardless of the name or pedigree.  In fact, one could argue you'd be seeing much lower scores on professional review sites and in gaming magazines if it didn't say Bioware EA on the cover.  Unfortunately, it carried some pretty hefty expectations so people are making a much bigger deal out of it as a result.

Also, there are plenty of game and movie sequels that are better than the originals, even in Bioware's own catalogue of titles.  Baldur's Gate II certainly comes to mind.

[RohanD]

Cybermortis wrote...

Lurid Sunshine wrote...

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

I managed to copy the save games for DAO from my old PC to this one. Then (because I was feeling lazy) decided to boot up DA2 to see if they had been copied correctly. I thought, well since DA2 is on I might as well start another game.

Five minutes later I realised I couldn't take going through the whole Flemeth cutscenes again, turned it off and dug out the disk for DAO. I booted up, loaded one of my save games for Awakening and in less than a minute was talking to Master Wade at Vigils. It then hit me that the 30 second conversation I had with Wade contained more characterisation in it than the entirity of DA2, and that Vigils keep felt more 'real' than everything in DA2 by a huge margin.

This is the point I decided to give up feeling guilty at having stopped playing DA2 after 4 days.

This happened to me as well. After suffering DA2, I bought NWN2 off steam and just thought...wow, this game from 2007, is so much better than DA2, and it's far from perfect. But in terms of role playing game enjoyment? It trashes DA2, hard. 

Modifié par RohanD, 25 mars 2011 - 12:57 .

[Reinveil]

RohanD wrote...

Cybermortis wrote...

Lurid Sunshine wrote...

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

I managed to copy the save games for DAO from my old PC to this one. Then (because I was feeling lazy) decided to boot up DA2 to see if they had been copied correctly. I thought, well since DA2 is on I might as well start another game.

Five minutes later I realised I couldn't take going through the whole Flemeth cutscenes again, turned it off and dug out the disk for DAO. I booted up, loaded one of my save games for Awakening and in less than a minute was talking to Master Wade at Vigils. It then hit me that the 30 second conversation I had with Wade contained more characterisation in it than the entirity of DA2, and that Vigils keep felt more 'real' than everything in DA2 by a huge margin.

This is the point I decided to give up feeling guilty at having stopped playing DA2 after 4 days.

This happened to me as well. After suffering DA2, I bought NWN2 off steam and just thought...wow, this game from 2007, is so much better than DA2, and it's far from perfect. But in terms of role playing game enjoyment? It trashes DA2, hard. 

Yes, I started a mage after finishing up my rogue playthrough and got as far as the Kirkwall docks before utterly losing interest.  I traded the game not long after.  Now I'm playing through both Mass Effects again to get the bad taste out of my mouth (so to speak).

NWN2 is great!

[Cody211282]

RohanD wrote...

Cybermortis wrote...

Lurid Sunshine wrote...

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

I managed to copy the save games for DAO from my old PC to this one. Then (because I was feeling lazy) decided to boot up DA2 to see if they had been copied correctly. I thought, well since DA2 is on I might as well start another game.

Five minutes later I realised I couldn't take going through the whole Flemeth cutscenes again, turned it off and dug out the disk for DAO. I booted up, loaded one of my save games for Awakening and in less than a minute was talking to Master Wade at Vigils. It then hit me that the 30 second conversation I had with Wade contained more characterisation in it than the entirity of DA2, and that Vigils keep felt more 'real' than everything in DA2 by a huge margin.

This is the point I decided to give up feeling guilty at having stopped playing DA2 after 4 days.

This happened to me as well. After suffering DA2, I bought NWN2 off steam and just thought...wow, this game from 2007, is so much better than DA2, and it's far from perfect. But in terms of role playing game enjoyment? It trashes DA2, hard. 

NWN2 is great for a little but then you start to see were they dropped things midway through and the ending as bad if not worse then KOTOR2s, honeslty Obsidean has a problem with not finishing games.

[AegisSir]

DarkSpiral wrote...

I read the whole review.  I cannot argue with some of his complaints.  That having been said, the score is ridiculous.

2.5? He's getting PAID for scoring a game that low, which mechanically works well? 2.5 is score that belongs to games that are b-r-o-k-e-n. I'd understand a 4 ort 5 out of 10.

And I completely disagree with the opinion of the companions. They're every bit as well written as DA:O.

It is broken in so many regions it isn't even funny.


Examples:
-Use a respec potion and you get 3 specilization points and extra ability points and then you slots all of those in and play for a while and spontaneously you get elemental tree skills and spirit tree skills (happened to me). Like LOL?

-Doing the save the human/elf mage kid I was expecting to get some superawesome tome of glory... for saving him that is. The tome? It's in the trash inventory. Some awesome tome that was, DURR DURR.

-Can get stuck in multiple zones and unable to move. Especially outside of kirkwall.

And a montage of other buggyness. Maybe on the surface it isn't buggy, but I played through this game like it was origins and there are one HELL of a few bugs.

[Cybermortis]

Cody211282 wrote...

RohanD wrote...

Cybermortis wrote...

Lurid Sunshine wrote...

The game looked gorgious and I loved the new combat, but as a ROLE playing game, I was so dissapointed. I feel like I should just go back and play Dragon Age: Origins instead ; ; 

I managed to copy the save games for DAO from my old PC to this one. Then (because I was feeling lazy) decided to boot up DA2 to see if they had been copied correctly. I thought, well since DA2 is on I might as well start another game.

Five minutes later I realised I couldn't take going through the whole Flemeth cutscenes again, turned it off and dug out the disk for DAO. I booted up, loaded one of my save games for Awakening and in less than a minute was talking to Master Wade at Vigils. It then hit me that the 30 second conversation I had with Wade contained more characterisation in it than the entirity of DA2, and that Vigils keep felt more 'real' than everything in DA2 by a huge margin.

This is the point I decided to give up feeling guilty at having stopped playing DA2 after 4 days.

This happened to me as well. After suffering DA2, I bought NWN2 off steam and just thought...wow, this game from 2007, is so much better than DA2, and it's far from perfect. But in terms of role playing game enjoyment? It trashes DA2, hard. 

NWN2 is great for a little but then you start to see were they dropped things midway through and the ending as bad if not worse then KOTOR2s, honeslty Obsidean has a problem with not finishing games.

True, but at least the games in question gave you a feeling that you were moving through a 'real' world that someone had worked out in detail. DA2 has...nothing. There is no feeling that you (or at least the character) is in any sense 'real' or that the world is. If Vigil's Keep and Wade felt more interesting and 'real' after five minutes of just standing there and talking than the entirity of DA2 you know there is something badly wrong with the game.

I'm not talking about bugs or story here, but the world itself. This is meant to be an RPG, and the main requirement for any RPG is feeling as if the world itself is 'real'. If it feels real you want to stick around, and can overlook or accept things that are not very well done - I've played KOTOR2 multiple times simply so I could go back and see the world it was set in. Even now I get the odd urge to play it again. DA2? After the third day I was apathetic, on the fourth I had to force myself to play and by day five I was done with it.

To me DA2 is a 'popcorn' game. At first it seems to have flavour, but then you realise it is bland and unforefilling and you crave something meater.

[Pcrews]

I agree with the points made in the review and I'm glad someone came out and said it, especially with the recycled areas. I have never seen a game re-use maps to this extent.

That said, I wouldn't score it a 2.5/10. I would sit somewhere along the 4-5 range.

[iEatDaRkSpAwN]

imo, alot of his dissaprovals of the game i do agree with....especially about the combat system and the depth of each area...but then again scoring the 2.5 to me is still unreasonable...yes i read the review and it is a good one...but he's basing it upon how he feels and not everyone in general...so he gave us his opinion on it...not everyone is the same. I liked the game because it was something new and a many new faces...i score this game 8.5/10 but then again its my opinion.

[Aumata]

Damn, was rated on the Xbox also. Might explain why I haven't beaten this game yet. 30 Hours in and I am still not done. Had it since launch day too. Maybe the fanboy in me is blocking the truth. Now I am starting to have doubts.

[Logikal1]

It feels good to see an honest review. I think 2.5 is a fair score.

The game is complete fail.

[RohanD]

Logikal1 wrote...

It feels good to see an honest review. I think 2.5 is a fair score.

The game is complete fail.

You live up to your username!

[Ariella]

Cybermortis wrote...


True, but at least the games in question gave you a feeling that you were moving through a 'real' world that someone had worked out in detail. DA2 has...nothing. There is no feeling that you (or at least the character) is in any sense 'real' or that the world is. If Vigil's Keep and Wade felt more interesting and 'real' after five minutes of just standing there and talking than the entirity of DA2 you know there is something badly wrong with the game.

Considering that FR's been around since 1987 and has a wealth of backstory, maybe too much backstory in some cases. That's not Dragon Age. Honestly, with two exceptions NWN 2's companions left me cold, the "romances" that were advertised were thinner than a matzoh because Chis Avellone doesn't like writing them.

Mask of the Betrayer is the best of the three NWN 2 games by Obsidian, but got major flack for er... trying something new which rings familiar in this forum I think. And SoZ, well... less said the better.

And I disagree with your opinion that DA has nothing. Aveline's questlines alone are just wonderful for all sorts of spoilery reasons, and Varric's commentary and narration give a lot of life to the DA. Also, my Hawke never felt dead or unreal. To me, Kirkwall works as a real place, more so than at least two of the villages in NWN 2, one of which is the protaginist birthplace.

[Oliver Sudden]

Kirkwall felt as real to me as the towns in DAO, but that didn't help me enjoy the game. I should have listened to my gut when playing the demo and realized this game was made for other types of gamers.

I agree with those who agree with the critic but not his score. I see DA2 as being average.

[UnstableMongoose]

I honestly think there should have been one reply to this thread, one which said "Gamecritics.com is a site that survives off pure and unbalanced negativity, and if you think that someone else assigning an arbitrary number to a game on the internets in some way validates your opinions to the level of fact, you're living in a fantasy world." At this point, ideally, the thread should have been locked.

But we seem to have passed the threshold where that was going to happen, so I suppose I'll go to a greater depth.

To directly answer the OP, I found the review "honest", but the word "integrity" simply doesn't roll of the tongue when thinking about Gamecritic's overly-negative writing style in general and the author's ignorance of the game's positive factors (which an analytical person would have to consider at least possibly intentional). He brings up good points, but he has a faulty sense of scale, and has tunnel visioned on aspects of the game that are negative and ignored anything that could be seen as an ameliorating, a redeeming or even a transcendent (depending on how good you thought the game was) feature. Considering Gamecritic's stance of hiding the mostly shallow number at the end of their article to emphasize analyzing the game rather than considering an arbitrary score a review, these shortcomings are inexcusable. His blank panning of all characters as sketches (with no exceptions or examples given) and other sweeping generalizations of the game's strong points designed to avoid giving it any credit (there is not a single positively-slanted sentence in the article, as a point of interest) are juvenile in delivery. Of course, GC articles without a single positive quality mentioned are, in fact, fairly common--just take a stroll through the archives.

In any case, the main complaint regarding Dragon Age II seems to be re-used environments. While to some extent I agree that it is somewhat true, I think that people's memories are too short and biased. Dragon Age: Origins, both Mass Effects, and KOTOR all relied on template maps. Dragon Age II obviously had a less-varied setting than previous games, and I agree that the degree to which the environments were re-used was most likely unnecessary, many are missing the point. DA:O focused on setting and conflict at the expense of its characters, while varied, becoming somewhat (though not entirely) flat reflections of ideals and conflicts. DA2 takes the opposite approach, focusing on character at the expense of environment. Hawke's decisions impact a much smaller area than the Warden's, but their impacts on characters run very, very deep. The way the narrative and characters were done in DA2 required that the setting be scaled back to some degree. Bioware's only crime was over-doing it (ideally, they should get the people that bought their game some nice DLC for free).

Going back to clarifying my opinion on the reviewer and his article, I find it suspect that there are three articles slamming the mess out of DA2 before the reviewer actually completed peeing all over the floor instead of the newspaper. This is incredibly odd, and, strangely enough, similar articles are not often found, even for clearly worse games that received even more negative reviews. The reviewer spent 22 hours playing the game. And wrote four articles on it. Even if you're not very cynical, you really should start wondering how much of the deep character stuff he skipped over, and how much he's reveling in the love-to-hate aspect of being a reviewer that operates on negativity. Anyone having the phrase, "a complete failure in every respect," is either engaging in hyperbole because he hates something too much to admit that it has positive qualities, talking about some horrific historic event that has been revealed to have no positive qualities such as the Hindenburg accident, or doesn't understand what he's talking about on a level high enough to identify any positive qualities. It's just such a damn catch-all statement with no meaning--there are only a miniscule number of things that have not succeeded in any aspect. We can rule out B, meaning that the reviewer is by simple logical process either blowing smoke out his ass, intentionally or uninentionally--the enormous degree of hyperbole and unclarified language in this "review" is staggering.