260 réponses à ce sujet

[Impmacaque]

But my point is that it would probably go against the code of the Qunari to just let her go. So the Qunari would have a problem, hence they demand her too. It's logical for them, perhaps not for us as humans.

The beliefs of the Qunari shouldn't be changed just so that there's a 'nice' option - the whole point of the act seems to be about the issues of the Qunari code of honour and how it clashes with other beliefs.

You're missing the entire point the reviewer was trying to make in bringing up the Qunari "crisis". The game devs failed to give us, the players, a means to roleplay our way to alternative solutions with the Qunari. Instead of the act ALWAYS ending the exact same way, we could've been presented with the opportunity to find the relic ourselves, to side with the Qunari, to explore other solutions to their problem, to discover their plot to take over Kirkwall beforehand, to make enemies with the Arishok, to seek a diplomatic solution, to convince the Arishok that humanity is more than it seems to be, etc. etc. This is an issue which could've and should've been given multiple solutions each with unique consequences (a staple of Dragon Age: Origins). Why didn't they take the time to give us CHOICE in the major conflicts?

We have come to expect choices and consequences. DA2's story is entirely fixed and unchangable. We're presented only with the pretense of choice. The choices you make as Hawke have no weight - no matter what you say, Anders will always do what he does, Meridith/Orsino will always meet the same end, the Qunari crisis always ends the same way, etc. The choices you make as Hawke barely matter even for the tiny  filler quests - NPCs you set free now will either die now or die later. How is that engaging or interesting in the slightest? It's not. It's poor writing. None of the interesting issues in DA2 are fleshed out to a satisfactory degree.

This is why so many are angered by DA2. There is barely any roleplay because the story does not react to how you play your character in any meaningful capacity. It's painfully apparent that in rushing the game to the market, the devs only (barely) had the time to piece together a single plotline.

Modifié par Impmacaque, 25 mars 2011 - 11:19 .

[The Brigand]

Persephone wrote...

Oh, I do. I've played many linear and so called non linear games. I love DAO but in all my +20 playthroughs I ended up with Archie dead and epilogue slides telling me the supposed consequences of my actions.

*sigh*



Not my run of Super Metroid, by the way, but I think it establishes what a lot of people, myself included, feel "nonlinear" means for videogames.

EDIT: Just an fyi: Crazy **** starts at around 4:30, wherein the player skips what's supposed to be a mandatory boss fight by getting through the door into the room before it closes.

EDIT2: Just finished watching the second video. The player skipped the final boss.

Modifié par The Brigand, 25 mars 2011 - 11:48 .

[Impmacaque]

>Haven't encountered a single game breaking bug in 4 playthroughs.

YOU may have been lucky enough to avoid the countless bugs, but there are TONS of us who have had our playthroughs crippled by the Isabella bug. Furthermore, many of these bugs are absolutely game breaking in nature. (Regroup bug, targeting bug, Friendship bug, etc). Again, just because YOU did not encounter them does not excuse their existence. These should've been picked up in the first day of testing. Seriously.

>The rehashed enviroments bothered me too but not as much as most.

It's exacerbated by the fact that, re-used environmemnts aside, there is barely any exploration to be had throughout the entire game. It all takes place in Kirkwall which itself becomes an extremely repetitive and lifeless city. There was not a single point throughout the entire game where I was excited about entering a new area, and that is an absolute tragedy for any RPG.

>I liked the gear/inventory system just fine.

Again, your opinion of adequacy does not change the fact that we are given NO customization options for our party members aside from agonizing amounts of the same amulets/rings/belts which are largely (read, almost entirely) composed of one or two repetitive stats. There is no DEPTH to the inventory/gear system. There are no meaningful choices to be made. Oh boy, another belt of +18 attack. I'll use this over my +12 attack belt. I suppose I should give the +4% fire magic ring to my mage until a +5% one drops. That's literally the entire gearing system in a nutshell. It's lazy, uninspired, and the items don't even have unique icons or names or flavor text or ANYTHING.

>I loved the Secondary and Companion quests. Much more than in DAO.

The vast majority of quests in DA2 are "go here, kill these." There are too many of these, and not enough legitimately interesting quests/sideplots.

>Dunno about RPG elements being dumbed down, I could RP my character much better than the Warden though.

Your "RP" choices do not carry any weight in DA2. There are no alternative solutions to problems. Your roleplay is superficial at best, you respond with wit or attitude and ****** off certain NPCs in dialogue, but you don't actually change anything. In DA:O, you could choose to kill or recruit your biggest political rival in the game (Loghain). You could choose the next ruler of the Dwarven kingdom. You could make yourself the king of the newly freed lands, appoint your best friend to do it, or exile him permanently. You could defile the ashes of andraste. You could ****** off spirits, kill off your own party members, kill an entire dalish village and recruit an army of werewolves, ****.. the list goes on. There are many DIFFICULT decisions to be made in DA:O which are simply not present in DA2. 

The plot in DA:O felt like it was moved forward by player action/player choice, wheras in DA2 the game will play itself and you cannot change anything meaningfully.

Modifié par Impmacaque, 25 mars 2011 - 11:38 .

[moilami]

Persephone wrote...

Impmacaque wrote...

Baelyn wrote...

I love all of the people saying its a good review by justifying it because they agreed with it, and then saying that the higher reviews are wrong because they didn't agree with it.

Was it well written? Yes.

Do I agree with what he says? No. This doesn't make it a bad review nor a good one. Just one that I simply disagree with completely. Just the same as saying an IGN review that gave it an 85/100 is a bad review that was obviously paid off by EA because you don't agree with it.

What exactly do you "not agree with"? The RPGcodex review is based entirely on objective flaws in Dragon Age 2. These aren't up for discussion. 

>Game has inexcusable, major, game-breaking bugs. Fact.
>Game re-uses the same environments ad nauseum. Fact.
>Game has an extremely limited, shallow gear/inventory system. Fact.
>Game is composed mostly of unrelated "filler" quests with little cohesion or central focus in theme. Fact.
>RPG progression elements are inexplicably dumbed down from DA:O. Fact.
>Despite the pretense of choice, the game's plot is entirely linear and immutable. Fact

Haven't encountered a single game breaking bug in 4 playthroughs.

The rehashed enviroments bothered me too but not as much as most.

I liked the gear/inventory system just fine.

I loved the Secondary and Companion quests. Much more than in DAO.

Dunno about RPG elements being dumbed down, I could RP my character much better than the Warden though.

DAO 's plot was linear and immutable as well. Except for MS Dos like Epilogue slides.

Here is a good game for you: www.supermariobros.com

[moilami]

FearMonkey wrote...

The obsolete “to hit chance” mechanic is gone. In your grandpa's RPGs, unsuccessful attacks missed their target. In Dragon Age 2 they merely cause less damage (glancing blows). Your primary stat (one for each class; might as well make the system even more ‘welcoming’ and call it DAMAGE!!!) determines your base damage and your chance to do extra damage. Hovering your cursor over your attack rating displays a breakdown, for example 85% vs normal enemy, 70% vs enemy lieutenant, 55% vs enemy boss. What does it mean for you? A system where you always hit is an HP game, so you’ll be hitting the “bosses” aka HP behemoths for a very, very long time.

My favorite part of the review.

Lol it was a very good review.

My favorite paragraph was this:

There are 4 combat modes: Casual – for people who want to click on
things and watch them explode; Normal – for people who don’t mind
clicking on things a few more times before they explode, Hard – enemies
have enough HP and armor to force you to pay attention to what you’re
doing, and the aptly called Nightmare – friendly fire is on, so watch
where you cast spells and where you swing that sword. Basically if you
like micromanaging a party using awful, unresponsive controls, this mode
is for you.


RPG Codex, hmm, appears to be an epic place.


Edit: HAHAHAHAHAHAH, I almost freak out when read these real pro reviews
when compared to noob reviews in PC Mag etc or escapist facepalm 10/10,
which I can't understand ever.

Modifié par moilami, 25 mars 2011 - 11:51 .

[Merced652]

Oh it is epic, they eat fangirls for breakfast.

[moilami]

Merced652 wrote...

Oh it is epic, they eat fangirls for breakfast.

The least any corporation should learn of this is that they don't call their games RPGs in vain.

[cotheer]

RPG should be licensed and standardized anyway.
Go off the road, and pay hefty fine for any mistake or "evolution" of the RPG brand.

[Nedereus]

A spot on review. Well thought and well written. Good job VD.

[Funkjoker]

cotheer wrote...

RPG should be licensed and standardized anyway.
Go off the road, and pay hefty fine for any mistake or "evolution" of the RPG brand.

No. It just doesn't have to appeal to the mainstream to be good and successful (DAO) and the article is quite clear about that.

[Darth Executor]

Delixe wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...
I never got the hate filled bile from Mr. Weller. From the Codex forums? Meh, only if you easily offended I guess.

They are rather more colourful in their language than is nessesary although I am not easily offended I simply find it a little unprofessional. Like the little dig he made at Feargus Urquart when New Vegas was fantastic. Obsidian have a reputation of being Bugsidian but in the case of New Vegas it was largely unwarranted especially when you compare it to the utterly broken state Fallout 3 shipped in.

As for the forums well, yeah there are some rather strange individuals that reside there.

What? NV shipped with a widespread bug that erased your saves. Fallout 3 had little more than the usual crashes I expect from games of that maginutde.

[Delixe]

Darth Executor wrote...

Delixe wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...
I never got the hate filled bile from Mr. Weller. From the Codex forums? Meh, only if you easily offended I guess.

They are rather more colourful in their language than is nessesary although I am not easily offended I simply find it a little unprofessional. Like the little dig he made at Feargus Urquart when New Vegas was fantastic. Obsidian have a reputation of being Bugsidian but in the case of New Vegas it was largely unwarranted especially when you compare it to the utterly broken state Fallout 3 shipped in.

As for the forums well, yeah there are some rather strange individuals that reside there.

What? NV shipped with a widespread bug that erased your saves. Fallout 3 had little more than the usual crashes I expect from games of that maginutde.

Fallout 3 had that exact same bug, it's a bug in the actual Gamebryo engine. People who complained about New Vegas had a seious mental block regarding the unplayable state of Vanilla Fallout 3.

[Tirigon]

Didnt read completely yet but I already agree:

Hawke starts the game as a refugee fleeing Lothering with his mother and two siblings, a humble beginning (except the game makes clear from the start that you’re destined to be the most awesome dude ever). During the game’s numerous trials and tribulations, Hawke manages to save everyone but his family, losing them one after the other in a series of unfortunate scripted events. I assume that we were expected to care and maybe even shed a tear during Hawke’s emotional speeches, which take place between frequently scheduled bouts of asskicking, but action RPGs probably aren't a good medium to explore the tragic loss of loved ones you’ve only just met. Or maybe it's the fact that it's hard to care about the plight of the insipid characters Bioware saddles you with as siblings.

[MonkeyLungs]

Impmacaque wrote...

>Haven't encountered a single game breaking bug in 4 playthroughs.

YOU may have been lucky enough to avoid the countless bugs, but there are TONS of us who have had our playthroughs crippled by the Isabella bug. Furthermore, many of these bugs are absolutely game breaking in nature. (Regroup bug, targeting bug, Friendship bug, etc). Again, just because YOU did not encounter them does not excuse their existence. These should've been picked up in the first day of testing. Seriously.

>The rehashed enviroments bothered me too but not as much as most.

It's exacerbated by the fact that, re-used environmemnts aside, there is barely any exploration to be had throughout the entire game. It all takes place in Kirkwall which itself becomes an extremely repetitive and lifeless city. There was not a single point throughout the entire game where I was excited about entering a new area, and that is an absolute tragedy for any RPG.

>I liked the gear/inventory system just fine.

Again, your opinion of adequacy does not change the fact that we are given NO customization options for our party members aside from agonizing amounts of the same amulets/rings/belts which are largely (read, almost entirely) composed of one or two repetitive stats. There is no DEPTH to the inventory/gear system. There are no meaningful choices to be made. Oh boy, another belt of +18 attack. I'll use this over my +12 attack belt. I suppose I should give the +4% fire magic ring to my mage until a +5% one drops. That's literally the entire gearing system in a nutshell. It's lazy, uninspired, and the items don't even have unique icons or names or flavor text or ANYTHING.

>I loved the Secondary and Companion quests. Much more than in DAO.

The vast majority of quests in DA2 are "go here, kill these." There are too many of these, and not enough legitimately interesting quests/sideplots.

>Dunno about RPG elements being dumbed down, I could RP my character much better than the Warden though.

Your "RP" choices do not carry any weight in DA2. There are no alternative solutions to problems. Your roleplay is superficial at best, you respond with wit or attitude and ****** off certain NPCs in dialogue, but you don't actually change anything. In DA:O, you could choose to kill or recruit your biggest political rival in the game (Loghain). You could choose the next ruler of the Dwarven kingdom. You could make yourself the king of the newly freed lands, appoint your best friend to do it, or exile him permanently. You could defile the ashes of andraste. You could ****** off spirits, kill off your own party members, kill an entire dalish village and recruit an army of werewolves, ****.. the list goes on. There are many DIFFICULT decisions to be made in DA:O which are simply not present in DA2. 

The plot in DA:O felt like it was moved forward by player action/player choice, wheras in DA2 the game will play itself and you cannot change anything meaningfully.

Why are you arguing with Persephone? Just put that guy on ignore. Great post though.

[Timon44]

It just comes down to what you expected of DA2.

If you expected a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate you will be disappointed of DA2.
If you expected an action RPG you will love DA2.


The author of the article clearly expected a classical RPG hence he is disappointed of DA2. He explains himself well and presents good arguments. However that doesn't mean that the game is bad for everyone.

Modifié par Timon44, 26 mars 2011 - 03:29 .

[Ixalmaris]

Timon44 wrote...

It just comes down to what you expected of DA2.

If you expected a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate you will be disappointed of DA2.
If you expected an action RPG you will love DA2.


The author of the article clearly expected a classical RPG hence he is disappointed of DA2. He explains himself well and presents good arguments. However that doesn't mean that the game is bad for everyone.

Most people expected something like DA:O. Silly I know, how could they...

[Tirigon]

Timon44 wrote...
If you expected an action RPG you will love DA2.

Hell no.

If I want an action RPG I do so because I want GOOD, CHALLENGING and GRAPHICALLY APPEALING combat with lots of awesome, bloody moves and dismemberments and severed heads all over the place and awesome finishing moves like THIS:



Not the horribly sh!tty, boring and ugly mess of a combat we had in DA2.

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 mars 2011 - 03:40 .

[Derax]

Nice review ;D

Why i play it ? -->Any port in a storm.

[Bostur]

Ixalmaris wrote...

Timon44 wrote...

It just comes down to what you expected of DA2.

If you expected a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate you will be disappointed of DA2.
If you expected an action RPG you will love DA2.


The author of the article clearly expected a classical RPG hence he is disappointed of DA2. He explains himself well and presents good arguments. However that doesn't mean that the game is bad for everyone.

Most people expected something like DA:O. Silly I know, how could they...

Yeah we should have expected something similar to DA1 - oh wait...

[Timon44]

Ixalmaris wrote...

Timon44 wrote...

It just comes down to what you expected of DA2.

If you expected a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate you will be disappointed of DA2.
If you expected an action RPG you will love DA2.


The author of the article clearly expected a classical RPG hence he is disappointed of DA2. He explains himself well and presents good arguments. However that doesn't mean that the game is bad for everyone.

Most people expected something like DA:O. Silly I know, how could they...

Poor job twisting my words. Keep on hating...

[FuzFuz]

Great review. I totally agree.

[Tirigon]

Timon44 wrote...

Poor job twisting my words. Keep on hating...

It´s not hating. Rather... disappointment.

See, regretting to have bought a game is one thing. Regretting to have borrowed it from a friend, well... that goes to show just how bad it is, right?

[ItsToofy]

"But, without cooldowns, how would I know when to click my buttons?"


"We called them tactics, son."

Couldn't have said it better myself...

[MorrigansLove]

Now just tack on the bland, limited and recycled environments, overwhelming gay content, poor story, simplified plot, boring and oversexualized characters, disfigured returning characters, alien-looking elves, a dumbed down inventory system that prevents you from changing the look/armor of your companions and a dumbed down talent system that removed several fan-favorite spells/abilities including shape-shifting and implimented long cooldowns and THEN I think you've hit the nail on the head with what people are upset about.

[Persephone]

moilami wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Impmacaque wrote...

Baelyn wrote...

I love all of the people saying its a good review by justifying it because they agreed with it, and then saying that the higher reviews are wrong because they didn't agree with it.

Was it well written? Yes.

Do I agree with what he says? No. This doesn't make it a bad review nor a good one. Just one that I simply disagree with completely. Just the same as saying an IGN review that gave it an 85/100 is a bad review that was obviously paid off by EA because you don't agree with it.

What exactly do you "not agree with"? The RPGcodex review is based entirely on objective flaws in Dragon Age 2. These aren't up for discussion. 

>Game has inexcusable, major, game-breaking bugs. Fact.
>Game re-uses the same environments ad nauseum. Fact.
>Game has an extremely limited, shallow gear/inventory system. Fact.
>Game is composed mostly of unrelated "filler" quests with little cohesion or central focus in theme. Fact.
>RPG progression elements are inexplicably dumbed down from DA:O. Fact.
>Despite the pretense of choice, the game's plot is entirely linear and immutable. Fact

Haven't encountered a single game breaking bug in 4 playthroughs.

The rehashed enviroments bothered me too but not as much as most.

I liked the gear/inventory system just fine.

I loved the Secondary and Companion quests. Much more than in DAO.

Dunno about RPG elements being dumbed down, I could RP my character much better than the Warden though.

DAO 's plot was linear and immutable as well. Except for MS Dos like Epilogue slides.

Here is a good game for you: www.supermariobros.com

No thanks, I prefer to play that on my old NES. And how does that matter again?:innocent: