212 réponses à ce sujet

[Talogrungi]

I liked ME2 way more than ME1.
I liked DA2 way more than DA:O.

I have my gripes about both games; but overall I feel that the sequels managed to maintain the quality of the storytelling while reducing some of the the tedium prevalent in the RPG genre and providing much needed improvements to the combat.

[1000questions]

I would like to state that I never fully played ME1, never bought it though had plans ( or still have to be honest and will buy now ).
I rented ME2 game on the recommendation of my friend. My friend suggested me that " ME2 IS A SHOOTER GAME WITH RPG ELEMENTS.IT IS SCIENCE FICTION AND IS A VISUAL TREAT". This set my expectations right. The dialogue were good, I could talk and know about my companions whenever I wanted. Agreed that they wont talk much till a trigger or flag has been set. The characters were good and variety. As someone said rightly the quests and side-quests slowly and steadily help you develop a team and prepare for an assault on REAPER's base. Cerberus was providing you intel on recruitments. So you knew since the begining what you were going to do and what to expect. Some characters you recruited yourself as old companions. I am not sure but anyone who is fan of ME series said that ME2 has better graphics but a bit less of RPG elements,never the less ME2 was never out of its place or track of ME series . So when ME2 game out with better graphics and all people who were looking forward for sequel got what they were expecting and hence it rose to popularity. ME1 made a fan base on which ME2 capitalized or should I say profited.

Now lets look at DA2, I bought DA:O as RPG game, I will not say it was Perfect 10 but definitely 9 and above on scale of 10 among latest RPG games.Characters, communication system etc everything was good, even bought dlc though they were full of bugs everytime they got released.
DA:Origins created a fan base among fantasy base RPG players. It had the characters, it had love stories in it. It had some portion of sex but I found it interesting not blunt on face , artistic would be right word.It was about a hero who rose to occassion, gathered allies,armies,companions and defeated a threat to his nation and the world. It was hit a hug success.
In DA2 they threw alot of things which worked for DA:Origins. Instead DA2 gave a different feel which was not in line of DA series or world. There are tons of things which went wrong in DA2. It did not even carried the story of the warden.

HONESTLY - I dont see DA2 as sequel to DA:Origins . If EA had released this game as separate title it would be considered good but you attach this game with DA:Origins and it takes sound beating.

[1000questions]

Sentox6 wrote...

And really, we're saying that the utterly pointless diversion that was Stop-the-Collectors is now better than DA2? Really? People seem to be getting upset because there's less of an illusion of Hawke being proactive and having a defined goal. Because everyone has a single, dominating goal in their life that overshadows everything else, right. DA2 gives you a character looking to survive, better their life, and deal with whatever comes their way. Just like most people live their life, really. It's refreshing to at least see the cliche change for once.

 If that is the case then why do people want to play FANTASY BASED RPG GAME ? If you want something closer to real life then play a game which is set in this era and closer to reality, games based on wars which have happened, or based on other aspects of life like GTA series ?
Why choose FANTASY ?
Yeah the story was refreshing if you take into account that it was a struggle of a man trying to survive with FAMILY. However in DA2 family was literally used as some useless pawn. You start with no father, kill a sibling, then other one is taking by templars and what not, the mother is killed ... Honestly that is how you use "FAMILY" element in the game ? by leaving your character alone well before the end of a game ? No that was not refreshing.

Shepard isn't actually any less reactive to events than Hawke is. It's the limitation of the medium. The over-arching goal of "stop the Reapers" simply gives the illusion of direction and purpose, but you still spend the whole game responding to scenarios that are delivered to you.

In ME2 still atleast you knew where you are heading , here in DA2 you have no idea at all , one of your own companion just goes and blows up something and kills innocent people just to push you to take side ? What the heck is that ?

[patcheeboy]

because you can simplify the rpg elements of a shooter and its still fun because shooting is fun.
Mindless button mashing in a action rpg isnt fun for people other then children and the easily amused, there is no direct skill involved to make it fun or a challenge, you could train a gibbon to do it
Also; DA2 had nowhere near as much effort put into its gameworld. ME2 had loads of "sweeeeeet" moments

[Sentox6]

1000questions wrote...
 If that is the case then why do people want to play FANTASY BASED RPG GAME ? If you want something closer to real life then play a game which is set in this era and closer to reality, games based on wars which have happened, or based on other aspects of life like GTA series ?
Why choose FANTASY ?

Um, because I might like fantasy? Are you seriously going to stand there and proclaim that specific narrrative structures must be paired with a specific context? I'm not allowed to enjoy a plot direction other than "save the world" unless it's set in some 'gritty', present-day urban environment?

I really can't say anything polite to this, so let's move on.

In ME2 still atleast you knew where you are heading , here in DA2 you have no idea at all , one of your own companion just goes and blows up something and kills innocent people just to push you to take side ? What the heck is that ?

A companion with an autonomous agenda? Yeah, that's ridiculous.

Modifié par Sentox6, 26 mars 2011 - 11:24 .

[Kandid001]

First I'm not happy with all changes of ME2, and I expect ME3 to be somewhere in between ME1 and ME2 instead of taking ME2's path further.

That said, ME wasn't exactly a CRPG to begin with. It was an RPG/shooter hybrid and design decisions of ME2 which got rid of detailed RPG elements (which were unnecessary according to many fans) and emphasized on the action/cinematic aspect were received positively.

[1000questions]

Sentox6 wrote...

Um, because I might like fantasy? Are you seriously going to stand there and proclaim that specific narrrative structures must be paired with a specific context? I'm not allowed to enjoy a plot direction other than "save the world" unless it's set in some 'gritty', present-day urban environment?

I really can't say anything polite to this, so let's move on.

You are beating around bush.Even in real life people have aims, goals of life anyways just move on.

A companion with an autonomous agenda? Yeah, that's ridiculous.

No the rediculous part is the execution of the agenda. I am sure it doesnt sound rediculous to you that how unlikely was the execution of the agenda if we take into the account of this companion's character in awakening and his role in DA2 before Act3.

I mean come on it is perfectly rational that a person who believes EXTREMELY in justice, who is a HEALER and helps poors will decide to blow up a building killing innocents... yeah thats perfectly sane.<_<

[Lord Gremlin]

DA2 is not a fail. It's really good. It just lacks content and has been produced in a very short time, so there you have too much linearity etc.
It's hard to live up to the story epicness of DAO, really. While ME1 is a sloppy linear shooter, and ME2 is a linear shooter that is no longer sloppy. Simple.

[Sentox6]

1000questions wrote...
You are beating around bush.Even in real life people have aims, goals of life anyways just move on.

I'm not beating around the bush. You essentially said you can't combine a more 'realistic' plot with a fantasy setting. That's a great idea if complete genre stagnation is the goal, but otherwise it's quite retarded. I like the change in narrative structure, and I like the fantasy setting. I refuse to accept that because I like the former, I should be playing GTA.

No the rediculous part is the execution of the agenda. I am sure it doesnt sound rediculous to you that how unlikely was the execution of the agenda if we take into the account of this companion's character in awakening and his role in DA2 before Act3.

I mean come on it is perfectly rational that a person who believes EXTREMELY in justice, who is a HEALER and helps poors will decide to blow up a building killing innocents... yeah thats perfectly sane.<_<

Right, because people never change. Their beliefs never become more extreme. Certainly someone possessed by a spirit of Justice and Vengeance would be perfectly stable.

This companion obviously perceives the Chantry to be an institution devoted to systematically oppressing, and perhaps even desiring the eventual eradication of, mages. And your argument is that because he shows compassion to individuals, he wouldn't sacrifice innocents to upset this status quo? You're going to have to convince me more than that.

I'm not saying it isn't shocking, but it's a long way from ridiculous.

[1000questions]

Sentox6 wrote...

1000questions wrote...
You are beating around bush.Even in real life people have aims, goals of life anyways just move on.

I'm not beating around the bush. You essentially said you can't combine a more 'realistic' plot with a fantasy setting. That's a great idea if complete genre stagnation is the goal, but otherwise it's quite retarded. I like the change in narrative structure, and I like the fantasy setting. I refuse to accept that because I like the former, I should be playing GTA.

I am not asking you to play GTA,COD or Mirror or any other game. Just sit down for a second, and ask yourself WHY YOU LIKE FANTASY ? anyways... not even interested in arguing with you on this point.

Right, because people never change. Their beliefs never become more extreme. Certainly someone possessed by a spirit of Justice and Vengeance would be perfectly stable.

This companion obviously perceives the Chantry to be an institution devoted to systematically oppressing, and perhaps even desiring the eventual eradication of, mages. And your argument is that because he shows compassion to individuals, he wouldn't sacrifice innocents to upset this status quo? You're going to have to convince me more than that.

I'm not saying it isn't shocking, but it's a long way from ridiculous.

He is not possessed by two spirits. If I am not wrong he allowed spirit of justice to reside in himself then his own vengenace towards TEMPLARS made the spirit of justice aggressive. Even in the wildest or most aggressive forms of justice which is REVENGE subjects (people) hit the party who inflicted the suffering on the subject not others... unless we are accepting that the subject is a lunatic.

Now , in the game where it is shown that Chanty wants to systematically oppress or tranquilize the mages ? Where does he get this information or intell or conclusion. It would have made sense if he would have killed templars or hit their base. Agreed that chantry holds alot of power over templar body but in this game it is clear that the templar order is not acting as per the chantry if you go by what is happening in the game. There is no indication that the companion gets this idea or from where. It is out of blue , out of line.

Yeah you are right that people transform but there is a SOLID reason to why they radically change. People just dont switch to extreme opposite characters just like that !

Modifié par 1000questions, 27 mars 2011 - 12:06 .

[StormenDK]

As others have said, ME2 is a different type of game from DA2, and thus the criteria to succeed are different.

I love CRPG inventory and customization of characters, and I am sad to see that getting dumbed down in DA2. It has little to do with wheter I should be able to dictate what Merrill should wear or not, since I have control over her rings, amulets, belts and her weapon.

It doesn't fit well in my CRPG-vision that inventory should be handled like ME2.

I do miss the customization in ME2, but I also recognize that it is a different and more fast-paced game. But I still think it is an improvement over ME1. Since ME1 inventory was a disaster. There were too many types of armor and weapons, most types were too similar, and some were way underpowered by the time you found them, that they never got used. Also calling them Leopard IV and V didn't help. Having to equip a Stinger IV with a Heatsink III, Recoil IV and loaded with Ice ammo V just made everything confusing.

I have yet to complete chapter 1 of DA2, but I am already a bit disappointed with it. I can't say much for the story or the characters, as I am not too far in yet, but the inventory "fix" doesn't sit well with me, and I must say that the constant reuse of the exact same "dungeon" is very annoying. How come in just one chapter, I have to see the same mine or cave 5 times? .. and they are even too lazy to remove the parts that are inaccessible, from the minimap.

I don't remember seeing this much reuse in any other RPG(ish) game i have yet played.

[AngelicMachinery]

Less stuffy old folks play space operas, these geezers get confused if they actually have to move their characters about faster then a few feet per turn. It's true, the maker told me when we were playing CoD.

[Hatchetman77]

Fikmeister wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Also with its own flaws. Kinematics not enough work, sloppy game, game rushed, lots of bugs. Graphics not quite worked, yet more linear.

I read this with Mordin's voice in my head. And I agree.

I took out the "its" in the first sentence and put a Shatner pause between more and linear and it is EXACTLY what Mordin would say.  Therefore I really can't disagree with it. 

Modifié par Hatchetman77, 27 mars 2011 - 02:39 .

[Hurbster]

Lets not forget, ME2 was a direct sequel as well, with a continuation of the story. Obviously it was not without it's flaws (the mediocrity of the side quests is something both DA, ME & ME2 all suffer from, imo), but it was in no way as radical a 'streamlining' as DA2 was.

DA2 goes off on a tangent with it's own story and has many reused areas ( a stupid amount to be honest) and the 'funnel' effect that bascially you choices just don't mean much to the end game. Lets face it, it has no 'epic' feel whatsoever.

We all know there is DLC coming, lets hope it's more in the form of Shadowbroker than Leliana's Song.

Modifié par Hurbster, 27 mars 2011 - 02:54 .

[Schurge]

Because Mass Effect 2 feels like what Mass Effect was meant to be.

EDIT: But for the record, I was upset about the whole Liara situation, but Lair of the Shadowbroker appeased me.

Modifié par Schurge, 27 mars 2011 - 03:03 .

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

For starters, ME2 had more than one map.

[Insom]

ME2 is a complete game over 14gb in size. I'm fulfilled when I beat it. With DA2 I don't even feel like playing past the first tutorial level anymore.

[Slayer299]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

The difference, I think, is in expectations. This was expected with ME2. That was EA's reach-out to the casual crowd. DA2 was supposed to be their reward to their loyal crowd.

Instead, both games ended up being reaches out to the casual crowd and an abandonment of their core fanbases.

And that last sentence sums up more than anything why DA2 makes people so mad and ME2 does not. Gamers like me may not have liked all the changes to ME2, but we consoled ourselves that the people who liked that type of RPG could have that and the rest of us could have our Dragon Age.

And that in a nutshell says it quite well! +10

[DungeonLord]

ME2 felt like a complete game, aside from the fact that it pretty much ended right after you recruited your whole crew. Most levels had nice design as well.

DA2 feels like it was cheesed together over a few months by pros who were in a rush.

[Well]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

Less stuffy old folks play space operas, these geezers get confused if they actually have to move their characters about faster then a few feet per turn. It's true, the maker told me when we were playing CoD.

Children who miss their naps say silly things.

[Hyper Cutter]

ME2 had much better production values, for starters. From what I hear, DA2 makes ME1 look good in comparison (the latter probably reuses fewer areas too, and if you've played ME1 you know how much that's saying).

Hell, DA2 can't even make the save importing work properly, from what I've read on these very forums, while ME2's works almost perfectly (and the only major problem, Conrad Verner, is on ME1's side iirc).

And ME2 is the game all the good DLC people are working on.

[ink07]

Simple.

ME2 built upon and improved the Action/Shooter RPG foundations of the first. It wanted to be a shooter with RPG elements, so it streamlined its mechanics still retaining its uniqueness (ie the biotic powers on top of the shooter mechanics).

DA2 first denied and then tried to unsuccesfully reinvent its CRPG foundations. It wanted to become a less tactic, faster and more actiony RPG (unlike what Origins was), so it got rid of what had made it unique in the first place (mechanics wise).

Imagine Mass Effect 2 had become a top down dual stick shooter (think alien swarm and the like) with a more environmentaly tactical approach but at the same time required the action to be paused for every input. See if people would've liked that.

Modifié par ink07, 27 mars 2011 - 04:47 .

[Tommy6860]

Eurypterid wrote...

One of the easiest things to point to is the fact that DA2 is way more similar to ME2 than it is to DA:O.

I have to admit seeing a forum mod make this statement is refreshing. That said, DA2 has no business being like ME2, unless there be aliens in DA2 as well, with whom we can earn paragon and renegade points. Maybe we can add The Wards as another part of the Kirkwall map locations while we are at it.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 27 mars 2011 - 04:47 .

[DTKT]

ME2 is a more polished product and feels much more complete than DAII.

How about that?