151 réponses à ce sujet

[Steppenwolf]

MrTijger wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

Where does personal integrity come into play then? I seem to recall a former Bioware employee turning down the big job on DA2 because he had some.
Seriously, people. Stop making excuses.

He also said he was burned out and couldnt stand the pressure and thats after having 4.5 years to accomplish something...so, how do you imagine he'd handle a 1.5 year production, hmm?

Provide a link to that or you're talking ****. I read all of those blog entries he made on the matter and I never read that. What he did for a fact say was that he turned down lead on DA2 because he didn't like the direction they were taking the game.

[Schurge]

There are many things that I don't like about Dragon Age II, but the writing isn't one of them, and I still don't really understand why a significant percentage of Dragon Age players hate the writing.

I thought the presentation of the game's story was unique and interesting. While I do not think that having the story told after the fact through the eyes of Varric is necessarily the most appropriate way for this style of game, it did an excellent job of keeping you interested and building up anticipation for chapter three since the game's story as a whole didn't have a central focus.

Because of Varric hinting at the future in Chapter II, I could barely stand to do the other quests in Chapter III because I wanted to see what was going to happen. And while Chapter I and most of Chapter II were kind of slow going, and you didn't feel the push to complete the main quests when the Companion quests were far more interesting, Chapter III felt like a race.

I also don't understand the hate for the characters, of whom I thought were well written and for the most part strongly developed over the course of the story (especially Merril and Aveline). Of course I miss Morrigan, Leliana, and the rest - I definently felt more connected to most of the companions in Origins more than those in DAII (I did not romance Leliana, but while playing I definently felt like she was my best friend because of our interactions). That doesn't mean however, that the DAII companions stunk, I think Aveline rivals several of the Origins companions. I loved that instead of being able to romance her, you could help her start a relationship with an NPC, it would be cool if in the future you could have the option to help cultivate a romance between two companions.

I think to many people are assuming that just because they liked Origins' story and companions better that that means the story and companions in DAII have to stink. That, and they are loathe to give DAII any credit for fear that it will reinforce Bioware's misguided belief that we didn't want another Origins' style game. I myself hesitate to compliment the story and characters in DAII because I like Origins' a helluva alot more - but just because I do, it doesn't mean I can't like parts of DAII or that DAII is 100% terrible.

Modifié par Schurge, 30 mars 2011 - 04:10 .

[Steppenwolf]

Schurge wrote...

There are many things that I don't like about Dragon Age II, but the writing isn't one of them, and I still don't really understand why a significant percentage of Dragon Age players hate the writing.

I thought the presentation of the game's story was unique and interesting. While I do not think that having the story told after the fact through the eyes of Varric is necessarily the most appropriate way for this style of game, it did an excellent job of keeping you interested and building up anticipation for chapter three since the game's story as a whole didn't have a central focus.

Because of Varric hinting at the future in Chapter II, I could barely stand to do the other quests in Chapter III because I wanted to see what was going to happen. And while Chapter I and most of Chapter II were kind of slow going, and you didn't feel the push to complete the main quests when the Companion quests were far more interesting, Chapter III felt like a race.

I also don't understand the hate for the characters, of whom I thought were well written and for the most part strongly developed over the course of the story (especially Merril and Aveline). Of course I miss Morrigan, Leliana, and the rest - I definently felt more connected to most of the companions in Origins more than those in DAII (I did not romance Leliana, but while playing I definently felt like she was my best friend because of our interactions). That doesn't mean however, that the DAII companions stunk, I think Aveline rivals several of the Origins companions. I loved that instead of being able to romance her, you could help her start a relationship with an NPC, it would be cool if in the future you could have the option to help cultivate a romance between two companions.

I think to many people are assuming that just because they liked Origins' story and companions better that that means the story and companions in DAII have to stink. That, and they are loathe to give DAII any credit for fear that it will reinforce Bioware's misguided belief that we didn't want another Origins' style game. I myself hesitate to compliment the story and characters in DAII because I like Origins' a helluva alot more - but just because I do, it doesn't mean I can't like parts of DAII or that DAII is 100% terrible.

You nailed it right on it's effing head and you don't even realize it. The story has no focus. It's 3 disjointed stories wherein you may as well have played 3 different people. Origins had a singular focus with numerous steps along the way. DA2 has no focus. The first act is just about getting money. Hardly interesting or driving. The second act is about playing politics for a while then killing some buttholes for being buttholes. Act 3 is where a story starts to take shape, but the game sets up Hawke as this world-changing figure and he just isn't.

SPOILERS BELOW, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED




Anders is the one who changes the world. Since the end is the same whether you side with the mages or Meredith after Anders destroys the Chantry you basically don't matter. The Seekers should have been trying to find out how Anders blew up a massive building with poop-crystals and rocks.

[Steppenwolf]

Oh, and I should say that I also liked some of the companions a lot. Aveline and Varric being my favorites of the bunch. The only ones that I actually dislike were Bethany and Isabela. Bethany is just boring through and through. No time was put into her character IMO. And Isabela is just eye candy for the teenage boys. She has a few humorous moments but is mostly just annoying. I'm annoyed by the sight of her. SHE'S NOT WEARING ANY PANTS. WTF BIOWARE?

[AngelicMachinery]

ToJKa1 wrote...

Because he responds to people and is not always too polite about it?

No one is polite on the interent.

[Steppenwolf]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

ToJKa1 wrote...

Because he responds to people and is not always too polite about it?

No one is polite on the interent.

Shut up!

[AngelicMachinery]

BasilKarlo wrote...

AngelicMachinery wrote...

ToJKa1 wrote...

Because he responds to people and is not always too polite about it?

No one is polite on the interent.

Shut up!

Bite me!

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Schurge wrote...
I thought the presentation of the game's story was unique and interesting. While I do not think that having the story told after the fact through the eyes of Varric is necessarily the most appropriate way for this style of game, it did an excellent job of keeping you interested and building up anticipation for chapter three since the game's story as a whole didn't have a central focus.

It's inappropriate because acting as the character is not the same as hearing a story from other person. Imagine or re-living flashback of someone else is not the same as living the character role. Flashback leaves out too many details especially narrative of person emotion. 

Schurge wrote...
Because of Varric hinting at the future in Chapter II, I could barely stand to do the other quests in Chapter III because I wanted to see what was going to happen. And while Chapter I and most of Chapter II were kind of slow going, and you didn't feel the push to complete the main quests when the Companion quests were far more interesting, Chapter III felt like a race.

DA2 main plot is about becoming the Champion of Kirkwall which serves it's purpose at ACT 2. However, It's lack of focus and drive. Act I Deep Road Expedition has little to do with ACT 2. Accumulating wealth has nothing to do with becoming the Champion. Act III does nothing to accomplish this because it's already accomplished in ACT 2.

Schurge wrote...
I also don't understand the hate for the characters, of whom I thought were well written and for the most part strongly developed over the course of the story (especially Merril and Aveline). Of course I miss Morrigan, Leliana, and the rest - I definently felt more connected to most of the companions in Origins more than those in DAII (I did not romance Leliana, but while playing I definently felt like she was my best friend because of our interactions). That doesn't mean however, that the DAII companions stunk, I think Aveline rivals several of the Origins companions. I loved that instead of being able to romance her, you could help her start a relationship with an NPC, it would be cool if in the future you could have the option to help cultivate a romance between two companions.

DAO has no time span. You have no sense of passing time. You get to chat freely with your companions. DA 2 span a decade. When you talk to your companions for 3 to 4 dialogues per years, what does that mean to you? How can I be connected to someone while I only talk few times with them. The more years passes the distant I feel about the companions.

Schurge wrote...
I think to many people are assuming that just because they liked Origins' story and companions better that that means the story and companions in DAII have to stink. That, and they are loathe to give DAII any credit for fear that it will reinforce Bioware's misguided belief that we didn't want another Origins' style game. I myself hesitate to compliment the story and characters in DAII because I like Origins' a helluva alot more - but just because I do, it doesn't mean I can't like parts of DAII or that DAII is 100% terrible.

DA 2 companions story can be more personal if it doesn't follow the silly ME 2 path. It has nothing to do with liking DA O companions stories. The companions interaction restriction is the major factor that prevent successfully relationship development.  I feel more confined and restrained because I cant talk to them unless there're journal entries. Then again, I can't have private chat moment and I have to walk far to get them when I should be doing side quests which is sometime just around the corner.  

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 30 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[Lord Gremlin]

Well, say what you will, but when people discuss Dragon Age it's Gaider who's deemed responsible for creating the whole thing.
Truth is, it's EA - too low budget. More money would have fixed every major issue.

[Lord Gremlin]

BasilKarlo wrote...
Anders is the one who changes the world. Since the end is the same whether you side with the mages or Meredith after Anders destroys the Chantry you basically don't matter. The Seekers should have been trying to find out how Anders blew up a massive building with poop-crystals and rocks.

He discovered the secret of gatlok, or whatever the Qunari black powder name is?
Qunari won't be pleased.

And you've got the point. About our choice... In Dragon Age Origins you see clear, large impact of your choices. In DA2, you choices in the end mean nothing.

[Steppenwolf]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Well, say what you will, but when people discuss Dragon Age it's Gaider who's deemed responsible for creating the whole thing.
Truth is, it's EA - too low budget. More money would have fixed every major issue.

That's quite naive. Bioware is basically putting all of their resources into TOR. At least most of the writers for DA2 were pulling double duty on TOR. More money wouldn't have made that better. The only thing money could have done is let them hire more people to work on the title, but then you need to bring all of those people up to spped on the game's progress while also getting them adjusted to their new environment.
What DA2 needed was more time and more focus. And I don't just mean focus on the writing. I mean focus as in focusing on a goal and achieving it. They aimed high and missed their target because they didn't take the necessary steps to achieve it.

[dfstone]

The characters were better done then they were in DAO. In DAO only a few of the characters were well developed and the rest were just background filler. In DA2 all the characters have good backgrounds and are well developed. But the problem I see is that none of them in DA2 stand out like Morrigan and Alistair did in DAO. You have lots of good characters in DA2, instead of some excellent characters and some poor ones. Everyone in DA2 is just kind of good, not great but not bad either.

[Steppenwolf]

dfstone wrote...

The characters were better done then they were in DAO. In DAO only a few of the characters were well developed and the rest were just background filler. In DA2 all the characters have good backgrounds and are well developed. But the problem I see is that none of them in DA2 stand out like Morrigan and Alistair did in DAO. You have lots of good characters in DA2, instead of some excellent characters and some poor ones. Everyone in DA2 is just kind of good, not great but not bad either.

I could not disagree more. Even characters in Origins that I should have hated I ended up liking. The only one I didn't really like was Oghren. All the rest were great IMO.

[FaeQueenCory]

People want a scapegoat, and they see the people at the top as an easy crucifix. It's as simple as that.

[Haexpane]

Personally attacking a dev is against the EA forum rules.

Personally attacking devs because you don't like a game is a cowardly act.

[rolson00]

Hey guys chris wrote this inanother thread...if you want to view the whole tread here ya go
http://social.biowar...47611/3#6853921

[quote]Chris Priestly wrote...


I still love* you too.

The reason people here have been very... vocal is because we have the most passionate fans. When we do something you like, you let us know. When we do something you dislike, you let us know, frequently loudly.

When Fox news accused Mass Effect of being a game about sex, our fans jumped to our defense. Now that some (not all, but some) fans have problems with Dragon Age II, they are jumping to let us know. Not because they hate BioWare, actually the opposite, because they care. They want BioWare to make great games and are letting us know that they have problems with Dragon Age II. They want us to make DA2 or DLC or other future games better. Yes there are a few trolls or troublemakers who are only trying to cause trouble, but these are very few. Most people are posting to let us know they liked the game and what they liked or disliked the game and what they didn't like and they're doing it becuase they care about BioWare or Dragon Age.

Taking fan reaction (the bad and the good) and passing it on to the Dev team is a core part of my job. I would much rather have fan feedback than silence. Sure, I would rather have everyone love everything we did and do nothing but tell me how awesome I am, but lets be realistic here. Even if you take BioWare's most successful games ever (arguably Baldur's Gate II or Mass Effect 2) there will still be people who didn't like them, or elements of them they didn't like. It is like asking what is the best ice cream or pizza topping. Not everyone likes the same things.

So, yes, some people are complaining and have problems. And some people enjoyed Dragon Age II and haven't had problems. I'm still here, reading, taking the feedback (negative and positive) and making sure that their voices are heard. We do this becuase we care about what our fans and customers think almost as much as they care about what we do.


* Not a guarantee of actual love such as between a man and a really great cheeseburger.
[quote]

[Statulos]

I think there is something weird going on with this last game and Mr. Gaider. I loved the characters he wrote for DA:O, particularly Alistair, Shale and Morrigan.

I think Mr. Gaider specializes (or at least shines) with characters that feel very week and very strong at the same time; characters that "mask" themselves. Morrigan and Alistair are extremely good examples in this sense; one uses humor and sarcasm to hide his insecurities while the other denies herself to not look weak.

In DA2 Fenris does not feel so well done. He's simply angry, permanently angry and bitter, also showing an anger that lacks the depth of Alistair's fears or the self-denial of Morrigan. Meredith becomes almost a Dr. Evil on crack villain being again too one sided. She's not even tragic as Loghain, because she behaves like a tyrant since the begging knowing she's against the very institution that gave her power.

So my guess is that something went wrong or different in DA2. Mr. Gaider, to our knowledge and unless abducted and replaced by aliens, is the same person for all these characters. Why on some characted did he an excellent job and on the others an inferior one? That's an answer only he can answer and due to professional constrains (contract, disclosure and so on) we'll never know.

[Alex Kershaw]

Where's the link to this?

[rolson00]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Where's the link to this?

its in orange but its called "bioware we still love you" or go on chris's profile and follow the link from there

Modifié par rolson00, 30 mars 2011 - 07:50 .

[NKKKK]

It's not Gaider's fault, it's Laidlaw's

[Fhaileas]

I used to like David Gaider a lot, I remember a time when he used to engage in constructive dialogue with fans on the old bioware forums, accepting criticism and not being derisive towards individuals who vehemently disagreed with him. Now, he just seems too bloody full of himself and he comes across as an over preening obnoxious individual (not unlike Mike Laidlaw) who reacts defensively to any criticism, refuses to recognize his own errors, adamantly believes that he is always in the right and simply dismisses any comment that is not congruent with his way of thinking. His hubris has definitely affected his work IMO which has gradually de-evolved (DA:O not withstanding).

[Zetheria Tabris]

Darth Death wrote...

People are always out for blood, its our nature. I blame the person who thought making DA2 like ME was a good idea.

Seconded.

[Archereon]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

Poorly written characters, terrible side quests, no real choices throughout the entire game, interesting concept of two factions fighting each other ruined...that's why.

Lack of choice is Laidlaw or EA execs, not Gaider.  It's quite probable his writing suffered because of all the constraints Laidlaw's game plan for the franchise and EA's budget and deadline put on it.

Of course, there's no excuse for his attitude, or Laidlaw's. 

Modifié par Archereon, 30 mars 2011 - 08:31 .

[Haexpane]

He compared ME2 to Baldur's Gate 2 and said some people didn't like BG2. That is false. The only ones who didn't like BG2 are trolls, not people

[rolson00]

ne1 else notice he only posts in the owner only treads now?
wonder why? to avoid haters maybe?

Modifié par rolson00, 13 avril 2011 - 08:15 .