203 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

[Dubya75]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

This.
LOL @ your last sentence! 

[Obadiah]

shantisands wrote...
...
But, I also started to notice what was great.  Some of the writing, when you see it in context of what you missed the first time, more companion interaction with different choices etc. was really good.  Some of it was great and will unfortunately probably not get the credit it deserves because of other things that were lacking, I really do think because of time constraints that were made, I won't point fingers or even guess, since I have no basis to think I know.  
...

I am still on my first playthrough, and am noticing how good some of the writing is. But it seems disjointed. I'll give Meredith as an example. My first encounter with her established one personality - sort of Gregoir-on-the-edge. I really liked how they built her up and then gave the player that encounter. Then I think another writer or something took over, and she turned into this split personality nutter: on the one hand committed, logical, and firm, on the other a mumbling loon. It seemed cheap, unpolished, and undeserving of the pretty good character that was building up.

So, agreed, time constraints kind of let this plot down.

[AkiKishi]

Fan boys are a completely worthless existence. Regardless of what a company puts out they lap it up , they could have just re-made DA and the fanboys would still lap it up and have a whole host of reasons why it was "Best Evar".

[Khayness]

Dubya75 wrote...

Oh great, here we go again with the troll accusations...

Give me a break, impersonating a BioWare fanboi is a tough job!

[Rafe34]

Obadiah wrote...

shantisands wrote...
...
But, I also started to notice what was great.  Some of the writing, when you see it in context of what you missed the first time, more companion interaction with different choices etc. was really good.  Some of it was great and will unfortunately probably not get the credit it deserves because of other things that were lacking, I really do think because of time constraints that were made, I won't point fingers or even guess, since I have no basis to think I know.  
...

I am still on my first playthrough, and am noticing how good some of the writing is. But it seems disjointed. I'll give Meredith as an example. My first encounter with her established one personality - sort of Gregoir-on-the-edge. I really liked how they built her up and then gave the player that encounter. Then I think another writer or something took over, and she turned into this split personality nutter: on the one hand committed, logical, and firm, on the other a mumbling loon. It seemed cheap, unpolished, and undeserving of the pretty good character that was building up.

So, agreed, time constraints kind of let this plot down.

Haha. Well. Let's just say you should finish the game first before commenting on that particular issue.

DA2 is a good game, not a great game, the problem is people were expecting a true sequel to DA:O, which they certainly did not get.

[Rockpopple]

Obadiah wrote...

shantisands wrote...
...
But, I also started to notice what was great.  Some of the writing, when you see it in context of what you missed the first time, more companion interaction with different choices etc. was really good.  Some of it was great and will unfortunately probably not get the credit it deserves because of other things that were lacking, I really do think because of time constraints that were made, I won't point fingers or even guess, since I have no basis to think I know.  
...

I am still on my first playthrough, and am noticing how good some of the writing is. But it seems disjointed. I'll give Meredith as an example. My first encounter with her established one personality - sort of Gregoir-on-the-edge. I really liked how they built her up and then gave the player that encounter. Then I think another writer or something took over, and she turned into this split personality nutter: on the one hand committed, logical, and firm, on the other a mumbling loon. It seemed cheap, unpolished, and undeserving of the pretty good character that was building up.

So, agreed, time constraints kind of let this plot down.

You're still on your 1st playthrough, so I won't give you any spoilers... but suffice it so say that in context, it makes sense.

[Rockpopple]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fan boys are a completely worthless existence. Regardless of what a company puts out they lap it up , they could have just re-made DA and the fanboys would still lap it up and have a whole host of reasons why it was "Best Evar".

Agreed. Similarly the fanboys that are haters would have hated DA II even if it gave them everything they wanted with some whipped cream on top because that whipped cream was a little on the dry side.

Worthlessness on both ends of the spectrum, Bob.

[_Aine_]

Rockpopple wrote...

Obadiah wrote...

shantisands wrote...
...
But, I also started to notice what was great.  Some of the writing, when you see it in context of what you missed the first time, more companion interaction with different choices etc. was really good.  Some of it was great and will unfortunately probably not get the credit it deserves because of other things that were lacking, I really do think because of time constraints that were made, I won't point fingers or even guess, since I have no basis to think I know.  
...

I am still on my first playthrough, and am noticing how good some of the writing is. But it seems disjointed. I'll give Meredith as an example. My first encounter with her established one personality - sort of Gregoir-on-the-edge. I really liked how they built her up and then gave the player that encounter. Then I think another writer or something took over, and she turned into this split personality nutter: on the one hand committed, logical, and firm, on the other a mumbling loon. It seemed cheap, unpolished, and undeserving of the pretty good character that was building up.

So, agreed, time constraints kind of let this plot down.

You're still on your 1st playthrough, so I won't give you any spoilers... but suffice it so say that in context, it makes sense.

I have played through the end and I still agree with the original assessment.  I thought she could have been better. lol  Ah, hindsight and not having to do the work myself makes an easy critic   I do wonder how much of this game got cut though.... 

[tomas819]

Obadiah wrote...

shantisands wrote...
...
But, I also started to notice what was great.  Some of the writing, when you see it in context of what you missed the first time, more companion interaction with different choices etc. was really good.  Some of it was great and will unfortunately probably not get the credit it deserves because of other things that were lacking, I really do think because of time constraints that were made, I won't point fingers or even guess, since I have no basis to think I know.  
...

I am still on my first playthrough, and am noticing how good some of the writing is. But it seems disjointed. I'll give Meredith as an example. My first encounter with her established one personality - sort of Gregoir-on-the-edge. I really liked how they built her up and then gave the player that encounter. Then I think another writer or something took over, and she turned into this split personality nutter: on the one hand committed, logical, and firm, on the other a mumbling loon. It seemed cheap, unpolished, and undeserving of the pretty good character that was building up.

So, agreed, time constraints kind of let this plot down.

It sounds like you haven't finished the game, though. An awful lot of details "come together" once you've completed the game. I like that kind of thing, actually, to come to the end of a story and look back and say, "oh, NOW I get it."

[The Earl Of Bronze]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

Then why are these "constructive" posts being posted outside of the appropriate thread? Nothing in this thread has been constructive. Being overly negative will help no one.

[Eclipse_9990]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

This^... Just... This^

[Deylar]

Rockpopple wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Fan boys are a completely worthless existence. Regardless of what a company puts out they lap it up , they could have just re-made DA and the fanboys would still lap it up and have a whole host of reasons why it was "Best Evar".

Agreed. Similarly the fanboys that are haters would have hated DA II even if it gave them everything they wanted with some whipped cream on top because that whipped cream was a little on the dry side.

Worthlessness on both ends of the spectrum, Bob.

I really wish comments like these wouldn't pop up. But they do. On both sides of the argument.

You cannot fight fire with grease. It just doesn't work that way.

Instead each side should be working to communicate more clearly. 

[Dubya75]

Khayness wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

Oh great, here we go again with the troll accusations...

Give me a break, impersonating a BioWare fanboi is a tough job!

ROFLMAO 

[Dragoonlordz]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

Then why are these "constructive" posts being posted outside of the appropriate thread? Nothing in this thread has been constructive. Being overly negative will help no one.

Same reason why ones keep popping up saying Bioware I love you, ignore everyone who has an non positive opinion. People wan't to be heard in general not lost in pages of text which goes for both the defensive fans flaming every negative comment (Templars) against their beloved Bioware (Chantry), to the ones who post anything negative and try to make suggestions/criticisms in order to improve the next title (Mages). 

[Obadiah]

tomas819 wrote...
...
It sounds like you haven't finished the game, though. An awful lot of details "come together" once you've completed the game. I like that kind of thing, actually, to come to the end of a story and look back and say, "oh, NOW I get it."

I already spoiled it with youtube videos, but I hope it makes sense.

[_Aine_]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Same reason why ones keep popping up saying Bioware I love you, ignore everyone who has an non positive opinion. People wan't to be heard in general not lost in pages of text which goes for both the defensive fans flaming every negative comment (Templars) against their beloved Bioware (Chantry), to the ones who post anything negative and try to make suggestions/criticisms in order to improve the next title (Mages). 

I'm just a wee elf in the alienage here =)  On the bright side? I am not used to being heard in the shadows so my ego isn't attached to my forum posts  (Thank god or I would need therapy from not having enough validation in my life lol ).  Being *invisible* makes it easier to detach my feelings from my opinion. =D  That, and I prefer the more rogueish attire.  Being all I can afford here in the alienage, that is a very good thing.   Good analogy =)

In general now:   Criticism yes, is negative, but it is worded diplomatically because we CARE about the outcome. Negativity just exists to point out the obvious and has no intention of being helpful. 

For the most part, I think the comments in this thread were constructive. Well, until we started to argue about what was constructive and what being a fanboy entailed. lol  

Modifié par shantisands, 29 mars 2011 - 02:50 .

[Weskerr]

It claims this is a lackluster game, but what a lackluster review! It's more like a short list of grievances and complaints than an in-depth assessment of the game.

[Painiess]

I first thought 5 out of 10 was a bit harsh. DA2 wasn't great, but it wasn't that bad. Then I started wondering what makes a game a 10 or 9. 5 means there's a solid game there and it works (no game releases without bugs, and this game has comparatively few), but it lacks in anything that makes it stand out.
DA2 is not a pretty game, it lacks in scale and I can not agree more with the Wired reviewer's "I just found myself clearing out quests based on how geographically close they were to me, advancing quests in no specific order and finishing each section with no real grasp on all of the plot points."

Personally I'd have given it a 6, some VERY good DLC might even get it a 7, but that's it. I can't believe PCG gave it 94%, that magazine used to be respectable.

Modifié par Painiess, 29 mars 2011 - 02:53 .

[The Earl Of Bronze]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

A negative review for the sake of it, time could be better spent doing something productive and positive.

So....a negative review is a waste of time but a positive review is productive? Right.

If you do not like the game why are you here posting about the game?

You do understand that the only reason they changed DA:O was due to negative views from some about some aspects which then turned into a game you liked, now we post negative things about this one in order to improve on the next so they don't make the same mistakes and your telling us/them to go away... derp.

No game is improved with positive comments, all changes come from negative comments the only difference is how those negative comments are worded hence the term constructive. Sucking a companies balls all day giving them 10/10 all the time will not make better games and only boost the ego of the developer, while it's nice to say nice things the negative 'constructive' feedback is what improves games.

Then why are these "constructive" posts being posted outside of the appropriate thread? Nothing in this thread has been constructive. Being overly negative will help no one.

Same reason why ones keep popping up saying Bioware I love you, ignore everyone who has an non positive opinion. People wan't to be heard in general not lost in pages of text which goes for both the defensive fans flaming every negative comment (Templars) against their beloved Bioware (Chantry), to the ones who post anything negative and try to make suggestions/criticisms in order to improve the next title (Mages). 

The difference is in the intention, the aim, the goal, why start a thread just to try to bring the game down just because you may not like it? Constructive criticism is fine but most of it is far from that. Most of these threads are not started with the intention of improving the next game, some possibly are.

[Simiancustard]

The review pretty much nailed it for me, as did the gamecritics one for xbox 360 (although I still think the 2.5 score was far too harsh).

By the way| I was going to start my second play through this week but I just can't bring myself to do so, because I think I've reached the anger phase in my Dragon Age 2 relationship. I really can't see myself playing it again. This is quite a realisation, because I generally do multiple playthroughs of bioware games. Very disappointing!

[Dragoonlordz]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

The difference is in the intention, the aim, the goal, why start a thread just to try to bring the game down just because you may not like it? Constructive criticism is fine but most of it is far from that. Most of these threads are not started with the intention of improving the next game, some possibly are.

Then why advocate the hypocrisy of picking a side when both sides do it. Posting an outside review of the game is different to leaving your own feedback in the CC. This topic started as an outside feedback which is something that would not be in the CC by the forum users.  Within 4-5 posts the (templars) as I call them leaped into offensive mode. This thread was started with correct intention of linking a review (from an outside source) whether or not you like it is why this has turned into same as the rest a templar / mage war. Just like posting a good review some mages jumped in as you templars have done now. I don't use the word fanboy or hater because every single person on these forums is a fan else they wouldn't even be here.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 29 mars 2011 - 03:09 .

[Wintermist]

I played through Dragon Age: Origins many times over, but I started Dragon Age 2, 3 times, and still haven't finished it. That tells me something is not as good as it used to be. I can relate to this review.

Modifié par Wintermist, 29 mars 2011 - 03:10 .

[Dubya75]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

The difference is in the intention, the aim, the goal, why start a thread just to try to bring the game down just because you may not like it? Constructive criticism is fine but most of it is far from that. Most of these threads are not started with the intention of improving the next game, some possibly are.

Then why advocate the hypocrisy of picking a side when both sides do it. Posting an outside review of the game is different to leaving your own feedback in the CC. This topic started as an outside feedback which is something that would not be in the CC by the forum users.  Within 4-5 posts the (templars) as I call them leaped into offensive mode. This thread was started with correct intention of linking a review (from an outside source) whether or not you like it is why this has turned into same as the rest a templar / mage war. Just like posting a good review some mages jumped in as you templars have done now. I don't use the word fanboy or hater because every single person on these forums is a fan else they wouldn't even be here.

Thank you for putting that into perspective for the templars! 

[The Earl Of Bronze]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

The difference is in the intention, the aim, the goal, why start a thread just to try to bring the game down just because you may not like it? Constructive criticism is fine but most of it is far from that. Most of these threads are not started with the intention of improving the next game, some possibly are.

Then why advocate the hypocrisy of picking a side when both sides do it. Posting an outside review of the game is different to leaving your own feedback in the CC. This topic started as an outside feedback which is something that would not be in the CC by the forum users.  Within 4-5 posts the (templars) as I call them leaped into offensive mode. This thread was started with correct intention of linking a review (from an outside source) whether or not you like it is why this has turned into same as the rest a templar / mage war. Just like posting a good review some mages jumped in as you templars have done now. I don't use the word fanboy or hater because every single person on these forums is a fan else they wouldn't even be here.

Reviews seem to serve as a catalyst.