203 réponses à ce sujet

[Woodstock-TC]

well its kindof cheap to review several weeks after launch and having seen the discrepancy between the professional reviews and the user reviews. - if they would have tested before release it would have been noteworthy

i find these "late" revieves more "bought" than others, as they aim to buy attention and please the crowd sorry.

Modifié par Woodstock-TC, 30 mars 2011 - 06:52 .

[Desty Nova]

DungeonLord wrote...

Some people will defend this game and that's their right. The rest of us will explain why the game fails to live up to our expectations.

I think the biggest problem is that people put bioware on a pedestal and expected something magical. A game that would whisk them away into a world full of wonders, interesting exploration and dramatic intrigue. A game you could get lost in.

Instead we got a game that is passable but nothing special. When you ****** off a large segment of your core demographic by letting them down like that, with a game that's supposed to be a sequel no less, you simply have to accept the consequence that they won't sing your praise.

DA2, as a sequel, should have eclipsed DA:O in every respect. It should have been bigger, grander and have really blown our socks off.
People would forgive a game that then turned out to be same-y but still good. However there is no mercy for a full price game that utterly disappoints on so many levels and also tarnishes the brand with which many fell in love.

Agreed.

And could somebody explain to me why comparing this game to it's predecessor or other games in the genre is out-of-bounds in reviews?  I've seen a lot of complaints on the threads that this reviewer or that criticism is not fair because it's comparing it to another game, or that DA2 should be reviewed on its own merits and not on the past.  Does it need to be viewed in a vacuum to be passable, as if no other games exist?

Every review would begin with, "If you have never played another video game in your life, the Dragon Age II is pretty good!"  Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

Modifié par Desty Nova, 30 mars 2011 - 07:13 .

[DTKT]

Woodstock-TC wrote...

well its kindof cheap to review several weeks after launch and having seen the discrepancy between the professional reviews and the user reviews. - if they would have tested before release it would have been noteworthy

i find these "late" revieves more "bought" than others, as they aim to buy attention and please the crowd sorry.

Strange, I would have the same opinion regarding early reviews. The PC Gamer and Escapist reviews more than any others.

Having more time to review a game is not a bad thing.

[hazarkazra]

Did anyone read the review? Because from the sounds of it, he would hate Origins aswell?

"Every job and task in Dragon Age II is a crash course in boredom. You’ll talk to somebody, engage in a few lines of banter, and eventually get sent to go kill a group of bad guys."

 You’ll spend most of your time in strange combat sequences. In Dragon Age: Origins, your character automatically attacks his target until it dies. In Dragon Age II, you have to mash a button for each attack. This feels like more of an action game, which is an improvement. But outside of a few innovative encounters with big boss characters, there’s very little strategy. Upon entering an encounter, just start spamming magic spells: Since your health and mana automatically regenerate after every battle, there’s little need to worry about resource management.  

Modifié par hazarkazra, 30 mars 2011 - 07:36 .