454 réponses à ce sujet

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

nicethugbert wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

It's pointless to start the story at Lothering.

I disagree. Starting at Lothering even in your family house and just the backyard (where you start fleeing from) could have allowed you some connection to your family and allowed a great chance to interact with your mother and discuss Kirkwall and dad and mages and templars etc.

They also should have followed this with having the PC choose which of Bethany or Carver gets fed to the Ogre and which one lives. These two changes would have had a massive impact on the family plot lines of the game and I think not taken a huge amount of developer time. But since they re-used every darn cave/house/warehouse maybe that is asking way too much to develop a house in Lothering with a backyard and a small quest to go spider hunting before the panic sets in.

Um, it's family.  What's this about not being connected?  Are you telling me that being homeless with your family, with your mom, and hunted down by dark spawn, mom being hunted down by dark spawn, mom, the old lady stumbling, falling behind, getting tired as dark spawn try to kill her, was not captivating enough for you?  And you want to choose which one of your siblings you feed to the orge?  WTF is wrong with you???????????????

You do get to choose which siblings die by choosing your role. Taking them into the Deep Road without a Grey Warden is also a way you can affect the outcome. Seriously, I felt no connection to the family. It's a filler, like Fable. Maybe if we were given a chance to develop a relationship with them we would have cared. Nope, by the time the first sibling is offed you had all of 2 minutes of face time with them and it only goes down hill from there. People feel starting in Lothering would have helped you build a repertoire with them before the darkspawn came.

You are meta-gaming!  That is a cardianl RPG sin!

The game you are decribing is not DA2.  What you want is a different game. 

It's exactly DA2. Before the game was even released they already let you know your siblings survival would be based on your class choice.

[Horus Blackheart]

It's still meta gaming and for really flimsy plot reasons to boot. Different if they pulled it off but to me it all fell a bit flat.

[calis_riakel]

Very well writen article. My only difference of opinion is re: Aveline. But that's just different people liking different things. All in all i hope Bioware take a good look at this article and learn from it. Especially since a lot of the replies i have seen in this thread seem to agree with the article.

[nicethugbert]

DTKT wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

DTKT wrote...

Here's the thing with wave base combat. The idea behind the waves is to throw as much filler mobs as possible. They die in one hit.

The second part of it is that the movement across the battlefield is totally unrestricted. There's no "physicality"

They could have popped out of the nearest house behind you or rounded the nearest corner behind you.  The aesthetics would have been differnet but the gameplay would have been the same.  The Devs could have made made the enemies more varied and given them more powers and still done multiple waves.  Therefore, there is nothing inherently lazy about multiple waves.  But someone on the internet said lazy so we all say it now because bandwagons are fun. 

Or they could have crafted for engaging combat scenarios instead of throwing filler at you.

Bull****!  There is physicallity, it's called interrupted.  So, the filler does serve it's purpose.  They swarm and interupt the party's squishies.  And it is perfectly sensible, especially for street gangs.  DA:O had filler too.  You guys simply want the nice clean cut battles of DA:O where what you see is what you get.  You don't want to wonder about being able to endure the battle.  You guys like it all spelled out.

I like certain things spelled, like the game mechanics.  Damn lazy devs never ever document how the game really works.  But a sense of mystery, wonder, dread is fine in the story and fights.

You dont get interrupted when moving. Only when queuing actions. There is no physicality in the sense that even with 25 dudes in front of you, you can run through them all without any trouble. They last under a seconds if any member as a single AOE spell.

If for god sake, are you calling DAII baltles mysterious, wonderful? DREAD? Really, dread in DAII?

I'm all for discussion but it seems you are just here to praise Bioware.

Bioware sucks.  Happy now?

Lots of games don't impede movement and when they do, they mess it up, no shield walls and other tactical physicality type stuff.  At least in DA2 interrupt is present and significant.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 02 avril 2011 - 05:07 .

[Pyrate_d]

DAO was criticized on consoles, and DA2 is clearly trying to make up for this. I'm not saying that it's bad because it's "consolized" (it's bad because of the reasons listed in the article), but Bioware is clearly trying to appeal to console players more.

This basically backfired, because DA2 has sold fewer copies on console (at lower average price) than DAO did at this point. I also really doubt that DA2 will sustain sales like DAO did, because after the first couple of weeks, word of mouth and reviews are a lot more important.

It's not possible to tell how well it's selling on PC, but PC players seem to be the most annoyed (probably because DAO was best on PC).

Hopefully Bioware will conclude that the approach they took with DAO was better than their approach with DA2.

[nicethugbert]

Horus Blackheart wrote...

its not bs its freedom on raills (thinly vailed rails in this case. so i'm going to try again to explane what I mean.

Endgame: during the game I was nutral I did not support party member A in everything result: views ignored forced to pick sides on very shaky logic just cause to do otherwise would brake the story. no matter that you do companion A always goes nuts and blows crap up. my point is not that the event happens but rather its always the same person setting it off irespective of my actions. you fight the same people urespective if the side you pick with a diffrent line or 2 its not even that the outcomes are the same its more that the motovations are the exact same. one side is bad!!
wow
imho both sides are nuts
and there was no way to express that.
in short I want a forget the lot of you i'm carvng my own path. the event can still play out the story ends as it should but my intent mattered. Thats what was missing.

Yeah, just like DA:O, unless, you suceeded in cozying up to the archdemon.  Oh wait, you can't.  And you do get to expres that both sides have a point.  You can spend the entire module taking the middle ground..  You simpy don't have the power to avoid getting sucked down the drain along with everyone else, just like in DA:O.

[calis_riakel]

nicethugbert we get it. You love the game. The way you're spouting your opinion here is no better than you blatantly thrashing the article in the OP. Your opinion is no better than anyone else's here and just cause you like saying bull**** doesn't make your points any more interesting or valid. If you can't accept people are going to disagree with you because their opinions are contrary to your and try to use your opinions on how the game should work to counter their opinions then you're essentially just chasing your tail (aka a circular argument) and being annoying, contributing nothing and trying to bludgeon people into your way of thinking by being insulting/a ******bag.

You've made your point as have others. Let it go and just agree to disagree. But i doubt you'll be able to do that as you seem to like all the attention people replying to you are giving you,.

[Pyrate_d]

nicethugbert wrote...

Yeah, just like DA:O, unless, you suceeded in cozying up to the archdemon.  Oh wait, you can't.  And you do get to expres that both sides have a point.  You can spend the entire module taking the middle ground..  You simpy don't have the power to avoid getting sucked down the drain along with everyone else, just like in DA:O.

You can cozy up with Loghain (the actual antagonist in DAO).

Just stop. You're not fooling anyone who has actually played both games.

[nicethugbert]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

It's pointless to start the story at Lothering.

I disagree. Starting at Lothering even in your family house and just the backyard (where you start fleeing from) could have allowed you some connection to your family and allowed a great chance to interact with your mother and discuss Kirkwall and dad and mages and templars etc.

They also should have followed this with having the PC choose which of Bethany or Carver gets fed to the Ogre and which one lives. These two changes would have had a massive impact on the family plot lines of the game and I think not taken a huge amount of developer time. But since they re-used every darn cave/house/warehouse maybe that is asking way too much to develop a house in Lothering with a backyard and a small quest to go spider hunting before the panic sets in.

Um, it's family.  What's this about not being connected?  Are you telling me that being homeless with your family, with your mom, and hunted down by dark spawn, mom being hunted down by dark spawn, mom, the old lady stumbling, falling behind, getting tired as dark spawn try to kill her, was not captivating enough for you?  And you want to choose which one of your siblings you feed to the orge?  WTF is wrong with you???????????????

You do get to choose which siblings die by choosing your role. Taking them into the Deep Road without a Grey Warden is also a way you can affect the outcome. Seriously, I felt no connection to the family. It's a filler, like Fable. Maybe if we were given a chance to develop a relationship with them we would have cared. Nope, by the time the first sibling is offed you had all of 2 minutes of face time with them and it only goes down hill from there. People feel starting in Lothering would have helped you build a repertoire with them before the darkspawn came.

You are meta-gaming!  That is a cardianl RPG sin!

The game you are decribing is not DA2.  What you want is a different game. 

It's exactly DA2. Before the game was even released they already let you know your siblings survival would be based on your class choice.

What I meant is that your idea of involving Lothering and choosing your sacrificial sibling is not DA2.  It is another game.  It involves another design than the one used in DA2.  DA2 is not about those types of choices.  It's about Hawke, not that other character you have in mind.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 02 avril 2011 - 05:17 .

[nicethugbert]

Horus Blackheart wrote...

It's still meta gaming and for really flimsy plot reasons to boot. Different if they pulled it off but to me it all fell a bit flat.

If you want to choose you role based upon which sibling dies, then good for you.  But, you don't get ot choose the class and the sibling in any combination you want because that is not the way the story is written.  If that is a game breaker for you then you don't like the story.  This game has choice, story, plot, point, and ending, it simply does not have those that you want.

[nicethugbert]

Pyrate_d wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Yeah, just like DA:O, unless, you suceeded in cozying up to the archdemon.  Oh wait, you can't.  And you do get to expres that both sides have a point.  You can spend the entire module taking the middle ground..  You simpy don't have the power to avoid getting sucked down the drain along with everyone else, just like in DA:O.

You can cozy up with Loghain (the actual antagonist in DAO).

Just stop. You're not fooling anyone who has actually played both games.

Anders, more I cannot say or I spoil the story.

[Pyrate_d]

You really need to stop spamming this thread. It makes it impossible to read. If you're intent on replying to tons of people, make a big post without pyramid quotes--only include the post you're replying to in the quote.

To quote the article, Anders is a "weedy drip." I'm unsure how bringing him up as a comparison to Loghain is helping your case.

[TJSolo]

nicethugbert wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...


In DA:O you don't get to side with the Archdemon and The Warden disappears anyway.  So the world ends exactly the same no matter what you do.  And the world has to end exactly the same no matter what you do if there is to be a series written by someone other than you that you only get to play through.  You only get to change the less important details.  You don't get to change the world because it's not yours.

Talk about oversimplification and demoting various key decisions as "less important details."
My Warden living or dying is an important detail to me at least.

Bull****!

It's still a cliffhanger.  You don't know at the end of DA:O what happens to the world regardless your warden's death or lack there of because the series is ongoing.  You simply did not like DA2.  You were cliffhung in DA:O just as much as in DA2.  You just liked the DA:O cliff better.

I don't recall talking about cliffhangers. Are you steering this conversation somewhere? Before I get into another tangent with you there needs to be some sort of agreement that you don't know what the hell you are talking about in regards to the details and relative impact the Warden had on Fereldan during the time of the blight.
Your oversimplification of the defeat of the Archdemon and the preceding choices was just an attempt to make the lack of choice in the end of DA2 seem better than what it is, tripe.

[calis_riakel]

Personally, Anders is the perfect example of why you have NO choice:

Drive him from your group - he still does what he does.
Beffriend/Rival him - he still does what he does which essentially demonstrates you have absolutely no choice in his plot's outcome as part of the overall story.

A certain character's parent plot outcome is just the same. What happens is inevitable meaning you have no choice.

In DAO you had a choice:
Loghain could live or die based on your choice. An npc in the game could be directly affected by your choice.

Not in DA2 though, because you're a participant in an already told story. Everything that happens is inevitable and any illusion of choice given to you along the way is rendered totally irrelevant by the outcomes of any significant plot.

End of chapter = something bad happen and no matter what you try to prevent said bad thing(s) nothing makes a difference.

[Pyrate_d]

If Anders dies in DA2 they'll probably just bring him back in DA3 (like they brought him back in DA2 if he dies in Awakening)

[nicethugbert]

calis_riakel wrote...

nicethugbert we get it. You love the game. The way you're spouting your opinion here is no better than you blatantly thrashing the article in the OP. Your opinion is no better than anyone else's here and just cause you like saying bull**** doesn't make your points any more interesting or valid. If you can't accept people are going to disagree with you because their opinions are contrary to your and try to use your opinions on how the game should work to counter their opinions then you're essentially just chasing your tail (aka a circular argument) and being annoying, contributing nothing and trying to bludgeon people into your way of thinking by being insulting/a ******bag.

You've made your point as have others. Let it go and just agree to disagree. But i doubt you'll be able to do that as you seem to like all the attention people replying to you are giving you,.

No.  You don't get it.  You remain cluless.  I can accept a difference in opinion.  Indeed, I have helped a great many cluless souls such as yourself understand that their bull**** is just opinion entirely divorced from fact.

DA2 has choice, story, plot, point, etc.  It simply does not have the one you wanted.  What you guys wanted was DA:O Reloaded.  But, Dragon Age the series is not DA:O.  Dragon Age the series is a story involving multiple super persons where each installment, ie. DA1, DA2, DA3, ..., is about a particular super person and his pet cliffhanger.  It's the story of an age, that means a lot a lot a lot of years, a really really really really llllllllllllllooooooonnnnnnnnggggggggg time.  The story is not over yet.  All the installments will end in cliffhangers and you will hate it.  Try another game for the sake of your happiness because this game is already written in novels so don't expect too much change.  If this realization, this teaching, makes me a six star bag, I have to warn you that this bag does not accept your garbage.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 02 avril 2011 - 05:40 .

[Horus Blackheart]

For me its not even about the lack of choice, events happen regaurdless thats always part of game design. The problem here is there is no diffrence in how the event go's down regaurdless of the players actions. Would it be so hard to have flags that allow for difrent npcs to triger said event based on ether your actions or lack of. and motavations?

[Ponendus]

I really think calling it 'Dragon Age 2' was the biggest mistake. It's not a sequel. It should be 'Dragon Age: Kirkwall' or 'Dragon Age: Champions' or I dunno, anything BUT 'Dragon Age 2'.

I wouldn't have cared that so much had been changed if that was the case.

[nicethugbert]

TJSolo wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...


In DA:O you don't get to side with the Archdemon and The Warden disappears anyway.  So the world ends exactly the same no matter what you do.  And the world has to end exactly the same no matter what you do if there is to be a series written by someone other than you that you only get to play through.  You only get to change the less important details.  You don't get to change the world because it's not yours.

Talk about oversimplification and demoting various key decisions as "less important details."
My Warden living or dying is an important detail to me at least.

Bull****!

It's still a cliffhanger.  You don't know at the end of DA:O what happens to the world regardless your warden's death or lack there of because the series is ongoing.  You simply did not like DA2.  You were cliffhung in DA:O just as much as in DA2.  You just liked the DA:O cliff better.

I don't recall talking about cliffhangers. Are you steering this conversation somewhere? Before I get into another tangent with you there needs to be some sort of agreement that you don't know what the hell you are talking about in regards to the details and relative impact the Warden had on Fereldan during the time of the blight.
Your oversimplification of the defeat of the Archdemon and the preceding choices was just an attempt to make the lack of choice in the end of DA2 seem better than what it is, tripe.

I am opening your eyes to the game.  It is not what you think it is.  DA:O did end in a cliff hanger or else there would not be a DA2.  DA:O was more than just The Warden.  Stuff happened to the world, stuff that was going to happen regardless of your petty decisions.  DA2 made that painfully obvious.  You want to go back to your delusions of choice, but, there is no going back once the eyelids have been cut off.  The Qun is coming and there is nothing you can do about it.

[nicethugbert]

Ponendus wrote...

I really think calling it 'Dragon Age 2' was the biggest mistake. It's not a sequel. It should be 'Dragon Age: Kirkwall' or 'Dragon Age: Champions' or I dunno, anything BUT 'Dragon Age 2'.

I wouldn't have cared that so much had been changed if that was the case.

Bull****!  It is a sequel in the story about an age.  The story has moved on.  You are still on DA:O.  But, that chapter is closed and will not reopen.  The abyss is coming.  You cannot stop it.  Flemeth says jump.  You don't want to upset Flemeth, do you?

[calis_riakel]

nicethugbert wrote...

calis_riakel wrote...

nicethugbert we get it. You love the game. The way you're spouting your opinion here is no better than you blatantly thrashing the article in the OP. Your opinion is no better than anyone else's here and just cause you like saying bull**** doesn't make your points any more interesting or valid. If you can't accept people are going to disagree with you because their opinions are contrary to your and try to use your opinions on how the game should work to counter their opinions then you're essentially just chasing your tail (aka a circular argument) and being annoying, contributing nothing and trying to bludgeon people into your way of thinking by being insulting/a ******bag.

You've made your point as have others. Let it go and just agree to disagree. But i doubt you'll be able to do that as you seem to like all the attention people replying to you are giving you,.

No.  You don't get it.  You remain cluless.  I can accept a difference in opinion.  Indeed, I have helped a great many cluless souls such as yourself understand that their bull**** is just opinion entirely divorced from fact.

DA2 has choice, story, plot, point, etc.  It simply does not have the one you wanted.  What you guys wanted was DA:O Reloaded.  But, Dragon Age the series is not DA:O.  Dragon Age the series is a story involving multiple super persons where each installment, ie. DA1, DA2, DA3, ..., is about a particular super person and his pet cliffhanger.  It's the story of an age, that means a lot a lot a lot of years, a really really really really llllllllllllllooooooonnnnnnnnggggggggg time.  The story is not over yet.  All the installments will end in cliffhangers and you will hate it.  Try another game for the sake of your happiness because this game is already written in novels so don't expect too much change.  If this realization, this teaching, makes me a six star bag, I have to warn you that this bag does not accept your garbage.

Really? DA:O was the story of an Age? If that's accurate why is it's outcome decided in a length of time that the prologue > act 1 transition covers?. Do tell. I thought an Age was 100 years with the last several years determining name of said Age?

Does DA2 have a plot? Sure. Does DA2 have a plot as good as DA:O no. That's the point i, the article's writer in the OP along with dozens of others in this very thread are making along with the expressed opinion that DA2 is an inferior game to DA:O because of the reasons outlined both by posters here and the author of the OP's linked article. THAT is a fact. One you continuosly refuse to acknowledge and blatantly try to lambast anyone who disagrees with your truths (aka opinions)

Opinion = me saying DA2 sucks
Opinion = you saying DA2 is awesome.

FACT = DA2 being reviewed and rated lower professionally and on an Amateur level than it's predecessor.

Metacritic proves that.

Opinion = me thinking Merril is a terrible character
Opinion = you saying combat in DA2 is superior to DA:O

FACT = neither of us are right or wrong, we're just people voicing our opinion.

Whether you want to see everything posted or not by me, or the author of linked article as accurate or not is entirely your opinion, and that  is a fact. So accept it and move on.

[John Epler]

Warnings handed out.

Let's cool it with the attacks and hostile posting style. If you can't disagree civilly, then take a step back from the thread.

[nicethugbert]

calis_riakel wrote...

Personally, Anders is the perfect example of why you have NO choice:

Drive him from your group - he still does what he does.
Beffriend/Rival him - he still does what he does which essentially demonstrates you have absolutely no choice in his plot's outcome as part of the overall story.

A certain character's parent plot outcome is just the same. What happens is inevitable meaning you have no choice.

In DAO you had a choice:
Loghain could live or die based on your choice. An npc in the game could be directly affected by your choice.

Not in DA2 though, because you're a participant in an already told story. Everything that happens is inevitable and any illusion of choice given to you along the way is rendered totally irrelevant by the outcomes of any significant plot.

End of chapter = something bad happen and no matter what you try to prevent said bad thing(s) nothing makes a difference.

Not true!  You can't stop Loghain from commiting his crime.  In the end you can let him fight the archdemon along side you or you can kill him.  In DA2, you can kill Anders or let him fight along side you.  Same choice, different bastard, same poopy.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 02 avril 2011 - 05:55 .

[Pyrate_d]

You need to moderate this guy--he makes this thread impossible to read. I really don't care what his opinion is, he needs to be able to express it without spamming pyramid quotes.

[calis_riakel]

nicethugbert wrote...

calis_riakel wrote...

Personally, Anders is the perfect example of why you have NO choice:

Drive him from your group - he still does what he does.
Beffriend/Rival him - he still does what he does which essentially demonstrates you have absolutely no choice in his plot's outcome as part of the overall story.

A certain character's parent plot outcome is just the same. What happens is inevitable meaning you have no choice.

In DAO you had a choice:
Loghain could live or die based on your choice. An npc in the game could be directly affected by your choice.

Not in DA2 though, because you're a participant in an already told story. Everything that happens is inevitable and any illusion of choice given to you along the way is rendered totally irrelevant by the outcomes of any significant plot.

End of chapter = something bad happen and no matter what you try to prevent said bad thing(s) nothing makes a difference.

Not true!  You can't stop Loghain from commiting his crime.  In the end you can let him fight the archdemon along side you or you can kill him.  In DA2, you can kill Anders or let him fight along side you.  Same choice, different bastard, same poopy.

Ok then, since you're so certain of yourself and that 2 has as much choice to as Origins. Show me the equivalent for Leliana dying if you don't let her join your group in Lothering.

That is a direct choice that you make that irreversibly alters the game and you're interactions in it regardless of race, class or gender.

How about if you kill Wynne in the tower. How does that choice get mirrored in 2? You make a conscious choice to remove a character or keep them in your game and it impacts on both your playthrough as well as the world as protrayed in the epilogue.

2 has no equivalents. Just a bunch of inevitablities.