579 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

Its a fail and an epic one

[AlanC9]

Well, at least we know that Monica didn't like it.

[DarthSliver]

As a sequel the game failed, most sequels aim to be better than the Original. But I have mostly mixed views of Dragon Ages 2, there are things in there id like them to keep and other things id like them to scrap. They put Dragon Ages 2 on a high level that when it was released and finally viewed fully by the fans, it was easy to knock down. In ways its not even comparable to ME2 because that is better that DA2 in my mine. Thats because once you play the ME2 you have a hard time to go back and play the Original but with DA2 its easy just to go back to the Original. Not to mention DA2 is more comparable to Awakening than Origins in many ways.

But for me I liked DA2 but it sorta feels like Awakening in away, I feel the need to have to upload a Warden to enjoy DA2 nowadays.

[Dark83]

Blue_Shayde wrote...

haha. i loved oblivion far more then morrowind. in morrowind, I couldn't hit anything unless I used magic. and that threw me off in the start. Oblivion had none of those issues with me. but again, that's always personal opinion and preference. =P

That's one of the things that's wrong with Oblivion (Personal opinion).

From Oblivion onwards, the games have been more FPS than RPG. The difference is that RPGs are based on character skill, not player skill. It doesn't matter how good a shot I am in real life, at the table it's the dice roll that matters, and my character's skill that determines how well I do.

Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate 1/2, Iicewind Dale 1/2, Neverwinter Nights 1/2, Knights of the Old Republic 1/2, all run off D&D and variant d20 systems - they're based on character skill. DAO, Diablo, WoW, Arcanum, Final Fantasy, Morrowind, Daggerfall, Guild Wars, Anachronox, Drakensang, Dungeon Siege, Fallout 1/2, etc. are character skill based.

Morrowind still had character skill based combat. Your to-hit was based on your weapon skill. Oblivion has player skill based combat. Your to-hit was based on how accurately you ran around smacking things - skill just had a little bit of an affect on damage (+1.5% damage per point of relevant combat skill).

Mass Effect 1&2, Fallout 3/NV, System Shock, Deus Ex, Alpha Protocol, and Oblivion are player skill based.

Bethesda really has been shedding RPG elements for the sake of a sandbox FPS.

Modifié par Dark83, 12 avril 2011 - 05:39 .

[TJSolo]

I am certain the FO3 and NV use character skill but being more realtime than turn-based player skill also plays a part.

[Dark83]

Fallout 3/NV's combat is player skill based, each point in the weapon skills increases damage done. It's entirely up to you if you hit or not. VATS is character skill based.

[TJSolo]

Damage is calculated after landing a hit. It takes many points, certain perks, and/or APs for the character to achieve 100% accuracy. So the points that increase damage done is added to skills instead of adding explicitly to a die role, combat is still dependent on the character stats.

Modifié par TJSolo, 12 avril 2011 - 06:07 .

[Dark83]

What on earth are you talking about? I can start a new FNV game and (with the weathered 12mm Pistol) not miss a single shot - if I'm not in VATS, all the skill does is increase damage. The ability to hit is based on my skill at shooting, not on my stats. It certainly makes it easier, but if you have a good enough gun your skill doesn't really matter.

So fine, it's player skill, and optionally you can make it character skill.

[Rune-Chan]

Good game, better than Origins in several ways, but worse in several others. Rushed and lazily donein some places, but with some deep thought and interesting ideas as well.

Overall an enjoyable game, but one that could have, and should have been better than it was, especially considering the quality of Bioware's past games.

[wrdnshprd]

imo no, DA2 is far from disappointing.. would i have liked the ability to change out my companion armor? sure, but the upgrades you can get for them, and the fact that the armor can be socketed (with the right upgrade) is a decent compromise.

also, form a pc perspective.. the combat hasnt changed THAT much.. sure friendly fire is gone on the default difficulty, and the combat animations are faster.. but IMO, i got no problem with that, because if i want friendly fire, i just play nightmare.. and really, i welcomed the change in combat animations.. the one complaint i had about DA1, was that combat in that game felt slow.. now, it feels right.. kudos to them.

and the story.. the overall story arch is great, the decisions and consequences were thought out well and awesome.. and come on.. who didnt like the merrill, verrick, or anders story lines? heck, even sabastian's story wasnt bad.

so no, da2 wasnt a disappointment.. ME2 on the other hand..

[Shadowbanner]

Blue_Shayde wrote...

haha. i loved oblivion far more then morrowind. in morrowind, I couldn't hit anything unless I used magic. and that threw me off in the start. Oblivion had none of those issues with me. but again, that's always personal opinion and preference. =P

I wouldn't shoot down DA2 that much. It was a decent game and I did enjoy playing it. The character story and interaction with party members was really a step forward. But the rest of the game felt half-done and extremely similar to ME2. But with elves and some male dwarves. (no female dwarf in sight) I was sad that being promised some none-robe armor for mages, there was only about two of said armor and with poor stats to keep. (not counting the champion armor) And despite all my choices, I still felt like I'd had no real effect on the town other then defeating the arishok.

But still...the darkspawn. T-T I was so tired of cheap spider scares partway through the game. I wanted the real darkspawn battles back. Real as in they look like darkspawn. Not some cheap knock-offs of Skeletor from He-Man and Masters of the Universe. xD (did anyone else think of this similarity? probably not. xD)

I did. I called them Skeletor clones.

[MercenaryRQ]

Consensus achieved, DA2 = Fail

dont forget to keep pushing the awesome button... the faster the more awesome

[Shadowbanner]

Strangely Brown wrote...

A consensus means that the majority don't like it. I am not sure this is the case and I think it is too soon to tell that.

May well be the case its still too soon. However, Metacritic scores suggest otherwise; both console and PC version average 4.4. That's clearly a fail.

Metacritic landed top scores for DA:O however. No conspiracy or internet trolls me thinks.

Had BioWare called this game anything but DA2 it would have scored higher IMHO. The problerm is that DA2 was sold on the piggyback of DA:O's success and fans, logically, were expecting a sequel of sorts, not a completely reworked unrelated game that removed core key elements of the DA universe. They felt cheated and betrayed.

Modifié par Shadowbanner, 12 avril 2011 - 07:30 .

[lord micha]

Shadowbanner wrote...

Had BioWare called this game anything but DA2 it would have scored higher IMHO. The problerm is that DA2 was sold on the piggyback of DA:O success and fans, logically, were expecting a sequel of sorts, not a completely reworked unrelated game that removed core key elements of the DA universe.

Don't know if it would have scored higher if they had called it 'Dragon Age: Reboot'...

That is what enrages me the most: Calling it "II" (a sequel) to get the customers of the previous game and changing the gameplay for the worse aka "awesome button", COD-fanbase, etc. at the SAME TIME.

Modifié par lord micha, 12 avril 2011 - 07:26 .

[lord micha]

lord micha wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Had BioWare called this game anything but DA2 it would have scored higher IMHO. The problerm is that DA2 was sold on the piggyback of DA:O success and fans, logically, were expecting a sequel of sorts, not a completely reworked unrelated game that removed core key elements of the DA universe.

Don't know if it would have scored higher if they called it 'Dragon Age: Reboot'...

That is what enrages me the most: Calling it "II" (a sequel) to get the customers of the previous game and changing the gameplay for the worse aka "awesome button", COD-fanbase, etc. at the SAME TIME.

[SilentK]

DarthSliver wrote...

As a sequel the game failed, most sequels aim to be better than the Original. But I have mostly mixed views of Dragon Ages 2, there are things in there id like them to keep and other things id like them to scrap. They put Dragon Ages 2 on a high level that when it was released and finally viewed fully by the fans, it was easy to knock down. In ways its not even comparable to ME2 because that is better that DA2 in my mine. Thats because once you play the ME2 you have a hard time to go back and play the Original but with DA2 its easy just to go back to the Original. Not to mention DA2 is more comparable to Awakening than Origins in many ways.

But for me I liked DA2 but it sorta feels like Awakening in away, I feel the need to have to upload a Warden to enjoy DA2 nowadays.

I have pretty much the opposite feelings from you. I continue to play both ME and ME2. Make a shep and put her through ME, ME2 and then LotSB. In the dragon age universe however I think that I will stick to DA2 and leave DA:O behind. It's just so difficult for me to play without a voice now that I got one. Perhaps I'll finish one more warden if it turns out that there is something fun to be seen later on in the story if a certain origin is choosen in the first imported game. Otherwise I'll probably just spend my time in DA2, and the ME-universe. That is plenty of games for the time I have available for computergames anyways    =)

[Shadowbanner]

lord micha wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Had BioWare called this game anything but DA2 it would have scored higher IMHO. The problerm is that DA2 was sold on the piggyback of DA:O success and fans, logically, were expecting a sequel of sorts, not a completely reworked unrelated game that removed core key elements of the DA universe.

Don't know if it would have scored higher if they had called it 'Dragon Age: Reboot'...

That is what enrages me the most: Calling it "II" (a sequel) to get the customers of the previous game and changing the gameplay for the worse aka "awesome button", COD-fanbase, etc. at the SAME TIME.

Maybe no top scores.

But you bet we wouldn't be having all this negativity and rage storming the forums including this one. The game would have probably gone unnoticed.

[Shadowbanner]

lord micha wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Had BioWare called this game anything but DA2 it would have scored higher IMHO. The problerm is that DA2 was sold on the piggyback of DA:O success and fans, logically, were expecting a sequel of sorts, not a completely reworked unrelated game that removed core key elements of the DA universe.

Don't know if it would have scored higher if they had called it 'Dragon Age: Reboot'...

That is what enrages me the most: Calling it "II" (a sequel) to get the customers of the previous game and changing the gameplay for the worse aka "awesome button", COD-fanbase, etc. at the SAME TIME.

Maybe no top scores, granted. I was thinking more in line with 5 or 6 out of 10.

But you bet we wouldn't be having all this negativity and rage storming the forums including this one. The game would have probably gone unnoticed.

Modifié par Shadowbanner, 12 avril 2011 - 07:35 .

[BubbleDncr]

Everyone I know IRL that's played it thinks its equal or better than Origins.

The only place it seems to be considered a failure, is on these forums, by the haters.

[ishii0615]

DA2 was just a complete dropoff. I don't even know if I can consider it a sequel. I wish it was just a bad dream.

[addiction21]

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, at least we know that Monica didn't like it.

Wasnt that clear 6 months ago?