158 réponses à ce sujet

[Akka le Vil]

Anastassia wrote...

And rose-tinted glasses. It's like the people who claim vanilla WoW was superior to its current incarnation. WoW is awful, but Cataclysm isn't even on the same spectrum of awful as vanilla was. People have very short memories indeed.

Oh God, not that crap again.
Why is it that, each time someone say that he dislikes X compared to Y, and X is older than Y, some idiot comes with the "rose-tinted" garbage ?

Vanilla WoW was much better for many to today's version because the paragdim and design philosophy were VERY different. The ones with very short memories are the ADD people unable to actually remember the differences and putting everything on "nostalgia".

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 02 avril 2011 - 04:38 .

[AlanC9]

Well, I don't know why others say it, but when I say "rose-tinted," it's because I've actually revisited something that's supposed to be great and found out it wasn't all that great. When I replayed BG last summer, I was shocked at how much better DAO is in virtually all aspects.

[Galad22]

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, I don't know why others say it, but when I say "rose-tinted," it's because I've actually revisited something that's supposed to be great and found out it wasn't all that great. When I replayed BG last summer, I was shocked at how much better DAO is in virtually all aspects.

I disagree, almost everything is still better in BG2 from combat and story to party banter and romances.

In my opinion of course.

Modifié par Galad22, 02 avril 2011 - 05:16 .

[nicethugbert]

Galad22 wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

DA2 is an action game with a really good cinematic story.  Everything evolves in action.  The personalities evolve in action.  The story unfolds through action.  You have to pay attention as story elements come quickly surrounded by action.

Indeed so we got action rpg, with crappy story. Instead of proper rpg where everything doesn't revolve around action like DA:O.

Look I don't know about you, but I expected DA2 to be proper rpg, not action rpg that it turned out to be.

It is not wrong to assume that sequel tries to stay loyal to its predecessor. I didn't expect plot to have any relevance to origins, but I did expected an rpg with more in it than action.

There is your problem right there.  You are attached to  labels and assume they mean something more than they do.  Throw away the labels and look directly at things.  You had a demo to show you exactly the type of action, dialog, cinematagraphy, pacing, story, combat, etc.  You had no use for the labels rpg, action, blah, blah, blah with the actual game demo in your hands.

The same problem is following you around the game and getting in your way.  You keep thinking "DA:O, where is it?"  DA:O is in the past.  DA2 is here now.  Tommorow it will be DA3.  None of these games are or will be the same.  They are all simply stepping stones in a story that can be told in many different ways.

[nicethugbert]

v_ware wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...
This is what the DA:O loving DA2 hating crowd does not get.  Dragon Age is not DA:O.  DA2 is not DA:O.  DA:O and DA2 are different and separate games in the Dragon Age Series of games.

So according to that logic Mass Effect is not Mass Effect. Mass Effect 2 is not Mass Effect. 

Tsssh.

Dragon Age is a series.  DA:O is the first instalment of the series.  DA2 is the second installment of the series. .........

It's not hard.

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Ixalmaris wrote...

JabbaDaHutt30 wrote...

Kirkwall is less static than any citiy/region in Origins I've seen.

The story in Origins is not supposed to span 7 years.
Kirkwall not changing at all in all that time? Thats static.

I thought you were referring to how lifeless the city feels in general, and not static in the sense that it doesn't change at all during those seven years.

Modifié par JabbaDaHutt30, 02 avril 2011 - 06:05 .

[Aether99]

abaris wrote...

iTIMMEH wrote...

Yeah, it was very effective. I was really cut up when 5 minutes into the game my sibling gets killed, and then Wesley.

Oh, sorry I meant it sucked.

Yeah, I was all in tears until I noticed I don't give a flying ..... I didn't even know that pixelpile after all.

Now compare that to the exposition in the human noble story of DAO or even the choice you had to make in ME1 between Ashley and Kaidan. On my first playthrough I really felt the emotion and toughness of the decision.

That's good writing asd opposed to pull something from between the cheeks, and they have more than proven, they are capable to pull that trick.

what are these tough decisions people speak of?  my first char was a human noble in DAO and i played both mass effect games (ashley died, no question, just to get her out of my party)


Granted rarely is there a decision in any game thats difficult for me.  DAO's decisions were easily discernible as good and bad decisions, there was no hard decision that i could find.

[orbit991]

Yea I felt no connection to this sterile city at all. From the GUI to armor to small things like icons most things were without style. There was not much that in any way gave a certain mood to this game.

Modifié par orbit991, 02 avril 2011 - 06:36 .

[iTIMMEH]

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

So let me get this straight, you wanted a large emotional attachment to a character we'd only seem for about 10 mins?
I know some people have valid concerns about DA2 but some seem to picking fights for non-reasons. Do what I do if you don't like a game, put it down to experience and move on.

The scene in which your sibling bites the dust is horrible. It is over dramatised and over acted. Trying to force an emotional scene for the death of a character (two including Wesley) shortly after the game opens is a bad idea and it falls flat on its face.

Ten minutes of setting up some kind of bond between characters and bringing the player in would have been better than throwing that scene at us and expecting anything other than groans and/or laughter.

[Aether99]

orbit991 wrote...

Yea I felt no connection to this sterile city at all. From the GUI to armor to small things like icons most things were without style. There was not much that in any way gave a certain mood to this game.

completly disagree in this respect.  Though thats exactly how i felt when playing DAO, it just felt like a clone of multiple other fantasy stories graphically.  Meanwhile DA2 at least felt like its own world graphically.

and i actually did grow attached to DA2's city, meanwhile in DAO the only place your in long enough to try to get bored/appreciate is the camp site.

im not simply saying DA2 is better, thats innacurate, i loved both of hte games, but i also am comfortable in both giving my opinion and giving credit where its due.  Not for one moment when i played DAO did i feel like it was its own game from a point of view of style/art. 

[Aether99]

iTIMMEH wrote...

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

So let me get this straight, you wanted a large emotional attachment to a character we'd only seem for about 10 mins?
I know some people have valid concerns about DA2 but some seem to picking fights for non-reasons. Do what I do if you don't like a game, put it down to experience and move on.

The scene in which your sibling bites the dust is horrible. It is over dramatised and over acted. Trying to force an emotional scene for the death of a character (two including Wesley) shortly after the game opens is a bad idea and it falls flat on its face.

Ten minutes of setting up some kind of bond between characters and bringing the player in would have been better than throwing that scene at us and expecting anything other than groans and/or laughter.

maybe we just thought about it differently.  Me i was watching a story unfold, not trying to be convinced that i have emotional attachment to something/someone.  aveline's husband dies, this helps shape and define her personality in the game.  i considered his death not something that i was supposed to be emotionally involved with (which is what i feel most peoples failings lie) but rather a tool to form her character.  and in truth i find avelines character to be wonderful and refreshing, the only people ive seen say they dislike her they site the shallow morrigan as high praise, cmon, we all know you just liked teh side boob and sexy accent.

[upsettingshorts]

Immersion is a 100% subjective thing. So if it lacks immersion for you, that sucks, but it's something that everyone is going to have to determine for themselves.

The same thing that weakens my immersion enhances it for someone else, and vice versa.  That's how subjective it is.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 avril 2011 - 06:56 .

[Aether99]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Immersion is a 100% subjective thing. So if it lacks immersion for you, that sucks, but it's something that everyone is going to have to determine for themselves.

The same thing that weakens my immersion enhances it for someone else, and vice versa.  That's how subjective it is.

to further elaborate, immersion doesnt in itself mean its a good game either.

[abaris]

Aether99 wrote...

to further elaborate, immersion doesnt in itself mean its a good game either.

OK, purely subjective - but I haven't immersed myself in a bad game yet. If its bad, its bad.

As for your earlier question: You didn't think its tough, when you have to decide which one of your companions should bite it in ME1?

Well, either you don't care for companion based games then or you didn't try to get to know these companions. They had convincing backstories after all.

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

[Akka le Vil]

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, I don't know why others say it, but when I say "rose-tinted," it's because I've actually revisited something that's supposed to be great and found out it wasn't all that great. When I replayed BG last summer, I was shocked at how much better DAO is in virtually all aspects.

Of course the "rose-tinted" and "nostalgia" thing does exist in many cases. The problem is that it's among the most classical, overused "argument" that are constantly recycled by the dumbest of the fanboys EVERYWHERE.

Along with the "there is magic so it doesn't need to make sense", "you just can't accept change" and "it's a different game", it's a ultra-cliché that immediately make anyone using an idiot.

I'm tired to see it used. Every. Single. Time.
Especially when it's glaringly obvious it's just copy'n'pasted and glaringly show that not a single thought has been spent in its adequacy.

[Eswyn]

I think Dragon Age 2 is lacking everything the Dragon Age Origins delivered

It says DA2, thats fine if they didt bring so many characters from DAO in to it. You made a story in DAO, you killed who you wanted to kill. But all that really didt matter case it was all for nothing in DA2, Anders stil show up even if you gav him to the teamplers in DAA or Leliana for that matter

The Darkspawn was in DAO was just the tainted creatures you would expect from the deep, monsters with armour and weapons they could find making not one look the same. Now they are
like a soldiers in shiny uniforms almost human looking

Sorry Bioware but you took the wrong turn with this

Is like the same if you make Mass Effect 3 with no Tail or Shepard

[abaris]

Eswyn wrote...

Is like the same if you make Mass Effect 3 with no Tail or Shepard

You had me there for a few moments: I pondered, Tail, what Tail....?

[Aether99]

abaris wrote...

Aether99 wrote...

to further elaborate, immersion doesnt in itself mean its a good game either.

OK, purely subjective - but I haven't immersed myself in a bad game yet. If its bad, its bad.

As for your earlier question: You didn't think its tough, when you have to decide which one of your companions should bite it in ME1?

Well, either you don't care for companion based games then or you didn't try to get to know these companions. They had convincing backstories after all.

no more convincing then any other game, but really ashley annoyed me greatly.  if it had been a different char maybe it wouldve been a hard choice.

also i do feel that i disagree with your, if its bad, its bad.  I dont agree with black and white mentality.  a game can be bad/good and have good/bad qualities in it.

[abaris]

Aether99 wrote...

also i do feel that i disagree with your, if its bad, its bad.  I dont agree with black and white mentality.  a game can be bad/good and have good/bad qualities in it.

Yeah, sure, but then its not bad. It still has something to get me going.

But if I feel, something's rotten to the core - and there are quite a few gems out there, fitting that description - I will have a hard time immersing myself, since my time can be better spent.

[ZombiePowered]

I was extremely immersed in both games. I liked Kirkwall. I suppose the people could've been a little less static, but it was hardly less immersive than Denerim or Orzammar.

Furthermore, by virtue of this being the internet and therefore my opinion counting as fact, I am right and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. And a troll.

[ZombiePowered]

Eswyn wrote...

I think Dragon Age 2 is lacking everything the Dragon Age Origins delivered

It says DA2, thats fine if they didt bring so many characters from DAO in to it. You made a story in DAO, you killed who you wanted to kill. But all that really didt matter case it was all for nothing in DA2, Anders stil show up even if you gav him to the teamplers in DAA or Leliana for that matter

The Darkspawn was in DAO was just the tainted creatures you would expect from the deep, monsters with armour and weapons they could find making not one look the same. Now they are
like a soldiers in shiny uniforms almost human looking

Sorry Bioware but you took the wrong turn with this

Is like the same if you make Mass Effect 3 with no Tail or Shepard

First, the Darkspawn in Origins did all look the same. Only different ones were "alphas", none of which were encountered in DA2. You should also note that the Emissaries look much different now. And Hurlocks should look like humans, since they are produced by human broodmothers.

Second, what if Tali and Shepard died in my ME2? Do I then reserve the right to be upset about the retcon Bioware is doing for that?

Modifié par ZombiePowered, 02 avril 2011 - 07:37 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Agreed with OP...DA2 has far less imeerions. From area design, to animations, to time-skips, items, etc...

[Eswyn]

HI ZombiePowered, I got every right (given by myself) to be upset

Modifié par Eswyn, 02 avril 2011 - 08:43 .

[AtreiyaN7]

And the Ostagar scene was almost a carbon-copy of LotR - original it was not. In DA2, you're starting out as a humble refugee, one who's supposed to be in a desperate situation and who is basically just one of many, many other refugees. The beginning was fitting, and I would hardly have expected people to be lined up with cornets heralding the protagonist's entry into Kirkwall. In each game, the scenes were appropriate for the stories being told.

[Tommy6860]

nicethugbert wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

DA2 is an action game with a really good cinematic story.  Everything evolves in action.  The personalities evolve in action.  The story unfolds through action.  You have to pay attention as story elements come quickly surrounded by action.

Indeed so we got action rpg, with crappy story. Instead of proper rpg where everything doesn't revolve around action like DA:O.

Look I don't know about you, but I expected DA2 to be proper rpg, not action rpg that it turned out to be.

It is not wrong to assume that sequel tries to stay loyal to its predecessor. I didn't expect plot to have any relevance to origins, but I did expected an rpg with more in it than action.

There is your problem right there.  You are attached to  labels and assume they mean something more than they do.  Throw away the labels and look directly at things.  You had a demo to show you exactly the type of action, dialog, cinematagraphy, pacing, story, combat, etc.  You had no use for the labels rpg, action, blah, blah, blah with the actual game demo in your hands.

The same problem is following you around the game and getting in your way.  You keep thinking "DA:O, where is it?"  DA:O is in the past.  DA2 is here now.  Tommorow it will be DA3.  None of these games are or will be the same.  They are all simply stepping stones in a story that can be told in many different ways.

Try telling that to Harry Potter fans when the franchise story bends towards Harry's family losing their homes because of a firestorm that destroyed their town, due to a final showdown between sorcerers and wizards. Then they have to get away fast, relocate to a another town where their families previously lived, became succsssful at teaching and developing sorcery/wizardy, got into a battle with the local head wizard, kicked his ass, then split without a trace. All of this told by a J.K. Rowling wanna-be, and see how that goes over.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 02 avril 2011 - 08:49 .