158 réponses à ce sujet

[88mphSlayer]

Awakenings was basically what DAO2 would've been - DAO but cheaply made

the sequel would feel like a downgrade regardless, so they went with the mass market experiment instead

[Killer3000ad]

They wanted the CoD crowd and felt the need to "streamline", "broaden the game to appeal to the mass audience", ie dumbed down for folk who didn't understand the meaning of STR,DEX,CON.

[Mantaal]

I think "move forward" is the wrong words to describe DA2.

I would say "moving backward with different Combat"

[88mphSlayer]

Killer3000ad wrote...

They wanted the CoD crowd and felt the need to "streamline", "broaden the game to appeal to the mass audience", ie dumbed down for folk who didn't understand the meaning of STR,DEX,CON.

i think this is an insult to people* who play CoD... i know plenty of people who play CoD who understand all the various rpg tropes, the difference is games like WoW made them sick of rpg's, hence why they play CoD

*not referencing the types who just started playing video games for the first time in the last 5 years

[Cyberstrike nTo]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Origins was built and founded upon traditional rpg roots. Why did BioWare feel the need to progress the Dragon Age series? It ruined many things about the franchise.

I go to a lot message boards now not all them are video game but they often have video game forums and the one thing that I hear time and again is that while Bioware games are considered great but they feel a lot of their games are starting to stuffer from what they call "one-game-itis" or basically if you play one then you have played them all.  Now I've defended Bioware against that claim but you know what with all of this hatred for DA2 and it's supporters: THEY WERE RIGHT! 

Doesn't Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2 all have the same basic storyline you must gather a group of companions to stop a moron from unleashing or using an ancient evil from destroying the world or the universe? Yeah pretty much. In fact DA2 is the first BW game that doesn't use the same old formula and tries something new.  

It is a simple evolutionary FACT: change or die. Bioware has chosen to change with the times and if you crybabies don't like it here is some simple advice: don't buy Bioware games, toys based on Bioware characters, novels and comics based on Bioware's products and you can leave this site too and as far as I'm concerned don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  

For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

Modifié par Cyberstrike nTo, 03 avril 2011 - 04:55 .

[Tirigon]

Changing is not always improvement.

[goering]

i can understand bw wanting to make money. but they could just have made an action-beat'em'up spinoff inside the dragon age universe instead making a half-assed hybrid and then calling it blatantly Dragon Age 2.
They didn't call that facebook sh;t DA2 either.

[abaris]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...


Doesn't Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2 all have the same basic storyline you must gather a group of companions to stop a moron from unleashing or using an ancient evil from destroying the world or the universe? Yeah pretty much. In fact DA2 is the first BW game that doesn't use the same old formula and tries something new.  

Every story has already been told. The difference is in the way the tale is told.

In my opinion, DAO, ME and ME2 are up to this task. I can't say much about the story of DAII, since I only have played the demo, but the tale centered around a single character and location is probably the hardest to pull off. What's more, if you play Mafia or something like that, you are fully expecting to slip in the shoes of a premade character with a more or less premade story. That's different with a RPG. I think, most people expect to be able to mold these kinds of characters to their liking and they expect to have some influence when it comes to making game changing choices. A premade story just doesn't do.

Even in ME and ME2, which are considered a hybrid between shooter and RPG, you can form your very own Shepard and you have a certain degree of influence over the games outcome. You have to make a choice between characters suriving and dying and you have a choice, who ist gonna survive the final showdown. And these choices carry over into the next instalment. And they make a difference, not only with cameos.

And now we come to the area where taste plays a large role. I for one didn't like what I saw in the demo of DAII. I didn't like the new fighting system one bit. It was too over the top for my liking, especially when it comes to my tastes what a fantasy RPG should feel like. I didn't get any exposition, but was thrown into a never ending sequence of fights immediately. Hence I couldn't relate to anyone of my companions. OK, these characters were supposed to be my family, but what the heck, I didn't know them. There hasn't been one peaceful moment to get even a basic relationship as in DAO or even ME.

Third, when I'm playing a RPG, I like to be something I'm not in real life: Epic. So I have the least bit of problem with the save the world stories. When it comes to my tastes, they could even be more epic, give me the opportunity to take the throne in DAO, give me the opportunity to take over the council in ME. But I wouldn't have a problem with the smaller scale story of DAII either, provided its pulled off in a very convincing and engaging way. From what I saw and what I heard, they fail on the convincing part. It seems to evolve mainly around fight this and fight that, fetch this and fetch that, whereas such a story would prosper when some very serious roleplaying is involved.

I'm not saying, DAII looks like a bad game. It looks like its one of the games we used to call "enjoy it and destroy it", meaning, you have a fun playthrough, but that's about it. Replayability next to zero. And having that in mind, I chose not to pay 60 for something I might like for a few casual hours.

[Akka le Vil]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

It is a simple evolutionary FACT: change or die.

Nice slogan, but without any basis in reality.
Another fact : DA:O sold 3,5 millions copies, and was rather acclaimed, despite being full of flaws. I don't know how someone can be retarded enough to consider that 3,5 millions copies is not good enough to prove there is a market here.

Also, considering the state of blandness of the video game industry today, "changing" is closer to "back to the roots" rather than "going mainstream", as nearly everyone has "gone mainstream" (and quality has dropped, see a link ?).

Stop using tired and idiotic cliché thinking they are great discoveries. "changing with the times" is just one of the most stupid argument that is thrown by fanboys because they have nothing else on which stand.
Change has no value in itself, it's what the game becomes which counts.

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 03 avril 2011 - 05:26 .

[orbit991]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

Origins was built and founded upon traditional rpg roots. Why did BioWare feel the need to progress the Dragon Age series? It ruined many things about the franchise.

I go to a lot message boards now not all them are video game but they often have video game forums and the one thing that I hear time and again is that while Bioware games are considered great but they feel a lot of their games are starting to stuffer from what they call "one-game-itis" or basically if you play one then you have played them all.  Now I've defended Bioware against that claim but you know what with all of this hatred for DA2 and it's supporters: THEY WERE RIGHT! 

Doesn't Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2 all have the same basic storyline you must gather a group of companions to stop a moron from unleashing or using an ancient evil from destroying the world or the universe? Yeah pretty much. In fact DA2 is the first BW game that doesn't use the same old formula and tries something new.  

It is a simple evolutionary FACT: change or die. Bioware has chosen to change with the times and if you crybabies don't like it here is some simple advice: don't buy Bioware games, toys based on Bioware characters, novels and comics based on Bioware's products and you can leave this site too and as far as I'm concerned don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  

For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

Lots of text, but you said very little. It seems they changed a lot more then just the story style in this game.

[AkiKishi]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...
For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

That's cute and all, but DA2 is not exactly selling better than DA did now is it ? Kind of puts the dampers on Mikes theory and your idea that somehow this is a change for the better.

Maybe you just don't realise this is the same pattern Westwood fell into.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 03 avril 2011 - 06:37 .

[AlanC9]

BobSmith101 wrote...
That's cute and all, but DA2 is not exactly selling better than DA did now is it ? Kind of puts the dampers on Mikes theory and your idea that somehow this is a change for the better.

As a cheaper game, DA2 doesn't need to sell more to be more profitable. But you knew that already.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

orbit991 wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

Origins was built and founded upon traditional rpg roots. Why did BioWare feel the need to progress the Dragon Age series? It ruined many things about the franchise.

I go to a lot message boards now not all them are video game but they often have video game forums and the one thing that I hear time and again is that while Bioware games are considered great but they feel a lot of their games are starting to stuffer from what they call "one-game-itis" or basically if you play one then you have played them all.  Now I've defended Bioware against that claim but you know what with all of this hatred for DA2 and it's supporters: THEY WERE RIGHT! 

Doesn't Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2 all have the same basic storyline you must gather a group of companions to stop a moron from unleashing or using an ancient evil from destroying the world or the universe? Yeah pretty much. In fact DA2 is the first BW game that doesn't use the same old formula and tries something new.  

It is a simple evolutionary FACT: change or die. Bioware has chosen to change with the times and if you crybabies don't like it here is some simple advice: don't buy Bioware games, toys based on Bioware characters, novels and comics based on Bioware's products and you can leave this site too and as far as I'm concerned don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  

For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

Lots of text, but you said very little. It seems they changed a lot more then just the story style in this game.

Which is what has to happen. As the song says "Times they are changing" and if Bioware doesn't change with it they will go out of business.

There are more people out there than just this site and a lot of them are starting to find Bioware's games dull and boring and not worth playing.

Now I love DA2.
I love the combat system it was more tactical and more fun for me than DA:O (not to mention it was visually more exciting), I love the characters, Kirkwall, and what I loved the most is that it was a personal epic story (I understand Hawke a lot more than the Grey Warden) and left me wanting more.

Is it for every one's tastes? 
Obviously not. But remember this: one person's treasure is another person's crap. 

Is it perfect?
No. You find me a perfect game and I'll find a flaw in it. (I don't believe in human perfection).

Do I find it insanely fun?
HELL YEAH! It's the most fun Bioware game that I've played.

Could it have been better?
Yeah, but it's still a fun and fantastic game.

Do I think some of criticisms against it are warranted?
Yes. in fact I share some of them.

Do I think that some people here need to take a chill pill and stop yelling at people, like me and others, because we enjoy Dragon Age II?
HELL YES.
I've seen heated political discussions that have been more civil (now that is saying something). People have different tastes and different likes. I for one can't stand Twilight but that doesn't mean I have to flame every Twilight fan I meet online. I just tell them I don't like it and move on. 

Now I've made up my mind and I believe Dragon Age II is a great game and I've played about 5 times (and going on my 6th play through) and I don't care what crybaby fans say about it. I know what I like, and I like Dragon Age II warts and all and right now my opinion is not going change and no one here is going to change it.
Now who knows?
In few years it might change.  

Now I'll stop calling haters "crybabies" when stop treating people that like Dragon Age II with respect. If you want my respect you have to treat me with respect. Otherwise I will have no respect for them or their opinions (and BTW I honestly don't give damn about what people think of me. Never have and never will).

And if I didn't like Dragon Age II EA, Bioware, and everyone here would know it. I would rather be hated for being honest with my opinions than being loved as a liar to be go long with the crowd.

[AkiKishi]

AlanC9 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
That's cute and all, but DA2 is not exactly selling better than DA did now is it ? Kind of puts the dampers on Mikes theory and your idea that somehow this is a change for the better.

As a cheaper game, DA2 doesn't need to sell more to be more profitable. But you knew that already.

Is quoting out of context one of your favourite passtimes or somthing? 

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...
For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

I've highlighted it now.

Is DA2 selling like CoD ? No. Point made.

[randName]

Trying to improve/change is good and well on the other hand, and sure it can backfire; but I like to think that DA2 would have been a good game, maybe even great if they had given it time, despite, or because of many of the changes.

[Tirigon]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

I've seen heated political discussions that have been more civil (now that is saying something). People have different tastes and different likes. I for one can't stand Twilight but that doesn't mean I have to flame every Twilight fan I meet online. I just tell them I don't like it and move on. 

The difference is, Twilight was basically the same in every 4 books (and I´m saying this as someone who actually enjoyed them), whereas DA2 is a great change compared to DAO.

Imagine "Twilight" would have been an epic, LotR-esque story, the work of a linguistic genius who invented his own laguages and all, and the sequel would be, well, what it actually is.

Wouldn´t you feel disappointed, even a bit betrayed?


Edit: To make it clear, I´m not judging what you have to like - I know people who actually prefer Twilight over LotR, even though I can´t understand it - It´s just about the difference.
You may as well imagine the sequel to Twilight being like LotR, if that fits more to your tastes.

Modifié par Tirigon, 03 avril 2011 - 07:53 .

[Mantaal]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

It is a simple evolutionary FACT: change or die.

Another simple Fact: Change and die. If you remove a Humans head he is changed but it does not work really well

Evolution is about building up to make something better. Something better is not something existing in DA2. Almost everything in DA2 is worse then DA:O

BG1 - BG 2 was evolution
NwN1 - NwN2 was evolution.
DA:O - DA2 was just a headless Human

Modifié par Mantaal, 03 avril 2011 - 07:57 .

[P_k_r]

Evolution means you take what you have and build on it, sticking to the same principles that were in the original product. When you change the core aspects of a game, you don't have evolution, *revolution* maybe...but most revolutions tend to end badly.

[Cobrawar]

this use of the word evolution is very loosly used. you cannot force evolution . evolution happens on its own thru time. DA2 is anythign but evolution

[Gatt9]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...
For those crybabies fans out there that accept that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play "old-school" (whatever that means) RPGs they don't sell enough to make sequels better. 3 Million copies is NOTHING to what a game like RDR, Halo: Reach, and the recent Call of Duty games sell. Those are the people you play games for enjoyment they want to fun which BTW is what Dragon Age II is FUN. Which is what I play video games for is too have fun and relax. 

So all of you crybabies can hit the bricks as far I'm concerned.  

I've highlighted it now.

Is DA2 selling like CoD ? No. Point made.

You really don't want to go down this road.

Because I'm going to have to point out that RDR,  Halo: Reach,  and Call of Duty don't sell anywhere near as well as either The Sims or Pokemon.

So those Shooters desperately need to change.  It's very clear the market has left behind old archaic games like those in favor of new evolved immersive games like Sims and Pokemon.  Those Developers need to get with the times and make more Sims and more Pokemon like games,  or face Genre-Death.  You crybabies who don't accept that those are the only two games that should ever be made just need to either accept it or quit playing games!

See how stupid it sounds when you follow the logic to it's conclusion?  That's what you sound like to me.

[Mus3]

I find all this ranting and raving quite funny. If DA2 was almost exactly the same as DA:O, you all would be ****ing that Bioware didn't do enough. Since the game changed a bit, you all freak out. Bioware is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Hell, people were begging for the Mako to come back after ME2 came out.

It's not a big deal if you don't like the game, but acting like it's the worst game ever? Most of these antics are quite childish.

Furthermore, I don't care if you want your money back. You ****ing bought it, no one forced you to. Bioware's direction with DA2 was obvious.learn2readpreviews.

[Mantaal]

Mus3 wrote...

I find all this ranting and raving quite funny. If DA2 was almost exactly the same as DA:O, you all would be ****ing that Bioware didn't do enough. Since the game changed a bit, you all freak out. Bioware is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Hell, people were begging for the Mako to come back after ME2 came out.

It's not a big deal if you don't like the game, but acting like it's the worst game ever? Most of these antics are quite childish.

Furthermore, I don't care if you want your money back. You ****ing bought it, no one forced you to. Bioware's direction with DA2 was obvious.learn2readpreviews.

DA2 was almost like DA:O? Man click on the DA2 button to start the game not on the DA:O button on your desktop

[Mus3]

Tirigon wrote...

Cobrawar wrote...

because of stupidity, greed and bad management

This GIRL speaks the truth.

I wonder if you're ever going to add to a discussion instead of just yelling "Truth!"

[Mus3]

Mantaal wrote...

Mus3 wrote...

I find all this ranting and raving quite funny. If DA2 was almost exactly the same as DA:O, you all would be ****ing that Bioware didn't do enough. Since the game changed a bit, you all freak out. Bioware is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Hell, people were begging for the Mako to come back after ME2 came out.

It's not a big deal if you don't like the game, but acting like it's the worst game ever? Most of these antics are quite childish.

Furthermore, I don't care if you want your money back. You ****ing bought it, no one forced you to. Bioware's direction with DA2 was obvious.learn2readpreviews.

DA2 was almost like DA:O? Man click on the DA2 button to start the game not on the DA:O button on your desktop

Can you read? I said "if".

[Stegoceras]

I think I can best explain the reason for the change by bioware of the DA line as follows.

Origins was a square piece of paper with somewhat equal sides, loved by a one group but other groups bumped into the corners. So to help/satisfy those players they decided to cut the corners of the game for number 2, to speed it up (and probably cut costs) they decided to give scissors to three more people so they could cut all corners off simultaneously. However they forgot to decide how much they would cut off, resulting in a mess. They fixed it by pasting on new pieces of paper however these were the wrong color. Resulting in what would consider a piece of art while others would see it as a useless waste of paper.

All that said they could avoided at least half of all the critiques by naming the game Dragon Age: Kirkwall (or champions or any other word you can come up with).