158 réponses à ce sujet

[88mphSlayer]

randName wrote...

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.

the concepts in DA2 are prevalent in plenty of successful games... what the game needed tho was more pre-alpha time and development in general to fully flesh out ideas

[erynnar]

I am thinking the title of this thread is not really accurate. It wasn't a move forward at all. I tried playing again, after having to set it down for a week and not touching it, and I find myself at the High Dragon fight. A fight that did nothing but ****** me off and frustrate me royally. I am fighting a boss with a gazillion hit points (which is doable, if not tedious) and then I get zerged by fifty million babies and some of her harder to kill flying offspring while she shoots fire balls at me. And targeting her while she sits on her cliff doing so is almost impossible since I CAN"T PAN UP WITH THE ****ING CAMERA! That fight is not fun, or challenging, it is pure drudge work. So I put it on casual because normal and nightmare are sodding ridiculous. And I still give up half way through and reload right before and take everyone home. Flemeth's High Dragon was fun, Andraste the High Dragon was fun,,,this one? A sodding chore, as are all the boss fights.

And despite the cool new fight animation, the combat with endless waves of (fully armored in metal) people jumping from a three to four story building is just stupid. Boring and so silly that I do have to laugh thinking that they would all break their legs, backs, or necks doing that.

And the seen one dungeon seen em all, just makes the feeling of tedium worse. I am trying sooo hard to give this game more love. I do love the world we are in but...I am really struggling to do so. that too, has become a real chore. Damn, I love DA too.

Modifié par erynnar, 04 avril 2011 - 04:46 .

[neppakyo]

88mphSlayer wrote...

randName wrote...

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.

the concepts in DA2 are prevalent in plenty of successful games... what the game needed tho was more pre-alpha time and development in general to fully flesh out ideas

That, and no frame narrative. It wasn't done very well, and I am afraid even with more time it would still be rubbish.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

This is less of Bioware "moving forward" with Dragon Age than it is "advancing to the rear, turning about till dizzy and panicking while your shoelaces are tied."

That's my impression and I'm sticking to it!

[erynnar]

neppakyo wrote...

88mphSlayer wrote...

randName wrote...

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.

the concepts in DA2 are prevalent in plenty of successful games... what the game needed tho was more pre-alpha time and development in general to fully flesh out ideas

That, and no frame narrative. It wasn't done very well, and I am afraid even with more time it would still be rubbish.

This, along with being stuck in one small place. I had to re-fill in the beach map, despite having been there and done that sixty times, because I was in Act 3 now. GAH!!! I want to love this game, I want to! But soooo much prevents me from doing so. DAMMIT!

[neppakyo]

is it true that the 360 version has extremely long loading times?

Took my PC 10 seconds or less to load an area. (10 seconds being the longest, normally a few seconds)

Modifié par neppakyo, 04 avril 2011 - 04:51 .

[Narreneth]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

Yet people on the other extreme are just as bad.  Almost like liking or disliking has nothing to do with attitude and individual personality traits are what determine the behavior.

Elitist jackass.

Actually, no, because at least criticism bear improvement, while brown-nosing brings mediocrity. Of course both extreme are bad (because well, they are extreme), but I much prefer people who point out the flaws (and hence helps making things better) than people who prevent actual progress.

And "elitism" is not a bad thing in itself, BTW. It involve striving for excellence, which is rather positive in my book.

That is not the definition of elitism. 

And no, "criticism" in the form of fanatic, frothing-at-the-mouth insults does not breed positive change.  Especially when it comes in the form of troglodytes like you berating people for liking something that you don't like.

Elitist jackass.

Modifié par Narreneth, 04 avril 2011 - 11:59 .

[Legbiter]

Well, sure Bioware could theoretically release DA:O every 3-4 years. They'd be a niche company like those who put out hex wargames by title 3 or so though.

My beef with DA II is the blatant map reusage and the small gameworld you get to play in. A lot of the criticism of the game seems to be of the "They changed it, now it sucks" variety, and I've never been one for that.

[Slayer299]

OP - I don't think you're thread title is right, it should be why did BW feel the need to move DA2 two steps sideways and three steps backwards. Changing things in a game isn't necessarily a bad thing, the problem is that DA2 didn't just change a few things here, tweak others there and fix some outright problems.

No, DA2 completely re-wrote 90% I loved about DAO. Combat went from tactical fights to grinding waves and bosses with ridiculously long health bars, a 'been there once seen every place' map, inventory became pretty useless, a plot that was disjointed and dropped the ball on 2 opportunities to actually "do" something and a pointless ending.

edit - formatting

Modifié par Slayer299, 04 avril 2011 - 12:38 .

[Akka le Vil]

Narreneth wrote...

That is not the definition of elitism. 

That's the consequence. Elitism is positive discrimination toward the best. That implies striving for excellence - which is the exact opposite of your funny accusation of "troglodytes", the primitive people being typically on the opposite side.
Additionnally, suckers having "elitist jackass" as a signature should refrain from giving lessons about civility, it just doesn't have any credibility.

And no, "criticism" in the form of fanatic, frothing-at-the-mouth insults does not breed positive change.

True. But at least it means that there is a problem, even if not in a useful way.
Defending at all cost does point at nothing but the emptiness of one's mind.

[Mantaal]

Legbiter wrote...

Well, sure Bioware could theoretically release DA:O every 3-4 years. They'd be a niche company like those who put out hex wargames by title 3 or so though.

My beef with DA II is the blatant map reusage and the small gameworld you get to play in. A lot of the criticism of the game seems to be of the "They changed it, now it sucks" variety, and I've never been one for that.

So you think Bioware was a niche company pre "hack&Slay DA2"? 

[Legbiter]

Mantaal wrote...

So you think Bioware was a niche company pre "hack&Slay DA2"? 

No.

They haven't been a niche company for 10 years. Niche companies don't employ hundreds of people and don't get bought up for almost a billion dollars.

They also haven't been releasing BG every 3-4 years. They've done D & D games, Star Wars, that Jade Empire IP that failed to take off, the ME space opera, etc. In short constantly trying out new stuff and the mooks have been crying into their neckbeards about RUINED FOREVER and how it's going to spell trouble down the road since ToB. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

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.

It blocked their view of the massive cash pile....

[Zeulon]

DA 2 doesn´t do anything new, most elements that are presented as an evoution of the genre have been around for years.
Especialy the story. How anyone can describe it as "mold breaking" mystifies me to no end.

[John Brightman]

To keep the franchise relevant?

[Cobrawar]

there was nothing majorly wrong with DAO. if they just build upon the the strengths of DAO they would of had a much better game then DA2.

[Slayer299]

@ John Brightman - relevant to what? DAO was greatly successful. Relevant implies that it no importance or value to anyone.

[DTKT]

Money and market share.

[Tirigon]

Mus3 wrote...

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!"

Tirigon wrote...

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.

Read BEFORE whine.

[Tirigon]

Legbiter wrote...

They also haven't been releasing BG every 3-4 years. They've done D & D games, Star Wars, that Jade Empire IP that failed to take off, the ME space opera, etc. In short constantly trying out new stuff and the mooks have been crying into their neckbeards about RUINED FOREVER and how it's going to spell trouble down the road since ToB. 

Yea but Jade Empire was actually good, unlike DA2, and StarWars was, well, StarWars. (Imo it sucked but that´s because I consider StarWars to be one of the most overrated crappiles ever, and you can´t blame BioWare for making a game in a franchise you don´t like)

You CAN however blame them for taking one of the best games ever (DAO) and turning the sequel into a f*cking mess.

[flipperwhipper]

 Because "moving things forward" = corporate speak for "the reviews are mediocre but we can't openly admit to glaring mistakes".

[John Brightman]

Slayer299 wrote...

@ John Brightman - relevant to what? DAO was greatly successful. Relevant implies that it no importance or value to anyone.

I don't know that's why I was asking.  Or was I saying that the game needed to change to adapt to a changing market?  Or was the game done with an experimental tone to social trends and topics?

Like I said I was just asking a question...

Let me ask you this.  Is Dragon Age Origins really important?  I mean it's just a game in the same vein as Dragon Age II.  You can turn your brain off for a bit and be entertained.  Mainstream market sucess doesn't necessarily mean something is relevant outside of executives wallets or stock shares. 

To be honest Dragon Age: Origins didn't really stick with me.  Some of the subject matter was light and has faded from my memory.  Already, in Dragon Age II there have been some quests that will stay with me and I can say brilliant.  In particularly I reference the Magistrate quest.  That was well done.  The overall story for Dragon Age II seems more memorable and grounded in social issues that the latter didn't.  Just an opinion.  Dragon Age II seems seems to delve into the politics of the realm and some of the quests are pretty good.  I guess if you take the sum of the parts then Dragon Age II is a leap forward when compared to the whole of Dragon Age: Origins.

*Plus, Dragon Age II seems to bring racism into the light more than other Bioware games that I can remember and racism in the real world isn't going anywhere any time soon.  No matter how you feel about that.  It's a fact.

One of the big reasons I even brought up the term relevant was I believe at it's core that's what every writer strives for in their work.  Being relevant to the world around you is very important believe it or not.  I'm having work of mine being submitted to the Library of Congress.  If my work is deemed relevant by powers to be then the book stays in the Library.  If not deemed relevant then it is simply catalogued and traded to other libraries.  So the term relevant means much more then units sold to me.  I also think BIoware has some of the best writers in the game industry so I would imagine they also want their work to be seen as relevant.  Then again maybe not.  If they are artists, which I think they are, then they probably care about things like that.

Modifié par John Brightman, 04 avril 2011 - 05:27 .

[Slayer299]

John Brightman wrote...

To be honest Dragon Age: Origins didn't really stick with me.  Some of the subject matter was light and has faded from my memory.  Already, in Dragon Age II there have been some quests that will stay with me and I can say brilliant.  In particularly I reference the Magistrate quest.  That was well done.  The overall story for Dragon Age II seems more memorable and grounded in social issues that the latter didn't.  Just an opinion.  Dragon Age II seems seems to delve into the politics of the realm and some of the quests are pretty good.  I guess if you take the sum of the parts then Dragon Age II is a leap forward when compared to the whole of Dragon Age: Origins.

*Plus, Dragon Age II seems to bring racism into the light more than other Bioware games that I can remember and racism in the real world isn't going anywhere any time soon.  No matter how you feel about that.  It's a fact.

One of the big reasons I even brought up the term relevant was I believe at it's core that's what every writer strives for in their work.  Being relevant to the world around you is very important believe it or not.  I'm having work of mine being submitted to the Library of Congress.  If my work is deemed relevant by powers to be then the book stays in the Library.  If not deemed relevant then it is simply catalogued and traded to other libraries.  So the term relevant means much more then units sold to me.  I also think BIoware has some of the best writers in the game industry so I would imagine they also want their work to be seen as relevant.  Then again maybe not.  If they are artists, which I think they are, then they probably care about things like that.

I see that you were asking a question in general rather than a comment which I misunderstood. But yes, DAO does actually stick with me.

As for DA2 I can't remember all that much about it, there were no socal issues like racism (elves) or social castes. There was the issue of a brewing religious confrontation but that seemed to be more skipped over than truly addressed.

Luck on the submition to the Lib of Cong., but as far as BW having some of the best writers in the industry, before DA2 I'd have agreed whole-heartedly with you, however, after the disjointed story and missed opportunities that filled DA2 I have to wonder if they took a vacation and BW had interns working instead. They tried hard but when it came up in the end the story seemed to come up short and very lacking overall to me.

[Aether99]

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.

many reasons are possible, none of which we would know for sure unless a bioware developer came here and told us.  but i can give my thoughts.

DAO was a long time in the making, by the time it was released, they had there wildly successful ME and were making ME2.

DAO probably didnt gross as much as they liked, and thought trying to make it more like ME's direction would spruce things up.

I think they failed for several reasons.

one, there are archetype gamers, ones that lean more towards a certain type of game.  Fantasy games might have a different fanbase then scifi (obviously) as such there may be different tastes.

DA2 was rushed, even for the people who enjoy DA2 (me) its easy to see that in certain ways, like some of the shockingly low res textures right next to high res, the gibbing i want to believe is a copout, and the re-use of dungeom maps.

Im currently playing (not right now, i have teh game) baldurs gate 2 cuz i never had the pleasure, and ill tell you what makes it so good, it was apparent in the first few hours. 3 main reasons

1-atmosphere, it has its own art direction, its distinctive and immersive, it isnt some tolken fantasy rip (DAO feels that way to me, very generic as far as art goes)

2-characters, seiously, minsc and boo?  possibly the best entertainment ever?  how is it that a still portrait, partial voiced dialogue and lots of text convey more emotion and enjoyment then all of morrigan and allistars banter?  They need to not be so afraid of stepping outside the box of characters they have.  morrigan was 1 note monotone char, allistar was a whiner coverin git with wisecracks, a drunk dwarf? wow, stretching there!  not saying they are bad (though i hate morrigan) but they are uninteresting.

3-quests, you mean, this old game baldurs gate 2, doesnt have mountains of random fetch quests?  but they still have a crapton of quests?  hmm, good quest quality, wish that even existed in the game anymore.

and my personal 4th reason-formula, its based off 2nd edition dnd, you know whats happening with your char you dont get a random number that you have no real knowledge of sept (higher is better durp) and the numbers are far too high, making it hard to figure otu for yourself.  in bd2 you know what +1 hit gives you, in DAO you dont know what increased attack rating gives you. 

this may be just because i like dnd in real life, so i seperated it.

id be for a remake of BD2 if they spend at least 4-6 years working on it.