126 réponses à ce sujet

[ThePasserby]

As for the OP, I agree about the lack of sufficient building up of emotional capital for the family. There aren't enough conversations with the mother for me to feel anything about her death beyond "Oh she's dead. Hmm ... I suppose the writers expect me to feel something about it." And the best way to express what I felt about her death is through a song in the musical "A Chorus Line"

"And I dug right down to the bottom of my soul
To see what I had inside.
Yes, I dug right down to the bottom of my soul
And I tried, I tried."

And I found ... nothing.

Overall, the game feels like the developers performed a hack and slash job on their product. Less choices, less import on our choices, less effort put into maps, less places to quest in, etc. Everything about the game is ... less. If I have to describe the game in one word, it'll be "wanting".

Edited the format.

Modifié par ThePasserby, 05 avril 2011 - 05:28 .

[wartabris]

 Agreed, killing off your family members was either too quick to have built a care for, or morbidly off putting (Leandra). I felt like they really had some good cards up their sleeves to play but burnt them way to early and or used no where near their potential.

[nicethugbert]

Danjaru wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Speak for yourself. I did not have this problem at all.

Also, DA2's story is just like DA:O.

DA:O, kill Archdemon, can't be avoided. DA2 kill Meredith, can't be avoided.

DA:O, kill Loghain or recuit him to fight Archdemon. DA2 kill Anders or recruit him to fight Meredith.

DA:O, do Morrigan's ritual or don't. DA2, side with mages and Cullen lets you go when Meredith dies or side with templars and all the Templars bow to you when Meredith dies.

DA:O how you treat various NPCs determines if they side with you for the final battle. DA2, how you treat various companions determines if they side with you for the final battle.

DA:O Was about the Journey to the Archdemon not necessarily about the fight with the Archdemon itself. While DA2 was about small dissjointed stories that didn't really make you care.

DA:O Spare Loghain and loose your first companion that you might've got a connection with. DA2, Spare anders and loose a preachy DLC character.

DA:O, realize that Morrigan had other intentions, sleep with her and she helps you and both Wardens survive, don't and she leaves and a Warden dies. DA2, choose either side, get the exact same result.

DA:O, treat various factions in a certain way through long story arcs and they might or might not help you (most of those choices being rather major btw). DA2, do 1 choice in a short sidequest and they might help you.

See the differense?

Yeah, the difference is you take your preferances too seriously, like they are gospel truth.

Loghain was lost to you from the start.  It was difficult not to want to kill him and you could kill him and get Alistair and Anora to marry and rule jointly.  Anders was a much more difficult, complicated, and surprising betrayal, unless you already wanted to kill him.  Kill Anders and you are out one ally, namely Anders.  Kill or spare Loghain and you still have the same number of allies, plus the same class as Alistair.  Loghain's fate is a cosmetic difference.  Oh noes!  DA:O is too deep for cosmetic differences!  Um, no it's shallow too.

[nicethugbert]

Persephone wrote...

Danjaru wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Speak for yourself. I did not have this problem at all.

Also, DA2's story is just like DA:O.

DA:O, kill Archdemon, can't be avoided. DA2 kill Meredith, can't be avoided.

DA:O, kill Loghain or recuit him to fight Archdemon. DA2 kill Anders or recruit him to fight Meredith.

DA:O, do Morrigan's ritual or don't. DA2, side with mages and Cullen lets you go when Meredith dies or side with templars and all the Templars bow to you when Meredith dies.

DA:O how you treat various NPCs determines if they side with you for the final battle. DA2, how you treat various companions determines if they side with you for the final battle.

DA:O Was about the Journey to the Archdemon not necessarily about the fight with the Archdemon itself. While DA2 was about small dissjointed stories that didn't really make you care.

DA:O Spare Loghain and loose your first companion that you might've got a connection with. DA2, Spare anders and loose a preachy DLC character.

DA:O, realize that Morrigan had other intentions, sleep with her and she helps you and both Wardens survive, don't and she leaves and a Warden dies. DA2, choose either side, get the exact same result.

DA:O, treat various factions in a certain way through long story arcs and they might or might not help you. DA2, do 1 choice in a short sidequest and they might help you.

See the differense?

DA2 certainly wasn't disjointed, one only has to pay attention to see the strings connecting the tale. They are there and I love the subtlety. And I cared PLENTY.

Anders was NOT a DLC character and I most certainly had a connection with him. Different ones through different playthroughs actually. As for preachy: Wynne is preachy. Anders is anything but preachy. Extremist? Yes. A fanatic? Yes. Preachy? Not so much.

The longer faction quests always end up in recruitment in DAO. The only differences are the models. Werewolves or elves? Dwarves and or Golems? Very linear.

This!

[ZombiePowered]

graavigala85 wrote...

Second big trauma that happens is when you are in deeproads and your sibling dies in there to Corruption or is recruited by Warden or just goes and joins the Templar or is dragged to Circle. So what? Then my biggest concern was that the bastards took my gear! MY FRIGGING STAFF OF PARLANTHA WAS TAKEN!!!!

You sister died/went Warden/was abducted by the Templars and you are worried about your staff!? Heartless, heartless, man. Sunshine was worth so much more than DLC items. So much more...

You can have no impact on the ending what so ever. You are forced to choose between two factions who you have very little interaction with, almost zero with the mages. Maybe one or two quests with the actual Circle itself and only thing you hear and see about the circle mages is that all are crazy bloodmages... Ye you really want to join those ****s?
Whole time in the game everyone says that Templars are the bad choice but when you it comes to the end even the mage leader goes ape**** with blodmage and you are left with the "wrong" choice to join those ****s. Even your teammates say its bad idea expect the bloodmage Elf and Anders, but I really dont give crap about his oppinions.

Then join the Templars? You can do that, you know.

So why would I want to care to join up with people who I have no idea who they are? With templars you atleast had some jobs to do so you got little more info about them and their mtives but the mages are left in the dark. I didnt even know who the Mage leader was until the begining of Act3. And he was supposed to be main character of game! Way to go and introduce main characters to a game Bioware. In future  why not hold of and show us the hero of the game after the end credits?

Since when? Orsino was an important figure in Act III (also, you met him and learned he was First Enchanter at the end of Act II), but not a main character. The main character is you, and then your companions, and then other NPCs. And I don't even know how to arrived at "show us the hero after the credits". That just straight up makes no sense.

So in the end the story feels empty and there is really nothing in the mainstory that makes you care what you do. You are nothing but delivery guy, sword to hire, mailman of death.

All these shortcomings could have been avoided with by just adding few more actual quests and less "Bring this finger to that man". More time on actually introducing the characters who are in the game is needed and not just giving some quick mentioning of them during random encounter.

What RPG PC isn't a mailman of death (by the way, that is a damn fine phrase right there, I am pocketing that one for later use!)? Quests are people paying us to go kill something or other, or find something, or find something and kill something guarding it, etc. I think the "bring this skeleton to this random guy in Lowtown" quests were a bit silly, but I doubt they took any significant amount of time to implement. They certainly weren't put in the game at the expense of real, meaty quests. They were just a little, additional source of income that you dropped off when waltzing around Kirkwall. I do think some introduction to important figures like Orsino or Meredith earlier on would have been nice--I would've liked to have gotten of sense of them before they were constantly at each other's throats (i.e. before Meredith started putting lyrium in her morning coffee). It would've made the depths Orsino went to in desperation, as well as Meredith's revealed insanity much more impacting. I was certainly impacted with the way things were, but it was more of a disgust for the corruptability and extremism of these two people who were supposed to be rational leaders of powerful organizations. In other words, while their actions greatly angered me, I wasn't saddened to see them become monsters--had I known them in more peaceful times, I might've been more personally affected, instead of just having my principles insulted.

[blothulfur]

Yeah never was able to immerse myself like when I was studying philosophy with Daakon or experiencing my own betrayal of Deionarra or thinking Bhelen you clever ruthless bastard.

[A Forgotten Tome]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Ah. Varnell. I would consider that just a case of a quest with a slightly different fight in the end. The results of both situations are the same. The qunari will be killed no matter what you opted for. And you already shed light on your second example. There was no choice. Picking the characters and whether they stayed is a good aexample. Just as good as the one I provided about the armies.

The decisions of Hawke that would "shape the world" never happened, though. It was advertized, but not seen. Unless the cameos count.

Maybe I misunderstood the ending, but the whole part of (in my mage playthrough anyways) "Hawke's decision to stand with the mages caused other Circles across Ferelden to begin to question the Templars" ... how did that not "shape the world"?

I think the problem I had with the ending in DA2 is it did feel rushed, no doubt about it. I felt pissed when Fenris betrayed me however, not unexpected but pissed. I also could not believe what Anders did, Grand Cleric Elthina did nothing wrong. I killed Anders simply for that crime alone.

I was glad Carver decided to join me as well, and he seemed to finally treat me with some measure of dignity instead of automatically assuming I was out to steal the stage from him.

[Vormaerin]

ThePasserby wrote...

You might wanna restate your stand on the dark ritual and the extent of the consequences of your choice.

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises, as does your decision about Anders' fate.  It changes the cut scenes you get and some of the trash mob fights you have.  It alters the epilogue.   Everything the Morrigan decision does and more in terms fo the game itself.

[Halo Quea]

Vormaerin wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You might wanna restate your stand on the dark ritual and the extent of the consequences of your choice.

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises......

That's it!  THAT'S what they should have called this game!  Dragon Age: Companion Crisis!

[ZombiePowered]

Halo Quea wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You might wanna restate your stand on the dark ritual and the extent of the consequences of your choice.

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises......

That's it!  THAT'S what they should have called this game!  Dragon Age: Companion Crisis!

Haha, so true! It's just like that other game... what is it called... oh yeah, Dragon Age: Origins. You know, the other one where your companions would turn on you if you went against their most fundamental beliefs.

[Medhia Nox]

There were approximately 20 hours of the TV show Firefly.

There were approximately 40 hours of the game Dragon Age 2.

I enjoyed every character in Firefly - cared when those characters died or were in danger.

I couldn't have cared less for any of the characters in Dragon Age 2.

Different styles speak to different people I suppose.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 06 avril 2011 - 10:40 .

[Alpr]

I cared when Bethany died in the deep roads
I cared when mother died to the mage dude

You are heartless, I need to kill you with my keyblade.

[Danjaru]

Vormaerin wrote...

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises, as does your decision about Anders' fate.  It changes the cut scenes you get and some of the trash mob fights you have.  It alters the epilogue.   Everything the Morrigan decision does and more in terms fo the game itself.

Morrigans ritual changes the final cut scene, and the post battle scenes.

And fighting or not fighting the generals changes the final battle against the Archdemon.

In DA2 choices don't matter cause no matter what you choose, you get almost the exact same outcome as if nothing you do matters. You could argue until you're blue about Feyndriel and Emile. But that doesn't change the fact that those are the only real choices you get. You won't really have a very different experience trying to go another route in a second playthrough. (You might get a companion change.. That's about it).

[Andronic0s]

Vormaerin wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You might wanna restate your stand on the dark ritual and the extent of the consequences of your choice.

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises, as does your decision about Anders' fate.  It changes the cut scenes you get and some of the trash mob fights you have.  It alters the epilogue.   Everything the Morrigan decision does and more in terms fo the game itself.

I look at it this way, in DAO the end result was the same but the path to my goal was of my choosing giving me the illusion that I had had an influence in the world around me, in DA2 the goal is the same and the path to my goal is also the same regardless of what I choose striping any illusion that might have been there in DAO

And companions do not change the story, when they do perform an action that modifies something I have no say on what they do, only when it's irrelevant to the plot can I convince them to change their actions.

[graavigala85]

ZombiePowered, pop i the game and you will see Orsino/Meredith on the starscreen. For me that is kinda important if they advertise the characters like that

Alpr, I have my staff of Parlantha, lets make it a battle of EPICS!!!!

[88mphSlayer]

i don't know i cared for the characters despite their flaws, that those flaws ended up bringing the party to an end and there's not much you can do about it is what can be frustrating tho, but if i didn't care in the first place i wouldn't have the motivation to complain about the game

[Schattenkeil]

I don't know about Carver, but while I would agree that Bethany is a Mary Sue, I did actually find it very sad when she died on my game.

She's a family girl to whom her heritage is very important and I guess her position would be as well. She's a bit shy for being used to dodging templars, she's obviously a tad vain. She's also disciplined when it comes to her magic and girl of prinple when it comes to that - as Aveline also notes. And she through and through... well, nice. And, as we know from a dialogue with Isabela (of course) she's virgin, yet, but was certainly not going to keep it that way forever, she seemed to be pretty romantic though.

That's more than nothing. To me Bethany was important in a way comparable to Imoen in Baldur's Gate / Baldur's Gate 2. IMHO she had more depth than any character in Neverwinter NIghts. Alone, the one thing she's not is edgy. In Dragon Age all characters had a personality as gigantic that it would make the Harbinger in Mass Effect like a wallflower against it. However, I don't see why every character must have a completely unlikely and horribly complex personality just for me to like them. On the contrary I liked Bethany because she was simply a nice girl, mage or no.

Modifié par Schattenkeil, 13 avril 2011 - 04:27 .

[Ygolnac]

completely agree with OP. In DA:O the choices to make were very significant, and still after six months after last playthrough i can remeber all of them, all of the npcs involved in the quests, becouse in origins you feel connected with the quests and the npcs. In DA2 i can't remeber any npc name, whats theyr role, etc. There are no rilevant choices to make, and everything that happens in the plot is thrown at you. You are just a delivery guy that kills people here and there (well, just here since there's only a location), and the plot is completely disjointed and you feel like acting not becouse you are involved in wht's happening, but becouse you must do it to make the game go on.
In my opinion the plot of DA:2 is a complete failure, and in a game like this the plot is at least 70% of fun.
An other 15% of fun is exploring, and in DA:2 that is completely neglected.
Combat system would be fun if you felt involved in the plot and had reason to combat, but since plot it's a failure you are just killing bounces of general peoples, and it becomes boring very soon.
So the "fun" factor is 0% for me in DA:2, and fun is not something you can introduce with a patch.

[Brilhros]

Andronic0s wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

ThePasserby wrote...

You might wanna restate your stand on the dark ritual and the extent of the consequences of your choice.

You might want to look at the argument I was responding to.  It was being asserted that the Morrigan decision changed how the game played, but nothing you did in DA2 did.  That is manifestly not true.   If the DA2 choices don't matter because you have the same boss fights in the end, you sure as heck can't argue that the Morrigan choice does anything, because it doesn't alter anything about how the final fighting goes.

Choosing between mages and templars caused companion crises, as does your decision about Anders' fate.  It changes the cut scenes you get and some of the trash mob fights you have.  It alters the epilogue.   Everything the Morrigan decision does and more in terms fo the game itself.

I look at it this way, in DAO the end result was the same but the path to my goal was of my choosing giving me the illusion that I had had an influence in the world around me, in DA2 the goal is the same and the path to my goal is also the same regardless of what I choose striping any illusion that might have been there in DAO

And companions do not change the story, when they do perform an action that modifies something I have no say on what they do, only when it's irrelevant to the plot can I convince them to change their actions.

I felt exactly like that. It was more like being a conduit than someone pivotal in the plot. I ended up feeling manipulated and underpowered in the end, in spite to the "rise to power" slogan.

[Corto81]

nicethugbert wrote...

Speak for yourself. I did not have this problem at all.

Also, DA2's story is just like DA:O.

DA:O, kill Archdemon, can't be avoided. DA2 kill Meredith, can't be avoided.

DA:O, kill Loghain or recuit him to fight Archdemon. DA2 kill Anders or recruit him to fight Meredith.

DA:O, do Morrigan's ritual or don't. DA2, side with mages and Cullen lets you go when Meredith dies or side with templars and all the Templars bow to you when Meredith dies.

DA:O how you treat various NPCs determines if they side with you for the final battle. DA2, how you treat various companions determines if they side with you for the final battle.

I know you're like the biggest DA II defender on these boads, but you're comparing apples to oranges.

The DA:O storyline is 90% about Ferelden people and politics and 10% about the Blight and the Archdemon.
Blight was just a cloak on the whole story. Which was deep, immersive and intricate.

DA II lacks depth, lacks character and lacks immersion. It's lacks in  the RPG department, it's much more of an action game than a tactical RPG where your choices matter.

I don't care how you spin it, if you're playing with an open mind there's no way in hell I felt any similar sort of connection to Isabela, Varric, Bethany, Mother, etc. - when you can only speak to them about "on-going quest" stuff, as opposed to Morrigan, Leliana etc. - when you speak to them at will, learn about their past and character, just talk and joke, etc.

Mother (and her unavoidable death) feel detached. She speaks to you like three times and that's it.
Bethany/Carver Deep Roads deaths are hilariously badly done, off-screen.
Anders, Fenris, Merril and Sebastion have one-track minds with the maturity of 12 year olds.

And DA:O's ending is more about how you end up with your hero, your ruler(s) and your companions, the Elves, the Dwarves, Redcliffe... Nearly EVERYTHING has an alternative scenario.

DA II just feels shallow. No matter how many billion times you say "Mages should die" you gotta whack Meredith.
No matter how many billion times you say "Templar should burn in hell" you gotta whack Orsino.
You help Anders, he blows up the Chantry. You don't... He blows up the Chantry.
Yeah, makes you feel like you mattered.... No, not really.

DA II could've been a great game in it's own right.
As it is, it's (to me) a fun side-track from DA:O but I'd never have bought it or felt any connection to it without the impact Origins made on me and on the RPG market.

The sales will tell. The general consensus is already out there.

You can spin it any way you want, but comparing DA II to DA:O is like comparing Dark Elf Trilogy to A Song of Ice and Fire... Insulting.
DA II is trying to be the "WoW" of the RPG market. And while WoW succeeded in main-streaming MMORPGs (while bascially killing the "RPG" bit in it), I hope DA3 goes back to its roots and the DA:O type of story and plot cos that's what made it such a huge success in the first place.
Not the exploding bodies and the "awesome button" strategy.

I won't even go into the art department where despite the outdated graphics the level designs make you go "whoa! screenshot!" (Lost Temple, Haven, etc. etc.), and DA II level design is just... I don't even have the proper word.
I think "bad" and "lazy" describes it though.

Modifié par Corto81, 13 avril 2011 - 07:47 .

[getterg]

100% agree with OP. Carver was a whiny *****, didn't care about him, bethany was much better but not by alot, the part where aveline gets with donnic and you choose the broken heart dialogue option was the only part that made me remotely depressed

[stobie]

It didn't make *you* care. I, otoh, did care, & more so than about Origins. I cared most about the city elves in Origins, yet my city elf rogue comes to Denerim, finds the alienage purged, then goes on happy quests to pick pocket people. I respected Morrigan, liked Alistair & Zevran, & didn't care one bit about the others. That doesn't mean the others were worthless - only that they didn't appeal to *me.*

God - I hate topics like this. Why wouldn't you just say, "It didn't make ME care?" Ugh.

Other than Sebastian, I cared about all of them. I didn't like Carver, but his death in the Deep Roads was wonderful. I became teary, as I did with Wesley's death.

[Destrier77]

@Vormaerin so glad someone else got it. Its like the fallout games where the decisions affect the actual game, who cares about the epilogue.

To be honest with you i felt much more connection with all the characters in this game than the first. I was gutted when my mum was captured, and feared the inevitable, i had grown attached to her from visits home and chats, so i guess i did more of that then you. I was even on edge so much when my sister was also captured, i was sure she would go the same way as my mother but i was lucky.

This game is beautiful in that the decisions affect every part of your play through, and peoples attitudes to you. In origins your choices have a one off effect which is either immediate (you get a party member, get some item, etc) or just talked about in the ending (i knew what happened i dont need to be told again in a cut scene at the end)

I think the final proof was my 3rd playthrough of origins to get a save for this game since my hard drive had broken was a chore. I knew as i played that no choice would change the game, no matter which direction i went first, or which side i sided with. I would still go the same direction and end in the same place fighting the same enemy. Im so excited to fire up a second game of dragon age 2 because of the adventure.

This game has an adventure and life to it. Its not perfect but as a hollywood advernture its great!!

[Sabriana]

I fully expected the family to die wholesale, because this kind of whipped up drama is becoming a stock in trade for bioware, imo.

I was actually shocked, shocked I say, when uncle survived all through the game, and then I was even more shocked when cousin had no major angst/death/violence incidents.

[graavigala85]

Sabriana wrote...

I fully expected the family to die wholesale, because this kind of whipped up drama is becoming a stock in trade for bioware, imo.

I was actually shocked, shocked I say, when uncle survived all through the game, and then I was even more shocked when cousin had no major angst/death/violence incidents.

Hah I had totally forgotten the cousin, I was expecting her to turn out to somekind of crazy bloodmage who was hungering for revenge and killed the uncle in angst