149 réponses à ce sujet

[Deified Data]

Blacklash93 wrote...

I really didn't like the article. Disagree completely on the story due to points stated above.

What bugs me the most is that the writer notes average gameplay and combat, music, and graphics, and yet says everyone of those flaws DA2 should be forgiven because of the story.

No, she doesn't. She mentions that she understands completely when people say they dislike the game, for those very qualities. What she is saying is that she's found a different criteria to judge the game. Whether you subscribe to the criteria or not is up to you.

[Demx]

zikadee wrote...

The article itself aside, (Agreed with most of it, but not all)

THIS RIGHT HERE

The moment that you, the player, realize that that tap of Anders’s staff connects with that one particular game changing event that I won’t describe here, something happens inside the player.

MIND BLOWWWWWWN.

It would have been a little bit of a mind blown for me, if I wasn't for the obvious foreshadowing brought up by Anders and having to choose a side. Then there was the bit with helping Anders in the chantry, and I misheard the Grand Cleric saying, "Your soul is troubled, child. I hope you found a balm for it here." As: "Your soul is troubled, child. I hope you found a bomb for it here."

[Sabotin]

I can understand the writer's point of view and what she is trying to say. I agree to an extent. But the problem with DA2 is also that people had certain expectations. And while the game may be very deep underneath and trying to steer the player into seeing those parts, the thing is if expectations are not met, those holes are the things that will be first seen.
I think it's ironic and sad that Bioware tried to follow gaming trends, putting more importance on first impressions even at the cost of some rage, but it turned out that people that caught on on that don't see the depth and people that would see it don't want to play because of that approach.

Disclaimer: I'm not calling anyone dumb or wrong, I hope it didn't come up as such.This is just some assumption making based on my own experience with the game. Played 3-4 times, started disappointed, but on the 3rd run I seriously enjoyed it.

[Paeyne]

I suppose it is going to be a hallmark of a game about polarization that the community will be polarized and even the individual emotional reaction will be polarized.

I agree with much that this reviewer says.

I also disagree with a great deal of what this reviewer says.

That sounds strange, but I think it is going to be the legacy of DA2.


For the most part I found the characters wooden, unrelenting and uninteresting in their zealotry.

But depending what you did on various playthroughs, those characters could shine and have glimmers of endearment .


I generally found many of the quests interesting and thought provoking.

But for every quest that was truly engaging and inspired there were two put into the game for the sole purpose of padding play time.


I applaud Bioware for breaking new story ground and putting so many real world concerns into a game.  I give them the highest marks for attempting material that many might consider inappropriate for a video game.

On the other hand I must chastise them fror not giving the player any impact on that story.  Rather than engaging the story and having some input into these weighty story issues, the story unfolds while the player helplessly watches, their opinion of the overall events ignored or trivialized.


I agree whole heartily with the reviewers sentiments if not with all her points.

I may have been disappointed with DA2 in many ways, but I still played through it three times.
That says something in and of itself.

[ZombiePowered]

IanPolaris wrote...

Whoah....let me get this straight (pun intended). We are supposed to forgive a game of a metric ton of very visible flaws, a clearly rushed implementation, and plot holes bigger than an NFL Lineman because it makes us good to be a political liberal?! We are supposed to cheer this gae on because it shouts "gay rights"?! Really?

Whatever your political leanings or beliefs, a damn video game isn't the place for that honestly and even if it were, that doesn't excuse a frankly bad game by any objective standard of computer games.

Bear in mind that the same thing that the reviewer lauds is only supporte by perhaps a third (being VERY generous) of the general population at least in the USA.

-Polaris

Why aren't video games a good place to bring up modern issues? They are just as valid a medium as film, television, books, painting, or any other art form. We do need more games like this--games that are intelligent, not just the same rehashed story and solid game-play.

[adneate]

This just reads like the typically desperate arguments that Dragon Age 2 is in fact not a rushed and cynical cash in on the success of Origins by Electronic Arts. This game is not some existential masterpiece on the fragility of humanity nor is it some great coup for sexual minorities. It can't be about the human experience because it is almost devoid of free will of any kind and is an incredibly deterministic story, no matter what the player says things happen exactly the same way. I can't honestly say this game treats bisexuality and homosexuality with any real depth or class either, it flat out recycles most of the animations from the hetero encounters and largely hand-waves the entire concept of these relationships being outside of the norms of society. The mere fact that this person suggests that Anders's line about the Templars being some sort of commentary on the oppression that gay people may face from religious institutions is a bad joke. The order of the Templars doesn't care that Anders has sex with men they care about him being a possessed abomination capable of killing thousands of people with his mind. This story is a ham-fisted over the top mess that beats the player over the head with it's themes, yet somehow this person missed ALL of them and turned a mediocre game into a 3rd year philosophy class debate on Western Liberalism.

Dragon Age 2 is a throughly mediocre game that pretends it's far deeper than it actually is. If the developers spent more time making a game that was actually deep as opposed to one that just seemed like it was then maybe people wouldn't be so negative about it.

Modifié par adneate, 05 avril 2011 - 10:45 .

[Morroian]

Deified Data wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

I really didn't like the article. Disagree completely on the story due to points stated above.

What bugs me the most is that the writer notes average gameplay and combat, music, and graphics, and yet says everyone of those flaws DA2 should be forgiven because of the story.

No, she doesn't. She mentions that she understands completely when people say they dislike the game, for those very qualities. What she is saying is that she's found a different criteria to judge the game. Whether you subscribe to the criteria or not is up to you.

Yep and its where I come from as well in liking the game. Its like Kotor 2 in this respect which I like better than kotor 1, flaws and all. Although I did think the political stuff in the article was way off the mark.

Modifié par Morroian, 05 avril 2011 - 10:44 .

[silver-crescent]

That's an incredibly interesting article/review. The novel like qualities really are the best thing about DA2 and what really makes it shine.

But on the other hand it kinda exagerates on the game's flaws I think. I for one quite enjoyed the gameplay in general, as well as the story.

Modifié par silver-crescent, 05 avril 2011 - 10:55 .

[silver-crescent]

adneate wrote...

This just reads like the typically desperate arguments that Dragon Age 2 is in fact not a rushed and cynical cash in on the success of Origins by Electronic Arts. This game is not some existential masterpiece on the fragility of humanity nor is it some great coup for sexual minorities. It can't be about the human experience because it is almost devoid of free will of any kind and is an incredibly deterministic story, no matter what the player says things happen exactly the same way. I can't honestly say this game treats bisexuality and homosexuality with any real depth or class either, it flat out recycles most of the animations from the hetero encounters and largely hand-waves the entire concept of these relationships being outside of the norms of society. The mere fact that this person suggests that Anders's line about the Templars being some sort of commentary on the oppression that gay people may face from religious institutions is a bad joke. The order of the Templars doesn't care that Anders has sex with men they care about him being a possessed abomination capable of killing thousands of people with his mind. This story is a ham-fisted over the top mess that beats the player over the head with it's themes, yet somehow this person missed ALL of them and turned a mediocre game into a 3rd year philosophy class debate on Western Liberalism.

Dragon Age 2 is a throughly mediocre game that pretends it's far deeper than it actually is. If the developers spent more time making a game that was actually deep as opposed to one that just seemed like it was then maybe people wouldn't be so negative about it.

Wow, talk about missing the point completely.

[sphinxess]

So style over substance - the goal in DA2 was to make one thing <character interactions and dialogue a 10/10 while letting the rest slip and the rest of us just don't get it. Oh I get it and I rather agree that the interactions <while too short for true substance> are a 10/10. But if this is true the makers of this game dont' understand their audience very well. This has been tried in other fields - a few lines on a canvas and critics writing glowing reviews.

[DeffFace]

I think the reviewers points about DAII's subtleties, and how much of that may get missed by players used to more overt narratives/characters, really hits the nail on the head.

[silver-crescent]

The writer of that review also wrote these 3 articles

http://www.popmatter...n-age-iis-isabe

http://www.popmatter...ectic-of-dragon

http://www.popmatter...n-dragon-age-ii

I just read them. Pretty interesting stuff and a refreshing look on the game.

[IanPolaris]

ZombiePowered wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Whoah....let me get this straight (pun intended). We are supposed to forgive a game of a metric ton of very visible flaws, a clearly rushed implementation, and plot holes bigger than an NFL Lineman because it makes us good to be a political liberal?! We are supposed to cheer this gae on because it shouts "gay rights"?! Really?

Whatever your political leanings or beliefs, a damn video game isn't the place for that honestly and even if it were, that doesn't excuse a frankly bad game by any objective standard of computer games.

Bear in mind that the same thing that the reviewer lauds is only supporte by perhaps a third (being VERY generous) of the general population at least in the USA.

-Polaris

Why aren't video games a good place to bring up modern issues? They are just as valid a medium as film, television, books, painting, or any other art form. We do need more games like this--games that are intelligent, not just the same rehashed story and solid game-play.

The same reason you shouldn't talk death and taxes with your friends at a social club (unless everyone understands that this will be the topic...i.e. a political rally).  Do that and you don't have friends.  At best, it has to be done carefully and I'd say try to avoid an overt PoV.

Frankly I don't think DA2 is groundbreaking on GBLT rights and frankly more from sheer developer laziness.  Not everyone in this world is Bi.  Honestly, if you want a game that handles sexuality in a much more thoughtful and mature manner, you simply need go no further than replaying DAO.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ZombiePowered wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Whoah....let me get this straight (pun intended). We are supposed to forgive a game of a metric ton of very visible flaws, a clearly rushed implementation, and plot holes bigger than an NFL Lineman because it makes us good to be a political liberal?! We are supposed to cheer this gae on because it shouts "gay rights"?! Really?

Whatever your political leanings or beliefs, a damn video game isn't the place for that honestly and even if it were, that doesn't excuse a frankly bad game by any objective standard of computer games.

Bear in mind that the same thing that the reviewer lauds is only supporte by perhaps a third (being VERY generous) of the general population at least in the USA.

-Polaris

Why aren't video games a good place to bring up modern issues? They are just as valid a medium as film, television, books, painting, or any other art form. We do need more games like this--games that are intelligent, not just the same rehashed story and solid game-play.

I didnt find DA2 to be all that intelligent honestly.  It's like trying to submit a serious academic paper full of typos, spelling errors, and even the wrong tone (colloquial rather than dry academic).  Whatever kernel of 'thoughful examination' might be there is ruined by the form and execution.

-Polaris

[blothulfur]

Did the reviewer get a different version of DA2 to me because the game I played contained none of these great moments or acts of character building and bloody hell was I looking for them, I mean I saw what they wanted to do with the story and character but to say a game where there is no outcome to any situation other than slaughter everybody and their pets is a liberal masterpiece is kind of laughable.

Maybe it just went over my head.

[Camenae]

IanPolaris wrote...

I didnt find DA2 to be all that intelligent honestly.  It's like trying to submit a serious academic paper full of typos, spelling errors, and even the wrong tone (colloquial rather than dry academic).  Whatever kernel of 'thoughful examination' might be there is ruined by the form and execution.

-Polaris

I agree with this.  Not saying that DA2 has NO redeeming qualities, but the flaws are too much for me to just "overlook and enjoy the story."  I want to say, yes you have some great ideas in your paper, but for goodness' sake please use spell check/proofread next time.

[silver-crescent]

blothulfur wrote...

Did the reviewer get a different version of DA2 to me because the game I played contained none of these great moments or acts of character building and bloody hell was I looking for them, I mean I saw what they wanted to do with the story and character but to say a game where there is no outcome to any situation other than slaughter everybody and their pets is a liberal masterpiece is kind of laughable.

Maybe it just went over my head.

So after going through the whole game the only thing you got was that you got to kill a lot of people? Did you skip all the dialogue or something?  
 

[Plaintiff]

IanPolaris wrote...

Whatever your political leanings or beliefs, a damn video game isn't the place for that honestly and even if it were, that doesn't excuse a frankly bad game by any objective standard of computer games.

Bear in mind that the same thing that the reviewer lauds is only supporte by perhaps a third (being VERY generous) of the general population at least in the USA.

-Polaris

Then where is the place for that? Is it okay to discuss gay rights in films and literature? If yes, then why not video games? If no, then why not? Why should video games be banned from exploring politics and sexuality in general when other forms of media are allowed? Are you saying that gaming is a "lower" form of entertainment, and is not worthy of such highbrow discussion? Or do you just hate being made to think because it gets in the way of your killing?

What "objective standard" is there for video games? Last I checked, there wasn't one. All reviews are opinion, nothing more. The things that bug you so much about Dragon Age 2 don't faze me in the slightest. In fact, I think it's a very good game.

And frankly, so what if a lot of people choose to remain willfully ignorant about homosexuality? "The majority doesn't like it" is never a good enough reason not to do something. The majority can be wrong, and often is. Are you suggesting that we should submit to ideals we fundamentally disagree with just because the other side might be bigger than us?

[scpulley]

javierabegazo wrote...

'Dragon Age II': Making the Case for "Quality" Games < PopMatters

Here's an excerpt.

By stripping the game of much of its visual excess—characters stick
to the same environments, don’t age despite the story taking the better
part of a decade, always wear the same clothes—the player’s attention is
steered to the characters themselves and all of their likes, dislikes,
politics, morals, and humors.

Dragon Age II is ultimately a character drama, less concerned
with an epic, save-the-world storyline than in examining the interior
worlds of distinct personalities. These are flawed beings, doomed by
their own hubris or madness, and weak creatures whose personal and
psychological failings become centerplace to the unfolding action. I
can’t really think of another game that has accomplished this kind of
presentation of character to the extent and depth that Dragon Age II does, save perhaps the kind of late-1990s Japanese RPGs that don’t really get made anymore.

I think it's a pretty awesome article and whether you like, or dislike, or feel lukewarm about Dragon Age II, I highly recommend reading the entirety of the Article.

Also I would love for Mr. Laidlaw, Mr. Gaider, or any of the Dragon Age Devs to take part and comment on this article, perhaps provide any unheard insight.

Again, the game had a great idea. They just failed to actually bring it home at the end by actually making the story connected to Hawke enough so you get the sense his decision actually matters. You can have the greatest idea for a story in the world that if written right will sit proudly on the national bestseller list. BUT....you still have to choose the right words and shape the story on the page correctly. No one cares so much if the concept is original or well crafted, they don't read a concept. Same goes for games, I buy bioware games because usually they offer great stories to play through. I'm not playing a concept, you actually need a story to be delievered well. In this case, it was cheated on to make room for other development choices in the game that I think left a very glaring hole in an otherwise well done game. If this wasn't a Bioware game probably people would have been more forgiving that the story didn't actually play out well at all in game, but a lot of us don't by Bioware for the worlds greatest gameplay. It's the stories. Miss that and people will notice.

[Miashi]

I loved the characters and their attitudes, however I feel like the game did not give us enough opportunities to sit down and actually "talk" with them; discussion was too often functional rather than personal.

I still think there should've been a campsite, something, where you could just talk with the character about what they were before, some confidences for the ones you're closer with, and whatnot. The only "close" relationship I felt I had was mostly involving romances.

About the article, I think that it speaks a lot about the conflicts within the game, but made them sound grander than they actually are; once you're past the first playthrough, that "fling of a staff" (or whatever it was), was not because you helped Anders, but because it was meant to happen, whether you like it or not.

Modifié par Miashi, 05 avril 2011 - 11:24 .

[LadyJaneGrey]

Did anyone else read her ME2 DLC commentary?  I'm not saying her conclusion is right or wrong, but it does read like some students' papers I had to grade in college classes...

Edit:

Modifié par LadyJaneGrey, 05 avril 2011 - 11:24 .

[adneate]

silver-crescent wrote...
Wow, talk about missing the point completely.

Her point is "Wow this is a really subtle and deep character driven story we should like this!" I disagree this is a shallow and poorly done character story much like Mass Effect 2. Both games want to be something that they aren't which is thought provoking. People defend Mass Effect 2's shoddy plot and story structure with the same tired excuse "It's a character story and you just don't get it."

Band of Brothers is a good character story, The Shield is a good character story Dragon Age 2 is a sloppy unfinished mess that was meant as nothing more than a quick cash in for BioWare's failing publisher and owner.

Modifié par adneate, 05 avril 2011 - 11:24 .

[silver-crescent]

IanPolaris wrote...
I didnt find DA2 to be all that intelligent honestly.  It's like trying to submit a serious academic paper full of typos, spelling errors, and even the wrong tone (colloquial rather than dry academic).  Whatever kernel of 'thoughful examination' might be there is ruined by the form and execution.

-Polaris

So the story has less quality because of the gameplay? Is that what you're saying?

The whole game might suffer because of the gameplay, but the story itself has nothing to do with it. 

Same as say you can have a game with terrible graphics and an amazing OST, or with terrible voice acting but amazing combat. The bad aspects don't make the good aspects worse, they just make the game as a whole worse.

[Miashi]

silver-crescent wrote...
So the story has less quality because of the gameplay? Is that what you're saying?

I don't know if that's what the guy was saying, but personally I think so. I mean, it's just like books and movies.

If you translate an awesome book into a movie: when the production is terrible, chances are the movie will get poor reviews, because it was poorly executed. DA:2 had a brilliant storyline, but the game itself drew it very very poorly.