297 réponses à ce sujet

[Lord Deshwitat]

This one liked DA:O and DA 2. In fact this one is on the 8 play throe with this ones smexy warrior Hawke and this one will play it again when the next patch is out. So this one must say that this is a good game and worth what this one paid for it.

Gahh, it's hard to write in Hanar^^. What I wanted to say was that I enjoyed the game over and over again and probably will in a few more run throes. So I' m a Lover not a Hater^^

[Tommy6860]

Ignore this as it was edited, the formatting in this forum is terrible!

Modifié par Tommy6860, 07 avril 2011 - 01:11 .

[Tommy6860]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Let's define RPG, well, we could try, but few can ever agree on the details of
what actually constitutes an RPG.

Some common things that make up most RPGs:

PC Character Customization 1: DAO allowed for more choices than DA II, and is a
feature I enjoy as much as anyone. However, the premise of DAO is very
different than that of DA II and Origins options would simply not work well in
the premise of DA II. As stated by the developers; DA II is about a specific
character (Hakwe) and his or her rise to power as Champion of a city.

I think you're over-simplifying the DA2 to Origins comparison, to be
honest. I venture to say that most gamers here that are disappointed with DA2,
are also very familiar with ME2, and most liked that game (I certainly
did). But ME2 was a relevant sequel to it its predecessor’s namesake, DA2
isn't. Sadly, the graphic elements of ME2 are so prevalent throughout DA2
(most can tell that certain animations were copied from ME2), in that alone
takes away some DA originality from it. The character strides, drinking at
The Hanged Man animation, are exactly like Shepard drinking at Afterlife
or Dark Star. The Rogue ability "Vendetta" is the exact animation of
Kasumi's "Shadow Strike". The character models and textures (most
notably, that ugly paint brush strokes for hair looks) are nearly the same.

This suggests that choices were going to be limited from the outset, and is
something that I use to temper my expectations...

It suggests rushing the game due to the need for money and time constraints.
Most know the game had little more than two years dev time, if it was that at
all, to get it to retail. The fact that recycled maps slightly reconfigured
with doors and place-able objects, with nothing else changed, and copied
animations and textures from another well noted Bioware franchise, speaks volumes.
You want limited, I just gave a few examples right here out of quite a few more
I could add. I have no problem with the area limitations, and reusing
animations from another game, but including those limitations shouldn't require
me to be even more tempered in my thinking about DA2 when considering it went
far and away from anything Dragon Age, but closer to Final Fantasy, that's
where the temperance stops.

For example, Hawke was intended to be human so you only get 1 of 2 choices,
male or female, along with the same limitation of character classes
(Warrior-Rogue-Mage) as Origins. Whether or not you can select a different race
does not determine whether or not the game can be considered an RPG; this also
serves to tempered my expectations.



There are still choices available for character advancement to be made for
advancement within the class skills and abilities. More limited perhaps, and
perhaps some players favorite specialties or skills from Origins were not
included. I can understand this can be frustrating to some, but there are still
plenty of options to choose from. I particularly enjoy the fact that the
re-design further separated the classes to be more class-specific and to
eliminate much of the duplicated cross-class abilities. While it does limit
choices compared to DAO, it is not a determining factor of what makes up a RPG,
since choices still remain. Again, this served to temper my expectations.



I could go on and on, but I don't favor writing the multiple walls of text that
would be required.

You don’t need to go on and on, but you left out so much as
to define what still is an RPG. Ok, we are limited to human character development
and storyline only now, that’s fine. class advancement is cool with skill and abilities
had that in Origins. But we also had the ability to talk to our companions at
any time, redress them if different armors, get a more personal story about
myself (like the City Elf or a Cousland) and get to know my companions in who
they are. That’s all lost in framed story-telling where cutscenes give me
cinematic conversation choices that are set in stone with my companions, with
choices that sometimes don’t match with what I thought the responses would be.
That in itself doesn’t lend to me building any kind of emotional connection to
them; right there, is a big hit against that being an RPG.

As I said earlier, I pay little or no attention to ads created by marketing
droids, and my age and experience over the last 30+ years of computer game
experience has given me the wisdom and insight to put such things into
perspective, even if I may not express it very well in a wall of text.

Well, I’ve been gaming since the early 70s (yes, I am that
old) and I pay no attention to those very same things, but I do pay attention
to labels. Last I saw, Dragon Age: Origins was labeled an RPG, and it brought
back days of yore for me. DA2 is not an RPG, it is an action/adventure story-told
game with unrealistic combat action to appeal to a market EA felt needed to be
tapped, and we now see what the results are becoming. I would venture to say
that had DA2 had not been promoted as a sequel to Origins, the result would
have been different in that there would be substantially less criticism of the
game. Unfortunately, the powers that be decided to play on the success of what
made Origins not only special and wonderful, but a big hit monetarily, and it
seems to be backfiring.

[ginzaen]

Mesina2 wrote...

This one believes that Dragon Age 2 is superior in almost every way then Dragon Age Origins.
This one believes some things about certain fans that could get this one banned so this one will remain silent on that.

I like both games and awakening but i wouldn't say da2 is superior.

[Tommy6860]

Otterwarden wrote...

Pariah00 wrote...

Say what you will about The Witcher, buuuuut...
*puts on theatrically dramatic countenance and clears comically empassioned voice* 
Don't dare utter such ghastly lies about Planescape! For shame, Serah.

Kidding aside, there is one major difference between DA2 and PS:T that goes far beyond the whole predetermined character thing- Choices in ROLE-playing through the story.  Oh, so many choices.  That's why, while people may dislike being TNO in all its gender and appearence predetermined glory, most people don't consider it not an RPG (at least not in serious circles).  The whole gender and appearence thing is so superficial in comparison the depths found elsewhere in that game.

edit: 'command x' is not always your friend when postin

Preaching to the choir... PS:T is my favorite by far and away... closest I ever came to blurring the lines between myself and the character.  Played it as the intellectual, so relatively few battles and the greatest choice options... loved every minute... simply the best.

Edit:  Passed it up when it first came out because of the gamebox art.  Had recently tried Fallout and it wasn't my cup of tea, and I thought the story was going to revolve around some nuclear catastrophe because of his looks.  Finally picked it up when the cult following gathered some steam.

I like Fallout 1,2 and especailly 3. They were certainly different kinds of RPGs, but they played like an RPG, but you were only one person. F3 had some of the best humor and characters I have ever experienced. I know some say they are shooters, but that is over-simplifying how it really plays out. I do agree with you on PS:T, that game I played about 10 times over. I also really liked Gothic 2, though it didn't translate well to English. Icewind Dale, Morrowind, any of the Ultima series from the mid 80s to early 90s and Wizardry 8. But my absolute all time is BG1&2 with Origins a close second. I can name quite a few more, but you get the point what games I like.

[v_ware]

Pacifien wrote...

This one is pleased to read about your enjoyment of Dragon Age 2. This one, however, is disappointed that you did not express your views in the ways of the hanar.

This one also likes your point about not expecting Dragon Age: Origins v2 because this one is a big believer in expectations dictating one's enjoyment of the sequel. This one wishes to say more about that, but this one's keyboard is broken and it makes this one want to CHOKE THE LIFE OUT OF SIX RANDOM PASSERBYS. This one means, um, yeah.

Well, maybe EA/Bioware shouldn't have hyped and marketed this game as Dragon Age 2, but as Dragon Age: Kirkwall or something like that.

And btw, without expectations nobody would buy the game.

[Nozybidaj]

Twulfster wrote...
It wasn't Dragon Age : Origins v2 but I wasn't expecting that

Yeah, that's pretty much why I haven't bought it yet.  The marketing and lead up to DA2 reminded me a lot of the lead up to ME2, so I wasn't all that interested in it.

If they ever do release DA:O 2 though I'll be right there ready to pre-order.

[Kane-Corr]

I don't get it. Did any of you realize before you put your money into it, that this game featured a different protagonist? I mean, why are you angry that it's called DA2...who cares? It's a game that continues a piece of the Dragon Age world. It SHOULD be called 2. Technically it should be called 1.

[1000questions]

Kane-Corr wrote...

I don't get it. Did any of you realize before you put your money into it, that this game featured a different protagonist? I mean, why are you angry that it's called DA2...who cares? It's a game that continues a piece of the Dragon Age world. It SHOULD be called 2. Technically it should be called 1.

You wont get it ! Do yourself a favour, stop trying^_^

[Otterwarden]

Finnigan McBonk wrote...

There you go... dictating to us what the "real" question is. Here is a ... different... question. At the end of the day, is it the fact that a game package includes the letters "RPG" that determines whether the game is entertaining, or is it the actual content of the game? And another question... is there a specific formula to which all "RPG" games ever made have conformed? And, finally, is there any hypocrisy to a fanbase clamoring for "choice" while accusing the developer of "changing?"

Ok, Mr. Reagan... this one will play…the letters “RPG” on the box set the expectations and, in so much as the expectations set determine whether or not they are ultimately met, they do impact on enjoyment.  The moderator made this point, and it also reminds this one of the last line in Skwervin's feedback found on page 87 of the feedback thread: 
 social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6413491/87

The answer to your second question is, no, there is no board certified definition that must be adhered to like the ERSB rating, so there has been wide discrepancies between what gets marketed under the RPG genre label.  And, for your final question, this one will first copy paste from a previous thread entry:

 

TheDarkShape wrote...

If the exact same game was released under a different title, reviews would be similar, but the fan score would be *way* higher.
The fans are off-base here, not the critics. The fans are the ones who feel personally insulted, as though the developer owes them something (spoiler: BioWare doesn't owe you anything). So they rate out of a state of incensed "passion," not an objective look at the game itself.

Otterwarden wrote…

Hmm, that's a tough one.  What does a manufacturer of any good owe their customer?

Leaving aside the long marketing 101 debate, there is a general consensus that a branded product carries with it certain responsibilities if the brand loyalty is to be maintained.  Deviate too much from the original and disaster strikes (Coke often cited here as prime example).  The insult could easily stem from a feeling that DA:O was the "bait" and DA2 the "switch".  Was Bioware within its rights to deviate from the classical RPG framework they provided in DA:O?  Of course they are.  Are the customers within their rights to loudly complain that their expectations of brand consistency was not met?  Of course they are.

So, basically, this one believes that your third question is moot.  The simple fact in marketing is that even if you win on a point of principle you loose.  Ultimately, the customer is always right and failing to accept this is simply cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Only circumstance that this one knows of that deviates from this rule is a monopoly situation of a necessity product.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 07 avril 2011 - 04:25 .

[xkg]

Kane-Corr wrote...

I don't get it. Did any of you realize before you put your money into it, that this game featured a different protagonist? I mean, why are you angry that it's called DA2...who cares? It's a game that continues a piece of the Dragon Age world. It SHOULD be called 2. Technically it should be called 1.

i agree to that 100% (only bold letters part)
Seeing so many "This is not DA:O2" etc comments all over the board i have to ask then
if it isnt DA:O2 but DA2 where is DA1 - did i miss it somehow ? is there such game and it is me who just missed it ?

Modifié par xkg, 07 avril 2011 - 04:22 .

[Horus Blackheart]

I Applaud the ops Applauding style

[golf claps]

[1000questions]

xkg wrote...
..............
Seeing so many "This is not DA:O2" etc comments all over the board i have to ask then
if it isnt DA:O2 but DA2 where is DA1 - did i miss it somehow ? is there such game and it is me who just missed it ?

Common Sense wont kill you, dont be afraid to use it.

when people say it is not DA:O2 or like Origins at all they refer to the feel,experience they got from DA:Origins. They are not pointing towards the naming convention.

[xkg]

1000questions wrote...

xkg wrote...
..............
Seeing so many "This is not DA:O2" etc comments all over the board i have to ask then
if it isnt DA:O2 but DA2 where is DA1 - did i miss it somehow ? is there such game and it is me who just missed it ?

Common Sense wont kill you, dont be afraid to use it.

when people say it is not DA:O2 or like Origins at all they refer to the feel,experience they got from DA:Origins. They are not pointing towards the naming convention.

You took i t wrong - im too disapointed with DA2 after playing DAO - this question was more toward developers
I mean it was bad idea to call this game DA2 because there is no DA1 - and if we want to look at DAO as "1" calling this game "2" still seems to be a bad idea because beside the lore ith has nothing in common with previous game

[CloudOfShadows]

This one enjoys DA2 a lot. This one even thinks DA2 is superior in the aspect that matters to this one. So, this one does not mind many of the changes, but this one feels the 'additions' made to DA2 that reference into this ones choices made in DA:O feel the most rushed and incomplete and don't seem to fit in with DA2. This one meant to express that the 2 is in the title and an attempt is made to justify the number.

[Pariah00]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Otterwarden wrote...

Pariah00 wrote...

Say what you will about The Witcher, buuuuut...
*puts on theatrically dramatic countenance and clears comically empassioned voice* 
Don't dare utter such ghastly lies about Planescape! For shame, Serah.

Kidding aside, there is one major difference between DA2 and PS:T that goes far beyond the whole predetermined character thing- Choices in ROLE-playing through the story.  Oh, so many choices.  That's why, while people may dislike being TNO in all its gender and appearence predetermined glory, most people don't consider it not an RPG (at least not in serious circles).  The whole gender and appearence thing is so superficial in comparison the depths found elsewhere in that game.

edit: 'command x' is not always your friend when postin

Preaching to the choir... PS:T is my favorite by far and away... closest I ever came to blurring the lines between myself and the character.  Played it as the intellectual, so relatively few battles and the greatest choice options... loved every minute... simply the best.

Edit:  Passed it up when it first came out because of the gamebox art.  Had recently tried Fallout and it wasn't my cup of tea, and I thought the story was going to revolve around some nuclear catastrophe because of his looks.  Finally picked it up when the cult following gathered some steam.

I like Fallout 1,2 and especailly 3. They were certainly different kinds of RPGs, but they played like an RPG, but you were only one person. F3 had some of the best humor and characters I have ever experienced. I know some say they are shooters, but that is over-simplifying how it really plays out. I do agree with you on PS:T, that game I played about 10 times over. I also really liked Gothic 2, though it didn't translate well to English. Icewind Dale, Morrowind, any of the Ultima series from the mid 80s to early 90s and Wizardry 8. But my absolute all time is BG1&2 with Origins a close second. I can name quite a few more, but you get the point what games I like.

I think these two bolded lines have a lot of truth for me. 

Fallout 3 is vastly different than, say, BG but both (indeed all of the games you mentioned that I have also played) succeed in one common thing:  Blurring the line between me and the game/character- they are more or less designed with this concept in mind.  It's a totally subjective thing and near impossible to explain, but I think it's real (and certainly replicable) and it has everything to do with why I enjoy the ME games but don't really consider them RPGs and why I can't view DA2 as an RPG. 

Many of us play video games as a form of escape and I have never found a more potent way to escape. 

Fallout 3 has ****** poor dialogue (in terms of meaningfulness), companions that are nothing more than extra fire power, and an after thought "story" in an sandbox world where exploration is the only worthy goal but when my character dresses up like Abraham Lincoln, complete with his repeater, and wages a full on assualt on the Slavers that's all me.

It's not pretermined characters, insofar as both Hawke and TNO are "predetermined," its how the game and the character are designed- with the player at the forefront conceptually or the writers?  Hawke comes alive via one of the scripts you choose and limited course of actions you take.  Combine that with gameplay one considers good and you have a game that I can see why people would enjoy but it is a far, far cry from creating the player-centered experience of many other RPGs.

Hope that made sense and sorry for the rant.

[Rockpopple]

I likes 'em both. I feel lucky to have so many great RPG titles on my console. This one's happy.

[Silvernight]

I have to say that at first I was pretty pissed, and more than anything because of the conversation wheel (I thought it sucked in Mass Effect), and because Kirkwall felt empty and ghost-like, but somehow further into the game the 'wtf' factor waned and I actually started enjoying it. Yep, the game has flaws, but I enjoyed it for what it's worth. Combat I don't care that much about, it's there and that's fine (although massive healthbars for bosses were annoying). The storyline definitely lacked overall epicness as compared to DAO, but in the end it was enough to keep me entertained. Guess I'm not picky. I bet many are going to disagree, but it's the characters that defined the game for me. Loved the interactions with and between all companions, except, maybe Carver. I'd say it's also an improvement how they were shown to interact with each other without Hawke (say you come to talk to Isabela and find her playing cards with Merrill). It actually felt like they were sort of dysfunctional, but a family and had their own lives and activities besides just tagging after Hawke. Oh and each one had more than one sidequest. Love companion sidequests And I can't complain about the cinematic bits either, to each their own I guess. And that is why I love Bioware games - because they're so heavy on character interaction.

Overall, this one is pleased. :innocent:

Modifié par Silvernight, 07 avril 2011 - 05:56 .

[erynnar]

Tommy6860 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

LiquidGrape wrote...

1000questions wrote...

All the long explanation boils down to one thing in the lengthy post. 

I liked the game, I dont care about your opinon if you dont like it even if it is logical,rational or honest criticism.

Well, somehow I dont care about the plea made in the end too.

By all means, criticise. What I wanted to illustrate with that disclaimer was how I've grown tired of being accused of being willfully blind or a hired goon through the most incongruous speculation, simply for having a positive stance on the subject.
So if you want to address my points, go right ahead. But I would appreciate it if you didn't attempt to discredit me by reducing my argument to a single sentence.

About as tired as I am of being called a "hater" and a narrow minded RPG'er who just wants another epic save the world story (two archdemons stapled together to make  super Blight, which I find to be a highly insulting comment) and an exact copy of DAO. As tired as I am of being told that a story in which my protagonist does nothing to change the world, so much as she piddles around deciding who to sleep with while she waits for the the world to go BOOM (no spoilers) and does nothing about it because she can't due to the story being in flashback. I am tired of being told it's so much more nuanced and complex, when really it's not (I can't go into that here no spoilers). And I don't like a cinematic movie with some combat thrown in.

But that is what I don't like. I don't hate the game there are things I loved about it, some I liked, the majority of it  disappoints me, and a good portion felt disjointed and confusing.. I didn't go in with expectations (no going on the forum, and when friends would talk or specuate I hated it). I went into it with no expectations and I still wound up disappointed. It feels shallow, rushed, and not worthy of BioWare. And it is not a sequel to DAO, so it's name shouldn't be DA2. It should be DA "The Kirkwall Adventures," I think. That would have kept disappointment at bay somewhat.

Now, my opinion is like a certain smelly body part...so,  I am very glad for those who got their monies worth. I love that you love it, simply for the fact that I prefer to be a lover not a fighter (my claws come out only if you like that sort of thing...heheh):innocent: Seriously, we can all agree to disagree. I am hoping they take the best of DAO instead of stripping it out completely, fix what was broken, do the same for DA2 and meld the two.  OH NOES! It will be the DA 3 MEGA HARVESTER!!!!!

I really love this response. The ending rejoinder was a classic that made me smile!!
:happy:

Aw! Thanks! Really, I do respect those who love it. I am agreeable to to agreeing to disagree. I see other's points of views, as long as we don't call each other names and belittle. I am not into that.

[byzantine horse]

This one pretty much agrees with the OP. This one agrees with flaws in the game but still enjoyed. This one is also very thankfull for the free ME2, a game this one was thinking of buying anyway.

[Persephone]

This one and That one (This one's sister) wish to applaud the OP.

[HERPADERPi]

Pacifien wrote...

This one is pleased to read about your enjoyment of Dragon Age 2. This one, however, is disappointed that you did not express your views in the ways of the hanar.

This one also likes your point about not expecting Dragon Age: Origins v2 because this one is a big believer in expectations dictating one's enjoyment of the sequel. This one wishes to say more about that, but this one's keyboard is broken and it makes this one want to CHOKE THE LIFE OUT OF SIX RANDOM PASSERBYS. This one means, um, yeah.

This one hopes you die in a fire after losing your virginity to a horse up the ass, f.aggot.

[erynnar]

Silvernight wrote...

I have to say that at first I was pretty pissed, and more than anything because of the conversation wheel (I thought it sucked in Mass Effect), and because Kirkwall felt empty and ghost-like, but somehow further into the game the 'wtf' factor waned and I actually started enjoying it. Yep, the game has flaws, but I enjoyed it for what it's worth. Combat I don't care that much about, it's there and that's fine (although massive healthbars for bosses were annoying). The storyline definitely lacked overall epicness as compared to DAO, but in the end it was enough to keep me entertained. Guess I'm not picky. I bet many are going to disagree, but it's the characters that defined the game for me. Loved the interactions with and between all companions, except, maybe Carver. I'd say it's also an improvement how they were shown to interact with each other without Hawke (say you come to talk to Isabela and find her playing cards with Merrill). It actually felt like they were sort of dysfunctional, but a family and had their own lives and activities besides just tagging after Hawke. Oh and each one had more than one sidequest. Love companion sidequests And I can't complain about the cinematic bits either, to each their own I guess. And that is why I love Bioware games - because they're so heavy on character interaction.

Overall, this one is pleased. :innocent:

This one wished they had a similar experience. *waves tentacles in sadness* But alas, this one did not. However, this one agrees with the noting of the characters talking to each other outside of talking to Hawke. This one will update that like on the reviews and constructive critcism threads by BioWare..  This one thanks you for something this one forgot. A terrible oversite! This one is trying to give both positive and negative feedback in a constructive manner.

[Silvernight]

erynnar wrote...

This one wished they had a similar experience. *waves tentacles in sadness* But alas, this one did not. However, this one agrees with the noting of the characters talking to each other outside of talking to Hawke. This one will update that like on the reviews and constructive critcism threads by BioWare..  This one thanks you for something this one forgot. A terrible oversite! This one is trying to give both positive and negative feedback in a constructive manner.

This one is happy to help.

[erynnar]

HERPADERPi wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

This one is pleased to read about your enjoyment of Dragon Age 2. This one, however, is disappointed that you did not express your views in the ways of the hanar.

This one also likes your point about not expecting Dragon Age: Origins v2 because this one is a big believer in expectations dictating one's enjoyment of the sequel. This one wishes to say more about that, but this one's keyboard is broken and it makes this one want to CHOKE THE LIFE OUT OF SIX RANDOM PASSERBYS. This one means, um, yeah.

This one hopes you die in a fire after losing your virginity to a horse up the ass, f.aggot.

Seriously? Okay I have reported you. This is the kind of stupidity towards one another I was talking about.