297 réponses à ce sujet

[Alex Kershaw]

'Unfair'

Metacritic score: 82
Worst Bioware RPG ever by quite some margin

You can state your opinion, but don't say that the majority are wrong or unfair.

[Crash_7]

Who knows the mind of the majority? Metacritic does not represent the majority, and neither do these forums or professional reviews.

[Blackshayde]

 
I'm tired of you idiots knocking this game, can you name a better RPG?  I don't think so, BG 2 is close.  Dragon Age 1 was overrated, and this game is incredibly underrated.  Doesn't anyone remember the INCREDIBLY BORING AND DUMB Circle tower quests, which took 4 hours to complete and you didn't even have a party for this part.  DA 2 does not have this.  The combat in DA2 is ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL, balanced, interesting, and rewards careful thinking. Most of you idiots probably play it on normal, not nightmare (w/ even less than 4characters by choice.).  So please shut up and go play this wonderful game.

[Twulfster]

@Alex Kershaw

Well to be fair, I never said the majority are wrong.
I'm a firm believer in opinions and letting people have them! Not here to challenge them.

[Pariah00]

Twulfster wrote...

I'm also not interested in insulting anyone elses opinion.

So why are you calling those opinions unfair and putting the word fans in quotes?  It feels a bit insulting and frankly, it seems somewhat audacious for you try to downplay and write off other peoples opinions by saying:

I wonder if perhaps too many of us are diluting our overall experience with the game in favour of playing up the parts we didn't expect or didn't enjoy.

rather than accepting that the dissenters had a legitimately different (and negative) experience than you did and that, for them, that experience is real and with merit.  It is not the case that they simply do not understand their own experience.

Sure, no one promised Origins 2.0.  But we were promised a game that would deliver quality and depth on par or better, experientially, with Origins.  For many, this did not happen.

please stop claiming it's 'dumbing down' 'lazy' and 'selling out'. I'm a independant Comic Artist; if I came up with a unique way to allow people to read my comics, why would I not apply some of that success across all of my ventures?

I'm a freelance colorist, and I use shortcuts all time- you have to. But I have to make sure that no matter what shortcuts I use, the final product retains every once of depth in the rendering than if I had spent a month doing it the hard way.  If my shortcuts are not imperceptable, my contractor will call me 'lazy' and stop giving my work.

Modifié par Pariah00, 06 avril 2011 - 09:16 .

[Pacifien]

People, avoid insulting others. Insults are not the hanar way.

[Serpieri Nei]

ItsToofy wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

1000questions wrote...
This one also wants to know what is wrong with expecting the key elements of DA:O intact in further sequels of DA franchise.After all why would DA fans buy something like DA2 if it is very different from its predecessor ?

That depends on what you feel are the necessary key elements to maintain a Dragon Age game. It has the Dragon Age setting if not the original game's gameplay and story design. So the question here is whether setting is enough to be considered a sequel or is continuity of gameplay design critical? 'Cause on that latter part, I personally feel no.

Continuity of gameplay design? i think more along the lines of "Improved or Removed", DA2 had too much removed, not enough improved.

That is a very accurate assessment, DA2 is half the game that Origins is and thats not even including the DLC's or the expansion.

[ItsToofy]

Blackshayde wrote...

 
I'm tired of you idiots knocking this game, can you name a better RPG?  I don't think so, BG 2 is close.  Dragon Age 1 was overrated, and this game is incredibly underrated.  Doesn't anyone remember the INCREDIBLY BORING AND DUMB Circle tower quests, which took 4 hours to complete and you didn't even have a party for this part.  DA 2 does not have this.  The combat in DA2 is ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL, balanced, interesting, and rewards careful thinking. Most of you idiots probably play it on normal, not nightmare (w/ even less than 4characters by choice.).  So please shut up and go play this wonderful game.

I can name a better RPG, Dragon Age: Origins...oh, wait, there was a little gem out there called Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, you may have heard of it during your crusade against people that do not agree with you.

[Twulfster]

@Pariah00

I'm sorry that you feel like I'm insulting. I wasn't attacking people personally, I'm a fan of this development studio and the game mentioned, I'm simply defending it with my own experience and thoughts. I'm confused at your reaction to my simple attempt to put my hand up and say 'Well I actually think it's pretty good guys.'

[Otterwarden]

Pacifien wrote...

That depends on what you feel are the necessary key elements to maintain a Dragon Age game. It has the Dragon Age setting if not the original game's gameplay and story design. So the question here is whether setting is enough to be considered a sequel or is continuity of gameplay design critical? 'Cause on that latter part, I personally feel no.

This one thinks the Cheetohs and lack of light are adversely affecting your brain...setting is hardly sufficient to provide continuity. 

Edit:  Ut, oh... wasn't meant as an insult.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 06 avril 2011 - 09:21 .

[Pacifien]

Pariah00 wrote...
So why are you calling those opinions unfair and putting the word fans in quotes?  It feels a bit insulting and frankly, it seems somewhat audacious for you try to downplay and write off other peoples opinions by saying: *snip*

You know, I'm equally insulted by people who didn't like the game saying that by liking DA2, I am dumber them, I am not appreciative of the right kind of RPG as them, I am a fanboy who drinks the koolaid, that I am blind, and that I'm not as valid as straight male gamers.

So for someone who actually tried to be diplomatic in his post about why he likes DA2 and not wanting to outright dismiss dissenters, taking offense just seems like... odd. To me.

[Serpieri Nei]

Blackshayde wrote...

 
I'm tired of you idiots knocking this game, can you name a better RPG?  I don't think so, BG 2 is close.  Dragon Age 1 was overrated, and this game is incredibly underrated.  Doesn't anyone remember the INCREDIBLY BORING AND DUMB Circle tower quests, which took 4 hours to complete and you didn't even have a party for this part.  DA 2 does not have this.  The combat in DA2 is ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL, balanced, interesting, and rewards careful thinking. Most of you idiots probably play it on normal, not nightmare (w/ even less than 4characters by choice.).  So please shut up and go play this wonderful game.

Oh Look another Fanboi resorting to insults. Isn't he the pinnacle of maturity.


Curious, are you even aware of the forum rules?

[1000questions]

Pacifien wrote...

1000questions wrote...
This one also wants to know what is wrong with expecting the key elements of DA:O intact in further sequels of DA franchise.After all why would DA fans buy something like DA2 if it is very different from its predecessor ?

That depends on what you feel are the necessary key elements to maintain a Dragon Age game. It has the Dragon Age setting if not the original game's gameplay and story design. So the question here is whether setting is enough to be considered a sequel or is continuity of gameplay design critical? 'Cause on that latter part, I personally feel no.

Why not ? Why isnt continuity important whether it is setting or gameplay design ? I am not saying make a copy of it but it should not feel drastically different or atleast shredded or ripped off version !

I am fine if you change some design aspects of gameplay but that should really add to the over all experience. It should ENRICH the environment , the quality of game, compliment the story. 

Incase of DA2 , it wasnt the case. Moreover as you said the "2" after DA and the way it was all presented to the gamers made a false impression that it is a successor or sequel to DA:Origins where it actually is a different chapter in history of DA universe

[RoboGeisha]

Good. Now I don't have to feel forever alone again for having enjoyed DAII. I am on my fourth playthrough & I am still not bored by it. Must account for something.

[Saphara]

Pacifien wrote...

Pariah00 wrote...
So why are you calling those opinions unfair and putting the word fans in quotes?  It feels a bit insulting and frankly, it seems somewhat audacious for you try to downplay and write off other peoples opinions by saying: *snip*

You know, I'm equally insulted by people who didn't like the game saying that by liking DA2, I am dumber them, I am not appreciative of the right kind of RPG as them, I am a fanboy who drinks the koolaid, that I am blind, and that I'm not as valid as straight male gamers.

So for someone who actually tried to be diplomatic in his post about why he likes DA2 and not wanting to outright dismiss dissenters, taking offense just seems like... odd. To me.

Pacifen, you know as well as this one does that well thought out opinions on both sides of the fence dont get all that warm of a reception here most of the time. Passion often times overwhelms common sense.

This one loves DA2, but this one sees the flaws in it. This one hopes the designers fix them and dont create more. This one hates the deja vu feeling from recycled maps.

Modifié par Saphara, 06 avril 2011 - 09:23 .

[Lord_Valandil]

Blackshayde wrote...
So please shut up and go play this wonderful game.

Do not want, thank you very much.
Stop tainting this well-written thread with your fanboyism.

[Serpieri Nei]

Pacifien wrote...

Pariah00 wrote...
So why are you calling those opinions unfair and putting the word fans in quotes?  It feels a bit insulting and frankly, it seems somewhat audacious for you try to downplay and write off other peoples opinions by saying: *snip*

You know, I'm equally insulted by people who didn't like the game saying that by liking DA2, I am dumber them, I am not appreciative of the right kind of RPG as them, I am a fanboy who drinks the koolaid, that I am blind, and that I'm not as valid as straight male gamers.

So for someone who actually tried to be diplomatic in his post about why he likes DA2 and not wanting to outright dismiss dissenters, taking offense just seems like... odd. To me.

Where did Pariah00 say that those that like DA2 are dumber?

[randName]

Congrats, I'm happy that you liked it ~ (I kind of do as well, well not the game so much, but these forums because of the game, but anyway).

As for the debate, that always blossoms after one of these posts (the OP that is).


If someone loves the game, believes it to be the best game ever ever, I don't understand why anyone would claim that he can't, or that he is dense and backwards for it; and the same goes those that finds DA2 to be a horrible pile of trite--pus-filed turds riddled with bubonic corpse flies.

They have the right to feel like it, and telling people they are retarded because they don't like what you do, might apply to arguments along the line of flushing the toilet, or perhaps rocket physics, but we are talking about enjoying a game, and honestly, how smart does anyone need to be to get through DA:O, PST, FO1&2 and so on?

Hardly bright I'd wager, since I managed, but maybe it helps.

Modifié par randName, 06 avril 2011 - 09:35 .

[Mr.House]

This one enjoyed dA2 alot.

[MingWolf]

As for myself, I'm rather pleased with the backlash, which I see as well deserved. With that I don't mean the troll threads, the "fire David Gaider" threads or just hating or flaming threads.
I just can't be thankful after paying full price for a half-baked game, which is also bugged, packed with glitches of every kind and a disappointing story.

Same here. The story was more personal as a lot of people pointed out, but I couldn't quite grasp the meaning, for it had little meaning to me, and I just can't for the life of me see how it would have any meaning on a person like Hawke. I might be blind, bleh. Personal story, great, but I have enough of a personal story in a game called real life.

I wasn't expecting a DA:O V2 either. I praised the demo when it came out. It was when I finished the game from start to finish that I ended up questioning the design of the product and the decisions behind the gameplay elements. I've collected hundreds of PC games over the last couple decades, and only few of them, this one included, made me question whether or not the money I spent was all that worth it. I felt the strong commercial impact of the product, but I still haven't felt sated as a gamer, and thats the thing that worries me.

What made the Mass Effect great was its consistent, creative, and elaborate design of the world. I felt this game "tried" to do that, but instead found themselves copying ideas and experimenting way too much creating a rather awkward mix that is neither the flavor of Dragon Age nor Mass Effect. Thats okay though, not everyone enjoys the same soup. Myself personally, I thought it was a poor mix. When Hawke drinks at the tavern, you see copied animations from Mass Effect 2. Things like this makes an awkward impression for a game that is marketed so heavily at 60 dollars. Reused areas is the obvious no-brainer. Then you also see NPC companions from the original DA:O that appear in just the most awkward scenes, which has to make one wonder why they are there to begin with. A lot of design choices felt like "plugs" to fill the holes. Its like when they built the Titanic and opted to use lower quality rivets compared to the overall quality of the ship. It sank.

I appreciate creativity, but I can't seem to bring myself to give credit in this scenario. Its not all bad, and at least I finished the game.

Anyways, I don't mean to rant or anything like that. I'm pleased that some people are getting their money's worth. That all that should matter right?

[Pacifien]

1000questions wrote...
Why not ? Why isnt continuity important whether it is setting or gameplay design ? I am not saying make a copy of it but it should not feel drastically different or atleast shredded or ripped off version !

I am fine if you change some design aspects of gameplay but that should really add to the over all experience. It should ENRICH the environment , the quality of game, compliment the story. 

Incase of DA2 , it wasnt the case. Moreover as you said the "2" after DA and the way it was all presented to the gamers made a false impression that it is a successor or sequel to DA:Origins where it actually is a different chapter in history of DA universe

Continuity of gameplay design actually isn't important to me. But this is coming from someone who actually does not like genre labeling of games. I understand that people like to have a label like "RPG" to give them an idea of what to expect in their game, but I'd rather the developers concentrate on designing the game in any way they see fit regardless of how much or less it makes it fit into any given genre.

The thing is, in spite of the 2 added to the name, none of the interviews actually seemed to promote the game as being very much like Dragon Age: Origins at all. So what was I going to believe, the 2 they tacked onto the game or what the developers were saying and showing me? I went with the latter. But to be fair, not every consumer goes looking for development news, interviews, and videos, and so calling it Dragon Age 2 specifically is misleading. It is, however, still a Dragon Age game. Just as Star Wars: X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter is as much a Star Wars game as Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, because they share the same setting if not the same gameplay. A bad decision in naming a game doesn't automatically make it a bad game, however. It makes the decision on what to call the game bad.

As for the experience of the game itself, it's criticized for lacking the depth of Dragon Age: Origins in some way. I wouldn't say it's in the design of Kirkwall or its outlying settings, as I find the developers applied more care into the details in some ways versus others. The repeated use of the same setting however whereas Origins had very little, however, is something I can see another person not liking much at all. I've played dungeon crawler games like Diablo, though, so it doesn't immediately jump out as being wrong to reuse a setting. Not optimal, but not necessarily wrong. I'd rather they didn't, but the fact that they did doesn't detract from a story I find personally superior to its predecessor.

Also, having just played Origins prior to DA2, I'm really not buying into the argument that the game is too buggy for release. This is because I had to reload the game half a dozen times to get through the Fade in the first game and never had to reload the game once with DA2. I do know the game has bugs in it, but there are so many games I have purchased over the years that have been buggy in one way or another. I mean, Knights of the Old Republic 2 was pretty bad, but I stuck with it bugs and all because I thought it had a pretty damn good game somewhere in there.

But for all of this, I am giving my own personal opinion. Not just about DA2, but about game design in general. I mean, in my mind, DA2 pisses off all the right people for the right reasons. Because a game shouldn't be judged by its predecessors, it should be judged on how it plays on its own as a game. And I'm specifically talking gameplay here, and not story, in case anyone thinks I have some aversion to continuity of story across multiple games. If someone wanted to tell a story in three parts, that'd be grand, but not something that any game ever has really hit just right for me.

[Pacifien]

Serpieri Nei wrote...
Where did Pariah00 say that those that like DA2 are dumber?

It's the second paragraph. The first paragraph is context for the second paragraph.

[Twulfster]

Maybe I should explain that my comments regarding the negative reception to DA2 aren't an attack or challenge to anyone who withholds them, rather; I feel like this game is getting way too severe a beating and I wanted to be a voice of support in that sense.

Maybe it deserves a beating, criticism is a good thing! but I see too much sheer outrage and wanted to defend what I felt was actually a worthwhile game, If you've taken my original post as offensive to your own opinion then I'm sorry- that was never my intention. 

I wanted to make a positive topic and I realise I'm in a huge minority, being someone who actually quite liked the game, I didn't expect anyone to read my post as being challenging or insulting. If anything this topic is probably my way of responding to the harsh comments made against the game, you know- just saying 'here's my opinion and here's what I think'.

And I honestly respect opinions, I'm only stating mine!

Modifié par Twulfster, 06 avril 2011 - 09:43 .

[Robbiesan]

This one likes DA2 as well. This ones agrees, there are flaws and such with this game and many other ones have valid points to express. This one understands that such user feedback is necessary to voice opinions and seek fixes now, and better games down the road. This one knows that if you do not speak up, you will not be heard. This one also understands that some other ones are just not happy ones no matter what you do.

This one thanks the other ones who are providing constructive criticism, towards improvements now and down the road. This one also thanks the others ones who know that enjoyment is up to you. This one knows that other ones may see the same things in different ways, and that is what makes Life great.

This one also likes speaking this way. This one thinks it is kind of fun. This one is going for a smoke break.

[Pariah00]

Pacifien wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...
Where did Pariah00 say that those that like DA2 are dumber?

It's the second paragraph. The first paragraph is context for the second paragraph.

Quote please.  I wrote the thing and even I can't find it.