297 réponses à ce sujet

[RussMajere]

I also love DA2. You are not alone sistah!

[Meesherbeans]

Thank the Maker, I'm not the only one. Yes, DA2 has some flaws...but so did DA:O! It's the nature of gaming: they can't please everyone all the time. I was admittedly skeptical of two things when they were hyping up DA2. I was very concerned with how they were changing the combat, and I was borderline angry at the player's character being voiced.

Those are now my two favorite aspects of DA2. The combat is more interesting, and playing a rogue is way more fun. The voice of FemHawke is great (I'm really not a fan of the male voice, sorry! ) and I think the options were far less...misleading than in Mass Effect 1/2. Anyway, yes! I'm not the only one. Thank you for this thread.

- Old school PC gamer who loves DA:O and DA2 as their own separate games. <3

[erynnar]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Blackshayde wrote...

I apologize for insulting anyone, this was my first post, and I wasn't aware of the rules.  I just had to jump off the sidelines because I can't believe this game is getting bad reviews.

A lot of folks are claiming that the game lacks merit because its RPG elements have been "dumbed down"; I don't understand why the simplification of the inventory system in this game is obviously an issue, but when Bioware completed GUTTED the inventory system in Mass Effect 1, people didn't seem to care and it didn't affect the overall stellar ratings that game got.  

And if people claim that dumbing down includes making the game "too easy",  I had a damned hard time on Nightmare, and I consider myself a very skilled player, so I'm not sure where that's coming from.  And the complexity of the combat system is essentially still there, you can still pause and have complete control over party members.  The combat may be "flashier", but its essentially the same engine under the hood.  

Here are a few flaws to the game to give you some perspective.

Recycled Environments/Instances/Beastiary is very bad for a game and an embarrassment for a company like Bioware.

All enemies in DA: 2 were trained by Mystical Ninjas – their new training providing them with the
ability to appear out of thin air, and complete back flips in full plate armor.

Limited Dialogue/Interaction with Companions – What makes a great Companion? Well for me, it’s getting to know that companion and learning about their past, challenges they have faced the mistakes they have made, and their motivations. People don’t want two dimensional stereotypes. What was that Isabella? We can't talk now? Why not? Hello Isabella are you there? She was just talking to me, guess I have to wait for the next act.
 
Lack of Race/Character Customization – The Origins was one of the greatest features of Dragon age. I can understand that EA has taken control and you will now cut corners/costs but you could have at least written Hawke as an elf, dwarf, or human. What is also interesting is that according to Bioware very few people played more than one play through, yet that is not apparent on the Bioware Social forum that has many users with multiple achievements for completed more than origin story. And why did Bioware not consider how many of those players that only did a single play through, what origin did they play. Human, Elf, or Dwarf.
 
Very little choices affect the world around you – Consequences..What consequences? I'm a Blood Mage walking around the gallows flaunting my power. Choices I made in the first game, were retconned by Bioware or simply made not to matter. One of the biggest appeals to the game was that choices made in the first game would carry over, or why even bother giving them the choices in the first place. 


Little to No Replay Value – Choices in the game simply don’t matter, and doesn’t impact/change the journey in any way. The changes in dialogue depending on friendship/rivalry are not worth trudging through the game to here a few different lines of dialogue.

Inability to Upgrade Companion Armor/lack of Inventory – The reasoning for this was so the companion does not lose its uniqueness. If that was true, then why is the player forced to lose its uniqueness and is required to spend several hours regaining it. Last I checked that was part of the fun, and was not restricted to a single character. Oghren, for example looked much better in the warplate of the fallen. The real problem here that Bioware didn't want to tackle was how plain many of the leather/robe armors were. 

Since Bioware decided to remove the ability to gear companions armor, 90% of generate drops that would have been useable was vendored. On top of that, there is nothing more redundant then getting mage armor for your warrior or rogue and warrior and rogue gear for your mage.

Lazy Side Quests – turn in random item to random generated npc - So, um why am I returning someone’s pants and ribcage to them. How on Thedas, do I know who these belong too and where to even find them.

Crafting – Marginalized – why not just take it out completely and replace it with a Pill Dispenser.

Trees/Abilities/Specializations – less variety – what happened to the Bard, Ranger, Arcane Warrior,
Shapeshifter, Battlemage, Keeper, Legionnaire Scout, and Spirit Warrior? The answer is simple, cost and time that Bioware is no longer willing to spend.

Dual Wield - restricted to the Rogue class. It seems warriors forgot how to in DA:2.

Companion Roles - Relying on just Anders to be a healer and locking companions to one fighting style is a grievous error. It forces the player to bring certain companions instead of leaving that choice to the player. In DA: Origins, we decided which character was the healer, who was the tank, the archer, and so on.

Tactical Combat: Passed the game on Nightmare – No tactics required, nor did I have to use the cross class combos too win. The only challenged I faced was to make sure none of my party members killed each other. Which they were more adept at doing then killing the bad guys.
 
You’ll have to forgive me, I did try to make this list a small one but they are just way to many glaring issues in the game. But, hey at least combat was sped up a bit. If you want to see all the other problems, drop by the constructive criticism thread.

'Awesome, totally awesome', Jeff Spicoli would have been proud! I agree with this post. May I reference this from time to time, with credits of course, since it was succinctly and definitively put in easy to understand in  "WTF happened to Dragon Age 2"?

Feel Free, and even more in the constructive criticism thread.

I love that list! Very succint and lays it out right. Thanks sweetie.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Otterwarden wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Very little choices affect the world around you – Consequences..What consequences? I'm a Blood Mage walking around the gallows flaunting my power.

Agree that that list was very well presented. 

On this particular issue, this one wishes to point out that the Citadel did acknowledge when this one brought Legion along... unlike certain Templars... who appear completely clueless to blood mages in their midst!

Edit:  "Geth do not infiltrate"  ... one of the best lines in the game!

I brought him on the flotilla and started a **** storm.XD

[erynnar]

Meesherbeans wrote...

Thank the Maker, I'm not the only one. Yes, DA2 has some flaws...but so did DA:O! It's the nature of gaming: they can't please everyone all the time. I was admittedly skeptical of two things when they were hyping up DA2. I was very concerned with how they were changing the combat, and I was borderline angry at the player's character being voiced.

Those are now my two favorite aspects of DA2. The combat is more interesting, and playing a rogue is way more fun. The voice of FemHawke is great (I'm really not a fan of the male voice, sorry! ) and I think the options were far less...misleading than in Mass Effect 1/2. Anyway, yes! I'm not the only one. Thank you for this thread.

- Old school PC gamer who loves DA:O and DA2 as their own separate games. <3

No,
they can't please everyone all of the time. But that is part of my beef
with DA2. It feels as if they made a grab at every possible audience
they could: console, RPG (barely I know), MMORPG, hack and slash,
anime/manga, and shooters.  It tried to wear too many hats and so it
came off as shallow and being a money grab in many ways.

And I too thank the OP for this thread. I don't have to agree with her/him, but I do respect them! Very much so![smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]

[Otterwarden]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Otterwarden wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Very little choices affect the world around you – Consequences..What consequences? I'm a Blood Mage walking around the gallows flaunting my power.

Agree that that list was very well presented. 

On this particular issue, this one wishes to point out that the Citadel did acknowledge when this one brought Legion along... unlike certain Templars... who appear completely clueless to blood mages in their midst!

Edit:  "Geth do not infiltrate"  ... one of the best lines in the game!

I brought him on the flotilla and started a **** storm.XD

Oooh... your Shepard was braver than mine!

Seriously though, it is that nuanced care that seemed to be missing from this game.  Just like the recycled dungeons, I get the feeling that the developers thought that we would just not notice.

[jds1bio]

I may be a bit behind in the thread here, but choice doesn't necessarily mean a different outcome. I can choose to eat a hamburger, or choose to eat ice cream, and end up with indigestion no matter what I eat. Why? Because I have a stomach bug that has been building up throughout the day, which I most likely caught right after I moved to a new country with my family. And even though I feel a rumbling every now and again, I really can't do anything to prevent the stomach bug from flaring up. So I might as well choose the meal that's the best fit at that time and try to enjoy cooking and eating it with good friends and family before all hell breaks loose.

Now, the meal itself may be so wonderful that legends may be told of it by those who took part. And though the meal itself may be wonderful, despite a touch of disappointment if people leave early or can't make it through the meal, I will have to battle both the stomach bug and side effects of the medicine fighting the bug before all is said and done.

But because the legend of the meal might be overshadowed by the stomach bug, which seems to attack no matter what food I eat or how happy the meal makes people, it's important to get the story of the meal told properly. I think the story of the meal, and the choices I made in preparation, consumption, and dining conversation, are important. Especially because I wouldn't want anyone to think that I made the wrong choice in medicine to fight the bug, or think that I was patient zero of the epidemic sweeping through the country. After all, when you're trying to stave off an epidemic, it's important to be sure of the root cause first.

So choice doesn't mean a different outcome necessarily, though someone might end up seeing you in a different light, and that may make all the difference.

[Meesherbeans]

erynnar wrote...

No,
they can't please everyone all of the time. But that is part of my beef
with DA2. It feels as if they made a grab at every possible audience
they could: console, RPG (barely I know), MMORPG, hack and slash,
anime/manga, and shooters.  It tried to wear too many hats and so it
came off as shallow and being a money grab in many ways.

And I too thank the OP for this thread. I don't have to agree with her/him, but I do respect them! Very much so![smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]

Ehhh. I disagree, but I can respect why people would think that. I think part of the issue is many people felt Awakenings was too short/small for an expansion pack, and these days if a game doesn't have a full-fledged expansion pack, they expect the sequel to fulfil that role. These are two separate games. Comparing DA:O to DA2 is unfair to both. YES, it's a sequel. It continues the world's story. It's not an expansion pack that uses the same engine and just calls it the next chapter. They were trying to improve upon it.

I can respect if people feel they did not improve upon it. I really can. That said, those exact same people would most likely be the ones clamoring that DA2 could have just been an expansion pack if it wasn't changed at all. Change the game and you ****** people off; don't change the game and you ****** people off - often the same group, too. Can't please 'em.

[Selene Moonsong]

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.

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

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.

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.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 07 avril 2011 - 02:47 .

[neppakyo]

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.

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

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.

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.

Ahh, so you admit DA2 is RPG-lite then? 

*runs away screaming pudding!*

[erynnar]

Meesherbeans wrote...

erynnar wrote...

No,
they can't please everyone all of the time. But that is part of my beef
with DA2. It feels as if they made a grab at every possible audience
they could: console, RPG (barely I know), MMORPG, hack and slash,
anime/manga, and shooters.  It tried to wear too many hats and so it
came off as shallow and being a money grab in many ways.

And I too thank the OP for this thread. I don't have to agree with her/him, but I do respect them! Very much so![smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]

Ehhh. I disagree, but I can respect why people would think that. I think part of the issue is many people felt Awakenings was too short/small for an expansion pack, and these days if a game doesn't have a full-fledged expansion pack, they expect the sequel to fulfil that role. These are two separate games. Comparing DA:O to DA2 is unfair to both. YES, it's a sequel. It continues the world's story. It's not an expansion pack that uses the same engine and just calls it the next chapter. They were trying to improve upon it.

I can respect if people feel they did not improve upon it. I really can. That said, those exact same people would most likely be the ones clamoring that DA2 could have just been an expansion pack if it wasn't changed at all. Change the game and you ****** people off; don't change the game and you ****** people off - often the same group, too. Can't please 'em.

Oops and this one apologizes for not speaking properly! This one should have its tentacles flogged. And this one agrees with you, no matter what, some will be angry.

[erynnar]

neppakyo wrote...

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.

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

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.

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.

Ahh, so you admit DA2 is RPG-lite then? 

*runs away screaming pudding!*

Yeah, emphasis on the "lite" part. This one found it so watered down as to almost disappear. Another here pointed to this game as a cinematic with some combat.

[Otterwarden]

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.

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

The logic forming here is that the premise of DAII is that it is not an RPG.

Look, I agree with you that a fully informed consumer could probably have discovered that the RPG elements of DA:O were going to be gutted to the point of being borderline RPG, thereby necessitating a complete overhaul of expectations in order to enjoy the game for what it was. 

Modifié par Otterwarden, 07 avril 2011 - 02:59 .

[Loc'n'lol]

Otterwarden wrote...

The logic forming here is that the premise of DAII is that it is not an RPG.

The witcher and planescape torment are not RPGs.

Modifié par _Loc_N_lol_, 07 avril 2011 - 03:06 .

[Otterwarden]

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...

Otterwarden wrote...

The logic forming here is that the premise of DAII is that it is not an RPG.

The witcher and planescape torment are not RPGs.

For many people they are RPG-lite because of the narrowed customization.  Don't personally fall into this camp, but did understand when DA:O players scoffed at the Witcher because of the single character option.  I prefered both those games to DA:O, but here we have developers who have moved away from their own RPG creation to provide much less than they had the first time round.  That is what makes it an RPG-lite.

[GEWill]

I personally like DA2 a lot after initially feeling leery about it. I love the NPCs a hell of a lot more in 2 than I did in 1. Overall I think the game is a success and I also find it very interesting that Bioware made ME more sandboxish and then changed up for ME and then DA was somewhat sandboxish and then DA2 followed the same path Bioware took with ME2. Interesting, but still very good at the same time. Too many people wanted this to be the 2nd coming of DA when its a completely new take on the DA world while still being in the same lore as the original. I love the new art style and I like that Elves were changed up to look different than humans since they are not human.

[AngryFrozenWater]

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

Hey!
I apologise firstly for the rather short entry here but I just wanted to sound off on my enjoyment of Dragon Age 2.[/quote]
I am glad you like the game. I do too. Yet, I don't turn a blind eye to its shortcomings.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

I'm urged to post because I feel disappointed by the harsh and unfair reception the 'fans' seem to be giving the game and I'm finding it maddening to see a far from medicore game recieve a constant savage beating.[/quote]
Interesting that you need to associate the discussions around the subject with emotional expressions like "maddening" and "savage beating". Anyway, in your view it is not a mediocre game and yet a lot of people express just that. Your viewpoint doesn't have to be wrong, but if you post about it then it has to be clear what differentiates you viewpoint from theirs to make them understand your opinion. In your post you do little to achieve that.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

We are all of us entitled to our own opinions and I'm glad we seem to atleast acknowledge and understand that amoungst ourselves. However 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.[/quote]
Of course you are free to post that you love the game. However, to convince others about a point of view one has to be able to discuss that. Of course does that emphasize that point. There is no other way. If you stay silent about it then you will never get your point across. It's no fight. It only becomes that if you start flaming about it. But that's another problem. I know that this forum is full of trolls. But one of the main problems here is there is a large group of BW defenders who feel that any critique is something they should fight and ridicule. They are worse than the stereotypical troll, because they are here in larger numbers. Put both type of trolls together in one forum and you'll have a war zone. The BW defenders seem to suggest that they use reason. If they really have that then start to change all that. It's good for a game company to listen and act upon critique. Don't make it impossible by sabotaging. Worshiping is even a greater offense. Hehe. It hurts the next game. I am not putting you into one of those groups. I just wanted to point out what bothers me in most of these discussions.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

I've been a steady fan of BioWare from NeverWinter Nights onwards, so I may not be as old school as others here but I but I know stellar game design when I see it, and I'd stick my neck out to say that Modern-Bioware are a prime example of a direction worth exploring in gaming. [/quote]
You love the company and you believe that their games are worth exploring. That's not hardly sticking your neck out.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

To those of us who love and adore Dragon Age Origins, I'd ask you to really think about the major differences between these two games. It's a personal story told in a style that Bioware have refined and begun to master.[/quote]
The intonation of statements like the above is designed to give an air of reason behind it and the phrase "really think" gives the impression that your opponents didn't do that. Sorry... But there is this huge constructive criticism thread. Most of the posters there write little bibles about why they love the game and what they didn't like. So far this post doesn't even come close to that. So please  don't trivialize their opinions by asking them to "really think" about the game. They have done that already.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

Sure, it's maybe not an Epic like Origins was- but was it ever advertised to be a homage to the adventure games of old, like Origins was?[/quote]
I assume that you've listened to the BW podcasts. The hype these were building suggest otherwise. And in addition to that: One of the major goals for BW was to keep everything that made DA:O a success and build upon that. They told us so and I want to believe that. However, the end result was something different than that. You can read the thread I mentioned before to get an impression of how people actually thought that ended up.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

I've a terrible memory but I'm fairfly confident that angle was never one used to hype Dragon Age 2, because it's a game set in the same universe, not an expansion pack. I wonder if maybe people expected something we were never promised, and that maybe more of us should just enjoy the 50 hours we get for our money?[/quote]
Here is an example of what was hyped up and what we didn't get: One of the main promises was that our decisions would "shape the world" over a period of 10 years. There are holes of years in that decade and in that period nothing changes as a result of the player's decisions. The environment didn't change at all and the political situation of the parties involved was on a collision course - no matter what you decided. That became clear to me after several playthroughs. Of course people are disappointed when they are promised features that are not there at all. The hype then becomes a lie.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

Once again, different strokes for different folks and I'd like to remind anyone reading that I'm not here to start a fight and I'm also not interested in insulting anyone elses opinion. I just find myself growing uncomfortable with the 'backlash' surrounding what I feel was well worth my money. It wasn't Dragon Age : Origins v2 but I wasn't expecting that, I got what I expected and I found myself impressed with what was achieved given the limitations in play.[/quote]
I am glad that you enjoyed the game. I am interested in the limitations that you encountered. Although I am not sure, I think those limitations are what people didn't like about the game. It's hard to guess, because there is a lot of talk in your post, but no meat.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

I guess what I want to say is people seem to forget that creative ventures aren't always flawless first time around and that video games can never stay in one place for long- they're one of the only mediums persistently pushed forwards, constantly forced and expected to change and evolve.[/quote]
Again talk, but no meat... What were those elements that gave you the impression that the game has moved forwards? You clearly believe that those elements exist, but people like me are curious about them, because I didn't see those. You missed an opportunity.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

Bioware was met with roaring success in Mass Effect and I won't deny there's a fair share of Mass Effect in Dragon Age 2 but 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?[/quote]
I think it is not surprising at all. That's not because these fans want to be rude, that's because nearly all previous DA:O features were literally simplified. It is hard to find one feature in the game that has not been simplified. Therefore I think the term dumbing down is justified.

[quote]Twulfster wrote...

Plus, guys. Varric. Varric.[/quote]
Finally something we agree upon.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 07 avril 2011 - 03:27 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Twulfster wrote...

Hey!
I apologise firstly for the rather short entry here but I just wanted to sound off on my enjoyment of Dragon Age 2.

No need. You are entitled to your opinion as much as I do. 

Twulfster wrote...
I'm urged to post because I feel disappointed by the harsh and unfair reception the 'fans' seem to be giving the game and I'm finding it maddening to see a far from medicore game recieve a constant savage beating.
We are all of us entitled to our own opinions and I'm glad wExplosivee seem to atleast acknowledge and understand that amoungst ourselves. However 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.

The "backlash" DA 2 received came before the game even release. I had posted many times about my concern for third person unreliable narrative story within story. The storytelling approach is best suit for audience where you have no role to play. Your only focus is about the story. Not about acting the role. Not about making choices and decisions. Not about branching plot. Like every movies, novels and comics you expected a linear storyline. This is what BioWare want to do. They want to tell us their story. They accomplish that. But in doing so, they alienated me from effectively acting my role, my character and my story. They tried to design a way to make me involve by
1. ) making the story more personal ( yet they don't bother to emphasize my relationship with Carver at Loitering )
2. ) illusion of choices
3. ) Throw out waves after waves battles
4. ) Dialogue wheels with 3 dominant characters
5. ) Full explosive bodies, swirling kick, flashy moves, etc... to engage me with combat elements
6. ) Overhype irrational companion characters for the sake of drama seeking with the exceptional of Varric and Bethany.
7. ) Time changes over the years

They fail because I keep seeing myself as the audience and Hawke as imaginary novel bullcrap character derived from unreliable Varric story. Nothing interesting changes that reflect the years pass. Instead I feel more and more distant from imaginary Hawke as I see his life develop without my input. The feeling is just like watching different actor in a movie where I have no part.

Twulfster wrote...
I've been a steady fan of BioWare from NeverWinter Nights onwards, so I may not be as old school as others here but I but I know stellar game design when I see it, and I'd stick my neck out to say that Modern-Bioware are a prime example of a direction worth exploring in gaming.

Then you should be aware of create-your-own-adventure Neverwinter Nights campaign back then where BioWare had been supportive with Aurora toolset and tons of advices on how to make a better custom adventure. Where is their support now? Or are you the type of RPG-er that are driven only to enjoy the story not matter what?  Because I find that many RPG-er didn't think Neverwinter Nights official campaign was a good story.

Twulfster wrote...
To those of us who love and adore Dragon Age Origins, I'd ask you to really think about the major differences between these two games. It's a personal story told in a style that Bioware have refined and begun to master.

It's a personal story because it's according to BioWare. It's not personal story to me because I don't  role-play imaginary novel bullcrap character. The style is an illusion to deceived players into thinking they are role-playing when in fact they did nothing other than like watching Luke Skywalker in Star Wars with hack n slash element and unrealistic hollow 3 to 4 dialogues per years romance options.  

Twulfster wrote...
Sure, it's maybe not an Epic like Origins was- but was it ever advertised to be a homage to the adventure games of old, like Origins was?

Sure it isn't epic like Origins. But still, I want to be active participant with flesh live character instead of imagining what would BioWare Hawke did as Varric tell his story. How could you expect me to role-play a character when the character itself has unknown current status? On what ground should I act Hawke's role? Based on his past and not so true narrative?  Think about this. I'm not going to comment further the rest of OP.
 

Twulfster wrote...
Plus, guys. Varric. Varric.

That's the problem. It's Varric unreliable story. And Hawke is nothing more than his illusion of novel bullcrap character. This is not my story. This is not my role-play. And Hawke is never be my character.

[Meesherbeans]

...A role playing game is a game where you play a role. This does not mean it'll be a role of your choosing; only that you will be put into the shoes of a character. In this case, Hawke was the character. Some may not appreciate this fact, but that does not take Dragon Age 2 out of the RPG category. Everyone is allowed to love, hate, or not care about DA2; but please don't call it "not an RPG." It is. It's just one you don't like.

[Otterwarden]

Meesherbeans wrote...

...A role playing game is a game where you play a role. This does not mean it'll be a role of your choosing; only that you will be put into the shoes of a character. In this case, Hawke was the character. Some may not appreciate this fact, but that does not take Dragon Age 2 out of the RPG category. Everyone is allowed to love, hate, or not care about DA2; but please don't call it "not an RPG." It is. It's just one you don't like.

If you read the post directly above yours you will understand how some feel there was "no role to play".  It was simply a story told, to observe nothing less.  Choose side A or side B the conclusion will be the same.  Just having a character avatar to equip does not constitute a role playing game either.

It's a fine distinction that can be debated until the cows come home, but the real question is "Why does an RPG developer want to be on the borderline of what constitutes an RPG?"  Very nebulous territory with fewer fans I suspect.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 07 avril 2011 - 03:47 .

[neppakyo]

Otterwarden wrote...
Just having a character avatar to equip does not constitute a role playing game either.

God damn thats a good line, pretty funny. But sad at the same time cause its true.

[Meesherbeans]

Otterwarden wrote...

If you read the post directly above yours you will understand how some feel there was "no role to play".  It was simply a story told, to observe nothing less.  Choose side A or side B the conclusion will be the same.  Just having a character avatar to equip does not constitute a role playing game either.

It's a fine distinction that can be debated until the cows come home, but the real question is "Why does an RPG developer want to be on the borderline of what constitutes an RPG?"  Very nebulous territory with fewer fans I suspect.

There was a role to play, and a story to play through. You may not have appreciated how little say you had in how the story progressed, and I totally respect that opinion, but it's just that: an opinion. You are still taking a character and playing through their role: their story.

As for the "real question," that is a good question. I don't know the answer, or if there even is one. I am, however, beginning to see why people who actually like DA2 don't post on these forums. It's kind of sad.

[Barefoot Warrior]

neppakyo wrote...

Otterwarden wrote...
Just having a character avatar to equip does not constitute a role playing game either.

God damn thats a good line, pretty funny. But sad at the same time cause its true.

I hear ya on that one..

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

neppakyo wrote...

Otterwarden wrote...
Just having a character avatar to equip does not constitute a role playing game either.

God damn thats a good line, pretty funny. But sad at the same time cause its true.

Gaia Online is forever ruined.

[Otterwarden]

Meesherbeans wrote...

There was a role to play, and a story to play through. You may not have appreciated how little say you had in how the story progressed, and I totally respect that opinion, but it's just that: an opinion. You are still taking a character and playing through their role: their story.

As for the "real question," that is a good question. I don't know the answer, or if there even is one. I am, however, beginning to see why people who actually like DA2 don't post on these forums. It's kind of sad.

Don't be sad...nobody wants sad. 

I'm even a fan of the shared character tale when it is implemented well.  Have both a paragon and renegade Shepard to prove it.  Yet, this kind of consensus script play needs to find its own genre so that people know in advance what they are buying into, and it really probably should not have snatched a beloved gameplay away from DA:O fans.  They are kinda sad about that