667 réponses à ce sujet

[Zjarcal]

Persephone wrote...
Never mind the excessive hate campaign going on once it was released. That's not to say that disliking the game isn't valid or that the game couldn't have used another 6 months of dev time. But the hyperbole really shocked me. I'm glad that I for one make up my own opinion by playing the game myself (If I am truly unsure I rent/borrow it from a friend first) .

Oh definitely, especially the last part of the bolded line. I really wouldn't have minded waiting an extra six months. Alas, I still enjoy the game. 

[Marionetten]

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

[Horus Blackheart]

Persephone wrote...

Horus Blackheart wrote...

Persephone : I find my self wondering if you find inter dimensional travelling mobs to be an improvement? Because I found most of the combat and encounter design 'improvements' to be abysmal personally.

I don't care much for the combat either way. Be it in Origins or DAII. I go through it to move the story along. But that's just me.

ah yes the story we have dismissed that:


serously the way the story ended did not do want it set out to do ie hook you for da3 the intire game should have been called DA2 the cash in adventures of hawke- Buy DA3

[Macrake]

Have they crossed the point of no return? Will bioware ever go back and be happy with the audience they've made games for the last 10ish years?

Chasing the "cod/farmville" crowd and losing core fans seems like it was a terrible idea.

bg2, nwn, kotor, da:o were successfull. Why stop?

[Persephone]

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

And how many DID redeem said antagonist? I (I do it every time because I adore him) I still remember the statistics re: Loghain. Oh? My Hawke ended up differently in 5 different playthroughs. You know, there is only so much influence a human being can have on others and events. (Take Loghain as a prime example, a man who had absolute power, just took 2 Wardens to ruin all his endeavours) The God like hero who turns people/the world upside down with a click....I simply don't buy it. The world doesn't work that way, there are things that WILL happen, no matter what you do or say. I liked that touch of realism and the game had moments where I went "OMG NO! DON'T!" because I could not control everything/everyone. In DAO I pretty much always knew I'd be able to "fix it" ....that's not very realistic though. I hope you understand what I mean.

Modifié par Persephone, 09 avril 2011 - 08:01 .

[Marionetten]

Persephone wrote...

And how many DID redeem said antagonist? I (I do it every time because I adore him) I still remember the statistics re: Loghain. Oh? My Hawke ended up differently in 5 different playthroughs. You know, there is only so much influence a human being can have on others and events. (Take Loghain as a prime example, a man who had absolute power, just took 2 Wardens to ruin all his endeavours) The God like hero who turns people/the world upside down with a click....I simply don't buy it. The world doesn't work that way, there are things that WILL happen, no matter what you do or say. I liked that touch of realism and the game had moments where I went "OMG NO! DON'T!" because I could not control everything. In DAO I pretty much always knew I'd be able to "fix it" ....that's not very realistic though. I hope you understand what I mean,

So now we're going to be using the realism argument to justify the utter lack of freedom? That just reeks of cop out. The Witcher probably has the most realistic fantasy world I've experienced to date and that game was still filled to the brim with choices. Some important, some less so. Dragon Age II by comparison is completely unrealistic and over the top... and yet there's barely any real choices. You can't even defend those dear to you because the game deems them necessary sacrifices for drama. It's not particularly well conceived drama etiher given the linearity. Hell, you can't even condone blood magic as a blood mage and you're telling me that's realistic?

And Dragon Age: Origins certainly had issues. The fact that there was an optimal path for one. I think we can all agree that the circle option shouldn't have been there for Connor. But how is removing all choice making things better? If anything, it's taking a giant leap backwards instead of that much needed step forward. Dragon Age: Origins did after all have actual choices which played some part in the game. Werewolves or elves, mages or templars, dwarves or dwarves with golems to mention some.

These were all choices with actual consequences. If you sided with the werewolves you actually had werewolves fighting by your side during the siege of Denerim and before that they were populating the barracks. It wasn't just some useless epilogue slider. It was something which actually took place within the game. No matter how much one claims opinion Dragon Age II doesn't really have anything like this. In fact, the only real consequential thing is whether your party members stay or not. Dragon Age: Origins had this too and it was far better implemented. To say that Dragon Age II improves on this area is simply put disingenuous.

Not saying that Dragon Age II didn't come with some improvements. It certainly did. As said, the rivalry system is a definite improvement over Dragon Age: Origins. But as a whole the game just doesn't manage to improve upon the formula. For every step forward it takes ten steps backwards. This is why BioWare needs to revisit Dragon Age: Origins. They need to take the good things out of that game before they start working on extracting whatever Dragon Age II has to offer. They abandoned far too much with this sequel.

Modifié par Marionetten, 09 avril 2011 - 08:10 .

[Cybermortis]

Persephone wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Persephone wrote...
And that is why I never listen to word of mouth. And hyperbole.

Yeah, word of mouth is not something I consider useful. My tastes can vary so much from everyone else's that listening to word of mouth is more than likely going to cause me to miss a game I like, or buy something I won't enjoy. 

Never mind the excessive hate campaign going on once it was released. That's not to say that disliking the game isn't valid or that the game couldn't have used another 6 months of dev time. But the hyperbole really shocked me. I'm glad that I for one make up my own opinion by playing the game myself (If I am truly unsure I rent/borrow it from a friend first) .

Apart from the people screaming 'Best Game Ever!' or 'Kill Bioware!' like parrots, the complaints about the game from the majority* are being consistant. The degree of enjoyment individuals in this majority group does vary, as of course does their opinion of the game overall. But taken as a whole this 'middle' group doesn't find this game as satisfying or as well done as DAO.

(*This is taking general impressions from the registered owners forum, since by definition these people bought the game rather than being random passers by spaming. The 'lovers' and 'haters' appear to be more or less equal in numbers and 'volume' and account for a fairly small number of the overall posters. Everyone is falling between these two groups, and is therefore in the majority).

I think another reason for the bad word of mouth is how the game has been marketed and sold. In terms of what not to do when releasing a game DA2 should be held up as an example. Having the Sabastian DLC a 'free' download only for people who pre-ordered the limited edition game gave the impression of money grabbing. Messing up the ordering system so stores that had taken pre-orders didn't get enough copies wouldn't have impressed shop-goers. While forgetting about time zones so people who had downloaded the game couldn't play it until the next day in some places did the same for the downloading crowd. And of course the news that they put DRM into the game (even if it isn't quite the same as the DRM they were ordered not to use) further erroded any good feeling with many no doubt.

I'd suspect/expect that the high first week sales were purely down to pre-orders and 'blind' buying based on DAO. (Which, incidently matches what I was told by one of the staff of one of my local games stores). There would have been a dip after this from word of mouth, because console users could rent a copy and also because people didn't have the money. There *might* be a slight surge in sales at the start of the next month, but even with the ME2 offer I wouldn't expect the downward tend to stop or slow down - People who want ME2 will either have a copy of DA2, or they can buy a copy for half the price of DA2.

[AtreiyaN7]

Ooo, congratulations. Now that people can officially declare it a failure because it has apparently sold over a million copies in four weeks but didn't sell 10 million copies in five days, maybe they can move on with their lives instead of complaining endlessly?

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 09 avril 2011 - 08:12 .

[ejoslin]

Persephone wrote...

ejoslin wrote...

Judge585 wrote...

Food for thought: maybe a lot of people did not enjoy Dragon Age Origins as much as people thought, that's why they're not buying Dragon Age II. The initial week 1 numbers for DAII were impressive only because of select people who enjoyed the hardcore RPG of DA:O, and that's why we see so many disappointment threads with the changes. Pondering this because in another thread, people were dismissing the 1million DAII sales figures by claiming that the "truth" will only be witnessed by DA3 sales figures, that DAII sales figures don't prove anything. I'm posing this possibility also because I got a few of my friends to be DAII fans after they wrote off the Dragon Age series off after Origins.

The main problem with this line of thought is that the preorders and first week sales for DA2 are high -- those are the sales that are based on how popular DAO was.  It's the marked drop off in later weeks that would come from word of mouth regarding DA2.  If the reason for the lower sales was because of a dislike for DAO, the first week would have been lower, and then as word of mouth and reviews came out, they would raise.  Instead, it's the opposite.

And that is why I never listen to word of mouth. And hyperbole.

And DAO's popularity sure did not help Awakening (Which kept all of DAO's elements...well, most of them) whatsoever.

Actually, Awakeing was an expansion, not a game, so it will sell far fewer copies -- that was to be expected.  Also, though, Awakening's conversation system left a lot to be desired -- in fact, people's reaction to that should have given the devs a bit of a clue that people like being able to initate conversations whenever they want.

I didn't like Awakening much.  It had a good story, but it didn't give enough information to make the final decision, and I felt the relationships with the companions felt forced. 

Modifié par ejoslin, 09 avril 2011 - 08:10 .

[Marionetten]

ejoslin wrote...

Actually, Awakeing was an expansion, not a game, so it will sell far fewer copies -- that was to be expected.  Also, though, Awakening's conversation system left a lot to be desired -- in fact, people's reaction to that should have given the devs a bit of a clue that people like being able to initate conversations whenever they want.

I didn't like Awakening much. It had a good story, but it didn't give enough information to make the final decision, and I felt the relationships with the companions felt forced.

The whole thing felt very underdeveloped, yes. While I definitely liked the Mother and her cronies more than the so called antagonists found in Dragon Age II I felt as if it was a bit too big for an expansion. Too many questions, too little time. Awakening would have probably been an awesome sequel though. It'd be worth it for a Sigrun romance alone.

[Kubriki]

Persephone wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

And how many DID redeem said antagonist? I (I do it every time because I adore him) I still remember the statistics re: Loghain. Oh? My Hawke ended up differently in 5 different playthroughs. You know, there is only so much influence a human being can have on others and events. (Take Loghain as a prime example, a man who had absolute power, just took 2 Wardens to ruin all his endeavours) The God like hero who turns people/the world upside down with a click....I simply don't buy it. The world doesn't work that way, there are things that WILL happen, no matter what you do or say. I liked that touch of realism and the game had moments where I went "OMG NO! DON'T!" because I could not control everything/everyone. In DAO I pretty much always knew I'd be able to "fix it" ....that's not very realistic though. I hope you understand what I mean.

Really 5 different endings?  I've only played through 3 times and I've only seen 2 different endings.  I'd be interested in hearing what endings you've seen.  Because from where I sit I can only really see 2 different endings.  You side with Mages or you side with Templars.  I've sided with Mages twice and Templars once.  Both times I sided with the mages I made completely different choices early in the game.  Is your idea of different X character is still alive or they weren't around?

[Persephone]

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

And how many DID redeem said antagonist? I (I do it every time because I adore him) I still remember the statistics re: Loghain. Oh? My Hawke ended up differently in 5 different playthroughs. You know, there is only so much influence a human being can have on others and events. (Take Loghain as a prime example, a man who had absolute power, just took 2 Wardens to ruin all his endeavours) The God like hero who turns people/the world upside down with a click....I simply don't buy it. The world doesn't work that way, there are things that WILL happen, no matter what you do or say. I liked that touch of realism and the game had moments where I went "OMG NO! DON'T!" because I could not control everything. In DAO I pretty much always knew I'd be able to "fix it" ....that's not very realistic though. I hope you understand what I mean,

So now we're going to be using the realism argument to justify the utter lack of freedom? That just reeks of cop out. The Witcher probably has the most realistic fantasy world I've experienced to date and that game was still filled to the brim with choices. Some important, some less so. Dragon Age II by comparison is completely unrealistic and over the top... and yet there's barely any real choices. You can't even defend those dear to you because the game deems them necessary sacrifices for drama. It's not particularly well conceived drama etiher given the linearity. Hell, you can't even condone blood magic as a blood mage and you're telling me that's realistic?

And Dragon Age: Origins certainly had issues. The fact that there was an optimal path for one. I think we can all agree that the circle option shouldn't have been there for Connor. But how is removing all choice making things better? If anything, it's taking a leap backwards instead of the much needed step forward. Dragon Age: Origins did after all have actual choices which played some part in the game. Werewolves or elves, mages or templars, dwarves or dwarves with golems to mention some.

These were all choices with actual consequences. If you sided with the werewolves you actually had werewolves fighting by your side during the siege of Denerim and before that they were populating the barracks. It wasn't just some useless epilogue slider. It was something which actually took place within the game. No matter how much one claims opinion Dragon Age II doesn't really have anything like this. In fact, the only real consequential thing is whether your party members stay or not. Dragon Age: Origins had this too and it was far better implemented. To say that Dragon Age II improves on this area is simply put disingenuous.

Not saying that Dragon Age II didn't come with some improvements. It certainly did. As said, the rivalry system is an improvement over Dragon Age: Origins. But as a whole, the game just doesn't manage to improve upon the formula. For every step forward it takes ten steps backwards.

Again, I do not see it as "utter lack of freedom" at all. (I have already explained why)

Different pixel models at Denerim. Yes. Don't care who helps me there as they are pretty much useless and my party does most of the work. It's not like those different models made a huge difference story wise. (Except for the MS Dos like & heavily bugged Epilogue Slides)

IMO Companions leaving in DAO was actually badly done. (The approval system was awful. Much prefer Friend/Rivalry paths and companions staying/leaving/challenging you based on that) 

Let's just leave it at where we do agree: Both games have its flaws and virtues and hopefully Bioware will learn from them.

Not that there won't be bashing, no matter what they do.

[DKJaigen]

Marionetten wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Its a good game and if DA3 improves on the strenghts of DA2 while removing the weaknesses of DA2 it will completely outclass DAO.

The problem is that Dragon Age II barely has any real strengths. In fact, the rivalry system and the family dynamic are the only things I can think of. The improved combat was awful with kiting being a broken mess. Choices were meaningless as there were no real consequences. The railroading was more heavy-handed than ever. Simply put, the game design was poor.

While I don't mind BioWare taking some things out of Dragon Age II I do not want to see them continue treading down that path. It's a dead end. Before they take any lessons from Dragon Age II they need to look back at Dragon Age: Origins. This is why I hope that Dragon Age II will continue failing. It would allow BioWare to revisit Dragon Age: Origins and figure out a new direction for the franchise.

You keep biching and not providing any decent feedback. If you hate this game so much plz remove it from your pc and ****** of from this forum. im getting very tired of your posts. Also you dont seem to realise that if a game fails  bioware or the francise will be canned by EA. Trust me you do not wish to see DA2 fail because their will not be a DA afterwards ever again.

Modifié par DKJaigen, 09 avril 2011 - 08:21 .

[Persephone]

Kubriki wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

And how many DID redeem said antagonist? I (I do it every time because I adore him) I still remember the statistics re: Loghain. Oh? My Hawke ended up differently in 5 different playthroughs. You know, there is only so much influence a human being can have on others and events. (Take Loghain as a prime example, a man who had absolute power, just took 2 Wardens to ruin all his endeavours) The God like hero who turns people/the world upside down with a click....I simply don't buy it. The world doesn't work that way, there are things that WILL happen, no matter what you do or say. I liked that touch of realism and the game had moments where I went "OMG NO! DON'T!" because I could not control everything/everyone. In DAO I pretty much always knew I'd be able to "fix it" ....that's not very realistic though. I hope you understand what I mean.

Really 5 different endings?  I've only played through 3 times and I've only seen 2 different endings.  I'd be interested in hearing what endings you've seen.  Because from where I sit I can only really see 2 different endings.  You side with Mages or you side with Templars.  I've sided with Mages twice and Templars once.  Both times I sided with the mages I made completely different choices early in the game.  Is your idea of different X character is still alive or they weren't around?

Non spoiler forum, hello?

And according to this, DAO only had one ending. Archie dead.

Of course the different fates of Hawke and her/his companions fall into the endings category in my opinion. (There are several differences at the end. Much like "Did Alistair become king?" differences. Not that there wasn't room for expanding those differences a little more via cutscenes ala Origins)

[Persephone]

DKJaigen wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Its a good game and if DA3 improves on the strenghts of DA2 while removing the weaknesses of DA2 it will completely outclass DAO.

The problem is that Dragon Age II barely has any real strengths. In fact, the rivalry system and the family dynamic are the only things I can think of. The improved combat was awful with kiting being a broken mess. Choices were meaningless as there were no real consequences. The railroading was more heavy-handed than ever. Simply put, the game design was poor.

While I don't mind BioWare taking some things out of Dragon Age II I do not want to see them continue treading down that path. It's a dead end. Before they take any lessons from Dragon Age II they need to look back at Dragon Age: Origins. This is why I hope that Dragon Age II will continue failing. It would allow BioWare to revisit Dragon Age: Origins and figure out a new direction for the franchise.

You keep biching and not providing any decent feedback. If you hate this game so much plz remove it from your pc and ****** of from this forum. im getting very tired of your posts.

Let's not start a flamewar here, please. I do disagree with this opinion too, but it's no less valid than yours or mine.

[Marionetten]

DKJaigen wrote...

You keep biching and not providing any decent feedback. If you hate this game so much plz remove it from your pc and ****** of from this forum. im getting very tired of your posts.

Meanwhile this kind of useless bile is to be considered quality feedback?

I'd suggest taking your own advice. It's obvious enough that you need a vacation.

Persephone wrote...

Different pixel models at Denerim. Yes. Don't care who helps me there as they are pretty much useless and my party does most of the work. It's not like those different models made a huge difference story wise. (Except for the MS Dos like & heavily bugged Epilogue Slides)

Different pixel models, different dialogues, different cutscenes. Entirely different outcomes, yes.

Persephone wrote...

IMO Companions leaving in DAO was actually badly done. (The approval system was awful. Much prefer Friend/Rivalry paths and companions staying/leaving/challenging you based on that)

Companions could leave or be killed. Take Leliana or Wynne at the ashes. While I agree that the rivalry system is an improvement I'm not seeing how the rest is. In fact, it infuriates me that Isabela isn't killable given her crimes.

Persephone wrote...

Let's just leave it at where we do agree: Both games have its flaws and virtues and hopefully Bioware will learn from them.

Indeed. But that means that they would have to go back and actually learn from Dragon Age: Origins first. Dragon Age II has made it adequately clear that they didn't do their homework.

Modifié par Marionetten, 09 avril 2011 - 08:24 .

[DKJaigen]

Marionetten wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

You keep biching and not providing any decent feedback. If you hate this game so much plz remove it from your pc and ****** of from this forum. im getting very tired of your posts.

Meanwhile this kind of useless bile is to be considered quality feedback?

No it isnt im just enjoying the emo from you whiners. quality feedback is wasted on you

I'd suggest taking your own advice. It's obvious enough that you need a vacation.

And derive me of my fun hell no. But to be honest marionetten i have visisted some of the DA2 bashing threads  and you have showed up in a lot of them. if anyone needs a vacation its you.

Persephone wrote...

Different pixel models at Denerim. Yes. Don't care who helps me there as they are pretty much useless and my party does most of the work. It's not like those different models made a huge difference story wise. (Except for the MS Dos like & heavily bugged Epilogue Slides)

Different pixel models, different dialogues, different cutscenes. Entirely different outcomes, yes.

This is not even worth a discussion. You have varied responses and dialogue in da2 and Dao.  what is so different to you then? where does it according to you differ? because i dont see it.

Persephone wrote...

IMO Companions leaving in DAO was actually badly done. (The approval system was awful. Much prefer Friend/Rivalry paths and companions staying/leaving/challenging you based on that)

Companions could leave or be killed. Take Leliana or Wynne at the ashes. While I agree that the rivalry system is an improvement I'm not seeing how the rest is. In fact, it infuriates me that Isabela isn't killable given her crimes.

This is called nitpicking. You cannot for example kill leliana when you learned she was a bard and was no doubt responsible for quite a few deaths in orlais

Persephone wrote...

Let's just leave it at where we do agree: Both games have its flaws and virtues and hopefully Bioware will learn from them.

Indeed. But that means that they would have to go back and actually learn from Dragon Age: Origins first. Dragon Age II has made it adequately clear that they didn't do their homework.

Once again your stating opinion as fact. What you dislike others will like. And i like DA2 better then DAO so they did do their homework.

[Marionetten]

DKJaigen wrote...

No it isnt im just enjoying the emo from you whiners. quality feedback is wasted on you

Ah, I see. You're that kind of person. That explains a lot. I wonder what cute expression you used before you mastered emo? 

And next time, do try and quote properly. It saves me from having to glue your sloppily written replies together. Not that they're really worth responding to.

DKJaigen wrote...

And derive me of my fun hell no. But to be honest marionetten i have visisted some of the DA2 bashing threads  and you have showed up in a lot of them. if anyone needs a vacation its you.

I haven't posted on here for quite a while. I was hoping that the forum would smarten up given time. Unfortunately, I was wrong. Still, it's nice to know that I managed to make you this butthurt with my previous commentary. You're welcome.

DKJaigen wrote...

This is not even worth a discussion. You have varied responses and dialogue in da2 and Dao.  what is so different to you then? where does it according to you differ? because i dont see it.

In the consequences. Dragon Age II barely has any lasting consequences. In fact, I'd say that Feynriel ( ... or Connor Redux ) is the biggest decision you make in the whole damn game. It's pretty telling that a mere sidequest is my best example of choices and consequences.

DKJaigen wrote...

This is called nitpicking. You cannot for example kill leliana when you learned she was a bard and was no doubt responsible for quite a few deaths in orlais

No, it's called having  more choice. No, you couldn't kill Leliana whenever you wanted to. But you could kill her. That's the whole point. Dragon Age: Origins gave you more freedom when it came to companions. No, it didn't give you unlimited freedom. Just more. Learn to love that word.

DKJaigen wrote...

Once again your stating opinion as fact. What you dislike others will like. And i like DA2 better then DAO so they did do their homework.

They did their homework by replacing the big encounters of Dragon Age: Origins with monsters spawning out of thin air? They did their homework by letting us endlessly mill around in Kirkwall waiting for something to happen? They did their homework by making your impact on the world absolutely minimal so they wouldn't have to support different plots?

No, they didn't do their homework and it's obvious enough that you didn't either. That said, I'm sure that BioWare will start doing their homework once EA makes them due to the overwhelmingly disappointing sales. I'm looking forward to that.

Modifié par Marionetten, 09 avril 2011 - 08:57 .

[Zjarcal]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Ooo, congratulations. Now that people can officially declare it a failure because it has apparently sold over a million copies in four weeks but didn't sell 10 million copies in five days, maybe they can move on with their lives instead of complaining endlessly?

You'd think they would but... 

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

As stated in your post, your argument boils down to "Waaaah!  Why isn't DA2's story the same as DAO?"

DAO's plot is different from DA2's plot.  They're different stories.  Different things happen. :lol:

'Nuff said.

[Night Prowler76]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

As stated in your post, your argument boils down to "Waaaah!  Why isn't DA2's story the same as DAO?"

DAO's plot is different from DA2's plot.  They're different stories.  Different things happen. :lol:

'Nuff said.

Your post was full of fail.

[Reinveil]

Dragon Age II forums, Week 4:

- Critics (with a few exceptions) put forth intelligent arguments supporting their opinions.  Critiques remain consistent.

- Defenders (with a few exceptions) act like their mothers were just insulted and white knight a corporation as though they own stock in it, usually with childish, poorly-worded tantrums.  Inability to read, spell, or format remains consistent.

Not sure why this continues to be so difficult for you guys to understand: we paid the same 60 dollars you did for the game, and our reaction ranges from "disappointed" to "wow, I just got seriously ripped off".  We're just as entitled to discuss it as you are.  

DEAL.
WITH.
IT.

Seriously, ask yourself why it bothers you so much, and what ways your time and passion might be better spent than raging against someone you don't know on the internet because their opinion is different from yours.

Nonsense like this...

DKJaigen wrote...

You keep biching and not providing any decent feedback. If you hate this game so much plz remove it from your pc and ****** of from this forum. im getting very tired of your posts. Also you dont seem to realise that if a game fails  bioware or the francise will be canned by EA. Trust me you do not wish to see DA2 fail because their will not be a DA afterwards ever again.

...makes me wonder if there's some kind of underlying mental illness or potentially dangerous anger issue at work.

[DAFerelden91]

Piracy is one of the main problem
Last year,PS3 was not yet fully jail-broken..Perhaps this is one of the reason lol

[kaiki01]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Persephone wrote...

That's just it, my opinion. No more or less valid than yours.

It has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with how the game was designed on a basic level.

In Dragon Age: Origins you can even redeem the main antagonist and get him as a party member. In Dragon Age II everyone goes ape**** and tries to kill you regardless of your previous actions. I expected three different endings at the very least. Instead, I just got one overwhelmingly disappointing one. Probably to pave way for future DLC installments.

As stated in your post, your argument boils down to "Waaaah!  Why isn't DA2's story the same as DAO?"

DAO's plot is different from DA2's plot.  They're different stories.  Different things happen. :lol:

'Nuff said.

Your post was full of fail.

^ this

[Maleficent]

No digital sales counted ,no consideration of the the 360 games that just went like bulletstorm,shift 2, its a recession! people holding for Crysis 2 and Homefront although it didnt turn out that well lol.Ps3 never gets decent sales anyway.Plus recently new map packs for Black Ops and Reach means renewed interest there.1.3 million sales discounting digital seems ok in the month of march and with the backlash it got too.

Modifié par Maleficent, 10 avril 2011 - 08:43 .