190 réponses à ce sujet

[SoR82]

thatbwoyblu wrote...

People who make complain accounts are 65 year old weirdos that need to grow the F up real spit. Bioware put they heart in DA 2 and all yall old azz EMOs wanna tear it apart. I say its time for Bioware to become console exclusive and leave these old LameOs in the dust.

I think i just threw up a little...

If I was on the same side as that comment... I think Id change sides on that alone

[neppakyo]

sleepyowlet wrote...

The issue I have with Hawke is that BioWare tried to make him/her an interesting character. Hello? That is MY job. Hawke is supposed to be my character in this game.

Other than that, I think it is actually Varric that made him/her a legend by telling all those tall tales. Without Varric Hawke would have remained in obscurity, and rightly so. My Warden became a legend/hero by her own merit, Hawke just had a good PR guy.

I agree with this.

Maybe Bioware should hire Varric to do PR instead of Laidlaw, since the last interviews didn't go over so well.

[Shasow]

http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc

#3 is Origins

#6 is DA2

[EccentricSage]

Shasow wrote...

Change the world? You mean change the city?

You do realise that what transpired in Kirkwall is about to start a world war, right?  That's the whole point.  The writers were forshadowing this in Origins, Awakening, and Witch Hunt.  'The world is about to change, people fear change and will fight it'.  Kirkwall is simply where the initial lines are drawn.

More personal? I thought your actions don't mean s***?

More personal in that the plot revolves around you not choosing the outcome for others, but rather, choosing where you stand and who exactly you are.  You don't get a choice in the battle you will fight, but you do get a choice in why you fight it, and where you stand and who you stand with.  Was Origins really so different?  No matter your personal narative in Origins, all rodes lead to Rome there, too.  You defeat a blighted old god to save the world.  The end.

I agree, at least, that the choices the Champion made should have had more ripple efects at the end of the game, like how you get the different ending slides in Origins.  But ultimately, the Champion's story is that of a person caught in between two factions, who can NOT fix everything.  In a way I find that more compelling, because the idea of some hero always getting to make everyone's decissions for them and being able to stop madmen and mad women from starting a war with nothing more than his words, is just ludicrous.

Honostly, defeating an archdemon is more world changing than defeating an obsessed templar and an elf mage.

Not really.  Stoping a blight is merely stopping a decidedly negative change in the world.  Defeating the Archdeamon makes you a hero, not the god of thedas who lays down laws across nations.  In 2, you pick sides in a war that is only starting.  That elf mage and mad templar were only the two fools who escalated a decidedly local conflict to the point where a revolutionary had cause and opportunity to take drastic actions.  Actions that make the conflict in Kirkwall into a conflict between all Templars, Mages, and the Chantry.  It's a very political story instead of a 'hero slays dragons and monsters, and everyone congratulates him' fairytale.

Modifié par EccentricSage, 10 avril 2011 - 08:35 .

[Tirigon]

Shasow wrote...

http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc

#3 is Origins

#6 is DA2

Well, #1 is WoW there, so I doubt this ranking can be taken seriously.

[Vicious]

I blame the waves of enemies, personally.

[Riloux]

Purple People Eater wrote...

I dont think it was the intent of the devs to go for "epic" in this game.It was always meant to be a smaller story told on a smaller scale. Not every RPG needs to be "epic". I actually liked that about DA2. It diddnt follow the tried and true RPG setup.

Yes it does. We play video games to get epic. We play real life to get dull, repetitive and unfair.

[EccentricSage]

Vicious wrote...

I blame the waves of enemies, personally.

Yeah.  Pointless filler battles just make every fight feel less signifigent, whick makes boss battles not feel as important as they should be.  I say fire the lead level designer.  I read the interview he did, and his entire defence was that the player gets to do awesome cool stuff, in-game logic does not matter, and all plot holes can be filled by the explanation that 'Hawk is just that awesome'.  I wanted to punch him in the face.

[thatbwoyblu]

SoR82 wrote...

thatbwoyblu wrote...

People who make complain accounts are 65 year old weirdos that need to grow the F up real spit. Bioware put they heart in DA 2 and all yall old azz EMOs wanna tear it apart. I say its time for Bioware to become console exclusive and leave these old LameOs in the dust.

I think i just threw up a little...

If I was on the same side as that comment... I think Id change sides on that alone

<_

[xkg]

EccentricSage wrote...

Not really.  Stoping a blight is merely stopping a decidedly negative change in the world.  Defeating the Archdeamon makes you a hero, not the god of thedas who lays down laws across nations.  In 2, you pick sides in a war that is only starting.  That elf mage and mad templar were only the two fools who escalated a decidedly local conflict to the point where a revolutionary had cause and opportunity to take drastic actions.  Actions that make the conflict in Kirkwall into a conflict between all Templars, Mages, and the Chantry.  It's a very political story instead of a 'hero slays dragons and monsters, and everyone congratulates him' fairytale.

sidenote:
i doubt qunari mages or tevinter magisters going to bother about that conflict so you cant count huge part of THEDAS (qunari lands + tevinter empire) out of this conflict

Modifié par xkg, 10 avril 2011 - 09:58 .

[EccentricSage]

xkg wrote...

EccentricSage wrote...

Not really.  Stoping a blight is merely stopping a decidedly negative change in the world.  Defeating the Archdeamon makes you a hero, not the god of thedas who lays down laws across nations.  In 2, you pick sides in a war that is only starting.  That elf mage and mad templar were only the two fools who escalated a decidedly local conflict to the point where a revolutionary had cause and opportunity to take drastic actions.  Actions that make the conflict in Kirkwall into a conflict between all Templars, Mages, and the Chantry.  It's a very political story instead of a 'hero slays dragons and monsters, and everyone congratulates him' fairytale.

sidenote:
i doubt qunari mages or tevinter magisters going to bother about that conflict so you cant count huge part of THEDAS (qunari lands + tevinter empire) out of this conflict

The Tevinter once ruled a vast empire before Andraste led the rebelion uppon which an entire religion was built, which the Chantry draws it's power and it's politics from.  I think there is reason to fear a mage rebellion could lead to a new Tevinter Emperium in previously free lands if the mages are corrupt, or are infultrated by Tevinter mages.  I expect them to play a big role.  The Qunari fear and hate mages even worse than the Templars, and have led crusades to conquor free lands and make them submit to the 'Wisdom of the Qun' before.  So they are a rogue elament that could still get involved.

[xkg]

EccentricSage wrote...

xkg wrote...

EccentricSage wrote...

Not really.  Stoping a blight is merely stopping a decidedly negative change in the world.  Defeating the Archdeamon makes you a hero, not the god of thedas who lays down laws across nations.  In 2, you pick sides in a war that is only starting.  That elf mage and mad templar were only the two fools who escalated a decidedly local conflict to the point where a revolutionary had cause and opportunity to take drastic actions.  Actions that make the conflict in Kirkwall into a conflict between all Templars, Mages, and the Chantry.  It's a very political story instead of a 'hero slays dragons and monsters, and everyone congratulates him' fairytale.

sidenote:
i doubt qunari mages or tevinter magisters going to bother about that conflict so you cant count huge part of THEDAS (qunari lands + tevinter empire) out of this conflict

The Tevinter once ruled a vast empire before Andraste led the rebelion uppon which an entire religion was built, which the Chantry draws it's power and it's politics from.  I think there is reason to fear a mage rebellion could lead to a new Tevinter Emperium in previously free lands if the mages are corrupt, or are infultrated by Tevinter mages.  I expect them to play a big role.  The Qunari fear and hate mages even worse than the Templars, and have led crusades to conquor free lands and make them submit to the 'Wisdom of the Qun' before.  So they are a rogue elament that could still get involved.

but Tevinter Empire still exist and is quite big and is ruled by mages so they dont have to rebel against no one
Besides Tevinter Empire and Qunari are at war with each other already so they dont need to get involved in new conflicts to bash each other

edit:
btw Tevinter Empire wasnt defeated in that coonflict with Andraste but i wont spoil it here - talk with Fenris at the GALLOWS if u didnt already

Modifié par xkg, 10 avril 2011 - 10:36 .

[trancers3]

where was effect from origins when you import save or why when you talk to someone all options lead to same ending no matter what you answer

[Night Prowler76]

For a fantasy game, this was not epic at all, it was boring the entire way through, I did every quest on 2 playthroughs and started a 3rd one and I just stopped playing, I was forcing myself to play but I couldnt go on, after seeing that making 2 completely different choices at the end of the game basically be meaningless, I just had to laugh.

I still cant believe this is a BioWare game, definately the biggest disappointment of of 2010, beating out Homefront, and that was bad.

[TRfore]

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

[neppakyo]

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

I shall counter with the defense of "metric scores are dum" Which is usually said when someone brings it up.

Not me, I give it a 5.5-6.5/10.

[The Angry One]

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

You are surprised BioWare's rep is going down after being bought by EA?
Hey I hear Maxis was a great and respected developer once, too..

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

neppakyo wrote...

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

I shall counter with the defense of "metric scores are dum" Which is usually said when someone brings it up.

Not me, I give it a 5.5-6.5/10.

No, it's usually the "metacritic scores are full of trolls from 4chan and RPGCodex" line.

Personally, the game has some good underlying concepts and good material to work with, but was absolutely butchered in execution due to conscious design decisions and the shortened development time. I like the faster paced combat. I like the cross class combos. I liked the integration of companions into dialogue (compared with Origins). But for everything that DA 2 does right, it does several things wrong.

What does get me though is the attitude that some Bioware employees bring to the table. That being that Dragon Age 2 was a great game, they will continue in this direction with minor tweaks. People who disagree are generally afraid of change and stuck in the past.

The worst part is that if they could justify many of the changes more than "because we can", it wouldn't be so bad. If the changes had a practical benefit that adds depth to the experience, then I'm all for it. The wheel doesn't bother me as much as the paraphrasing. Voiced protagonist doesn't bother me as much as the voice acting itself. Give us variety (5-6 per gender per race) and the option to stay silent and I wouldn't mind it so much.

On the other hand, I have no idea what the re-used environments or waves of materialising enemies or non customizable companions (thereby ruining much of the inventory system) or no tactical camera or limited choices have to do with adding depth. All of which were defended by Bioware.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 11 avril 2011 - 02:14 .

[neppakyo]

The Angry One wrote...

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

You are surprised BioWare's rep is going down after being bought by EA?
Hey I hear Maxis was a great and respected developer once, too..

Hey, I hear Westwood Studies was a great and respected developer once, too..

[The Angry One]

neppakyo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

You are surprised BioWare's rep is going down after being bought by EA?
Hey I hear Maxis was a great and respected developer once, too..

Hey, I hear Westwood Studies was a great and respected developer once, too..

At least Westwood was put out of it's misery.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

The Angry One wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

You are surprised BioWare's rep is going down after being bought by EA?
Hey I hear Maxis was a great and respected developer once, too..

Hey, I hear Westwood Studies was a great and respected developer once, too..

At least Westwood was put out of it's misery.

What about poor Mythic? They were cannibalised and eaten by Bioware.

[88mphSlayer]

the best moments of a lot of video games are not the parts produced to feel "epic"

to me this is why i liked the concept of Dragon Age 2 but wish there were more subtle ways to solve everything than "blood and gore at every corner", i loved mass effect 1 and the witcher and both of those games can be pretty sparse in combat at times and they're all the better for it, same goes for Oblivion which is amazingly epic but you spend a great deal of time not fighting hordes of enemies at every corner

hell i can even make this comparison with first person shooters... Killzone 3 and Crysis 2 came out a month apart from eachother, i bought the latter and rented the former, both games are very pretty and combat can be very visceral but Crysis 2 is so much more enjoyable because there are many moments throughout the game when they basically slow the combat down and give you room to be flexible with how you want to proceed... on the other hand Killzone 3 is basically "run here go here shoot this guy go go go" all the time and it gets old... it's easy to make epic feel dumb

[Pandaman102]

The Angry One wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

TRfore wrote...

The only thing epic about this game is that it basically destroyed Bioware's  EPIC reputation as a producer of quality RPGs.
If you don't believe me checkout Metacritic's and Amazon's buyer's reviews

You are surprised BioWare's rep is going down after being bought by EA?
Hey I hear Maxis was a great and respected developer once, too..

Hey, I hear Westwood Studies was a great and respected developer once, too..

At least Westwood was put out of it's misery.

And Origins, but we still have Ultima Online flopping about like some terrible reminder of what happens when EA decides when a developer with a solid reputation is only good for making an MM.. O...

*eyes Star Wars: The Old Republic*

(though to be fair Garriott did go bat**** insane by Ultima 9, so it's not all EA's fault)

[Boiny Bunny]

EccentricSage wrote...

Not really.  Stoping a blight is merely stopping a decidedly negative change in the world.  Defeating the Archdeamon makes you a hero, not the god of thedas who lays down laws across nations.  In 2, you pick sides in a war that is only starting.  That elf mage and mad templar were only the two fools who escalated a decidedly local conflict to the point where a revolutionary had cause and opportunity to take drastic actions.  Actions that make the conflict in Kirkwall into a conflict between all Templars, Mages, and the Chantry.  It's a very political story instead of a 'hero slays dragons and monsters, and everyone congratulates him' fairytale.

Sort of, except it's not.

Dragon Age 2 is a story of various fragile political states falling to pieces for various reasons.  Hawke has little to nothing to do with any of these.

The ends of Act 1 were entirely meaningless. 

The events of Act 2 were not meaningless, however, would have transpired in exactly the same way had Hawke never existed.

The events of Act 3 were also not meaningless, but again, had nothing to do with Hawke.  Hawke was just a moron who was at the wrong place at the wrong time.  He/she picked a side, and made absolutely no difference whatsoever.  Completely irrespective of whether Hawke had been present or not, the war would have come about in exactly the same manner, and resulted in both the final bosses dead anyway.

Anders is more or less responsible for everything.  And even had Hawke AND Anders not existed, it is quite arguable that the situation would have escalated to the stage it got to anyway.