190 réponses à ce sujet

[Wye]

Borrachofunk69 wrote...

You all know the OP is right.

I tried to defend DA2 myself as well. About the small focus of the story and "maturity" of it. It didn't fly. Any reasonable, open-minded, unbiased player will tell you the same. A game can take place in one room with two people and be epic. In DA2 nearly none of your choices mattered, combat was a thankless chore and the environments felt deader than an 8bit static map in Wasteland.

Fact.

People like to over-exaggerate the mediocrity of certain aspects too, yet they never acknowledge it.

[maladictor2009]

David gaider had a good run but bioware needs to fire him. Any artist settling for mediocrity should be fired on the spot.

And as I have stated many times earlier romance is not always to way to go in games, focus on story and game design first then worry about if the main character is gonna love someone.

It actually felt like the only thing they took their time with was the banter between companions and romances. That will never constitute a real game.

Bioware its time to throw your rulebook out and start from scratch.

[Vicious]

Taking on the boss of Act 2 was the most epic part of the game imo, particularly if you do it solo.

Everything else either sucked or was rife with missed opportunities.

[Behelit_Outlaw]

maladictor2009 wrote...

It actually felt like the only thing they took their time with was the banter between companions and romances. That will never constitute a real game.

The Sims?

[Mecher3k]

Vicious wrote...

Taking on the boss of Act 2 was the most epic part of the game imo, particularly if you do it solo.

Ya kiting him around is so epic!!! /flex

Then there is the impale you and have you slide down and yet live through all that move.

[DeathStride]

xkg wrote...

SoR82 wrote...
On your second point your basically saying what we all know DA 2 was an extended piece of DLC that we had to pay a full game price for to set up DA 3....

^ this + you must remember there are peoples buying games as stand alone game
they want to have whole story in single game - so they dont care about DA:3
This isnt DA:2/3 this is DA:2

You have a really good point there. People didn't pay $60 for this game so they could get "DA2: The Prologue to 3" DLC- they paid to get a full game's worth. Every game should be able to stand on its own feet, not be beholden to something that is going to be made "one day."

The biggest, most important, and single most epic part of this game- the mage revolution of Thedas, isn't part of this game. They do the worst thing an artist can do with a story, they tell you, instead of showing you. All we get is a "and so the dissent spread to the other circles and both the x and the y factions turned against the Chantry so yeah..." instead. That is probably THE lamest and weakest way they could have introduced that story element.

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

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.

I can´t hear that bullsh!t anymore.
If this was true, maybe the marketing team should be fired for advertising DA2 with words like  "CHAMPION OF KIRKWALL", THE MAN WHO CHANGED THE FATE OF THEDAS!!!!!" etc........

Also, wasn't it Anders who changed the fate of Thedas?

Truer words were never spoken.

Modifié par DeathStride, 13 avril 2011 - 03:33 .

[Roxlimn]

Mecher3k wrote...
Or maybe we want our choices to have, get this, MEANING?

It's funny you say you have yet to see a coherent commentart about why DA2 is not epic, and yet call does who like DA:O's storyline an "juvenile power fantasy."

Yea because having a game were our choices matter and we have an actual impact on the story is so childish, amirite?

Choices always have meaning.  They don't always result in the consequence you had hoped for.  This is one of the things that's present in DA2 that's not in DA:O.  Hawke choice does have an impact on many narrative sequences in DA2, arguably more than in DA:O.  But all people see is that Hawke was unable to change the final course of events in DA2 - even though the Warden can't change the course of events in DA:O either!

He can't side with the Archdemon, change the site of battle, or alter the overall strategy of battle, even.  In many ways, the lack of choice in DA2 mirrors a similar lack of choice in DA:O, but DA2 is "less epic?"  That doesn't compute.

Gamers who are calling DA2 "not epic" are looking for a power fantasy.  That's not wrong, but it doesn't mean that DA2 is a failure or a cliffhanger or incomplete.  It's just not the usual power fantasy game many gamers were looking for.

[neppakyo]

Roxlimn wrote...

Mecher3k wrote...
Or maybe we want our choices to have, get this, MEANING?

It's funny you say you have yet to see a coherent commentart about why DA2 is not epic, and yet call does who like DA:O's storyline an "juvenile power fantasy."

Yea because having a game were our choices matter and we have an actual impact on the story is so childish, amirite?

Choices always have meaning.  They don't always result in the consequence you had hoped for.  This is one of the things that's present in DA2 that's not in DA:O.  Hawke choice does have an impact on many narrative sequences in DA2, arguably more than in DA:O.  But all people see is that Hawke was unable to change the final course of events in DA2 - even though the Warden can't change the course of events in DA:O either!

He can't side with the Archdemon, change the site of battle, or alter the overall strategy of battle, even.  In many ways, the lack of choice in DA2 mirrors a similar lack of choice in DA:O, but DA2 is "less epic?"  That doesn't compute.

Gamers who are calling DA2 "not epic" are looking for a power fantasy.  That's not wrong, but it doesn't mean that DA2 is a failure or a cliffhanger or incomplete.  It's just not the usual power fantasy game many gamers were looking for.

Or a good fantasy game.

[Roxlimn]

neppakyo:

I consider DA2's narrative structure and quest structure better and more sophisticated than DA:Os. It's an excellent fantasy game, but it's not your typical power fantasy fairy tale. There won't be a shortage of those, so it's not a huge loss that this one game isn't juvenile fare.

And you know what? I'm older now. I can use better stories. I wouldn't mourn overmuch if most of the industry made their stories better.

[PlumPaul93]

Roxlimn wrote...

neppakyo:

I consider DA2's narrative structure and quest structure better and more sophisticated than DA:Os. It's an excellent fantasy game, but it's not your typical power fantasy fairy tale. There won't be a shortage of those, so it's not a huge loss that this one game isn't juvenile fare.

And you know what? I'm older now. I can use better stories. I wouldn't mourn overmuch if most of the industry made their stories better.

you like finding a random item, then magically knowing where an NPC who needs it is, and then getting 50 silver? I'd prefer quests with you know story

[erynnar]

maladictor2009 wrote...

David gaider had a good run but bioware needs to fire him. Any artist settling for mediocrity should be fired on the spot.

And as I have stated many times earlier romance is not always to way to go in games, focus on story and game design first then worry about if the main character is gonna love someone.

It actually felt like the only thing they took their time with was the banter between companions and romances. That will never constitute a real game.

Bioware its time to throw your rulebook out and start from scratch.

Well...I would argue that banter and romance works for a game like Sims. But that being the focus for an RPG, even a light one like DA2, not so much no.  

I don't think Mr. Gaider needs to be fired. I am a writer, and I sympathize. Also, the story suffers the same as the game, being rushed.  Seriously, I know Mr. Gaider and the other writers can be brilliant, and are brilliant. I have DAO for the proof of that. But writing suffers if it's rushed too. Writing has it's ups and downs, and it is hard to write on command like a trained seal, especially if pressured by time constraints. That doesn't help the muse (who is likely to take off to Cabo, MIami, or Hawaii). I am not saying writing can't be done under those constraints, but it isn't easy, nor are you liable to produce your best work.  

I agree, put two characters in a room and it can be epic if the writing is good enough. But it is hard to balance all the other things that the writing has to go with, or that it has to enhance like game play.

[erynnar]

Vicious wrote...

Taking on the boss of Act 2 was the most epic part of the game imo, particularly if you do it solo.

Everything else either sucked or was rife with missed opportunities.

I know it was epic for me...epically funny as hell. *ques Benny Hill theme music* My warden ran in circles screaming like a girl at a Justine Bieber concert. So, yeah it was epic...

[Mecher3k]

Roxlimn wrote...

Choices always have meaning.

Everything happens no matter Hawke, Hawkes dies and the events of DA2 happen anyway.

Warden dies and ferelden is completely overrun by the blight at the very least.

Roxlimn wrote...
 even though the Warden can't change the course of events in DA:O either!

He can't side with the Archdemon, change the site of battle, or alter the overall strategy of battle, even.  In many ways, the lack of choice in DA2 mirrors a similar lack of choice in DA:O, but DA2 is "less epic?"  That doesn't compute.

Yet the Warden determines if the entire ferelden circle is purged except for a small handful of mages/tranquil. The warden determines who is the next dwarven king and if they will have golems again or not. And on and on with choices that have meaning.

Roxlimn wrote...

Gamers who are calling DA2 "not epic" are looking for a power fantasy.  That's not wrong, but it doesn't mean that DA2 is a failure or a cliffhanger or incomplete.  It's just not the usual power fantasy game many gamers were looking for.

Gamers who are calling DA2 ****, I mean ""not epic"" are people who want what even bioware hyped the game to be.

"Play as Hawke through his rise of power and as champion of Kirkwall!"

Really? What power does Hawke have? And champion of Kirkwall for doing something the templars would of done anyway?

Even the game itself and Bioware are against you.

[Mecher3k]

Roxlimn wrote...

neppakyo:

I consider DA2's narrative structure and quest structure better and more sophisticated than DA:Os.

LOL!

Enough said.

[Roxlimn]

Mecher3k:

Everything happens no matter Hawke, Hawkes dies and the events of DA2 happen anyway.

Warden dies and ferelden is completely overrun by the blight at the very least.

We don't know if Ferelden would have been overrun if the Warden were not there. Alistair is still a Grey Warden and he could still have killed the Archdemon.

Things in Kirkwall would not have turned out the same if Hawke did not act the way he did. If you think so, then you need to read the story again because you didn't get it.

Yet the Warden determines if the entire ferelden circle is purged except for a small handful of mages/tranquil. The warden determines who is the next dwarven king and if they will have golems again or not. And on and on with choices that have meaning.

Hawke can kill the Arishok, or he can give him what he wants and he goes away peaceably. He can decide to rule Kirkwall to stabilize it or leave it in ruins. He can eliminate a whole Dalish clan, or not. He can loose an world-changing abomination on the world - or not. He can preserve the last of the Harrowmont line, or he can sell him to bounty hunters.

Gamers who are calling DA2 ****, I mean ""not epic"" are people who want what even bioware hyped the game to be.

"Play as Hawke through his rise of power and as champion of Kirkwall!"

Really? What power does Hawke have? And champion of Kirkwall for doing something the templars would of done anyway?

Even the game itself and Bioware are against you.

You so did not understand how the game unfolded. It's probably for the same reason you use "of" instead of "'ve." Better reading comprehension is needed on your part.

[Mecher3k]

Roxlimn wrote...


We don't know if Ferelden would have been overrun if the Warden were not there. Alistair is still a Grey Warden and he could still have killed the Archdemon.

Things in Kirkwall would not have turned out the same if Hawke did not act the way he did. If you think so, then you need to read the story again because you didn't get it.

There's a certain DLC who's whole premise was what would happen if the warden died during the joining or just never attempted it! So we in fact do know.

And no everything would still have happened had Hawke not been there. Anders would still have done what he did the the revolt would still had happen and a certain someone would still have been killed in act 2 by the templars.

You are like someone debating that 1+1=3.

And nothing you listed is a major event or is actually against you.


And funny you mention grammar when you obviously can't read since you posted quite a few spoilers.

Modifié par Mecher3k, 13 avril 2011 - 05:28 .

[Roxlimn]

Mecher3k:

1. That DLC puts the player in command of the Darkspawn, so it's not exactly JUST that the Warden is inconsequential. It's also a situation in which the player is given over to the Darkspawn so that that side has the potency. So we don't know.

2. You don't know that Anders would have done that. Would he have been inspired to act? Will he have interacted enough with the Chantry not to have been suspicious at the site? Would the Guard even have overlooked his little clinic as much as they did? You don't know any of that. You're assuming.

Also, the Viscount tells you straight out what would happen if they had to rely on the Templar for the end of Act 2. The fact that the city escaped as much destruction as it did is purely because of Hawke. That's why he's the Champion.

[PlumPaul93]

Roxlimn wrote...

Mecher3k:

1. That DLC puts the player in command of the Darkspawn, so it's not exactly JUST that the Warden is inconsequential. It's also a situation in which the player is given over to the Darkspawn so that that side has the potency. So we don't know.

2. You don't know that Anders would have done that. Would he have been inspired to act? Will he have interacted enough with the Chantry not to have been suspicious at the site? Would the Guard even have overlooked his little clinic as much as they did? You don't know any of that. You're assuming.

Also, the Viscount tells you straight out what would happen if they had to rely on the Templar for the end of Act 2. The fact that the city escaped as much destruction as it did is purely because of Hawke. That's why he's the Champion.

he was making an assumption so how could he know for sure? And if memory serves orsino and meredith were right behind hawke and got to where hawke was fairly quickly and I'm pretty sure they could've handled the boss at the end of act 2 (hiding spoilers)

[Mecher3k]

Roxlimn wrote...

Mecher3k:

1. That DLC puts the player in command of the Darkspawn, so it's not exactly JUST that the Warden is inconsequential. It's also a situation in which the player is given over to the Darkspawn so that that side has the potency. So we don't know.

2. You don't know that Anders would have done that. Would he have been inspired to act? Will he have interacted enough with the Chantry not to have been suspicious at the site? Would the Guard even have overlooked his little clinic as much as they did? You don't know any of that. You're assuming.

Also, the Viscount tells you straight out what would happen if they had to rely on the Templar for the end of Act 2. The fact that the city escaped as much destruction as it did is purely because of Hawke. That's why he's the Champion.

Again, the whole point of that DLC is what would happen if the warden died. Hence why can't just import a DA:O save and have your warden be in it.

2. "You don't know that Anders would have done that. Would he have been inspired to act?"

He does it anyway without helping him so yes he would.

And no the city did not escape any destruction because of Hawke, the templars were right athe doorsteps by the time Hawke got there.

Modifié par Mecher3k, 13 avril 2011 - 05:32 .

[Bostur]

Roxlimn wrote...

neppakyo:

I consider DA2's narrative structure and quest structure better and more sophisticated than DA:Os. It's an excellent fantasy game, but it's not your typical power fantasy fairy tale. There won't be a shortage of those, so it's not a huge loss that this one game isn't juvenile fare.

And you know what? I'm older now. I can use better stories. I wouldn't mourn overmuch if most of the industry made their stories better.

I feel the exact opposite. DAO didn't feel juvenile at all. But DA2 did by its constant exaggerations and lack of structure.

DA2 was more like a collection of special effects, and small bits of story that never seemed to fit together in any meaningful way. Some of those small bits were good though.


I'm not sure what you mean by a "power fantasy fairy tale". Established modern fantasy generally use a relatievly weak framework storyline, inside which characters and setting get a much stronger story of their own. By using real 'people' in an imaginary world a strong connection can be made to those people.

DAO had this somewhat bland framework story of killing an archdemon. Inside this framework the real stories of the inhabitants of the gameworld was told. 10 minutes into the game we all know the Archdemon will die in the end, thats not the point and the interesting bit at all. But it is used as motivation for friendship, rivalry, deceit and bravery. My biggest hero in DAO was the young dwarven girl that wanted to go to the wizard's tower to study. The biggest scoundrel was the innkeeper that was too cheap to give his beer away in the face of certain doom.

In DA2 the characters have little motivation for doing what they do. In DAO the setting provides the motivation.

[Bostur]

DeathStride wrote...

The biggest, most important, and single most epic part of this game- the mage revolution of Thedas, isn't part of this game. They do the worst thing an artist can do with a story, they tell you, instead of showing you. All we get is a "and so the dissent spread to the other circles and both the x and the y factions turned against the Chantry so yeah..." instead. That is probably THE lamest and weakest way they could have introduced that story element.

I completely agree. Sometimes it seems they completely discard what could have been the tastiest bits. When I was aware that Hawke was about to sell himself/herself as an indentured servant either to smugglers or mercenaries, my thought was "Hey, thats a great setting for a story", and then they just went ahead and skipped the whole thing.

[Otterwarden]

Borrachofunk69 wrote...

You all know the OP is right.

I tried to defend DA2 myself as well. About the small focus of the story and "maturity" of it. It didn't fly. Any reasonable, open-minded, unbiased player will tell you the same. A game can take place in one room with two people and be epic. In DA2 nearly none of your choices mattered, combat was a thankless chore and the environments felt deader than an 8bit static map in Wasteland.

Fact.

That defense provided me one of the singular most amusing moments on this board.  I had just finished reading your "seminar on destroying a franchise" thread when I saw the second posting.  Reading it was very perplexing and I wondered "Is the op trying some reverse psychology on us?"  Finally, I caught on that a spammer had retrieved the post from prior to the game's release.  Agree fully with Jim_uk that you probably should not start a detective agency...lol!

If we define epic as "extending beyond the usual or ordinary especially in size or scope" DA 2 was the antithesis... "Champion of Chores" indeed!

[Roxlimn]

Bostur:

I feel the exact opposite. DAO didn't feel juvenile at all. But DA2 did by its constant exaggerations and lack of structure.

DA2 was more like a collection of special effects, and small bits of story that never seemed to fit together in any meaningful way. Some of those small bits were good though.

Nearly all of the main plot points lead up to the finale in Act 3. If you don't get why, you need to replay the narrative bits, preferably with subtitles on and Cliff Notes.

I'd suggest that not being totally and completely obvious about how everything fits together was a failure of writing, but I wouldn't want Bioware to dumb down the story for the benefit of the lowest common denominator.

DAO had this somewhat bland framework story of killing an archdemon. Inside this framework the real stories of the inhabitants of the gameworld was told. 10 minutes into the game we all know the Archdemon will die in the end, thats not the point and the interesting bit at all. But it is used as motivation for friendship, rivalry, deceit and bravery. My biggest hero in DAO was the young dwarven girl that wanted to go to the wizard's tower to study. The biggest scoundrel was the innkeeper that was too cheap to give his beer away in the face of certain doom.

You mean, it's BETTER writing to write off the main story points as a loss? That's... ...I don't even know how to describe that.

In DA2 the characters have little motivation for doing what they do. In DAO the setting provides the motivation.

You are looking for Hawke's motivation to accidentally run into chance encounters in Act 1? I... ...you don't have a motivation to experience accidental events. What's Japan's motivation for blowing up their nuclear power plants? They don't. They didn't want that to happen.

I completely agree. Sometimes it seems they completely discard what could have been the tastiest bits. When I was aware that Hawke was about to sell himself/herself as an indentured servant either to smugglers or mercenaries, my thought was "Hey, thats a great setting for a story", and then they just went ahead and skipped the whole thing.

You want to do a whole year's worth of ultimately pointless side quests? Really?

[DeathStride]

Bostur wrote...

DeathStride wrote...
The biggest, most important, and single most epic part of this game- the mage revolution of Thedas, isn't part of this game. They do the worst thing an artist can do with a story, they tell you, instead of showing you. All we get is a "and so the dissent spread to the other circles and both the x and the y factions turned against the Chantry so yeah..." instead. That is probably THE lamest and weakest way they could have introduced that story element.

I completely agree. Sometimes it seems they completely discard what could have been the tastiest bits. When I was aware that Hawke was about to sell himself/herself as an indentured servant either to smugglers or mercenaries, my thought was "Hey, thats a great setting for a story", and then they just went ahead and skipped the whole thing.

They could definitely worked that angle and introduced some dark plotlines in there, morally gray areas that Bioware excel in, if they had had you play that part. It would have been vastly more interesting than running around doing pointless makework so you could earn 50 gold to invest in something.... to earn more gold. Real deep.(no pun intended)

Modifié par DeathStride, 13 avril 2011 - 05:58 .

[Roxlimn]

DeathStride:

If you guys think that the majority of the quests in Act 1 were just to make gold, then you're missing the entirety of the setup of DA2. Go to YouTube and play the narrative bits again, in sequence, knowing what you know of later events.