966 réponses à ce sujet

[H1natachan]

Lets all just sit back and hope the DLC's might save or even turn around DA2, guess i'm naive even daring to think that, then again, what other suprises are in store for us ?

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

DA:O venturing into the deep roads felt more epic, you actually did feel like you was in a hostile place. Deep roads in DA2, well i guess they failed there.

I really hope that lessons are learned and DA3 at least gives us what us players want in a RPG.

[Kimberly Shaw]

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

When did we get 4 classes? Cool!

[Yrkoon]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

It was an interesting read, but I still see that they didn't ask him the hard and obvious questions. So I will now, I doubt ML will respond though.

Q: What do you think went wrong with the production of DA2?
Q: What do you think you could have done better?
Q: The public backlash on DA2 was massive, why do you think so many gamers got so mad?

 
Yep.  All decent questions.  Well, except for the first one, which is one of those "loaded" questions similar to the "when did you stop beating your wife?" line of interrogation.  I'm fairly certain that if Laidlaw were  here he'd answer it by saying:  "production didn't go wrong.  The game turned out exactly as we intended, production-wise"

That all said, I do find it  telling that Laidlaw is suddenly unapproachable  on this forum.    Before DA2 came out, he was a prolific poster...with hundreds of posts.  He was almost always right there to answer qauestions and engage in debate.   Even during the peak of the Devoloper crunch-time for the game.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 15 avril 2011 - 06:39 .

[erynnar]

Sable Phoenix wrote...

Count Viceroy wrote...

Sable Phoenix wrote...

Except that, you know, it's not.  It's riddled with bugs, it's filled with recycled content, and there are tons of issues related to combat that have everything to do with the game design and nothing to do with personal preference.

No game is perfect. In fact every game has it's fair share of issues post release. Yes, even DAO did. A lot of them. The only difference was we had a toolset to fix the issues ourselves.

1.  I am not claiming Origins was perfect, in fact I did not even mention it.

2.  The existence of flaws in one game does not excuse the existence of flaws in another.

3.  Familiarize yourself with logical fallacies.

Even if we were comparing the two games directly, that wouldn't really help your argument much, since Origins had fewer game-breaking bugs and vastly more content.

Finally! Someone who makes the point that flaws in one game does not excuse the flaws in the other, and DAO had less game breaking ones and more content. Oh wait, those are our rosy colored glasses and our blind love of DAO, right?

[H1natachan]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

When did we get 4 classes? Cool!

rogue, warrior, mage ,rogue archer lol

LOL my bad for even daring to count four what was i thinking of

[AlexXIV]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

When did we get 4 classes? Cool!

4th class will be revealed after finishing the game 10 times => replay value

[Killjoy Cutter]

AlexXIV wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

When did we get 4 classes? Cool!

4th class will be revealed after finishing the game 10 times => replay value

April 1st was a couple weeks ago.

[erynnar]

Volourn wrote...

What's funny with all this praise DA1, diss DA2 and then blame DA2 all on Liadlaw 9and Gaider) is that both of these guys played huge roles in DA1 as well.  While pretending the syck and can't make games LMAO


"Just look at the sales figures."

Selling more than 1 mil in less than 2weeks, and at a faster pace than DA1. And, much cheaper to produce. L0L

Gaider yes, Laidlaw no. It was my understanding that Laidlaw came late to the DAO camp, when it was almost finished and ready to go. I saw it in an interview with Laidlaw (and damn if can remember which one, since his interviews tend to swing me from dismay to digust equally so they tend to run together).

Please give him Jade Empire 2 or something equivalent to work on, that he is better suited for and give DA to someone who loved and worked DAO, and can improve its flaws while creating a true sequel.

[Volourn]

Laidlaw was a Lead designer on DA1. 'Nough said. Why do people argue against facts because it hurts to admit the truth?

[H1natachan]

erynnar wrote...

Volourn wrote...

What's funny with all this praise DA1, diss DA2 and then blame DA2 all on Liadlaw 9and Gaider) is that both of these guys played huge roles in DA1 as well.  While pretending the syck and can't make games LMAO


"Just look at the sales figures."

Selling more than 1 mil in less than 2weeks, and at a faster pace than DA1. And, much cheaper to produce. L0L

Gaider yes, Laidlaw no. It was my understanding that Laidlaw came late to the DAO camp, when it was almost finished and ready to go. I saw it in an interview with Laidlaw (and damn if can remember which one, since his interviews tend to swing me from dismay to digust equally so they tend to run together).

Please give him Jade Empire 2 or something equivalent to work on, that he is better suited for and give DA to someone who loved and worked DAO, and can improve its flaws while creating a true sequel.

100% This ^^ 
This post iz teh winnar of teh internettz

[Killer3000ad]

Volourn wrote...

What's funny with all this praise DA1, diss DA2 and then blame DA2 all on Liadlaw 9and Gaider) is that both of these guys played huge roles in DA1 as well.  While pretending the syck and can't make games LMAO


"Just look at the sales figures."

Selling more than 1 mil in less than 2weeks, and at a faster pace than DA1. And, much cheaper to produce. L0L

Brent Knowles was lead designer for most of DA:O's development, Laidlaw only came aboard at the end to do the console port of DA:O.

http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

Modifié par Killer3000ad, 15 avril 2011 - 06:56 .

[DreGregoire]

erynnar wrote...

give DA to someone who loved and worked DAO, and can improve its flaws while creating a true sequel.

That would be nice. I'm not saying that some of the things in DA2 wouldn't improve the DAO system but I would rather a system closer to DAO than Mass Effect. It's not like we'll get the changes we want anyways. I would love to see DA2 remade, it isn't going to happen though. *sighs*

[Cutlasskiwi]

H1natachan wrote...

Lets all just sit back and hope the DLC's might save or even turn around DA2, guess i'm naive even daring to think that, then again, what other suprises are in store for us ?

DA:O has replay value up it's sleeve at least, but DA2 the replay value plummets once you've played all 4 classes + possible questing paths.

DA:O venturing into the deep roads felt more epic, you actually did feel like you was in a hostile place. Deep roads in DA2, well i guess they failed there.

I really hope that lessons are learned and DA3 at least gives us what us players want in a RPG.

For me it's the other way around. DA2 offer me far more replay value than DAO ever did. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Volourn wrote...

Laidlaw was a Lead designer on DA1. 'Nough said. Why do people argue against facts because it hurts to admit the truth?

You keep saying that, and I don't recall you being able to answer any questions as to when he actually took that title, how much influence he had on DA:O (no such thing as DA1), and what he was actually up to while "a lead designer".  He could have been there just to handle the console ports.  

I could have missed past answers on your part, though, there's a lot of traffic on these threads. 


EDIT:  Ah, I see, just as with the last several times you've made that claim about Laidlaw, others have pointed out that he was brought on late to do the console ports, and really didn't have much of a hand, if any, in the actual game. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 15 avril 2011 - 06:57 .

[AlanC9]

Volourn wrote...

Laidlaw was a Lead designer on DA1. 'Nough said. Why do people argue against facts because it hurts to admit the truth?

Simple. Either their beliefs have to change or the facts have to change.

[MingWolf]

Killer3000ad wrote...

Volourn wrote...

What's funny with all this praise DA1, diss DA2 and then blame DA2 all on Liadlaw 9and Gaider) is that both of these guys played huge roles in DA1 as well.  While pretending the syck and can't make games LMAO


"Just look at the sales figures."

Selling more than 1 mil in less than 2weeks, and at a faster pace than DA1. And, much cheaper to produce. L0L

Brent Knowles was lead designer for most of DA:O's development, Laidlaw only came aboard at the end to do the console port of DA:O.

http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

If I'm not mistaken, Brent Knowles was mostly the central figurehead behind DA:O as well. 

Edit: Nevermind.  I just repeated what you said.

Modifié par MingWolf, 15 avril 2011 - 07:01 .

[DreGregoire]

Killer3000ad wrote...

Brent Knowles was lead designer for most of DA:O's development, Laidlaw only came aboard at the end to do the console port of DA:O.

http://blog.brentkno...008-summer-2009 

I totally wish I had seen this blog before. And it explains so much on what happened to DA2 dangit!!!!

[Killer3000ad]

MingWolf wrote...

If I'm not mistaken, Brent Knowles was mostly the central figurehead behind DA:O as well. 

His blog post certainly indicates that. Brent Knowles we will miss you.

[Killjoy Cutter]

AlanC9 wrote...

Volourn wrote...

Laidlaw was a Lead designer on DA1. 'Nough said. Why do people argue against facts because it hurts to admit the truth?

Simple. Either their beliefs have to change or the facts have to change.

Except that that Volourn happens to be using a technically correct claim -- "Laidlaw was a lead designer on DA:O" -- to imply something that evidently isn't at all truthful -- "Laidlaw had a big role in both DA:O and DA2". 

[Volourn]

"You keep saying that, and I don't recall you being able to answer any questions as to when he actually took that title,"

He is a Lead designer of DA1. This is undisputable fact. It doesn't matter what he did. That was his position on the game as given to him by the BIO docs. I trust them tom give credit to the right people on their own games as they get nothing for giving false credit. Next you gonna claim that Dave Gaider wasn't a Lead Writer for DA1 but just the janitor. That's ridiculous.

If people are going toa ccuse BIO of lying about who a Lead designer was they need to prove it. Until then, Laidlaw was a LD on DA1. This is fact, and it's dishonourable, pathetic, and disgusting to claim otherwise.

[Reinveil]

erynnar wrote...

Count Viceroy wrote...

xkg wrote...

Thank you for your advice. Not that it is very wise or worth remembering but at least you have tried

Have a nice day

Yes, pardon me ever so much for not joining in with the haters. Whatever shall I do without your approval.


Especially hilarious coming from a 2 week old account without any registered games too. Now I almost feel insulted.

And what ever shall we do without yours? Oh dear me...If you don't like the thread, why are you here? So you can look down your nose and feel superior because you love the game and the rest of us have a problem with your precious?  I am glad you love the game, gratz to you, really. I am glad people like/love it.  I don't, and most of the people here don't  and we get to voice our opinions same as you.

Indeed.  I still don't understand (after a month of checking the DAII boards) what the apologists/hardcore "fans" hope to accomplish by blaring their opinions over and over and over again.  Or losing their minds with rage and slinging insults at the rather large number of people that have issues with the game, like they're taking it personally or something.  It would make sense if the majority were coming here claiming that the game sucks and everyone that likes it is an idiot, but I mostly just see the same critiques presented in a more or less civil manner.  And it's always the same responses, isn't it?

• The people that don't like it are "haters".  Like we all got together at my house before it launched and decided to smear a company we love (notice how many "haters" have multiple registered games) for absolutely no reason.
• The people that don't like it are obviously "entitled".
• "You can't compare it to Origins!  I mean sure, it's a numbered sequel, but it has to be judged independently!"  Which always comes across as "yeah, it doesn't compare to Origins, so please look over here".

Is my opinion that it's an unfocused rushjob going to change because you keep screaming at me that I'm wrong?

Protip: No, it's not.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Roxlimn wrote...

Let me clarify. You think that many design choices in DA:O are better and that deviation from them represents a change for the worse. This does not mean that you like all design choices in DA:O, but it does mean that you hold those you like as objectively better, without regard for reason or discussion.

No.  It means that I prefer some features over others, and I can defend my choices.  It means I think some features are objectively better, but not just because I like them.  I think I can demonstrate the superiority of those features.

And where DA2 deviates from that feature set, the game becomes less fun.

Bioware could have spawned them in a party-sensitive manner, but that's even more unrealistic. That said, I'm not against a party-based spawn design.

This is a terrific example.  I'm against spawning generally, because it doesn't make any sense within the setting.  Having an internally consistent setting makes the game more fun because it permits coherent roleplaying.

All I want from the game is roleplaying, and DA2 seemingly goes out of its way to prevent that.

[Yrkoon]

[quote]Volourn wrote...


Selling more than 1 mil in less than 2weeks, and at a faster pace than DA1. [/quote]

[/quote]
This is a bit misleading.  Or "spin" as it's called in politics.

400,000 of that 1.1 million did NOT come in the first two weeks, it came in the last 4 *months* (Pre-order sales).   And that speaks more of DA:O's popularity than anything else.   


The fact of the matter is that   DA2 does not have the legs to ever   outsell  DA:O.  But as you point out, it may not need to, since  it was so  monumentally cheaper to produce than  DA:O.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 15 avril 2011 - 07:09 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Roxlimn wrote...

Laidlaw actually does have a point in combat terms. DA2's combat systems are more complex than DA:O, and better balanced.

Better balanced?

Why does Hawke do so much more damage than an Ogre does?  Why is Hawke's friendly fire so much more lethal to his allies than his enemies' friendly fire is to theirs?

There's no balance at all.  The asymmetric combat mechanics guarantee that.

[Mecher3k]

Volourn wrote...

Laidlaw was a Lead designer on DA1. 'Nough said. Why do people argue against facts because it hurts to admit the truth?

Not for PC he was. He was the lead designer for DA2 and console DA:O.

http://blog.brentkno...08-summer-2009/

Weep little boy, weep.

Modifié par Mecher3k, 15 avril 2011 - 07:08 .