148 réponses à ce sujet

[foolish_sagacity]

Why does it matter if one "dethrones" the other? Both are very interesting games, very well executed. Just because they are somewhat similar doesn't mean one person can decide if one is better than the other. That's highly personal and based entirely on opinion.



I think BG2 is better. But Dragon Age has captured me like no game outside the Infinity engine has. When Alistair and Wynne had a conversation about his dirty socks in a freakin' hallway full of dead bodies, this game instantly entered the sacred part of my heart. Brought me right back to playing Baldur's Gate 2, being in a Lich's crypt and having Jan Jansen say "Ah....it's good to be home....WAIT! I don't live here!"



If you're able to enjoy both games for the unique items they bring to the table...why would it matter "which is on top?"

[Edner132435]

For me, DA doesn't exceed BG2. Admittedly, I may be looking at BG2 through rose tinted glasses, I'll have to give it another play here soon, but the side quests just aren't that great in DA, as has been said before. Perhaps DA the second can improve on this and some other facets that weren't so spectacular so it can become even greater than the first. Love the game btw, best gaming experience I ahve had in a long time.

[Shannara13]

enormous gameplay (90 odd hours),

Dragon Age: Origins offers all of these, but with today’s standards.

If the person who wrote this really thinks DA:Os length is comparable to that of BG2 then he clearly missed alot in BG2.

[Legion-001]

DA:O beat BG2??? Even BG2's basegame is better then DA:O but with Throne of Bhaal added to BG2, DA:O doesn't stand a chance.

[Chastain]

Probably 1/5-1/4 of all the hours spent in BG2 was spent looking at the "resting" screen after every freaking battle.



And I'm a BG2 fan...

[foolish_sagacity]

I agree with you Edner. Where Baldur's Gate 1 was good but had some definite flaws, I do believe Dragon Age 2 has a shot at improving enough to enter the hall of legends and be one of those games we'll all be nostalgic about. Maybe in a decade it'll be "Today's kids need to play Dragon Age 2! Then they'll know a real RPG!"



That said, I'm as happy with Dragon Age as I've been with a game in years. It sufficiently met all my expectations, exceeded many others, and has no issue so massive that it blocked my enjoyment of it.

[Legion-001]

Chastain wrote...

Probably 1/5-1/4 of all the hours spent in BG2 was spent looking at the "resting" screen after every freaking battle.

And I'm a BG2 fan...

I assume you know that the Resting Screen of BG2 can be skipped?

[Shannara13]

Chastain wrote...

Probably 1/5-1/4 of all the hours spent in BG2 was spent looking at the "resting" screen after every freaking battle.

And I'm a BG2 fan...

You really should have just skipped the resting screen...

[Darpaek]

Seifz wrote...

I don't know why y'all think BG2 was better. All that BG2 had was a great story and interesting companions. AD&D v2 sucked and the graphics weren't all that great, even for their time. Since DA:O has better companions and a fantastic story that isn't set in an overused Forgotten Realms and doesn't involve any Drow Rangers... Yeah, DA:O is much better.

I disagree with every one of the normative statements in your post.  However, I'm not here to debate your opinion - I just want to remind you that FR wasn't "overused" in 1999.

That being said, I am enjoying DA:O very much.  I'm starting my third playthru (so I can romance Alistair  LOL - I'd so have gay sex with him).  I do not know, however, if I will be playing DA:O in 10 years.  However, I do know that I played BG2 again earlier this year.

[Legion-001]

Crawling_Chaos wrote...

Legion-001 wrote...

DA:O beat BG2??? Even BG2's basegame is better then DA:O but with Throne of Bhaal added to BG2, DA:O doesn't stand a chance.

Yes, let's continue to compare a classic sequel and it's expansions based on decades old IP's to a first-run game of an infant IP.

... Made by a games company that has previous experience with RPG style games.

[Legion-001]

Face it as game go DA:O doesn't even stand up that well against BG1.
There's even a BG2 ToB reference in DA:O!

Modifié par Legion-001, 19 novembre 2009 - 02:04 .

[Seifz]

Chastain wrote...

Probably 1/5-1/4 of all the hours spent in BG2 was spent looking at the "resting" screen after every freaking battle.

And I'm a BG2 fan...

Not to mention the excessive travel time and the uninteresting areas that only existed to make the world look larger.

[Darpaek]

Crawling_Chaos wrote...

same company =/= same development team

Dude... it's David ****ing Gaider!  You know - the guy that rewrote the ending to TOB and released it as a mod b/c he didn't like the original?  The guy used to be my ****ing hero back in the day!

[Mnemnosyne]

I'm going to have to say that BG2's sidequests were not a strong point for me. In fact they took away from the experience slightly. Think about the story of that game for a moment - there is no point in the game where you do not have a constant sense of urgency in that you must go rescue Imoen. Why are you tromping across all of Amn doing random sidequests? You can easily have the money you need without even leaving Athkatla, so pretty much all the traveling all over the place is very out of place. Firkraag, Trademeet, Umar Hills, the Druid grove, all of it is completely unconnected to the plot. Once you have the money you need to pay for passage to Spellhold, any other adventuring you do is jarring and somewhat out of character, unless your character doesn't give a damn about Imoen or getting revenge.

So far in Dragon Age, I haven't encountered very many such jarring sidequests. The board/blackstone/etc quests all seem to occur in places you're visiting anyway, or in random encounters along the road. Those ones that do require you to go out of your way seem to actually involve the plot.

As an overall game, I'm not sure whether I'll say yet that DA is superior to BG2, but it is definitely a contender in my eyes. There are key points where BG2 is far and away the superior game, primarily where mechanics are involved. Besides using the well-known 2nd Edition AD&D rules, it is well documented and provides full combat feedback on everything, if you turn the options for it on. You know precisely what each piece of equipment does, every spell is well-detailed in its function, there are considerably more spells available in total with a greater variety of functions. You can even determine the exact THAC0 of your enemy if you so choose by calculating it out of what they roll in order to hit or miss you. As a tactical combat RPG, BG2 is far and away the superior game and Dragon Age can't hold a candle to it. DA is the best thing that's come along since then, but it still doesn't match up to the possibilities you have in BG2, and the understanding of the system you had. Not to mention the manual, which was a 241 page book (not counting credits and index) that thoroughly covered every aspect of the game and mechanics.

As for characters, I can't fully speak to DA's characters, not having finished the game yet. They seem like strong characters and the writing seems quite good. BG2's characters were good, but some of them came off shallower than others, and there were only a few really memorable ones, out of somewhere over a dozen possible companion characters. And in all honesty, the voiceovers really help build character identity. Think about Alistair and his tone of voice as he says various things, then imagine reading those exact lines in flat text without ever hearing them. They often just wouldn't be as effective in bringing out the character's mood and emotions.
So on the tactical combat side, I seriously doubt Dragon Age will ever match up to BG2. I wonder if any game will ever do so, honestly. But as a whole, I'm undecided. DA is definitely up there. It may well be superior, it may not be, and much of it will be a matter of opinion as to which aspects of the game a person is focusing on at the particular moment that they make their judgement. Without question, I can say this: Dragon Age is the best overall RPG since the Infinity Engine days.

Modifié par Koyasha, 19 novembre 2009 - 02:17 .

[JfBorrego]

The only things DA:O has going for it over BG2 is the game mechanics and you'd hope after all that time they'd had time to get to where they are.



Comparatively speaking to what's on teh market, DA:O's graphics are definitely subpar.



From a content perspective the storyline is OK; the dialogue is awful and the cut scenes are utter rubbish.



Whoever is making this claim is schmoozing EA...

[Shannara13]

Seifz wrote...

Chastain wrote...

Probably 1/5-1/4 of all the hours spent in BG2 was spent looking at the "resting" screen after every freaking battle.

And I'm a BG2 fan...

Not to mention the excessive travel time and the uninteresting areas that only existed to make the world look larger.

WTF are you talking about? What excessive travel time? Where were those areas that only existed to make the world look bigger? I am thinking you just didn't find the sidequets for areas and designated them as excess.

[Seifz]

Darpaek wrote...

Seifz wrote...

I don't know why y'all think BG2 was better. All that BG2 had was a great story and interesting companions. AD&D v2 sucked and the graphics weren't all that great, even for their time. Since DA:O has better companions and a fantastic story that isn't set in an overused Forgotten Realms and doesn't involve any Drow Rangers... Yeah, DA:O is much better.

I disagree with every one of the normative statements in your post.  However, I'm not here to debate your opinion - I just want to remind you that FR wasn't "overused" in 1999.

That being said, I am enjoying DA:O very much.  I'm starting my third playthru (so I can romance Alistair  LOL - I'd so have gay sex with him).  I do not know, however, if I will be playing DA:O in 10 years.  However, I do know that I played BG2 again earlier this year.

FR was definitely overused by the time BG2 was released.  I was already tired of it, anyway.  It's a pretty terrible setting, all things considered.

Anyway, I can't force myself to play through BG2 anymore.  Whenever I start a game, I remember that I've already finished it a few times before and that it's not worth suffering through the ugly graphics again. 

[Thibbledorf26]

I loved DA, but I think BG2 still trumps it. BG2 had the combination of goodness in one package, pacing, consistent enjoyment, memorable henchmen, quality graphics... etc.

[Sinfulvannila]

I just wrote a blog touching on this last night. I know a lot of you are going to disagree with me, but whatever.Here goes...

[Valamyr]

jawlz wrote...

Yes, but there is no equivalent to Minsc in Dragon Age!!!!

Indeed. Dragon Age is impressive, but Minsc still leads! Swords for everyone!