254 réponses à ce sujet

[Wyndham711]

I was able to appreciate the craftsmanship in ME2, to a degree, but the game itself didn't really meet my tastes. I don't much like shooters and the way they stripped down RPG elements from ME1 certainly didn't help. Plus it too has that atrocious dialogue system.

[drvaughn1999]

@zeejay21

"If I asked you to simplified DA2 whole backstory, what would it be?"

Moved to kirkwall and companions and business partner screwed me over, (izzy, anders, and bartrand) See easy!

Modifié par drvaughn1999, 21 avril 2011 - 09:24 .

[Faded_Jeans]

ME2 was probably my favorite game, ever. I have replayed it nine or ten times since it was released. I loved DA:O, and have played it seven or eight times as well, especially because of the 6 different ways to experience the beginning. It seemed to frame the rest of the story in a different light. I have played DA2 twice now, and I’m not really sure what I would get out of another go at it. It was fun, but not nearly the caliber of ME1/2, DA:O.

I don’t think it is because it was “made for a console”, to address the OP. I think it is because it feels like they cut corners. The repetitious locations, the parts of the plot that don’t seem realistic at all; they make it hard to get to get invested. It has become “just a game”, in my house. Not a bad game, but just a game.

The others were so much more.

[Guitar-Hero]

I loved ME2, one of the best games i have ever played, i think you present an interesting question that i myself would like to see play out as i play on console, i played DA2 on console and the quality of the game bothered me the most, i am impressed with what they have produced i such a short amount of time, however considering how much a game costs in hindsight i would not spend that amount on this product.

[Sussurus]

I doubt it's to do with console or PC for me, I did like ME2 though.
I just disliked how it was a party and character build based game.
That in combat and in character builds had little to do with the party.
It felt there was no, maneuver, min max or power to the party, but tons of it with the foes and encounters.

Modifié par Sussurus, 21 avril 2011 - 09:26 .

[Veovim]

I enjoyed ME2 (and more than ME1 for the most part).  The main story in ME2 may not have been quite as strong as ME1, but the characters were quite well done, and the combat was a major improvement.  In DA2, I liked how the story went up until act 3, where my choices more or less vanished from the main plot (except the big one, obviously).  The big difference I didn't like is how combat changed from DAO to DA2.

1) How much choices in combat matter

You can cut down individual enemies very quickly in ME2 (even on insanity), but you usually need to be out of cover to do so, and you can't stay out of cover for long without getting killed yourself.  You need to prioritise your targets carefully, as whichever enemies you aren't targeting will try flank you, or otherwise push you out of cover.  Compare that to ME1, where defensive abilities (barrier/immunity) and biotics were way too powerful, so most enemies are never a real threat to you (hence it doesn't really matter which you target first).

This is what bothers me most about combat in DA2--the majority of enemies are meaningless.  Only assassins and elite mages tend to be any real threat, and everything else can just be mopped up.  The plentiful critter-ranked enemies have so little health that a single ability use will kill them instantly--if it's an AoE ability, you can kill half a dozen of them at once.  In DAO, pretty much all enemies have a meaningful amount of health, and you need to prioritise and focus fire if you want to quickly reduce the overall power of a group.

2) How hand crafted encounters feel

In ME2, pretty much every encounter is in its own unique environment, and has its own twists.  ME1 wasn't horrible about this, but wasn't as good.  The main story missions all had their own environments, but the side quests used the same limited set of maps.

In DAO, pretty much all encounters feel hand crafted.  There are some exceptions, but encounters in DA2 feel much less unique to me.  The extreme reuse of maps is obviously to blame for some of this.  I think that the wave mechanic is also somewhat responsible--almost every encounter starts out with some mix of enemies, then brings in more of the same several times.  I don't think waves are inherently a bad idea, but they're very overused.

[zeejay21]

drvaughn1999 wrote...

Moved to kirkwall and companions and business partner screwed me over, (izzy, anders, and bartrand) See easy!

Hey, you're a spoiler! Where's the fun in surprising in newer gamers?

Still, it's was a mouthful to say it. Gladly, I have cupcakes. Would you want one?

[drvaughn1999]

zeejay21 wrote...

drvaughn1999 wrote...

Moved to kirkwall and companions and business partner screwed me over, (izzy, anders, and bartrand) See easy!

Hey, you're a spoiler! Where's the fun in surprising in newer gamers?

Still, it's was a mouthful to say it. Gladly, I have cupcakes. Would you want one?

No thanks, I'm watching my figure.

[Reinveil]

zeejay21 wrote...

Reinveil wrote...

Yes, this has everything to do with "complexity" and nothing at all to do with the story being poorly executed.  Applying that same logic, Final Fantasy VIII's plot is the greatest ever written.

You've yet to explain to the unwashed masses why it's so "complex".

If I asked you to simplified DA2 whole backstory, what would it be?

I'm voting for 'it's story sucks'. Simple fact, no?

Also, didn't FF8 was praised for it's plot and before that FF7?

So you're going to deflect the question again, is what you're saying.  Do you even know what you're talking about at this point?

The story attempts to depict the life of a war refugee and his/her family getting swept up into the politics of a corrupt realm quickly finding itself the epicenter of a growing conflict between differing viewpoints and beliefs (primarily regarding mages).

What it actually does is poorly link these individual stories together with a weak (at best) overarching "plot" that's resolved with a lame deus ex machina, demonizing nearly every important character along the way to the point that many players felt the importance of the few choices they were allowed to make was completely stripped from them.  The result being that they just stopped caring at all.

Yeah, that's right up there with Eraserhead in terms of complexity, man.

Oh wait, I'd better answer "it sucks" so I fit into that pigeonhole you've already decided to put me in.

Now quick, talk about how much smarter you are than everyone else again before people start to forget!

[zeejay21]

Reinveil wrote...

(By the time I quote this, I was half asleep, remind me what's he's saying again)

My, my, my. The issue is becoming boring. I still have my cupcakes, would you like some?

I'm also half-sleep so I'll probably get back to you after I dream of sunshine and rainbows.

Or not.:innocent:



PS: I <3 ME2. Looking forward to ME3.

Modifié par zeejay21, 21 avril 2011 - 09:52 .

[Galad22]

zeejay21 wrote...

You like changing subjects.

You believe a game intended for 18 and above today are not played by those below the intended age?

And yes, as people grow up, people takes on a mature, harder and complex decision hence it becomes natural to like complexity. Even so, there are times people wish things are simpler.

And as for DA:O, it wasn't really all that complex. It's based on a simple concept: defeat an invasion. People already understood it the minute the game takes them to Ostagar to become one of the legendary Grey Wardens.

Mike Laidlaw did say he wanted DA2 to be a mature game, much more mature than DA:O. It's no wonder the game is confusing, what's  with it's politics, extreme views & controversial outcomes.

As for notorious exploding bodies, consider it the silly side of the game - besides Varric is the one that told the story and he did say he's a compulsive liar.

You only talk about story here, as a game DA:o was much more complex.

In your opinion DA2 had a complex story, in my opinion it did not.

Story in DA2 lacked focus it wasn't coherent and it wasn't interesting. This is obviously my subjective opinion about the matter.

[Reinveil]

zeejay21 wrote...

Damn, I just got thoroughly destroyed and will now play the smugness card again in an attempt to save face.

Gotcha.

[zeejay21]

Reinveil wrote...

Gotcha.

I'm glad we agreed. 

Now it's time to sleep. Bye, bye.

[Vilegrim]

I enjoyed ME2, and despise DA2,

In ME2 he rapid combat made sense, highly trained commando team doing what it does best, tearing the place apart with tactics, the use of cover, and superior firepower. The story also made sense, there weren't many 'meaningful' choices, because there shouldn't be: you have a mission you have to fufil, the way you do it is up to you, but the final mission (that you have been building towards the entire game) is the goal all the way thru.

DA2: the combat DOESN'T make sense, no one moves the way the characters do in a fight, the it doesn't make sense to fight as they do, the reason the characters are together doesn't really get explained, and the horrible amount of railroading is obvious, (Sister Patrice I'm looking at you) oh and your choices mean even less than they did in ME2.

ME is a sci-fi RPG with heavy shooter elements, it was that from the start, so the changes worked in that framework.

DA:O was an old scholl fantasy RPG frst and foremeost, adding button frenzy, making empty 'choices' and advertising 'become the most powerful person in the world' when really you don't, after the Arishok, you are an observer at best with no influence on events it's startingly obvious playing both endings, no matter what you do, the same boss fights happen, the same choices are made by the npcs, you get to watch..then button mash.

[Reinveil]

Persephone wrote...

I do agree with this. They family plotline could have and should have been fleshed out a whole lot more. I just had a thought....when Leandra mentions her suitor....why not add a few cutscenes where Mama Hawke introduces her intended to her child? Imagine if your Hawke were to get along with the guy and.... Or allow Hawke to visit the sibling at *Spoiler*. Or, since the sibling will only be around until XYZ happens, give them more personal quests. Helping Carver get accepted at the City Guard. Protect Bethany against the Templars getting too close. Just some things I thought of just now.:happy:

Those ideas are so much better than how the family dynamic was actually implemented it's almost sad.

[Uzaik]

Reinveil wrote...

zeejay21 wrote...

Reinveil wrote...

Yes, this has everything to do with "complexity" and nothing at all to do with the story being poorly executed.  Applying that same logic, Final Fantasy VIII's plot is the greatest ever written.

You've yet to explain to the unwashed masses why it's so "complex".

If I asked you to simplified DA2 whole backstory, what would it be?

I'm voting for 'it's story sucks'. Simple fact, no?

Also, didn't FF8 was praised for it's plot and before that FF7?

So you're going to deflect the question again, is what you're saying.  Do you even know what you're talking about at this point?

The story attempts to depict the life of a war refugee and his/her family getting swept up into the politics of a corrupt realm quickly finding itself the epicenter of a growing conflict between differing viewpoints and beliefs (primarily regarding mages).

What it actually does is poorly link these individual stories together with a weak (at best) overarching "plot" that's resolved with a lame deus ex machina, demonizing nearly every important character along the way to the point that many players felt the importance of the few choices they were allowed to make was completely stripped from them.  The result being that they just stopped caring at all.

Yeah, that's right up there with Eraserhead in terms of complexity, man.

Oh wait, I'd better answer "it sucks" so I fit into that pigeonhole you've already decided to put me in.

Now quick, talk about how much smarter you are than everyone else again before people start to forget!

Thanks. This basically sums everything I thought about the plot, in a more eloquent way.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I didn't like ME2, no. I thought the game was too simple, too linear, had nonsensical game mechanics, and offered too little control over the PC's behaviour.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 21 avril 2011 - 10:07 .

[Miashi]

You guys are throwing complexity here and there without understanding what it really means.

A "complex" game could have 2 meaning - either, let's say, the fighting mechanics are complex, with a lot of fine tuning and skill micromanagement, or a complex storyline.

I guess you guys are talking about a complex storyline, right?
A "complex" story, is a story where everything is a big card castle. Balance is delicate, and being reckless will quickly make the castle crumble. (aka, you die, get imprisoned, or get sent to the gallows)

Here's the thing with Dragon Age 2. The setting is complex. But the game is not. Nothing you do in the game tilts the balance in any way, from agreeing or disagreeing with the mages. Your companions are completely black or white. They have no in between.

I think you guys confuse complexity with dilemma. You have to "choose" one side, but really, it all comes down to pick mages or templars, and stick to it.

You want complexity? Do something in the lines of politics in Orzammar. Form pacts with shadowy groups, but be benevolent in broad daylight. Support the chantry to get favors with the merchants, but in the night, escort apostates out of the town. Be confronted with situations where you must keep the templarsaway from your stuff, while helping the mage cause.

There's nothing like that in Dragon Age 2.

Realistically, doing such a thing couldn't be accomplished in 18 months. But I'm just saying. Stop saying this game is complex. It's not. And DA:O wasn't complex either.

Modifié par Miashi, 21 avril 2011 - 10:46 .

[drvaughn1999]

Miashi wrote...

You guys are throwing complexity here and there without understanding what it really means.

A "complex" game could have 2 meaning - either, let's say, the fighting mechanics are complex, with a lot of fine tuning and skill micromanagement, or a complex storyline.

I guess you guys are talking about a complex storyline, right?
A "complex" story, is a story where everything is a big card castle. Balance is delicate, and being reckless will quickly make the castle crumble. (aka, you die, get imprisoned, or get sent to the gallows)

Here's the thing with Dragon Age 2. The setting is complex. But the game is not. Nothing you do in the game tilts the balance in any way, from agreeing or disagreeing with the mages. Your companions are completely black or white. They have no in between.

I think you guys confuse complexity with dilemma. You have to "choose" one side, but really, it all comes down to pick mages or templars, and stick to it.

You want complexity? Do something in the lines of politics in Orzammar. Form pacts with shadowy groups, but be benevolent in broad daylight. Support the chantry to get favors with the merchants, but in the night, escort apostates out of the town. Be confronted with situations where you must keep the templarsaway from your stuff, while helping the mage cause.

There's nothing like that in Dragon Age 2.

Realistically, doing such a thing couldn't be accomplished in 18 months. But I'm just saying. Stop saying this game is complex. It's not. And DA:O wasn't complex either.

I agree , but only zeejay21 said the game is complex the rest of us disagreed with him.

[_Aine_]

Miashi wrote...

. But I'm just saying. Stop saying this game is complex. It's not. And DA:O wasn't complex either.

DA:O was *more* complex in *some* ways. But, you are absolutely correct.  DA2 was NOT complex. It didn't even try to give the illusion of being.   It doesn't need to be,in order to be enjoyable either, but it was not complex.

Modifié par shantisands, 21 avril 2011 - 10:59 .

[Miashi]

drvaughn1999 wrote...
I agree , but only zeejay21 said the game is complex the rest of us disagreed with him.

Bah but you forgot my friend persephone

Anyways, I guess I was offtopic. As I mentionned a few pages back, I did like ME2 a lot.

Modifié par Miashi, 21 avril 2011 - 11:03 .

[scpulley]

Good question, and I'll just say this, said it before as well. ME 2 I really liked, regardless of it more of a shooter and much less an actual RPG, it had a cohesive story with the first game that had a beginning middle and end and it lead smoothly to a coming 3rd game. DA 2, however, has very little to do with the first game story wise except for a few bits, the protagonist is different, and it was never written as a 3 parts series in mind from the start. That being said, it makes the change in storytelling style much more obvious as a break from the feel of the first game. Say what you want about the mechanics, the epic fail on the part of DA 2 is ignoring the story telling elements that made the first game good. Just because ME 2 was a success doesn't mean you can translate that to a more traditional RPG setting and get away with it. Bioware hopefully will learn from this and not try to merge the two settings storytelling styles again. They should be totally separate in how they feel because they appeal setting wise to vastly different types of gamers, with only a small portion that would play and like both.

[Shazzie]

In many ways, I preferred ME1 to ME2. Oh, I still loved ME2, but it just felt... more of a shooter, which is a genre I totally do not enjoy. There were some changes that I didn't like - the loss of inventory, the inability to equip your teammates. But I still enjoyed the story and the characters a lot. ME2 made changes from ME1, but it was still along the lines one might possibly expect.

The thing is, in the ME games, I'm Shepard. I feel she's already stamped with something of a personality, due to the background you choose. So I don't feel like I *become* the character, I feel more like I'm *playing with* the character. In DA:O, I *became* the Warden. In DA2, I was expecting the same thing. But, whether due to the story, the character being voiced, or my inability to influence events, I never *became* Hawke. And DA2 was NOTHING like DA:O, and should never, ever have had that '2' on the end, as that indicates progression from the first. Not regression and deconstruction.

Modifié par Shazzie, 21 avril 2011 - 11:16 .