simfamSP wrote...
Dragon age 2 has a much better story than Dragon age: Origin's cliche of a story line done hundreds of times. Bioware should stick to newer, more original story lines such as DA2, but expand on it a little more. This is unexplored territory for Bioware, give them a ****ing chance.
afhdjs wrote...
It just lacks the same "epicness" compared to DAO, and here's my reasons:
1. No sense of urgency. Nothing is more epic than a sense that the end of the world is coming soon and you are the only one to stop it. A 10 year story, most of it about you making a name for yourself just doesn't show this.
afhdjs wrote...
2. No spectacular locations, lore, creatures etc. Think about it, DA2 almost didn't introduce any new creatures. I kinda thought from Witch Hunt that they were going to show us a great fabled location, like Arlathan or something, and they didn't. Nor did they really show us some great secret about Thedas (ex. Darkspawn were produced by Broodmothers etc.) either.
afhdjs wrote...
3. Qunari invasion mishandled. If they were going to show us an invasion, they should make a whole game about it. Maybe they could in a future DA, but with the arishok and a lot of aspects of the Qunari already shown it just doesn't seem as great anymore. Plus, qunari invasion could have been much better with you as the warden. You might have to face the uncomfortable choice of confronting Sten in battle and killing him.
the Qunari plot-device may have been awesome in an Expansion pack (not DLC, I repeat, NOT DLC : Pure genuine Material based 40$ value Good Ol' Expansion Pack like Awakening).afhdjs wrote...
4. No giant armies. DAO had a LoTR feel, with armies marching, fighting. DA2 has none of it.
afhdjs wrote...
5. No spectacular villain, or a central villain. Meredith (who is only one in a string of enemies) is no archdemon, and DA2 could have been much better with big supernatural villain.
Yeah, I know, they are setting DA2 up for a spectacular battle between mages and the chantry in DA3. However, they should have shown at least some sense of how big this battle is going to be at the end of the game.
Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 24 avril 2011 - 11:59 .
mrcrusty wrote...
For all those people saying "Dragon Age 2 wasn't meant to be epic" and excusing an unsatisfying experience with "but it's a personal story, if you don't like it, you don't get it."
Let me just say, Planescape: Torment and Mask of the Betrayer, two of the greatest RPG narratives in the last decade, were non-epic personal stories.
The story of DA 2 was executed poorly. That's it, no ifs and buts.
Also, for those saying that Dragon Age 2's story was incredibly unique.
*Blurb*
Sounds familiar?
Well it should, because that's the story of Fallout: New Vegas.
Modifié par Scimal, 25 avril 2011 - 12:35 .
Scimal wrote...
Never played PS:T pass the first act. Too much text for me.
MotB was pretty epic IMHO. You travel to the plane ruled by the God of the Dead to take part in the Third Crusade in the City of Judgement where you get to decide the fate of your own soul.
Scimal wrote...
The story itself is adequate. The pacing is mediocre.
Personally, I just think it's the DA universe. The other two you mention are in a much more "magical" universe where you can get crazy stuff happening just because it's possible. As much as I think use of the Forgotten Realms is overdone, the heavy-magic D&D setting does allow a lot of neat stuff to occur.
DA:O and DA2 suffer from an innate restriction because of what BW is going for. You won't see floating, talking heads in DA - the only other plane is the Fade (which is blurry and brown) - the species are pretty realistic (read: bland) - there isn't any dual-classing - the technology is decidedly medieval and unassisted by magic (read: realistic and bland).
There's nothing interesting about the setting - so it's more difficult to make the stories that take place within the setting interesting.
I found the story fine, aside from the pacing. From the Demo I pretty much set my expectations and knew that it was going to be more of a "mundane" storyline focusing on Hawke. DA2 met my expectations in terms of the story I wanted out of it - for many it didn't.
Scimal wrote...
Who's claiming it's unique? So far I've read that it's "Different" - not unique.
Sometimes a company needs to branch out and experiment.
They put out plenty of information prior to its launch, lots of screenshots, lots of interviews, and even a Demo that was downloaded over a million times on the PC alone.
I just don't get all the countless whining on these boards about how awful DA2 is. I know some of them played the Demo. I know some of them played the flash game. I know some of them followed the features and previews.
That means they knew ahead of time that DA2 wasn't going to be focused on saving the world - only Kirkwall. They knew how the controls responded, how battle was handled, and what the new style looked like. They knew about the dialogue wheel, the inventory, and pretty much everything but the meat of the story - yet some of those same people are on here complaining about those very features.
It's like test-driving a car, buying it, owning it for a month, then getting pissed off at Ford because it wasn't what you were expecting.
Granted, the storyline was kept pretty well hidden, so it's probably the most valid complaint someone who did all of the above has against the game.
In which case, the OP has my sympathies that the pacing was poor and that it wasn't as "epic" as they wanted. I never went into DA2 expecting something uber-epic, and wasn't disappointed. In DA3 the OP and those who agree may get what they want, if they choose to spend their money on it.
Modifié par mrcrusty, 25 avril 2011 - 12:54 .
p
k)
Guldor wrote...
From the free dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/epic
ep·ic
play_w2("E0174500")
(
n.
1. An extended narrative poem in elevated or dignified language, celebrating the feats of a legendary or traditional hero.
2. A literary or dramatic composition that resembles an extended narrative poem celebrating heroic feats.
3. A series of events considered appropriate to an epic: the epic of the Old West.
adj.
1. Of, constituting, having to do with, or suggestive of a literary epic: an epic poem.
2. Surpassing the usual or ordinary, particularly in scope or size: "A vast musical panorama . . . it requires an epic musical understanding to do it justice" (Tim Page).
3. Heroic and impressive in quality: "Here in the courtroom . . . there was more of that epic atmosphere, the extra amperage of a special moment" (Scott Turow).
Obviously NO!! Not sure finding owners of lost items fits in that definition.
However, DAO, BG1-2, KOTOR 1, NWN, DQ9, FF1-2-7, Icewindale IMHO would fit in that category.
Roxlimn wrote...
DA:O definitely doesn't fit in the actual definition of epic. Kind-of okay fairy talish is more appropriate.
Modifié par ChickenDownUnder, 25 avril 2011 - 02:33 .
mrcrusty wrote...
Well, that's a difference of opinion then. But then you say DA:O suffers the same problems (limited universe), aside from the slight cliches, most people were really happy with the narrative of Origins.
It wasn't that the story was original, but it was well told and they allowed players to make it their own. Which is far more important than originality. Originality with poor structure and exeuction is for post-modern artists. Not video games.
And I do think it's a matter of expectation, but personally, it's also about knowing that there was potential had it been done properly. Except it wasn't, it was rushed for a quick buck.
Not you specifically but I have read around people claiming that DA 2's story is unique and/or different. I tend to mix the two for the sake of argument. The idea being that it's an original story. When it's clearly not.
As for disappointment on the narrative (which is what this topic is about), the setup and premise was actually very good. Bioware, IMO could've really done something a lot better with the same basic story in the same chronological order.
It all comes down to the execution of said story. Which was quite frankly, awful. For the few and minor things DA 2 did right, I felt as if it did several wrong.
I won't claim it's teh worst gaem ever or some crap, but it's a mediocre game that could've been amazing. That's the sad part.
Scimal wrote...
I don't know if they were "really happy" with the narrative, but I would say the majority were obviously content. The narrative never blew me away, some places were done better than others, but it was consistent in its quality.
Scimal wrote...
I do agree that Origins told its story well. Then again, that's what you get with redundancy. Kill the dragon and become king? That's as old as Beowulf. BioWare has told the "same" story a few times now, so they can do it well.
DA2 suffers from being part-virginal territory. Does it excuse the poor timing? No, but it also means that BioWare fans - fans which have come to enjoy BioWare's products for the same-y "epic" stories - aren't used to the narrative. It adds another layer of bias, which is even exhibited by yourself with the last two sentences.
Scimal wrote...
Again, I agree - but only to an extent. Almost every game could be "Better." BioWare is simply known for doing better work. I got A's and B's throughout High School - entered Honor courses and scored well on the SATs (shows my age here). I never got anything special for doing so well - just praise.
My brother didn't do so well, but when he did get an A, the entire family went out to dinner.
BioWare has been making above-average games for over a decade, so they finally put out an average game, and you have former fans foaming at the mouth about the oncoming doom of the "classical RPG".
Scimal wrote...
That depends on what they were going for. DA:O was very superficially epic - raising armies of old to fight a corrupted god through hordes of undead. Then you find yourself 38 hours in taking orders from a rhyming ent while the elderly mage behind you chides the only other Grey Warden in existence for not washing his underwear. However, because the over-arching plot was epic, and each quest hub had a fairly epic conclusion - it retained what BioWare was going for once you forgot all the incredibly tedious quests you did to reach the epic ones.
If BioWare's intent for DA2 was to have the player experience what it's like to go from outcast, to striking it rich, to getting thrown into the middle of a conflict the player never wanted to be in - then I'd say they were close to their mark. The Warden in DA:O is special - half of an exclusive pair that are the only ones who can bring an end to a nightmarish horror. Hawke isn't special - Hawke just murders enemies or heals allies really well, which gets the attention of people in high places half as much because of circumstance as Hawke's abilities.
I can certainly conceive of the narrative being told in a better way, but I don't think BioWare could've blown people away with the narrative unless they took massive departures from their usual RPG system - which would've upset people even more than the different narrative.
For BioWare - for whom the story archetype is fairly unexplored, limited by the mechanics the fans expect, I think they did well. Aside from the bit of awkward pacing.
There is a general idea for Fallout quest missions where you can
take the Action Boy, Stealth Boy, Charisma Boy or Science Boy approach
in order to complete a quest. That means solving problems through
combat, stealth, persuasion or knowledge. Usually tied to character
skills. All that was on top of the choices you made in regards to quest
narratives. It wasn't in every quest or anything, but it was a general
theme you could see throughout the Fallout games.
Now, I don't
think you could directly put this into a Dragon Age game, but you can
incorporate the idea of multiple ways to solve one problem. Dragon Age
focused on Action and Charisma Boy, and DA 2 almost exclusively focused
on Action.
An example would be including infiltration missions.
Have incredibly powerful enemies that can be circumvented by good use of
rogue specialised skills. Like disarming traps and warning systems,
picking locks for alternatve pathways through buildings. Disguises,
bribes or blackmailing to prevent combat.
Companion skills sets
could come in handy. You are at a guard checkpoint, a cutscene opens up,
you've been seen. Get your mage companion to freeze them. If there's
only one guard, he's frozen. If there's more than one at the checkpoint,
the companion needs an AOE freezing spell (CoC), or the rest get away
and set off the alarm.
It wouldn't be too hard to implement, some
elements of these were already in Origins and it would be really
enjoyable to play through. If you can't handle stealth, then fight your
way through. Get schooled. Or pull off an incredibly satisfying victory
against overwhelming and powerful enemies.
Imagine if sneaking into your Hightown mansion to get the deed played like the above description?
Scimal wrote...
For my bit, I think DA2 is going in the right direction for what it did well. DA:O's battle system was dull at the best of times, the inventory system was awkward, every single piece of Mage gear in the entire game looked hideous to me - which meant at least two of your party looked like clowns, and the "Tone" icons of the dialogue wheel would've been quite welcome at some points.
Basically, I thought that while DA:O's story was well done, the engine was completely mediocre. I still enjoyed the game, but I knew from the get-go I'd only enjoy the combat during the very brief and interesting fights amidst the countless chump-battles taking place.
DA2 was, in every way, more responsive, more dynamic, and more "visceral." Spell effects were better, colors were brighter, the style was finally appreciable (elves actually looked like elves - not just skinny humans with pointed ears), and I enjoyed only having to customize Hawke's gear. It even makes sense internally - do you really think Isabella would be caught dead wearing a dress? Nah.
From the combat and mechanical basis that DA2 showed, I'm excited for DA3. Stories and timing can be toyed with. You can cut out characters and edit the storyline until you think you have it right far before any code is written. However, getting a combat system that makes the player engaged beyond the narrative is difficult.
Scimal wrote...
I don't know if it's sad, so much as inevitable. BioWare has had a very good run. Almost as good as Valve's. It's inevitable that a game put out by either one should be "mediocre" in some way, shape, or form. For BioWare it's NWN's SP campaign (ugh) and DA2. For Valve, most would argue it's Ep2 - which was very short, even for Valve standards (though I loved it anyways).
Could it have been amazing? Yes. Did I expect it to be one? No, not really. I played through the entire demo, knew that BioWare was shooting for a 40-hour playtime, and instantly knew that it wasn't going to fulfill the adjective. Am I mourning the "amazingness" that was lost? Nope. I'm playing games that actually are amazing instead. Before DA2 I played HL2 through Ep2 (favorite series of all time), after DA2 I played Portal 2 (still need to go back and try for a few achievements), and in-between 3-hour bouts of studying for finals I'm playing BGII for probably the 5th time.
I think a lot of the bitter people are going to benefit from DA2's mediocrity. Maybe they won't trust BioWare to be amazing 100% of the time. Maybe they'll branch out to other games to fill the time until ME3 or DA3 and find more amazing games.
Unfortunately, I think too many will just hang around the forums waiting for opportunities to "stick it" to BioWare for not meeting (much less exceeding) their high expectations.
Modifié par mrcrusty, 25 avril 2011 - 03:30 .
Modifié par Romantiq, 25 avril 2011 - 04:43 .
Roxlimn wrote...
The story part of DA2 was a good story that could have been amazing. Lost opportunity.
The story part of DA:O was a bad story that had no hope of being anything other than just another fairy tale. No lost opportunity.
I still prefer the DA2 approach. Definitely a change for the better there.
Retour en haut