251 réponses à ce sujet

[julian08]

Agreed. There are a lot of things about DAII that you can either like or dislike. A lot of my own problems with the game can be boiled down to personal preference as well, but there are things about it that are just bad design, plain and simple.
It may be a testament to BioWare's skills that the game came out tolerable despite the ridiculously short developing time, but it was still released completely crippled.

I imagine these issues will be addressed someday, but not before the sequel is announced. The only thing that makes it tolerable how brutally Origins is getting bashed by his own creators right now is the realization that they are going to do the exact same thing to DAII someday.

"Hey, remember the enemies spawning out of nowhere in DAII? Yeah, that was a huge load of crap, wasn't it? People were so right to call us out on it. To be honest, we just didn't have the time to balance the encounters properly, so that is what we ended up with. And the copypaste dungeons? Oh, don't even get me started on those. DA3 is going to be so much better that that. . ."

Well, I guess that is how marketing works.

[Tommy6860]

Sidney wrote...

SirGladiator wrote...

It sounds like, from the interview, that Ray not only fully understands the main criticisms, but agrees with them as well, at least to a degree. And that's perfectly understandable, as they took their most popular game ever, made radical changes to it, and the sales tanked.

...except they didn't make radical changes. They made small changes in the game and people have blown them up to be radical. I thought the ME2 criticisms were overblown but people have lost their minds on DA2. There are a lot of legit gripes about the game but so much has been made over meaningless or minor changes that it is silly.

Didn't make radical changes, they are only "minor?? Here's a small list of minor (erm MAJOR) changes:

• Excessively recycled enviroments
• No choice for a silent PC
• Removal of dialogue list to dialogue wheel using paraphrased lines
• Radically changed submenus and talent/skills sets changed into expanded tree view
• Removal of item descriptions
• Removal of ability to give companions different armors
• PC choices have nearly no impact on plots states
• Cannot play other races
• Removed realism from combat (e.g.  teleporting backstabs by rogues, enemies spawning in mid air, removing any semblance of tactics, etc)
• Cannot chat with companions at any time, only when their relative plots states happen
• Inability to call up map and fast travel at any time, though somewhat limited in Origins
• Majoirty of quests are not plot related, rather fedex type fetch quests.
• Cannot chooe which major plot line to follow, as it only has one

Need I go on? Comparing ME to ME2 is not even close since ME2 at least followed the theme of ME in style and gameplay.

The game wasn't a stunning success in total but it also wasn't the
spectacular failure some people seem to think and at the core of it is
still a lot more of of a pure RPG than anything else on the market.

DA2 is so radically different from Origins is just about every feature of a true RPG, that the game's genre should be listed as an action adventure game, rather than an RPG. It's hard to imagine what you consider a "pure RPG' when what you favor in DA2, is barely representative of even its most basic elements.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 25 avril 2011 - 01:07 .

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

SirGladiator wrote...

It sounds like, from the interview, that Ray not only fully understands the main criticisms, but agrees with them as well, at least to a degree. And that's perfectly understandable, as they took their most popular game ever, made radical changes to it, and the sales tanked.

...except they didn't make radical changes. They made small changes in the game and people have blown them up to be radical. I thought the ME2 criticisms were overblown but people have lost their minds on DA2. There are a lot of legit gripes about the game but so much has been made over meaningless or minor changes that it is silly.

Didn't make radical changes, they are only "minor?? Here's a small list of minor (erm MAJOR) changes:

• Excessively recycled enviroments
• No choice for a silent PC
• Removal of dialogue list to dialogue wheel using paraphrased lines
• Radically changed submenus and talent/skills sets changed into expanded tree view
• Removal of item descriptions
• Removal of ability to give companions different armors
• PC choices have nearly no impact on plots states
• Cannot play other races
• Removed realism from combat (e.g.  teleporting backstabs by rogues, enemies spawning in mid air, removing any semblance of tactics, etc)
• Cannot chat with companions at any time, only when their relative plots states happen
• Inability to call up map and fast travel at any time, though somewhat limited in Origins
• Majoirty of quests are not plot related, rather fedex type fetch quests.
• Cannot chooe which major plot line to follow, as it only has one

Need I go on? Comparing ME to ME2 is not even close since ME2 at least followed the theme of ME in style and gameplay.

The game wasn't a stunning success in total but it also wasn't the
spectacular failure some people seem to think and at the core of it is
still a lot more of of a pure RPG than anything else on the market.

DA2 is so radically different from Origins is just about every feature of a true RPG, that the game's genre should be listed as an action adventure game, rather than an RPG. It's hard to imagine what you consider a "pure RPG' when what you favor in DA2, is barely representative of even its most basic elements.

[*]I think one of the things I dislike most was the absence of different races. I expected that feature to be the norm for all DA games. If there's one thing I'd like BioWare to do is implement dwarves and elves so you could play from the start of DA 2 as one of them, but I doubt we'll ever see that.

Modifié par JabbaDaHutt30, 25 avril 2011 - 01:13 .

[Ariella]

billy the squid wrote...

Ariella wrote...

billy the squid wrote...



I love how these wild assumptions are thrown around. "we wanted DA O conceptually and literally". Well no, this is the same kind of deliberately obtuse attitude that Mr. Laidlaw has stated, DA2 super blight!, yes to go with the new button awesome. People are not hung up on the fact there is no blight, rather, that the story line is disjointed with Act 3 in particular feeling like its cobbled on for no particular reason, other than to set up the sequal.

Out of context much? Mike Laidlaw has stated very specifically he used to joke around the office that the only way to top the story of Origins in "save the world sense" would be to staple two archdemons together .Thus super blight. Which is why they went with a different type of story telling technique this time around.

Second, the so called awsome button is reference to the reactivity of the game when playing it rather than the supposed magic button some have tried to make it out to be.

Finally, I have yet to see anyone say they wanted a recycled story from DAO, but the vast majority of what I have read seems to say that a certain segment of people were expecting a very similiar 60 hour gaming experince to DAO, rather than what Bioware had been talking about for months prior to release.

Hence, the refrence to the person I was refering to, when they replied that critics wanted "DO O conceptually and literally" that even Mr. Laidlaw has stated that DAO rehashed with super blight would have been panned by fans of DAO, apologies typos an lack of coherecy on my part are to balme.

Mike was saying that long before it was mentioned in interviews, it was an office joke. My objection is calling Mike obtuse, which he is not, and that you seemed to take the "super blight" quote out of context like some many, if I was wrong in that I apologize.

Regarding the issues of story it is not the shift in technique or focus it is the implementation which is poorly done.

And the awsome button has become something of a running joke after interviews stating " press a button something awsome has to happen, button awesome"
I don't think anyone has claimed it to be a magic button. In fact I think to some the entire direction the game took in response to shuffling in DAO lead to the current predicament of overfrantic combat due to the design direciton because of the desire to provide movements which were brash and flashy rather than reactive in any useful way. Hence the refrence to button awesome when my warrior dashes 15 ft when I press A, this is flashy rather tahn any genuine attempt to fix the pathing issues.

Honestly, I don't see the difference. I hit the B or X and it automatically enters into that attack skill rather than waddling around like an LotR movie orc doing the full diaper walk, which is of great relief to me. They do need to fix a few issues with targetting breaking on knockback etc, but I've gone over that one til doomsday. Hopefully it'll get some kind of fix in DA3.

Regarding the recycled storyline from origins again a response to the poster who said that people wanted "DAO fundamentally and conceptually" no one wanted recycled storyline, whilst despite what Bioware said were we actually supposed to have anticipated the extent of the limitations placed upon where the story would occur.

Namely the same repeated allys in kirkwall and dungeons, and the tiny strips of land on the coast and hills surrounding the city, without any significant information other than it takes place in Kirkwall?

What kind of significant information do you want about the area? It's generally all in the quest text, and the larger areas do have their own codex, so what's left?

[Shadowbanner]

Ok, I'll play ball just for the sake of Herr Doktor's nostalgia argument.

Let us forget DA:O ever existed.

Let's take DA:2 as "Dragon Age", a new exciting RPG IP that's just been released by EA in March 2011. And the developer is, ta-ta-ta-chan BioWare no less, you know the guys from KOTOR, BG and ME1 and ME2. Previews are red hot. PC Gamer ranks it at 94%, "Best RPG of the next decade" they write (sic).
OMG! OMG!! OMG!!! Can't wait to play it, oh, the emotion.

After playing it for over 50 hours and finishing it....What was the name of the PC Gamer bloke who rated it as 94%?

Objective flaws:

1. Ranking number one, re-used dungeons and caves ad nauseam. The first 6 hours are new, the remainding 40 hours are all repetition of the same environments, just filler. Lazy.

2. Successive waves of enemies materialize -literally- out of thin air, even in closed rooms, negating player manual tactical positioning. Often ranged units are wiped out on Hard and Nightmare. Poor design.

3. Pre-rendered cut scenes already lay out teams starting position negating -again- player manual tactical positioning. Poor design.

4. Side-quests are menial, repetitive and souless almost like running mindless errands. "I believe this leg I found in some dump pile is yours" "Oh my, thank you Serah, I just don't know what I would have done without it". Stupid, stupid, stupid fed ex (fetch-type) quests that are mind-numbing. I mean really, what in God's name was the point of that. Well this type of quests abund in all three acts. They feel like tedious repetitive chores. Did I mention they were stupid? Lame and lazy.

5. Loot in its majority is junk, literally. Moreover, the game itself acknowledges and stashes it as "Junk" in your in-game inventory. What's even worse is that on selling it you are paid a pittance, literally. Poor design.

6. You over spend 50 hours collecting armor that is mostly useless, as neither you nor your companions can use it. In the case of the player, because he lacks the required specific player-class that enables its use (mage, warriror, rogue). Your companions are ruled out because that was the intended game design. So, unless you want to collect useless trash and stash it in your home, you might as well sell it; it's the only logical thing you can really do. Lame.

7. Game is riddled with glitches and bugs. QA wo bist du?

8. Story is disjointed and lacks purpose, drive. Poor plot.

9. The antagonist is introduced far too late into the game to really care about him/her. In my case I met both of them 65 hours into the game!! Poor plot.

10. The start is way too slow. In BioWare tradition starts are always purposely slow. But in DA2 it reaches an all-time high. You spend a good 10/15 hours to earn 50 g. It's a "get rich or die trin'' Act 1. Boring. Poor plot.

11. Lack of environments, lack of exploring. You do not journey anywhere. In RPG's you are always exploring, not stuck -for ten years, no less- in one venue!!! Remember when you are killed a pop-up says "Your journey ends...". That's because you are meant to be travelling the land, not stuck as a lab rat in the same hellhole for over 50 hours. Poor design.

12. Companions are shallow and one-faceted as opposed to -ehem- other games. X hates Templars. Y hates Mages. There is no inuendo, no subtleties, no nuances. Or it's black or its white, period. People tend to be far more complex than that. Poor script.

13. Dialogues are not very well written out imo. Poor script.

14. Soundtrack is uncompelling. Yes I know Mr Inon Zur is behind it and I respect his prior work. Rushed?

15. And the game ends. Wot? Just like that? After playing for over 50 hours? That's it? Are you sure? WTF?

16. And finally, my biggest gripe is that this game is mis-sold as an RPG. Meaning choices matter. Well my friend, they don't matter one iota because you can save and reload and the vast majority of times the same outcome happens regardless of your dialogue choices. Big deal. For me, this is a game-breaker in an RPG. Moreover, take away the "RP" from RPG more like, and leave it at G.

17. Where's the epic (this reminds me of McDonald's where's the meat?)? Really can anybody please point out just what makes this game epic? Anyone? You there at the back...The game was sold as "epic" and "rise to power" thingy...

18. And finally, in line with the above, it feels more like an "Action-RPG" than say a traditional RPG. Umm, the button-mashing thingy you know...so much for the "Think like a general and play like a Spartan". This line is so cool and catchy, but WTF does it mean? Anyone? It's just a click fest. Have you actually tried to play-and-pause it. The game is NOT suited for that type of gameplay and rewards playing it on real time.

19. And finally it feels all-round rushed and that too many corners were cut. Kirkwall feels dead. It never changes and nothing ever happens. NPC's are all brain dead. Bustling activity in a city is missing a la Assasins Creed.

20. Oh and we are going to sell you two DAY-ONE DLCs btw. At 7 USD a piece. Yes, we cut them out from the main game; suck it up princess!

All 20 points above are, imo, objective and are wholly unrelated to DA:O.

Capisce? The game in itself is bad, as in VERY bad. I'm sure I could add more points to the above, but you get the idea.

We are not being nostalgic (on a year and half game from December 2009??!!; Ray, please, give us some credit, will you?!).

Simply put, DA2 is mediocre at best...

...and NOW Ray (yes, now), if you happen to compound all the above to the fact that it was sold on the piggyback of DA:O, as "an epic sequel" then....... and if you spice it up with Laidlaw's and Gaider's brilliant comments :devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil:  and more of this .

Modifié par Shadowbanner, 26 avril 2011 - 08:33 .

[KLUME777]

*snip*

Muzyka:

We’ve actually attracted a lot of new people to the franchise. Dragon Age II is selling faster than Dragon Age Origins. It’s probably part because it’s drawing a lot of new fans in. And that’s exciting to us. But our core fans are really important to us. I can’t emphasize that enough. They helped get us to where we are today. They’re the core of what we do, and we want to make sure we’re making games that satisfy them.

Uhh!, How can they get so far from the truth! Its obvious why DA2 is selling faster than DAO. Becuase its the sequal to a fantastic game that everybody loves. The people that are buying DA2 are fans of the first game who of coarse are going to buy the sequal regardless of its quality (like me).

After those first two weeks however, the game has taken a massive nosedive in sales because of bad word of mouth that the game was dissapointing. Plus, it isn't very attractive to a gamer unfamiliar with the series when there is so much other competition that can offer better than what DA2 has. DA2 has a bad reputation now.

[AkiKishi]

KLUME777 wrote...

*snip*

Muzyka:

We’ve actually attracted a lot of new people to the franchise. Dragon Age II is selling faster than Dragon Age Origins. It’s probably part because it’s drawing a lot of new fans in. And that’s exciting to us. But our core fans are really important to us. I can’t emphasize that enough. They helped get us to where we are today. They’re the core of what we do, and we want to make sure we’re making games that satisfy them.

Uhh!, How can they get so far from the truth! Its obvious why DA2 is selling faster than DAO. Becuase its the sequal to a fantastic game that everybody loves. The people that are buying DA2 are fans of the first game who of coarse are going to buy the sequal regardless of its quality (like me).

After those first two weeks however, the game has taken a massive nosedive in sales because of bad word of mouth that the game was dissapointing. Plus, it isn't very attractive to a gamer unfamiliar with the series when there is so much other competition that can offer better than what DA2 has. DA2 has a bad reputation now.

It's great how he ignores nearly half a million pre-orders in those calculations isnt it ?

[Rockpopple]

If you're a newcomer to WRPGs, what other game came out around the same time as Dragon Age II that would be better competition? I never heard of any.

That's dumb. A lot of people got scared away from a decent - no - good and lots of fun wRPG like Dragon Age II because of a bitter word of mouth campaign because the game wasn't up to people's standards. So "not good enough" became "not good at all".

[TUHD]

*sighs* Really, they throw it all at 'Disappointed fans largely are people who can't handle change and/or were badly informed'. You can't get any further from the truth in most cases....
Edit: 'New people'. Hm... I don't think so - if any, it are just few. And he's ignoring the well over 400k pre-orders. He's also ignoring the trend of nose-diving sales.

@Rockpopple: Call it good if you want, but by my standards, this game is missing too much elements and breaking too much elements to pieces to be called 'an good RPG'. For an action/adventure it is good enough, but as an RPG, it's totally lacking the necessary elements.

Modifié par TUHD, 25 avril 2011 - 01:58 .

[Rockpopple]

I'd ask what elements it was missing from Origins, other than the Origins themselves.

[Shadowbanner]

BobSmith101 wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...

*snip*

Muzyka:

We’ve actually attracted a lot of new people to the franchise. Dragon Age II is selling faster than Dragon Age Origins. It’s probably part because it’s drawing a lot of new fans in. And that’s exciting to us. But our core fans are really important to us. I can’t emphasize that enough. They helped get us to where we are today. They’re the core of what we do, and we want to make sure we’re making games that satisfy them.

Uhh!, How can they get so far from the truth! Its obvious why DA2 is selling faster than DAO. Becuase its the sequal to a fantastic game that everybody loves. The people that are buying DA2 are fans of the first game who of coarse are going to buy the sequal regardless of its quality (like me).

After those first two weeks however, the game has taken a massive nosedive in sales because of bad word of mouth that the game was dissapointing. Plus, it isn't very attractive to a gamer unfamiliar with the series when there is so much other competition that can offer better than what DA2 has. DA2 has a bad reputation now.

It's great how he ignores nearly half a million pre-orders in those calculations isnt it ?

Ooops, yes the pre-orders, come to think of it, gosh hand't thought one iota about them.

[TUHD]

@Rockpopple:

- Feeling of impact of your decisions. While DA:O lacked in this a bit too (but not as bad), the narrative at least compensated this. Because the narrative in DA2 is VERY badly set up, you straightly away in Act 2 get the feeling 'Why didn't my decisions make any impact?'.
- Subtle atmosphere. The cities in Origins were quite empty too, but this got compensated a bit by the choice of colors, different styles of buildings etc. Whereas DA2 chooses an 'same color approach', worst of all the 'sleeping color' grey. And you can see lines between the textures in DA2 way more easily then DA:O...
- Clear goal. In DA:O (albeit a bit cliché) you know from nearly the start 'Hey, I'll need to gather an army to defeat the archdemon'. In DA2 you're getting utterly confused by what your goal actually is... only revealed in Act 3, which is about 30-50 hours into the game. (On which moment the most players will already have stopped playing if they aren't impressed by the game)
People need a goal to focus on long-term. DA2 is when it comes to that too haphazardly build.

Maybe I'll think of more later on...

Modifié par TUHD, 25 avril 2011 - 02:16 .

[byzantine horse]

TUHD wrote...

*sighs* Really, they throw it all at 'Disappointed fans largely are people who can't handle change and/or were badly informed'

I think anyone complaining about people not being able to take changes well are on the wrong track. There are good and there are bad changes, and even bad changes (from someone's perspective) can be made decent or even good if executed right. I think that most complaints regarding the changes is not due to the changes themselves, but rather the way the changes were made, how they were executed. Could for example the voiced protagonist and the dialogue wheel been great? Yes, Mass Effect 2 does a superb job for one. However in DA2 you often end up saying something you didn't intend in a tone you didn't intend. A "No thanks" is suddenly a "No way you ****** go to hell!" and sometimes the other way 'round. Sometimes the optons at hand don't fit the situation at all or very poorly.

When it comes to the second part of that statement - well, isn't it true? People bought the game expecting a second Origins. I didn't and enjoyed the game immensly (up until the boss fight in Act 3...) and I am firm in my belief that the game is good. Not great, but good. Others, who expected Origins, bought a game they didn't expect to get and in many cases didn't want. Considering all the information that went out about the game before release that is your own bloody fault imo. If you know that there is a pig in the sack yet still buy it expecting diamonds it is hardly the seller's fault when you are dissapointed. I see people complain about the lack of choices regarding race, that they don't enjoy the faster combat, that they don't like playing a game that only has one city... I mean, really? Didn't you know this before you bought the game? And if you didn't, whhy didn't you look it up? We live in the Information Age, it is easier than ever to get hold of information regarding everything and anything. As a consumer that is your own responsibility.

I bought Two Worlds (1) a while back, knowing full and well that its reviews were... mixed... at best. Some reviewers even stated that "This is what it looks like when the RPG-genre tries to commit suicide. A bloody mess." and I still bought it, thinking that "Hey, it can't be THAT bad, and I really feel like playing some RPG anyway". Well, the reviewer was right in every way. I played the game for 20 minutes and never looked back. Whose fault was it? Mine and none elses. There are plenty of ways to find out about a game, if you preordered long before real information got out you can always cancel it before release if you are in doubts.

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
That comment is interesting when you consider in the end what they ultimately create in DA2 is a war potentially spanning entire Thedas, and whole continent plunged into chaos with the Chantry falling apart, the mage uprising and general free-for-all. Which is quite on the level of the Blights and yet there's no stapled archdemons to speak of.

In other words, DA2 could've easily started at the point where it actually ends (with the events simply explained in beginning cutscenes) and it had full potential to be "save the world" story as large and "epic" as DAO was without reusing the Darkspawn threat. So much for "the only way".

This is Bioware, though. Bioware games are 80% useless plots. Once you remove save the world, you realize that Bioware just writes unconnected vignettes that lack direction and connection. DA:O was the same way - you run errands for 90% of the game and 80% of the errands you run are at best only tangentially related to your goal. But DA:O at least gave you an umbrella - stop the blight - that made things work.

Bioware couldn't decide between the qunari and mages, and IMO that was the problem. If they wanted to avoid a save the world plot, they could have stuck with either a qunari invasion or the mage civil war, but then make everything in the game about that.

The problem with trying a personal and engaging story is that you then have to a have a tight and personal story. That doesn't mean restricing choices in terms of all roads lead to Rome, but rather making it such that there is one narrative thread we're following.

[Rockpopple]

- If you mean the lack of an epilogue card at the end of the game letting you know how your decisions influenced some people... I don't know if that's necessarily an "element". The game made me feel how my decisions influenced things as they went along. I didn't need a post-game sign telling me how someone was sad that I killed their son in the Fade, or what that son was doing in Tevinter if I chose to save his life.

- Subtle atmosphere? That's not an RPG element I've ever heard of. What does that even mean? If we're talking about colour - I remember a lot of Origins being monochromatic. Not factually but it seemed that way. They even joked about it in Dragon Age 2 with their "not enough brown" jokes.

- Clear goal. That's not an RPG element. That's an RPG cliche, and I'm glad they got rid of it this time around. In any case, Hawke has goals and they change with the situation. No, there's no uniformly unambiguous big bad to kill, and I liked that.

In any case, most of those elements just seem to be things you like in your RPGs. That's fair enough - I'm not saying don't like them. But when you call something an 'element', you're saying it's essential to the very nature of the game... and those aren't. Not really.

[Roxlimn]

Pandaman102:

No, people don't notice reused assets in other games as much because the developers made clever use of the tools they had to hide the recycling. DA2 didn't bother to hide anything and making maps bland without addressing the sloppy reuse of maps would just make it even worse.

Which clever tools would those be? The reused assets and map fragments were completely in your face, and completely obvious, if you were actually paying attention. It boggles my mind that most people don't know how much DAO reused assets.

The main reason for them not noticing is because the locations were almost all unremarkable.

What ambitious scope? I could understand if sacrifices had to be made to deliver a truly impressive and innovative new feature, but nothing DA2 does hasn't been done better in other games. The framed narrative is about the only "new" thing, but that should have absolutely no bearing on the teams in charge of quest scripting or modeling.

The ambitious scope is in trying to really flesh out a whole city complete with interesting features, locations, and concurrent events, as well as carrying that city through 7 years through the development of those events.

There's a bunch of things DA2 does really, really well, but I wouldn't expect someone of your stance to be open to that discussion. Pardon the generalization but the usual Bioware forumgoer who doesn't like DA2 tends not to be a very rational poster.

[Orion34]

These guys are an absolute mind f***. I wasn't disappointed with the game because it wasn't DAO all over again, I was disappointed with the game because it was a buggy,rushed cash in feeding off the success of the original.

Don't ****** on my back and tell me it's raining.

[Curlain]

Roxlimn wrote...

Pandaman102:

No, people don't notice reused assets in other games as much because the developers made clever use of the tools they had to hide the recycling. DA2 didn't bother to hide anything and making maps bland without addressing the sloppy reuse of maps would just make it even worse.

Which clever tools would those be? The reused assets and map fragments were completely in your face, and completely obvious, if you were actually paying attention. It boggles my mind that most people don't know how much DAO reused assets.

The main reason for them not noticing is because the locations were almost all unremarkable.

What ambitious scope? I could understand if sacrifices had to be made to deliver a truly impressive and innovative new feature, but nothing DA2 does hasn't been done better in other games. The framed narrative is about the only "new" thing, but that should have absolutely no bearing on the teams in charge of quest scripting or modeling.

The ambitious scope is in trying to really flesh out a whole city complete with interesting features, locations, and concurrent events, as well as carrying that city through 7 years through the development of those events.

There's a bunch of things DA2 does really, really well, but I wouldn't expect someone of your stance to be open to that discussion. Pardon the generalization but the usual Bioware forumgoer who doesn't like DA2 tends not to be a very rational poster.

In my opinion Kirkwall didn't never came fully across as a whole living city, unlike say Vizima in the Witcher, now that is a city fleshed out with life, interesting features and locations (or for that matter Atkathla in BG2, even Baldur's Gate in BG1).  Kirkwall just doesn't compare to any of these.

Agree or disagree with that as you will, however putting down others to attempt to make your own opinions feel superior is just sad and all it does really is reflect poorly on you at the moment.  Saying you feel the story is complex etc is one thing (and you are perfectly entitled to enjoy and look on DA2 that way), implying anyone else who doesn't see this as intellectually inferior is not, and just comes off as an insult based on a subject opinion.  The same goes for the above bolded qoute, because some doesn't share your opinion on something they are immediately irrational?  Really?

[Roxlimn]

Curlain:

That was not an attempt to make my points appear superior. They stand on their own. I did not elaborate because in the past, the practice has proven almost completely wasted and futile.

In my opinion Kirkwall didn't never came fully across as a whole living city, unlike say Vizima in the Witcher, now that is a city fleshed out with life, interesting features and locations (or for that matter Atkathla in BG2, even Baldur's Gate in BG1). Kirkwall just doesn't compare to any of these.

Methinks you need to actually go back and replay those games. Baldur's Gate is interesting enough, but it's not Kirkwall.

[DTKT]

Roxlimn wrote...

Curlain:

That was not an attempt to make my points appear superior. They stand on their own. I did not elaborate because in the past, the practice has proven almost completely wasted and futile.

In my opinion Kirkwall didn't never came fully across as a whole living city, unlike say Vizima in the Witcher, now that is a city fleshed out with life, interesting features and locations (or for that matter Atkathla in BG2, even Baldur's Gate in BG1). Kirkwall just doesn't compare to any of these.

Methinks you need to actually go back and replay those games. Baldur's Gate is interesting enough, but it's not Kirkwall.

Just be clear.

You think the recycling was not an issue? You think that Kirkwall was a well made city?

I just want to be sure I understand where you are coming from here.

[Roxlimn]

DTKT:

Recycling has always been an issue with Bioware games. It's still an issue in DA2.
Kirkwall is one of Bioware's better made and more fully fleshed cities. It's above average as cities in games go.

[MingWolf]

Kirkwall doesn't exactly have NPCs that take cover from the rain; who gets up from bed certain times in the day to visit friends or to sit at a bar; or flee/fight when a street fight is going on. More or less a Witcher comparison there. Oblivion makes their cities quite lively too, though obviously with dated technology. Athkathla in Baldur's Gate had NPCs that reacted to you when you decided to use "forbidden magic." Now, I was not trying to make any direct comparison here, but Kirkwall doesn't exactly live up to a level of grandeur that makes it that off-the-top spectacular in my opinion.

Roxlimn

There's a bunch of things DA2 does really, really well, but I wouldn't expect someone of your stance to be open to that discussion. Pardon the generalization but the usual Bioware forumgoer who doesn't like DA2 tends not to be a very rational poster.

Your generalization of people who don't like DA2 is blatantly rude. Forum-goers are all entitled to their opinions, as are you. Insulting people for differing opinions or who take a different stance in the game is outright against the rules of conduct that is posted on this site (ref: pt 2&3). Your last post in another thread on this forum went as far as dismissing the literary intelligence of those who don't quite like the story as you do. While your free to express your opinions on the game, don't go out mocking people because they don't share your stance of opinion. Be civil.

[nopho]

Shadowbanner wrote...

Ok, I'll play ball just for the sake of Herr Doktor's nostalgia argument.

Let us forget DA:O ever existed.

Let's take DA:2 as "Dragon Age", a new exciting RPG IP that's just been released by EA in March 2011. And the developer is, ta-ta-ta-chan BioWare no less, you know the guys from KOTOR, BG and ME1 and ME2. Previews are red hot. PC Gamer ranks it at 94%, "Best RPG of the next decade" they write (sic).
OMG! OMG!! OMG!!! Can't wait to play it, oh, the emotion.

After playing it for 50 hours and finishing it....What was the name of the PC Gamer bloke who rated it as 94%?

Objective flaws:

1. Ranking number one, re-used dungeons and caves ad nauseam. The first 6 hours are new, the remainding 40 hours are all repetition of the same environments, just filler. Lazy.

2. Successive waves of enemies materialize -literally- out of thin air, even in closed rooms, negating player manual tactical positioning. Often ranged units are wiped out on Hard and Nightmare. Poor design.

3. Pre-rendered cut scenes already lay out teams starting position negating -again- player manual tactical positioning. Poor design.

4. Side-quests are menial, repetitive and souless almost like running mindless errands. "I believe this leg I found in some dump pile is yours" "Oh my, thank you Serah, I just don't know what I would have done without it". Stupid, stupid, stupid fed ex (fetch-type) quests that are mind-numbing. I mean really, what in God's name was the point of that. Well this type of quests abund in all three acts. They feel like tedious repetitive chores. Did I mention they were stupid? Lame and lazy.

5. Loot in its majority is junk, literally. Moreover, the game itself acknowledges and stashes it as "Junk" in your in-game inventory. What's even worse is that on selling it you are paid a pittance, literally. Poor design.

6. You over spend 50 hours collecting armor that is mostly useless, as neither you nor your companions can use it. In the case of the player, because he lacks the required specific player-class that enables its use (mage, warriror, rogue). Your companions are ruled out because that was the intended game design. So, unless you want to collect useless trash and stash it in your home, you might as well sell it; it's the only logical thing you can really do. Lame.

7. Game is riddled with glitches and bugs. QA wo bist du?

8. Story is disjointed and lacks purpose, drive. Poor plot.

9. The antagonist is introduced far too late into the game to really care about him/her. Poor plot.

10. The start is way too slow. In BioWare tradition starts are always purposely slow. But in DA2 it reaches an all-time high. You spend a good 10/15 hours to earn 50 g. It's a "get rich or die trin'' Act 1. Boring. Poor plot.

11. Lack of environments, lack of exploring. You do not journey anywhere. In RPG's you are always exploring, not stuck -for ten years, no less- in one venue!!! Remember when you are killed a pop-up says "Your journey ends...". That's because you are meant to be travelling the land, not stuck as a lab rat in the same hellhole for over 50 hours. Poor design.

12. Companions are shallow and one-faceted as opposed to -ehem- other games. X hates Templars. Y hates Mages. There is no inuendo, no subtleties, no nuances. Or it's black or its white, period. People tend to be far more complex than that. Poor script.

13. Dialogues are not very well written out imo. Poor script.

14. Soundtrack is uncompelling. Yes I know Mr Inon Zur is behind it and I respect his prior work. Rushed?

15. And the game ends. Wot? Just like that? After playing for over 50 hours? That's it? Are you sure? WTF?

16. And finally, my biggest gripe is that this game is mis-sold as an RPG. Meaning choices matter. Well my friend, they don't matter one iota because you can save and reload and the vast majority of times the same outcome happens regardless of your dialogue choices. Big deal. For me, this is a game-breaker in an RPG. Moreover, take away the "RP" from RPG more like, and leave it at G.

17. Where's the epic (this reminds me of McDonald's where's the meat?)? Really can anybody please point out just what makes this game epic? Anyone? You there at the back...The game was sold as "epic" and "rise to power" thingy...

18. And finally, in line with the above, it feels more like an "Action-RPG" than say a traditional RPG. Umm, the button-mashing thingy you know...so much for the "Think like a general and play like a Spartan". This line is so cool and catchy, but WTF does it mean? Anyone? It's just a click fest. Have you actually tried to play-and-pause it. The game is NOT suited for that type of gameplay and rewards playing it on real time.

19. And finally it feels all-round rushed and that too many corners were cut. Kirkwall feels dead. It never changes and nothing ever happens. NPC's are all brain dead. Bustling activity in a city is missing a la Assasins Creed.

20. Oh and we are going to sell you two DAY-ONE DLCs btw. At 7 USD a piece. Yes, we cut them out from the main game; suck it up princess!

All 20 points above are, imo, objective and are wholly unrelated to DA:O.

Get it? The game in itself is bad, as in VERY bad. I'm sure I could add more points to the above, but you get the idea.

We are not being nostalgic (on a year and half game from December 2009??!!; Ray, please, give us some credit, will you?!).

Simply put, DA2 is mediocre at best...

...and NOW Ray (yes, now), if you happen to compound all the above to the fact that it was sold on the piggyback of DA:O, as "an epic sequel" then....... and if you spice it up with Laidlaw's and Gaider's brilliant comments :devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil::devil:  and more of this .

very well written, you sir make it to my number one person of the day.

[DTKT]

Roxlimn wrote...

DTKT:

Recycling has always been an issue with Bioware games. It's still an issue in DA2.
Kirkwall is one of Bioware's better made and more fully fleshed cities. It's above average as cities in games go.

Would you mind elaborating on Kirkwall. You are honestly the first person I saw on this forum that felt like Kirkwall was a well done city.

As for the recycling, everything has already been said but I would say that DAII failed to "hide" it. Of course every single Bioware game had the issue. It's something that is present in the entire industry. The challenge is to make sure that the recycling does not impact the experience of the player. Unfortunately, due to it's nature and the fact that it was everywhere, DAII failed in that category.

[GravityParade]

It wasn't DA2 that brought more people. It was the recognition and reputation of DA:O that drew a bigger crowd for DA2