583 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightnight]

5/10

[SilentNukee]

DAO: 9.5
DA2: 7

[jimmy_smith]

7.5/10

[Lykang]

DAO: 8.8
DA2: 5 (would give 6, but when devs are saying that reused environments are not a big deal and thinking DA2 is so awesome and the best game ever created, DA2 don't deserve anything higher)

[TRUTHMACHINE]

DAO: 9
DA2: 6

[Elanareon]

DA:O = 8~9
DA2 = 4~5

[ElnVld]

DAO:9,5
DA2:9,5

[Zeevico]

DAO-9
DA2--6/7

[Lestatman]

DA:O 8
DA2 4

[sassperella]

DA:O 9
DA2 8.5 - because for all it's flaws (and DA:O wasn't without a large amount of flaws itself) I thoroughly enjoyed the game and to me that's what counts.

[gotthammer]

DA:O - 9
DA2 - 6

I gave DA2 a 7 or so when I first finished it, but since I feel that I can't really get through my 2nd playthrough, I deducted a point.
If no 'fix' is made or the toolset isn't updated for it, I'll gladly deduct another point or two.

IMHO, DA2 feels rushed...but is salvageable. A Free 'Enhanced Edition' to fix its many flaws (disjointed story, lack of exposition and establishing shots, re-used environments, enemy waves, etc.).

[v_ware]

DAO: 8.5
DA2: 6

[DAO MAdhatter]

sympathy4saren wrote...

What is your rating, and why?

Also, if you played it (almost everyone has), what is your DAO rating?

Dao. 7/10. Its fun, but way to cluncky combat. The story is LAAMMMMME! its just a ripoff of EVERY OTHER RPG STORY EVER! Morrigan is an annoying biatch. Leliana is a sicophantic zelot & allister is an over sensative idiot.

DA 2. 8/10. more orignial story, better more viseral combat, cooler weapon animations, but reused EVERY map. & no Qunari companion(lolwut!?)

Modifié par DAO MAdhatter, 30 avril 2011 - 08:53 .

[Kilshrek]

AAHook2 wrote...


True enough, but subtlety is lost on some people, especially those of the zombie-killing, RC explosive driving, dispositions.

To be fair, it's not as if anyone has threatened BioWare developers thus. I highly doubt anyone would rate a game of theirs  as such, and I believe this person knows this.

Let's not be pedantic.

I don't know anyone who could make a game that would warrant people wanting to kill them (besides possibly the people behind Postal). And I'm sorry, I get into weird habits sometimes.

/thread derail

[KLUME777]

DAO - 9
DA2 - 5

[DraCZeQQ]

Dragon Age: Origins - 8.5
Dragon Age:Varric's & Cassandra's bedtime stories (copy-paste edition) - 5 (i started on 7, but for each found plothole, absence of inner-logic and bug, I just have to go lower)

[DAO MAdhatter]

Fiddles_stix wrote...

DA:O - 9.5
DA2 - 5

Sometimes I think I should give DA2 a higher rating because I did finish it but I just can't, maybe I need a new state of mind when I play it.

You gave DAO a 9.5!? thats is total fanboyism. It doesnt deserve any were closed to that. Dont you even see its MANY flaws?How bout its clunky slow out dated combat, its cleiched story, its use of a voiceless main ncharacter who stares blanky at everyone even during the most desperapte of times? Your either a lier, or your blind.

[uglor808]

I'd give DA2 a 6.

I just can't get over the recycled interiors and waves of enemies spawning during combat. Combat is too cheap and cheesy for me, hordes of weak enemies exploding into pieces and everyone is moving at hyperspeed and jumping all over the battlefield. I guess it makes for more exciting combat sequences for casual gamers. I prefer fewer but stronger enemies. I thought some of the combat skills were well done, BUT I was quite disappointed when i found out that they got rid of all non combat skills. I guess Bioware wanted to go the action route to attract a wider audience, and the more hardcore rpg elements were either "Streamlined' or taken out. Another reason for my score: Kirkwall as a city is small in scope and not "alive". The city never changes within the 10 years span of the game. The environment got old really fast, and the recycled interiors just makes it even worse.

Modifié par uglor808, 30 avril 2011 - 09:39 .

[Stegoceras]

DA:O - 9
DA2 - 6.5

DAO MAdhatter wrote...

Fiddles_stix wrote...

DA:O - 9.5
DA2 - 5

Sometimes I think I should give DA2 a higher rating because I did finish it but I just can't, maybe I need a new state of mind when I play it.

You gave DAO a 9.5!? thats is total fanboyism. It doesnt deserve any were closed to that. Dont you even see its MANY flaws?How bout its clunky slow out dated combat, its cleiched story, its use of a voiceless main ncharacter who stares blanky at everyone even during the most desperapte of times? Your either a lier, or your blind.

Can i just say:
- Cluncky slow out dated combat, it's an opinion not a fact or in other words, I guess I prefered slow and clunky then.
- Cliched story, true, but is DA2 really so original as you stated in your earlier post then? Been playing Mafia II lately and can only say I see an awful lot of similarities in the story (although much better executed there)
- Voiceless main character, again an opinion, several people prefer that.
- Blankly staring protagonist, Very true, but there are very few games that can pull of a facial emotion (DA2 with the wiggly eyebrows made me frown in that matter)

So I think Fiddles_stix was perfectly viable in his opinion, it's all a matter of opinion and apparently he wasn't as troubled by the shortcomings "you" saw in the game, as you obviously were.

[Whammo]

DAO: Solid 9/10
DA2: 7/10 bordering on 6/10

[AAHook2]

DAO MAdhatter wrote...

Fiddles_stix wrote...

DA:O - 9.5
DA2 - 5

Sometimes I think I should give DA2 a higher rating because I did finish it but I just can't, maybe I need a new state of mind when I play it.

You gave DAO a 9.5!? thats is total fanboyism. It doesnt deserve any were closed to that. Dont you even see its MANY flaws?How bout its clunky slow out dated combat, its cleiched story, its use of a voiceless main ncharacter who stares blanky at everyone even during the most desperapte of times? Your either a lier, or your blind.

There are no perfect games.
Eventually you come to love something not because it's flawless, but because of its flaws. I rate a game according to its overall value.
There's something nearly intangible about Origins that is just...enjoyable.  I was watching an HBO sitdown called Talking Funny, with Jerry Seinfeld, Louie CK, Chris Rock and Ricky Gervais. Seinfeld said something that was very interesting. He said, [You can't tell someone why they like something...They just do.]
Tell me the story is cliched all you want, but at a lot of points, I think that was the intention. It was like a love note to the RPG genre and Fantasy as a whole. It just worked for me. There were many references to Tolkien, Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin, Dungeons and Dragons. I think a lot of so called "elitists" have missed the whole point of the game. It was meant to be a tribute to Fantasy and the Western RPG.
Of course it's cliche!
Even down to your non-voiced hero. The voice is yours. The slower combat. It felt more thoughtful. You had to think a little ahead about what you were doing. Sometimes you miss. Sometimes you didn't position your team right. Of course it's clunky and complicated. You need a better scheme to operate. Reload the fight and think about it, then try again.
I loved this game and all of its flaws and foibles. You could have reconstructed this game in all detail only changed the names and shifted the story around a bit and I would have loved it if you called it Dragon Age 2. I would have enjoyed that immensely. Sure we'd get complaints that it was no different than Origins, but I don't think many people would have minded that all that much.
I mean, just look at this thread. Origins averages a 9 out of 10.
Dragon Age 2 is something like a 7.
And who has the nerve to say that Dragon Age 2's story isn't cliche? A down on their luck family enters a city as a fefugee and has to do whatever it takes to survive, eventually rising to the top...
That doesn't sound familiar AT ALL.
For crying out loud, that angle was covered in the Dwarf Commoner story in Origins.

Sorry, all of the arguments putting down Origins are pretty tired. And still the same people who love to say so cannot bring themselves to say that Dragon Age 2 was better. Not with a straight face.

[Tommy6860]

AAHook2 wrote...

DAO MAdhatter wrote...

Fiddles_stix wrote...

DA:O - 9.5
DA2 - 5

Sometimes I think I should give DA2 a higher rating because I did finish it but I just can't, maybe I need a new state of mind when I play it.

You gave DAO a 9.5!? thats is total fanboyism. It doesnt deserve any were closed to that. Dont you even see its MANY flaws?How bout its clunky slow out dated combat, its cleiched story, its use of a voiceless main ncharacter who stares blanky at everyone even during the most desperapte of times? Your either a lier, or your blind.

There are no perfect games.
Eventually you come to love something not because it's flawless, but because of its flaws. I rate a game according to its overall value.
There's something nearly intangible about Origins that is just...enjoyable.  I was watching an HBO sitdown called Talking Funny, with Jerry Seinfeld, Louie CK, Chris Rock and Ricky Gervais. Seinfeld said something that was very interesting. He said, [You can't tell someone why they like something...They just do.]
Tell me the story is cliched all you want, but at a lot of points, I think that was the intention. It was like a love note to the RPG genre and Fantasy as a whole. It just worked for me. There were many references to Tolkien, Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin, Dungeons and Dragons. I think a lot of so called "elitists" have missed the whole point of the game. It was meant to be a tribute to Fantasy and the Western RPG.
Of course it's cliche!
Even down to your non-voiced hero. The voice is yours. The slower combat. It felt more thoughtful. You had to think a little ahead about what you were doing. Sometimes you miss. Sometimes you didn't position your team right. Of course it's clunky and complicated. You need a better scheme to operate. Reload the fight and think about it, then try again.
I loved this game and all of its flaws and foibles. You could have reconstructed this game in all detail only changed the names and shifted the story around a bit and I would have loved it if you called it Dragon Age 2. I would have enjoyed that immensely. Sure we'd get complaints that it was no different than Origins, but I don't think many people would have minded that all that much.
I mean, just look at this thread. Origins averages a 9 out of 10.
Dragon Age 2 is something like a 7.
And who has the nerve to say that Dragon Age 2's story isn't cliche? A down on their luck family enters a city as a fefugee and has to do whatever it takes to survive, eventually rising to the top...
That doesn't sound familiar AT ALL.
For crying out loud, that angle was covered in the Dwarf Commoner story in Origins.

Sorry, all of the arguments putting down Origins are pretty tired. And still the same people who love to say so cannot bring themselves to say that Dragon Age 2 was better. Not with a straight face.

Hmm  good points! It seems the only defense by those in (strong) favor of DA2 is how much they can tear down Origins, yet they list nothing that revealing as to why DA2 is superior. It is almost like dealing with the religious right here in the U.S., they are high on making moral proclamations, but reflect little of it in substance.