Hatchetman77 wrote...
1. Yes it does. I have different expectations when I go see The Godfather II than I do when I go see Best of the Best II. That name before the II tells me what I can expect.
2. The thread is about the fact that DA:2 is not as good as DA:O but is still an enjoyable game. We're not discussing anything about WHY it is not as good. There are tons of other threads for that. This is irrelivent to the topic and I don't know why you included it.
3. No it's not. I have different expectations when I go see The Godfather II than I do when I go see Best of the Best II. That name before the II tells me what I can expect.
4. I don't understand why you feel it should be evaluated solely on its own merits if it's a sequal. Almost any review of Final Fantasy games you can find will compare it to previous Final Fantasy games in terms of quality (ie, is Final Fantast VII better or worse than VI, etc.). Any movie review of a sequel will reference the movie's quality in comparison to its predecessor. You draw in the previous audience when you make a sequal. The trade off is that your product will be compared to the original that those people loved. It's done all the time in movies, but because this is a video game people have this notion of "meh, they phoned this one in but thats ok because it's just a video game for stupid gamers".
1. No, the name tells you what you can reasonably expect the film to be about. If the movie is Rocky 3, I can reasonably conclude that it features Stallone as an underdog boxer. It doesn't magically mean it will be good.
2. Then obviously your reading comprehension needs work. I included that statement to show that naming the game DA II didn't make the game bad because people are comparing it to Origins. You know, the thesis statement that you responded to first.
3. Thank you for repeating yourself. However, repetition doesn't make your opinion any more valid.
4. I feel that all media should be examined on its own merits. That is what leads to objective, constructive criticism. This is especially true with a medium like video games; where virtually every aspect can be altered from installment to installment, but still remain a "sequel". And I guess that is what it comes down to. Despite the II, I don't consider DA II a sequel. I won't consider the third game a sequel either, even if they call it DA3. To me, they are the second and third games within the Dragon Age franchise. A sequential number doesn't make something a sequel.
Retour en haut
Or anyone's( and spare us the unistalling it...that was funny to some of us, and never to some, long ago...just don't go there. Please, keep this as a real enjoyment thread).
