279 réponses à ce sujet

[neppakyo]

What they hay, I'll play along.

Story: 4 - Loved the concept, executed poorly, ended up hating hawke.

Graphics:6 - Most of the character models were detailed nicely, overall too cartoony, prefer the gritty style of origins

Combat: 4 - Balance issues from DA:O were addressed, but it was hooked on meth and speed, silly anime animations and exploding balloons. Not to mention the wave combat was one of the worst I've seen.

About it.

[Sussurus]

Story 6 - 7:
I disliked its randomness and disjointed one man / woman rises to power shtick.
However it did have lots of elements that I found interesting... but not in depth enough to make me awestruck.
That and it was not really dark fantasy as DA was sold as.

Graphics: 6 - 7:
Again I liked the "improvements" but not the change of design.
Some of it was brilliant but disjointed and no real choice or depth.

Combat: 4:
Too few options, no real choice or customisation.
I thought the faster combat was more fun at first, but it was silly and held no semblence to player character at all imo.

Modifié par Sussurus, 10 mai 2011 - 10:11 .

[upsettingshorts]

Story: 7 (agreed with ish but I place more emphasis on concept, because I *hated* the DAO "big bad villain" concept)
Graphics: 6 (this includes the ability to render scenes as described)
Combat: 8 (much better in concept, needs a lot more polish)

This is relative to Origins. If Origins had come out after DA2, my numbers would look like this:

Story: 3 (a cliched concept executed well)
Graphics: 4
Combat: 2 (dumbed down, would have removed many knockdowns, melee FF, cross class combos. Though the difficulty levels would have been better balanced)

Adds up to 10! 

If any of those ratings are potentially misleading when it comes to my opinion it'd be combat.  I feel like DA2's needs a lot of work, but I think it has more potential.  

neppakyo wrote...

gritty style of origins

I am shocked every single time I read this.  I simply didn't play that game, apparently. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 mai 2011 - 10:14 .

[Stegoceras]

Story: 2, I simply want a story I can follow, have to feel I'm working towards anything. Some people claim that DA2's story is innovative, actually I felt it was a poorly executed (and nearly equally cliched) 'rise to power' story.

Graphics: 8, good enough, not my prefered style but there has been some (expected) progress.

Combat: 2, Too fast paced for any strategy (for a normal difficulty player that is), bad waves system, horrible spawning mechanics and too much combat over-all (What ever happened to a few puzzles, riddles and the occassional talking yourself out of a fight instead of this constant free-for-all)

[Aaleel]

Story (4) - It was a good idea, but it was executed very poorly, so no points for trying and failing.  The story was disjointed throughout and rushed at the end.  Also nothing in the story or game gave the impressions that 7 years had passed.

Graphics (5) - The graphics themselves were better, but the art design was a step backwards for me.  It was supposed to be a dark story but the art design was cartoonish.  Wasn't gritty, serious, or ominous.  

Combat (3) - Enemy waves, enemies falling from the sky, the rogue/ninja hybrid.  To quote Yahtzee there was tweaking in the combat in a Crystal meth sense

Modifié par Aaleel, 10 mai 2011 - 10:27 .

[Tommy6860]

Alistairlover94 wrote...


I agree with your ratings on everything except for the combat. The combat is a 3 for me. Sure they made the combat move at a faster pace. But the enemies still attack in Origins' battle pace, which makes the game incredibly easy.

I can agree your reply (you saved me typing time, so thanks), except your take on the battle pace being the same between Origins and DA2. That I don't get. In Origins, I don't remember Templars (as one example) teleporting, doing backflip-kicks in full plate with sword and shield in hand, along with spawning from nowhere. Unless I am not understanding what you mean by 'battle pace'...

[Mrbananagrabber]

Story (2): Did not care for most of the characters, holes in the plot, ending was cop-out, Kirkwall is not interesting and so is Hawke. Wanted to side with the Arishok but couldn't, HUGE letdown for me. I could side with Loghain in the first one, how come in a sequel thats supposed to be expanded I cant join with the (then) major vilain? Lazy.

Graphics (4) Mixed bag, but overall not as good as DA:O in most areas. Some NPCs are seriously ugly and Kirkwall once again is unappealing. I really liked what they did with some of the designs (Flemeth should've looked like this all along and Varric looks and is awesome) but then again whats with Merril's hands??

Combat (4) Yeah it's not like DA:O, I did enjoy whacking people senseless but overall I like the good old strategic combat of DA:O. I would've given a 5 had it not been for the ridiculous moves Hawke makes (refugee picks up a claymore out of the blue and does backflips, hitting 3 times per second? Sigh) and the enemy waves. Bioware: THE WAVES HAVE TO GO.

[upsettingshorts]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

And how is DA2's story not cliche? .

Well it's certainly not the BioWare cliche.   Except for the humble origin and 2 companions parts.

But like I implied, I prefer "DA2's cliches" despite their execution issues to "DAO's cliches" in my opinion again despite their execution issues.  I don't think DAO pulled off its own story all that well, either, certainly not as well as the forums seem to think it did nowadays.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 mai 2011 - 10:37 .

[mesmerizedish]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

And how is DA2's story not cliche? And the "rise to power" story has been done far, far better in other stuff. At least Origins executed its cliches well.

You may have missed it, but "rise to power" is not DAII's story.

[upsettingshorts]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

But it did do it better than DA2's barely coherent plot.

Opinion.

Case in point:  I had few issues following it.  I do think one ending makes more sense than the other.

That being said, DA2 has serious issues with gameplay/story segregation and pacing.  DAO had it's share of the former, but not as much, and its issues with pacing were almost immaterial because it had no pacing.  

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Really? I seem to remember the tagline "Rise to power, by any means necesarry". And Laidlaw/Gaider saying so in interviews, if i'm not mistaken.

Come now.  Why take marketing seriously on this subject?  Especially if we understand the rest of it is nonsense.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 mai 2011 - 10:44 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

DAO had it's share of the former, but not as much, and its issues with pacing were almost immaterial because it had no pacing.

And that, I think, is a huge plus.  The game can't really have pacing while still allowing the player any freedom to construct his own narrative.  And that is the number one thing I want from any RPG.

Any game that fails to do that is a bad game.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 10 mai 2011 - 10:45 .

[mesmerizedish]

If this thread becomes a 'Shorts/Sylvius debate, I am so selling refreshments.

[upsettingshorts]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Opinion. See? Everybody has one.

It was an exaggeration, yes, but of something I can attempt to describe.  In DAO, the pacing was mostly under the player's control.  Not to the extent of say, a Bethesda game however.

This is often cited as a positive feature, and it can be, but it harder to hold a central plot hook. 

That's why I meant by it being almost immaterial.  I'm not sure that it can be held up as a positive or negative.  

DA2 is meant to tell a personal story, so it needs better pacing than it had.  Concept and execution.  DAO's concept simply didn't call for much pacing. 

Edit:

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

DAO had it's share of the former, but not as much, and its issues with pacing were almost immaterial because it had no pacing.

And that, I think, is a huge plus.  The game can't really have pacing while still allowing the player any freedom to construct his own narrative.  And that is the number one thing I want from any RPG.

Any game that fails to do that is a bad game.

See.

Of course we're going to disagree on the positives and negatives of the concept, I only meant to demonstrate that the difference exists. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 mai 2011 - 10:50 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

DA2 is meant to tell a personal story, so it needs better pacing than it had. 

If it wants to tell a particular personal story - one written by the designers - then I agree.

However, having the game tell a story at you isn't fun gameplay.  It arguably isn't gamplay at all.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Pretty much this. Which DA2 sorely lacked.

Act I has it.

[Maria Caliban]

Savber100 wrote...

DA2'S Three Promised Improvements: Did Bioware fulfill her goals?

Savber100 wrote...

Did Bioware fulfill her goals?

Savber100 wrote...

her goals?

Savber100 wrote...

her

BW for bi LI in DA III pls. :happy:

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

DA2 is meant to tell a personal story, so it needs better pacing than it had. 

If it wants to tell a particular personal story - one written by the designers - then I agree.

I believe that was their intent, yes.  They've said as much, and the game does reveal just those intentions.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

However, having the game tell a story at you isn't fun gameplay.  It arguably isn't gamplay at all.

I also believed it's been established that BioWare has mostly stopped making games you find fun.  

That isn't to say you should stop posting or anything, obviously.  Just that I wouldn't expect you to say anything else.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 mai 2011 - 10:54 .

[mesmerizedish]

Maria Caliban wrote...

BW for bi LI in DA III pls. :happy:

/agree

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If it wants to tell a particular personal story - one written by the designers - then I agree.

However, having the game tell a story at you isn't fun gameplay.  It arguably isn't gamplay at all.

You seem to be implying that adhering to a predetermined story is somehow somehow mutually exclusive to gameplay.

I had a ton of fun playing games that did just that - Shadow of the Colossus, Portal, God of War, Call of Duty, and Uncharted all more-or-less forced me into following a predetermined path, but I still found them all to be enjoyable and fun games with terrific gameplay.