510 réponses à ce sujet

[Slugwood]

ipgd wrote...

Cipher1989 wrote...

Dragon Age 2, as a stand alone game, it's actually pretty decent. But as a sequal to Dragon Age Origins? Not so much.

I think it actually draws a lot of its impact from its role as a sequel to DAO: specifically, the awareness of sequel-pattern expectations. A lot of the dramatic tension is derived from setting you up to expect significant player agency (through the player's familiarity with DAO, and a series of "illusionary" choice options early in the game such as Meeran/Athenril), and then denying it to you (e.g. as with Leandra, the Chantry, etc.) in a way that links the protagonist's in-narrative sense of helplessness to the player's own metagame "frustrations", if you will. Unlike DAO, which consistently offers the player choices that heavily impact the narrative, or at least enforce an illusion thereof, DA2 forgoes the illusion entirely as the game progresses and rubs it directly in your face. By the end, the player is made to empathize with Hawke's powerlessness in a way a purely linear series would not have been able to accomplish.

Okay.  I really like your analysis, and I would be inclined to agree, but the problem is that by intentionally frustrating the player the vast majority will respond by feeling angry, not by empathizing with the protaganist.  Angry customers mean that this tactic, while good art, is terrible business.  And Bioware / EA have made it clear that the bottom line is a huge factor in their decisions with this IP ever since Origins.  

Because of this, unfortunately, I have to think that DA2 represents a miscalculation rather than a genuine artistic statement.

[Giggles_Manically]

Who believes marketing these days?

With its awesome buttons and darker edgier content?
Origins had bugs and bad spots in the extreme.
Mass Effect had horrible design choices and very wonky combat.
Mass Effect 2 was a goofy railroaded game with regular stops at the galaxies finest shooting galleries.

Getting upset that something did not deliver how it is marketed is just a waste of time.

Was Mass Effect 2 really that dark and edgy?

[Dragoonlordz]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

What?

Bioware's marketing has always been ****.
You are annoyed that once again what they promoted is not what they delivered?

Not really, I have never had reason to worry about purchasing one of their titles before, until DA2 was in development and was beginning to get worried so for first time ever I listened/read a Bioware/EA marketing promotion or description because in the past I never needed too. I got concerned so for first time did pay attention to what they advertised the game as having in order to make my final choice of if to risk it, in the end i got screwed over from the deception and it was not like described or promoted.

[Mr.House]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Who believes marketing these days?

With its awesome buttons and darker edgier content?
Origins had bugs and bad spots in the extreme.
Mass Effect had horrible design choices and very wonky combat.
Mass Effect 2 was a goofy railroaded game with regular stops at the galaxies finest shooting galleries.

Getting upset that something did not deliver how it is marketed is just a waste of time.

Was Mass Effect 2 really that dark and edgy?

ME2 gave us good shooting galleries though!

[billy the squid]

Modifié par billy the squid, 21 mai 2011 - 10:33 .

[Giggles_Manically]

@Mr. House.

I think for every Collector or Reaper allied for I fought in ME2 I probably killed like 10 times that many in just random Mercs.

Save the galaxy!
By shooting these random mercs!

There are what like.... three points in ME2 where we fight collectors.

[Mr.House]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

@Mr. House.

I think for every Collector or Reaper allied for I fought in ME2 I probably killed like 10 times that many in just random Mercs.

Save the galaxy!
By shooting these random mercs!

There are what like.... three points in ME2 where we fight collectors.

Pretty much, the mercs where the true threat in ME2 imho

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

An experimental detour that costs 60$ (and the fear is that EA is going to keep with the policy of low costs, fast profit).

Not worth it at all in my books (especially since I am not even slighty encouraged to play it a 2nd time). If it was 40 or 30$? Yea, I may consider it decent.

Personally, I loved it, but I am a stickler for games that screw with my head. I've got a good 200 hours played and two months worth of excruciatingly nerdy ****** posts out of it so far, so I'd say my money was well spent. i'm also a dirty pirate so i paid approximately infinite dollars more than i was planning to and i even bought the silly gay lion armor dlc because i love bioware THAT MUCH

Merced652 wrote...

You're not seriously trying to say that what they did was intentional are you? Oh god, i wonder under what circumstances they'd feel worse. Knowing they were making a ****ty game, or unknowingly. {smilie}

I'm not sure they set out to make DA2 the way it was from the beginning (they probably didn't), but I think the time/budget constraints imposed upon the dev team necessitated that they take the narrative in a different direction from DAO's. There is no way they would have been able to make the same kind of game as DAO in a year, and I get the feeling the release time wasn't negotiable.

I think if they'd tried to specifically follow the sequel pattern, it would have been very... unspectacular.  Rather than aggressively subverting expectations, it would have just been letting them down. And I think when faced with expectations you have no hope of ever meeting, manipulating them is better than just giving up. And they did that very, very well, if you take the time to really think about the way the agency denial frustrations you felt mirrored the narrative of Hawke.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

"RISE TO POWER...
BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY"

" The legend of your Rise to Power begins now."

"determine your rise to power"

Mmhmm

That ties very well into my interpretation, doesn't it? It was playing very hard into the sequel pattern, setting up expectations to later deconstruct.

Granted, Bioware doesn't have an sort of token Hideo Kojima figure so I'm not going to get that conspiratory about it. The advertisement was likely a matter of the disconnect between the development team and the marketing team, which is certainly not a phenomenon exclusive to Bioware by any means. Still, the game is structured in such a way that I don't think the marketing necessarily detracts from the purpose of this particular narrative, since it very heavily facilitates the expectations the narrative operates off (possibly to the benefit of creating those expectations for people who haven't played DAO). Then again, people are so determined to hate the game I doubt it even matters.

Modifié par ipgd, 21 mai 2011 - 10:36 .

[Mr.House]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

I enjoyed FFXIII. I did not enjoy DA2. Say what you will about FFXIII, but that game has a coherent plot, polished everything, better UI, better protagonist(I cared more about Lightning than that useless bum Hawke), better graphics, and an actual conclusion that leaves you satisfied.

I never finished the game because I found the plot and majoirty of the characters crappy, add that with a really crappy combat system and I felt like ripping my mustache off.

[Fraevar]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Is it odd that Geralt appeals to me more than Female Hawke? I think it's because Geralt's actually interesting and not a useless bum. Not to mention having a fleshed out backstory(Blood of Elves).

I don't think it's odd, but I can understand why some won't share the sentiment. Hawke and Commander Shepard both suffer from Blank Slate Syndrome, as the developers try to make a character that's both the world-defining hero but still kept as a blank slate. For me, it hasn't worked and I find myself increasingly frustrated with both protagonists as I feel they're sorely underdeveloped for the sake of player entitlement.

I can fully understand why someone wouldn't like Geralt, but I like him on the fact that he's a character not a blank slate, and he has to abide the rules of the world he exists in. It gives a layer of depth that the two voiced BioWare protagonists have sorely been lacking, in my view. 

[Dragoonlordz]

Mr.House wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


~Clarification, both DA2 and FF13 are RPGs my position was based on even FF13 is a more fun RPG.

FF13 combat system was like being kicked in the gut, getting your eyes poked and then shot in the arm. It was horrible, painfull and annoying. FF13 was a disgrace, even Lighting played by the awesome Ali Hills could not save that game.

It's better to be kicked in the gut by FF13 than kicked in the balls by DA2 though.

[_Aine_]

Slugwood wrote...

Okay.  I really like your analysis, and I would be inclined to agree, but the problem is that by intentionally frustrating the player the vast majority will respond by feeling angry, not by empathizing with the protaganist.  Angry customers mean that this tactic, while good art, is terrible business.  And Bioware / EA have made it clear that the bottom line is a huge factor in their decisions with this IP ever since Origins.  

Because of this, unfortunately, I have to think that DA2 represents a miscalculation rather than a genuine artistic statement.

Ha.  True enough.  Art does the same thing...

I think you are right.  In games, people don't want to *remain* angered or used etc.  It is great as a story-telling thing as long as there is hope to become something greater.  Games are the one area where a huge win is possible for every single one of us. And here, we had a game that decided to kick us in the teeth and then give us every reason to hate every single person in Kirkwall. lol    If I could have told them all (everyone in Kirkwall, save Varric and a few others) to shove off, I would have.  I didn't care if I ever saw Hawke or Kirkwall again, my first playthrough. =D   Now I am fairly neutral about it. I like certain aspects, dislike others.  

[KnightofPhoenix]

shantisands wrote...
But in the end, maybe that is exactly what they wanted, a story that WAS frustrating but that made you feel.  I personally didn't see that I was given many real consequential choices, and that has been one of my lasting criticisms with the story, but that is a preference thing.

Thehn they shouldn't market it as the complete opposite.

I don't mind situations that take away choice from the PC and force moments of powerlessness. I have always been a supporter of how the DR was in Origins in large part because of that.

But to tell me that the game is all about determining a rise to power that did not happen, that one of those ways may have you command non-existant armies, that the entire story is Hawke embracing his destiny when he's slapped around by it, then I feel my intelligence is insulted. It's not even subtle lying (it's always present and I can tolerate it), it's just idiotic marketing with no concern over the long term.  Now, I will never pre-order a Bioware game on faith alone.

Now if the game really made me empathize with Hawke, the characters and the context, I may have appreciated Hawke's powerlessness. But most characters were uninteresting except the one person who actually does something (Aveline), and the other who keeps trying to convince Hawke to do something to no avail (Varric). For me, powerless =/= laziness and Hawke is just more lazy than powerless. The context was extremily badly written especially in Act 3 as well.

So at the end, there is really nothing or very little for me to appreciate in it (and what's there is not worth my 60$) and my dislike of it goes way beyond extremily unsubtle short sighted marketing.

[Mr.House]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


~Clarification, both DA2 and FF13 are RPGs my position was based on even FF13 is a more fun RPG.

FF13 combat system was like being kicked in the gut, getting your eyes poked and then shot in the arm. It was horrible, painfull and annoying. FF13 was a disgrace, even Lighting played by the awesome Ali Hills could not save that game.

It's better to be kicked in the gut by FF13 than kicked in the balls by DA2 though.

I rather have bandits coming out of nowhere then have frustrating gameplay, I take great care of my mustache, I don't want a poor game ruining it!

[Dragoonlordz]

Mr.House wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


~Clarification, both DA2 and FF13 are RPGs my position was based on even FF13 is a more fun RPG.

FF13 combat system was like being kicked in the gut, getting your eyes poked and then shot in the arm. It was horrible, painfull and annoying. FF13 was a disgrace, even Lighting played by the awesome Ali Hills could not save that game.

It's better to be kicked in the gut by FF13 than kicked in the balls by DA2 though.

I rather have bandits coming out of nowhere then have frustrating gameplay, I take great care of my mustache, I don't want a poor game ruining it!

See to me the wave system was one of the many frustrating gameplay aspects.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 21 mai 2011 - 10:42 .

[_Aine_]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Thehn they shouldn't market it as the complete opposite.

trust me, I agree with you.  I am not a fan, in the least, of how they marketed the game.   I personally hope think that was a disconnect for Bioware and whoever did their marketing/advertising.    

[ipgd]

Slugwood wrote...

Okay.  I really like your analysis, and I would be inclined to agree, but the problem is that by intentionally frustrating the player the vast majority will respond by feeling angry, not by empathizing with the protaganist.  Angry customers mean that this tactic, while good art, is terrible business.  And Bioware / EA have made it clear that the bottom line is a huge factor in their decisions with this IP ever since Origins.  

Because of this, unfortunately, I have to think that DA2 represents a miscalculation rather than a genuine artistic statement.

Hence why I'm always saying DA2 is going to be like MGS2. Hate it now guys, I'll be laughing a decade later when you're all using my hideously pathetic essays to show all your friends that you're totes down with deep art games

oh god i am such a loser ; ;

But yeah, it obviously wasn't a very good financial move. Still, it's nice to see a game every now and get that steps off the beaten path (or lays horrific disfiguring traps on the beaten path to torment you) for the sake of art, even if it means the development team will have to eat out of the dumpster for a while.

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...
Then again, people are so determined to hate the game I doubt it even matters.

Yes, that must be it. I wake up everyday and practise.

Anyways, suggesting that Hawke's powerlessness is some kind of plot twist that is supposed to deconstruct pre-established notions is just...well kind of ridiculous. I don't really care if there was a disonnect or not, at the end of the day, I feel my intelligence was insulted.

Which I wouldn't mind that much if the game delivered anything, and it did absolutely nothing for me. I am a sucker for the tragic and bittersweet, so powerlessness is not something I reject. I reject masking laziness with powerlessness, while claiming that the whole thing is about a rise to power.

[Tommyspa]

It's probably the best game I've ever played produced in 18 months.

[upsettingshorts]

Enemies coming from nowhere and the wave mechanic are two different, but closely related things.

Its possible to have waves come from somewhere, but DA2 didn't do a good job with this.

Also, I'm not entirely certain what the specific marketing gripes in this thread are asking for, a marketing campaign that said, "Rise to prominence but fail to prevent Kirkwall from being overcome by events?" I mean, I enjoyed that part of the game, but I wouldn't have been excited pre-launch by that prospect.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Anyways, suggesting that Hawke's powerlessness is some kind of plot twist that is supposed to deconstruct pre-established notions is just...well kind of ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous? 

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I reject masking laziness with powerlessness, while claiming that the whole thing is about a rise to power.

I reject making strong statements as a replacement for an argument.  Where does Hawke specifically demonstrate laziness?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Now if the game really made me
empathize with Hawke, the characters and the context, I may have
appreciated Hawke's powerlessness.

Ah there we go, subjectivity.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 mai 2011 - 10:47 .

[Xilizhra]

My solution is taking all the joy I can in the ending and feeling as though it's a moment of power.

[tonnactus]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


But to tell me that the game is all about determining a rise to power that did not happen,

If hawke side with the templars at the end of act 3,he becomes the viscount.Thats not a rise to power?

[Mr.House]

DAO had waves, but it did better with waves, DA2 did poorly with it, but I like Gaiders excuse for the parachuting bandits.