252 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

DA2 didn't drop the main quest in the player's lap right at the beginning. That's something DA2 did right.

DAO tells you pretty much as soon as you reach Ostagar what the game's core plot is. This is very common in modern games, and I don't like it.

DA2 doesn't do that. That's a huge plus for DA2.

[Nerevar-as]

DA2 doesn´t really have a main quest.

[Theagg]

Nerevar-as wrote...

DA2 doesn´t really have a main quest.

Not everything in life is a 'main quest' though, so in that respect its an improvement.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Nerevar-as wrote...

DA2 doesn´t really have a main quest.

I think that's a huge positive for DA2.

[Nerevar-as]

No main plot an improvement? So you like books with no story? (Was going to add movies with no plot, but that´s most blockbusters anyway).

[Aesieru]

I think you're misunderstanding.

Having an over-arching theme be the main plot rather than a main quest to follow is an improvement to some and bad in some forms.

For instance, in many books you have no idea what the main quest is versus a few side quests, in some you do, and in some it just flips it on you.

In this game the political standpoint is the arching theme and the main quest changes, first to get in the city, then to survive, then to get rich, and it all arches in surviving... until the means to survive for your family is no longer... prudent because of the situation, then it becomes a different thing.

It is not that the game is no longer focusing on a main quest.

Unfortunately, I can not praise anything DA 2 did because I did not enjoy anything they did.

So...

[FiachSidhe]

1. I like the character art more.
2. The combat flows better, no having to auto run and clumsily jockey for a position and auto attack. (Really? I have to go all the way up to, and around the elevated platform to the ramp just to aim my bow and fire at the darkspawn archer?)
3. The story is far more personal, and emotionally driven.
4. The companions are deeper, and seem more realistic than origins.
5. Armor looks better (especially Mage equipment).
6. The menu screens are easier to manage.
7. Being able to choose a personality is great.
8. Crafting is far more convenient.
9. Companion skill trees and Friend/Rival bonuses.
10. Merrill and Varric.

Modifié par FiachSidhe, 30 mai 2011 - 09:23 .

[Nerevar-as]

Aesieru wrote...

I think you're misunderstanding.

Having an over-arching theme be the main plot rather than a main quest to follow is an improvement to some and bad in some forms.

For instance, in many books you have no idea what the main quest is versus a few side quests, in some you do, and in some it just flips it on you.

In this game the political standpoint is the arching theme and the main quest changes, first to get in the city, then to survive, then to get rich, and it all arches in surviving... until the means to survive for your family is no longer... prudent because of the situation, then it becomes a different thing.

It is not that the game is no longer focusing on a main quest.

Unfortunately, I can not praise anything DA 2 did because I did not enjoy anything they did.

So...

Ah, now I get what you say. My problem is there´s no focus on any of the Acts, save for the Prologue and Act 2 end (which gets killed with the 30 min Life of Brian"duel").

[Persephone]

+ Friendship/Rivalry system. Including different romances. Develop that further.
+ Using party members in quests (Varric lying me out of a fight, Anders helping Varric's brother, Merrill checking someone for possession etc.)
+ Player personality. Develop that further.
+ Multiple quests for each companion. Each one better than those in DAO.
+ I'm in love with the new mage robe design
+ No "Defeat a big awzum dragon" storyline. BUT: Take hints from TW2 as to how that's done. And TW2's dragon beats Archie to a bloody pulp!
+ Mage combat. Kick ass!
+ Some moments of Bioware's writing brilliance. I shall always remember "If you cannot show me another way, do not brand me a tyrant!". etc.
+ Varric. Best friggin' companion EVER. I want that romance DLC!
+ I prefer the DAII inventory system & crafting. Though it needs work.
+ Elves & Qunari redesigns. They actually look like different races now!
+ Aveline. Badass, perfect, awesome! My kind of woman!
+ Hawke feels more REAL & PERSONAL than my Wardens

Modifié par Persephone, 30 mai 2011 - 09:29 .

[Aesieru]

Life of Brian?

I didn't know I was in the game.

Anyway...

The main quest in most games becomes insignificant especially in games like The Witcher 2 or other things, when you realize something entirely different or you get some new information... the focus on a main quest is really just a side quest that is merely the current focus of the player, until it changes into a new form..

But that's an argument of semantics and so... honestly, quest-style aside... the important thing is whether it has a focus or is just a lot of things happening randomly, and you're trying to make sense of it.

[Aradace]

The only things DA2 did wrong in my opinion was 2 things:

1.)  The obvious;  Re-use of dungeon maps etc.  On a scale of 1-10 this was about a 4 in terms of annoyance.  Not game breaking, but definately wish they hadnt did it this way.

2.) My old standby that I know I'll never get;  New Game Plus.  And seeing as how the way the mechanics are in this game, there's not even any sense in my asking for it to be added at some point so I wont.  For me NG+ is the difference between 5-6 playthroughs, and 12-24+ playthroughs.  It's the reason why I still play ME1 and ME2.

Other than that.  I can deal with the other things that some other people call "wrong" with the game.  Waves of enemies?  *shrugs*  I just imagine the jumping off the buildings etc so it doesnt really bother me.  The only thing is this regard that actually "bothers" me is when a group leader or whatnot calls for backup, they whistle and the mobs appear.  That's not so bad in most cases.  What makes it bad is when you're fighting say, a giant spider or, a Varterral and they also "whistle" to call in their "friends" lol.  Again, much like the re-used maps, it's not "gamebreaking" but a little annoying if not unnerving at times.

Beyond anything else I've already mentioned, anything else considered "wrong" with this game is people being very nitpicky and overall "bitter" that they didnt get Dragon Age: Origins 2.  It's humorous in one regard and sad in another.  Overall, I gave this game a solid 8/10.  The only reason I didnt give it a 10?  See my afore mentioned "complaints" about the game.  

In the end, I'll definitely be playing DA3.  The catch is that I'll first be renting it from gamefly.  Once I've played it and finished it to see if there is a NG+ option this time around, then I'll decide whether or not to click the "keep" button on my GF account (Keep if it does have NG+) or if Ill be putting it back in it's envelope and sending it back.  (If it doesnt have NG+ like Im pretty sure it wont lol)

[KnightofPhoenix]

Well this is going to be a difficult exercise.

1- more fleshed out specializations, though some animations need work (looking at blood wound)
2- Varric and Aveline
3- usually funny banter and some funny moments
4- be able to have companions help you intimidate / persuade, really liked that but they could have used it more after Act 2.
5- Gift system refined, it was meh in Origins.
6- Friendship and rivalry, though I'd call it a mixed success. It didn't go far enough and in some cases (like Sebastian) it didn't make much sense.
7- I actually thought Kirkwall *looked* interesting. But the lack of life and soul made it very dull very quickly.
8- Act 2 was not bad, but if held under scrutiny had a few problems in it. But fo me it's the only redeeming main thing about the game.
9- Some good music, like Qunari on the Rise. But needed more.

And I think that's about it.

[Aesieru]

I play games again for the story or for changes in the game-experience... not because I keep my stats or what not...

New Game Plus is a waste to me in my opinion and I've played games ... well at least once or twice each year usually... I mean played them all over.

The annoyance factor of everything wrong was a 9 in my eyes... and it was poor story and... well a lot of poor qualities... I just..

I've rarely had an experience where I enjoyed not a single moment of the game.

That's approaching Storms of Zehir or Killzone right there...

[Mecher3k]

grey_savant wrote...

Compare the tepid High Dragon fight in DA:O to the much more dynamic and challenging High Dragon fight in DA2. The boss fights were greatly improved.

Yea because constant spawning of absurd number of dragonlings and the High Dragon going on top of the cliff, which can be exploited btw, is such a vast difference from a the High Dragon fight in DA:O!

LOL.

You defenders of one of the biggest failures of the past 11 years are gasping at the air behind the straws at this rate.

[Aradace]

Mecher3k wrote...

grey_savant wrote...

Compare the tepid High Dragon fight in DA:O to the much more dynamic and challenging High Dragon fight in DA2. The boss fights were greatly improved.

Yea because constant spawning of absurd number of dragonlings and the High Dragon going on top of the cliff, which can be exploited btw, is such a vast difference from a the High Dragon fight in DA:O!

LOL.

You defenders of one of the biggest failures of the past 11 years are gasping at the air behind the straws at this rate.

Just an FYI,  The High Dragon in Origins can be exploited as well.  Much easier than in DA2 I might add.  Just saying.

I still think that it's a decent game on it's own merits.  I've definately played better games (ME comes to mind when considering games in general) and Ive definitely played worse (Dragon Age: Origins.)  And I still hold the opinion that it's primarily out of bitterness that folks didnt get Dragon Age: Origins 2 that they hold the game in such low regard.  And some who cant get passed that, are incapable of judging the game on it's own merits.  It doesnt make their opinion any less valid than say, mine.  But it does make them extremely biased.

Modifié par Aradace, 30 mai 2011 - 10:05 .

[Nerevar-as]

I think that if a combat against one main enemy lasts more than 5-10 minutes something is wrong. DA2 had ARW, Arishok, Meredith, and high Dragon (can´t compare with Origins HD as I never saw reason to fight it, but I enjoyed the AD fight more). Maybe it is different in lower dif settings, but almost half an hour of slowly eating away a life bar is no fun. Worst was that at least Meredith seemed to be immune to CCC.

On topic, I liked the skill trees, Varrick, Aveline, and Qunari in Act 2 up until the duel.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 30 mai 2011 - 10:06 .

[Aesieru]

I never managed to exploit the Dragon in either... so oh well.

I didn't enjoy any of the boss fights... too much health...

But long battles aren't bad if done well.

As long as Ganondorf doesn't appear with 11 forms.

[Aradace]

Aesieru wrote...

I never managed to exploit the Dragon in either... so oh well.

I didn't enjoy any of the boss fights... too much health...

But long battles aren't bad if done well.

As long as Ganondorf doesn't appear with 11 forms.

And as long as he doesnt laugh at you when he kills you and the "Game Over" screen pops up

[Mr.House]

No sustained abilities being shown in cutscenes was a huge bonus imho.

[Morroian]

What they did right:

• Party banter and the companions in general.
• Graphics were good.
• Skill trees were an improvement.
• VO/Wheel/tone icons although the paraphrases still need work.
• Friendship/rivalry although it still needs to be refined more.
• I'm one who likes the changes to combat although I do think it should be toned down to a mid point between DA2 and DAO.
• The writing for the Qunari portion.
• The broad thrust of the game in trying not to do a save the world type plot and being innovative with the narrative even though it didn't quite come off. I'd hate to see BW backslide in its plotting.
• Hawke
• Crafting

Modifié par Morroian, 30 mai 2011 - 10:46 .

[Daveros]

bEVEsthda wrote...

- Thankyou for so perfectly illustrating my point! And proving me right!
You liked DA2. Now what is "right" or not may be viewed as just opinion. ( I for instance, regard the notion, that DA2 is "streets ahead of DA:O already", as absolutely ludicrous. My opinion is that there is not one single instance where DA2 is ahead of DA:O) However, in the context of learning something from DA2, as in the failure DA2, "right" is not a matter of just opinion. As for the purpose of avoiding another failure, we cannot find out what DA2 did "right" from you or other persons who think DA2 is "one of the best games of recent years". Beacause this game didn't fail because of you.

I understand what you're saying a little better now, but I still struggle to agree with it.

Eventually were going to have to start talking about the game as a failure from either a financial aspect or from an opinion based viewpoint. From a financial aspect, it's tough; Dragon Age 2 has had a huge crusade of vitriolic hate spewed against it, which is tough enough for anything to handle, let alone something you have to spend $60 on.  So, arguabley, it's lost many sales due to that.

How to recoup those sales? Does one then go back to appeal to the core userbase only or does one then target the series at a different audience, citing the original userbase as a dead market? It's a tough call, and not one we can make. We can only cite what it would take for us to buy the next game in the series.  Which, again, leads us back to opinion, as what changes you would like may very well stop me from buying the next game. That's still a lost sale.

I still believe Dragon Age 2 to be the better game in the series, and that the changes it made from Origins were for the best. It did it right for me, to a huge extent. I enjoyed Origins but I really couldn't say it was a perfect game for me; Dragon Age 2 is for me. So it did something right. How much that means is another question; but I think it means more than you believe.

[Aesieru]

I disagree and understand EVE.

I have to say DA:2 doesn't have any saving graces worthwhile enough.

[TheJediSaint]

I'm mostly just echoing what other people have already stated on this thread, but here's my take of what DA2 did right.

I think that DA2's basic gameplay mechanics were much improved over DA:O, particularly in regards to combat. I also liked that we had a fully voiced character who's attitude was shaped by our choices. All the companions were well fleshed out, with interesting side quests and real contributions to the plot. I think the framing device worked very well for telling the main plot, which I also thought quite strong.

I don't think DA2 was a perfect game, I've stated in other threads what I think it's biggest issues are. But no game can really be perfect. In the end, unless you go in the overly strong negative preconceptions, it's an enjoyable way to spend 30-50 hours

[Mecha Tengu]

although dumbed down and more flashy

the casual trash in me likes the combat, I found it VERY fun