252 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

Companions were well written with interesting backstories, dialogue and banter. In particular Isabella, Merill and Anders were extremely well done. Unique appearances were a big plus for me, although I know a lot of people didn't them.

Main plot was a move in the right direction with a more realistic/grey/mature outlook on the world. There were some problems with it though, I felt certain bits were overdone (ie almost every mage was an evil bloodmage) and the ending really meant you hadn't achieved anything by design. You effectively leave Kirwall in a worse state than you arrive. However it was much more original with more realistic character motivations than Origins. I like the fact the story was more tightly tied to the main character, again I know a lot of people didn't like that.

Combat pacing was improved although I think it went a touch too far. Being able to dodge blows via your proximity was important. Specialisations were done significantly better. Overall there were fewer useless talents. Balance was slightly better. Overall combat was a little bit better but it was such a mixture of improvements and steps backwards that it is hard to judge. I think it would be better to settle on something and make incremental imrpovements than re-inventing everything. I think if incremetal improvements to the DAO system was made, it would have been better than what we had in DA2.

Inventory was better. Mirror of appearence changing and re-spec potions (were free DLC available straight away) improved the game quite a bit.

[Lemmiwinks1]

I thought the characters were lame, melodramatic, and totally uninteresting. Fenris is a melodramatic JRPG douche. Anders is an emotionally crippled wuss and totally different than in DA:A. Merril is Tali version 2.0 for her cuteness and naiveness at times. Isabella is Morrigan version 2.0 for her disbelief in love and general selfishness. Aveline is basically a waling statue of a man. Varric is cool, but it doesn't really go any deeper than that.

As for romances, they use the cheap tactic of melodrama for a more emotionally driven scene.

For family, well they just kind of all died or left and it was totally out of your control, and you, Hawke, seemed unchanged by any of it.

This game is absolutely emotionally dull, has 2D melodramatic characters, and has no plot, its just a "read your quest log to go do stuff, and check your mail box to go do stuff." Absolutely horrid and a huge let down from DA:O.

http://www.youtube.c...mudboy          <----watch this guy's 5 part disection of this game, its eye opening. You have to put in more than ~1.5 years to make a good game Bioware, I will never pre-order from you again.

[FiachSidhe]

Lemmiwinks1 wrote...

I thought the characters were lame, melodramatic, and totally uninteresting. Fenris is a melodramatic JRPG douche. Anders is an emotionally crippled wuss and totally different than in DA:A. Merril is Tali version 2.0 for her cuteness and naiveness at times. Isabella is Morrigan version 2.0 for her disbelief in love and general selfishness. Aveline is basically a waling statue of a man. Varric is cool, but it doesn't really go any deeper than that.

As for romances, they use the cheap tactic of melodrama for a more emotionally driven scene.

For family, well they just kind of all died or left and it was totally out of your control, and you, Hawke, seemed unchanged by any of it.

This game is absolutely emotionally dull, has 2D melodramatic characters, and has no plot, its just a "read your quest log to go do stuff, and check your mail box to go do stuff." Absolutely horrid and a huge let down from DA:O.

http://www.youtube.c...mudboy          <----watch this guy's 5 part disection of this game, its eye opening. You have to put in more than ~1.5 years to make a good game Bioware, I will never pre-order from you again.

It's weird, that you suddenly chose Dragon Age 2 to take umbrage with derivitive character traits when every Bioware game since KOTOR have used them.

Tali version 2.0? That's funny, as Tali is Mission Vao 2.0
Hell Carth has been in every Bioware game save Jade Empire.and Sonic.
Morrigan? Selfishness, yeah they're practically the same. <_<
Aveline - Your sexism does not make her a bad character.
Varric, any deeper than cool? Awesome rationilaztion man. That doesn't even make sense.

Do you have any GOOD reasons behind your complaints? Because I can reduce every character in Origins to the same, glib framework and make them all sound crappy too.

Modifié par FiachSidhe, 02 juin 2011 - 04:15 .

[ItsTheTruth]

FiachSidhe wrote...

Combat was highly flawed, slow, with an over reliance on bad auto-pathing. Auto attacking is the worst concept in video gaming besides turn based combat, having to waste skill points/attributes on conversation options is lame.

Well I loved the tactical combat in DAO and auto-attack is great when you try to control four characters at once. Smashing buttons doesn't make DA2 combat good, it is more like a lame God of War clone.

[Sylvius the Mad]

FiachSidhe wrote...

Auto attacking is the worst concept in video gaming besides turn based combat

Without auto-attacking, the player would need to trigger each attack individually.  That's horribly repetitive.

I simply refuse to play games that require such a thing.

Aside from removing two antiquated combat designs that made combat awkard, the system was exactly the same. You still cast spells using hot buttons, or by pausing the game and selecting from the wheel.
The ony difference is, you don't need the game to auto-move you around until it decides that you can attack, and it moves faster.

DA2 requires auto-moving just as often as DAO does.  When you trigger an attack that isn't in range, you get a shuffle.  In both games.  The only difference is the addition of DA2's closing attacks, which only applies with the auto-attack (something you just derided).

And DA2's combat moves too quickly, I think.

[Herbie_Hind]

The new combat system was terrible but optional, the option to turn it off was done right.
The new ability tree system was awesome, actually.

[KalDurenik]

Honestly...

*thinks*

Well ok honestly i cant think of anything MAJOR that was good except a few minor things (design on items / some lines of text / a quest here and there).

[Xewaka]

FiachSidhe wrote...
Combat was highly flawed, slow, with an over reliance on bad auto-pathing. Auto attacking is the worst concept in video gaming besides turn based combat,

I assume you were playing DA:O on console (which lacked the "click to go" option, that solves all pathing issues). Also, please explain me how do you control four characters at once when you have to trigger all attacks from each of the four manually.
Arguably the best and most long-kicking franchise in computer gaming (Civilization) is turn-based strategy with turn-based combat. Same can be said for Heroes of Might and Magic. Turn based gaming is the foundation of most entertainment forms, and is arguably more fulfilling to the tactical mind than letting go in a twitch-fest.

FiachSidhe wrote...
having to waste skill points/attributes on conversation options is lame.

It's only a waste if you decide to murder everything rather than talk your way out of conflicts. I take it you never played PnP RPG (which, we shouldn't forget, is the basis of cRPG, and the point from where they should draw the inspiration). Deciding between utility and combat effectiveness is one of the hallmarks of proper character building. It is an autobalance feature, and one that should see play more often.

Modifié par Xewaka, 02 juin 2011 - 08:48 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

I completely agree with Xewaka on turn-based gameplay.

[the_one_54321]

Xewaka wrote...
I only like reflex based mechanics.

Xewaka wrote...
There are people that hate reflex based mechanics and only like planning based mechanics.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I only like planning based mechanics.

No one can be right or wrong when all you're talking about is what you happen to find fun. Trying to claim to be right is like trying to shove your own foot in your mouth. It's funny for everyone watching until they realize you expect to be taken seriously.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

And DA2's combat moves too quickly, I think.

I think the pace is just right. The problem is the lack of a queque.

[In Exile]

Xewaka wrote...
It's only a waste if you decide to murder everything rather than talk your way out of conflicts. I take it you never played PnP RPG (which, we shouldn't forget, is the basis of cRPG, and the point from where they should draw the inspiration). Deciding between utility and combat effectiveness is one of the hallmarks of proper character building. It is an autobalance feature, and one that should see play more often.

I disagree with you that it's auto-balance. Combat doesn't ever resolve differently in CRPGs based on your ability to beat it faster. Whereas talk skills give you more content + greate rewards. If the way you fought actually impacted the story in significant ways, then I would agree with you it is auto-balance.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

And DA2's combat moves too quickly, I think.

I think the pace is just right. The problem is the lack of a queque.

I think DA2's pace is well-suited to warrior-based gameplay, while DAO's pace was better-suited to mage and archer-based gameplay.

Since I prefer the latter, I prefer DAO's pace.

That said, playing DA2 with a S&S warrior the speed doesn't really bother me (though I'm just controlling the one character - I don't see how I could keep track of all four characters simultaneously at this higher speed).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 02 juin 2011 - 06:20 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I disagree with you that it's auto-balance. Combat doesn't ever resolve differently in CRPGs based on your ability to beat it faster. Whereas talk skills give you more content + greate rewards. If the way you fought actually impacted the story in significant ways, then I would agree with you it is auto-balance.

Things like regenerating health really damage this.  If there was some in-game benefit to being more skilled at combat, then it would be an auto-balance.

That said, I think there should be.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I think DA2's pace is well-suited to warrior-based gameplay, while DAO's pace was better-suited to mage and archer-based gameplay.

Since I prefer the latter, I prefer DAO's pace.

I thought DA2 worked much better for mages and archer.

That said, playing DA2 with a S&S warrior the speed doesn't really bother me (though I'm just controlling the one character - I don't see how I could keep track of all four characters simultaneously at this higher speed).

I always control all 4 characters and never use tactics. DA2 improved expotentially for me when I learned hold cancelled all tactics. It's just pause + action + pause + action + pause + action with F1/F2/F3/F4 interspercsed..

[erynnar]

Xewaka wrote...

FiachSidhe wrote...
having to waste skill points/attributes on conversation options is lame.

It's only a waste if you decide to murder everything rather than talk your way out of conflicts. I take it you never played PnP RPG (which, we shouldn't forget, is the basis of cRPG, and the point from where they should draw the inspiration). Deciding between utility and combat effectiveness is one of the hallmarks of proper character building. It is an autobalance feature, and one that should see play more often.

Yes, spending points in coersion if you are just Hawke, mass murderer and bloodlusting merc, is a waste. Hawke had one oppurtunity to talk people out of fighting that I remember. The other times it was companions who did it . I Idid like involving them, but I would like more opportunities to have Hawke talk her way out since it would give me more of a sense of being my Hawke instead of just along for the ride.

DA did involving companions in convos right (one more for my tally).

Modifié par erynnar, 02 juin 2011 - 06:26 .

[the_one_54321]

In Exile wrote...
I always control all 4 characters and never use tactics. DA2 improved exponentially for me when I learned hold cancelled all tactics. It's just pause + action + pause + action + pause + action with F1/F2/F3/F4 interspersed..

And here I absolutely adored programming all my characters so that I hardly had to touch anyone except the PC.

[Zjarcal]

erynnar wrote...
Hawke had one oppurtunity to talk people out of fighting that I remember.

Just off the top of my head I can think of three, the dalish clan at the end of Merrill's quest, the templars in the Dalish Clan early in act 2, and the people who attempt to attack you for searching for Anders.

There were more that I'm simply not recalling right now.

EDIT: There were also the mercenaries who had the human/dalish kid (always forget his name).

SECOND EDIT: Also, the templars outside the cave where Grace was hidden.

In all those cases it was Hawke who could do the talking out of the fight (even if you could also have a companion do it).

Modifié par Zjarcal, 02 juin 2011 - 06:33 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Herbie_Hind wrote...

The new combat system was terrible but optional, the option to turn it off was done right.

In what way is the new combat system optional?

In Exile wrote...

I always control all 4 characters and never use tactics. DA2 improved expotentially for me when I learned hold cancelled all tactics. It's just pause + action + pause + action + pause + action with F1/F2/F3/F4 interspercsed.

I control all four characters, as well, but that often involves putting them in situations where I want them to auto-attack.  I use auto-attack a lot, with almost all of their combat talents triggered manually by me.

I do us the tactics screen to add abilities that are inconsequential (melee talents that do more damage, for example, but never knockdowns or stuns), or to set stamina-level triggers for sustained abilities, but for the most part my contribution to combat is to place the characters and then I watch them fight (usually from a mage's perspective).  I intervene only when I need to stun someone or cast a spell.

Now that I think about it, the speed probably wouldn't bother me at all if I had a better camera with which to observe the combat.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

In Exile wrote...
I always control all 4 characters and never use tactics. DA2 improved exponentially for me when I learned hold cancelled all tactics. It's just pause + action + pause + action + pause + action with F1/F2/F3/F4 interspersed..

And here I absolutely adored programming all my characters so that I hardly had to touch anyone except the PC.

That's fun, too.

It would be even more fun if we didn't have to touch the PC, either.  I'd like to deselect everyone and have tactics run the entire encounter.

The devs have this ability during development.  They had it in DAO, and they had it in DA2, but they removed it from the release version of both games.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Merrill. That's about it.

[Siven80]

I like the unique appearance of the companions and their own skill tree.

But the companions were quite weak in that they had little character. When i compare them to the TW2 characters i find myself preferring the TW2 characters as they seem to have personalities and ideals that clearly define them far better than the DA2 characters are.
Part of the weakness of DA2s companions imo is that they are all bisexual in an attempt to pander all fans, rather than having all out straight or gay characters which imo would strengthen them as characters.

Other than the terrible waves, i liked the combat...but i also liked the slower DAO combat...apart from the shuffling. A mix of the two would be good imo.

I like the skill trees, its much better than the linear way DAO had them. But i miss non-combat abilities.

Modifié par Siven80, 02 juin 2011 - 06:45 .

[Realmzmaster]

Zjarcal wrote...

erynnar wrote...
Hawke had one oppurtunity to talk people out of fighting that I remember.

Just off the top of my head I can think of three, the dalish clan at the end of Merrill's quest, the templars in the Dalish Clan early in act 2, and the people who attempt to attack you for searching for Anders.

There were more that I'm simply not recalling right now.

EDIT: There were also the mercenaries who had the human/dalish kid (always forget his name).

SECOND EDIT: Also, the templars outside the cave where Grace was hidden.

In all those cases it was Hawke who could do the talking out of the fight (even if you could also have a companion do it).

Hawke also had the option not to use the companions and basically step all over there toes. If you remember when Aveline confronts Jeven in Act 3. Hawke can choose to speak.  Also when trying to find the Quarni delegation you can choose to use or not use Aveline in the Hanged Man. There are also other situations

[Xewaka]

In Exile wrote...
I thought DA2 worked much better for mages and archer.

My playthrough as an archer, experienced the problems with frontloading damage on long autoattack animations disagres with this statement. Having your character inmobilized and unable to respond for a second, making the game responsiveness nonexistant, was quite annoying.