1373 réponses à ce sujet

[dkm945]

Thank you, Mr. Laidlaw, for designing a highly enjoyable game. Sure it had plenty of flaws, but they didn't pervade my experience with the game. Hell, I put in more hours with this game in a shorter period of time than any other game I've ever played (50 hours in 5 days, since I had to go back to college). Probably too much, but I don't regret it one bit. Very engrossing, like a good rpg should be.
Also, props to you for taking the criticism (to put it mildly) like a champ.

Modifié par dkm945, 28 mai 2011 - 08:13 .

[Firky]

I think DA designers get "points" for making a party based game, and for allowing for customisation/gender. I think The Witcher 2 gets "points" for interactive world and C&C.

These days, and probably historically speaking too, it's hard to find a game that ticks every single box on the list of expected RPG elements, so I tend to look at how a game works as a coherent unit.

I think TW2 works because it has integrity, it just focusses on its strengths and plough you if you don't like it. (And many people do like interactive world/C&C anyway.) I think DAII works because the stat/ability mix is well balanced so combat works, and there are many clever devices employed to ensure that the story is told in a evocative manner. (Although, if someone was more after an Origins style approach, I can see why this might have the opposite effect.)

I guess many games will take what elements from the RPG genre they want to use, and go from there. (I still miss food from The Witcher, dammit, but I think I'm probably the only one.)

[Pandemonic IX]

That's cool! Can't wait to see Griffins! (Griffins are a lie!) :-)

[fightright2]

Pandemonic IX wrote...

That's cool! Can't wait to see Griffins! (Griffins are a lie!) :-)

*Scratches griffins off her list between the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy*

[Xewaka]

edin_marty wrote...

 I'm very late to this thread and doubt anyone will read it, but still....

I thought DA:2 was a very good game and took the franchise in a much needed direction. I though the combat was engaging and there were enough difficult bosses to offset the easy in-betweens. And I think we can all agree easy kills on meat-and-potatoes badguys has always been an RPG staple. how many goblins did you kill in Neverwinter Nights? 

It's really important to push the genre in new directions. There will always be griefers - people who wish we were still playing Baldur's Gate II. Times have changed, tastes have changed. If you want a tabletop game where you have to remember to drink water and rest to recover health, play one. I can't think of anything more boring, nerdy, and lame. More, it reflects a poorly placed nostalgia. BG2 was good, but it was also fiddly, had unclear quest paths, and, while immersive, didn't have a patch on the immersion you get nowadays with 3D graphics.

It didn't need 3D graphics to be inmersive. The narrative quality was enough to inmerse you in the story. It had a colorful cast of available companions. It was more reactive to the player's actions than DA 2. Do you remember the mage hunters in Athkatla? I expected pretty much the same from the Templars in DA 2. I didn't get it. Baldur's Gate 2 is more inmersive and more reactive to the player than DA 2.

edin_marty wrote...
Removing FF on spells was a great idea in my opinion. It opened up skills that never got used in previous D&D-based (however loosely!) games. What's the point of 'tactical combat' if it means you only end up using magic missile over and over again because you don't want to risk a fireball killing your party?

Risk/reward assessment apart, you are factually wrong. Fireball is a great opener for monster clusters. Even if you don't want to use it, there's entangle, Hold Person, Horror, Summon Monster, Otiluke's Elastic Orb, Call Lightning, Cromatic Orb, Aggnazzar's flame -just to name a scant few-, and that's without entering into counters, buffs, and utilities. That you couldn't be bothered to learn to micro and use skills effectively doesn't mean that they weren't useful. Removing FF simplifies the game. Removing it for PC abilities but not for NPCs destroys the setting internal coherency. Guess what? Coherent settings make for a better experience.

edin_marty wrote...
No, I completely disagree with the reviews that knock DA2 for bad combat. I think this is a fresh take on a tired and increasingly irrelevant genre, and it was a massive success. Any consolifiaction has been to the game's benefit, not detriment. RPG snobbery is an epic, epic fail. The only criticism I would mirror is the recycled environments.
I've been RPG gaming for 20 years and I can say, without hyperbole, that this is on my top 10. It's not my favourite, but it's a solid game and I like the direction Bioware have taken the franchise.

The problem with DA 2 is not one of concept, but one of execution. I see some of the ideas behind the combat as solid concepts, but they were horribly implemented. The wave mechanic is used as a crutch to pad encounters, rather than as an engaging dynamic encounter creation. The Force mechanics, while intriguing in theory, need a very hard, long look and a revision of its inner workings. The frontloading of attack damage destroy the snap-reaction vignettes, as animations must run to conclusion before the character answers to your command (try to shoot and run with an archer rogue and you'll see what I mean). The closing attacks, ignoring for a moment how ridiculous they look on dagger rogues, destroy the pathfinding, and make the use of architecture a hindrance rather than a boon: Commanding Aveline to attack only to have her smash her shield agaisnt the wall without reaching the enemy was a constant through my game.
DA 2 needed a much higher level of polish to implement the (admitedly good) ideas it presents to the player in a way that is actually workable.

Modifié par Xewaka, 28 mai 2011 - 08:33 .

[In Exile]

Xewaka wrote...
Which is a pity. Ugly characters tend to be more memorable, because they're made or break in their characterization, and thus extra effort is put on giving them rounded, appealing personalities. It's the only thing the character can rely on to reach the player.
Ugly characters are usually the best ones.

I prefer hubris. A character that's brilliant, charismatic.. and has some fatal set of flaws. A liar, narcisistic, and lazy - for example. Someone you could look at and think, if only not for x this person would have changed the world.

[Pandemonic IX]

fightright2 wrote...

Pandemonic IX wrote...

That's cool! Can't wait to see Griffins! (Griffins are a lie!) :-)

*Scratches griffins off her list between the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy*

Don't worry! There's still hope for Santa!  (He's a lie too)

Modifié par Pandemonic IX, 28 mai 2011 - 08:37 .

[MorrigansLove]

Just give us a good story, Bioware! We can wait!

[Dormiglione]

Everwarden wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

It's nothing new, people have been calling BioWare personnel liars for a long time. It's their choice, it just doesn't really add anything. What's Laidlaw gonna say?

An honest acknowledgement of Dragon Age 2's significant flaws would be a start. All I saw was him acknowledging that people have been complaining, and those complaints will be 'examined'. He said he's aware of concerns, not that he accepts that any of them are valid or that there are any plans to go in a different direction.

I think that Laidlaw and the Bioware Devs are aware of the flaws and recognize them also as major issues. But you cant expect that they would official apologize. Maybe they would like to but i dont know if they are allowed to.

You are right when you say "All i saw was him acknowledging..", same was my impression of his post. Cant help, i believe it only when i see that the next Story DLC or the next DA installment do not have the same issues.

[Dormiglione]

Persephone wrote...

Everwarden wrote...

He didn't admit any problems in Dragon Age 2, he said he was "aware that people had concerns". That isn't the same thing. That's like someone making a public apology to the effect of, "We're sorry if what we said offended anyone", rather than actually conceding fault in something one has said. 

Missed this part?

Further, I'm not only aware of the concerns, but I agree that there are aspects of DA II that not only can but must be improved in future installments. And that is precisely our intent.

I believe that its their intent to improve it for the next installments. But this statement is just vague.

[Riloux]

edin_marty wrote...

 I'm very late to this thread and doubt anyone will read it, but still....

I thought DA:2 was a very good game and took the franchise in a much needed direction. I though the combat was engaging and there were enough difficult bosses to offset the easy in-betweens. And I think we can all agree easy kills on meat-and-potatoes badguys has always been an RPG staple. how many goblins did you kill in Neverwinter Nights? 

The enemies in DA2 are only difficult because they have too much health and come in waves. There's no tactical aspect to their difficulty. 


I'm not against new directions if they raise bars rather than lowering them. Look at the Witcher 2, they successfuly made a tactical, challenging, extremely fun and unique game that can be enjoyed by both console (potentially) and PC players. They set the bars for several key next-gen RPG aspects, and now Bioware will be expected to raise them. We can only wait and see what they do next, and I'm sorry, but Dragon Age 2 was not by any means a good RPG.

Modifié par Riloux, 28 mai 2011 - 09:01 .

[Dormiglione]

@BeefoTheBold

Honestly, Kudos to you for your post. And i agree with you.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/7475089/39#7482916

[Dormiglione]

Maverick827 wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

With all due respect, your perspective is not the one that matters. The customer's perspective is the important one.

With no due respect, not only are you incorrect, but you are not all customers and thus probably shouldn't speak as if you are. You know of maybe one thousand disgruntled fans (on the internet, no less) out of millions of consumers: to believe this number is significant is simply ignorant.

- Sales do not reflect that Dragon Age 2 goes the direction that a RPG fan wants
- Lot of professional critics review gave DA 2 a mediocre score
- Lot of players gave DA2 bad score and pointed out the four major issues with DA2

So, who is blind? How its possible that a "few disgruntled" people have such a loud voice and impact on critics, reviews and sales? 

[Dormiglione]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

People are excited about griffons because they are supposed to be extinct.

Nah mostly we're pretending to be excited about griffons to annoy the hell out of Wynne.

Agree, would like to see Wynne's face when a griffon land in front of her.

[Tommy6860]

Persephone wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Everwarden wrote...

Ottemis wrote...

You expect fullblown details now? That's not realistic and I hope you realise that.
If that was what you expected I'd dare say you set yourself up for disappointment intentfully.

No, I expect* honest admissions of their mistakes. That didn't happen, and it won't, but it still should.

*"Expect" in this context doesn't mean I actually anticipate this will happen, this is just what I would require to happen to restore my faith as a customer in Bioware.

I agree with all of your sentiments in nearly all of the post you've made regarding DA2. I (personally) think the game wasn't good, but I will never ever say that Mike, Bioware or anyone involved with creating the game should say they made a mistake; that's just unfair really. They took the game in a direction where I didn't like it, but they did it with the intent to move in a different direction and attract a larger crowd. I think they know the consequences of the changes. Wanting them to admit a mistake is only for the purpose of one's self and not some good of the community. If they did do that, then what does that say to those who liked the game?

That we don't matter. It's a sentiment I've had tossed at me anyhow. (Not by the devs though)

Maybe you're just taking it too personally. I guess "we" is a collective, or you are "we".

Seriously though, you like the game, what other validation or approval do you need?

We as in yours truly and several of my friends here who feel the same way at times. I do not need anyone's approval. Civility will do just fine.

Best to speak one's own mind, lest you misspeak for all, anyway....

Yes, civility does do fine and I agree. But is civility enough? I find some people here are very civil, yet disingenuous and that is just grating to me.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 28 mai 2011 - 09:42 .

[Serpieri Nei]

Dormiglione wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

With all due respect, your perspective is not the one that matters. The customer's perspective is the important one.

With no due respect, not only are you incorrect, but you are not all customers and thus probably shouldn't speak as if you are. You know of maybe one thousand disgruntled fans (on the internet, no less) out of millions of consumers: to believe this number is significant is simply ignorant.

- Sales do not reflect that Dragon Age 2 goes the direction that a RPG fan wants
- Lot of professional critics review gave DA 2 a mediocre score
- Lot of players gave DA2 bad score and pointed out the four major issues with DA2

So, who is blind? How its possible that a "few disgruntled" people have such a loud voice and impact on critics, reviews and sales? 

Only four...

Recycling Maps/Instances/Beastiary
Waves of Mystical Ninjas
Limited Dialogue/Interaction with Companions
Lack of Race/Character Customization
Inability to Upgrade Companion Armor
Restricted Companion Roles
Poorly Executed Framed Narative
Loot/Drops – 90% of which are vendored
Trees/Abilities/Specializations – less variety
Tactical Combat - consisted of increased HP/resistances - which made Companions a greater threat to Hawke then the enemy
Dialogue Wheel - Failing to match response chosen
Limited Choices - No Consequences
Little to No Replay Value
Equipment Rating – Not Accurate/Bugged
Dual Wield - restricted to the Rogue class
Lazy Side Quests – turn in random item to random generated npc - here's your dead skeleton sir
Crafting - Marginalized

and this is just a short, condensed list

Modifié par Serpieri Nei, 28 mai 2011 - 09:44 .

[blaalindorm]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

@BeefoTheBold

Honestly, Kudos to you for your post. And i agree with you.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/7475089/39#7482916

*gives a standing ovation at BeefoTheBold's post*

Bravo sir/m'am. Summed up my feelings perfectly.

Mr. Laidlaw does seem to make games based on HIS personal taste, and not on the statement of being the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate". And Griffons does not an RPG make, Mr. Laidlaw.

+1  I sure won't be pre-ordering DA3, will wait to see what everyone makes of it.

Skyrim will soon be here anyhow...

[Serpieri Nei]

blaalindorm wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

@BeefoTheBold

Honestly, Kudos to you for your post. And i agree with you.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/7475089/39#7482916

*gives a standing ovation at BeefoTheBold's post*

Bravo sir/m'am. Summed up my feelings perfectly.

Mr. Laidlaw does seem to make games based on HIS personal taste, and not on the statement of being the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate". And Griffons does not an RPG make, Mr. Laidlaw.

+1  I sure won't be pre-ordering DA3, will wait to see what everyone makes of it.

Skyrim will soon be here anyhow...

Aye, very well said by all,  The Witcher 2 has already proven to be a vastly superior game to DA2. And we have many more on their way Skyrim, Demon Forge, and several others.

[In Exile]

Serpieri Nei wrote...
Aye, very well said by all,  The Witcher 2 has already proven to be a vastly superior game to DA2. And we have many more on their way Skyrim, Demon Forge, and several others.

The Witcher 2 proved to be a well executed DA2. But the gameplay elements that were so well done in TW2 would push DA2 even further away from Origins. As would Skyrim.

I just find the comparisons confusing. Many of the problems you listed with DA2 are central design elements to TW2. I fall on the side of DA2 failed to deliver... but how do you reconcile the two?

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

With all due respect, your perspective is not the one that matters. The customer's perspective is the important one.

With no due respect, not only are you incorrect, but you are not all customers and thus probably shouldn't speak as if you are. You know of maybe one thousand disgruntled fans (on the internet, no less) out of millions of consumers: to believe this number is significant is simply ignorant.

- Sales do not reflect that Dragon Age 2 goes the direction that a RPG fan wants
- Lot of professional critics review gave DA 2 a mediocre score
- Lot of players gave DA2 bad score and pointed out the four major issues with DA2

So, who is blind? How its possible that a "few disgruntled" people have such a loud voice and impact on critics, reviews and sales? 

Only four...

Recycling Maps/Instances/Beastiary
Waves of Mystical Ninjas
Limited Dialogue/Interaction with Companions
Lack of Race/Character Customization
Inability to Upgrade Companion Armor
Restricted Companion Roles
Poorly Executed Framed Narative
Loot/Drops – 90% of which are vendored
Trees/Abilities/Specializations – less variety
Tactical Combat - consisted of increased HP/resistances - which made Companions a greater threat to Hawke then the enemy
Dialogue Wheel - Failing to match response chosen
Limited Choices - No Consequences
Little to No Replay Value
Equipment Rating – Not Accurate/Bugged
Dual Wield - restricted to the Rogue class
Lazy Side Quests – turn in random item to random generated npc - here's your dead skeleton sir
Crafting - Marginalized

and this is just a short, condensed list

There is only one thing in this list that I disagree with and I know alot of people didn't like the wave after wave of enemies.  I do like it and thought it was realistic.  When you go back and play DAO now, the combat seems so slow.  Now that I've played DA2 and really understand how to kill those enemies the easier it seems and now when playing the game it seems easy even with the waves and waves of enemies.  I like the idea of struggling in a fight to win.  I appreciate the challenge. 

When DA2 was in development and following the discussions here on the forums, this was something that I did ask for and I think alot of other players did as well and we got it.  This is something in DA2 that I do like. 

[Kroepoek]

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

With all due respect, your perspective is not the one that matters. The customer's perspective is the important one.

With no due respect, not only are you incorrect, but you are not all customers and thus probably shouldn't speak as if you are. You know of maybe one thousand disgruntled fans (on the internet, no less) out of millions of consumers: to believe this number is significant is simply ignorant.

- Sales do not reflect that Dragon Age 2 goes the direction that a RPG fan wants
- Lot of professional critics review gave DA 2 a mediocre score
- Lot of players gave DA2 bad score and pointed out the four major issues with DA2

So, who is blind? How its possible that a "few disgruntled" people have such a loud voice and impact on critics, reviews and sales? 

Only four...

Recycling Maps/Instances/Beastiary
Waves of Mystical Ninjas
Limited Dialogue/Interaction with Companions
Lack of Race/Character Customization
Inability to Upgrade Companion Armor
Restricted Companion Roles
Poorly Executed Framed Narative
Loot/Drops – 90% of which are vendored
Trees/Abilities/Specializations – less variety
Tactical Combat - consisted of increased HP/resistances - which made Companions a greater threat to Hawke then the enemy
Dialogue Wheel - Failing to match response chosen
Limited Choices - No Consequences
Little to No Replay Value
Equipment Rating – Not Accurate/Bugged
Dual Wield - restricted to the Rogue class
Lazy Side Quests – turn in random item to random generated npc - here's your dead skeleton sir
Crafting - Marginalized

and this is just a short, condensed list

There is only one thing in this list that I disagree with and I know alot of people didn't like the wave after wave of enemies.  I do like it and thought it was realistic.

Enemies dropping randomly from the sky is realistic. Enemies randomly appearing out of thin-air is realistic.

Modifié par Fix1o0, 28 mai 2011 - 10:36 .

[Tommy6860]

In Exile wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...
Aye, very well said by all,  The Witcher 2 has already proven to be a vastly superior game to DA2. And we have many more on their way Skyrim, Demon Forge, and several others.

The Witcher 2 proved to be a well executed DA2. But the gameplay elements that were so well done in TW2 would push DA2 even further away from Origins. As would Skyrim.

I just find the comparisons confusing. Many of the problems you listed with DA2 are central design elements to TW2. I fall on the side of DA2 failed to deliver... but how do you reconcile the two?

Hmm, that's an interesting perspective really, and I agree. They are totally different games. Bioware, IMO, has mainly been about well written scripts and deep stories. They have never been noted for great game mechanics, but I buy into them because of the rich stories and and they're adept at script writing. I haven't played TW2 yet and won't for a long time, it isn't my cup of tea for me being the hardcore RPGer. I have TW and I just cannot compare the two games. If only going by RPG elements, then if I were to compare that aspect, TW wins hands down. The story in DA2, IMO, is well thought out, but the RPG elements just seem stripped away. But I do see simialrities, so if one is not liked, then it should be universal.

I want for Bioware to make DA, not for DA to be along the lines of TW, and therefore, I think you make a good point here.