1373 réponses à ce sujet

[marshalleck]

Atakuma wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ottemis wrote...

So yeah, it's odd. But I don't believe they could have 'fixed' it.

Exactly. Which is why they probably should have reconsidered the story they were trying to tell with DA2, instead of just blundering ahead regardless under the assumption their audience was either too dumb or indiscriminate to care. 

Unless the story is set in Tevinter or you are a warden, being a mage is going to be a problem, they wrote themselves into a corner with their own lore.

Bang. Awesome. Make it happen. Or actually, maybe not. I don't know if I care anymore. I think I do since I still post here, but I don't feel it. 

Modifié par marshalleck, 28 mai 2011 - 05:55 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yes for the Tevinter Imperium. Show us real civilization for a change.

[EugeneBi]

I think this game is beyond redemption. Just drop it and instead of DA3 release DAO2 with discount to DA2 owners.

I understand a lot of people liked direction DA2 took - they deserve their own separate IP, leave DA universe where it was set by DAO.

[marshalleck]

You know, setting the game in Tevinter would have been much more effective at showing us the supposed downside/inequities of what happens when mages aren't repressed by the Templars and Chantry. Certainly it would have been much more interesting than a city which just makes people insane because it's built on a giant tear in the veil--a revelation only made by digging through one's codex.

Modifié par marshalleck, 28 mai 2011 - 06:01 .

[Atakuma]

Filament wrote...

Rumor has it DA3 has you as a Seeker, so if that ends up being true, you'd probably be a "sanctioned mage" like in Origins.

Where did you here that?

[In Exile]

Ostagar2011 wrote...
Did it? Or did DA2 just move an epic, complex, mature, classic RPG into the casual action adventure genre? And you even managed to bungle the implementation of that... Besides, were 4 million copies of DA:O too little "potential"? At what point in the sales charts will you stop diluting into the lowest common denominator? 6 million? 25 million?

You have to look at cost, too, if we are looking at it from a business standpoint. 18 months was certainly too little, but 26 months might not be. And DA:O was in development for give or take 4 years (or maybe 3 & 1/2), which is closer to 42-48 months. 

News at 11 - when you cut out a ton of RPG conventions to attract more casual gamers, you aren't doing RPG's any favors. If you want to do something for RPG fans, remove that acronym from DA3 (if as you say, you believe DA2 direction is the "future") - your silly game will shame it.

The issue, of course, is that you won't find agreement as to what makes a good RPG. Some people believe very strongly that an RPG is about stat-based combat customization, e.g. roll playing. Others believe in role playing. Others want role assumption. Some want lots of customizability in their character for little reactivity. Others want less customizabilty for more reactivity.

RPG fans aren't a hive mind. DA2's problem wasn't this broadly worded part of the design philosophy - it was the execution.

The thing is - DA:O was not at all a game like old school RPGs. It had an isometric view and a silent PC, full party control and the quasi-tactical wargame combat of the old D&D RPGs... but there were lots of substantive differences in how the game played. I was there for how heavily criticized the game was for departuring from real oldschool RPGs, with features like the Origins being called a travesty and a clear way to reduce RP.

[neppakyo]

Filament wrote...

It's a rumor, I heard it from nowhere.

I don't remember, somewhere on the forum someone had a somewhat convincing idea about that.

Heh. So a seeker. aka SPECTRE from ME.

Ahh rumours and silliness.

[Atakuma]

Filament wrote...

It's a rumor, I heard it from nowhere.

I don't remember, somewhere on the forum someone had a somewhat convincing idea about that.

Well, it's a cool idea anyway.

[In Exile]

DownyTif wrote...

Mr. Laidlaw, I read a lot of posts during development of DA2 from people on this forum that were warning Bioware of the choices made in the design and were disagreeing. There was a LOT of people trying to communicate their fear during development. They have been ignored and DA2 came out and alienated a lot of people.

The community wasn't right on the money at all. No one said: DA2 will have ridiculous and frustrarting wave combat, recycled areas that are so common they are integrated into every aspect of the main plot, a PC that cannot rise to power and is a stooge through most of the game, and effectively no choice that shapes the world.

We never got the game we were told DA2 was going to be, and the features it faile to deliver and the state of the game is different than the uproar over the design of it.

[marshalleck]

neppakyo wrote...

Filament wrote...

It's a rumor, I heard it from nowhere.

I don't remember, somewhere on the forum someone had a somewhat convincing idea about that.

Heh. So a seeker. aka SPECTRE from ME.

Ahh rumours and silliness.

Oh my zomg, get ur Mass Age out of my Dragon Effect etc. etc!

[erynnar]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Razor_Zeng wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

One peice of advice I guess could give given DA2 was designed to attract this 'new audience' I suggest they look at the results of "broadening the fanbase" has done to the DA franchise regarding sales of DA2 which clearly showed this has not worked and won't work. So applying the same broadening to DA3 will probably cost them just as badly. My advice is drop this tower of babel idiology and just do what was best at and let that speak for itself, after all thats why EA bought you guys and wasn't because you sucked at what you did, do not throw away your old fanbase to attract this new shiny gimmick EA dangle in front of you.

aS gAMEiNFORMER SAID: "On all platforms, Dragon Age II caters to an audience that didn’t
connect with Origins, while alienating those who did"

Thats me. I struggled to finish one playthrough of DAO. Pretty much had to force myself to play the game to get it over and done with (Awakening was better - got given it as a gift). DA2 I have already beaten twice and am on a third playthrough.

That's what most of us here had to do with DA2, as you did with DAO we had to force ourselves to finish or even attempt to replay it and a lot of us failed to drag up enough enthusiasm to do so.  So I guess the big question is how many felt that way about DAO compared to how many felt that way about DA2, if sales are to go by then the former new audience wished to attract is smaller or atleast less successfully done and the latter is larger audience that are put off from the changes made.

I was in the loved the previous game camp and forced myself to play the first playthrough (rogue) all the way, still have to go back and fix something and finish again but I just can't. My second was less painful though still a tedious grind in large swaths of it as a mage (that and the glaring plot holes of playing a mage just made me facepalm so much I'm surprised my forehead isn't flat). Still, mage was more enjoyable than the rogue by far.

And Dragoon that is the question that goes begging doesn't it? Was DA2 profitable enough, seems so if we are getting DLC and DA3. But the number are what I am interested in. Were there enough of the new shiny audience they were looking for high enough in numbers to replace and exceed the numbers of the old fan base.

[Aaleel]

I think if they had a game in the Tevinter it would just strengthen the fact that mages need to be locked up.  They oppress elves and have open and legal slavery, and slave trade.  Deep into the black market.  They war with the Qunari constantly, and would war with the rest of Thedus if they weren't tied up fighting the Qunari.

If it followed the lore, they would portray mages in a far worse light than the ones in Kirkwall. 

With the way the game ended, I can't see any expansion or DA3 taking place in any other place than Orlais.

[Ottemis]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Same here. It's like they were going for another "Dark ritual" choice, yet the writers just conviniently forgot about Meredith making Anders tranquil, thereby preventing his *END-GAME SPOILERS BELOW!!!*

He's a Warden though, asmuch as I don't agree with it, I believe it's pretty much a 'get out of jail free-card'
Even though, weirdly, this is contradicted in the game aswell, as Anders in in hiding, afraid the templar hounds would sniff out his practice.

Modifié par Ottemis, 28 mai 2011 - 06:14 .

[neppakyo]

marshalleck wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

Filament wrote...

It's a rumor, I heard it from nowhere.

I don't remember, somewhere on the forum someone had a somewhat convincing idea about that.

Heh. So a seeker. aka SPECTRE from ME.

Ahh rumours and silliness.

Oh my zomg, get ur Mass Age out of my Dragon Effect etc. etc!

So, does that mean we'll have a new seeker VO named Captain Shaeperd, who sails on the most advanced steamship called the SR1 Normandy?

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
We already have Mass Effect for that. I'd prefer it if they kept that series and Dragon Age as completely separate entities instead of trying to compromise between them. Dragon Age needs to find its own unique focus and run with it.

Here is the issue: if you actually happen to be a fan of Mass Effect, there is no other series that looks to even come close to replicating the experience. There are some games with some shared features, but there is no series that combines PC Voice with customizability and some choice in outcomes. What if I like party-based combat, and voice and customizability? Suddenly there exists no game and no developer on the market that wants to deliver this.

You say, why mess with DA:O, you have Mass Effect? I say, why force me to enjoy a single series, when you have RPGs from the 1980s to today that fall under your aegis, whereas I have one series that doesn't even implement all of its elements well?

[Ottemis]

Filament wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ottemis wrote...
Still not logical to not want to stick with your 'entire' family when they go anywhere, when you were just mangled and had to leave everything you knew behind.

Wasn't Hawke supposed to be the head of the family?
He / she should decide where they go.

If I was him, I would have avoided Kirkwall, settled somewhere (maybe Starkhaven) and then went off there to find out about the family heritage and if it could be retrieved, after making sure my family is safe elsewhere.

Yeah, the whole "I'm not putting mother through that" handwave via sibling was pretty weaksauce. Oh, as opposed to putting mother through harboring an apostate in a city ruled by templars?

The world, whatever country you pick is in some form of shambles anyways and you could find a convincing counterargument against going anywhere. I don't see the point, they went to Kirkwall, with reason though they also had arguments against going there sure. What else is new, right?

If you want to find an argument against something, you will find it regardless of what that 'something' is.

Modifié par Ottemis, 28 mai 2011 - 06:26 .

[In Exile]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Do we have stats on how many people Hawke killed? I would not be surprised if they  numbered over 2000.
In TW2, I got the achievement of killing 500 at around the end of Act 2, so I am thinking that it's around 6 to 700 by the end. That's really more than enough.

When you have to kill thousands, essentially becoming a mass killer which stands in sharp contrast to how useless Hawke is in the story, I think you have a problem.

To be fair, the murder machine that Hawke is gets taken seriously in the story. The issue is that Hawke is never pro-active. But you can be talented and disinterested. I really liked that about DA2. I believe there should have been an option to be involved, but one of the best things about the Witcher series was the ability to always leave the world to crash and burn as a Witcher on the Path.

Very few games just let you say "it isn't my concern".

Modifié par In Exile, 28 mai 2011 - 06:20 .

[Yrkoon]

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.

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? 

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. 

So let me see if I've got the gist  of the points you're making:

1) Having to think - BAD
2) Having to tactically time/position your spells -  BAD
3) Convoluted Questlines - BAD
4) RPG Genre - BAD

Translation:  Keep it simple, stupid!


Yeah, no thanks.  I'm neither a kid, nor am I afflicted with ADD.    So I have no reason to play games designed to appeal to  ADD afflicted Kids.

[In Exile]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Wasn't Hawke supposed to be the head of the family?
He / she should decide where they go.

If I was him, I would have avoided Kirkwall, settled somewhere (maybe Starkhaven) and then went off there to find out about the family heritage and if it could be retrieved, after making sure my family is safe elsewhere.

No. I'm pretty sure the mother was the head of the family.

[Ottemis]

In Exile wrote...

Marionetten wrote...
We already have Mass Effect for that. I'd prefer it if they kept that series and Dragon Age as completely separate entities instead of trying to compromise between them. Dragon Age needs to find its own unique focus and run with it.

Here is the issue: if you actually happen to be a fan of Mass Effect, there is no other series that looks to even come close to replicating the experience. There are some games with some shared features, but there is no series that combines PC Voice with customizability and some choice in outcomes. What if I like party-based combat, and voice and customizability? Suddenly there exists no game and no developer on the market that wants to deliver this.

You say, why mess with DA:O, you have Mass Effect? I say, why force me to enjoy a single series, when you have RPGs from the 1980s to today that fall under your aegis, whereas I have one series that doesn't even implement all of its elements well?

Aside from that, Mass Effect is meant to only count 3 games total.
Asmuch as ME1 and 2 are similar, they are also different, so yeah. Agreed.

Modifié par Ottemis, 28 mai 2011 - 06:27 .

[In Exile]

neppakyo wrote...
Heh. So a seeker. aka SPECTRE from ME.

Ahh rumours and silliness.

Or a Warden from DA:O. Or a Jedi from KoTOR. Or a Spirit Monk from JE.

Bioware seems only to be able to write solid plots for secret warrior orders.