I believe DA2 was designed to focus on the console market, and seeing as how the ps3 and 360 markets combined vastly outnumber the pc's it is a very intelligent decision. I can understand the anger some of the louder pc gamers show though. Improving a game for consoles shouldn't mean ostracizing the pc fanbase, but calling DA2 the worse game you have ever played is ludicrous. The majority of console players, myself included, agree that many of the changes made were genuine improvements, like the closer to real-time combat, the altered graphics that make DA look like its own game and not just another lord of the rings ripoff, and automatically putting useless loot into the trash to later be sold.
However, DA2 has many obvious and glaring flaws. I would have found the revisited environments more bearable if they were larger, and changed as the years went by. I feel as if the Sacred ashes quest alone had a much larger area than the entire game of DA2. And When I first heard that DA2 would span an entire decade I was very excited, but the execution was less than impressive. Kirkwall's color changes slightly with each act but that's bout it. Now the whole "spanning a decade" thing just seemed like a hook to get people interested.
And of having a decade to build relationships was very intriguing, until once you finished the game you realize in over 7 years you spoken to each companion maybe 6 times, Your companions still look basically the same, and as far as I know, unlike how you could influence the personalities of some of your team in origins, aside from the final battle, everyone on your team has had no change of heart due to your influence. Anders will go through with his terrorism no matter what, Isabella is still a ****, Merrill is still a dumb malificar who gets the keeper killed, etc.
The addition of a voiced main character can be taken either way. I feel dialogue was handled better here than in mass effect, given that how you acted in the beginning of the game actually influenced how your character would act in cutscenes and whether you had certain dialogue options or not. I certainly had more of a connection to Hawke than I did to my warden but I don't feel that DOA suffered because you character lacked a voice. I notice that in games that lack a voiced protagonist, the rest of the cast has to work much harder, and this is where DAO outshines DA2.
I LOVED every single companion in DAO. In no other game have I felt such a connection to every single character.Even one who I disagreed with, I still cared for them. While in DA2 I love Varric, Aveline, Bethany, and Isabella, but I really couldn't care less for the others. Maybe for the story's sake the other companions were made to be more polarizing but still...
The addition of a family was also interesting to me but I feel it fell flat on ocassion. Given that I saw carver killed about 24 minutes after I learned his name I realized I really didn't care. I would have had a seperate origin for the mage & warrior/rogue hawke.Like the warrior origin would start with hawke fleeing ostagar with carver and maybe throw in a wynne cameo idk, and for the mage have hawke and bethany actually work with the templar captain in lothering to repel darkspawn scouts idk so they could build some connection wit the brother of sister who would soon be killed.
Ultimately, I feel that DA2 is an ambitious, excellent, but flawed game. Many of the promised features felt half done, and the game felt like it was rushed. I applaud Bioware for finally doing a game without the same formula they've been doing for years. Insert protagonist who is the member of a select order of warriors, give prophetic dreams, que plot twist, roll credits. So of the things done are improvements, but others are serious issues, especially for the pc players. I feel that DA2's only purpose was to set the stage for the rest of the DA universe
8/10 console
6/10 pc
Retour en haut
Quest / Fedex item". Much less interesting.
