169 réponses à ce sujet

[Slayer299]

I'm talking about the execution of the plot for BG2 and DA2. Both BG2 and DA2 were 'personal' stories in concept, DA2 just failed miserably in the execution unlike BG2 which succeeded.

[atum]

I think it's also common to have epic over-arching stories described as "predictable" and non-epic, out-of-the-box type stories described as having ended too aburptly. Something to keep in mind anyways. I always found the complaint that there was "no single over arching evil to fight in DA2" to be a little naive. Execution, on the other hand and like others have said, left a bit to be desired.

[Wozearly]

yaw wrote...

The same applies to the Circle. If you took too long, instead of arriving in time to save the mages, you arrive as the right of annulment is being executed and the only option is to help the templars. 

So yeah, the sense of urgency was totally absent for me in Origins.

Woah, is that true??

I always do the Circle first because I always save both the Arlessa and Connor, but I never knew you could actually leave it too late.

Origins just got better, wow.

It would have been a fantastically dark twist if the fourth location that you went to had succumbed to its situation to the point where it couldn't help you, or where its conclusion and epilogue outcome were significantly different.

Wouldn't have necessarily required a huge amount of additional work - just some differences at the initial conversations and a few more enemies and chaos. Off the top of my head...

Orzammar: The political situation deteriorating into the riots on the streets that are predicted, with the Warden bringing the crown back in time to stop civil war ripping Orzammar apart, but with the dwarves only being able/willing to offer token support to the Blight (e.g. a donation of gold, or enchanting supplies) rather than an army, as the situation would still be too politically delicate for the new king.

Circle: The tower being completely overrun with abominations, with most of the Templars killed. Again, rescuing it would be sensible to prevent a significant distraction to the Bannorn and the Templars, but with the Templar order too weakened to be able to present an army.

Dalish: Similarly, with a full-blown conflict having escalated against the werewolves and other clans having had the time to scatter further, meaning Dalish support would be a primarily token gesture.

Redcliffe: The castle having been overrun for so long, and with Aemon only appearing on the scene after the civil war in the Bannorn had been in progress for over a year, would mean he lacked the ability to marshal the armies of the Bannorn in his favour, and with his own army in tatters they would be unable to directly support as an army in the battle for Denerim.

It wouldn't have necessarily added to the sense of urgency, but it would have created consequences for the actions and priorities that you took, whilst not meaning that a 'bad' decision messed up your enjoyment of the endgame from a gameplay perspective.

[KennethAFTopp]

Why exactly was Hawke the most important person in Thedas?

[alex90c]

Because everyone knows he makes a great errand boy.

[Cutlass Jack]

KennethAFTopp wrote...

Why exactly was Hawke the most important person in Thedas?

The exact same reason anyone is 'important' in the real world. He has a great publicist.

[KennethAFTopp]

So basically he's: http://www.weirdspac...oodlePigeon.gif

[Sidney]

AlanC9 wrote...
That's my problem with threads like these. I never know if we're talking about concept or execution.

I think there are two different camps. I have  alot of problems with the execution of DA2 but conceptually I think it is a sound premise. A lot of the deep hatred is from people who don't even like the concept.

The "I want epic" people aren't on board with the concept. They want as much Michael Bay  in their stories as they can get - bigger, BIGGER, BIIIIIIIIIGGGGERR. The fact that Hawke isn't the only person acting the world is wrong and the fact that he can't change history is wrong. Armageddon is "epic". The Maltese Falcon sure as heck isn't. The former is 100% crap and the latter is brilliant story telling. I want more Maltese Falcon and a lot less Armageddon in my stories.

[_Aine_]

KennethAFTopp wrote...

Why exactly was Hawke the most important person in Thedas?

Because in Kirkwall, where there aren't the brains for solutions, scapegoats will suffice. 

[Zulmoka531]

At the very least, I felt as though I was playing BG 1 and 2 all over again in origins.
Da2 was at some points..enjoyable, but it felt..tacky? Like it was trying to be something it wasn't.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

I having been lurking about these forums for a while now and I don't get this statement "I have alot of problems with the execution of DA2 but......." it usually comes from people defending DA2 but to me all this statement is saying is: DA2 sucked but, so honestly how can you defend a game the you are saying sucks?




Oh! and yes I miss the epicness of DAO, when I first played DAO I thought it was gonna suck but in the end I loved it but with DA2 it was the other way around

Modifié par DinoSteve, 15 juin 2011 - 07:31 .

[ToJKa1]

As much as i hate word "epic" (almost as much as "Immersion", two words overused so much they have lost all meaning. If they had any to begin with), there is nothing in DA2 that even comes close to the Fade and Deep Roads. Yes, i'm aware that most people hated them with a passion, but to me they are exactly what i want in the "epic" department. Shame that the Brecilian Forest is a big snooze.

[Nerevar-as]

Deep Roads at least ended with the Awesome Moment of Crowning. The only moment in DA2 that felt epic to me was the end of Act 2. Sadly that ended with 30 min of kiting the Arishok. I still can´t believe that fight passed playtesting.

[ItsTheTruth]

I think the execution was terrible but the concept (making a tactical RPG more like an action game) was even worse.

Sidney wrote...
The "I want epic" people aren't on board with the concept. They want as much Michael Bay  in their stories as they can get - bigger, BIGGER, BIIIIIIIIIGGGGERR. The fact that Hawke isn't the only person acting the world is wrong and the fact that he can't change history is wrong. Armageddon is "epic". The Maltese Falcon sure as heck isn't. The former is 100% crap and the latter is brilliant story telling. I want more Maltese Falcon and a lot less Armageddon in my stories.

Where do some people get this idea that DA2 is somehow a complex work of art that demands effort to be appreciated? I just don't understand, especially compared to DA:O. "Button awesome" and fetch quests in The Cave are similar the Maltese Falcon how?

Modifié par ItsTheTruth, 15 juin 2011 - 02:36 .

[Well]

Sidney wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
That's my problem with threads like these. I never know if we're talking about concept or execution.

I think there are two different camps. I have  alot of problems with the execution of DA2 but conceptually I think it is a sound premise. A lot of the deep hatred is from people who don't even like the concept.

The "I want epic" people aren't on board with the concept. They want as much Michael Bay  in their stories as they can get - bigger, BIGGER, BIIIIIIIIIGGGGERR. The fact that Hawke isn't the only person acting the world is wrong and the fact that he can't change history is wrong. Armageddon is "epic". The Maltese Falcon sure as heck isn't. The former is 100% crap and the latter is brilliant story telling. I want more Maltese Falcon and a lot less Armageddon in my stories.

Actually your opinon is wrong.You can have a deep hatred of other people having different views.That is fine but your wrong.You can classified others as haters as much as you want but because they don't conform to your narrow "If it is different than I think they must be haters" view.It is your opinion.So whine all you like..pout and spew this hater garbage but bottom line it is just your opinion.People will have different opinions.Get over it.No amount of crying and labeling them will change it. Now back OT.
I do miss the Epic feel of DAO.DA 2 had potential but failed to produce.Even if it had I don't know if it would of been on par with DAO.

[Sidney]

ItsTheTruth wrote...

I think the execution was terrible but the concept (making a tactical RPG more like an action game) was even worse.


Where do some people get this idea that DA2 is somehow a complex work of art that demands effort to be appreciated? I just don't understand, especially compared to DA:O. "Button awesome" and fetch quests in The Cave are similar the Maltese Falcon how?

Where do some people get the idea this is an "action RPG" and DAO was a "tactical RPG"? I know it has been said enough so it must be true to you but this is mechanically the same game. All DA2 did was put a better presentation layer onto the DAO combat engine. There is nothing less tactical about DA2 than DAO and that is assuming DAO even sniffs being called "tactical" (I know RPG fans think it is tactical but it really isn't).


To your main point...

The Falcon isn't a big movie, there's nothing big or important or OMFG about it just in terms of the story. There's no one saved, there's no treasure found, the world 99.99999999999999% of it will move on never knowing this story even happened. It is still great, it is still entertaining and it is still a whole lot more engaging story than Armageddon. One doesn't need epic to tell a great story. Now, the fact that people seem to "need" epic is a failing on their part.

There are people who watch the Falcon or King's Speech and get bored. I'm sorry for those people but I don't need that in my stories be it a book, a movie or a game. I'd hate to think that Bioware walks away from DA2 and think the problem is "epic" and not "well executed" with what they tried to do.

[Wozearly]

Sidney wrote...

The Falcon isn't a big movie, there's nothing big or important or OMFG about it just in terms of the story. There's no one saved, there's no treasure found, the world 99.99999999999999% of it will move on never knowing this story even happened. It is still great, it is still entertaining and it is still a whole lot more engaging story than Armageddon. One doesn't need epic to tell a great story. Now, the fact that people seem to "need" epic is a failing on their part.

There are people who watch the Falcon or King's Speech and get bored. I'm sorry for those people but I don't need that in my stories be it a book, a movie or a game. I'd hate to think that Bioware walks away from DA2 and think the problem is "epic" and not "well executed" with what they tried to do.

I'm inclined to agree on the angle that a story / game can be great whether its 'epic' or not. It isn't a prerequisite.

Ultimately, the story is always going to hinge on the journey and the events more than the outcome, but its harder to get something right when the outcome is fairly anticlimatic and the journey is fairly pedestrian as the story itself has to work harder to engage the player and it runs the risk of being more prescriptive about how it unfolds...as we've seen, a lot of people value the fact that a game gives the player the opportunity to shape the story and the path that they take as well as just play through it, which was something that I think was unintentionally lost between Origins and DA2.

However, I do feel that DA2's fault was primarily in execution. Lots of changes and good ideas came about for the right reasons, but so many things were slightly off the mark that the overall combination (for me) lacked the spark and draw that Origins gave. The changes in direction and limited development time were also key contributors to a number of these failings.

[PsychoWARD23]

I missed the epic, but grounded in the game's fiction reality. No idols, no crazy Templars, no walking 30ft statues etc.

[Guns]

Wozearly wrote...

yaw wrote...

The same applies to the Circle. If you took too long, instead of arriving in time to save the mages, you arrive as the right of annulment is being executed and the only option is to help the templars. 

So yeah, the sense of urgency was totally absent for me in Origins.

Woah, is that true??

I always do the Circle first because I always save both the Arlessa and Connor, but I never knew you could actually leave it too late.

Origins just got better, wow.

It would have been a fantastically dark twist if the fourth location that you went to had succumbed to its situation to the point where it couldn't help you, or where its conclusion and epilogue outcome were significantly different.

Wouldn't have necessarily required a huge amount of additional work - just some differences at the initial conversations and a few more enemies and chaos. Off the top of my head...

Orzammar: The political situation deteriorating into the riots on the streets that are predicted, with the Warden bringing the crown back in time to stop civil war ripping Orzammar apart, but with the dwarves only being able/willing to offer token support to the Blight (e.g. a donation of gold, or enchanting supplies) rather than an army, as the situation would still be too politically delicate for the new king.

Circle: The tower being completely overrun with abominations, with most of the Templars killed. Again, rescuing it would be sensible to prevent a significant distraction to the Bannorn and the Templars, but with the Templar order too weakened to be able to present an army.

Dalish: Similarly, with a full-blown conflict having escalated against the werewolves and other clans having had the time to scatter further, meaning Dalish support would be a primarily token gesture.

Redcliffe: The castle having been overrun for so long, and with Aemon only appearing on the scene after the civil war in the Bannorn had been in progress for over a year, would mean he lacked the ability to marshal the armies of the Bannorn in his favour, and with his own army in tatters they would be unable to directly support as an army in the battle for Denerim.

It wouldn't have necessarily added to the sense of urgency, but it would have created consequences for the actions and priorities that you took, whilst not meaning that a 'bad' decision messed up your enjoyment of the endgame from a gameplay perspective.

Everytime I play Origins I think about this and how awesome it would've been.