738 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Mr.House wrote...

No they don't, you only read about them after you beat the game. No matter what choices you make, the Archdemon still dies, the only diffrence is you have diffrent troops. Not really that big imho.

But you at least do get to read about them. In DA2 you don't even get that -- and whether you side with the templars or with the mages, the same key figures still die.

[Persephone]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Persephone wrote...
Objective truth....

You know what? This is beyond offensive and entitled.

Even Shooters that last only 10 hours of play and have zero customization offer you enemy spawning that makes sense and reacts dynamically to your play, and environments that are individual and dynamic. DAII could hardly even be considered to use reskinned copied layouts.

Er, this wasn't about the re-used enviroments or the waves, why the sudden switch of topics there? (I criticized the re-used enviroments myself) 

And DAII reacted better to my gameplay than any shooter ever did.

[Aaleel]

Mr.House wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...
You'll be here defending DA2 to death won't you?

ok, yeah, in terms of gameplay it didn't change much, but at least, Origins you truly feel like you are affecting a lot of peoples lives, there are multiple ways of how you can affect said lives (ex: Dalish), and i liked that, it only works in terms of story, but still feels like it matters.

in DA2, most end up in the same way in terms of story and gameplay, that is my biggest problem.

Awakening.... can't argue with you there.

My choices in DA2 changed quest, addedv new quest or removed quest but made no diffrence in the end, my choices in DAO only affected the final battle.

Solution? Make choices matter for once in DA3.

I don't agree with this.  In Origins you made a choice help werewolves, elves or cure the curse.  Either people died right then and there, or people were saved.  What did any of that have to do with the final battle. 

When you get Redcliffe, you can leave and say you don't feel like helping, the town gets wiped out right then and there. 

You can defile the urn and **** goes down right then and there.

Either a Circle survives or they don't, and then later on when you get to Redcliffe, if the circle was wiped out, no lyrium, and you either have to use blood magic (which means killing someone) or kill the boy.  Has nothing to do with the final battle.

I don't know how anyone can say the choices only affected the final battle.

Modifié par Aaleel, 14 juin 2011 - 10:23 .

[csfteeeer]

Persephone wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

yeah, by  killing them, or let them leave to god knows where (or doing absuletely nothing, which doesn't really count)

in DAO, you can give them a brand new territory for them (Dalish Origin only btw), leave Zathrian as their leader, which will lead them to either have no leader, or more problems with the humans, you can out right kill them all, or you can make Zathrian sacrifice himself and leave the Dalish with a new Keeper, which leads to a more peaceful ending.
oh and at the same you are also affecting the Werewolves lives you know.

I know about the (bugged) Dalish Origin boon. And again, all these things are hardly shown IN GAME, just in MS Dos Epilogue boxes.

I KNOW, i meant in terms of the story, like i have been saying other comments here.

[Feanor_II]

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

[the_one_54321]

Master Shiori wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Persephone wrote...
No. Just different pixels in the final battle.

That's a completely bogus argument. In DA:O your actions actually change the status in the game world and you can see it  happen during the game.

You can see it written in the epilogue slides. Your choices in treaty quests do come down to the same thing, because your only real concern is getting your troops, which you will acomplish regardless of what you do.
So the only real difference ingame is who will aid you during the final battle. The far reaching consequences aren't evident until the epilogue.

Example:

Supporting Bahlen or Harrowmont will initialy have the same result: crisis in Orzammar is resolved and dwarves have joined your army. You don't see the political or social consequences in the game.

Siding with templars or mages is the same. Demons are banished and the tower is scured once more. You lose one potential quest if you sided with the templars, but nothing else changed.

Dalish and werewolves can result in the Dalish camp being wiped out, which means you lose access to their vendor and, possibly, some Dalish quests. Other than that it has no impact on the final battle.

Those are not about the impact to the final battle! When you choose something, the world you play in changes. The Dalish camp getting wiped out only means you loose a vendor?? The camp gets wiped out!

As for the results in the endgame, DAII tells you that your choice of sides matters, and then at the end of the game it says, "nevermind, your choice actually didn't matter."

[the_one_54321]

tmp7704 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
No they don't, you only read about them after you beat the game. No matter what choices you make, the Archdemon still dies, the only diffrence is you have diffrent troops. Not really that big imho.

But you at least do get to read about them. In DA2 you don't even get that -- and whether you side with the templars or with the mages, the same key figures still die.

Changing topics???
That is what is objectively wrong with the game! That's what has been the point every time someone says that DAII had poor design! 

[Persephone]

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

[Melca36]

Persephone wrote...

ink07 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

So those are facts written in stone now? 

WOW. Just WOW. Yes, Bioware should totally ignore those who loved the game by "owning up to their mistakes" ....

Interesting context for the word "jaded".......the irony.....

Yes they are. I know you are one of the posters constantly campaigning in favour of DA2 because you loved the game so much and you think Merril is the bestes character ever, and I don't have anything against that, you are free to like the game as much as you wish.

But you simply fail to understand you are in the minority here. For the majority out there DA2 was failed to improve on the original, 
*Snips*
whatever, the objective truth here is that DA2 is an inferior product, plagued with design mistakes and EA/Bioware are still not owning up to that, rather blaming the gamers for not "getting it".

I "think Merril is the bestes character ever"? (Sic!) Are you bloody joking? She is probably my least fave DAII companion.

Majority out there? You know all of them or just the 2% who post online? Jesus, the presumption!

Objective truth....

You know what? This is beyond offensive and entitled.

You know I never hated the game but it speaks volumes when the higher ups have acknowledged the shortcomings of the game.

And the higher ups are NOT refering to the forums. 

They are acknowleding the shortcomings because its NOT making the sales they projected.

if the game made sales projections or sold more than Origins...then they would have NEVER acknowledged the shortcomings of the game.

I think people on both sides of the fence should be able to agree with that.



If they keep what worked great in DA:2 and incorporate some of the elements from Origins, they will get the fans back. Its that simple.

[Night Prowler76]

Persephone wrote...

ink07 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Is this actually a thread bashing EA for saying they made a game not everyone liked?

Honestly?

No, people are bashing EA for rushing out the door a horrible sequel to a great game. People are bashing EA because they don't own up to their mistakes and instead they release half-assed apologies *Snips*

Honestly.

I'm sorry you are too jaded to understand that.

So those are facts written in stone now? 

WOW. Just WOW. Yes, Bioware should totally ignore those who loved the game by "owning up to their mistakes" ....

Interesting context for the word "jaded".......the irony.....

Ea likes there money Pers, Bioware basically lost half of the Dragon age Origins fanbase inside of 2 years, that is a huge failure in any business, not just video games, its almost not even worth while to make any DLC for the game at this point, DLC attach rates were low for Origins, and they will be down right sad for DA2.

There is a valuable lesson in all of this, especially for BioWare, people arent as stupid as the game companies think, word travels fast when a game is a stinker,  I understand there are things about the game that you like and that the people who enjoyed it liked, but there are alot more people that dislike alot of aspects about this game, its pretty simple, if they go back to an Origins type game, they will sell a good amount of copies, if they make DA3 like DA2, they will likely sell less than a million copies and kiss the franchise goodbye.

At this point, they franchise might just die anyways, the fanbase for this series keeps getting smaller, I cant even see them gettting 100k pre orders for DA3.

[csfteeeer]

Persephone wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

This.
that's fair, and in THAT, i can agree with you, i'm not hoping they make The Witcher 2, but at least that they try a little harder.

[Persephone]

csfteeeer wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

This.
that's fair, and in THAT, i can agree with you, i'm not hoping they make The Witcher 2, but at least that they try a little harder.

Totally on board there, yep. And I do hope that they ARE listening to the feedback. From both sides.

[Mr.House]

csfteeeer wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

This.
that's fair, and in THAT, i can agree with you, i'm not hoping they make The Witcher 2, but at least that they try a little harder.

I'm hoping they do take some cues from TW2 with main story choices maknig a real diffrence.

Modifié par Mr.House, 14 juin 2011 - 10:28 .

[Persephone]

Melca36 wrote...

If they keep what worked great in DA:2 and incorporate some of the elements from Origins, they will get the fans back. Its that simple.

A-M-E-N. :happy:

[DragonRageGT]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

FJVP wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Can someone actually link me to the videos/websites/whatever where Bioware bashed Origins? I'd love to see it, lol.

Click

HOLY F***.  This guy is a total tool. Sorry, I think what he said there is punishable by making him find another line of work.  Ugh.

Major FAIL.

That interview really depressed me. That guy should receive a shlaga in his gulliver, have his yahzick removed, have his gloopy glazzes forced wide open while watching my 150 Dragon Age Origins videos, very Clockwork Orange style. He is a bolshy bratchny! 

Modifié par RageGT, 14 juin 2011 - 10:31 .

[Persephone]

Mr.House wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

This.
that's fair, and in THAT, i can agree with you, i'm not hoping they make The Witcher 2, but at least that they try a little harder.

I'm hoping they do take some cues from TW2 with main story choices maknig a real diffrence.

And another A-M-E-N. If TW2 did anything right (And it did LOTS of things right), it's that.

[Persephone]

RageGT wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

FJVP wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Can someone actually link me to the videos/websites/whatever where Bioware bashed Origins? I'd love to see it, lol.

Click

HOLY F***.  This guy is a total tool. Sorry, I think what he said there is punishable by making him find another line of work.  Ugh.

Major FAIL.

That interview really depressed me. That guy should receive a shlaga in his gulliver, have his tongue removed, have his gloopy glazzes forced wide open while watching my 150 Dragon Age Origins videos, very Clockwork Orange style. He is a bolshy bratchny! 

I don't like the guy much myself, but this is hyperbole taken to obsessive levels. Yeesh.

[Feanor_II]

Persephone wrote...

Feanor_II wrote...

It's curious that one of the arguments that Persephone uses to defend that choices matter in DA2 is that Grace's conversation changes if you release her or you give her to the templars..... BUT she doesn't accept that choices DA:O regarding elves/werewolves or templars/mages matter "just pixels in the final battle" Yeah, you go to Brescilian Forrest and you have killed elves, or you go to Orzammar and Drawes talk about Behlen or Harrowmot becoming finally king, no, those things don't matter, but a few sentences in Grace's dialogue do matter......

Let me set this straight: They matter as much to me as the differences in DAII. I liked both approaches but felt that they both lacked something. Neither system convinced me fully. And I am hoping that DA3 will change that.

At this point I agree with you

[Xayoz]

On the topic of choice.

The reason why I felt like this game gave my none is basically this...
Say, my character is a mage. A bloodmage even.
And I do what? I spend the better part of the game killing my potential allies, without any option of talking my way out of those fights.
This would be perfectly fine, if I where to be role play someone strictly moral that maybe sympathizes with the templars.
However, what if I want to play as someone who wouldn't blink an eye at someone summoning demons and performing bloodmagic?
As this claims to be an RPG, I certainly feel like I should have had that option.
In truth, it really puzzles me why I didn't.
Surely it would not have been difficult to implement diplomatic solutions to many such quests or provide alternative ways of completing them, nor would it have prevented the game from reaching it's current conclusion.
There where oh so many instances where the game gave you no 'option b' for solving a quest, where as it clearly could and should have.
In the end, this left me incredibly frustrated and feeling like every dialogue was there simply to give you 3 different ways for reaching the same outcome.

The game just forces you into this one role.
You are Hawke. You are the champion. You do what is right and heroic.
But what if you want to play a rogue who only cares about coin and getting out of this mess with mages and templars, alive?
What if you want to be a mage who is all for killing every single templar, not matter the means?
A warrior that actually believes ridding the world of mages is for the best?

All I really wanted to see was more than one predetermined path to reach the final outcome (witch I tough was perfectly fine).
Even 2 would have been fine.
Witcher 2 for instance, is a good example of how this could have been done.

[DragonRageGT]

Persephone wrote...

I don't like the guy much myself, but this is hyperbole taken to obsessive levels. Yeesh.

Hyperbole: It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

[Huntress]

ink07 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

So those are facts written in stone now? 

WOW. Just WOW. Yes, Bioware should totally ignore those who loved the game by "owning up to their mistakes" ....

Interesting context for the word "jaded".......the irony.....

Yes they are. I know you are one of the posters constantly campaigning in favour of DA2 because you loved the game so much and you think Merril is the bestes character ever, and I don't have anything against that, you are free to like the game as much as you wish.

But you simply fail to understand you are in the minority here. For the majority out there DA2 failed to improve on the original, was marketed to capitalize on its succes and most of its design decisions were taken in order to make development faster/ bring in other people, not out of respect and love to the source material or audience that bought the game in the first place, but to make room for other big releases in the fiscal year 2012.

I seriously want you to disprove the fact that most of the design choices that made this game poor, like reuse of dungeons, removal of origins stories, a single city/character to choose from, cookie-cutter MMO like quests, less customization options, less dialogue options, the lack of consecuences for your choices, no change in the city at all after "10 years", disjointed storyline were not due to time/probably budget constrains. You may think that the story was the best ever, and the mashy combat improved on consoles, whatever, the objective truth here is that DA2 is an inferior product, plagued with design mistakes and EA/Bioware are still not owning up to that, rather blaming the gamers for not "getting it".

The people who likes the game " me been one of them" know that the game is not perfect or anything close to epic, and we did post in Constructive Criticism and let bioware know about what we liked and what we do not.

Then this players and me having clear it out of our system started to focus on the good side of it, I have yet to see any of the players that neither bought the game or have any intent of playing doing it, they cant stop bashing and whinning about it, 3 months have pass and they still going about it.

When I don't like something I leave it and move on, alot of better things to do/play/read out there to waste time talking about something that I don't enjoy.

[Master Shiori]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Master Shiori wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Persephone wrote...
No. Just different pixels in the final battle.

That's a completely bogus argument. In DA:O your actions actually change the status in the game world and you can see it  happen during the game.

You can see it written in the epilogue slides. Your choices in treaty quests do come down to the same thing, because your only real concern is getting your troops, which you will acomplish regardless of what you do.
So the only real difference ingame is who will aid you during the final battle. The far reaching consequences aren't evident until the epilogue.

Example:

Supporting Bahlen or Harrowmont will initialy have the same result: crisis in Orzammar is resolved and dwarves have joined your army. You don't see the political or social consequences in the game.

Siding with templars or mages is the same. Demons are banished and the tower is scured once more. You lose one potential quest if you sided with the templars, but nothing else changed.

Dalish and werewolves can result in the Dalish camp being wiped out, which means you lose access to their vendor and, possibly, some Dalish quests. Other than that it has no impact on the final battle.

Those are not about the impact to the final battle! When you choose something, the world you play in changes. The Dalish camp getting wiped out only means you loose a vendor?? The camp gets wiped out!

As for the results in the endgame, DAII tells you that your choice of sides matters, and then at the end of the game it says, "nevermind, your choice actually didn't matter."

The fact that the camp gets wiped out makes no difference ingame. Once I've completed "Nature of the Beast" I have no reason to return to Bracillian Forest unless I want to buy something from the dalish vendor or complete one of the side quests there.

Nobody notices that the Dalish are gone. The fact that they're gone has no impact on anything outside of who joins your army.

Therefore, the true consequences of curing the werewolves, killing them or the Dalish or Zathrian dying only become evident when the epilogue describes what happened in the months and years after your victory.

My choices of siding with mages or templars in DA2 won't have an effect on preventing the greater Mage vs Templar war from happening, but they will effect Kirkwall in the immediate future. Either many mages will survive the Annulment and new templars will eventualy arrive to restore order or I'll destroy the Circle and therefore ensure that Kirkwall remains stable without outside intervention, which could have disasterous consequences for the city (Exalted March).

Modifié par Master Shiori, 14 juin 2011 - 10:36 .