738 réponses à ce sujet

[Merilsell]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Seriously, and no offense to him personally, but his position should be reconsidered. I've never seen a worse marketing campaign for a game.

Good thing you didn't see the dead space 2 and dantes inferno ones then.

That reminds me on this video., though. Which is so true...and sad.

[TEWR]

simfamSP wrote...

Why was Hawke so bad? I actually loved the way they made his character change through our choices of dialouge, much better than ME's way of doing it.

Hawke wasn't a bad character. In theory he could've been well loved. But he's far too reactive. No, he's entirely reactive once he sets foot in Kirkwall.


He could've been both proactive and reactive, but he wasn't. I liked the idea of Hawke trying to keep the peace but things just spiral too far out of control and he's unable to keep things from escalating to the point they did. But he didn't try and keep the peace. He just...... constantly sits on his ass. He couldn't even be bothered to warn a certain person close to him about a murderous psychopath!


In theory, a Rise to Power, trying to keep the peace, and being an important person in Thedas was a great concept. In practice, it was executed horribly.

[Feanor_II]

¿Innovations? I wouldn't call "innovate" to oversimplificate the game, there were some inovations, yeh. But what "brands" this game is oversimplification.

I have expresed my concerns and complaints in the corresponding topics, now let's see what do they do now, I'm not very positive about it.......

[Tirfan]

^^ This for the most part - and seriously the fact that sometimes Hawke said something without any input from the player - and to me, most of the time he said something on his own it was completely out of the character I tried to make him. I know I don't have complete freedom about how to play a character in any RPG other than PnP.. but with Hawke there was just so many more restrictions than with Warden that Hawke never was my character.

Modifié par Tirfan, 14 juin 2011 - 05:25 .

[lichtdwarf]

i liked the gameplay and the story of DAII. but i would lie if i said that DAII didn't had any problems. mostly those were because the short development time. re-using maps, spawing of enemies and more.

if they just took their time with with 3 i will be fine. and although i liked MY Hawke, i would not like to play with him again, but rather see him as a NPC in the next part.

[erynnar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Why was Hawke so bad? I actually loved the way they made his character change through our choices of dialouge, much better than ME's way of doing it.

Hawke wasn't a bad character. In theory he could've been well loved. But he's far too reactive. No, he's entirely reactive once he sets foot in Kirkwall.


He could've been both proactive and reactive, but he wasn't. I liked the idea of Hawke trying to keep the peace but things just spiral too far out of control and he's unable to keep things from escalating to the point they did. But he didn't try and keep the peace. He just...... constantly sits on his ass. He couldn't even be bothered to warn a certain person close to him about a murderous psychopath!


In theory, a Rise to Power, trying to keep the peace, and being an important person in Thedas was a great concept. In practice, it was executed horribly.

I agree Eth. The ideas were great for Hawke, execution fell flat on its face down a flight of stairs out the door and into rush hour traffic where it met the Number 9 bus head on.  Really, Hawke could have been just as brilliant a character as my Wardens, it was all there.

[GregoriusMaximus]

Morroian wrote...

Merilsell wrote...

Innovation and DA2 in one sentence? 

Boggles the mind, really.

The friendship/rivalry system wasn't an innovation? Or the way characterisation was tracked? 

Umm... no?

[ddv.rsa]

Filament wrote...

Kirkwall and Hawke could have both been better, I can agree to some extent at least... but IF any future installment is about Hawke though, I doubt it'll be in Kirkwall, and just because a character might have been dull to you in DA2 doesn't mean the character will always be dull. Characters can evolve, etc. In NWN2's expansion instead of just being some schmuck with a piece of metal in your chest, now all of sudden you find out your soul is ripped out and replaced with some monstrous thing. Big change, same character.

That was Obsidian. Can you realistically expect the same from the team who turned out DA2? Radically different philosophies there.

[Feanor_II]

"Ray [Muzyka] and Greg [Zeschuk] have built a long career being close to
their fanbase and understanding what they want. If they do something in
a direction that is innovative and fresh for some but not for others,
they'll take that into consideration as we think about the next design
and where the game goes from here."

In my humble opinion, they should go back to DA:O and from there IMPROVE and EVOLVE, no SIMPLIFICATE.

[TEWR]

GregoriusMaximus wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Merilsell wrote...

Innovation and DA2 in one sentence? 

Boggles the mind, really.

The friendship/rivalry system wasn't an innovation? Or the way characterisation was tracked? 

Umm... no?

Friendship and Rivalry is an innovation. It's not perfect, but it is one.

[erynnar]

GregoriusMaximus wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Merilsell wrote...

Innovation and DA2 in one sentence? 

Boggles the mind, really.

The friendship/rivalry system wasn't an innovation? Or the way characterisation was tracked? 

Umm... no?

I agree with Greg on this. No, not really. The Friendship/Rivalry needs a lot more work, more detail, something. But when I badger my companions just to drive the rivalry and then they romance me?

And characterization? Really? Again, I must be missing the just copious amounts others got. I did two playthroughs, hubby did two. There were changes in dialogue, but not much. And one of my Hawkes wound up sounding like she had personality affect disorder when I tried to make her more like a real human with subtleties. I prefer to make my own personality. Then my PC's don't wind up so one dimensional.

[erynnar]

Feanor_II wrote...

"Ray [Muzyka] and Greg [Zeschuk] have built a long career being close to
their fanbase and understanding what they want. If they do something in
a direction that is innovative and fresh for some but not for others,
they'll take that into consideration as we think about the next design
and where the game goes from here."

In my humble opinion, they should go back to DA:O and from there IMPROVE and EVOLVE, no SIMPLIFICATE.

This^

[the_one_54321]

Can someone recap the things that were considered "innovations" in DAII?

I can think of a few: (note, I'm not saying that I like or don't like any of these, just listing them)

Framed Narrative
Unique "companion" appearances
Streamlined Skill Tree
Faster Combat Animations
Dialog Wheel
Voiced Protagonist
"Updated" User Interface
Friendship/Rivalry Relationship System

Modifié par the_one_54321, 14 juin 2011 - 06:07 .

[Brockololly]

Filament wrote...
To be honest I think someone tried to explain to Matt Silverman that they wanted a consistent visual style but he didn't quite understand the explanation so his retelling involved the rather absurd notion that forests should look the "same" as the Deep Roads. (which they obviously shouldn't, for that matter even in DA2 they don't)

Yeah, I get what he was trying to say but even still I have issues with their art style change as (IMO) it makes the game far less visually appealing and far more boring. Sure they want a consistent style, but its like the one thread Maria Caliban started a while back: DA2 has no style. Everything looks the same generic blocky/jaggy/spikes/horns/feathers look, whether thats the Dalish camp to Kirkwall to the armor somebody like Fenris (supposedly from Tevinter) wears to Flemeth. There is no style in having everything look like they got it from the same pre-fab warehouse of building blocks and clothing/armor when you should see visually different aesthetics to account for different races/cultures/locations.

[upsettingshorts]

GregoriusMaximus wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Merilsell wrote...

Innovation and DA2 in one sentence? 

Boggles the mind, really.

The friendship/rivalry system wasn't an innovation? Or the way characterisation was tracked? 

Umm... no?

Posts like thes are why I stopped bothering to contribute.  Though I'm sure my own posting motivations are off-topic and irrelevant, so I'll explain:

People who hate the game so much that things that are objectively more complicated or new features are dismissed as not being either, or people who love the game so much that cases of objectively removed options or features are dismissed as not being missed.

This post just happens to be one of the former.  And it's a big reason with discussion over DA2 is a pointless, unfulfilling mess.

[Addai]

alex90c wrote...

I think the worst bit was:

In a Dragon Age II interview with Eurogamer, lead designer Mike Laidlaw said the developer had "ideas" for a sequel and protagonist Hawke.

Hawke is a loser and deserves to die. Preferably through over exposure to awesome (i.e. the warden).

/hate rambling about Hawke off

+1

I hope that refers to DLC and not to a third game.  Hawke just needs to stay in whatever Bermuda Triangle she disappeared into.

[Redcoat]

I think people are reading too much into the word "innovation"...it's just PR-speak. No publically-traded company is going to fall on their sword and admit their product was terrible. They're not going to come out and say, "We screwed up, plain and simple. Sorry about that, old bean!" Hence the game's controversial changes are spun into "innovations." Which they are, technically, since they're something that wasn't there before. Like a tumour.

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
People who hate the game so much that things that are objectively more complicated or new features are dismissed as not being either, or people who love the game so much that cases of objectively removed options or features are dismissed as not being missed.

This post just happens to be one of the former. And it's a big reason with discussion over DA2 is a pointless, unfulfilling mess.

Ahem:

the_one_54321 wrote...
Can someone recap the things that were considered "innovations" in DAII?

I can think of a few: (note, I'm not saying that I like or don't like any of these, just listing them)

Framed Narrative
Unique "companion" appearances
Streamlined Skill Tree
Faster Combat Animations
Dialog Wheel
Voiced Protagonist
"Updated" User Interface
Friendship/Rivalry Relationship System

[upsettingshorts]

@the_one

I didn't say it applied to everyone. I just feel like there's too many turds in the punch bowl.

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
@the_one

I didn't say it applied to everyone. I just feel like there's too many turds in the punch bowl.

And I'm just pointing out an opportunity to participate in a constructive objective discussion about the "new" features.

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...

And I'm just pointing out an opportunity to participate in a constructive objective discussion about the "new" features.

Would love to if I weren't already far too jaded to contribute.  

Still, it would be more refreshing to read than the childish "hahah I demand we kill Hawke in DLC or DA3" posts.