1248 réponses à ce sujet

[cmessaz]

Filament wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...

Hm. I actually can't recall who said it. I know one of them was a vendor-- a woman that sells ... something. Potions, I think. I can see adventures there.

But that's small stuff compared to the 1- and 3-year gaps. It just doesn't make sense to have such big time skips-- especially when your character doesn't seem to do anything during them. Is my Hawke really such a lazy potato? Get off your arse, buddy!

It would have been nice seeing year 1, yeah. Instead of "and so Hawke worked for a year, settling his debt with the mercenaries." Meh. In fact some have asked for DLC of this first year. Though I'd prefer to just go forward in time with any DLC.

I figure the second and third time jumps are full of lavish orgies. Exciting but not necessary to be shown per se.

But orgies are fun to watch!

[astrallite]

"But also there were a lot of fans of the original Dragon Age: Origins 
who weren't as happy with it. Maybe they were looking for more of the 
same, and it was different and innovative in ways they weren't 
expecting.

Way to make a thinly-veiled insult at your own fanbase.

[KnightofPhoenix]

In Exile wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I disagree. Design wise, yea, PCs generally had little choice (which I hope is improved). But story wise (or in-game wise), the Warden was much more active. He was rallying an army and he was out to replace Loghain.

Well, no, you feel that the Warden was more active. That's just you buying into the plot.

Hence "story wise" and "in-game".

Here is what the Warden did:

Beg for soldiers against the Blight because "pretty please I have a treaty!". You don't get to decide to get allies. Flemeth and Alistair tell you to suck it and collect exactly those allies you have treaties for. You obey.

Then, you get to be execute multiple errands to collect the army and have to allow the Ruler of Ferelden + Eamon + Riordan to come up with the plan and command the army. In fact, you can't even object to the epic stupid plan that is splitting up your party from Riordan.

You get to beg Eamon to do something about Loghain. Then you get to follow orders from Eamon and you have to pick between Anora and Alistair as ruler.

You don't obey, you are just rail roaded to do that (otherwise there is no game). But you have a choice in what allies you'll get. Werewolves vs elves. Templars vs mages. Golems or not golems...etc. Could it have been done better? of course.

And I agree that Origins did not make you feel like the leader you were supposed to be after the Landsmeet even though you technically tell them to move out and get to pick who is to guard the rear. Awakening did it better though.

You don't beg Eamon at all. You save him (in stupid circumstances) and ask him to do something in return, which he already wants to do. And  he doens't command you at all. He indeed can't start the landsmeet without your ok (because you have the army) and you can out maneuvre him and do exactly the opposite of what he wants.

And there are more variations than just Anora or Alistair. There is who gets to be chancellor (the Warden or Eamon). There is Alistair + Anora. There is Alistair + Warden (mistress or no), or Anora + Cousland. So it's mroe than just two choices.

You find this an active role because you bought into the plot. But that's all it takes in DA2. If you don't look at Hawke as someone who cares even a bit about the templar/mage conflict, but instead someone who's entirely invested in something else, Hawke can be just as active as the Warden.

Invested in what? Family and companions? I didnt' feel they were developped enough for me to care. But if that worked for you, then good on you.

Power? That was non-existent in the game.

I found the Warden incredibly passive because I was forced to try and beg for scraps to stop a single blight like had happened in the past, instead of driving to the source of all blights and trying to stop each forever. You see the plot as epic; I see it as the biggest waste of time, essentially getting everything to be as close to identical as the start of the game as possible.

Except you don't know what's the source of all blights and if you're criticizing DA:O for being your typical "be the hero story", then what you want makes it worse. I am not saying that Hawke should end all sources of conflict between Templars and mages and spread peace to the world. In fact he can fail, and I wouldn't mind.

It ha to be at least somewhat believable.

DA2 had very many choices were you can try and flesh out why Hawke is making the choice. In fact, DA2 follows right up on DA:O's "show no consequences" approach to RP by making the outcome irrelevant to your choice, and letting you fully determine why you do something (Act of Mercy being a great example, but the Fenryiel quest being a good one too).

I really can't think of that many. I remember more from Origins. At least ones I found more interesting. Not saying either is that much better than the other, though Origins appeals to me more because I am more of the big picture kind of person, which I also believe influences characters. But Origins also had "small picture" choices.

I never had a playthrough in DA:O that felt like a rise to power, but I had 2 that felt like a "go screw yourself, you can't have power" when my Dwarf Noble wasn't allowed to declare herself Queen and my Cousland couldn't declare himself king.

Well that's just them being a bit stupid, no offense, if they are asking for something obviously no one will accept (and it's good they put those limitations). There is a difference between power and a title.
Play a Warden that has a weak Alsitair on the throne and impose yourself as his chancellor, and there you go. A rise to power. Is it a rise to godhood level of power? No, of course not.

The Warden was the epitome of genocide against an entire race. The job description of a Grey Warden was "eliminate all darkspawn".

And DA2 did have some no combat quests. Bribing for Aethenril is one of them. So is the Werewolf quest (if you have the right personality). I agree with you that DA2 absolutely needed less combat quests, but suggesting the unholy genocide machine that was the Warden (I had something like 1000 personal kills in DA:O) did wade through combat encounter to combat encounter is not accurate.

Where did I say that DA:O was that much better in that regards? I didn't. I specifically mentionned Mass Effect and Kotor. But DA:O had more IIRC. Like some of the Couldry missions, where you can use your poison skills and persuasion. in the Landmseet you can minimize the violence to one duel. But I agree, they didn't do it that well either absolutely.

I am no where suggesting that DA:O should be the epitom of RPGing.  Still my second favorite RPG (because like you said, I bought into it), but it had a lot of flaws.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 juin 2011 - 04:06 .

[Bejos_]

In Exile wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
But that's small stuff compared to the 1- and 3-year gaps. It just doesn't make sense to have such big time skips-- especially when your character doesn't seem to do anything during them. Is my Hawke really such a lazy potato? Get off your arse, buddy!

I think that was my favourite part of DA2. Not being force to give a **** for once was great. I don't like to RP people that run to be the hero. That I could imagine my Hawke messing around with Isabella in hightown buying hats while trying to bully a stake in the Hanged Man, generally disintersted in politics, was great.

I don't mind if there's not a big baddy, or if I'm not the ultimate hero (even though the game tells you at the beginning, through Varric, that you are), or if I'm hat-shopping. (Okay, I'd hate the last, actually, heh.) However, let us roleplay through a bit of that. Maybe three 5-minute segments where we're doing other things, that helps us to connect to this city that we're supposed to care about; or if not the city, then the companions; or if not the companions, the character of Hawke; or if not Hawke, then his family.

Modifié par Bejos_, 18 juin 2011 - 04:05 .

[Bejos_]

cmessaz wrote...

But orgies are fun to watch!

Watch? I'd rather participate, but if that's your thing ...

[KnightofPhoenix]

Rojahar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

cmessaz wrote...
And...it's sadly not easily ignored.   I mean I mostly just avoid the forums because of the negativity. But I feel like I haven't been able to discuss the game at all and would love to...just need a safe place to do it. Safe without saying my opinion isn't as important as someone elses or that I'm not a true RPG player...etc.

You people are way too sensitive
But yea, I understand.

And for what it's worth, I apologize since I tend to snark about it. But I expected people were used to me being that way by now. 

I think that's a bit hypocritical to accuse people of being "oversensitive" about resenting and not wanting to post on the forum because anyone who doesn't agree with the "DA2 is the worst thing ever crowd" is called an idiot... considering this whole thread is about a few people raging that Bioware is "offending" them, as if Bioware personally killed their family, simply for stating the fact that DA2 wasn't all bad

It's not hypocritical when I am not the one being offended.

[Bryy_Miller]

Sidney wrote...

In Exile wrote...

I've thought about the 'passive' thing, but to be honest, Hawke is no more or less passive than any other Bioware PC. The big difference is that the ball and chain that you usually have (be the big hero!) isn't actually there. Hawke is being suckered into some other outcome.

And the dislike I sense coming toward Hawke (as a protagonist) is effectively, Hawke didn't do enough (particularly in the interim) to try and stop the templar/mage showdown.

But design-wise, this isn't actually any different from KoTOR, ME, or DA:O.

DA2 doesn't have a "classic" ending - Irenicus is stopped, the archdemon is stopped, Sovereign is stopped, Malak is stopped. Notice a theme? DA2 is not about how something stops but about it starts and so it doesn't seem "finished".

You know, I agree with this. It would have worked much better if Meredith was much more defined from Act 1 onward as.... well, anything, really. 

It's the same problem I had with Iron Man. Stane all of the sudden, without any warning, became a violent killing machine.

[cmessaz]

Bejos_ wrote...

cmessaz wrote...

But orgies are fun to watch!

Watch? I'd rather participate, but if that's your thing ...

Yeah..I prefer to watch :DDDDD Well...depends on who is involved.

[Bejos_]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Sidney wrote...

In Exile wrote...

I've thought about the 'passive' thing, but to be honest, Hawke is no more or less passive than any other Bioware PC. The big difference is that the ball and chain that you usually have (be the big hero!) isn't actually there. Hawke is being suckered into some other outcome.

And the dislike I sense coming toward Hawke (as a protagonist) is effectively, Hawke didn't do enough (particularly in the interim) to try and stop the templar/mage showdown.

But design-wise, this isn't actually any different from KoTOR, ME, or DA:O.

DA2 doesn't have a "classic" ending - Irenicus is stopped, the archdemon is stopped, Sovereign is stopped, Malak is stopped. Notice a theme? DA2 is not about how something stops but about it starts and so it doesn't seem "finished".

You know, I agree with this. It would have worked much better if Meredith was much more defined from Act 1 onward as.... well, anything, really. 

It's the same problem I had with Iron Man. Stane all of the sudden, without any warning, became a violent killing machine.

Are you talking about the movie, Iron Man?
That actually made sense. I saw it coming. He at least had a defined, subdued character.
Meredith just comes off as crazy throughout the entire DA2 story. I guess DA2 likes OTT characterisation, and if that's your thing too, that's fine. I personally don't like it. Give me a gentle character arc; or, at least, one that's reasonable.
The Power Ranger-y 3rd Act was just >;,,,(

[KnightofPhoenix]

Rojahar wrote...
You're not the one being called an idiot or being personally attacked, constantly, in just about every thread on this forum. As much as you may take offense to the mere existence and direction of DA2, at least you're able to express your opinions. Anyone who doesn't want to fling mud at DA2 and it's fans don't have a safe place on BSN to talk about the game without being insulted.

I don't take offense at the mere existence of DA2.

Why are you saying this to me? I think some on both side are being too sensitive.
So I am not being hypocritical, which is what you accused me of.

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't take offense at the mere existence of DA2.

Why are you saying this to me? I think some on both side are being too sensitive.
So I am not being hypocritical, which is what you accused me of.

You do like to turn threads into Hawke hate threads or Witcher ****** threads, bby, which when grouped with the dozens upon dozens of other people who are absolutely dedicated to derailing threads into mindless hate/****** fests gets a bit tiring

[KnightofPhoenix]

Rojahar wrote...
 it's hypocritical of you to condescend to others who resent being called unsophisticated, not true fans, idiots, or other insults simply because they're not part of some DA2 hating lynch mob. I don't think there's anything "oversensitive" about wishing the forum environment wasn't so hostile and hateful toward anyone who doesn't hate the game.

I was talking to Cmess, my friend, and if she felt I was being condescending to her, she can speak for herself.

But if you feel I am being  condescending to you, then I apologize.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 juin 2011 - 04:24 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't take offense at the mere existence of DA2.

Why are you saying this to me? I think some on both side are being too sensitive.
So I am not being hypocritical, which is what you accused me of.

You do like to turn threads into Hawke hate threads or Witcher ****** threads, bby, which when grouped with the dozens upon dozens of other people who are absolutely dedicated to derailing threads into mindless hate/****** fests gets a bit tiring

Yes, I do like to ****** my Witcher a lot. Removes pressure. Releases tensions.

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yes, I do like to ****** my Witcher a lot. Removes pressure. Releases tensions.

Savor the last shot before you pop the heat sink.

[In Exile]

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Hence "story wise" and "in-game". [/quote]

No, not story-wise. Story-wise, you don't have a choice at all. You can't, for example, go to Orlais and get actual Grey Wardens. Story-wise you have absolutely no choice but to solve every mission the same way except for a single choice 10 seconds from the end.

[quote]You don't obey, you are just rail roaded to do that (otherwise there is no game).
[/quote]

You obey. There are lots of things you could do to want to stop the blight: but you don't have a convincing argument put foward other than: you have to want to save Ferelden. But that's no different than being told that you aren't allowed to care about the mage/templar conflicy.

[quote]But you have a choice in what allies you'll get. Werewolves vs elves. Templars vs mages. Golems or not golems...etc. Could it have been done better? of course.
[/quote]

No, you don't. You don't know you can recruit any of these allies. I'll 100% grant you the werewolves - that's an out of left field choice the Warden can offer with no prompting. But otherwise you go there to get a single ally: and it turns out right at the end that there could be another choice you make.

But you don't choose to go to the Brecelian forest to get the Werewolves. You don't choose to go Orzammar to get Golems. It's all you being the errand boy (or girl).

[quote]You don't beg Eamon at all. You save him (in stupid circumstances) and ask him to do something in return, which he already wants to do. And  he doens't command you at all. He indeed can't start the landsmeet without your ok (because you have the army) and you can out maneuvre him and do exactly the opposite of what he wants.
[/quote]

Alistair says - maybe Eamon can do something. You go along to ask Eamon. You get told to get the ashes. You can't say that you think it's stupid. You can even get called out by Sten for doing something you think is stupid the game is forcing you to do.

Eamon tells you he won't call the Landsmeet without you gathering other allies for the Blight; but none of the allies you gather are going to fight to put a King in Ferelden. In fact, there is no army the Warden has at all, and Eamon makes it very clear if Loghain wins in the Landsmeet he will bend his knee.

You can't out manuever him at all, since you follow orders to save Anora, and then you follow orders to investigate the Landsmeet.
[quote]And there are more variations than just Anora or Alistair. There is who gets to be chancellor (the Warden or Eamon). There is Alistair + Anora. There is Alistair + Warden (mistress or no), or Anora + Cousland. So it's mroe than just two choices. [/quote]

No. It's two choices. Otherwise you have to say that a lot of non-choices in DA2 are actual choices (because the Chancellor choice has no consequences). Alistair + Warden can't exist if the Warden is male. Anora+Warden can't exist if the Warden is female and/or not a Cousland.

[quote]
Invested in what? Family and companions? I didnt' feel they were developped enough for me to care. But if that worked for you, then good on you.
[/quote]

It's not about them being developed. It's about RP, and inventing an in-character motivation.

Personally, I think Alistair is an idiot, Flemeth gives you no reason to believe her, and Duncan is a psychopathic kidnapper who deserved to be killed by the ogre. Other than "but thou must!" I don't think DA:O gave me any reason to care about Ferelden for any Origin except for the Human Noble.

[quote]Except you don't know what's the source of all blights and if you're criticizing DA:O for being your typical "be the hero story", then what you want makes it worse.
[/quote]

I'm not criticizing it for being a typical hero story. I'm saying DA:O is something worse: it's a fight for the sake of the status quo.

[quote] I am not saying that Hawke should end all sources of conflict between Templars and mages and spread peace to the world. In fact he can fail, and I wouldn't mind.

It ha to be at least somewhat believable.
[/quote]

But Hawke not caring is just like the Warden caring. You've just flipped the switch. You really cared about Ferelden. Awesome for you. But that isn't something that makes the Warden more active.

[quote]I really can't think of that many. I remember more from Origins. At least ones I found more interesting. Not saying either is that much better than the other, though Origins appeals to me more because I am more of the big picture kind of person, which I also believe influences characters. But Origins also had "small picture" choices.
[/quote]

Just about every quest in DA2 lets you invent a reason for why Hawke is doing it. In fact, all of act 1 is just inventing reasons for why Hawke does things.

[quote]Well that's just them being a bit stupid, no offense, if they are asking for something obviously no one will accept (and it's good they put those limitations). There is a difference between power and a title.
[/quote]

No, it isn't. The dwarf noble has an automatic crown of rulership from a paragon saying "I don't give a flying **** what you do with it."

With a Cousland, you potentially have someone blessed by the Maker (I found the ashes of Andraste) against the common born child of a traitor and a bastard you don't even have a reason to believe is a descendant of Marric in the first-place.

So, no, it has nothing to do with being stupid.

[quote]Play a Warden that has a weak Alsitair on the throne and impose yourself as his chancellor, and there you go. A rise to power. Is it a rise to godhood level of power? No, of course not.
[/quote]

Okay, so play a Hawke who become Viscount by exterminating the mages. You just rose to power. Is it the power you want?

Do you see how inane this argument you're putting forward is?


[quote]Where did I say that DA:O was that much better in that regards? I didn't. I specifically mentionned Mass Effect and Kotor. But DA:O had more IIRC. Like some of the Couldry missions, where you can use your poison skills and persuasion. in the Landmseet you can minimize the violence to one duel. But I agree, they didn't do it that well either absolutely.

I am no where suggesting that DA:O should be the epitom of RPGing.  Still my second favorite RPG (because like you said, I bought into it), but it had a lot of flaws. [/quote]

I'm not saying DA2 didn't have flaws - just the opposite. I'm only pointing out DA:O had the same flaws as DA2.

Modifié par In Exile, 18 juin 2011 - 04:30 .

[Firky]

Rojahar wrote...
I don't think there's anything "oversensitive" about wishing the forum environment wasn't so hostile and hateful toward anyone who doesn't hate the game.

I'm with that. 

I think the OP is interesting, though. Thanks for posting quotes. I think this "it's been successful with a lot of new fans" is interesting. I wonder what that statement is actually based on. The data they get from people actually playing? Like people without a registered Origins? 

One way or the other, looking forward to see what you guys; Bioware, do with the DLC. (But I like both more classic RPGs and DAII, so I can't picture being disappointed.) How you manage to sort the good and useful criticism from the rest, is beyond me. But, keep up the good work.

[Thor Rand Al]

Rojahar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Rojahar wrote...
 it's hypocritical of you to condescend to others who resent being called unsophisticated, not true fans, idiots, or other insults simply because they're not part of some DA2 hating lynch mob. I don't think there's anything "oversensitive" about wishing the forum environment wasn't so hostile and hateful toward anyone who doesn't hate the game.

I was talking to Cmess, my friend, and if she felt I was being condescending to her, she can speak for herself.

But if you feel I am being  condescending to you, then I apologize.

Understood. Don't worry about it. I wasn't trying to specifically target you with that quote, FYI, but rather make a broader point about these forums in general. I share the feelings about these forums being hostile at times, that anyone who has anything positive to say shouldn't even bother to post because they'll just be attacked and insulted, and I don't think it's oversensitive at all to feel that way. Why would someone want to post or be around such an environment? I think it's pretty obvious these forums are hostile, and quick to insult the intelligence and integrity of anyone who likes DA2.

I see a lot of people brushing off that there are people who feel these forums are hostile and impossible to have any kind of discussion that isn't the same old DA2 hate without being insulted or trolled. I don't think those same people, however, would brush it off or take it any better (I think they'd take it a lot worse) if people were insulting them for their tastes, or trying to relentlessly crush and discredit all dissenting opinion.

Anyone who likes DA2 and resents being called dumb for liking something about it is often called "oversensitive" and basically told to shut up, but if anyone says something as simple as "I personally thought DA2 did some things better than DAO." then they're jumped on and attacked for "daring to personally insult" the DA2 haters - when I think if anything that is what's oversensitive: taking someone's liking of a game to be an insult to you because you hate it. Calling someone an idiot, or not as smart, or "The Call of Duty crowd" or not a true Bioware fan, or counterproductive, or promoting bad games... IS an express insult, however.

Wow, here, here. Said it in a nutshell

[Steppenwolf]

I don't take this promise of the new DLC being made for the Origins fans seriously at all since they say DA2 is the direction of the franchise moving forward and they refuse to call their boneheaded changes anything but innovations. It's disheartening. Why am I either an old fogey, afraid of change or in love with the new "direction"?

And I put direction in parentheses because calling DA2 the direction of the franchise suggests DA2 had direction.

[cmessaz]

Rojahar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Rojahar wrote...
 it's hypocritical of you to condescend to others who resent being called unsophisticated, not true fans, idiots, or other insults simply because they're not part of some DA2 hating lynch mob. I don't think there's anything "oversensitive" about wishing the forum environment wasn't so hostile and hateful toward anyone who doesn't hate the game.

I was talking to Cmess, my friend, and if she felt I was being condescending to her, she can speak for herself.

But if you feel I am being  condescending to you, then I apologize.

Understood. Don't worry about it. I wasn't trying to specifically target you with that quote, FYI, but rather make a broader point about these forums in general. I share Cmess' feelings about these forums being hostile at times, and I don't think it's oversensitive at all to feel that way. I think it's pretty obvious these forums are hostile, and quick to insult the intelligence and integrity of anyone who likes DA2.

I see a lot of people brushing off that there are people who feel these forums are hostile and impossible to have any kind of discussion that isn't the same old DA2 hate without being insulted or trolled. I don't think those same people, however, would brush it off or take it any better (I think they'd take it a lot worse) if people were insulting them for their tastes, or trying to relentlessly crush and discredit all dissenting opinion.

Anyone who likes DA2 and resents being called dumb for liking something about it is often called "oversensitive" and basically told to shut up, but if anyone says something as simple as "I personally thought DA2 did some things better than DAO." then they're jumped on and attacked for "daring to personally insult" the DA2 haters - when I think if anything that is what's oversensitive: taking someone's liking of a game to be an insult to you because you hate it. Calling someone an idiot, or not as smart, or "The Call of Duty crowd" or not a true Bioware fan, or counterproductive, or promoting bad games... IS an express insult, however.

And I know some disagree but to me it's very obvious the forums have been....unwelcoming for people who like DA2. I use other places to keep in touch with many "buddies" from BSN before DA2...and I'd say about 80% of them do not come to the forums (other than character threads) because of the enviroment. So I'm not just speaking about myself.
@KoP I disagree with you in some things, but you haven't offended me...yet.

[dheer]

Rojahar wrote...
I don't think there's anything "oversensitive" about wishing the forum environment wasn't so hostile and hateful toward anyone who doesn't hate the game.

This place is pretty damn hostile to anyone who didn't like the game as well. Quit pretending this all comes from one side.