1248 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Not true. You can decide a course before going on that mission. Does it change much? No. But you get make the choice before starting and confirm it at the end. For instance, Templars and mages. You can decided what to do 3-4 times throughout. [/quote].

You can't go to the Tower to recruit the templars. You go to the recruit the mages. That's the choice. And you do it because either you buy into it from start, or surrender to the demand of the plot.

[quote]Does it give you a lot of huge choices that can change the entire game? No. That doesn't mean there is not a big amount of choices in the story. And I am not syaing DA:O pulled it off perfectly. TW2 beats them both. Easily. [/quote]

I'm saying you're not active - you execute someone else's plan (Flemeth and Alistair's, in that case) which is to get the treaties. You have no choice in that. That's what makes you passive.

Then it becomes a question of how you execute that plan. But even that is not your choice. The game just lets you pick between two options at times.

[quote]It's different, because the  Warden acts for something while Hawke doesn't do anything because he doens't care about the main thing that is going on.  [/quote]

Why does Hawke have to think the mage/templar business is the main thing going on?

[quote]Yes, you do. You know that you can recruit Tempalrs before you go to the Tower. [/quote]

No, you don't. And you can't not choose to get to the tower. That's the point. That's what makes the Warden passive: executing someone else's vision (and not even being able to have an original thougth while doing it).

[quote]You confirm that  choice during the quest. You decide who you want to support for the throne in Orzammar, and confirm at the end. [/quote]

Once again, you get two options laid between you and are forced to pick. Just like Hawke.

[quote]You can try to negotiate with werewolves the moment you see them, and then come to a decision
almost at the end. Golems no, since it wouldn't make sense for you to know.[/quote]

Like I said: I think the werewolves are about the only active choice the Warden makes.

[quote]Except the army is a clear signal that you are an alternative to Loghain, hence why he says that it's either you and him the men will follow. If you didn't have an army, no one would care.  [/quote]

No one knows you have an army. You never mention it, it isn't present, you have no representation for it, and Eamon makes no use of it. Eamon just refuses to call the Landsmeet earlier, and sends his errand boy (i.e. you) to collec the army.

[quote]Yes you can. He wants Alsitair on the throne and he wants to be his chancellor. You can end up with executing the last Therein, and placing Anora on the throne. How is that not out-maneuvring him?[/quote]

You execute his plan to the letter, and then at the end you say "Changed my mind! I'm siding with Anora!". Your entire "activity" resolves around doing everything absolutely the same as his best errand boy and then barking different orders that, for whatever unexplained reason, everyone seems perfectly happy to go along with.

You don't outmanuever Eamon - you can put Anora in the throne over Alistair, and then she demands that Alistair dies. You can not object, but you can't actually demand Alistair die yourself, independently. Once again, you're the passive stooge. 

[quote]Of course  some options are restricted based on who the Warden is. How does that make the choice non-existent? Taht's like saying that warrior no being able to use magic is removing choice. [/quote]

It doesn't. But the Landsmeet never has more than 2-3 choices at any one time.

[quote]I don't remember saying that DA2 had no choices. Just that I felt DA:O had more, and ones that interested me more. Especially when DA2 had the potential to be more than just that. [/quote]

That doesn't have anything to do with the Warden being active.

[quote]Andif I dont' feel they are developped well enough for me to care, then I don't even want to RP. And yes, I know that people can feel this way about Origisn and they are entitled to. [/quote]

Certainly. My only point is that feeling is the difference between DA:O and DA2. Not much else. There's certainly a level of execution DA:O has that DA2 absolutely misses, but at the meta-level, DA:O and DA2 are basically the same.

[quote]Bhelen is not status quo. Anora / Alsitair is not the status quo either, each in their own way. In addition, there are the boons and choices, like the Circle in Orzammar...etc. There are definitely ways to change the status quo.[/quote]

The difference between the world at the start of DA:O and the end of the actual game (i.e. the Throne Room) all that you've changed is that there is no more Blight.

Bhelen was in a power-struggle with Harrowmont without the blight. Would he have won? Who knows - but the Warden didn't set anything in motion. Loghain planned to depose Cailan either way. Would Alistair have been King? Who knows. Eamon, if he lived, would have opposed him. And without a Blight Teagan absolutely would have. Dagna wanted to leave for the Circle, and she could have found some other way to escape.

So none of these things are things the Warden sets in motion. The Warden fights to keep everything the same way.

[quote]
No, not at all.That's exactly the difference between beign passive and active. If you dont' care about the main thiung that is happenign around you, you'll be passive. If you do care, you'll be active.

Now you can say that Hawke can care about hsi family instead and if that works for you, good for you. But I'd much rather care about the thing that is making the whole city collapse, when I have the capacity to. [/quote]

Caring has nothing to do with being active. A great example is Alistair/Anora giving the final speech instead of the Warden. The Warden can care to save Ferelden, but is still being passive.

[quote]I thought you were talking about a Dwarf becomign King of Ferelden. Granted. But there are alternatives.
Prince Consort, or being chancellor to a weak Alsitair.[/quote]

But I don't want to RP these alternatives. I want sole rule, and Anora feeding the worms with Alistair. And DA:O tells me to go stuff myself.

[quote]And having Harrowmont on the throne, would more likely allow your Warden to influence him.  Both are a rise to power. Ideally of course, I would have wanted more options. [/quote]

Or Harrowmont just ignores you. Influence is just that - a whim that the person who actually has power decides to grant you. Certainly, I'd say being a paragon is 10x better than being King. But DA:O stil rescrits you.

[quote]No, here's why. I don't get to choose to be Viscount. It's imposed on me simply because I slaughtered mages. That's it. My Hawke didnt' have to work for it, or think for it. Or even want it. It's just given, even when it makes no sense (if apostate). So no, that's not power, nor is it a rise. [/quote]

Well, I don't want to be a Councillor. But you said, if I want to rise to power, I could RP a character that wants that in the confine of the game. Well, you can RP a character who wants to be Viscount.

You offered me an outcome and told me to like it because it was good enough. Here you go: this is the same logic, and it's equally bad.

I have a character that doesn't want to be Chancellor; I have a character who wants to rule, officially. And DA:O tells me to go stuff myself.

[quote]
A lot of them, yes. Not denying that. And I wished that DA2 was actually true to its concepts.

But overall, I do feel that the Warden was more active and had more influence. Better writing for the most part and better companions. But I am nto saying that DA:O is most definitely better. A lot of it has to do with buying in, of course. 
[/quote]

I am saying that all of this things are consequences of DA:O 'clicking' for you.

Modifié par In Exile, 18 juin 2011 - 05:31 .

[Foolsfolly]

So it seems BioWare is intent on painting DA2 as "innovative" and those who didn't like it as some sort of outlier that simply couldn't handle the change and "innovation." What bugs me is how they act like the people that didn't like it are all lumped into one group that simply wanted more Origins. Well, maybe DA2 just wasn't a very well put together game?

That does bother me. The only real innovation the game made was in the personalities and the three different tones of voice.

I guess you could lump all the romances being Hawkesexual but that's not a real innovation is it?

Everything else is either just a little different than Origins or taken from similar games. There's nothing here outside of the personalities that haven't been done a dozen times in other games, some even being BioWare games.

But they never say what's so innovative about the game. They use the word to defend and backslap anyone who doesn't adore the game but they never explain what was so innovative.

I also hate the "more personal story" defense. What a load of crap. It's three DLC storylines strung together with only two threads continuing between them: the same core characters, and the same location.

Just because there's a family doesn't mean it's some deeply personal story. I applaud the attempt but the outcome was just a mess of 'Who Cares' as the family members drop like flies.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's an unfair example.  We know BioWare doesn't like to model unsuccessful outcomes.  Since going to Orlais to find more Wardens would result in the Archdemon destroying Ferelden, that's not a result they model.

It's not unfair at all: you can't actually decide the plan yourself. Others decide the plan for you.

Would the game have been better if you were allowed to make that choice only to see a fancy Game Over screen?  Yes, I think it would.  But we know BiOWare isn't going to make that game, so it's unreasonable of you to expect it.

That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that the Warden executes the vision of someone else.

Much like playing a tabletop game, where the GM  can respond to player choices that would result in irredeemable failure with a simple "No, you're not doing that," wherever the game doesn't model some outcome is effectively the game doing exactly that.

It's an abstraction.

In a tabletop game, if one player is the 'leader' the GM can come up with another way to sucker the PCs into the quest.

e.g. the Blight overruns the only mountain path in Ferelden and it's either save the country or die, painfully.

You can choose to go to those places, and you can choose to go to those places for reasons other than recruiting armies.  But once you arrive, the locals are too tied up in their own problems to accommodate any action you might want to take other than helping them.

You can't choose to go to any places but those, and it's not your idea to do it.

And again, not collecting the armies results in the destruction of Ferelden.  That's an outcome the game doesn't model.

It's not the game modeling it. It's who makes the choice.

But you can say that saving Recliffe is stupid.  You can say that going to the Circle Tower to get mages to help Connor is stupid.  It's not a complete railroad, because there are meaningful choices along the way.  There isn't every possible choice, but that's an absurd standard.

It isn't. A choice is 'active' when you make it yourself, for yourself. It's passive when you're executing it for someone else.

You can choose two wholly different paths in Orzammar (by wholly different, I mean that they look different when you are choosing between them, which is all I think they need to be relevantly dissimilar).

You pick which leader to obey.

But you do get one time to be active in that quest line: you get to pick to betray one of the two, and you get to make that decision on your own.

That's exactly the plot of the Lord of the Rings.  It's the most traditional fantasy narrative available.

No, it isn't. That's the thing. LoTOR is a tragedy about how the world is changing, and how nothing can stem the tide of that change, but stopping Sauron at least evades a horror.

In the end, the elves leave Middle Earth, the last of the Nuemorian blood will diminish to nothing, and the other mystical creatures (e.g. hobbits) slowly begin to retreat. It's a bittersweet note, and with the demise of Sauron he world changes forever.

Bad things happen.  Reluctant hero quests to stop it.

In LOTR, no one is reluctant except for Frodo/Merry & Pippen.

Except for the dialogue system, and the obviously nonsensical combat mechanics.

I was only looking at whether or not Hawke was more active/passive than the Warden.

[KnightofPhoenix]

[quote]In Exile wrote...
You can't go to the Tower to recruit the templars. You go to the recruit the mages. That's the choice. And you do it because either you buy into it from start, or surrender to the demand of the plot.[/quote]

Why can't the Warden want to try and see if he can recruit Tempalrs anyways? Nothing really says he can't.
And the plot quickly shows you that you don't have to have mages.

[quote]
I'm saying you're not active - you execute someone else's plan (Flemeth and Alistair's, in that case) which is to get the treaties. You have no choice in that. That's what makes you passive.

Then it becomes a question of how you execute that plan. But even that is not your choice. The game just lets you pick between two options at times. [/quote]

It makes the player passive. Not the character. In game, they don't tell him to do this and he just follow orders. The character is supposedely convinced (poorly it's true) that this is a good plan. So he does it. Same with going for Eamon instead of going after Loghain. Neither Alistair nor Morrigan orders the Warden to do it.

Player agency is not always equivalent to character agency. Though they are supposed to be interrelated in RPGs.

[quote]
Why does Hawke have to think the mage/templar business is the main thing going on? [/quote]

Because it is. What else is happening in Kirkwall, at least after act 2? tAht is risking the destruction of the whole city? 


[quote]
Like I said: I think the werewolves are about the only active choice the Warden makes.[/quote]

Templars is an active choice. Golems as well. People present you with the option, and you decide whether you agree or not. That's active choice.  Because without you, they are screwed.

[quote]
No one knows you have an army. You never mention it, it isn't present, you have no representation for it, and Eamon makes no use of it. Eamon just refuses to call the Landsmeet earlier, and sends his errand boy (i.e. you) to collec the army.[/quote]

Except you can collect the army before waking him up (so he doesn't send you) and of course everyone knows about the army. It could have been ingegrated better, but you see the army in Redcliffe castle. And yes, they have representatives.

They also have representatives in your camp.

[quote]
You don't outmanuever Eamon - you can put Anora in the throne over Alistair, and then she demands that Alistair dies. You can not object, but you can't actually demand Alistair die yourself, independently. Once again, you're the passive stooge.  [/quote]

Without your approval, she can't do it. And you can choose not to have her on the throne in the first place.
No, that's not being passive at all. And yes, it's out maneuvring when you do everything he didnt' want you to do. And when you do what he wants initially for your own reason (decide for instance to marry Anora or have her take the throne when she is in Eamons' estate). You can backstab both in fact.

And being a prince consort has you ask for it. As well as being chancellor.

[quote]
It doesn't. But the Landsmeet never has more than 2-3 choices at any one time. [/quote]

It has several, which I already listed.

[quote]
Certainly. My only point is that feeling is the difference between DA:O and DA2. Not much else. There's certainly a level of execution DA:O has that DA2 absolutely misses, but at the meta-level, DA:O and DA2 are basically the same. [/quote]

And that's the level of execution that I am talking about. Hence "in the story" or "in-game".

[quote]
So none of these things are things the Warden sets in motion. The Warden fights to keep everything the same way.[/quote]

None of these things need to be set in motion for the Warden to actively decide the outcome. And he can set something in motion. He can decide to have Ferelden send reinforcements to Orzammar. He can suggest to the Circle to go to Orzammar. He can request havign a new circle....etc

So no, not at all.


[quote]
Caring has nothing to do with being active. A great example is Alistair/Anora giving the final speech instead of the Warden. The Warden can care to save Ferelden, but is still being passive.[/quote]

Not giving a speech is being passive? What?

Of course it has everything to do with being passive or active. If you dont' care about something, there is no reason to be active.

[quote]
But I don't want to RP these alternatives. I want sole rule, and Anora feeding the worms with Alistair. And DA:O tells me to go stuff myself.[/quote]

Yea and too bad. No game has every possible choice. But DA:O gives you some alternatives. DA2 doesn't.

[quote]
Or Harrowmont just ignores you. Influence is just that - a whim that the person who actually has power decides to grant you. Certainly, I'd say being a paragon is 10x better than being King. But DA:O stil rescrits you.[/quote]

Of course it does. It doesn't rescrit you as much.

[quote]
Well, I don't want to be a Councillor. But you said, if I want to rise to power, I could RP a character that wants that in the confine of the game. Well, you can RP a character who wants to be Viscount.

You offered me an outcome and told me to like it because it was good enough. Here you go: this is the same logic, and it's equally bad. [/quote]

No, it's not the same at all. Because the game doesn't impose the alternative on you.
Furthermore, even if I want to RP a Hawke that wants to be Viscount, the choice is stil not presented to me. They just tell me. Why? Because I happen to be good at killing mages, even if I am an apostate. It makes little sense.

[quote]
I am saying that all of this things are consequences of DA:O 'clicking' for you.
[/quote]

I disagree, not all of them no. A lot of them yes.
You just said, level of execution that DA2 misses.

EDIT: anyways I gtg sleep. Nice discussing with you as always!

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 juin 2011 - 06:13 .

[Foolsfolly]

It has several, which I already listed.

It also has the choices of courting the different influential people in the Landsmeet. While it isn't much of a choice (do or do not) it's still a choice.

None of these things need to be set in motion for the Warden to actively decide the outcome. And he can set something in motion. He can decide to have Ferelden send reinforcements to Orzammar. He can suggest to the Circle to go to Orzammar. He can request havign a new circle....etc

So no, not at all.

Can also kill an entire Dalish camp, figure that Redcliffe isn't important and have the undead murder the whole town, and if a Human Noble can position him/herself to use the whole Blight as a power grab for the throne.

The Warden isn't a force for the status quo. The Warden actually can drastically change a place. Even Orzammar is radically changed since the Warden's arrival.

No, it's not the same at all. Because the game doesn't impose the alternative on you.
Furthermore, even if I want to RP a Hawke that wants to be Viscount, the choice is stil not presented to me. They just tell me. Why? Because I happen to be good at killing mages, even if I am an apostate. It makes little sense.

It makes no sense at all for a Mage Pro-Templar to be Viscount and not locked in the Circle and/or Tranquiled.

[stoicsentry2]

Stanley Woo wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I assume that the "Innovation" referred to things like the shift from a silent protagonist to a voiced protagonist or the structure of the narrative - and yes, even the wheel, plus tonal icons. Whether or not you agree with the supposed innovations, it seems that they have taken notice of the criticisms, or does the part where Muzyka says they're going to try to address some of the issues the old fans have had with DA2 and satisfy old and new fans not count? Not that I really give a flying fig about "old" fans who still have their knickers in a twist about the game and are yet again upset about something someone at BioWare said.

Some people just want to argue because they really wanted to like Dragon Age II and didn't, and they're blaming everyone and everything so they won't have to admit that maybe, just maybe, Dragon Age II might not be for them. This i why, despite all the accusations and rants and name-calling and quote-mining and misrepresentation of developer responses, they keep coming back--simply put, they want to like the next game we release.

And that's okay, as long as respect and courtesy are still maintained on this forum.

I understand that you're upset about how much of a dismal failure DA2 was when compared to DA:O. That's OK. 

Still, it's OK for me to feel betrayed when I buy your game and you betrayed the original. Then, your developers want to insult the "old" fans and toss them out. Fine. That's OK, too.

I was going to wait for DA3. I definitely wasn't going to pre-order it after this fiasco. The more  I hear from your developers, the more disrespected I feel as a fan. Again, that's OK too, you can disrepsect your fans.

I am enjoying the Witcher 2. I am interested in Skyrim. Hopefully these games will provide more for the money. I am mostly interested in purchasing RPGs, and I think you've taken the franchise too far away from RPGs at this point. The overwhelming majority of this entire forum disagrees with your developers. That's OK too, just fact.

[erynnar]

You know, reviews are one thing, but the implication of the people unhappy with it being the minority, or some strange group who fears change and innovation? Yeah, sales don't bear that out.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again...take out the huge bump from pre-orders, and DA2 was not a success. Was it enough to get us DA3? Apparently so. But only sales from the DLC and DA3 will tell who was the majority and who was minority.

Oh, and another smack in the frekkin' face with that frekkin' bull****e word, "innovative." Bascially, it's my fault because I am too dull, too set in my ways, too afraid of change to like DA2. *sigh*

I didn't want my Warden back, I ddin't need an Archdemon to kill.  What I did need, is a game with a story, not three disjointed ones tied together with spider webs. I needed a PC that was actually worth playing. I needed choices to matter in the game to enjoy it more. That hardly makes me a drooling dullard who sits in a corner drooling and rocking because I am so afraid of things being different.

Maybe the good doctor didn't mean it that way, but "innovation" and "awesome" and "fear-change" are becoming dirty words in my personal dictionary. LOL!

Modifié par erynnar, 18 juin 2011 - 06:25 .

[stoicsentry2]

erynnar wrote...

You know, reviews are one thing, but the implication of the people unhappy with it being the minority, or some strange group who fears change and innovation? Yeah, sales don't bear that out.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again...take out the huge bump from pre-orders, and DA2 was not a success. Was it enough to get us DA3? Apparently so. But only sales from the DLC and DA3 will tell who was the majority and who was minority.

No damnit, you are all part of one group of 'innovation' haters! We only lost a few fans. Like 10, maybe 11.

LOL

[erynnar]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

You know, reviews are one thing, but the implication of the people unhappy with it being the minority, or some strange group who fears change and innovation? Yeah, sales don't bear that out.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again...take out the huge bump from pre-orders, and DA2 was not a success. Was it enough to get us DA3? Apparently so. But only sales from the DLC and DA3 will tell who was the majority and who was minority.

No damnit, you are all part of one group of 'innovation' haters! We only lost a few fans. Like 10, maybe 11.

LOL

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Thanks! I needed that! I admit, I am a bit testy because I have to visit with the monster-in-law tomorrow. Thanks for the laugh!

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Is there a chance that Dragon Age 2's narrative was a subtle commentary on the nature of the forums and gaming communities at large?

Regardless of whether the protagonist chooses to side with the haters or apologists, it doesn't matter anyway - people go crazy over nothing and destroy attempts at a constructive discussion.

In the end, the only people who are nerdy enough to care to talk about it later is a Dwarf and some French woman.

If that is indeed the case, I take back my previous opinions and declare Dragon Age 2 to be a masterpiece.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 18 juin 2011 - 06:27 .

[Bejos_]

mrcrusty wrote...

Is there a chance that Dragon Age 2's narrative was a subtle commentary on the nature of the forums and gaming communities at large?

Regardless of whether the protagonist chooses to side with the haters or apologists, it doesn't matter anyway - people go crazy over nothing and destroy attempts at a constructive discussion.

In the end, the only people who are nerdy enough to care to talk about it later is a Dwarf and some French woman.

If that is indeed the case, I take back my previous opinions and declare Dragon Age 2 to be a masterpiece.

Hah. Clever. Who is Meredith and who is Orseno?

[Foolsfolly]

I bought DA2 opening night. I was reading the manual in the parking lot.

I'm going to pre-order Mass Effect 3 (I just haven't decided where I'm preordering it from yet). But I'm definitely going to wait a bit for DA3. With the price drop and a few big patches out now's about the time to pick up DA2.

I'd probably still pick up DA3. Am I a glutton for punishment? Of course not. BioWare's quality even if I didn't like the disjointed storytelling of DA2. Or the mess that is the finale. BioWare's still a good bet with video games.

Just being more cautious with a series that's released some, in my opinion, disappointments (Awakenings, the non-Shale/Soldier's Peak DLC, and DA2).

[stoicsentry2]

mrcrusty wrote...

Is there a chance that Dragon Age 2's narrative was a subtle commentary on the nature of the forums and gaming communities at large?

Regardless of whether the protagonist chooses to side with the haters or apologists, it doesn't matter anyway - people go crazy over nothing and destroy attempts at a constructive discussion.

In the end, the only people who are nerdy enough to care to talk about it later is a Dwarf and some French woman.

If that is indeed the case, I take back my previous opinions and declare Dragon Age 2 to be a masterpiece.

Is that true for every game? I wasn't here during DAO, because I was too busy PLAYING it. See that's the real backfire of DA2: the reason you're getting so many angry fans on here is because they finished the nonsensical 'innovative' game in less than a week and it has NO replay value. So what else is there to do but try to get Bioware back to producing real RPGs? 

[erynnar]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Is there a chance that Dragon Age 2's narrative was a subtle commentary on the nature of the forums and gaming communities at large?

Regardless of whether the protagonist chooses to side with the haters or apologists, it doesn't matter anyway - people go crazy over nothing and destroy attempts at a constructive discussion.

In the end, the only people who are nerdy enough to care to talk about it later is a Dwarf and some French woman.

If that is indeed the case, I take back my previous opinions and declare Dragon Age 2 to be a masterpiece.

Is that true for every game? I wasn't here during DAO, because I was too busy PLAYING it. See that's the real backfire of DA2: the reason you're getting so many angry fans on here is because they finished the nonsensical 'innovative' game in less than a week and it has NO replay value. So what else is there to do but try to get Bioware back to producing real RPGs? 

I admit, I was one of those too busy playing and enjoying DAO to come to the forums and talk about it (psssst, BioWare, overf hear, *waves* it was ****ing amazing despite its flaws, which I didn't notice because it was amazing!) .

@Foolsfolly I too am not going to write BioWare off because of DA2. I will be cautious and wait. I will wait for user reviews and read the forums. They aren't persona non grata obviously, or I wouldn't still be here. ROFL!

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

In one way or another, BioWare has been accused of shafting their RPG fanbase since KotOR. Dragon Age 2 has probably had the most adverse reaction so far, though.

[Foolsfolly]

stoicsentry2:

I disagree. When ME2 came out I needed to sign into here and just gush about how great it was. I just had to. I was up here often, reading people's responses, telling my own, hanging around the gameplay forum to better my character builds.

That said, I do agree that DA2 has little replay value. I have no idea why that is though. I can't really point at any one thing.

[Bejos_]

mrcrusty wrote...

In one way or another, BioWare has been accused of shafting their RPG fanbase since KotOR. Dragon Age 2 has probably had the most adverse reaction so far, though.

Simply because it's been the most noticed, probably.

[Elhanan]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

I understand that you're upset about how much of a dismal failure DA2 was when compared to DA:O. That's OK. 

Still, it's OK for me to feel betrayed when I buy your game and you betrayed the original. Then, your developers want to insult the "old" fans and toss them out. Fine. That's OK, too.

I was going to wait for DA3. I definitely wasn't going to pre-order it after this fiasco. The more  I hear from your developers, the more disrespected I feel as a fan. Again, that's OK too, you can disrepsect your fans.

I am enjoying the Witcher 2. I am interested in Skyrim. Hopefully these games will provide more for the money. I am mostly interested in purchasing RPGs, and I think you've taken the franchise too far away from RPGs at this point. The overwhelming majority of this entire forum disagrees with your developers. That's OK too, just fact.

This one's for you:

[Bejos_]

Oh look. snigger.

[erynnar]

Foolsfolly wrote...

stoicsentry2:

I disagree. When ME2 came out I needed to sign into here and just gush about how great it was. I just had to. I was up here often, reading people's responses, telling my own, hanging around the gameplay forum to better my character builds.

That said, I do agree that DA2 has little replay value. I have no idea why that is though. I can't really point at any one thing.

Yes, Foolsfolly, but not everyone does. It didnt occur to me to get on the forum and do what you did for DAO. That's why I think BioWare really ought to do customer surveys.

Modifié par erynnar, 18 juin 2011 - 06:55 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

erynnar wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

stoicsentry2:

I disagree. When ME2 came out I needed to sign into here and just gush about how great it was. I just had to. I was up here often, reading people's responses, telling my own, hanging around the gameplay forum to better my character builds.

That said, I do agree that DA2 has little replay value. I have no idea why that is though. I can't really point at any one thing.

You Fool, not everyone does. It didnt occur to me to get on the forum and do what you did for DAO. That's why I think BioWare really ought to do customer surveys.

I honestly read it like that. Sorry.

[erynnar]

Elhanan wrote...

stoicsentry2 wrote...

I understand that you're upset about how much of a dismal failure DA2 was when compared to DA:O. That's OK. 

Still, it's OK for me to feel betrayed when I buy your game and you betrayed the original. Then, your developers want to insult the "old" fans and toss them out. Fine. That's OK, too.

I was going to wait for DA3. I definitely wasn't going to pre-order it after this fiasco. The more  I hear from your developers, the more disrespected I feel as a fan. Again, that's OK too, you can disrepsect your fans.

I am enjoying the Witcher 2. I am interested in Skyrim. Hopefully these games will provide more for the money. I am mostly interested in purchasing RPGs, and I think you've taken the franchise too far away from RPGs at this point. The overwhelming majority of this entire forum disagrees with your developers. That's OK too, just fact.

This one's for you:

What  a cute put down. Very clever (those are all opinions by the way, I got 100% on the tutorial). I don't see any where that the poster above stated what he said as fact. Just that it was okay for both him and Mr. Woo to have differing opinions on the matter. Or did I miss something that was listed as 'fact." Seems to me neither Mr. Woo nor the poster were doing anything other than sharing opinions. But maybe I need to take the tutorial again.:happy:

[erynnar]

mrcrusty wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

stoicsentry2:

I disagree. When ME2 came out I needed to sign into here and just gush about how great it was. I just had to. I was up here often, reading people's responses, telling my own, hanging around the gameplay forum to better my character builds.

That said, I do agree that DA2 has little replay value. I have no idea why that is though. I can't really point at any one thing.

You Fool, not everyone does. It didnt occur to me to get on the forum and do what you did for DAO. That's why I think BioWare really ought to do customer surveys.

I honestly read it like that. Sorry.

ROFL! Does that mean I need to change it? OH dear!Fools is not just a fool, he is the folly as well! Okay I will edit, I don't want that happening again.

[stoicsentry2]

Elhanan wrote...

stoicsentry2 wrote...

I understand that you're upset about how much of a dismal failure DA2 was when compared to DA:O. That's OK. 

Still, it's OK for me to feel betrayed when I buy your game and you betrayed the original. Then, your developers want to insult the "old" fans and toss them out. Fine. That's OK, too.

I was going to wait for DA3. I definitely wasn't going to pre-order it after this fiasco. The more  I hear from your developers, the more disrespected I feel as a fan. Again, that's OK too, you can disrepsect your fans.

I am enjoying the Witcher 2. I am interested in Skyrim. Hopefully these games will provide more for the money. I am mostly interested in purchasing RPGs, and I think you've taken the franchise too far away from RPGs at this point. The overwhelming majority of this entire forum disagrees with your developers. That's OK too, just fact.

This one's for you:

Most of this was opinion, though I am more than happy to back up the claim that DA2 is taking the franchise far away from RPG territory.

The one thing I said was "fact" was that the overwhelming majority of this forum disagrees with the developers. I would encourage you to read through this entire thread if you think that's mistaken, or find one of any number of threads discussing the game. 

[PsychoBlonde]

That does bother me. The only real innovation the game made was in the personalities and the three different tones of voice.

The complete combat redesign, the friend/rivalry system, the changes to equipment (most notably that you couldn't change what your companions were wearing aside from upgrades), the fact that there was no "save the world" plot (first Bioware game where you don't save the world/kingdom/galaxy/whatever, I believe), the new art style, the weirdly-structured boss fights,  all these failed to register on you completely?  The hugely improved animations?  People actually interacting with objects?!  The fact that all the good armor wasn't some hideous shade of purple?!?!  The removal of skills?  The not-completely-linear skill trees?  COME ON.

Innovation is stuff Bioware hasn't done before.  It doesn't matter if some other game, somewhere, has done something, because Bioware still has to figure out how to implement it from scratch.  DA2 has all sorts of interesting little innovations in it, as well as some big ones.  Some of them worked.  Some of them not so much.  Some of them worked in some places, and not in others.  It was highly experimental, and like all experiments conducted within a series, some people liked it, and some didn't.  Some really hated it.

People are taking this stuff WAY too personally.