1248 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Aeowyn wrote...

Well part of the point was that the majority of those people who complained still complained when the game was released. Which of course, might be because to them the game sucked, but to me it just felt they didn't give the game a proper chance because they were determined to hate it.

And that'd be exactly that confirmation bias mentioned earlier. I mean, it makes it easy to dismiss complaints about quality of the game as simple "oh they're just haters and didn't give it a proper try." And from there it's just a small step to convincing oneself that the game itself doesn't have any real issues and it's nothing but people judging it unfairly.

The whole "proper chance" thing is btw rather silly when it comes to complaints about technical matters like quality of textures and animations, reuse of levels etc. Which is what makes it especially annoying when it's used to gloss over such concerns.

[DanaScu]

Aeowyn wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

I certainly understand that folks are sore over some of what we did with Dragon Age II, but I think a lot of the rage is based on confirmation bias. You're already dead set against liking DA2, and feel you've been betrayed by BioWare, of course you're going to take what we say in the most negative way possible. That's why we're having his "argument" in the first place. (..)

Remember how the forum was when DA2 was first released? Flame posts everywhere and we largely said nothing. Why? Because people weren't ready to listen and be reasonable yet. All they could focus on were the differences between DAO and DA2 and how much they didn't like that.

Actually when DA2 was first released, considerable part of what the people were focusing on were the shortcomings of DA2 itself, ones which had nothing to do with DAO. You know, the things doe-eyed developers after a while publically declared as stuff that "we never thought would be such a problem."

Funny, all I remember seeing months before the game was released was people complaining about how DA2 was not going to be about the Warden, how their favourite characters weren't going to be in it etc. That continued for months, and when you told them to not buy it, it turns out they'd pre-ordered it ages ago.

The Alistair Gush Thread is a really good example of this.

I recall complaints about the restrictions for weapons, armor, and not being able to change companions outfits, no matter how much you attempt to justify someone fighting in a thong. Companions not changing outfits for 10 years. No talking to companions except in certain places. Not being able to initiate conversations with companions. "Sweeping cinematics" that took control away from the player so they can watch the movie instead of playing the game. Not having the Warden back was actually about the last thing that was a concern for me.

I was willing to go along with the human only character. Changing so many other aspects was pushing it. Adding the ME dialogue wheel so you have no idea beyond "good", "sarcastic jerk", and "douche" answers, along with the "tone/intent" thing that really restricted your role-playing shoved it over the edge of a very high cliff for me. That's why I not only didn't pre-order it, I didn't buy it. My brother didn't believe me when I said what had been changed; he bought the game. Lost any interest he had in the game in act 2. I borrowed his copy, played it, didn't do many side quests and really had to force myself to finish it.

I have read the interviews. I don't seem to be getting the reasurance from those interviews that some others seem to be. They supposedly hear/read what the issues are that people have with the game. They admit changes have to be made. Not saying *what* those changes should be doesn't make me believe they are going to fix anything, except maybe the reused maps. They already flat out said they did a 180 to make DA2, so don't expect massive changes for DA3. They're going to keep the wheel of vaguely worded possibilities that won't actually be what your character will say. I shudder to think what they will remove, restrict, or streamline next in their mission to create *unique* characters [that somehow seem to be the stereotypical sword and board/two handed weapon fighter, dual dagger wielding rogue, and fireball flinging mage].

[Aeowyn]

Monica83 wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Monica83 wrote...



I feel sad for those people that say: Ohhhhh look what ray said.. is very refreshing to read.. now i can't wait the new dlc!

Or...: Look griffin statues i want that DLC...

Poor humanity

And here is your typical insult directed at anyone that dares like something you dont like.

Oh yes mhhhh mass effect 2 honestly a better game.. You can insult me i don't mind...

I don't like to feed drones

About the lies:
Also best answers by the devs like: We don't rush games....

ooooh sure... XD

How suitable.

Edit for quote fail

Modifié par Aeowyn, 18 juin 2011 - 11:07 .

[Aaleel]

cmessaz wrote...

Ok, thanks for not taking that wrong I can respect that.

Honestly Hawke was not the main reason I didn't like the game.  It was.

1) the reused areas, because I'm a what's next, what's over the next horizon kind of person.  So the reused areas really took a lot away from the game.  Plus I naively thought things would change over the years, so after time skips when I saw that same warehouse, same cave, unchanged Kirkwall again, it just took away from the grand adventure, epic tale type feel.

2) Enemy waves.  Like I said earlier, 1 wave fine, 2 maybe.  Limited use fine.  But several waves every fight in and outside the city, it just became tedious, and moreso, not fun.  So when I stopped having fun, it was all over.

So once that happened other little things probably bothered me more than they normally would have.

And that in a nutshell was my expierence with DA2.

[Aeowyn]

tmp7704 wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

Well part of the point was that the majority of those people who complained still complained when the game was released. Which of course, might be because to them the game sucked, but to me it just felt they didn't give the game a proper chance because they were determined to hate it.

And that'd be exactly that confirmation bias mentioned earlier. I mean, it makes it easy to dismiss complaints about quality of the game as simple "oh they're just haters and didn't give it a proper try." And from there it's just a small step to convincing oneself that the game itself doesn't have any real issues and it's nothing but people judging it unfairly.

The whole "proper chance" thing is btw rather silly when it comes to complaints about technical matters like quality of textures and animations, reuse of levels etc. Which is what makes it especially annoying when it's used to gloss over such concerns.

Oh do you seriously think they don't take feedback into consideration? But when the same people complain over and over again about the same thing "because we need to make sure that BioWare insulted and disappointed us and I demand satisfaction, ser!" it does get very tiring.

[addiction21]

Monica83 wrote...


Oh yes mhhhh mass effect 2 honestly a better game.. You can insult me i don't mind...

What does ME2 have to do with this other then you saying its skill trees were like DA2. If you had actually played both you would know that is wrong and telling someone that they clearly have no idea what they are talking about is not a insult when they so clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

Monica83 wrote...

I don't like to feed drones

What a shock. You have no argument so you resort to name calling. I did not epect anything else from you.

Monica83 wrote...

About the lies:

Want to elaborate on the lies? Or did you just pull a random youtube vid of a DA2 dev discussing the game?

Monica83 wrote...

Also best answers by the devs like: We don't rush games....

ooooh sure... XD

Are you going to show us where they stated this? I have seen a lot of PR BS from them but not this. Like I have told you many times before Monica. If you are going to accuse someone of lieing you better be able to back it up.

And if you can then I will eat my words but untill then...

Modifié par addiction21, 18 juin 2011 - 11:07 .

[the_one_54321]

Ray Muzyka wrote...
"It actually drew a lot of new players in who really love it," "Many people who played Dragon Age: Origins loved it as well.

"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.

"We think it was innovative. We're proud of the risks the team took. We  think it's the right direction for the franchise. We also think there's  an opportunity to listen to the core fans who loved Dragon Age: Origins  to make sure they're with us on the journey going forward.

All of the above is a serious porblem  and one of the main reasons I expect I won't be buying BioWare games anymore. That having innitially started with the debut of DAII. The other big reason is because of the previous announcements EA has made regarding how they want to handle the production and distribution of their future titles.

[tmp7704]

Aeowyn wrote...

Oh do you seriously think they don't take feedback into consideration?

I simply don't know how they are taking it into consideration, as they aren't really elaborating on that. So we can only interpret what's provided in these interviews ... and this very conversation sparked by one of them shows that it's possible to think that they could easily dismiss lot of the complaints. Because after all, why not dismiss them when it's all just the haters who were determined to dislike the game from the start?

[the_one_54321]

addiction21 wrote...
I have seen a lot of PR BS from them but not this.

Like I have told you many times before Monica. If you are going to accuse someone of lieing you better be able to back it up.

Two examples, both in threads that I personally took part in.

When it was first brought up that the game was only going to take a small amount of space on the hard drive people were freaking out about "well how much can you fit in such a small space? Is the game so much shorter?" Chris Priestly's response, and I quote, "we've just gotten that much better at making games. That's really it."

Also, and this was literally to me specifically. When I and a couple others asked for a straight answer on the game camera Mike Laidlaw specifically said that he viewed a detacable arial camera as key to tactical play and the game would have it. The game did not have it.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 18 juin 2011 - 11:12 .

[Cutlasskiwi]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

How on earth are DAII's skill trees like Mass Effect's? o.O

I would very much like to know this as well. I see no similarities.

[kingjezza]

I had major doubts about the game before release, just from the things we had seen and been told and how Bioware seemed as desperate as they could be to get as many pre-order sales as possible. In the end I decided to stick with my pre-order simply because of the good faith I had in the series thanks to Origins.

I would have loved to have been proven wrong, in the end I wasn't, all I feared was pretty much true, that was the last Bioware game I pre-order, once ME3 is gone it might well be the last Bioware game I buy at all, I don't really have the faith in them as a company to make the games I want any longer.

Maybe they'll attract a whole new set of gamers, who knows, fair play to them if they do.

[Sylvius the Mad]

uote]the_one_54321 wrote...

Two examples, both in threads that I personally took part in.

When it was first brought up that the game was only going to take a small amount of space on the hard drive people were freaking out about "well how much can you fit in such a small space? Is the game so much shorter?" Chris Priestly's response, and I quote, "we've just gotten that much better at making games. That's really it." [/quote]
I never really thought about it.  I suppose the reused areas might save a lot of space.

In terms of gameplay I don't think DA2 is much shorter than DAO.  DA2 just holds the player's hand more, telling him where to go and what to do.  If you turn that off, there is a bunch of exploration that suddenly becomes necessary that makes the game quite a bit longer.
[quote]Also, and this was literally to me specifically. When I and a couple others asked for a straight answer on the game camera Mike Laidlaw specifically said that he viewed a detacable arial camera as key to tactical play and the game would have it. The game did not have it. [/quote]
That's not evidence of Mike misleading us.  That's evidence of DA2 not being the game Mike would like it to be.  I'm not even willing to blame Mike for that - I pretty sure it wasn't his call.

[Wodenborn]

Here's my $0.02

1) LELIANA IS DEAD. I KILLED HER. I KILLED HER DEAD. I KILLED HER DEAD AND THEN DESECRATED THE ASHES OF HER SAVIOR. SHE IS GONE NOW.

Do NOT bring her back into my game, do NOT make her involved in the chantry's inquisition. Jeezbus. It's really hard to take choice in a bioware game seriously, if all my most memorable choices (ALISTAIR IS DEAD TOO) are going to be instantly retconned.

This made the ending of DA2 twice as anticlimactic. Not only did my entire party flip out and leave me all at once, but it felt completely fake, since I know we'd all be back together in the DLC. I know this because I got a second chance with two of the party members that felt entirely insincere, like it was only there to prevent me from facing the consequences of my actions. Screw that. I want the drama. BRING THE DRAMA. People who can't face up to their own actions have a reload button. Leave my game be.

2) Pursuant to that: NO RETCON DLC. I had enough of that with the first dragon age, let's give it a rest.

3) More Locales. I didn't care about lazily reused levels, even though simply randomizing level sections at each doorway would have added variety and an accurate minimap would have kept me from running into the new set of invisible walls every time.

No, I didn't care, but I still never got to see half the variety I saw in DA1. More varied areas, which means not having multiple city tiles, multiple forest tiles, and multiple cave tiles would have helped.

3) The gameplay is vastly improved. I suffered through the console controls to complete DA1, and this feels much better. However, by the end, all the action elements felt repetitive and rote, so add some cool, new moves for DLC plz? Thx.

4) End it. End it once. When I kill the big bad guy featured in ALL the cinematics and promotional materials, I expect a pat on the back and some credits. Having the game drag on afterwards felt tedious, even though I loved the set-up, even though I loved the combat, I just didn't have enough time to give a flying spigot about any of the new characters before the game was over. It made the last section of DA2 feel entirely disconnected, devoid of cohesion, and left a slightly sour taste in my mouth.

I thought the 'unreliable narrator' frame story of DA2 was brilliant in theory. But when the overarching frame is a FREAKING CUTSCENE, the most important part of the story is not interactive. This makes you feel small and insignificant in a genre that's all about feeling powerful. It can be done. It can be awesome. Just do it right next time.

- Marcus

[Zanallen]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Two examples, both in threads that I personally took part in.

When it was first brought up that the game was only going to take a small amount of space on the hard drive people were freaking out about "well how much can you fit in such a small space? Is the game so much shorter?" Chris Priestly's response, and I quote, "we've just gotten that much better at making games. That's really it."

Also, and this was literally to me specifically. When I and a couple others asked for a straight answer on the game camera Mike Laidlaw specifically said that he viewed a detacable arial camera as key to tactical play and the game would have it. The game did not have it.

But the game isn't really all that much shorter than base Origins. Both games took me about 40 hours to complete with Origins a few hours more that DA2.

I don't recall Laidlaw saying for certain that the camera would be there. I remember him saying that he felt it was important to tactical play, but not that it was for sure in the game.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
In terms of gameplay I don't think DA2 is much shorter than DAO.  DA2 just holds the player's hand more, telling him where to go and what to do.  If you turn that off, there is a bunch of exploration that suddenly becomes necessary that makes the game quite a bit longer.

That's not evidence of Mike misleading us.  That's evidence of DA2 not being the game Mike would like it to be.  I'm not even willing to blame Mike for that - I pretty sure it wasn't his call.

People worried about the amount of exploration. People worried about the development time. Then the disk space issue comes up and people point and say "is this a sign?" And the response is "it's a sign of how awesome we are!" Which was pretty darn false.

I don't blame Mike specifically for something that may not have been his call. But in the end we were promised something would be in the game and then it was not in the game.

[cmessaz]

Zanallen wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Two examples, both in threads that I personally took part in.

When it was first brought up that the game was only going to take a small amount of space on the hard drive people were freaking out about "well how much can you fit in such a small space? Is the game so much shorter?" Chris Priestly's response, and I quote, "we've just gotten that much better at making games. That's really it."

Also, and this was literally to me specifically. When I and a couple others asked for a straight answer on the game camera Mike Laidlaw specifically said that he viewed a detacable arial camera as key to tactical play and the game would have it. The game did not have it.

But the game isn't really all that much shorter than base Origins. Both games took me about 40 hours to complete with Origins a few hours more that DA2.

I don't recall Laidlaw saying for certain that the camera would be there. I remember him saying that he felt it was important to tactical play, but not that it was for sure in the game.

I actually take longer to beat DA2, personally, because I feel more compelled to finish everything.

And I seem to remember the opposite, them saying that the tactical camera would NOT be in DA2....because it upset me.

And yes...I still miss the camera.

[the_one_54321]

cmessaz wrote...
And I seem to remember the opposite, them saying that the tactical camera would NOT be in DA2....because it upset me.

The conversation I refer to is not a reference to something I saw on the forums. It was a conversation between Mike and I, with a couple others chiming in. I was told that this camera would be in the game in some form. It was not in the game in any form.

[Morroian]

the_one_54321 wrote...

When it was first brought up that the game was only going to take a small amount of space on the hard drive people were freaking out about "well how much can you fit in such a small space? Is the game so much shorter?" Chris Priestly's response, and I quote, "we've just gotten that much better at making games. That's really it." 

And then later they talked about better compression techniques.

the_one_54321 wrote...

Also, and this was literally to me specifically. When I and a couple others asked for a straight answer on the game camera Mike Laidlaw specifically said that he viewed a detacable arial camera as key to tactical play and the game would have it. The game did not have it.

If thats the thread I remember he said he was testing it. My view is that testing simply didn't work out.

[cmessaz]

the_one_54321 wrote...

cmessaz wrote...
And I seem to remember the opposite, them saying that the tactical camera would NOT be in DA2....because it upset me.

The conversation I refer to is not a reference to something I saw on the forums. It was a conversation between Mike and I, with a couple others chiming in. I was told that this camera would be in the game in some form. It was not in the game in any form.

Ah, I see. Yeah I do miss that camera.

[Persephony 30]

Biodrones will probably eat anything up. I don't even care at this point. Game sucks, but there's always the Witcher & CDProjekt.

[DragonRageGT]

Monica83 wrote...

Oh yes mhhhh mass effect 2 honestly a better game.. You can insult me i don't mind...

I don't like to feed drones

About the lies:
Also best answers by the devs like: We don't rush games....

ooooh sure... XD

Why did they have to say lies about Origins to justify their changes in this lousy sequel? Origins Two hander played the same as a S/S? Yeah, right. Watch some of my 150 Origins vids to see how my two hander plays exactly like Alistair. Quit watching after he said that.

Modifié par RageGT, 18 juin 2011 - 11:31 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I don't blame Mike specifically for something that may not have been his call. But in the end we were promised something would be in the game and then it was not in the game.

We weren't promised it, though.  We were told it was in the game, but that it didn't work the way we might expect.  And they also offered their standard "we can't guarantee it will stay in the game" line.  And we never knew that the featrure existed on all platforms.

And then they didn't talk about it again.  Mike's assertion that a detachable camera was critical may have been an attempt to drum up support for the idea to convince his superiors to let him keep it.  We don't know.

I don't have enough information to find fault with anyone in particular for that screw up.  Yes, the DA2 camera is appalling, but I don't think we were lied to.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

cmessaz wrote...
And I seem to remember the opposite, them saying that the tactical camera would NOT be in DA2....because it upset me.

The conversation I refer to is not a reference to something I saw on the forums. It was a conversation between Mike and I, with a couple others chiming in. I was told that this camera would be in the game in some form. It was not in the game in any form.

Actually, Mike made the "critical to tactical play" comment in the "No Overhead Camera" thread.  He clarified that the camera wasn't the same as DAO's camera, but that it zoomed out farther than DAO's low-angle camera.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 18 juin 2011 - 11:33 .

[cmessaz]

Persephony 30 wrote...

Biodrones will probably eat anything up. I don't even care at this point. Game sucks, but there's always the Witcher & CDProjekt.

Cool. Go play their games then.

Modifié par cmessaz, 18 juin 2011 - 11:34 .

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
We were told it was in the game, but that it didn't work the way we might expect.

But it was not in the game at all. I remember him saying it wouldn't zoom as far out. That's what sated my curiosity. "Oh, it's there but it doesn't go as far back. That's ok." But it's not there. In anyway. There is no tactical camera in this game. There is an over the shoulder camera and only and over the shoulder camera. It just happens to zoom back farther than in some other games. I view that as being lied to.