Aller au contenu

Photo

Muzyka: Dragon Age 2 "one of the most polarising launches we've had"


1248 réponses à ce sujet

#1126
dheer

dheer
  • Members
  • 705 messages

Morroian wrote...
So you think scores of 0 are warranted and are not indicative of an irrational, emotional reaction.

Sure, it was. Just as irrational as the other side trying to do the same thing to Witcher 2 reviews when it was released even though they're not really related other than being playable on a pc and are described as an rpg.

In the long run, things tend to average out however. DA2 user reviews will mostly likely rise to the 5s eventually and solidly represent a polarised reception for a game.

#1127
Redcoat

Redcoat
  • Members
  • 267 messages
The only problem is, what sort of measures does Metacritic have for stopping individuals for giving multiple ratings? Take Amazon.com, for instance. They only allow people to review products if they've actually purchased it from them.

#1128
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

tmp7704 wrote...
Yes, it's pretty similar. Or maybe rather (since it's about learning something that makes you change view about a character) it's like believing the swans are 100% heterosexual until one day you see one male mounting another. But my question/doubt remains -- while you're unaware of this extra fact, your experience isn't really different from the experience you have afterwards. In both cases you are convinced that you have proper and full idea of the character's personality.


Well, no. At this point, I'm not at all sure about Isabella. I'm going to read the short story. What you asked was whether something like that affects my enjoyment of the game. I'm saying, it does. For example, being able to make Anders a blood mage before learning he hates blood magic would be a pretty big character breaking moment.

Or making Sten take levels in S&S or bows before learning about Asala.

Morrigan gets upgraded robe at some point actually Image IPB (after/if you pay Flemmeth a visit you get one which looks the same but has updated stats) I can quite easily see similar equipment swap mechanics used for the other characters. In any case, with the auto-levelling items this is really moot.


That would be a very different can of worms. I'd prefer the unique follower armour system I mentioned (because I like swapping armour in and out and worrying about builds), but auto-leveling items would certainly be better than DA:O.

The way i see it, since my ideal game isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, it's better in the long run if they can make games which also appeal to other people. It may be at my expense, but this way the devs get enough money to develop more games that i can enjoy, rather than go bankrupt leaving me with single ideal game but nothing after that.


I trust that the developers are comptent enough to know what features to include. I'm going to be loud and annoying, ideally other people will be loud and annoying, and the market will eventually determine what equillibrium of features gets to exist long term.

There's also the fact that while i prefer the game to be made in certain way it doesn't mean i can't enjoy the content i'm not 100% enthusiastic about. As such, these alternatives which eat part of resources aren't necessarily always a total loss for me.


There tends to be lots of content that takes away from my experience. Open-world content being a good example.

And finally --maybe because i can enjoy these different things-- the "ideal game" is quite nebulous for me. It'd be hard for me to describe it aside from some possible features. So i'm not going to resent it if part of the resources is spent on things which i don't necessarily prefer... because who knows, maybe it turns out for that particular game they'll really make sense and i'll have fun with them.


Maybe. I'll still advocate against them (since I have to pay for them) and if they turn out to be worth it, I'll change my taste accordingly.

But that's the thing -- there's nothing in game about Sten being certain type of 2H warrior... except isn't it the exact sort of a "blank" that you advocate the game should address and lock down, to avoid any sort of "player content" filling it? Shouldn't Sten be certain and precisely defined kind of the 2H warrior, if his characterization is supposed to be as complete as possible?


No. To go back to your example, whether or not Isabella likes the colour purple isn't something we need to know. Unless the colour purple is a proxy for a political alliance with respect to the lore, in which case suddenly it matters.

I think the player should have no role in determining the personality of the NPC. That's different than picking what role the NPC serves in combat within that scope.

And of course, "there's nothing about him being certain kind of warrior in-game" ignores the fact that his auto-level scheme follows certain, fixed path. I.e. something that's apparently the developers' vision how his character should progress...


I don't see it that way. I see it as one possible build, done with gameplay in mind, rather than RP. I wouldn't think auto-level is designed to make broken characters.

#1129
KnifeForkAndSpoon

KnifeForkAndSpoon
  • Members
  • 288 messages

Morroian wrote...

So you think scores of 0 are warranted and are not indicative of an irrational, emotional reaction.


That's how people often vote on the internet. 10 if they liked it, 0 if they didn't. It doesn't make their opinion less valid.

#1130
Jon Jern_

Jon Jern_
  • Members
  • 600 messages
Numerical scores are bull****, really. How do I know the difference between a 9.5 and 10? Between an 8 and a 9? Can I simply say I like a game or I don't like a game?

#1131
Morroian

Morroian
  • Members
  • 6 395 messages

KnifeForkAndSpoon wrote...

Morroian wrote...

So you think scores of 0 are warranted and are not indicative of an irrational, emotional reaction.


That's how people often vote on the internet. 10 if they liked it, 0 if they didn't. It doesn't make their opinion less valid.


If you want objective reasons as to why a game is great or sucks it does.

#1132
MorrigansLove

MorrigansLove
  • Members
  • 1 444 messages
The execution of the story was horrendous.

#1133
Edhriano

Edhriano
  • Members
  • 310 messages
The only review I will EVER trust are from 3 or maybe 4 friends (yes I do have real friends ...)
who actually played the game, IF the review are good then I will ask them nicely to let
me 'test' play it, which often work about 8 out of 10 occasions.

If I really like it then maybe I will buy the game.

I will not be sucker punched by "give this game good review or else kiss adds goodbye"
magazine ever again ...

Really ...

#1134
Firky

Firky
  • Members
  • 2 140 messages

Edhriano wrote...

I will not be sucker punched by "give this game good review or else kiss adds goodbye"
magazine ever again ...

Really ...


Except that there's yet to be any proof that that's the case, except in a handful of instances that made online news, and could be backed up by emails etc. (Because, you know, even the best industry has its moments.)

To support the opposing argument... When 2K's PR guy recently "joked" via Twitter that outlets that reviewed DNF negatively wouldn't get future review copies of games, the PR company was fired. (The PR guy then apologised and said he was reacting emotionally. Good for him. And good for 2K for reacting appropriately, IMO, too.)

Some might suggest that 2K were trying to cover up bad practices or some such. Personally, I don't think that's the case. If there was some kind of widespread practice on "you must review our game such and such" someone would have exposed it by now, surely.

(PS. I post this view on here occasionally because I think its important to address common misconceptions about the industry. I should add that I review games freelance for a print mag, so this view is based on my experience. It may not reflect the experience of all reviewers/outlets - but I can't see why my experience would  be atypical either.)

#1135
Guest_PureMethodActor_*

Guest_PureMethodActor_*
  • Guests

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

PureMethodActor wrote...

I gotta say, I admire the time and energy a lot of you have put into this discussion as well as others, and I'm being serious here as well a complimentary. I cannot possibly imagine how anyone finds the time for such lengthy, second-to-second-posting conversation on a lot of topics here in this thread. Is it the passion for/against DA2? I seriously can't keep up at all, even with posts I want to respond to :blink:.


Makes me wish I had more time and energy for it, but all I can manage in a day is one or two posts per thread in about maybe 3-4 threads max.

Thankfully most, if not all, of my opinions are represented here.


Well it is very polarizing.




True, but just the sheer amount of effort I'm seeing, I was wondering if that was the only motivator. Either way, makes me feel inferior for not having the time to be among the most vocal :unsure:.


I mean, other than proper resolution for Morrigan's storyline, good Warden closure, and improved gameplay/enviroments/dialogue for the next game (which you know of from the Morrigan thread, KoP), the only things I'm just wishing for for bonuses are a game set in Antiva and the ability to choose from more than one race.

I'm not asking for much myself, as others have said my views better than I could.

#1136
Devouree

Devouree
  • Members
  • 4 messages

dheer wrote...

Morroian wrote...
So you think scores of 0 are warranted and are not indicative of an irrational, emotional reaction.

Sure, it was. Just as irrational as the other side trying to do the same thing to Witcher 2 reviews when it was released even though they're not really related other than being playable on a pc and are described as an rpg.

In the long run, things tend to average out however. DA2 user reviews will mostly likely rise to the 5s eventually and solidly represent a polarised reception for a game.


Exactly, Portal 2 initially had very very poor user reviews post launch, it was flooded with 0's for reasons such as DLC etc, and now it is a healthy 8.3 (for PC). It shows that truly good games can overcome trolling scores, and average out to something close to its real value. Now I'm not saying DA2 deserves a 4.3 (its like a 6.5-7 for me), but when the user score fails to shift even so long after release, you cannot blame it on the "first day haters" who gave it 0. It means many people are contining to give it mixed reviews.

#1137
alex90c

alex90c
  • Members
  • 3 175 messages
Wow, just go on the first page of the Metacritic user reviews for DA2 and I think every single review except one is either red (95% of them) or orange.

#1138
billy the squid

billy the squid
  • Members
  • 4 669 messages

Firky wrote...

Edhriano wrote...

I will not be sucker punched by "give this game good review or else kiss adds goodbye"
magazine ever again ...

Really ...


Except that there's yet to be any proof that that's the case, except in a handful of instances that made online news, and could be backed up by emails etc. (Because, you know, even the best industry has its moments.)

To support the opposing argument... When 2K's PR guy recently "joked" via Twitter that outlets that reviewed DNF negatively wouldn't get future review copies of games, the PR company was fired. (The PR guy then apologised and said he was reacting emotionally. Good for him. And good for 2K for reacting appropriately, IMO, too.)

Some might suggest that 2K were trying to cover up bad practices or some such. Personally, I don't think that's the case. If there was some kind of widespread practice on "you must review our game such and such" someone would have exposed it by now, surely.

(PS. I post this view on here occasionally because I think its important to address common misconceptions about the industry. I should add that I review games freelance for a print mag, so this view is based on my experience. It may not reflect the experience of all reviewers/outlets - but I can't see why my experience would  be atypical either.)


No company in their right mind would be so dumb as to state the obvious or hand over an envelope of money, but if you don't believe swaping favours and nebulous dealings go on in the any type of industry then you may have seriously underestimated the how the business world works. It is difficult legally to prove that certain actions took place on the balance of probability, as it is harder to tell when favours are done for services provided as a thank you which is common place, justifiable and legal, rather than incentives and pressure from large companies to secure contracts, reviews etc.  which is shaddy at best. 

It is why these practices have developed, to try and circumvent legislation, the OFT (office of fair trading) and other regulatory bodies which have been formed to prevent distortion of competition and bribery, but it has become difficult to determine favours rendered for jobs well done and incentives for a particular outcome, especially as the companies in question will have their own legal departments to ensure they don't fall foul of legislation and case law. These companies have not grown to their current size by being moral paragons when it comes to business deals, but neither are they sloppy when it comes to exposing their business practices to scrutiny.

While the practice of using incentives may not extend to every review, certain major ones may well have been influenced simply due to the cost involved in producing the game, making too important to flop. Pulling advertising, sponsorship, early release access and preview info from a magazine publication will inevitably affect that publication's standing in the overall market and revenue streams as it must compete with others who also will want early info. The implication is therefore clear, give major products a good review or we will have to re evaluate our relationship with the magazine publication. It is not illegal, but it is painfully obvious what will happen if certain magazines don't play ball, so to speak.

Edit for Typos

Modifié par billy the squid, 20 juin 2011 - 05:47 .


#1139
Firky

Firky
  • Members
  • 2 140 messages
Yikes, man. If you say so. The fact remains that I've never felt any pressure to review/score in any way, positive, negative, high, low. Thankfully, because reading that makes me feel really uncomfortable. (And, yes, I am just one freelancer.)

I'm not denying that what you have said sounds logical. But, I haven't seen it. I've reviewed big budget games from a whole bunch of places, and barely even exchanged two words with publishers etc. Most of the contribs for our mag are freelance. Oh, what's the point.

Edit: Your last sentence. Certain publishers wont play ball? So now reviewers/publications are more harshly inclined towards games that don't come with free review copies/interviews/advertising/life-size-qunari-dolls now too? To the best of my knowledge, The Witcher 2 guys didn't give out review copies, which is why there weren't 20 critic reviews released on release day. Believe me, I reviewed it based on my legal, normal GoG version. Was I more harshly inclined towards the game? Why would I be? I have to give around 50% of the games I review back, anyway. The Witcher 2 was well received by critics, despite a general lack of early review copies.The game has its strengths. Why can't it just be that simple? (Also, I have no idea what our mag advertises. Do CDPR have a large advertising budget?)

Sorry. I'm getting annoyed. I think I've made my point. I blithered on about the review process for DAII on the Dragon Age podcast, anyway, so I'm done. I should just keep out of these discussions.

Modifié par Firky, 20 juin 2011 - 12:48 .


#1140
Morroian

Morroian
  • Members
  • 6 395 messages

Devouree wrote...

Exactly, Portal 2 initially had very very poor user reviews post launch, it was flooded with 0's for reasons such as DLC etc, and now it is a healthy 8.3 (for PC). It shows that truly good games can overcome trolling scores, and average out to something close to its real value. Now I'm not saying DA2 deserves a 4.3 (its like a 6.5-7 for me), but when the user score fails to shift even so long after release, you cannot blame it on the "first day haters" who gave it 0. It means many people are contining to give it mixed reviews.


Portal 2 was first day haters DA2 was an organised campaign thats the difference.

#1141
Devouree

Devouree
  • Members
  • 4 messages

Morroian wrote...

Devouree wrote...

Exactly, Portal 2 initially had very very poor user reviews post launch, it was flooded with 0's for reasons such as DLC etc, and now it is a healthy 8.3 (for PC). It shows that truly good games can overcome trolling scores, and average out to something close to its real value. Now I'm not saying DA2 deserves a 4.3 (its like a 6.5-7 for me), but when the user score fails to shift even so long after release, you cannot blame it on the "first day haters" who gave it 0. It means many people are contining to give it mixed reviews.


Portal 2 was first day haters DA2 was an organised campaign thats the difference.


Organised campaign? You mean the 4chan thing?.<_< Even if we did believe BioWare's massively exaggerated propaganda, it is hard to think that the "campaign", probably 20 people from 4chan, made a signficant difference, or is STILL ongoing 3 months after release. Nor would all that outweigh all the supposed positive reviews of DA2, "the great game" It is clear to many people that DA2 isnt as well liked as Origins, and no amount of straw grasping from BioWare or you can deny that.

#1142
KilrB

KilrB
  • Members
  • 1 301 messages

Morroian wrote...

Devouree wrote...

Exactly, Portal 2 initially had very very poor user reviews post launch, it was flooded with 0's for reasons such as DLC etc, and now it is a healthy 8.3 (for PC). It shows that truly good games can overcome trolling scores, and average out to something close to its real value. Now I'm not saying DA2 deserves a 4.3 (its like a 6.5-7 for me), but when the user score fails to shift even so long after release, you cannot blame it on the "first day haters" who gave it 0. It means many people are contining to give it mixed reviews.


Portal 2 was first day haters DA2 was an organised campaign thats the difference.


Organized?

Nobody tried to "organize" me!

Damn! I feel so left out now ... :pinched:

#1143
Ryllen Laerth Kriel

Ryllen Laerth Kriel
  • Members
  • 3 001 messages
I think we've taken all this way out of proportion. Dr. Muzyka was misquoted. He meant that a friend bought him a new pair of polarized sunglasses the day of DA 2's launch and he really enjoys them since he is sensitive to sun glare from UV rays. So he wore them on the way to the launch celebration and it was very polarizing.

#1144
william.munden

william.munden
  • Members
  • 106 messages
the conversation wheel isnt innovative i hate it. It was ok in mass effect but it has no place in a so called RPG if Dragon age 3 has this wheel then that's a deal breaker right there for me.I still havnt played DA2 i just cant bring myself to play it i played about 30min then thought good god ill never play it again.

Modifié par william.munden, 20 juin 2011 - 03:24 .


#1145
LobselVith8

LobselVith8
  • Members
  • 16 993 messages

Sidney wrote...

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".


There's a lot about Dragon Age 2 that doesn't seem finished, considering the recycled enviornments and even the recycled use of the GoA antagonist in Act III. However, a real issue is the storyline. When Hawke is dealing with people who seem more like cardboard cutout antagonists rather than real people, there's a problem. The ending doesn't even make sense - there are real story issues with the two endings that only make sense if you account for one choice, but not the other. The two antagonists at the end of Act III weren't as developed as Loghain, and I saw them more as caricatures than antagonists, particularly when one isn't making any sense with his 'transformation' and the other is dominated by a macguffin.

Sidney wrote...

You've also got the problem that Hawke can't solve all the problems of the world. The Warden solves everything including finding my lost socks I think. When people say "passive" the problem is that unless you are doing everything and solving everything you're not really "active" to them and it means that only superhero stories have active protangonists by that definition.


The Warden didn't solve all the problems of the world, though. He was stopping the genocide of every race in Thedas, possibly by any means necessary. The problem is that Hawke's story was supposed to be a "rise to power," which is even stated in the opening of Dragon Age 2 at the outskirts of Lothering, but it wasn't. The problem is that Hawke isn't proactive, and Mike Laidlaw originally told everyone that Kirkwall would be shaped around Hawke's actions. This wasn't the case in Dragon Age 2.

Hawke was an errand boy even in Act II and Act III, doing nothing to change the city-state, while The Warden was able to irrevocably change the societies that he visited. I wanted Hawke to be proactive, I wanted him to try to change things even if he failed, I wanted him to do something about the situation in Darktown and the Alienage instead of wearing silk robes and standing in front of a fireplace doing absolutely nothing. Does he do anything to help Bethany at the end of Act I? No. Does he do anything to help Bethany despite knowing what happened to Karl, and discovering the situation with Ser Kerras and Ser Alrik? No. I wanted Dragon Age 2 to improve on what was done in Origins, and instead I received a reactive protagonist who couldn't even be bothered to find his own lost socks unless someone told him to do so.

Sidney wrote...

You almost wonder if superheroes are even enough. Batman doesn't solve the problems of Gotham, he treats symptoms. I have no idea what he does other than sit in the Batcave in between missions but Gotham is obviously still one really messed up place despite his efforts.


I respectfully disagree; people have with the storyline. People aren't expecting Hawke to be a superhero and solve every situation that arises, they were expecting a real "rise to power" and to have a proactive protagonist instead of a reactive one who does nothing for seven years. My Surana Warden suggested to Alistair that they should use the treaties, and his response was "of course!" My protagonist was allowed to be proactive, to suggest a course of action that would be followed. He dealt with the political situations around Ferelden by gaining the assistance of other groups, even getting the new ruler of Orzammar to make a statute of him, and had Arl Eamon tell him that he could do nothing without him and his armies. Hawke, in contrast, seems to go into a coma between each Act, where he doesn't do anything, and even in the main quest he's not proactive. The Warden can refuse Bann Tegan, but Hawke can't refuse Petrice even when he outright says no.

Dragon Age 2 had little to no choices in fleshing out Hawke, particularly when the protagonist is speaking without me choosing any dialogue options and saying things that don't represent the dialogue options I actually chose him to speak. Could I chose for Hawke to be an atheist? No, I couldn't, but I could chose for The Warden to be an atheist. My lack of control over the protagonist, and his reactive status, was a problem for me. Dragon Age 2 shows no consequences when Dragon Age Origins did, which can be seen as early as Dust Town if Bhelen was chosen to be King of Orzammar. My Surana Warden had more of a rise to power when he became the Arl of Amaranthine, a high noble despite being an elven mage, and had lesser nobles swearing fealty to him, than Hawke does in a game that's supposed to be a "rise to power."

#1146
billy the squid

billy the squid
  • Members
  • 4 669 messages

Firky wrote...

Yikes, man. If you say so. The fact remains that I've never felt any pressure to review/score in any way, positive, negative, high, low. Thankfully, because reading that makes me feel really uncomfortable. (And, yes, I am just one freelancer.)

I'm not denying that what you have said sounds logical. But, I haven't seen it. I've reviewed big budget games from a whole bunch of places, and barely even exchanged two words with publishers etc. Most of the contribs for our mag are freelance. Oh, what's the point.

Edit: Your last sentence. Certain publishers wont play ball? So now reviewers/publications are more harshly inclined towards games that don't come with free review copies/interviews/advertising/life-size-qunari-dolls now too? To the best of my knowledge, The Witcher 2 guys didn't give out review copies, which is why there weren't 20 critic reviews released on release day. Believe me, I reviewed it based on my legal, normal GoG version. Was I more harshly inclined towards the game? Why would I be? I have to give around 50% of the games I review back, anyway. The Witcher 2 was well received by critics, despite a general lack of early review copies.The game has its strengths. Why can't it just be that simple? (Also, I have no idea what our mag advertises. Do CDPR have a large advertising budget?)

Sorry. I'm getting annoyed. I think I've made my point. I blithered on about the review process for DAII on the Dragon Age podcast, anyway, so I'm done. I should just keep out of these discussions.


With refrence to the edit. Sorry I meant publications not playing ball. not the publishers as in ubisoft, EA etc.

As I have said, it doesn't go on everywhere, but it does go on in every industry. Infact there is legislation in the EU particularly for solicitors to stop this kind of incentivisation, because it has become a problem.
Allegations of bribery by BAE which was settled out of court with the OFT, alleged free products distributed by tobacco companies to emerging markets, and quite a few others.

In the gaming world ubisoft allegedly attempting to guarrante a good review from a german magazine for Assassins Creed 2, The gamespot reviewer supposedly getting fired for giving kane and lynch a poor review. These are the ones I can remember off the top of my head, now am I saying every review is crooked, bought off or simply wary of loosing potential favours from a large publisher? Hell, no! But, it is also why I don't go by a single user or critic review or I try and see the gameplay for myself.

#1147
LobselVith8

LobselVith8
  • Members
  • 16 993 messages

Persephone wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

In Exile wrote...

By telling us how superior we are while streamlining the game for consoles. It's clear that lip-service is more important than results, at least for some people.


I suspect it has more to do with the fact that they manage to get patches out in a timely fashion while offering DLC for free. Meanwhile, BioWare is all lip service and no action. "Yeah, we really care" followed by releasing overpriced Hawke armor. 


Overpriced? Hardly. And no one was forced to buy that DLC. 

So three patches for all platforms is nothing? Another patch for DAO/DAA to fix Import issues in future installments etc. is nothing? To discuss the game, its pros & cons etc. for months is nothing? (CDPR didn't do that, they didn't even have their forums up, they were conveniently down while a TW2 dev was posting here....)

They might as well actually do nothing then.

I'm sick of the CDPR whitewash, their juvenile marketing and I'm getting sick of TW2 itself. (Something I never thought I'd feel)


Are you talking about the DAA and Architect bugs? People have repeatedly asked when these import issues will be fixed, and there doesn't seem to be any indication that the developers will address them. At the PS3 forum, the devs acknowledged the bugs, but addressed they were because of bad flags with DAA. They gave the indication that there woudn't be anything done to correct these issues. Weeks later, after this was repeatedly brought up, Luke posted and gave a vague "in the future" answer that he never clarified, and no one knows if he's talking about addressing the import problems with DA2, with DLC, a possible expansion, or for DA3.

#1148
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

LobselVith8 wrote...
Are you talking about the DAA and Architect bugs? People have repeatedly asked when these import issues will be fixed, and there doesn't seem to be any indication that the developers will address them. At the PS3 forum, the devs acknowledged the bugs, but addressed they were because of bad flags with DAA. They gave the indication that there woudn't be anything done to correct these issues. Weeks later, after this was repeatedly brought up, Luke posted and gave a vague "in the future" answer that he never clarified, and no one knows if he's talking about addressing the import problems with DA2, with DLC, a possible expansion, or for DA3.


1.03 fixed the import bugs for me. Not sure how it was for you.

#1149
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests
It didn't fix the import bugs as a result of improper flagging in Awakening. Those need to be fixed in Awakening, as I understand it.

Well, if it's a matter of the flags being reversed or something you'd think they would be able to account for it in DA2 by just reversing the conditions. But that may not be the case.

#1150
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

Filament wrote...

It didn't fix the import bugs as a result of improper flagging in Awakening. Those need to be fixed in Awakening, as I understand it.

Well, if it's a matter of the flags being reversed or something you'd think they would be able to account for it in DA2 by just reversing the conditions. But that may not be the case.


Ah, then it's just like ME2. A few ME1 plot flags were completely b0rked, and even the save editor won't do anything.