231 réponses à ce sujet

[Sabriana]

What I hate the most is that they had a great story. It was on par to flip the finger at WotC. It was, to me, great that they went ahead on their own fantasy story. I read the backgrounds, the books, the lore, and I was intrigued and captivated. I thought they could surpass D&D. I think I expected too much. I do feel sad. Oh well, there is always Tolkien. I guess.

[FieryDove]

Elton John is dead wrote...

It was poor in some places. You can actually report Anders to Cullen but nothing happens.

That had to be like that or...the game could not have ended?

Or maybe we'd get a to be continued in DA3 line. I don't think many people would have liked that even if that's what happened anyway.

[Gotholhorakh]

Disagree completely.

I felt it had issues and I preferred DA:O's story, but the main issues revolved around how the experience was changed and the tactical/party based aspects of the game were largely destroyed for me.

Yes, the execution felt a little sketchy, and there were shortcomings for me with character motivation, fleshing out of the different story arcs (and to be honest tying them up nicely) - but that stuff seemed more like the effect of constraints on time/money/whatever than a conscious decision. I didn't feel it lacked potential as a story.

The writing was far... far from a crippling factor for me.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:29 .

[Eromenos]

Storywise, their only failing was to lead us into thinking that events would culminate into some by-the-numbers apocalyptic battle royale against an easily-identifiable "Big Bad." Thank goodness it didn't lead to that, but BioWare trying to hypocritically hold onto fantasy-purest interest with gossip between Cassandra + Varric was wrong.

Their scenes served no purpose except to undemine and detract from the interesting narrative we were playing through. Jarring voices aside, their presences in the game were overblown and overvalued just like the "suicide" variables for ME2. Unnecessary exposition bots. All the buildup about them was just a hook gimmick. Nothing more.

Had I been spoiled about the end, or left in the dark, then my first playthrough would've been enjoyable because I could've explored the meat and bones of the story without constantly waiting for something that never came. Either of those would've been preferable to those pearl-clutching bait-and-switch hints from two characters I didn't know well and didn't care much about.

Modifié par Eromenos, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:50 .

[Theagg]

Elton John is dead wrote...

It was poor in some places. You can actually report Anders to Cullen but nothing happens.

Well, here's the thing. Anders was going to do the deed so you could not stop him since that's a major plot point. Nothing wrong with that.

However, in reporting him to Cullen, Anders, if present in the party  at that point clearly gets somewhat agitated at you ratting on him. Cullen obviously knows who you are talking about, (but since Cullen mentions no name its not fully clear because heck, Merrill is a dodgy apostate too), however his dry reply to Hawkes accusation in the accompanying dialogue clip works both for Anders being present or not. And since Hawkes dialogue is simply that he believes a plot is afoot but it mentions no details or evidence, (Hawke doesn't even mention Anders by name after all) and Hawke clearly does not confirm Cullen's suspicion as to the identity of the person, its not really that far fetched to assume Cullen wouldn't immediately grab Anders on the spot. So Cullen does what he says he will do, he obviously goes away and passes the message on to his senior.

The problem is, what with Kirwall red tape and all, it doesn't get acted upon quickly enough. So before you know it, its too late...

So, despite the terrible issues others have with that bit of dialogue, I don't really see it as being that problematic at all, either with of without Anders there.

After all, think of a reason why Hawke said "I believe one of my associates is plotting against the Chantry"

and not "I believe Anders is plotting against the Chantry."

Modifié par Theagg, 05 juillet 2011 - 12:16 .

[erynnar]

Filament wrote...

I disagree with those who disagree with those who agree about disagreeing about agreeing to disagree. Agreeably.

You disagreeably agreeable person you? Wait... Fil you always make my day!

[maxernst]

I think the writing was fine, by which I mean the actual dialogue is well written, although I feel the dialogue wheel and the way that the icons are used to generate a personality for Hawke didn't work very well. Many of the individual quests are quite well done.

However, I think that they made some poor decisions with respect to the plot, perhaps because the time constraints didn't allow for much branching of the storyline. There's a certain amount of passivity that's forced on Hawke that I found frustrating, and a lack of clear motivation to pursue some main plot quests. Hawke's story might have worked better as a novel. In a novel, it's perfectly okay for the point of view character to not really be the protagonist in the drama, but I don't think that works very well in a game.

I also think the whole lyrium idol plotline was dissatisfying because it made Meredith simply a victim of a supernatural force, rather than a rational person who makes disastrous decisions based on an extreme view of chantry dogma..Maybe it was only in there to tie the first act to the rest of the plot, but I think it distorts the game, moving the focus away from the whole Templar/Mage issue. Petrice, for example, is a better antagonist.

[Pasquale1234]

maxernst wrote...

I think the writing was fine, by which I mean the actual dialogue is well written, although I feel the dialogue wheel and the way that the icons are used to generate a personality for Hawke didn't work very well. Many of the individual quests are quite well done.

However, I think that they made some poor decisions with respect to the plot, perhaps because the time constraints didn't allow for much branching of the storyline. There's a certain amount of passivity that's forced on Hawke that I found frustrating, and a lack of clear motivation to pursue some main plot quests. Hawke's story might have worked better as a novel. In a novel, it's perfectly okay for the point of view character to not really be the protagonist in the drama, but I don't think that works very well in a game.

I also think the whole lyrium idol plotline was dissatisfying because it made Meredith simply a victim of a supernatural force, rather than a rational person who makes disastrous decisions based on an extreme view of chantry dogma..Maybe it was only in there to tie the first act to the rest of the plot, but I think it distorts the game, moving the focus away from the whole Templar/Mage issue. Petrice, for example, is a better antagonist.

I found it somewhat challenging to role-play Hawke, for that very reason.  I tried to play a Hawke whose primary motive was to take care of her family, but that didn't work out so well - so I had to dig a little deeper to find other motivations.

To answer the question posted in the title of this thread: DA2 isn't dead, and the writing was decent.  I thought the characters and dialogue were very well done and some of the quests were a lot of fun.

[Luvinn]

Bad writing would kill the replay value over time for me sure. I don't see myself ever playing DA2 again, be it next week or next year. But i might give it a few playthroughs while its still a new game. The reused areas and waves of enemies killed it for me first, before the bad writing got to me. Either way, i was playing it on borrowed time

[dreadpiratesnugglecakes]

XX55XX wrote...

I didn't mind how DA2 took a step backwards and "streamlined" the gameplay. DA2 played fine. The recycled caves and mansions? No doubt, all part of the pressures of a two year development cycle. You see, I was quite forgiving when it came to most of DA2's shortcomings, but there was one shortcoming I could not forgive:

The bad writing.

Yes, the dialogue was good, for the most part. Entertaining, even. The party banter was excellent. But dialogue constitutes only a small part of a game's script.

In most stories, you have a pyramid-style chart which waxes upwards towards the climax, and ebbs downwards towards a conclusion. They taught this back in my eighth-grade English class seven years ago. My old English teacher says that most good stories follow such a diagram. DAO had such a pyramid as part of its narrative structure, and so did many of BioWare's past games.

Yet, DA2's narrative decided to flatline itself for some reason. So, did BioWare's writers achieve something revolutionary by not following the model set forth by centuries of writing tradition? No. There was no excitement, no sense of rising action, nor any sense of falling action. Hence, the game's visible lack of progression dulled any sort of suspense within the player, and perhaps even discouraged a few players from finishing the game. It was boring. Hardly entertaining. Many events in the game were abrupt, occurring without the support of any suspense or anticipation.

Additionally, my eighth grade English class also discussed the concept of conflict quite a bit. I'm sure most of you know what it is, so I won't regurgitate the dictionary for you here. Nearly every story, regardless of its medium, has a conflict, and in some cases, many sub-conflicts. Conflicts keep an audience engaged and allow characters to express themselves fully.

BioWare did include a conflict in DA2. Yes, they did. But it resembled more of a series of sub-plots more than anything else - not strong enough to stand on their own, and yet, BioWare allowed them to do so anyway.

What was Hawke fighting for? At first, it looked as if he was fighting for riches. Okay, cliched, but perfectly fine.

The sub-plot BioWare introduces in the first act is fine, but they forgot to include one thing: a dramatic arc of events that would keep a player engaged and willing to keep playing. In short, by creating a series of "kill-everything" quests that lead to even more killing in the Deep Roads, BioWare killed the dramatic element in the first act then and there. There was no attempt to mix things up or even introduce any complications that may have a player scratching his or her head. The feeble attempt at drama near the end of the act does little to salvage it. Again, this relates back to my first point of DA's lack of narrative progression.

I am not going to write anymore, since I am tired. But, if you have scrolled down just to read my conclusion, then I can say only this: BioWare, through some pretty bad writing, managed to strip away the most important elements of a good story: drama. Without drama to keep the story moving and the player entertained, who would continue playing? Would you read a story about a man who eats his pancakes without encountering any resistance? There is a reason why centuries of writers have utilized these traditions, time and time again:

Because it's the only way of making sure that a reader doesn't fall asleep. And BioWare sure did.

I agree.  Although poor story writing was not the most irritating thing to me.  Gameplay mechanics that took us back to the original Diablo and 4 mapsets pretty much guaranteed I wouldn't be playing this game more than once.  Add to it poorly developed and unlikeable companions, ham-handed romance options and artwork reboots that ranged from the outright laughable (Battle Cattle aka Qunari) to the ridiculous (elves) and Bioware almost killed 12 years of blind fandom going back to Baldur's Gate. 

This was one of the worst games I've played and for it to be out of one of my favorite gaming houses was extremely disappointing.

[Wonderllama4]

I felt like the characters were more developed in Dragon Age 2. I loved how everyone got their own side quest in each act. Dragon Age 2 was definitely better with the main character. Sarcastic Hawke made me laugh lots of times

[Cauld]

I agree that the writing was poor, an ill-used framed narrative, three tenously connected story segments, only one of which was strong on its own merits, painfully transparent rail-roading and so on and so forth. However, I'm not someone who will happily play a game of any quality - or lack thereof, as in this case - for the sake of a story, so the gameplay remains the single largest factor in my assessment of Dragon Age II as a bad game, though the writing certainly doesn't help.

[darknoon5]

I disagree.

The plot was solid enough and the characters vivid and memorable. Lack of content,ack of capitilization on key ideas and lack of closure are my main faults with DA. Act 3 was a poor, rushed conclusion that didn't do the mage vs templar issue justice and made Hawke feel like a pawn as opposed to having political influence. They never expanded on mages being subjugated much-the majority are evil blood mages and abominations. Only a few are actually decent people, likewise only a few templars are nasty and are generally likeable. It skews things out of perspective.

Similarly, the whole (SPOILERS WARNING!!!!!) "kill every mage or free them" was also a stupid choice, as it made siding with the templars tantamount to genocide. Why can't I merely bring the mages back to the circle and change how it is run? This choice was one I struggled with, even as templar supporters, to take seriously. Was it a way to compensate for the lack of likeable mages? Who knows.

Oh, and the horrible, lazy re-used enviroments. They even used the same maps, they just added in blocks of rock to cut off areas they didn't want to put in. I suppose that comes under "lack of content," alongside how lacking Act 3 was.

As for lack of closure...well, that's pretty obvious, without posting any spoilers.

[Soilborn88]

The whole development process was poor which is why DA2 turned out the way it did.

[alex90c]

I wish when they recycled maps, rather than blocking doorways off with a stone slab they'd kind of just make it so that the rock around where the door would be simply covers it (for the cave map) so it looks natural.

[macrocarl]

While I really dug the more fleshed out side quests there was a point somewhere towards the end of Act 1 where I felt the main thrust was held only by the fact you needed gold. There was plenty of dialog with companions and NPC's to keep it moving nicely though. I just felt all the side quests added up to a lot of running around and weakened the thread a bit. Although that's not just DA2 related. That's all the RPG games problem. I think it's the overall design they've fallen into. Alpha Protocol has been already mentioned, but that game had every little thing tied into the main plot, which was amazing. As for the 8th grade pyramid thing, I'm fine with chucking that to the wind. I really enjoyed DA2 3 times already. Speaking of adding up though, there was something very negative about the game in terms of overall tone and I found everyone acting somewhat selfishly add up to quite a lot of cynicism. I hope BW lightens up a bit more in the future and explore other ways of being a 'dark fantasy'. All in all though I think it's a pretty solid game!

[telephasic]

IMHO the problem wasn't poor writing, it was poor editing.

When you break the game down to individual parts, much of the game writing is far better than DA:O. I'm particularly talking about secondary/minor quests (does anyone remember the Origins bulletin board quests with fondness?). Arguably the companion characterization was done as well as Origins, although I'd say character development isn't as good.

Still, the game felt as though they parceled out quests and characters to each of the writers, and then didn't take the time to synthesize it all back into a cohesive plot, let alone game. This is a fault of editing, not writing.

[Theagg]

alex90c wrote...

I wish when they recycled maps, rather than blocking doorways off with a stone slab they'd kind of just make it so that the rock around where the door would be simply covers it (for the cave map) so it looks natural.

What they should have done for some of the recycled environments is simply mirror imaged them in the horizontal plane. That way would have been far less obvious but also in some cases made sense (in the way mass building projects often have duplicate floorplans but also some of the properties are mirror imaged, like the apartment next to mine)

[Morroian]

alex90c wrote...

I wish when they recycled maps, rather than blocking doorways off with a stone slab they'd kind of just make it so that the rock around where the door would be simply covers it (for the cave map) so it looks natural.

I agree with that, plus removing those blocked off areas from the maps. While I like the game I'm amazed that they didn't take the time to do this.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Morroian wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I wish when they recycled maps, rather than blocking doorways off with a stone slab they'd kind of just make it so that the rock around where the door would be simply covers it (for the cave map) so it looks natural.

I agree with that, plus removing those blocked off areas from the maps. While I like the game I'm amazed that they didn't take the time to do this.

I'd rather they just didn't block off those areas.  Why does every map need to limit our wandering to just those specific spaces filled with content?

[Sylvianus]

Well, There are some inconsistencies, I didn't find DA2 very epic, but overall it isn't poor writting.

Party banter, the wonderful characters, they were good. But the story was poorly executed, with more time, resources, willingness to do everything perfectly and in-depth, story could have been great. Romance is it the same, they are bad because poorly executed and less depth, but note because of poor writting.

Also, For example the act  one is good in the thought, but poorly executed in the game. Have to spend hours doing quests, and the result doesn't even leading in the beginning of the plot.

The years pass in Kirkwall, but nothing changes. 

Hawk who does nothing during many years.

Meredith should have appeared a little more, and Orsino should have seen his character more substantial given his importance and what he has done.

And the end, and the act 3 were rushed as well.

To sum up, many things sad, but not because of that. Fundamentally

Modifié par Sylvianus, 05 juillet 2011 - 11:39 .

[jds1bio]

Disagree. The story, the writing of the story, and the writing of the companions were all fine. The writing of the MARKETING, however, was a different story...literally.

If anything is to kill a game like DA2, it's the recycled environments, and the QA process. The recycled environments need little explanation, except that their use gives the indication that quest set pieces were not specifically crafted to promote or take advantage of emotional or gameplay context, or the actual writing.  This may make the writing seem to be of a lower quality than it actually is.

But for an RPG that is at least in part stat-based, why scenarios with bugs like Sunder Talent, too many exploding enemies, and Sebastian's quest availability aren't caught, tested and tamed by an automated testing harness is unbelievable.

Modifié par jds1bio, 06 juillet 2011 - 12:13 .

[Kimberly Shaw]

The writing was so uneven....Act 2 was very well done, for instance. And the Arishok was written and voiced wonderfully.

Then we have Act 3. Ugh. The less said the better about that horrific part of the game.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Morroian wrote...

alex90c wrote...

I wish when they recycled maps, rather than blocking doorways off with a stone slab they'd kind of just make it so that the rock around where the door would be simply covers it (for the cave map) so it looks natural.

I agree with that, plus removing those blocked off areas from the maps. While I like the game I'm amazed that they didn't take the time to do this.

I'd rather they just didn't block off those areas.  Why does every map need to limit our wandering to just those specific spaces filled with content?

I've been having that issue with games ever since NWN 1. I always wanted to go in the directions I wasn't supposed to. The illusion of freedom and exploration was best for me in the Baldur's Gate series. It's not for everyone but I enjoyed the unecessary areas and adventuring through them. I hope Bioware, in the future can combine their creative writing with better exploration mechanics. They still don't really use the strength of polygonal graphics and take advantage of the z axis. I'd love to see a Bioware game with their strong writing combined with solid adventuring, climbing, swimming. Not a full sand box, mind you, but offer a broader variety of ways to explore the world, approach the jumping off points to the main plot.

And if they do a set protagonist, do so at 100% with both feet in the pool. Hawke felt like a very luke-warm character to me. Enough was set in stone that Hawke deffinitely didn't feel like my character in any way past some cosmetic factors in character creation, yet Hawke didn't seem to have enough unique personality to stand on his/her own to me either. It didn't give me creativity and bound the writer's hands, a no win situation for a protagonist. I would rather the writers jump in and just own the main character, make someone catchy and fascinating, I'd surrender the meager customization options for that any day. Of course I would rather have a non-voiced protagonist with a variety of backgrounds...but I'm not sure Bioware will ever do that again with the trends gaming companies seem to be embracing.