466 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Captain_Obvious wrote...

RussianSpy27 wrote...

John, your opinion is duly noted. However, as a fan of DA:O for its literary strength (and a huge fan of David Gaider's novels), I have to say that in my hubmle opinion, codex is brilliant and should not be decreased in any way.
~RS

Am I the only one who never reads codex entries? 

Depending on the game I may not read the codex, but only if I understand everything. FFXIII's codex was one example. I understood everything that happened in game and didn't need to read it.

Of course, if I'm bored I might just pull it up and read it and go "Huh.... interesting." if there's something in there that I didn't know. Which I did with FFXIII

In Origins, I read most if not all of the Codex entries so I could get a handle on the lore. At first I thought the Chantry was a good institution on my first playthrough (Human Noble). Then Dwarf Noble told me that they were just a bunch of pricks who would rather spout allegorical lies instead of the truth. And they called Xanthos Aeducan a heretic. 

I'm not against reading the Codex (not saying you are against it. I don't know if you are), but it really depends on the game.

[erynnar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

erynnar wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Tirfan wrote...

^ Sounds good in theory, if I recall correctly, Planescape: Torment did quite well in the gameplay & narrative working together, which sadly, isn't something neither DA:O or DA2 did very well. (It really has been too long since I played that game.. perhaps I should buy it from GoG)

Weren't the enigma of Kirkwall the codices that could have explained a quite a bit why everything in Kirkwall seemed to be so crazy? I remember just that they were scattered in the most random places ever and I didn't find most of them.. which, in hindsight as I learned about them later seemed a really weird choice to make, important info that can explain quite a few things.. but we have hidden them! (Wwhhat?)

Agreed. Both DA games didn't present information very well and instead relied on either telling us or relied on a 30 second cinematic.


The Enigma of Kirkwall is definitely one of those things that should've been shown. I thought I had gotten them all my first time through but I had missed 3. My second time I got them all and read them. My reaction was just "..... why wasn't this shown? Why was it hidden?"


But even then, I feel that the Enigma of Kirkwall was just a reason for why every mage we meet (aside from Merrill and Bethany) is a crazy wackjob. So it became less of an important piece of information and more of an excuse as to why the game was developed so much into trying to make a "grey issue" out of something that was purely black and white.

We never met any good mages from the Circle, and the one mage who actually seemed sensible and trustworthy among the mages that we did meet decided to betray me in a stupid manner because the Plot Dictates.

The only problems are...if Bethany goes to a certain <spoiler> and Hawke is a mage and Merrill, who all live in Kirkwall for 10 years, shouldn't they go loop the loo too? I mean, one good mage chick from Ferelden tried to turn herself into the Circle and later becomes an abomination. Hawke and Bethany and Merrill should all go bonkers too.

I guess it just goes to show that they have the willpower to resist such things (proving to me that Merrill is a smarter mage than people give her credit for. Much smarter than Marethari). Also, the Plot Dictates.

Yeah willpower. Though others should have that same constitution so not every mage in Kirkwall is a nutter. But I suspect it is must PLOT DICTATES.  Still enjoyed playing my mage despite the plot holes.

[Captain_Obvious]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'm not against reading the Codex (not saying you are against it. I don't know if you are), but it really depends on the game.

I just don't like to read pages and pages in a video game.  It always seemed like filler rather than real content to me.  Devs can't fully integrate it into the game, but they don't want to leave it out, therefore codex.  Maybe it's because a lot of games do it nowadays.  It's just tiresome to me.  I got my fill of reading three books a week at university.  Maybe that's the real problem, it just reminds me of homework.  And I am so completely done with homework. 

[TEWR]

There are definitely some glaring plot holes for DA2 as a mage. Act 2 specifically.


And there are some things that Bioware needs to retcon. Like a certain elven Circle mage on pro-mage playthroughs. I would be happy if it turned out Varric just embellished on that part and it actually didn't happen.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 07 juillet 2011 - 06:39 .

[Deathwurm]

I waited for a Sale and for the 1.03 patch before I bought and played...
Never had anything to cool down about because I enjoyed the Game.
Wasn't too keen on the recycled Maps but they really didn't kill the overall experience for me.

[erynnar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

There are definitely some glaring plot holes for DA2 as a mage. Act 2 specifically.


And there are some things that Bioware needs to retcon. Like a certain elven Circle mage on pro-mage playthroughs. I would be happy if it turned out Varric just embellished on that part and it actually didn't happen.

I don't usually approve of retconning...but that definitely could be, and making Varric tell a whopper works for me.

[Sad Dragon]

Ok, I'll bite, someone needs to bring up the less popular point of view. :/

While I am not against the codex in general there are plenty of reasons why it could be a good idea to remove it correctly.
Not all people read the entries -- if it is the majority or minority, i don't know but I believe BioWare has the statistics -- all players on the other hand play the game. Integrating it into the game would then mean that all people would take part of the information naturally while playing the game rather then having to remove themselves from the game to do so.
Should it be the minority of players that actually read the entries in the codex then the situation becomes even darker for the codex.

Writing all those entries takes time, and that is time the developers could use to make something else. Should it also be only a small minority of people who actually read the entries then the devtime -- and thus the cost of the project -- would be spend on making a feature that the majority of people doesn't care about. While I am sure many people in this hypothetical majority would still not mind that the codex is there for those who enjoy it, I am sure if they could choose they would have wanted the devtime to go elsewhere -- especially if there is a short devtime for the project to begin with.

As a counter point I would like to add that it is not a given that the devtime could have been put to greater use elsewhere even if they didn't make the codex. If the writers where to write more dialogue means you need to bring in the voice actors to record it -- which means a higher dev-cost. You could also argue that -- hopefully -- the codex entries are written when all other writing duties are at a minimum towards the end of the development and thus the majority of their work is already done -- so adding flavour just adds to the game with "no additional cost".

Of course it might not just be the writers that are involved with the codex. There might be artist that has to make the GUI as well as programmers that write the actual code that is needed. The reason I say might is due to the fact that they might be able to recycle art and code depending on how they did the planning and thus making no extra work for the artists and programmers when making the codex. Though should both programmers, writers and artists need to be involved in making the codex then that would mean even more devtime that could potentially be used elsewhere.

One final point I would bring up is that there might be a double purpose in writing the entries -- namely to also serve in the same way as concept art does. Written to give the people in the devteam an insight in to the world and serve as an inspiration during the creative process. In which case the addition of the codex should be seen like an ingame bonus -- and who doesn't like a bonus?

Anywho, this post is getting a bit on the long tide so I will stop here. I just wanted to present some reasons as to why removing the codex could be a good idea, but at the same time show that there are too many assumptions on our side to really be able to judge if it is a good or bad idea -- only BioWare have all the facts to make that call.


-The Sad Dragon

[ScotGaymer]

I have said this in other threads but I will repeat myself here.

Dragon Age 2 is not a horrible game. It isn't and the people who claim it is are frankly nothing more than whiney idiots who find it impossible to be objective. The American's are supposedly want to saying "Haterz Gonna Hate" and I feel that that is an idiom that holds true here.

It only feels horrible because you are comparing it to Dragon Age Origins and other BW games; and when held up against DAO, ME 1, ME 2, BG 2, KotOR 1 etc, the game is so far below them its not even funny.
DA2's metacritic score averages a clear 15 to 20 points less than every other BW game in review scores. That tells you that I am right; the game is decent/good it just isnt great, it has a lot of flaws and the team took a lot of design decisions that were just the wrong ones to take.

For myself I loved Dragon Age 2 through my first play through in spite of its flaws (some of them were EXCEPTIONALLY irritating) because the overall package was delivered quite well or so I thought.
Got the end of Act 2 and thought "I Cant be at the end already?" and then was kind of "oh right, bit of a tangent here but lets see where it goes" when the game shot off onto the rather abrupt mage v templar storyline (which didnt have much foreshadowing in the prior acts IMO). BUt I went with it and felt it was okay, was liking it at least then I hit the end run.

My first thought was "oh im on the end run now. bit soon for that." because I felt that the game need a LOT more exposition before it reached "the end". And then the game ended and I felt like Bioware had slapped me.
The ending was awful. Truely awful and it dropped me from "loving" the game to merely tolerating/liking it somewhat.
It basically ended like nothing I had done during the entirety of the game mattered whatsoever; if Hawke hadnt been there the exact same sort of thing would have happened. Except the Chantry wouldnt have had their convenient scapegoat for it all in the form of Hawke. It made me think what was the point in playing a game that championed its "choices" and "different paths to power" when the end result is you in actuality had NO choice whatsoever that mattered at all in any way shape or form.

It was very dissapointing.

To the OPs question; do I still feel as negatively about the game now as I did?

No, I don't. The game is alright if you ignore the ending.

What I am more upset about now, and the reason I wont get the DLCs and whatnot is Bioware's response to people like me, who don't "love" the game.
Basically dismissing those of us who had negative but constructive criticism as people who simply did not like change was shocking, something that I feel very upset about. I am not afraid of change.
I like ME2 better than ME1, and I am loving how ME3 is shaping up so far. I think TW2 looks much better than TW1. I actually prefer KotOR 2 over KotOR 1 (now that TSLRCM has finished the game). I loved the new direction Fallout went in (even if i hated the F3 main storyline which sucked).

I am not afraid of change. I just had legitimate well documented gripes with the FLAWS in this game, and the MISTAKES the development team made in its execution.
I find it beyond insulting to be told repeatedly by Bioware devs that my concerns mean nothing, my criticism means nothing, and that I am merely afraid of change and thus worthy of being ignored.

[AloraKast]

Eliamor wrote...

While I played DA2 I was also finishing my first playthrough in DA:O. My reaction to the both game endings were completely different and express quite well whatI feel about the two games in the franchise.
When I finished DA:O I was so proud! I really felt like I had accomplished something and that I cared about the destiny of my Warden and the companions. I was so moved by the endgame that I almost cried!
My reactions when I was playing the third act in DA2 could be described with one meaning: "Isn't this mess over yet?" I felt nothing as I set the difficulty to casual and rushed through the last two hours only to end up with a disappointing ending and a feeling of... nothing.
For me, that and the reused maps is the biggest reason I uninstalled it as soon as I finished it.

I think that I may take it out from my shelf sometime later, when I have forgotten about everything I didn't like about the game. Now, a few months after the DA-tragedy (if you can call it that), I still feel disappointed and sad when I think of what DA2 could have been but wasn't to me.

When I played Origins I could feel that someone really put his soul into that game and made Thedas a world that was living, full of mystery and marvellous events that never will be forgotten. Just like a really good fairy tale or novel (like Michael Ende's books). A world I could visit time and again and still find something completely new!
The magic Origins had just wasn't there in DA2. It was like someone stole the soul from the DA universe and left an empty shell.

As you may have figured out by now, I still haven't got over the disappointment. Sure, I can play a game with big flaws in the game mechanics and design and still love it (e.g. Oblivion) but if the game has no soul or good story I don't see the point. Sure, the companions were great and I like the fast-paced combat in DA2, but since everything from design of UI (which may have been well coded but were so generic and boring that I started to hate it) to the city of Kirkwall had the personality of a stone, I will probably not enjoy another playthrough.

Eliamor, I believe your post sums up rather nicely my two drastically different reactions to DA:O and DA2, even after all this time. I was shocked and extremely disappointed after I finished my playthrough of DA2... among other things, of course. Now, I'm just disappointed and disheartened as well. Like you said, DA:O had so much heart and soul poured into it... whereas that soul was ripped out and lost by the wayside, leaving a shell that is DA2.

*sigh* I had a whole big rant written but then I decided against it. Basically I would really love for Bioware to let us know either way whether this new direction is actually where they wish to take their games in or perhaps this was an experiment to try and duplicate the success of ME2 and apply it in a more traditional RPG game setting. If it's the former, then I know that Bioware is no longer the company for me and will seek truly satisfying RGP experiences from elsewhere. If it's the latter... well, how about we let Mass Effect be Mass Effect and refrain from trying to make Dragon Age into Dragon Effect.

Alas, as much as I would love to get some insight into Bioware's (or is it EA) thinking, I know that nothing bad will be said about DA2 until the time comes to talk about DA3, as that would only hurt any DA2 DLC sales and any other tie-ins. So where does that leave me, your average long time Bioware fan? Well, guess getting cautiously excited about ME3 - excited because I still have faith in that franchise and cautious because of my experience with DA2 and Bioware's reaction to and handling of genuine fan concerns. As for any future DA products, be they DLC or expansions or DA3... only time will tell. I shall wait well after the release and read fan feedback (not even bothering with other reviews as they are almost always the same whether the product is truly great or truly horrible) carefully before making a decision about purchasing the product for myself. I shall not be buying TOR but that has not changed since learning that it's a MMO, as I have no need for yet another MMO experience. And anything beyond that... well, again, wait for fan feedback and then decide. And of course hope against hope that Bioware has not let me down completely and that they are still capabale and, what's more important, willing to produce those truly fantastic games full of heart and soul.

eh, guess I ended up with a rant afterall

[Realmzmaster]

Nothing to cool down from. I like DA2. It has problems and flaws, but so do most if not all the CRPGs I have played. I do not get upset over a game. I do not get upset over how I spend my entertainment dollar. I chalk it up to experience and move on. I will give my opinion on what I think about a game, movie, book or other forms of media that I have experienced.

[fightright2]

erynnar wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

There are definitely some glaring plot holes for DA2 as a mage. Act 2 specifically.


And there are some things that Bioware needs to retcon. Like a certain elven Circle mage on pro-mage playthroughs. I would be happy if it turned out Varric just embellished on that part and it actually didn't happen.

I don't usually approve of retconning...but that definitely could be, and making Varric tell a whopper works for me.

Works for me as well.

[Redcoat]

My personal pet theory is that the entirety of DA2 is a made-up tale by Varric. I believe that he never even knew Hawke; he only met him/her at the Hanged Man one time, and that was it. But for some reason Cassandra believes that he was well-acquainted with him/her, and Varric knows that he can't convince her otherwise, so he spins this completely ludicrous story that he made up on the spot. That's why the plot is so disjointed, that's why the final boss fight makes no sense, and that's why characters who are dead suddenly reappear - because Varric's making the whole story up as he goes along. The whole game is one big lie.

And Hawke? He was crushed by an ogre five minutes after the game ended. Because ogres are the #1 killer of Dragon Age characters.

[erynnar]

Redcoat wrote...

My personal pet theory is that the entirety of DA2 is a made-up tale by Varric. I believe that he never even knew Hawke; he only met him/her at the Hanged Man one time, and that was it. But for some reason Cassandra believes that he was well-acquainted with him/her, and Varric knows that he can't convince her otherwise, so he spins this completely ludicrous story that he made up on the spot. That's why the plot is so disjointed, that's why the final boss fight makes no sense, and that's why characters who are dead suddenly reappear - because Varric's making the whole story up as he goes along. The whole game is one big lie.

And Hawke? He was crushed by an ogre five minutes after the game ended. Because ogres are the #1 killer of Dragon Age characters.

ROFL!!! This gave me such a giggle Redcoat!

[fightright2]

Damn that Varric. Making such tall tales about a champion of a blown up city.

*snickers*

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Captain_Obvious wrote...

RussianSpy27 wrote...

John, your opinion is duly noted. However, as a fan of DA:O for its literary strength (and a huge fan of David Gaider's novels), I have to say that in my hubmle opinion, codex is brilliant and should not be decreased in any way.
~RS

Am I the only one who never reads codex entries? 

Usually I don't read them on my first playthrough since I'm too intent on moving the story ahead. Pausing in the middle of some life-threatening situation to read a codex entry is a bit of an immersion breaker.

On the second play I stop to to smell the roses.

[RussianSpy27]

JohnEpler wrote...

RussianSpy27 wrote...

John, your opinion is duly noted. However, as a fan of DA:O for its literary strength (and a huge fan of David Gaider's novels), I have to say that in my hubmle opinion, codex is brilliant and should not be decreased in any way. As much as I love DG's novels on my kindle, seeing some of the story and DAO lore in written form within the game itself is very important for me. It makes me feel as if I, the role playing hero, am actually picking up that scroll or a book about a part of Fereldan's history and that is a unique experience. 

Moreover, out of all the criticism the development team has recieved from critics and users about DA2, do you really believe that improving DA expansions/sequels includes decreased codex? 

I'm respectfully appauled at how out of all criticism posts, this suggestion actually recieves notable attention and agreement. As if the development team is thinking "hmmm so we got a B for DA2 from the community & critics and A for DA:O...what can we do? OH LOOK this guy feels presenting story in written codex form is weak...bingo!!!!


~RS

I think you're grossly misrepresenting what I said. I feel the Codex is best used when it's giving the player ancilliary information that they might not otherwise have access to - things like flavour, in-character essays, that sort of thing. However, sometimes, we lean on the Codex a little too hard to tell you things that would be stronger if they were shown through the world and through gameplay. I don't feel that's a particular controversial position to take - I'm not saying 'less reading is always better!', but, well, I feel that since this is an interactive medium, wherever possible, let's let you discover things through interactivity. A good example that's been brought up is the Enigma of Kirkwall - as it stands, it's entirely Codex-based. It might have been stronger if we'd shown signs of the Veil being thinner at Kirkwall, and little hints through gameplay and in-engine stuff that says 'hey, here's this important fact about Kirkwall' because, well, it -is- important information.

And contrary to what some think, I'm certainly not opposed to reading. My degree is in English, so a certain love of literature and reading is inherent in that However, I also believe that games have certain strengths and abilities that are unique to the medium that we should, wherever possible, capitalize on. Again, I'm not saying 'no more Codex! Let's take out every bit of reading from the game!', because that's simply not something I feel would be productive. Nor would that decision be in any way made by me, regardless of my personal feelings. What I -am- saying, however, is that we can work on the confluence of gameplay and narrative - the two should work together, rather than existing in almost separate boxes. And part of that is going to be bringing more of the narrative into the game world, whether through ambient events or any of the other tools in our toolbox.

EDIT: Corrected 'showed' to 'shown'. I will now hang my head in shame, as I have dishonoured my ancestors.

Thanks for replying, John! I agree with everything you're saying but will offer one last point: 

There is often a debate that resurfaces about cost of production vs. content (such as one voiced PC vs many silent ones, etc). If I'm not mistaken, codex entries are relatively innexpensive and quests that involve collecting pieces of codex entries (e.g. chapters 1, 2, 3 and so on) are, in my view, insanely fun. I'd gladly spend hours doing a quest to be rewarded with a continuation of an in-game scroll or a book. 

[PsychoBlonde]

JohnEpler wrote...
 What I -am- saying, however, is that we can work on the confluence of gameplay and narrative - the two should work together, rather than existing in almost separate boxes. And part of that is going to be bringing more of the narrative into the game world, whether through ambient events or any of the other tools in our toolbox.

Yay!

I'm the no-codex person mentioned earlier in the thread.  It's not that I'm opposed to flavor text, it's that I think it allows people to be lazy and not develop their abilities to their full potential, like putting a "here's an explanation for the magic system" section in the back of a novel.  Now, if you write just like the usual novelist where you do actually explain how things work within your story, the addendum is harmless overflow, something to work on when you're too strung-out to work on the novel itself.

What I really want is for them to *write the game* as if there's no codex.  (And I don't mean, "design" the game as if there's no codex--that may lead to laziness of a different kind, where you just rely on quest markers to tell your poor blind users what to do.)  Write as if the player has a broken keyboard and can't access the codex for some reason, so 100% of the information they get on the world has to be IN the world.  This would also enable you to write a more interesting codex, because you won't just have to be reiterating info that's already in the game.  (Some of that may be desirable, as I expect some people may put down a game and come back to it later having forgotten everything--so what you could do is fill the codex with off-camera stuff that would serve to remind someone of the information they've forgotten without just reiterating it.)

Sometimes, you guys do this well.  Sometimes, not so much.

[PsychoBlonde]

Also, regarding the original topic question, my overall reaction to DA2 at this point is basically, "next game please!" I don't have that much interest in the Legacy DLC at this point. I hope they wind up showcasing some changes they're planning on incorporating into DA3--that might get me interested again.

[csfteeeer]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

I feel the same. Well, perhaps I'm a bit less angry.
I really loved Origins, and also enjoyed Awakening, despite its flaws. I even bought all the DLC, though some of the content was truly awful (Golems, Witch Hunt...).
Witch Hunt started to make me angry...with all the marketing promising "All your questions will be answered, blahblah"...and then it turned out to be a buggy mess which answered nothing and instead delivered even more questions.

When DA2 was announced I was sad to know that the Warden's story wouldn't continue...
I didn't like the idea of a fixed human character, but I said "Hey, let's give it a shot, maybe it'll be something epic!", and then...it started to look more and more like Mass Effect, and it was pretty obvious that it would be a rushed job. Nevertheless, I remained optimistic with the idea that "Bioware cannot screw it up, they will deliver something wonderful".
Alas, they didn't.

DA2 felt like a spit on my face.
For me, it's a rushed, soulless exercise, without passion or real desire to be something more than just a hack-and-slash with a dialogue wheel and a false sense of interaction, because you cannot change anything...NOTHING changes. Recycled areas, generic waves of enemies...an unfocused and messy plot full of holes and bad choices, retcons, the art direction is a mixed bag, bugs, clipping...almost everything it's a recipe for disaster.
There are some good things...I like the music, despite being mostly uninspired and forgettable, and some characters, like Merrill or Varric. There are some good moments, like the Scarface parody, but they're just little moments of brilliance drowned in a sea of boredom.
I do know that Origins isn't perfect (I've never said that), and that Awakening isn't widely appreciated, but they're far better than DA2. And I truly, truly, truly wanted to love DA2, but now I just want to forget about it...

I don't want anyone to lose their job or anything like that, I don't want Bioware to come out and say "We made a crappy game, please forgive us", no, no. But I'd really appreciate them to stop saying "We made innovations and some people couldn't handle them" or "We are really proud of DA2", come on...You guys seriously cannot say that with a straight face. I know nobody would talk trash about their baby, but it's really annoying, just as it is annoying to read the 100000th thread of "DA2 SUCKS".

I know some people truly liked DA2, and I have no quarrel with them. They're free to enjoy whatever they like. What's truly sad is that Bioware divided their fanbase...and I doubt that anything they make from now on will satisfy both sides.

Sigh.

Oh My God!

that is EXACTLY what i think.

[imnar]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I have said this in other threads but I will repeat myself here.

Dragon Age 2 is not a horrible game. It isn't and the people who claim it is are frankly nothing more than whiney idiots who find it impossible to be objective. The American's are supposedly want to saying "Haterz Gonna Hate" and I feel that that is an idiom that holds true here.

It only feels horrible because you are comparing it to Dragon Age Origins and other BW games; and when held up against DAO, ME 1, ME 2, BG 2, KotOR 1 etc, the game is so far below them its not even funny.
DA2's metacritic score averages a clear 15 to 20 points less than every other BW game in review scores. That tells you that I am right; the game is decent/good it just isnt great, it has a lot of flaws and the team took a lot of design decisions that were just the wrong ones to take.

For myself I loved Dragon Age 2 through my first play through in spite of its flaws (some of them were EXCEPTIONALLY irritating) because the overall package was delivered quite well or so I thought.
Got the end of Act 2 and thought "I Cant be at the end already?" and then was kind of "oh right, bit of a tangent here but lets see where it goes" when the game shot off onto the rather abrupt mage v templar storyline (which didnt have much foreshadowing in the prior acts IMO). BUt I went with it and felt it was okay, was liking it at least then I hit the end run.

My first thought was "oh im on the end run now. bit soon for that." because I felt that the game need a LOT more exposition before it reached "the end". And then the game ended and I felt like Bioware had slapped me.
The ending was awful. Truely awful and it dropped me from "loving" the game to merely tolerating/liking it somewhat.
It basically ended like nothing I had done during the entirety of the game mattered whatsoever; if Hawke hadnt been there the exact same sort of thing would have happened. Except the Chantry wouldnt have had their convenient scapegoat for it all in the form of Hawke. It made me think what was the point in playing a game that championed its "choices" and "different paths to power" when the end result is you in actuality had NO choice whatsoever that mattered at all in any way shape or form.

It was very dissapointing.

To the OPs question; do I still feel as negatively about the game now as I did?

No, I don't. The game is alright if you ignore the ending.

What I am more upset about now, and the reason I wont get the DLCs and whatnot is Bioware's response to people like me, who don't "love" the game.
Basically dismissing those of us who had negative but constructive criticism as people who simply did not like change was shocking, something that I feel very upset about. I am not afraid of change.
I like ME2 better than ME1, and I am loving how ME3 is shaping up so far. I think TW2 looks much better than TW1. I actually prefer KotOR 2 over KotOR 1 (now that TSLRCM has finished the game). I loved the new direction Fallout went in (even if i hated the F3 main storyline which sucked).

I am not afraid of change. I just had legitimate well documented gripes with the FLAWS in this game, and the MISTAKES the development team made in its execution.
I find it beyond insulting to be told repeatedly by Bioware devs that my concerns mean nothing, my criticism means nothing, and that I am merely afraid of change and thus worthy of being ignored.

i feel it's a horrible game, i'm not a whiny idiot. i'm just a person with an opinion just like you. i think it's disrespectful to call names, especially when you follow that rudeness up with a valid argument. there are a lot of people like me that are upset by the fact bioware put out a half *ss game. i paid 59.99 + tax for my game. for that  FULL PRICE, i should be able to expect a full game. it felt like a disjointed expansion pack. also it's illogical not to expect people to compare previous games the company has made. if anything that is a compliment, because we all know just how consistantly incredible bioware can be. i STILL own every bioware game EXCEPT DA2...i got rid of it...we expect a greatly crafted and engrossing narrative. granted, the game is visually beautiful, but when you give me a bag of crap in a pretty gift box, i'm still left with a bag of crap...this is 2011 and they frigging cloned the dungeons!!!! the bad guys appear out of thin air!! these aren't bugs these are intentional occurances. it's stuff you expect from lesser devs. if it didn't have DA2 on the box i wouldn't have bought it the game. i don't mind change. i don't need it to be exactly like da:o. me2 had changes from me1, but it was EPIC just like me1. it had complaints, but i loved me2 as much as me1 and i preordered me3 based on that. da2 should have made that same jump. bioware should be ashamed for rushing a game to make a buck. i don't mind waiting for the people that worked on kothr online to come back after it's finished to work on da2. i would have rather them push it back a year or even two. i don't mind waiting for qualilty.

Modifié par imnar, 08 juillet 2011 - 10:20 .

[Darth Death]

I don't see how BioWare will recover from this mishap. At this point the DA series is half dead to me. The only thing that's keeping DA alive (for me) is Origins. I really want DA3 to "redeem" itself some how, but I can't see it happening.

[Macrake]

Bad game is still bad. Why would anyone buy an addon for a bad game.

We'll see what they do with DA3.

[ScotGaymer]

imnar wrote...

i feel it's a horrible game, i'm not a whiny idiot. i'm just a person with an opinion just like you. i think it's disrespectful to call names, especially when you follow that rudeness up with a valid argument. there are a lot of people like me that are upset by the fact bioware put out a half *ss game. i paid 59.99 + tax for my game. for that  FULL PRICE, i should be able to expect a full game. it felt like a disjointed expansion pack. also it's illogical not to expect people to compare previous games the company has made. if anything that is a compliment, because we all know just how consistantly incredible bioware can be. i STILL own every bioware game EXCEPT DA2...i got rid of it...we expect a greatly crafted and engrossing narrative. granted, the game is visually beautiful, but when you give me a bag of crap in a pretty gift box, i'm still left with a bag of crap...this is 2011 and they frigging cloned the dungeons!!!! the bad guys appear out of thin air!! these aren't bugs these are intentional occurances. it's stuff you expect from lesser devs. if it didn't have DA2 on the box i wouldn't have bought it the game. i don't mind change. i don't need it to be exactly like da:o. me2 had changes from me1, but it was EPIC just like me1. it had complaints, but i loved me2 as much as me1 and i preordered me3 based on that. da2 should have made that same jump. bioware should be ashamed for rushing a game to make a buck. i don't mind waiting for the people that worked on kothr online to come back after it's finished to work on da2. i would have rather them push it back a year or even two. i don't mind waiting for qualilty.

I am not talking about people who legitimately dislike the game man. Sorry I thought I was fairly clear on that point.

I am talking about the whiny fanboys who gave it "OMG!!11!!1!11 THIS IS THE WORST GAME EVAR!!!11!!1!" because DA2 wasn't up to Bioware's usual standards.
And who spewed so much inconsistent incoherent nonsensical vitriol about the game that Bioware had to seperate out the discussion forums into "non registered users" and "registered users" in an effort to get to the REAL problem; to me that was a disgusting stupid overreaction to something some people may have had a legitimate problem with.

Some people may find the game a "bad" game. Some people may find it a "good" game. That's fine.

If you can put forth your arguement for not liking the game in a coherent and sensible manner then you aren't one of those whiny idiots. lol.

And I maintain my point that you only feel DA2 is a horrible game because you are comparing it to DAO and to other BW games. If it didn't have the DA tag on it, if it wasnt from Bioware you would probably like it well enough (or you much still dislike it but it wouldnt be called "horrible").
I challenge you to actually think about it and about why you dislike the game, and if you would dislike it this much if it wasnt called Dragon Age 2 and was a release from some other studio,

Dragon Age 2 isn't the worst game ever. Wanna know what the worst game ever was? Spore.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:51 .

[Tirfan]

No, I can agree on that it wasn't the worst game ever. It was the second worst. Of course I'm comparing it to DA:O, it is a sequel after all.

If it didn't have DA or Bioware tag on it, I would have never bought this game, I bought it because I genuinely fell in love with the lore of Thedas, and hoped that Bioware can't make a game that sucks.

If I had bought it against all odds even if it wasn't a DAgame & Bioware game, it still would be the second worst game I have ever played. Nothing changes that, it is a horrible game, made even worse because of the title Dragon Age.

[BroBear Berbil]

My opinion of the game hasn't changed. I've thought to play it again but then I realize I'm just not interested in it enough to run it. There's sidequests in Act 3 I never did because by that point I just rushed through the rest but it feels like I've seen just about everything DA2 had to show...several times.

I'm still interested in the franchise because of how much I loved Origins so I come here every couple of days to look for news and maybe read a thread or two.