Aller au contenu

Why did so many people say Dragon Age 2 was a bad game?


296 réponses à ce sujet

#226
Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*

Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*
  • Guests

bEVEsthda wrote...


"inflammatory language"? Guilty, but I still say you have to read it in the context.
"deliberately insulting people"? No, I wouldn't do that. If I do then only if I was insulted first and I'd try to be milder about it, and at least make it a bit fair. If people read this in the context, and still feel insulted, then they have misunderstood something. That was never my intention. The subject of my irony is myself. The language I put in my own mouth make me myself the target.

Besides, the smilie as well as the context should have made this clear.

So maybe you should start to question your own agenda?


 I'm only in on the gay agenda. Any of the others can go and stuff it.

I didn't realize you were being self-ironic, which is why I asked. Tone is difficult to read in text, as you probably know.

#227
Monica83

Monica83
  • Members
  • 1 849 messages
I just say that...

Take a success game make a complete different sequel that change not only in the story but also in the lores in design and also in the system... then call it a "sequel"

Da2 is not a sequel... is a mediocre and poor of content game as a standalone game...

Im just thinking at the ones that sayd: Long time of dev don't need to make a nice game!

After dragon age 2 you really still think that? :D

Modifié par Monica83, 04 août 2011 - 03:39 .


#228
Kappa Neko

Kappa Neko
  • Members
  • 2 328 messages

Amitar wrote...

The problem is that they clearly wanted to drop the players into the action, whereas personal stories need time to setup:
We needed to see Hawke in Lothering as the recruiters came to drag people off to Ostagar.
We needed to spend time with the Sibling that died (Mage Hawke with Bethany dodging the recruiters, Warrior/Rogue Hawke with Carver at Ostagar).
We needed to see what Hawke lost as Lothering was Destroyed and their connection with their family.
We needed to see Hawkes first year in Kirkwall working for the smugglers/mercenaries and their reaction the the newness of the environs.

Instead we got a naff outdoor dungeon with a pointless death sequence and a cutscene to the Deeproads Expedition prelude.

I think EA wanted an RPG it could treat like the the CoD/Madden/Fifa series and put no effort into market research about the majority of RPG gamers.


I'm one of the few people who really like DA2, but so much this as well.
I wrote a very long review in German and don't feel like translating it into English.
So I'll just add a  few lines:
I LOVE the mages against templars story and I consider it infinitely more interesting than fighting some evil monsters. But yeah, the first 20 hours of the game (it's not a short  at all, people!) up until the second act were painfully devoid of a real plot. It's basically: you're a poor refugee who needs to get money from somewhere to join a mysterious expedition in order to become rich or something. Uhm, ok.
It took me slightly frustrating 15 hours to relealize that the endless list of sidequests *are* the game. Once I accepted this I actually started to enjoy these sidequest *g*
Anyway, dropping the player into the action doesn't work well for RPGs. It might work for short stories but it sure as hell doesn't work for video games that are supposed to offer an emotional connection to the characters.
You *need* to get familiar with a setting and the characters. You *need* the guy/girl-venturing-out-into-the-big-bad-world-introduction. Kill a few rats as training and so forth.
I don't mind all that much that I had to play a human, that I couldn't choose an origin. But it would have been nice to at least be given ONE origin for this one character.
This game would have had much more impact if it had started in Lothering. I agree.
Your sibling dying after 5 minutes was not a smart move. I felt nothing.
Creating a storyline that stretches over a period of 7 years is a cool idea. And I'm fine with having to fill in some of the gaps. But the time leaps left me confused mostly. Or disappointed.
Take the arrival in Kirkwall: You are told that you'll have to work for a year before you can enter the city. I expected this year to be part of the game. But what happens? Once I choose who to work for the prologue simply ends and BAM the year has passed. Okay.....
A minor time leap gripe was the romances: I've only done the Fernis romance so far. Anyway, I was expecting a romance that develops in accordance with a long time frame. It didn't! You can hit on Fenris right away but then nothing much happens and I don't even know why. Years pass and we're still flirting but not getting anywhere. Then the relationship does finally progress and you spend a night with him but he freaks and runs. But there's no follow-up. I was assuming the relationship continued somehow. I didn't consider this scene to be a relationship breaker. Only in act three did I realize that the relationship had ended YEARS ago because a companion asked me about it! Maybe that was just me not getting it but the romances shouldn't be so vague and cut up, should they?! Maybe that's just the Fenris romance....?
The time leap between act two and three wasn't so bad. But they could have shown better how the conflict is on the brink of escalating now by maybe inserting a few cutscenes, not just a few lines by Varric.

Ok, that was more than just a few lines *g*
It might not sound like it, but I had tons of fun with DA2 despite the prologue and act one failure. It's not a bad game at all. But I'd prefer the DAO style story telling. Don't mind experiments, but DA2 didn't quite work out. The 7 year storyline is a nice idea but could have been executed better. Definitely.

#229
Fast Jimmy

Fast Jimmy
  • Members
  • 17 939 messages
While I agree that there were a multitude of reasons why DA2 was vastly different from DA:O in an attempt to make it more enjoyable, it does sometimes feel like they taught us all to swim in the deep end, then at the next pool party, made everyone play in the kiddie pool.

#230
Travie

Travie
  • Members
  • 1 803 messages
Yeah, that beginning ripped away so many parts that could have potentially made this a deep (or at least deeper) RPG.

#231
bEVEsthda

bEVEsthda
  • Members
  • 3 612 messages

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

I didn't realize you were being self-ironic,


But only in terms of the expression. I absolutely mean it as in that I dislike DA2, and the underlying reasons as to why I dislike it.

#232
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages

Monica83 wrote...

I just say that...

Take a success game make a complete different sequel that change not only in the story but also in the lores in design and also in the system... then call it a "sequel"

Da2 is not a sequel... is a mediocre and poor of content game as a standalone game...

Im just thinking at the ones that sayd: Long time of dev don't need to make a nice game!

After dragon age 2 you really still think that? :D


I agree that it needed more time in the oven... but I pose this question when should i have it been released.  Unfournatly as awesome as Bioware is they are not  Blizzard awesome  with the pull to tell the distributor to **** off.   One day yes...not today.

DA 2 came out in March . So lets say you wait 6 months that is September  so you  now are ahead  out of Gears of War 3, Battlfield 3,  Batman Arkhym City,, Skyrim and if I am correct KOTR comes out later this year as well.   Wait a year and you have it going up against Mass Effect 3.   They could have waited say  4 months maybe 5 and you have Deus Ex: Human Revolution.   

At best they  would have pushed it back to  late 2012 is they only time I can see them pushing it back too. Just as release a game early is bad - pushing it back to far can be bad.

#233
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages
*Delete*

Modifié par nitefyre410, 04 août 2011 - 04:07 .


#234
erynnar

erynnar
  • Members
  • 3 010 messages

Fast Jimmy wrote...

While I agree that there were a multitude of reasons why DA2 was vastly different from DA:O in an attempt to make it more enjoyable, it does sometimes feel like they taught us all to swim in the deep end, then at the next pool party, made everyone play in the kiddie pool.


This^ vert much this^.

#235
Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*

Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*
  • Guests

bEVEsthda wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

I didn't realize you were being self-ironic,


But only in terms of the expression. I absolutely mean it as in that I dislike DA2, and the underlying reasons as to why I dislike it.


Which is what the term self-ironic and not... other-people-ironic would imply :P

It's entirely a matter of taste. Despite its flaws, I quite liked the game myself.

#236
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages

bEVEsthda wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

I didn't realize you were being self-ironic,


But only in terms of the expression. I absolutely mean it as in that I dislike DA2, and the underlying reasons as to why I dislike it.



you know I never had a issue with what you  were saying about the game...  the issue was how your saying it .  It was drowing  out some of the points you were trying to make. 

#237
Asepsis

Asepsis
  • Members
  • 468 messages
My only complaint about DA2 was that it was too short, and some things I wish they delved deeper into. I'd give examples but I don't want to risk a spoiler.

Other than that I enjoyed the game myself! It wasn't really a sequel, more like another branch/episode of Dragon Age. I liked the fact it allowed us to see more of the world of Dragon Age through a different perspective, not JUST through a Grey Warden's POV.

#238
miskatonica

miskatonica
  • Members
  • 47 messages
As a general observation not limited to this forum/thread: there are times that when people criticize DA2 for being a bad game (which I can accept, because even if I liked it there are definitely things that make me go "hold up, that could have been done better") it comes across less as "this game is dumb!" and more like "people who like this dumb game are dumb!"

Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.

I reckon what it just boils down to is simply that DA2 wasn't fun for a lot of people. Since that's theoretically the point of playing any game-- to have fun (unless you're a professional game reviewer, in which case...) even if the game was perfect in every technical aspect, because you didn't enjoy it, you'll consider it a bad game. You can make a bullet point list of the good/bad things in the game, but the human mind just doesn't work that logically. You know exactly when something leaves you feeling shafted. :P

Modifié par miskatonica, 04 août 2011 - 06:22 .


#239
Valo_Soren

Valo_Soren
  • Members
  • 769 messages

miskatonica wrote...



Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.



Don't apologize. DA 2 is an awesome game, the reason the haters hate is because Origins is a better game so they can't sit back and appreciate DA 2 for what it is because they are to busy comparing and contrasting. And there's more people that love the game then actually hate it but nine times out of ten the haters are more likely to get on forums and complain about crap rather then people who like the game get on and support it. Because that's what forums are for, the ****ing of the masses.

#240
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages

Valo_Soren wrote...

miskatonica wrote...



Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.



Don't apologize. DA 2 is an awesome game, the reason the haters hate is because Origins is a better game so they can't sit back and appreciate DA 2 for what it is because they are to busy comparing and contrasting. And there's more people that love the game then actually hate it but nine times out of ten the haters are more likely to get on forums and complain about crap rather then people who like the game get on and support it. Because that's what forums are for, the ****ing of the masses.


Is DA 2 a perfect game no but does it deserve the thrashing that it is getting absolutely not. There are some the make like Bioware took  the  puppy put in  burlap sack and beat it with a bat . There are some good solid   compliants about the game and some just make me wonder.

Modifié par nitefyre410, 04 août 2011 - 07:41 .


#241
Realmzmaster

Realmzmaster
  • Members
  • 5 510 messages

miskatonica wrote...

As a general observation not limited to this forum/thread: there are times that when people criticize DA2 for being a bad game (which I can accept, because even if I liked it there are definitely things that make me go "hold up, that could have been done better") it comes across less as "this game is dumb!" and more like "people who like this dumb game are dumb!"

Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.

I reckon what it just boils down to is simply that DA2 wasn't fun for a lot of people. Since that's theoretically the point of playing any game-- to have fun (unless you're a professional game reviewer, in which case...) even if the game was perfect in every technical aspect, because you didn't enjoy it, you'll consider it a bad game. You can make a bullet point list of the good/bad things in the game, but the human mind just doesn't work that logically. You know exactly when something leaves you feeling shafted. :P


If you enjoyed the game you have no reason to apologize. You have as much right to like the game as others have to dislike it. But do not worry you are not alone. I also enjoyed DA2 and thought it was fun.

#242
contextual_entity

contextual_entity
  • Members
  • 345 messages

nitefyre410 wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

I just say that...

Take a success game make a complete different sequel that change not only in the story but also in the lores in design and also in the system... then call it a "sequel"

Da2 is not a sequel... is a mediocre and poor of content game as a standalone game...

Im just thinking at the ones that sayd: Long time of dev don't need to make a nice game!

After dragon age 2 you really still think that? :D


I agree that it needed more time in the oven... but I pose this question when should i have it been released.  Unfournatly as awesome as Bioware is they are not  Blizzard awesome  with the pull to tell the distributor to **** off.   One day yes...not today.

DA 2 came out in March . So lets say you wait 6 months that is September  so you  now are ahead  out of Gears of War 3, Battlfield 3,  Batman Arkhym City,, Skyrim and if I am correct KOTR comes out later this year as well.   Wait a year and you have it going up against Mass Effect 3.   They could have waited say  4 months maybe 5 and you have Deus Ex: Human Revolution.   

At best they  would have pushed it back to  late 2012 is they only time I can see them pushing it back too. Just as release a game early is bad - pushing it back to far can be bad.


This makes me wonder. In theory the only one of those games that should be direct competition is Skyrim, and even then, it's a very different type of RPG than your standard Bioware RPG. All the other are in completely seperate genres and while that may effect week one sales, continued sales are vital for a games economic performance, DA:O alone is evidence of that.

Does that mean that EA felt that irregardless to how much time and effort went into DA2 it would never match up to some of the other blockbusters due out soon, even without sharing the genre?

Or was it a simple test run, to see if they could turn the franchise into a $60 game every 12-18months, quality be damned practice?

#243
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages

Amitar wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

I just say that...

Take a success game make a complete different sequel that change not only in the story but also in the lores in design and also in the system... then call it a "sequel"

Da2 is not a sequel... is a mediocre and poor of content game as a standalone game...

Im just thinking at the ones that sayd: Long time of dev don't need to make a nice game!

After dragon age 2 you really still think that? :D


I agree that it needed more time in the oven... but I pose this question when should i have it been released.  Unfournatly as awesome as Bioware is they are not  Blizzard awesome  with the pull to tell the distributor to **** off.   One day yes...not today.

DA 2 came out in March . So lets say you wait 6 months that is September  so you  now are ahead  out of Gears of War 3, Battlfield 3,  Batman Arkhym City,, Skyrim and if I am correct KOTR comes out later this year as well.   Wait a year and you have it going up against Mass Effect 3.   They could have waited say  4 months maybe 5 and you have Deus Ex: Human Revolution.   

At best they  would have pushed it back to  late 2012 is they only time I can see them pushing it back too. Just as release a game early is bad - pushing it back to far can be bad.


This makes me wonder. In theory the only one of those games that should be direct competition is Skyrim, and even then, it's a very different type of RPG than your standard Bioware RPG. All the other are in completely seperate genres and while that may effect week one sales, continued sales are vital for a games economic performance, DA:O alone is evidence of that.

1. Does that mean that EA felt that irregardless to how much time and effort went into DA2 it would never match up to some of the other blockbusters due out soon, even without sharing the genre?

2. Or was it a simple test run, to see if they could turn the franchise into a $60 game every 12-18months, quality be damned practice?



My gut is telling  number  1 on this people don't have a lot money to drop on games anymore  so you have a new potential audeince that may lean towards Batman and choose it over DA or have more RPG centered audience that may choose to either rent DA and buy Skyrim consider how much of a powerhouse  Oblivion was  when it came out.   Honestly I would have to say even a Bioware fan... If had to choose it would between DA:O or DA 2 and Batman it would Batman(speaking which time for get  Arkhym Asylum  again...get to get back in practice.)

Of course the cynic in me whats to say number 2 but then  I remember step 3:  Profit and we have seen trying push out games like in 12-18 does not work with RPGs. Shooters and sports games -  yes. RPG's -  no 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 04 août 2011 - 10:03 .


#244
KotorEffect3

KotorEffect3
  • Members
  • 9 416 messages
DA 2 is not as good as it could have been and is no where as good as DAO but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be either. Just because something isn't a 10 doesn't make it a damn 1 either. I would give DA 2 a 7 while most bioware games are at least 9s if not 10s.

#245
Travie

Travie
  • Members
  • 1 803 messages

KotorEffect3 wrote...

DA 2 is not as good as it could have been and is no where as good as DAO but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be either. Just because something isn't a 10 doesn't make it a damn 1 either. I would give DA 2 a 7 while most bioware games are at least 9s if not 10s.


After such a great game as DA:O 'the expectations game' pretty much wiped out any chance of DA2 being treated as a 7, for so many it will always be an angry 1.

#246
KotorEffect3

KotorEffect3
  • Members
  • 9 416 messages

Travie wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

DA 2 is not as good as it could have been and is no where as good as DAO but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be either. Just because something isn't a 10 doesn't make it a damn 1 either. I would give DA 2 a 7 while most bioware games are at least 9s if not 10s.


After such a great game as DA:O 'the expectations game' pretty much wiped out any chance of DA2 being treated as a 7, for so many it will always be an angry 1.



People need a little perspective.  If DA2 was as horrible as people make it out to be I wouldn't have given the multiple playthroughs I have given it (and still continue to give it)

#247
xkg

xkg
  • Members
  • 3 744 messages

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Travie wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

DA 2 is not as good as it could have been and is no where as good as DAO but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be either. Just because something isn't a 10 doesn't make it a damn 1 either. I would give DA 2 a 7 while most bioware games are at least 9s if not 10s.


After such a great game as DA:O 'the expectations game' pretty much wiped out any chance of DA2 being treated as a 7, for so many it will always be an angry 1.



People need a little perspective.  If DA2 was as horrible as people make it out to be I wouldn't have given the multiple playthroughs I have given it (and still continue to give it)


And you need some understanding ... For you it isn't bad and for me it is HORRIBLE. You can play through it multiple times but I CAN'T.
So don't tell me it is bad ot not because I know better if it is FOR ME.

#248
DariusKalera

DariusKalera
  • Members
  • 317 messages

Valo_Soren wrote...

miskatonica wrote...



Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.



Don't apologize. DA 2 is an awesome game, the reason the haters hate is because Origins is a better game so they can't sit back and appreciate DA 2 for what it is because they are to busy comparing and contrasting. And there's more people that love the game then actually hate it but nine times out of ten the haters are more likely to get on forums and complain about crap rather then people who like the game get on and support it. Because that's what forums are for, the ****ing of the masses.


Of course they are going to compare and contrast, it was billed as a sequel and has a "2" in the title.  Any time that happens the second installation of ANY product is going to be compared to the first.

If you want something to be appreciated for what it is, don't call it a sequel and don't put a "2" in the title.

#249
billy the squid

billy the squid
  • Members
  • 4 669 messages

Valo_Soren wrote...

miskatonica wrote...



Which somehow leaves me feeling the awkward need to apologize for actually liking DA2. Er.



Don't apologize. DA 2 is an awesome game, the reason the haters hate is because Origins is a better game so they can't sit back and appreciate DA 2 for what it is because they are to busy comparing and contrasting. And there's more people that love the game then actually hate it but nine times out of ten the haters are more likely to get on forums and complain about crap rather then people who like the game get on and support it. Because that's what forums are for, the ****ing of the masses.


Oh really?

People dislike DA2 as it was rushed and messy. But, if you don't mind paying £40 for such a product, its your money feel free to waste it. As to the "judging it by its own merits" this arguement is plainly daft and grasping at straws. It was sold as the "sequal to the RPG of 2009" That was its selling point and as such when it was percieved not to be anything like its predecessor it was roundly bashed by players. So, saying one can't compare DA2 to DAO or any other game is ridiculous as, there are other games which compete for the same market, why would I examine DA2 in isolation if the another product gives me a something similar for the same value. The entire premise of such a statemet is an attempt to prevent DA2 from looking quite so bad against this years competition.

Finally, if forums are *****ng for the masses, as you have stated, the the masses are clearly displeased. As such your emphatic assertion that DA2 was actually well recieved despite the repeated interviews and defences for the games by the developer seem to be based on a perfidious fantasy, which you are attempting to peddle. Should one feel badly about enjoying the game? No, but one should not be in denial as to how the game has been percieved.

Modifié par billy the squid, 05 août 2011 - 11:24 .


#250
alex90c

alex90c
  • Members
  • 3 175 messages
The whole "don't compare DA2 to Origins, rate DA2 on its own merits" is such a hilariously bad argument, it's just a way of saying DA2 sucked, just lower your standards enough so that it seems good in comparison to them.