250 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Aradace wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You were told from the get go that you had to be a Grey Warden. It's what the game was about. You were NOT told from get get go that you could only play Hawke and that was not the expectation of DRAGON AGE TWO.

Wait, you weren't told that the story was Hawke's story? That's not what I remember...

Dragon Age TWO

Enough said.

-Polaris

Again, YOUR fault for not keeping up with the information fed to us prior to release.  If you had stayed in the loop, you'd have known that you could ONLY play as Hawke.  ONLY play as a Human, and ONLY play as a character escaping Lothering.  You cant blame someone else for your inability to keep up with information and flying into a game blind.

Blame the customer for expecting a sequel to be a SEQUEL.  Yeah, that's the ticket......

-Polaris

[mesmerizedish]

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

[IanPolaris]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Since when does "two" imply, without a doubt, a direct sequel?

Pretty much always.  If you have a product/story/game that is titled Kibbles, and then later you come out with a product that is called "Kibbles TWO" then the customer has every right and expectation to see something very similiar to "Kibbles" and anything else is dishonest marketing and merchandizing.

Bioware knew perfectly what would be assumed when they called this game "Dragon Age TWO" and did so to sucker as many DAO fans into buying it before the word got out.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it. [The sales and preorder figures and trends bear this out fwiw.]

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

It's not idiotic to assume that something labeled as a sequel to be a sequel.  This sounds like an excuse to me.  If that wasn't the intent it should have been called something else.

-Polaris

[whykikyouwhy]

Well, it's your right to believe that Bioware is an evil greedy corporate conglomerate out to rob you of your nickels. I prefer to think of them as a business that happens to make enjoyable games. Maybe the advertisements weren't perfect for your tastes, maybe lots of folks could do with a grain of salt view to *any* advertisement.

But you sure are raising a fuss about a company that you have already villified. If guess you could try to get your money back if you plead your case.

[ipgd]

Then why on Earth does Final Fantasy sell so well? Almost none of its "sequels" are direct sequels.

Not all sequels are direct sequels that pick up the narrative exactly where it leaves off. And many non-direct sequels are wildly successful.

[IanPolaris]

ipgd wrote...

Then why on Earth does Final Fantasy sell so well? Almost none of its "sequels" are direct sequels.

Not all sequels are direct sequels that pick up the narrative exactly where it leaves off. And many non-direct sequels are wildly successful.

I didn't say "direct" sequels. You will find that the Final Fantasy series (at least those that sold well) had strong common elements to each other, and the buyer could expect a certain experience based on the Final Fantasy name.  That's the expectation generated by putting a TWO after the name of a game.  It's not that hard.

-Polaris

[happy_daiz]

I believe that common element was the name "Square Enix".

[Aradace]

IanPolaris wrote...

Aradace wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You were told from the get go that you had to be a Grey Warden. It's what the game was about. You were NOT told from get get go that you could only play Hawke and that was not the expectation of DRAGON AGE TWO.

Wait, you weren't told that the story was Hawke's story? That's not what I remember...

Dragon Age TWO

Enough said.

-Polaris

Again, YOUR fault for not keeping up with the information fed to us prior to release.  If you had stayed in the loop, you'd have known that you could ONLY play as Hawke.  ONLY play as a Human, and ONLY play as a character escaping Lothering.  You cant blame someone else for your inability to keep up with information and flying into a game blind.

Blame the customer for expecting a sequel to be a SEQUEL.  Yeah, that's the ticket......

-Polaris

When the information was given to you on a freakin' silver platter? Yea, you do in this case.  It's YOUR fault for not researching the title.  It's YOUR fault for ASSUMING anything.  You know what they say about assumptions right?  No matter how you look at this, it's YOUR fault for not researching the game before buying it.  

Take me for example:  I bought ME1, enjoyed it etc. etc.  When they announced ME2, do you think I just sat by, and blissfully assumed that it would be identical to the first game without first researching it and keep up with release notes? HELL NO!!  Its YOUR job as the consumer to do the research when the information is given.  

Make no mistake, Im not saying that you cant be disappointed with the game.  Many are.  But the diffrence between you and them? Is that THEY did their research and still was disappointed by it.  Where as you flew blissfully blind into the experience, once again assuming that you'd get a Dragon Age ORIGINS 2.  You could have probably saved yourself 60 dollars had you just sucked it up, and did a little research before hand.  But did you? No.  So guess what? You made your bed by remaining blind and going off assumptions.  Now you get to lay in it.

[Rovay]

I find it amusing, blaming Bioware for your own lack of info about DA 2 and it's protagonist... I mean, is it really that hard to check the website or whatever, just to be sure nothing gets drasticly changed?

Edit:  ninja'd

Modifié par Rovay, 23 août 2011 - 02:49 .

[whykikyouwhy]

So where were those strong common elements lacking? I didn't see or feel an absence in them.

Again, I this boils down to expectations. But I don't think it's fair to blame a title for your issues with the game. There were screenshots released, info, even a demo to help players gauge the kind of game DA2 was.

[LobselVith8]

Aradace wrote...

I dont have this problem seeing as how I almost always (unless doing my solo runs) have Bethany become a Warden. 

I chose to become a mage. It's a lot easier (for me) to justify bringing Carver (in spite of Leandra's pleas) than it is Bethany.

Aradace wrote...

Beyond that, any "idle" time in between acts are justified IMO.  Even the protagonist deserves down time.  And besides, it's kind of implied in some dialogs that he/she isnt completely idle during this time.

I think that's the difference between us. I don't dislike Hawke for being a new protagonist - I want a protactive Hawke who can (as Anders repeatedly asks of my apostate protagonist) be a leader to the mages. I simply don't feel like I'm getting a protagonist who is capable of that.

Aradace wrote...

For example, when you talk to Isabela during Act 2 for the first time and you choose the snarky response of "Isnt that what you said last time?" It's kind of implied here that Hawke went with her on this particular "adventure" to help her out.  So saying he/she is completely idle in between acts is a bit of a stretch. 

I never said Hawke is idle 24/7, I said he's idle in circumstances where he shouldn't be. I see no justification in letting Petrice walk away when she tried to start a religious war, I see no justification for letting Cullen take away Bethany given Hawke's knowledge of the Circle with his exposure to the Gallows and the events in "Tranquility," I see no justification for doing nothing as Meredith became a dictator and cracked down harder on the mages, and I see no reason for Hawke to stand idly by while Grace murders Ser Thrask. In addition to Legacy's ending with Larius, which mirrors the ending of "Sheparding Wolves" with Sister Petrice, and I have a hard time investing myself in Hawke as a protagonist because I find this actions frustrating and foolish.

[Aradace]

@Lobsel - I dunno. I understand how you feel I think. I just dont have the same view of it as you do I guess.

[Aradace]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

So where were those strong common elements lacking? I didn't see or feel an absence in them.

Again, I this boils down to expectations. But I don't think it's fair to blame a title for your issues with the game. There were screenshots released, info, even a demo to help players gauge the kind of game DA2 was.

And yet he remained blissfully ignorant of everything around him.  It's people like that, that get me fired up faster than anything.  It was his responsibility to do the research.  Not sit idly by and assume he was getting ORIGINS 2.  

[ipgd]

FF's battle system changes with practically every installment. None of the narratives have anything to do with each other. Practically the only thing they share in common is aesthetic designs, some obnoxious character archetypes and the presence of some kind of magic. I wouldn't say DAO and DA2 are more dissimilar than any two FF games, and yet people still eat that **** up. Perhaps FF fans are just less hysterically terrified that new, different installments will retroactively erase the games they liked from history.

Typing with one hand on a phone touchscreen is very unfun so I am going to not.

[Rinji the Bearded]

I'm not sure why a "sequel" has to involve the continuation of a single character's story. They've said over and over again that the story is centered around Thedas's history and the important people in it, not one character's glorious, blind charge through it.

A sequel continues a previous work's narrative, which Dragon Age 2 DID.

[LobselVith8]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

I think Ian is talking about the dichotomy between fans of the "old school" RPG feel of Origins that drew them to the classics and the "innovations" (as Dr. Ray Muzyka termed it) that were employed in making the sequel. I know a lot of people became fans of Dragon Age: Origins because they were fans of the "old school RPGs" that used to be made, and Origins was hyped as being a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate (as some of the creators from Baldur's Gate created Origins). I know that's one of the rifts between fans of Origins and fans of Dragon Age 2.

[Aradace]

LobselVith8 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

I think Ian is talking about the dichotomy between fans of the "old school" RPG feel of Origins that drew them to the classics and the "innovations" (as Dr. Ray Muzyka termed it) that were employed in making the sequel. I know a lot of people became fans of Dragon Age: Origins because they were fans of the "old school RPGs" that used to be made, and Origins was hyped as being a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate (as some of the creators from Baldur's Gate created Origins). I know that's one of the rifts between fans of Origins and fans of Dragon Age 2.

Actually, read a few of his other posts.  He's claiming ignorance of not knowing that DA2 was going to have a fixed Protag and no origin stories or whatnot.  No Dichotomy at work here.  And he's trying to use that ignorance as some sort of justification behind his disappointment with the game.  Where if he had just did a little research....Well....I wont go into it again.

[IanPolaris]

RinjiRenee wrote...

I'm not sure why a "sequel" has to involve the continuation of a single character's story. They've said over and over again that the story is centered around Thedas's history and the important people in it, not one character's glorious, blind charge through it.

A sequel continues a previous work's narrative, which Dragon Age 2 DID.

No it didn't really.  Other than an excuse to get Hawke out of Lothering, the blight may as well never have happened when it comes to the impact on DA2.  At BEST it's a parallel story.  Not a sequel.  When an RPG (like DAO) has a sequal labeled DRAGON AGE TWO, then I expect another RPG (esp if it's marketed as the spiritual successor of Balder's Gate) and not a badly done hybrid.

-Polaris

[ipgd]

LobselVith8 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

I think Ian is talking about the dichotomy between fans of the "old school" RPG feel of Origins that drew them to the classics and the "innovations" (as Dr. Ray Muzyka termed it) that were employed in making the sequel. I know a lot of people became fans of Dragon Age: Origins because they were fans of the "old school RPGs" that used to be made, and Origins was hyped as being a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate (as some of the creators from Baldur's Gate created Origins). I know that's one of the rifts between fans of Origins and fans of Dragon Age 2.

Funny, I am a fan of Origins and Dragon Age 2. I must be at war with my inner self !!!

[IanPolaris]

Aradace wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

I think Ian is talking about the dichotomy between fans of the "old school" RPG feel of Origins that drew them to the classics and the "innovations" (as Dr. Ray Muzyka termed it) that were employed in making the sequel. I know a lot of people became fans of Dragon Age: Origins because they were fans of the "old school RPGs" that used to be made, and Origins was hyped as being a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate (as some of the creators from Baldur's Gate created Origins). I know that's one of the rifts between fans of Origins and fans of Dragon Age 2.

Actually, read a few of his other posts.  He's claiming ignorance of not knowing that DA2 was going to have a fixed Protag and no origin stories or whatnot.  No Dichotomy at work here.  And he's trying to use that ignorance as some sort of justification behind his disappointment with the game.  Where if he had just did a little research....Well....I wont go into it again.

I am not claiming that.  I am claiming that I wanted to have more control over my character, and if he isn't really my character then what's the point?  [Since at this point you are not playing an RPG.]  The rest is in your imagination.  The expectation of an RPG is a valid one based on the name of the game alone.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ipgd wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

No, it's blaming the customer for being an idiot.

I think Ian is talking about the dichotomy between fans of the "old school" RPG feel of Origins that drew them to the classics and the "innovations" (as Dr. Ray Muzyka termed it) that were employed in making the sequel. I know a lot of people became fans of Dragon Age: Origins because they were fans of the "old school RPGs" that used to be made, and Origins was hyped as being a "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate (as some of the creators from Baldur's Gate created Origins). I know that's one of the rifts between fans of Origins and fans of Dragon Age 2.

Funny, I am a fan of Origins and Dragon Age 2. I must be at war with my inner self !!!

Many people are.

-Polaris

[Aradace]

IanPolaris wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

I'm not sure why a "sequel" has to involve the continuation of a single character's story. They've said over and over again that the story is centered around Thedas's history and the important people in it, not one character's glorious, blind charge through it.

A sequel continues a previous work's narrative, which Dragon Age 2 DID.

No it didn't really.  Other than an excuse to get Hawke out of Lothering, the blight may as well never have happened when it comes to the impact on DA2.  At BEST it's a parallel story.  Not a sequel.  When an RPG (like DAO) has a sequal labeled DRAGON AGE TWO, then I expect another RPG (esp if it's marketed as the spiritual successor of Balder's Gate) and not a badly done hybrid.

-Polaris

Regardless of how you feel, you can only blame yourself at this point for your disappointment.  Because had you just had the clarity of mind, as I said, to do the research, then you wouldnt even be here talking about this because Im sure you wouldnt have bought the game to begin with.  Now again, before you make MORE assumptions, Im NOT saying you CANT be disappointed with the game.  What I AM saying, is that in this very rare case, the disappointment, is YOUR fault.

[Aradace]

IanPolaris wrote...

 .... The expectation of an RPG is a valid one based on the name of the game alone.

-Polaris

Omfg....No...Just...No....Read VERY carefully:  Not.....When....The...Information....Is....there....Ahead....of.....time....to.....tell....you.....OTHERWISE!!!! There is no way you can spin this where it isnt YOUR fault for not researching the game.  You seem to be convienientlly dodging that aspect frequently.  You cannot use ignorance as an excuse here.

Modifié par Aradace, 23 août 2011 - 03:17 .

[IanPolaris]

Aradace wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

I'm not sure why a "sequel" has to involve the continuation of a single character's story. They've said over and over again that the story is centered around Thedas's history and the important people in it, not one character's glorious, blind charge through it.

A sequel continues a previous work's narrative, which Dragon Age 2 DID.

No it didn't really.  Other than an excuse to get Hawke out of Lothering, the blight may as well never have happened when it comes to the impact on DA2.  At BEST it's a parallel story.  Not a sequel.  When an RPG (like DAO) has a sequal labeled DRAGON AGE TWO, then I expect another RPG (esp if it's marketed as the spiritual successor of Balder's Gate) and not a badly done hybrid.

-Polaris

Regardless of how you feel, you can only blame yourself at this point for your disappointment.  Because had you just had the clarity of mind, as I said, to do the research, then you wouldnt even be here talking about this because Im sure you wouldnt have bought the game to begin with.  Now again, before you make MORE assumptions, Im NOT saying you CANT be disappointed with the game.  What I AM saying, is that in this very rare case, the disappointment, is YOUR fault.

Bolluxs.  If I buy Kibbles TWO then I expect to see a very similiar product to Kibbles and no amount of excuses will change that.  Same, same.

-Polaris