452 réponses à ce sujet

[Liaren]

I am one of those that likes DA:O and DA2 equally. And I like them  a lot.

Modifié par Liaren, 03 septembre 2011 - 03:46 .

[jbrand2002uk]

dont get me wrong i did like some aspects of origins having been an RPG veteran since the 80's when Dungeons& Dragons was the best thing since sliced best and the Commodore Amiga 500 was the latest in personal computing my biggest fault with Origins was as has been said by some that it just felt exactly like 20 or so other RPGs just with a different story and characters where i found DA2 to be a breath of fresh air in a very stale Genre because lets face it RPG's havent changed much at all if ever since the 80's and if the resistance to changes keeps going on it will just kill the Genre off completely

[casadechrisso]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

Unfortunatly the biggest cause for the "lack of freshness" is the core fans who are completely and utterly resistant to any changes whatsoever being made to their beloved game which in this case is DAO now while most fans of both DA games are willing to accept some compromise their is a hardcore group in both camps though the most being in the Origins camp due to bigger sales that point blank refuses to accept any change and are usually the first in the forums to resort to asking for the whole Dev team to be fired.

I can't say I disagree with you. Although I wouldn't blame only the die-hard core fans (I consider myself one) for it, but a lot of bad decisions were I think based on player and community feedback. I think vocal groups from all sides do their part in washing a game down. A good example imo would be the romances, Bioware did what the players demanded there (everyone bi/Hawke-sexual), and the result is a washed down, meaningless romance that is just meant to please everyone on the lowest common ground.
Actually though, I have to give Bioware some credit in DA2's case, because I can clealy see they attempted to do something different in many parts. Sadly, the execution was too bad.

Liaren wrote...

I seriously don't get the DA2
hate/dissapointment. All threads I see here basically end up in people
saying that DA2 sucks. Sure, it had it's flaws, each game has, but
people are treating it like it's an abomination.

Well, for me it is, and not because of all the changes, but mainly because of the bad execution. And a sequel must be expected to be compared to the first game. Why it has turned into an abomination for me is mainly the horrible art direction (I can't use a single unique item because I have to puke when I look at this kiddie stuff), streamlining and washing out/dumbing down and last but not least bad writing. I feel no love for detail in this game at all. That does not mean it hasn't some good ideas, but the sum is mediocre at best.

[AngryFrozenWater]

There is a problem with this whole trust thing. If we emphasize too much on that then there is no way BW can ever defend itself. As a fan of its games I should give them a chance. Still, the damage is done. And I cannot simply let it go and believe BW's big blue eyes.

Another problem with discussions like these is that the individual employees of BW are great people, who love their jobs and work their asses off. You can see that they love gaming. They live and breath it. So when criticizing the company I am not pointing any fingers to these individuals. However, I cannot dismiss what I see in the company policy, no matter how much I respect many of its employees.

It became obvious that BW's statements about DA2 didn't match the final game. So I am very skeptical about anything they'll tell about DA3.

It looks like BW wants the best of DA:O and DA2 for DA3. What I have seen so far is that they want to continue on the route set by DA2 and maybe throw a bone to the DA:O fans. The way the plans were unfolded for companion armor strengthened that impression. That idea pretty much involved what BW perceived was an improvement of DA2. While it was offered for discussion, it was obvious that improving the DA:O alternative was not open for discussion. And that's the problem. If some fans already felt the way marketing and Mr Laidlaw advertized DA2 was not close to the truth then keeping on the DA2 track does not create confidence.

We read that the idea behind DA2 was to keep the strong points of DA:O. That was supposed to be what the doctors urged the team to do. In the end it didn't even come close. I felt that everything that made DA:O a success was either removed or overhauled. The game lost its identity and it felt to me like it became a ME with swords and magic. The companion armor, the e-mails to the Hawke Estate, the first signs of decentralized inventory in combination with oversimplified potion and poison use and creation, the voiced PC (which I like, BTW), the human only PC, the railroaded storyline, the removal of background story, the dialogue wheel, the removal of skills, the meaningless cameos from the earlier game, the removal of dual wielding for warriors, the waves of foes, the recycled environment, the removal of the tactical camera, the removal of the dialogue logs, the bad PC user interface control, the removal of the checkbox to disable all tactics entries, the removal of the menus to conveniently select entries in the tactics list, and so on, all felt it was going into the ME direction or were chosen to reduce cost and development time and felt rushed. I wasn't charmed by how ME2 ended up, but if I compare DA2 to it then ME2 was a brilliant game.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think DA2 was an awful game. I've finished it 4 times, so it is good enough for that. But I don't adore the game like DA:O. Of course BW cannot please everyone, but there are too many signs that DA2 wasn't a good enough game and the long list I mentioned above tells me why.

Then we have BW winking to a new audience. It is interesting to note that BW said that they never wanted to attract the CoD crowd, but they let that myth live until it did them more harm than good. What remains is that BW wants to attract a new action oriented audience. And that's fine. After all, they do need to make money. I am not sure that they've succeeded, though. It seems that some loved the new combat look and feel. So, there is that. However, the changes in DA2 were too radical to please a fan like me. And that is strange, because I am anything but an old school RPG fan and couldn't care less about those games. To me it looks like the path BW has chosen caused DA2 to lose its identity. No new art style can make up for that.

So, how to get on from here? I thought Legacy was a step in the right direction. Of course that DLC cannot change many of the core problems of the game. Even though Legacy is a better DLC than many of the DA:O ones, it didn't address the decision making. And here's why:

I see the BW's game as a collection of points of interests, puzzles, and bosses. The story simply connects all of those locations and rarely has branching to an unique story line which involves other locations. In general the cienematics and dialogue simply forces you to visit all of them. It doesn't matter how you respond. So, any choices you make are cosmetic and are rationalizations to force you on a railroaded path. You usually still visit the same locations, solve the same puzzles and fight the same bosses. Of course there are a few exceptions, but it still applies to both DA2 and Legacy. You still fight both Orsino and Meredith, no matter what side you have chosen. You still fight the same end boss in Legacy, no matter what side you have chosen. In the end the story feels constructed and artificial because of all those rationalizations in the dialogue.

We are getting used to games that offer us branching stories and allow us alternate paths in a story. BW has chosen something different. Instead of doing that they feel that alternate dialogue lines are the way to go. For many players that's something they can either do in their head (like when reading a book) or by choosing another branch in the story. All that energy that BW is putting into that is lost for them. I feel BW's approach as needless hand holding. Maybe it is time for BW to leave that path and explore gameplay offered by some of the newer action RPGs competing with them.

The list of changes I've mentioned above needs to be addressed in some way or another. If BW wants to have my "faith" in them back then I think they should quit dreaming up marketing stuff that doesn't match reality and just show that critique is valued and researched. Throwing bones is not enough. Although I believe that BW discussing DA3'on the forums is a step in the right direction, I still have that feeling when it comes to DA:O.

I don't view BW and EA as separate entities, so the Origin "affair" didn't help to gain my trust either.

So the whole thing made me weary of DA3. I will certainly not pre-order BW's games anymore. I need more reliable info first.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 03 septembre 2011 - 04:23 .

[naledgeborn]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I don't know. They need to do a lot of work on improving things. Enemies need to use the same combat animations, skills, and cross class combos we use as well as using tactics of their own.

The cities need to feel more alive, since Denerim was dead and Kirkwall was in a coma.

The player needs to be given more choices that matter. They should also attempt to cover up certain things better if the player can't make a choice.

They need to understand politics and tactical warfare more to help strengthen the story, because DAII was lacking in both.

Those are just some things. Oh and they need to give me a gorilla companion or bring back the Ranger specialization with a gorilla summon .

A day on BSN, priceless. For everything else, there's MasterCard. 

All bs aside pretty much this. I brought up in another thread that the Anders' fight in Legacy  (as short as it was) was one fo the more satisfying fights because he played by the same ruleset as Hawke & Co. Why can't I get hit with a Crushing Prison or Winter's Grasp by enemy mages? Why can't enemy Reavers hit me with a Mighty Blow or Devour? Tactics are dumbed down when bad guys are stuck in Origins and Hawke's combat prowess is "evolved".

2nd point. More poltically grey bad guys. Loghain, Arishok, and Flemeth should be the standard. Not the cackling, Saturday morning, mustache-twirling. cartoon villian that lost their minds (Meredith, Orsino, every bloodmage in the game). 

[jbrand2002uk]

True casadechrisso i agree with pretty much all of your assessment while i did like the art direction of DA2 though i'm not keen on the staff in the new mage pack II for example, Of i wouldnt suggest the blame lies purely with the Hardcore core fans as there as some of the more casual fans that are just as resistant to change its usually comes loudest from the Hardcore core fans.

Although a short Dev cycle doesnt automatically equal a poor game as many Devs have multiple studio's working on a single game which can improve the quality and nowadays then trend is towards fixing bugs and errors though free patches.

The biggest case i can think of that validates this point is the latest Duke Nukem game doing the rounds after being in and out of Development for 12 yrs it doest feel as good as it could have been given the time spent on it

[RagingCyclone]

Liaren wrote....

I seriously don't get the DA2 hate/dissapointment. All threads I see here basically end up in people saying that DA2 sucks. Sure, it had it's flaws, each game has, but people are treating it like it's an abomination.

As a BW fan since KOTOR, I think a lot of the dislike of the changes comes down a simple prognosis. Many fans of DA are also fans of ME. Look at the registered games under user's avatars and many have both. While ME is the rpg/action hybrid, DAO was the traditional rpg, and that mix allowed fans to enjoy both types of games.  The direction DA2 took was to go more into the rpg/actio hence all the earlier posts about "Dragon Effect" when DA2 first came out. That is still the underlying cause of the dislike/hate/vitriol or whatever you want to call it. Where before there was teh oportunity to play both types and enjoy both types, now there is just the one type to play and some of the joy of delving into both types is gone. It was what set the two games apart, DA and ME. Now with the changes to DA it's a feeling that for many they have been...how to say this...undercut by BW and EA.  It did not help that EA and BW rushed DA2. It has as many flaws as Origins does, and the changes help to highlight these moreso in DA2.  Sure DA2 was more profitable, it should have been since it uses the same engine and toolset parameters as Origins. Don't think so, check the mods and see how many armors and weapons have been easily ported from DA2 to DAO. So if DA2 were as successful as some people want to believe, the sales do not support it. I would be interested to see the P&L with actual vs projected figures. In any case BW is listening to the feedback and making the changes they feel the fans want. (an indication to me that actual is far below projected)  Legacy was the first example of this. Some people argue it didn't go far enough, but I think they forget those changes are limited to the current game platform since it was a DLC not a full fledge game. As such those types of arguments you mention will continue at least until the new game comes out. It sucks, but also the most probable scenario.

[MerinTB]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
There is a problem with this whole trust thing. ...

snip

... I will certainly not pre-order BW's games anymore. I need more reliable info first.

Bravo.

Well said.

[AloraKast]

*standing ovation for AngryFrozenWater*

Amazing, fantastic, fabulous post hun!

[jbrand2002uk]

Some people say Origins had an "identity" although i do not profess to be an Origins Fanatic this simply wasn't the case having played RPG's since 80's as previously stated i can say with certainty that if you took any other RPG from the last 25yrs and changed the graphics and few other things and voila what do you have DAO, DA2 was the change that has been long overdue now while it too had flaws and yes the changes were too radical for some of the traditional RPG players the change was inevitable and would have happened anway whether it was now or 10 yrs down the line.

[TheEndOfAllThings]

I just want a good story!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Deus Ex: Human Revolution has an absolutely mind blowing story, why not get the writers from that for DA3?

[jbrand2002uk]

Resistance is Futile you will all be Assimilated in the End
-------------------------END OF LINE--------------------------------------

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

Some people say Origins had an "identity" although i do not profess to be an Origins Fanatic this simply wasn't the case having played RPG's since 80's as previously stated i can say with certainty that if you took any other RPG from the last 25yrs and changed the graphics and few other things and voila what do you have DAO, DA2 was the change that has been long overdue now while it too had flaws and yes the changes were too radical for some of the traditional RPG players the change was inevitable and would have happened anway whether it was now or 10 yrs down the line.

Removing alot of party customization be it visual or otherwise from a party based CRPG was over due? Having a framed narrative that completely fails due to Hawke's complete inability to be proactive was over due? Copying WoW's cartoony visual style for what was once marketed as a mature dark RPG was over due? Kinda having a hard time following your logic here.

How bout reusing the same areas for 95% of the game, or enemies paratrooping in out of thin air? Seriously, I really have a hard time with the acceptance of alot of this design decisions, never mind praising BW for them. The game had some very serious flaws.

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 03 septembre 2011 - 04:46 .

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Liaren wrote...

I am one of those that likes DA:O and DA2 equally. And I like them  a lot.

Well, with Bioware stating that they are looking to combine the best of both worlds, DA3 could be a signifgant improvement over both. We shall wait and see. If they pull it off well, and keep the things that were right about both games and combine them successfully, I shall be happy.

[jbrand2002uk]

you may not agree with all the changes that were made and hell even i did not like some of the things in DA2 like the recycling of some maps like the caves and regardless of what species you choose human.elf,dwarf.Qunari they cant see into the future so being proactive is irrelevant and impossible and if you could it wouldnt be an RPG if you could make them react to things that happen outside their FOV that only you the player has the benefit of seeing as none of these species have xray vision or the abillity to read minds or eyes in the back of their head.

And in the same post you completely FAIL on an epic scale to see the biggest flaw that origins had and any sequels had to change, It was completly and utterly like every other RPG that has come out over the last 25yrs though your proberly way too young to have been playing games that far back as i have so thats proberly why you fail to understand that rather simple point
The truest saying in Buisness is "Innovate or Die" and thanks to players wanting absurdly high levels of intricate detail into every statistic and area of there characters RPG's have become stale and has resorted in the general public's perception that all RPG players are "nerdy geeks who know more about their d20+roll than they do about the world outside their own back door and unfortunatly as unpopular as it may be to say it said gamers have only themselves to blame for this but rather than accepting responsibillity for this sad state of affairs they resort to Dev bashing because a company that has made many good games in over 10 yrs makes one single game that same group of said gamers dont like

[Pasquale1234]

alex90c wrote...

Indoctrination wrote...

alex90c wrote...

DA2 wasn't actually a commercial failure at all. It was made at about 1/5 the cost of Origins and did pretty decent profit-wise. That's not to say I think it's a good game, just that it did quite decently in regards to Bioware making money from it.

When a game drops from full retail price to $29.99 in less than half a year after release, that's pretty much a white flag from the publisher that they're desperate to unload inventory of the game no one wants. Just saying.

The point I'm trying to make is that DA2 was made in 16 months (so as opposed to Origins' what ... five years?) and on 1/5 the budget, so yes DA2 has received a lot of hate, it hasn't sold as much as Origins' etc. etc. but DA:O itself was far more expensive to make whereas Bioware made DA2 on the cheap, so yes it made a profit.

Basically, it's like me making something for £1,000, perhaps charging £50 per copy of it and selling it to 15 people. Woohoo, I got £750 but I didn't make a profit. Or, there could be my friend who makes something for £300, charges £50 per copy and then only sells it to 10 people. My friend's product (let's call it X, and my product Y) was, for the purpose of this example was as well as being made cheaper is of a poorer quality and lets say as well he found out I was making my product quite late in its ... production ... so he wanted to rush a piece out himself and make a quick buck. Point is, in this example, product X is of a lower quality, was made for less and even sold less, but I spent far more money and made a superior product with Y, and despite that because my friend spent less money making his, he made a profit whereas I actually lost money since i wasn't able to make up the original investment.

It's pretty much the same thing with DA3 - was rushed, crap, whatever you want to call it, and has sold less than Origins and yet BIoware probably made more money out of it because it was made cheaply.

Short term - I don't disagree with you.

Longer term - I would guess the overall value of the franchise has been damaged somewhat.  It's pretty unlikely that they will enjoy the level of pre-orders for DA3 that they had for DA2, and I would be very surprised if retailers stock as many copies on release.  If it turns out to be well-received once it is released to the public, sales would likely pick up.  I think that in the minds of many of us, DA has moved from an automatic purchase to a wait-and-see approach.

I know it has for me, and many others have expressed similar sentiments.  Even though I dearly love DAO, I didn't pre-order, and didn't pay any attention to any of the marketing hype or early reviews, didn't play the demo, etc.  I happened to see it in Best Buy one day, so I bought it, expecting it to be a sequel.  I was "surprised" but not "delighted".  You can bet I will be better informed before I buy next time.

[jbrand2002uk]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

Liaren wrote...

I am one of those that likes DA:O and DA2 equally. And I like them  a lot.

Well, with Bioware stating that they are looking to combine the best of both worlds, DA3 could be a signifgant improvement over both. We shall wait and see. If they pull it off well, and keep the things that were right about both games and combine them successfully, I shall be happy.

Finally a voice of reason in a forum full of hot headed whinging Ego/Emo's

[Momiji.mii]

Of course I trust them, especially after the amazing experience that was DA2. Besides, it's a weird question to ask. Who else would create DA3 but Bioware? It's their franchise, they created it and they do with it as they see fit. I'm looking forward to see what they can come up with this time, storywise as well as the actual gameplay. I hope they'll blow me away with a game that actually surpasses both DAO and DA2.

[jbrand2002uk]

just started a new thread on how can trust be an issue comments from both sides are always appreciated but please no happy slapping

[MerinTB]

Momiji.mii wrote...

Of course I trust them, especially after the amazing experience that was DA2. Besides, it's a weird question to ask. Who else would create DA3 but Bioware? It's their franchise, they created it and they do with it as they see fit. I'm looking forward to see what they can come up with this time, storywise as well as the actual gameplay. I hope they'll blow me away with a game that actually surpasses both DAO and DA2.

NWN2 was Obsidian, not BioWare.
KotOR 2 was Obsidian, not BioWare.
Fallout 3 was Bethesda, not Interplay
Fallout New Vegas was Obsidian, not Bethesda.
V-TM:B was Troika, not Nihilistic.
*ahem* Call of Duty


Just a few examples of "who'd make a game in a series other than the original creators."

[DrFumb1ezX]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Being proactive means not doing absolutely nothing for years despite what's accomplished at the end of the Deep Roads venture. Hawke does nothing when he finds Quentin's note, he doesn't do anything about the dictatorship for three years, and he lets dangerous people go despite knowing they are dangerous. The end of "Shepherding Wolves" and "Legacy" makes Hawke seem incompetent, in my humble opinion. You're welcome to disagree, soccerchick, but Hawke doesn't need to be psychic, he simply doesn't need to be lazy.

So because you didn't get to play for the 3 year intervals, Hawke did nothing? Yeah, no.
Who is Hawke supposed to know who "O" is? S/He hasn't even met *Spoiler*.
S/He has no reason to dislodge Meredith from power, Meredith hasn't made any attempt to attack Hawke, and even made him Champion. Plus, pissing off the entire templar order would not have been the best move.
Like Hawke really would have gotten away with killing a chantry sister and templar. Possibly in front of the new Captain of the Guard?
Hawke doesn't know that Corypheus can take over Grey Wardens.

Once again, we have the problem of knowing something our main character doesn't, and it pisses us off. Respect your opinion, but this is mine.

[Maconbar]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...


I don't view BW and EA as separate entities, so the Origin "affair" didn't help to gain my trust either.

I enjoyed reading your post even though we are frequently on opposite sides of many of these debates.

But what is the Origin "affair"?

[seraphymon]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

you may not agree with all the changes that were made and hell even i did not like some of the things in DA2 like the recycling of some maps like the caves and regardless of what species you choose human.elf,dwarf.Qunari they cant see into the future so being proactive is irrelevant and impossible and if you could it wouldnt be an RPG if you could make them react to things that happen outside their FOV that only you the player has the benefit of seeing as none of these species have xray vision or the abillity to read minds or eyes in the back of their head.

And in the same post you completely FAIL on an epic scale to see the biggest flaw that origins had and any sequels had to change, It was completly and utterly like every other RPG that has come out over the last 25yrs though your proberly way too young to have been playing games that far back as i have so thats proberly why you fail to understand that rather simple point
The truest saying in Buisness is "Innovate or Die" and thanks to players wanting absurdly high levels of intricate detail into every statistic and area of there characters RPG's have become stale and has resorted in the general public's perception that all RPG players are "nerdy geeks who know more about their d20+roll than they do about the world outside their own back door and unfortunatly as unpopular as it may be to say it said gamers have only themselves to blame for this but rather than accepting responsibillity for this sad state of affairs they resort to Dev bashing because a company that has made many good games in over 10 yrs makes one single game that same group of said gamers dont like

That is not origins biggest flaw. Even if iit was similar to many of the classic RPGs it only proves that people who are into that genre like it, because its what works. Innovate or die is complete BS. Change for the sake of change is not a good thing. You have to be smart when going about changes. Even so DA2 wasnt so much change as it was a cash grab and slashing and taking away soo much from the player. It wasn't innovative either. Years ago  if a company made a game like this or  if it wasnt Bioware maybe fans would have let some things slide. but as far as we have come and from a company like this, you can see why people dont want to cut them any slack.

Modifié par seraphymon, 03 septembre 2011 - 05:43 .

[RagingCyclone]

Maconbar wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...


I don't view BW and EA as separate entities, so the Origin "affair" didn't help to gain my trust either.

I enjoyed reading your post even though we are frequently on opposite sides of many of these debates.

But what is the Origin "affair"?

My understanding, and I could be wrong, it's a similar type of system like Steam. I think it came from some issues EA/BW had with Steam when they released DA2, and subsequently Legacy.

[jbrand2002uk]

my point exactly hawke is not omnipitent just because you become aware of something do not assume that you knowing it means that hawke knows it too on your first playthrough did you actually know who O was no because you had not met them yet and and when you did was it immediatly obvious to you that that person and the O in the note were one and the same i doubt it and does that warden no longer acting like a tainted crazy person automatically make him possessed no it doest again you make the mistake of assuming that because you suspect it means that Hawke should suspect or know this too when he/she is staring at the back of that wardens head what do you think hawke can do read minds or sense Corypheus .

If you have a genuine criticism fine but this sounds like nothing more than nitpicking for the sake of it im sure if I had the time to spare and trawl through Origins i could finds many many more plot holes and moments where maybe something like this would be obvious to me