26 réponses à ce sujet

[TheWasian]

I completed my first playthrough of DA 2 about a week ago. I have to say I like DA:O a lot more as far as being an actual rpg. DA:O seemed to have a lot more character interaction, romances could be reinitiated after they were established, character/companion background was a lot more in-depth, skill tree was a lot more versatile, etc.

DA 2 seemed to focus on story and "polish" (combat look/graphics/etc.). Which don't get me wrong that's a good thing! Yet in an rpg you need to focus on rounding out actual interaction to make you feel like you ARE that character. DA:O executed this perfectly, but I constantly found DA 2 lacking. DA:O let you dig deep into your companions history, the games world history.

DA 2 in my honest opinion had what DA:O didn't which was the "cool" feel in combat from the more grueling looking combat scenes, etc. Yet at the same time DA:O still had the scenes where you killed Ogres and it would slow mo and show you doing the final blow on it. Wheras in DA 2 that doesn't appear to happen anymore. It's just a small touch up they took away but even the small things matter.

Companion customization was limited. I liked this but I can see how some people don't, you could no longer completely equip your companions with what armor you choose. For me this was great as I didn't have to worry about scrounging around for equipment, which I liked so I won't go into detail.

The skill tree was something else I didn't like in DA 2. Unlike DA:O it seemed harder to branch out to different skills and do a sort of "mix-and-match" as upgrades to abilities cost a full point. I just overall like DA:O's style of skill tree. Not to mention being a mage in this game seems so much more dull. I didn't like the concept of Lifeward being a potion. Heal, regeneration, rejuvenation, lifeward, and revival were all spells that made being a support class in DA:O so much fun (in my opinion) you kept your allies alive by healing them and keeping them alive/bringing them back to life. When they took that out of DA 2, I found being a mage so extremely boring as instead of healing so much and keeping them alive by support spells, it felt that I was forced to use offensive spells. DA:O provided you a chance to be more versatile in your combat role as a mage.

Not to make this sound like DA 2 was bad, I did like several things in DA 2. The texture pack was an amazing option, scenes where you interacted with characters changed a lot (example: inviting Merrill to live with you and you have scenes where you talk with her by the window, by the fireplace, etc.) it's nice when you're not always talking in the same spot, like the camp in DA:O. The combat animations were well done also hearing your own character talk a lot more was nice too haha.

Overall DA 2 was a good game but in my opinion it isn't great. DA:O seemed to be a lot better for me even with the authentication issues,etc. it had that DA 2 wasn't plagued with.


I know, I know I'm late in the game, but I wanted to get this off my chest. Also constructive criticism is welcome! Even though I know it may be controversial.

Edit: Forgot to mention this, but hate the companion romance glitches in DA 2. As in at the end game if you slept with Isabella but turn around and sleep with Merrill and invite her into your home and basically drop your relationship with Isabella, at the end game scenario everyone leaves your side but Isabella -.- Basically the person I strived to be with in game more (Merrill) leaves and the one night stand stays sounds like a glitch

Modifié par TheWasian, 29 octobre 2011 - 04:03 .

[Madcow12]

I totally agree with everything you said. I think the game had the potential to be so great, it is so far removed from DAO which i thought was a true rpg!

[Persephone]

Madcow12 wrote...

I totally agree with everything you said. I think the game had the potential to be so great, it is so far removed from DAO which i thought was a true rpg!

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

If DAO is, The Witcher 2 is not. If The Witcher 2 is, the Might and Magic Series is not. If BG2 is, then DAO isn't. (Spiritual successor...uh huh.) Maybe the ALL are RPG?:happy:

[alex90c]

Persephone wrote...

Madcow12 wrote...

I totally agree with everything you said. I think the game had the potential to be so great, it is so far removed from DAO which i thought was a true rpg!

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

for all that is good and holy, do NOT open that can of worms

all you'll get are pompous dumbasses on both sides arguing "hurrrrrr dats not an RPG it needs more tedious micromanagement to be an RPG"  or "herpderp these are what make an RPG: this list consists of things which I like btw, not what actually constitutes an RPG"

[Zanallen]

Persephone wrote...

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

If DAO is, The Witcher 2 is not. If The Witcher 2 is, the Might and Magic Series is not. If BG2 is, then DAO isn't. (Spiritual successor...uh huh.) Maybe the ALL are RPG?:happy:

Contrariwise, what if none of them are RPGs?

[Persephone]

Zanallen wrote...

Persephone wrote...

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

If DAO is, The Witcher 2 is not. If The Witcher 2 is, the Might and Magic Series is not. If BG2 is, then DAO isn't. (Spiritual successor...uh huh.) Maybe the ALL are RPG?:happy:

Contrariwise, what if none of them are RPGs?

I think they are all just pretending. Toying with us to strike when we least expect it!

[AlexXIV]

Persephone wrote...

Madcow12 wrote...

I totally agree with everything you said. I think the game had the potential to be so great, it is so far removed from DAO which i thought was a true rpg!

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

If DAO is, The Witcher 2 is not. If The Witcher 2 is, the Might and Magic Series is not. If BG2 is, then DAO isn't. (Spiritual successor...uh huh.) Maybe the ALL are RPG?:happy:

Witcher is not, Witcher 2 is neither. DA:O ... not really but close. Baldur's Gate ... people are nostalgic and it was a huge, epic game, but not a true RPG. I think Bethesda is getting closest with Morrowind. But then again NPC interaction in Bethesda games sucks, but that's probably not really as important since the protagonist is a lonewolf type anyway. I don't think we have seen a true RPG video game yet. Unless maybe in times beyond thinking when games didn't need to have any graphics at all.

Oh and Planescape:Torment, NWN, etc. are not true RPGs either. They only use the combat ruleset of D&D or AD&D which makes people think it qualifies for being a true RPG, but it is not even half of it.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 28 octobre 2011 - 10:39 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

I think Bethesda is getting closest with Morrowind.

Best, punch line, ever.

what IS a true RPG?

It's subjective. Some people think key story is the ultimate RPG experience. Other people believe it's forging their ideal hero. Other people believe it's NPC interaction.... But it's all subjective.

And reasonably more on-topic: I enjoyed Dragon Age 2, Mr.OP, it isn't great, granted, it has it's issues, it has it's shining glory moments also. It had potential to be better.. Overall, I think there are better games, and i think DA2 could've been better itself, but it's still entertainment.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 28 octobre 2011 - 10:46 .

[AlexXIV]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

I think Bethesda is getting closest with Morrowind.

Best, punch line, ever.

what IS a true RPG?

It's subjective. Some people think key story is the ultimate RPG experience. Other people believe it's forging their ideal hero. Other people believe it's NPC interaction.... But it's all subjective.

Actually there are RPG elements. They pretty much boil down to skillsets that allow making a realistic hero. Skills could be to build all kinds of items to use, all kind of thieves skills, language skills, social skills as dancing, singing, playing instruments, etc. Basically everything you can think of, which would be a really long list. Anything that allows you to make a character as unique and detailed as possible. And of course all of the skills must have practical use and not just be fluff. That's why it is so hard to make true RPGs and probably why nobody really pulled it off. Argueable even Bethesda games who are probably those who do most for it are too 'actiony' for some people. Something you don't need at all in true RPGs is player skill. You don't need to be because you define your character's skill when you create it and level it, so any time you as player change that is a bit like cheating. Which is probably why RPG and video games are two terms which never really match. Video games are all about player skill. That's the fun in them.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 28 octobre 2011 - 10:51 .

[TheWasian]

AlexXIV wrote...

Sylvanpyxie wrote...

I think Bethesda is getting closest with Morrowind.

Best, punch line, ever.

what IS a true RPG?

It's subjective. Some people think key story is the ultimate RPG experience. Other people believe it's forging their ideal hero. Other people believe it's NPC interaction.... But it's all subjective.

Actually there are RPG elements. They pretty much boil down to skillsets that allow making a realistic hero. Skills could be to build all kinds of items to use, all kind of thieves skills, language skills, social skills as dancing, singing, playing instruments, etc. Basically everything you can think of, which would be a really long list. Anything that allows you to make a character as unique and detailed as possible. And of course all of the skills must have practical use and not just be fluff. That's why it is so hard to make true RPGs and probably why nobody really pulled it off. Argueable even Bethesda games who are probably those who do most for it are too 'actiony' for some people. Something you don't need at all in true RPGs is player skill. You don't need to be because you define your character's skill when you create it and level it, so any time you as player change that is a bit like cheating. Which is probably why RPG and video games are two terms which never really match. Video games are all about player skill. That's the fun in them.

True as far as what an RPG is both games were RPG's but the way they rank as far as elements of an RPG DA 2 consisted of less than DA:O

Let me say this what DA 2 did to the Dragon Age series is what Obsidian did to the KOTOR series instead of answering questions, having better story and character development, it left us with more questions and a WTF?!? expression.

Modifié par TheWasian, 28 octobre 2011 - 11:04 .

[_Aine_]

Very likely a synonym for "definition of RPG" is Schadenfreude. Or is that the synonym for Forum, I always forget.....

A fair critique op - much of what is a success in this game or not, really does boil down to preference. I cast my game net wide these days so I try to enjoy as many as possible, and I guess there are as many ideas of what constitutes a RPG as to ways to make a martini. And likewise, you may enjoy one way more than another.

Contrary to you, I missed being able to customise my companions (especially on the umpteenth playthrough) but like you I really, really missed the killing blows. They are kind of a game version of an instant replay in sports: You know it was epic when..... Miss those.

ANyway, was interesting reading your POV. Partly, I think DA2 was marred a bit by the "OMG DEADLINE!" brush it was painted with.... It wasn't nearly as bad as the cut corners made it seem.

[TheWasian]

I agree with what you said shantisands and as far as my statement about the companion appearance the only reason I made that decision is honestly I'm half and half on it. It's cool looking for armor sets in DA:O for your companions but the opportunity to find a lot of good armor sets in DA 2 was nearly non existent compared to DA:O. If they fixed that I would welcome it again, but then again I do have to say in my opinion Merrill look damn sexy in the white Dalish outfit she had lol.

I understand BioWare was rushed but honestly I wish deadlines wouldn't be an issue, I'd wait for a game if it was well polished off (as long as the wait isn't as long as Starcraft 2's was). BioWare has kind of done "drastic" changes in their second installments recently. Kind of like the differences between ME 1 and 2 but let's not go there lol.

[DeathDragon185]

i agree with everything but the part about mages being dull. I felt i could do alot more damage in DA2 than DAO.

[Rawgrim]

Mages do alot more damage in DA2. They can fire spells alot faster. And do alot more standard attacks too.

[eroeru]

EDIT: this goes to the whole RPG thing...: ... I really think the usage of a term (even though remembered and thought of from a perspective) is pretty ok to draw your inferences from.

A term gets most of its meaning via it's usage (at least a lot, even if you're not with Wittgenstein on this). And I've most seen the word associated with D&D kind of play. Role-play.

It's always with imagining into a different world, and hence it must be sufficiently believable or intriguing (actually working). If Oblivion does the trick for you, that's good, but I for one am more captivated by a different world which constitutes an interesting well-developed central rule-set (which makes it easier to mess with the idea). But still, the more important part of my associating D&D with the term role-play is purely how much and when I've linked those two together in the past.

So anybody saying that they'd think Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights etc. as not really role-play (though most who played them AND had knowledge of the whole D&D thing did name it as such), it's just adding to the notion of a meaning-in-itself, eg. real meaning, of a word. But isn't it mostly contextual? And such inferring for "real" meanings certainly don't make it relevant for everybody else accepting a re-naming convention (as opposed to those that simply use words in used context).

Sorry, but this ain't subjective as far as the history of the term goes (though it surely can be confusing and foggy, but that's just how this world plays out)...

Double-EDIT: (just ranting against all who ridicule any side of discussion - in this case the ones who are against the viewpoint of DA2 being less of a RPG - and not liking the rather pointless discussion of whether the games that are more widely known as RPG, really are that) (and I'm sorry for the not at all fluent English, I'm a bit pompous at the moment as well...)

*lots of editing done due to me being up all night *

Modifié par eroeru, 29 octobre 2011 - 07:39 .

[xkg]

AlexXIV wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Madcow12 wrote...

I totally agree with everything you said. I think the game had the potential to be so great, it is so far removed from DAO which i thought was a true rpg!

I am curious....what IS a true RPG?

If DAO is, The Witcher 2 is not. If The Witcher 2 is, the Might and Magic Series is not. If BG2 is, then DAO isn't. (Spiritual successor...uh huh.) Maybe the ALL are RPG?:happy:

Witcher is not, Witcher 2 is neither. DA:O ... not really but close. Baldur's Gate ... people are nostalgic and it was a huge, epic game, but not a true RPG. I think Bethesda is getting closest with Morrowind. But then again NPC interaction in Bethesda games sucks, but that's probably not really as important since the protagonist is a lonewolf type anyway. I don't think we have seen a true RPG video game yet. Unless maybe in times beyond thinking when games didn't need to have any graphics at all.

Oh and Planescape:Torment, NWN, etc. are not true RPGs either. They only use the combat ruleset of D&D or AD&D which makes people think it qualifies for being a true RPG, but it is not even half of it.

Yep you are right. They are not RPGs - they are cRPGs. "True" cRPGs.

[Zanallen]

xkg wrote...

Yep you are right. They are not RPGs - they are cRPGs. "True" cRPGs.

That makes no sense. You can't be a cRPG without first being a RPG.

[TheWasian]

Rawgrim wrote...

Mages do alot more damage in DA2. They can fire spells alot faster. And do alot more standard attacks too.

Exactly my point offensive spells are more capable in DA 2 but being a healer in DA 2 is near impossible compared to DA:O. You only have heal now, I haven't made a mage character but just looking at the mages you have as companions, mages are now specifically for an offensive support role/crowd control. Being a healer is no longer a suitable option. Basically you're more limited to what you can do with mages in DA:O I don't care if you can fire spells faster if you can't be as flexible of a mage as you were in DA:O.

I liked all the abilities DA:O had but I like how DA 2 had the skill tree layed out. Sadly the two weren't combined and some skills seemed to have disappeared or be made into potions. Which brings up another problem, the crafting system in DA 2 was a nice concept but you had to scrounge around to find health potions, you couldn't make them yourself -.- along with other potions, that's just annoying the most basic potion is not available. I could've missed something but doesn't appear so. There's a thread concerning the potion system so I won't go into detail.

Edit: As for the people ranting about RPG's every rpg game is an rpg. I may have poorly worded that, it's just as far as the elements an rpg is suppose to have/consist of (story, detail, background history, replayability, etc.) DA:O had more overall than DA 2.

Modifié par TheWasian, 29 octobre 2011 - 03:46 .

[xkg]

Zanallen wrote...

xkg wrote...

Yep you are right. They are not RPGs - they are cRPGs. "True" cRPGs.

That makes no sense. You can't be a cRPG without first being a RPG.

Yes I know )) I was just LOLing at his
"I don't think we have seen a true RPG video game yet" and "Planescape:Torment, NWN, etc. are not true RPGs either"
statements.
Just another pointless "what is an RPG" debate

Modifié par xkg, 29 octobre 2011 - 03:58 .

[TheWasian]

xkg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

xkg wrote...

Yep you are right. They are not RPGs - they are cRPGs. "True" cRPGs.

That makes no sense. You can't be a cRPG without first being a RPG.

Yes I know )) I was just LOLing at his
"I don't think we have seen a true RPG video game yet" and "Planescape:Torment, NWN, etc. are not true RPGs either"
statements.
Just another pointless "what is an RPG" debate

Ya can't tell if the guy is serious or if he's trolling either way the debate is retarded. I added an edit to my original post about my frustrating romance glitch. Wonder how that will effect DA 3, wanted Merrill to stay by my side.

[Madcow12]

Personally i like a rpg with a story i can really connect to and i didn't feel that way about DA2.. It was just an opinion guys.

Modifié par Madcow12, 30 octobre 2011 - 12:11 .

[AlexXIV]

TheWasian wrote...

xkg wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

xkg wrote...

Yep you are right. They are not RPGs - they are cRPGs. "True" cRPGs.

That makes no sense. You can't be a cRPG without first being a RPG.

Yes I know )) I was just LOLing at his
"I don't think we have seen a true RPG video game yet" and "Planescape:Torment, NWN, etc. are not true RPGs either"
statements.
Just another pointless "what is an RPG" debate

Ya can't tell if the guy is serious or if he's trolling either way the debate is retarded. I added an edit to my original post about my frustrating romance glitch. Wonder how that will effect DA 3, wanted Merrill to stay by my side.

Of course they are pointless, because people have a hard time understanding, and the term 'roleplay' is rather wide and blurred. If you look at the market, an RPG is a video game on which the company wrote the 3 letters r, p, g. Then some people will say yes it is and other no it isn't, but it stays a RPG nontheless. Because the company labeled it as such. What is roleplaying? Can you roleplay a golfer, soccer player, general, car driver, soldier, etc.? Why not? Makes every game an RPG because in every game you assume a role. But everyone and their mother have their own vision of what an RPG is so there will always be people who say 'I don't think so.'

So since we can't agree what an RPG is, let's discuss what a 'true' RPG is. Or a cRPG. Or a true cRPG. Yeah, pointless. So my point is that none of them are RPGs because they don't fit my definition. I'm stupid like like that.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 30 octobre 2011 - 01:14 .

[Uccio]

TheWasian wrote...

The texture pack was an amazing option, scenes where you interacted with characters changed a lot (example: inviting Merrill to live with you and you have scenes where you talk with her by the window, by the fireplace, etc.) it's nice when you're not always talking in the same spot, like the camp in DA:O.

And this is where DA2 failed completely. You get to invite someone to live with you but besides two cinematic dialogs and one gift there is no way to open discussion with the partner. I expected to be able to discuss even more in depth with Merrill afte she moved in with me but was thoroughly disappointed with the limited or no discussion at all situation.

[FASherman]

There is no RPG when the ending is the same no matter what you do.

At least DA:O had different potential endings. The Archdeamon always died, but how that was achieved varied.

[kwinkatopo]

FASherman wrote...

There is no RPG when the ending is the same no matter what you do.

At least DA:O had different potential endings. The Archdeamon always died, but how that was achieved varied.

While it's true that the Archdemon always died, we did have a choice as to whether or not we could save the old god's spirit that lied dormant (suggestive as dormant, "corrupted" would possibly be a better word) in the demon.

I wholeheartedly agree that both games had their faults, especially DA2, and they both had their phenominal characteristics that either set them apart from or were better used than many other games. Nice, honest review. With that said, I remain hopeful that Dragon Age "3"  takes the good elements of both games, as well as player suggestions and breathes new life into the franchise; a game I won't have to mod so it feels a little less linear.