249 réponses à ce sujet

[happy_daiz]

Zanallen wrote...

Not even if I paid you...In gum?

You are funny. I like you. 

[Complistic]

Dubya75 wrote...

Complistic wrote...

No, playing through it once is pretty much playing through it 3 times. You couldn't pay me to play it again.

Sadly, you are mistaken. How does 50 bucks sound?

$50 for 30 hours of my time doesn't sound very good. 

[Rafficus III]

I like how people missed the whole point of what the article was about. The gaming community can be very superficial at times. Thanks for the article TC, I'll be sharing it on another site as it was good food for thought.

I believe most of the negativity is centered around the loss of control the player experiences or experienced. When Bioware removed the race specialization, implemented the voiced dialogue, and set the character up with a very distinct background many felt angry at the get go. DA2 had it's flaws, but it's story was compelling and it was bold. It sought to set itself apart from Origins and it did whether people like it or not. It gave the gamer a sense of what it meant to be a hero rather than a superhero as it set the stage for the colossal ramifications set to follow in the third installment. I actually applaud Bioware for not going the patsy route and doing the usual generic D&D superhero whose entourage and him/her save everyone and everything and happy endings run abundant.

Gamers aren't used to a sense of powerlessness partly because the gaming industry has so long served the fantasies of becoming god like characters and in part I don't think most were ready for what was DA2. Yes, recycled maps and not being able to play dress up with squad armor racked with overpowered stats that make all your characters look homogeneous is horrendous, I understand. For gameplay and void of tactics, it is still the same thing just accelerated. Play on nightmare and tell me you don't need tactics. Companions are no longer groupies that follow your every whim and to further this, Bioware did a big positive that many do not bring up in a good light: romances.

For the first time it's not just a straight male game for romances, but one that provides romances for different genders and orientations. But such strides in the RPG field are not recognized nor applauded as they apparently pale in comparison to going through recycled maps. I'm done now, I'm sure someone will call me out or tell me how wrong I am but I'll be a tad busy playing DA2.

Modifié par hornedfrog87, 01 novembre 2011 - 03:54 .

[adneate]

Having given Dragon Age 2 a second chance I can say I don't agree with the author's argument that character interaction and a "unique" narrative cancel out bad game play changes and terrible encounter design. The game and developer's heart are clearly in those character moments but they are simply the minority of the content in the game. A 10 minute conversation with Merril does not then compensate for 45 minutes of unimaginative encounters in an environment you've already cleared in the 2 previous acts. Being a bystander to cataclysmic events is a interesting idea for a story but the game waivers on the tone unsure of whether Hawke is powerful and important or weak and common, sure you're a bystander but you HAVE to get 100% involved at the end and kill scores of people and giant monsters. Having strengths in one part doesn't, in a strictly objective view, negate glaring weaknesses in many others. It's a lot like saying the game has no merit whatsoever because it has things you hate in it.

[Dubya75]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

I like how people missed the whole point of what the article was about. The gaming community can be very superficial at times. Thanks for the article TC, I'll be sharing it on another site as it was good food for thought.
I believe most of the negativity is centered around the loss of control the player experiences or experienced. When Bioware removed the race specialization, implemented the voiced dialogue, and set the character up with a very distinct background many felt angry at the get go. DA2 had it's flaws, but it's story was compelling and it was bold. It sought to set itself apart from Origins and it did whether people like it or not. It gave the gamer a sense of what it meant to be a hero rather than a superhero as it set the stage for the colossal ramifications set to follow in the third installment. I actually applaud Bioware for not going the patsy route and doing the usual generic D&D superhero whose entourage and him/her save everyone and everything and happy endings run abundant. Gamers aren't used to a sense of powerlessness partly because the gaming industry has so long served the fantasies of becoming god like characters and in part I don't think most were ready for what was DA2. Yes, recycled maps and not being able to play dress up with squad armor racked with overpowered stats that make all your characters look homogeneous is horrendous, I understand. For gameplay and void of tactics, it is still the same thing just accelerated. Play on nightmare and tell me you don't need tactics. Companions are no longer groupies that follow your every whim and to further this, Bioware did a big positive that many do not bring up in a good light: romances. For the first time it's not just a straight male game for romances, but one that provides romances for different genders and orientations. But such strides in the RPG field are not recognized nor applauded as they apparently pale in comparison to going through recycled maps. I'm done now, I'm sure someone will call me out or tell me how wrong I am but I'll be a tad busy playing DA2.

Nicely said! Wall of text, but I prevailed! 

[jlb524]

adneate wrote...
Having given Dragon Age 2 a second chance I can say I don't agree with the author's argument that character interaction and a "unique" narrative cancel out bad game play changes and terrible encounter design.

I don't think the author is arguing that the bad stuff goes away when learning to appreciate the game for what it did a good job with (in the author's opinion).

[culletron1]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

I like how people missed the whole point of what the article was about. The gaming community can be very superficial at times. Thanks for the article TC, I'll be sharing it on another site as it was good food for thought.

I believe most of the negativity is centered around the loss of control the player experiences or experienced. When Bioware removed the race specialization, implemented the voiced dialogue, and set the character up with a very distinct background many felt angry at the get go. DA2 had it's flaws, but it's story was compelling and it was bold. It sought to set itself apart from Origins and it did whether people like it or not. It gave the gamer a sense of what it meant to be a hero rather than a superhero as it set the stage for the colossal ramifications set to follow in the third installment. I actually applaud Bioware for not going the patsy route and doing the usual generic D&D superhero whose entourage and him/her save everyone and everything and happy endings run abundant.

I've heard people say this time and time again. Now I can't speak for anyone else but that is absolutely NOT why I dislike DA2.

The ideas of a voiced PC and moving through time rather than space were great ideas and I was all for them. I was also all for a darker plot... *HOWEVER*... DA2 was THE most underdeveloped AAA game I have played in recent years... It lacked polish in every way. 

Kirkwall is dull, the character models are dull, the NPCs don't even speak to you anymore, you can't talk to your companions when you want to anymore, the map reuse is pathetic, the new game menus are horrid etc etc etc... the whole game stinks of a rush job.

IMO what people say was "a loss of control" was mainly down to an underdeveloped game... The player could have had a loss of control of the plot outcome but could still have gave meaningful choices which determined how the bad things would happen... 

Modifié par culletron1, 01 novembre 2011 - 04:19 .

[Atakuma]

I already gave it a second chance and it got worse.

[Addai]

Eh, it was on a 2nd and 3rd chance that I went from neutral about the game to really disliking it.  I gave it a 6 or 7 on Metacritic after my 1st pt, and I was probably being generous then, but if I could go back now I would revise it down.  And that was mostly due to reflection on the story. So a "2nd chance" can go either way. I'm still more interested in Origins' characters and plot than DA2's.

Modifié par Addai67, 01 novembre 2011 - 04:33 .

[adneate]

jlb524 wrote...
I don't think the author is arguing that the bad stuff goes away when learning to appreciate the game for what it did a good job with (in the author's opinion).

The argument seems to be "DA2 had great character moments and an unconventional story thus it's a good game and I love it to death", to which I would say I'm glad you enjoyed it but that doesn't make it good in a product sense. DA2 as a commercial product is remarkably lazy and rushed, which is unfortunate for it since it's a product first and art a distant second.

[jlb524]

culletron1 wrote...

IMO what people say was "a loss of control" was mainly down to an underdeveloped game... The player could have had a loss of control of the plot outcome but could still have gave meaningful choices which determined how the bad things would happen... 

I think that's the point with this 'loss of control' thing...you can't even decide how the bad things happen.

[MerinTB]

On a third play right now and I couldn't disagree more. I liked it MORE the first time, and subsequently have enjoyed it LESS each play.

[Loain]

And here I had started to think it was just me that had realized that those very same things that had put off so many people were in fact just brilliantly layered pieces of cake, as whykikyouwhy put it. Layers that allowed for a much more personal journey. The real nagging question on my mind is what comes next for DA, do they go back to what 'worked' or forge ahead? Can they go back, should they? It's perhaps beyond a bit silly but I look at it like they're Hawke and they need to make a new life now in Kirkwall and beyond.

[Dmasterman]

How about all the countless broken things in the game? Bugs, glitches, save transfers from the previous game?

Technically if you're a PC user all of your past gameplay transfers will be ruined. Which was never fixed

[jlb524]

adneate wrote...

The argument seems to be "DA2 had great character moments and an unconventional story thus it's a good game and I love it to death", to which I would say I'm glad you enjoyed it but that doesn't make it good in a product sense. DA2 as a commercial product is remarkably lazy and rushed, which is unfortunate for it since it's a product first and art a distant second.

I think the article is saying that if you judge a game mostly on gameplay, then DA2 falls short of many other games in this genre.

If you judge a game mostly by story and character dev (which is how I personally judge these games), then DA2 has its merits.

If you use my standards of judgment, then DA2 is a good product.  If you use the former standards, then it's not.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Now that the "It's not the same!" (read: WAAAAAAH!) is over with, I think a lot of people are seeing that DA2 is the better game.

[adneate]

jlb524 wrote...
If you judge a game mostly by story and character dev (which is how I personally judge these games), then DA2 has its merits.

I'm not saying it doesn't have merits but the cold fact is that stuff is the minority of the content in the game, the amount of time you spend talking to people pales in comparison to the amount of time you spend massacring hundreds of faceless mooks that fall from the sky to fight you to the death.

The idea that Hawke isn't a hero also doesn't make sense to me since Hawke not only kill hundreds of people just going from point A to point B but in Act 2 you and small group of followers smash through Qunari lines, storm a fortified castle and then you proceed to either kill the Arishock in single combat or wipe him and his entire Guard division off the face of the planet in a battle where you're outnumbered 4 to 1. Thus saving the entire city of Kirkwall, all the nobles in the Keep and gaining quite literally the title of Hero.

That's pretty goddamn heroic.

[Fortlowe]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Now that the "It's not the same!" (read: WAAAAAAH!) is over with, I think a lot of people are seeing that DA2 is the better game.

Don't know about 'better' but I liked it a lot, and I'm more optimistic with where the series can go from here than I would have been if DA2, would have been more of the same of DA:O.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Fortlowe wrote...

Don't know about 'better' but I liked it a lot, and I'm more optimistic with where the series can go from here than I would have been if DA2, would have been more of the same of DA:O.

Well said.  I'm looking forward to some of the tweaks we've seen hints of already.  DA2 was DAO with most of the boring parts cut out...  Some of what went could have been left in, I agree.  Hopefully Bioware is going to take the lost bits, chop them up, and make a delicious stuffing to ram up DA3's butt before it all goes into the oven.

Mmmmm, Thanksgiving!

[Xewaka]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...
Now that the "It's not the same!" (read: WAAAAAAH!) is over with, I think a lot of people are seeing that DA2 is the better game.

Except, you know, it's not.
The writing has its merits, but the game as a whole is not better.

Modifié par Xewaka, 01 novembre 2011 - 05:04 .

[jlb524]

adneate wrote...
I'm not saying it doesn't have merits but the cold fact is that stuff is the minority of the content in the game, the amount of time you spend talking to people pales in comparison to the amount of time you spend massacring hundreds of faceless mooks that fall from the sky to fight you to the death.

It is, but if story is what typically stands out for an individual, then the combat (whether it's good or bad) will be overshadowed...even if there's more of it.  At least, that's my experience with all of BW games and not just DA2.

adneate wrote...
The idea that Hawke isn't a hero also doesn't make sense to me since Hawke not only kill hundreds of people just going from point A to point B but in Act 2 you and small group of followers smash through Qunari lines, storm a fortified castle and then you proceed to either kill the Arishock in single combat or wipe him and his entire Guard division off the face of the planet in a battle where you're outnumbered 4 to 1. Thus saving the entire city of Kirkwall, all the nobles in the Keep and gaining quite literally the title of Hero.

That's pretty goddamn heroic.

Well, yes, Hawke is really good at killing things and has saved people's lives.  I think the idea is that Hawke isn't as 'epically heroic' as some other BW protagonists have been because she can't solve the most important issues facing the people in Kirkwall (the mage issue, for one).

The greatest issue facing people in DA:O is the Blight of course and the Warden swoops in to save the day and everyone is happy.  Nothing like that happens in DA2.  At the end of DA2, there's no feeling of great accomplishment, a "Woot!  Hell yes!  I saved the day!"  No fist-pumping.

Modifié par jlb524, 01 novembre 2011 - 05:11 .

[MerinTB]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Now that the "It's not the same!" (read: WAAAAAAH!) is over with, I think a lot of people are seeing that DA2 is the better game.

I disagree.  Vehemently.

[hoorayforicecream]

Dmasterman wrote...

How about all the countless broken things in the game? Bugs, glitches, save transfers from the previous game?

Technically if you're a PC user all of your past gameplay transfers will be ruined. Which was never fixed

The bugs and glitches were mostly fixed. Do you not patch your game or something? 

As for save transfers... that depends. Do you consider "all of your past gameplay" to be Zevran's romance? Because if you do, then you'd be right. If you don't consider all of your past gameplay to be Zevran's romance, then you're wrong. Most of the import bugs are fixed.

[Fraevar]

MerinTB wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Now that the "It's not the same!" (read: WAAAAAAH!) is over with, I think a lot of people are seeing that DA2 is the better game.

I disagree.  Vehemently.

As do I - As much as I enjoyed some of the character moments, the endless amount of repetative combat and changes to how the PC version handled (spent as much time fighting the camera as I did enemies!) simply kill a lot of the fun factor of DA2 for me. It tries to do a lot of things but it doesn't do many of them well.