249 réponses à ce sujet

[adneate]

jlb524 wrote...
At the end of DA2, there's no feeling of great accomplishment, a "Woot!  Hell yes!  I saved the day!"  No fist-pumping.

Being skeptical I wonder if that was intentional or just someone going "Holy crap we have to finish this game in a month!" and just deciding to end the game abruptly. There's no sense of accomplishment and no sense of closure either, we really don't learn much about the world or solve any of the franchises mysteries. I guess we learn that crazy people can start a world war, but we kinda already knew that from our own world.

I just have higher standards for these games and I want more than the
bare minimum of effort to string a person along for the next title.

[syllogi]

adneate wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
At the end of DA2, there's no feeling of great accomplishment, a "Woot!  Hell yes!  I saved the day!"  No fist-pumping.

Being skeptical I wonder if that was intentional or just someone going "Holy crap we have to finish this game in a month!" and just deciding to end the game abruptly. There's no sense of accomplishment and no sense of closure either, we really don't learn much about the world or solve any of the franchises mysteries. I guess we learn that crazy people can start a world war, but we kinda already knew that from our own world.

I just have higher standards for these games and I want more than the
bare minimum of effort to string a person along for the next title.

The bolded bit is what it comes down to for me.  I loved the characters in DA2, and there were parts of the story that grabbed me, and the writing is mostly great, for a video game.  It's the lack of overall quality, and the feeling that this game was rushed and compromised, in order to get it out the door as soon as possible, that I don't think deserves a handwave.

I don't think asking the devs to strive for higher production values in future DA games is unreasonable.

[Zjarcal]

Xewaka 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.

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

Subjective stuff is subjective...

And no, I'm not even saying I agree with Rinpoche, who's not exactly making the best case for DA2 with a statement like that.

Having now read that article, I can't say it does much for me because I actually think DA2's gameplay is pretty damn awesome (paratroopers aside) and way more enjoyable than DAO (and before anyone asks, I play on PC), so it's not like I ever had the issue the author mentioned, about letting gameplay "frustrations" ruin my experience.

Not to mention that I always value characters and story above anything else anyway, and DA2 also satisfied me there right from the start.

Personally, my enjoyment of the game has increased with each playthrough (on my third at the moment), as I'm now only focusing on the things I enjoy (of which there is plenty of) and ignoring the things that annoy me (there's plenty of that too, but I'm good at ignoring it if the rest pleases me).

That being said, I also understand the point of view of those who say their enjoyment has actually gone down after playing it multiple times. It's a case of "your mileage will vary".

[Parahexavoctal]

I've played the game through 3 times by now, which I guess amounts to giving it a second chance twice considering my initial reaction to the game.

My impression of the game hasn't changed much, my additional playthroughs only seemed to cement and elaborate on what I already knew or instinctively felt on my first time through. If anything improved my disposition at all, it was being able to tweak the story slightly more to my liking by metagaming in the latter runs.

I appreciated the deep characters and cinematic storytelling just fine the first time I encountered them, and I loved my first Merrill romance. But I also detested the on rails drama and tragedy on all my runs. I may not quite have been able to put into words how the issue was the game making me feel powerless, but the issue remained. I gained no appreciation for it at all. Depending on who you ask, it may have been an impressive feat to pull off and may set DA2 aside as new, unique and different.. but I've hated it on every single Hawke I played, and it's robbed me of any enthusiasm or desire to play again more than the repetitive environments or waves of ninja paratroopers ever could.

[Slayer299]

OP - I read the article link and I disagree with it 100%. Dragon Age II is not worthy of a second chance, the many flaws in it do not change or lessen over time and it is a ******-poor showing for a AAA title from Bioware much less any AAA developer. If DA II was a bottle of fine wine it would improve over time, but DA II was closer to moonshine.

Do I think that DAII had no redeeming qualities? No. It definitely did have some, but it will sit at the back of my shelf gathering dust and not be getting any replays from me.

[alex90c]

Interesting article, but I still disagree with it. I'm getting a "lower your expectations and you will like the game" vibe from it, which I hate because I'm not going to lower my expectations just so a game I find insufferable becomes remotely enjoyable.

[bEVEsthda]

I think some people (DA2 fans + article author) have totally lost their foothold now.
I read the article. There is no new information. No new angle.
Just the suggestion that we somehow should appreciate DA2 by focusing on its qualities.

No deal. The 'soap' properties of DA2 was not the reason I purchased the game, and no matter how well the dialogue is written, it's definitely not worth wasting the hours to experience again.

The bottom line is that those who felt DA2 was the 'better' game got a game they liked. I didn't. I don't like DA2. Period.
And thanks to this illusionist article, I and others will now have to endure paraphrased nonsens from this, puffed and huffed, used as inflated arguments, over and over again in this forum.

...Or not. No real big reason to hang here, I guess.

[Fortlowe]

Playing through DA2, the first time at least, it was, I admit, hard to ignore that the game had nowhere near the amount of world affecting choice that DA:O had. But when I played through again, I realized, that there wasn't a lack of choice at all. It's just that the consequence of those choices impacted the PC more than the world at large.

I'm interested to see how much further this dynamic can be pushed. Can Hawke become sarcastic and playful in his/her dialogue with one NPC, while being venemous and hateful with another? Or better, warm and nurturing then cold and manipulative with the same NPC. How does the NPC react? How does this simulation of a personality affect the world at large?

There's a subtlety to this game that a lot of people miss, or at least underappreciate. Lots of potential here.

[dsl08002]

Interesting and everyone has a different opinion.

I however is on my fourth playthrough on DA2 and i´m really struggling to like the game but it is however IMPOSSIBLE to do it. DA2 is that bad

[Heather Cline]

I enjoy DA2 as I enjoy DA:O. My only problem with DA2 really is that none of my choices had any far reaching effects. I don't agree with the article that your choices shouldn't matter. If you freed the mages they should have gotten away during a certain quest (not to spoil anything) But the fact is you didn't have that.

Gameplay I enjoyed. Didn't like the patch that gimped the blood mages. But as a whole I enjoyed the game. Is it better than DA:O? I can't say for sure. Combat is better. Story is maybe lesser because you don't have that ability to affect the outcome. Character interaction is just as good as it was in DA:O.

Each game has it's flaws and each game has it's charm. So I like them for what they are.

[SoulRebel_1979]

I don't know what was more boring, DA2 or that article.

[Dubya75]

bEVEsthda wrote...

I think some people (DA2 fans + article author) have totally lost their foothold now.
I read the article. There is no new information. No new angle.
Just the suggestion that we somehow should appreciate DA2 by focusing on its qualities.

No deal. The 'soap' properties of DA2 was not the reason I purchased the game, and no matter how well the dialogue is written, it's definitely not worth wasting the hours to experience again.

The bottom line is that those who felt DA2 was the 'better' game got a game they liked. I didn't. I don't like DA2. Period.
And thanks to this illusionist article, I and others will now have to endure paraphrased nonsens from this, puffed and huffed, used as inflated arguments, over and over again in this forum.

...Or not. No real big reason to hang here, I guess.

Indeed, so sorry to see you go! 

[Zjarcal]

dsl08002 wrote...
I however is on my fourth playthrough on DA2 and i´m really struggling to like the game but it is however IMPOSSIBLE to do it. DA2 is that bad

I really have to wonder why you play a game you think is THAT bad, four times.

[TTTX]

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.

That's how I judge a game.

But I don't see DA2 as one story, but I rather see it as 3 short stories that are loosely connected by Varrics story telling.
There's also some trouble with the lore and timeline, like if you touch raw lyrium if you are human you will die or at least go crazy and how Anders shows up in Kirkwall despite that DA:A is happening around the same time, just to show some examples.

The whole powerless feel DA2 has in it's story, I find annoying simply because I experience this often in my own real life, so I play games to forget this fact about my life just for a minute or more and all the overused emotional deaths gets old very quickly by the time that Hawke's mother died, I just thought in a sarcastic way "Another one, great let's see who dies next." I could continue, but I don't want spoil to much.

The 3rd act was so badly written, I wondered why it was in the game at all, since there is no build up of tensing and the villains doesn't even get any depth or explanation other then "I'm crazy."

Still the story isn't the worst I have seen, but it sure isn't great either.

In my opinion DA2 tried to do so many things different from DA:O in such a short development time, that the whole game suffered because of it, including story.

I have tried this game 5 times, I'm not going to pick it up and play it again anytime soon, simply because I can't stomach most of the story or characters who are very easy to figure out  and aren't that interesting compared to DA:O ones, there is no character within character or anything like that, hell even Anders has changed so much since Awakning that I swear whoever the person is he's not Anders.

[Dubya75]

SoulRebel_1979 wrote...

I don't know what was more boring, DA2 or that article.

Well at least you read it, considered it's content and voiced your opinion on it. 

[The dead fish]

bEVEsthda wrote...
I read the article. There is no new information. No new angle.
Just the suggestion that we somehow should appreciate DA2 by focusing on its qualities.

Pretty much this, knowing its qualities are subjective according to each. I do not share the opinion of the author about these.

If I change my mind about DA2, that won't be because of this article in any case. And I don't think many people who didn't like DA2 will change either. In my opinion only/ most of those who already like/love DA2 will be convinced.

The line won't move that much. But thanks for the intention, op.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 novembre 2011 - 06:01 .

[Dubya75]

dsl08002 wrote...

Interesting and everyone has a different opinion.

I however is on my fourth playthrough on DA2 and i´m really struggling to like the game but it is however IMPOSSIBLE to do it. DA2 is that bad

That makes no sense. Why would you play a game 4 times without getting any enjoyment out of it?

[MerinTB]

Dubya75 wrote...

dsl08002 wrote...

Interesting and everyone has a different opinion.

I however is on my fourth playthrough on DA2 and i´m really struggling to like the game but it is however IMPOSSIBLE to do it. DA2 is that bad

That makes no sense. Why would you play a game 4 times without getting any enjoyment out of it?

Why did I try NWN five times?

Why did I watch Phantom Menace in the theater four times?

Sometimes we WANT to like something.  And if we have a negative experience with it once we think maybe it was our mood, other RL things distracting us, etc.  So we try it again.

Sometimes you REALLY like a creator / developer and you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, and so you try multiple angles to see all the item in question has to offer.

And sometimes you want to write a thorough review of said media but want to know most of the nooks and crannies and are trying to cut off the "play it a second time to see the brilliance" arguments at the pass.

BioWare, as a company, has enough good will from me for me to buy DA2 despite reservations.  To play it all the way through despite it wearing on me.  To play it MULTIPLE times really trying to get myself to like it.

But I don't do this as often as I used to.  If I don't like something once, after giving it a full chance, odds are I won't like it period.  The times that trying again has matter (Arcanum, The Crystal Shard) are almost always cases of me not getting very far on the first or second attempt.

[Salaya]

The only thing that this article tries to argue is something that I'm unable to accept -the non-primacy of gameplay over everything else. What I mean is: gameplay is, in fact, the primary element in videogames. That does not mean that everything else is unimportant, and thats what both articles seem to forget. By negating the gameplay value, they just fell in the same mistake they are supposed to be pointing at.

Everything else is an obscure, very uninspired way to reinterpretet the plot and the characters. With some imagination, Super Mario Bros. could be the greatest tragedy of all historic narrative.

But, of course, is just my opinion. I have played Dragon age 2 three times, experiencing as many variations and alternative ways as I could. With every playthorugh, the narrowness of the plot and character motivations was clearer.

As I see it, DA2 fans should accept the game for what it is; I understand that its core elements and new perspective pleases tons of people. Hell, I think it's cool; but do not try to turn it into something that is not.

Modifié par Salaya, 01 novembre 2011 - 06:36 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Huh...interesting article that completely misses the bloody ****ing point as to why many people dislike DA2,

It's not that the gameplay is trash, which it is ( The fact it's better DA:O does not mean much ). It's not that Hawke is a completely idiotic protoganist, which she/he.is. It's the crap main plot.

Oh look I'm Insane Meredeith, Terrorist Ander who apparently is also doing it cause of his madness, or rather his inability to control Justice ( I loved Awakening Anders ) or Harvester Orsino.

The fact the companions do their own things...well that's a good idea from Bioware, implementation for said idea however sucks.

I've given DA2 a second chance, hell I finished it twice fully...my opinion of the game has only gotten worse. Stuff I ignored on my first or second run is painfully obvious on my attempted 3rd run.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 01 novembre 2011 - 07:13 .

[Zjarcal]

MerinTB wrote...

Dubya75 wrote...

dsl08002 wrote...

Interesting and everyone has a different opinion.

I however is on my fourth playthrough on DA2 and i´m really struggling to like the game but it is however IMPOSSIBLE to do it. DA2 is that bad

That makes no sense. Why would you play a game 4 times without getting any enjoyment out of it?

Why did I try NWN five times?

Why did I watch Phantom Menace in the theater four times?

Sometimes we WANT to like something.  And if we have a negative experience with it once we think maybe it was our mood, other RL things distracting us, etc.  So we try it again.

Sometimes you REALLY like a creator / developer and you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, and so you try multiple angles to see all the item in question has to offer.

That's all fine and dandy but I don't think you need to go through something more than twice to fully realize if you're going to like it or not. I have had experiences where I didn't like something the first time (or at least didn't love it) and loved it the second time (Half Life 2 Episode 2 comes to mind).

But if something fails to grab me on two occassions, I really doubt a third chance would help. I would've had to be in a really bad mood/state of mind to dislike something I could've otherwise liked, two times.

Now, when someone flat out says that the game is "that bad" (which I know isn't the case with you, I'm referring to the other poster), it just doesn't make any sense to go through it four times. Not to me anyway.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 01 novembre 2011 - 07:49 .

[Rafficus III]

I have a question. What element of gameplay is being challenged here? It seems several can agree the story plot is for certain tastes, but the one thing I haven't seen much explanation given to is the gameplay and how horribly awry it veered off of the track.

The gameplay in one and two function very similar to the point where though they are different they achieve the ultimate same goal. You may still use EXP to go to your protagonist and their squad, there is a partially slimmed down tree with more talents allocated to the specialization classes, and you can still choose between the three top classes and class specializations.

For combat: Origins had your warrior/rogue sprinting for minutes trying to track down a genlock, followed by an awkward little shuffle dance where it looks as if the Warden is humping the poor darkspawn, and as you go for the kill another party member cuts the genlock down and you're back to chasing the nearest one again. Yes, DA2 moves a tad too fast for it's own good and the acrobatics need to be toned down, but at least now I get to fight without waiting minutes to become properly positioned. And the waves? How is this any different then the darkspawn that would come out of walls in the Deep Trenches? The in-game pause still remains, as down allocating tactics and changing squad members.

I'm in no way attempting to diminish Origins for the gem that it is/was, but things need to be analyzed as there are parallels between these games. The major things that DA2 dropped for me in gameplay was watching a tiny elf girl wielding a great sword like a two during conversation and not being able to alter squad mates armor looks or stats (which has been said will be fixed). I'm not going to parade around and say this is the best game in years nor am I trying to persuade anyone, but it is a great game to me as a long standing Bioware fan. It could have been better with more development to prevent minor setbacks, but it's still a good game. People should just let it go already and accept the fact maybe, just maybe people aren't fooling themselves into liking such a game, but genuinely do. Maybe this is just me, but wouldn't it be more productive to direct our ideas in improvement to Bioware for DA3 rather than trying to persuade each other to like or dislike something?

Modifié par hornedfrog87, 01 novembre 2011 - 08:36 .