249 réponses à ce sujet

[IRMcGhee]

I'd agree with a lot of what the article says, but then I primarily play Bioware games for the character interaction. There's a lot to like about DA2 in that respect regardless of any other issues it might have for you (I'm not particularly fond of the recycled areas and some of the changes to the combat system myself, or the over-reliance on codex entries to explain the overall storyline).

I still find new exchanges that shed new light on the characters even after over a dozen playthroughs. I love the way that you get to know them at least as much by the way they interact with each other as they do with hawke.

[Brockololly]

MerinTB wrote...

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.

Pretty much this.

Its my issue with most recent BioWare games (ME2 and DA2 specifically)- the initial playthrough might be ok, but they get worse as you play them more as you realize that even if you play radically different, everything stays the same.

I get what the author of the article is getting at, but for me, if I'm not able to get into and care about the PC, it doesn't matter one bit how nuanced or complex or interesting the companions are. Beyond that, you could take games like The Witcher 2 or Alpha Protocol as doing the exact thing the author of the article claims DA2 does, but both of those games do it much better (having multilayered characters who reveal more about themselves on multiple playthroughs).

AP and TW2 get it right in that based on the interactions and choices the PC makes in those games, they not only can see different aspects of one character, but they might not even see a character based on their choices. And the existence of characters and how those characters affect the game world and story changes based on how you've interacted with them and made choices. Whereas in DA2, the companions feel mostly isolated affecting the plot in any meaningful way...not that there is much of any overriding plot in DA2 anyway.

So in TW2, based on your choice in Act 2, you might get far more insight into Iorveth or Roche and in turn the entire game's events change based on what side you're on. You meet different characters who you might otherwise only hear mentioned in passing. And when you get to the end of the game, certain events will happen no matter what, but its an entirely different experience based on what characters you've come to know and your perception of the events can be completely different.

I get what they were maybe shooting for in DA2, but its **** execution. An admirable intention in some of the design points maybe, but **** is ****. Its no flawed gem, its just straight up flawed.

[Heimdall]

I actually find DA2 has grown on me with each playthrough.

[IRMcGhee]

Inb4 Varric quote ;P

[Seagloom]

I preferred Ms. Brice's article on mages to this one. Her argument is entirely based on like or dislike of DA2 being rooted in perspective. I can hardly blame many players feeling shortchanged when the perspective BioWare's marketing and DA2's development offered was quite different from powerlessness. If anything, they were repeatedly encouraging a viewpoint of larger-than-life heroism with heretofore unseen player agency.

I also think that a game, any game, that fails to get its full story across in a single playthrough is... problematic. I disliked that about NWN2's Mysteries of Westgate adventure pack. You needed to play through that from both good and evil perspectives to get the entire story. Otherwise there are question marks all over the place. I consider that sort of thing a failing; but then I have never been keen on being forced to replay a game just to "get it".

I have no opinion on DA2 one way or another, but the ideas Ms. Brice's article suggest make for a highly subjective and altogether shaky defense of the game's merits.

Modifié par Seagloom, 01 novembre 2011 - 09:44 .

[IRMcGhee]

That was something I actually liked about DA2. Everything we knew about the story pointed to The Legend Of Hawke but, just like Cassandra, we discover along the way that legends and the truth don't always go hand in hand. Especially if Varric's doing the telling over the years

I can see how some people would be upset at that (Bioware betrayed us !), but I thought it was a stroke of genius.

Modifié par IRMcGhee, 01 novembre 2011 - 09:47 .

[Big I]

So the article is essentially saying that the friendship/rivalry system redeems the game. No.


Fenris will always hate mages regardless of friendship of rivalry, and will always respect Hawke if the appropriate score is high enough (regardless of things like "Hawke being a blood mage" or "Hawke owning an elven slave"). There is no way to influence Fenris's post game "position" (unlike say Alistair or Sigrun) except through romancing him. The story of Fenris and Hawke is a linear one; either you recruited him and completed his quests or you didn't recruit him/didn't do his quests. The same is true for Aveline, Varric, and Sebastian.


Even in instances where you have greater control over companion fate and character such control is marginal. Conversations with Anders may play out differently but his Act 3 actions remain the same. Sebastian will always remain within the Chantry regardless, and will likewise leave take back Starkhaven so long as an unrelated choice is made, no matter what input you've given him.


DA:O wasn't much better, particularly because of the DA:A retcons, but at least it gave you a wider range of choices for companions (e.g. Alistair is a Warden/King/drunk). Friendship and rivalry are the same path with only slight variation between them.

[Morroian]

Seagloom wrote...

I preferred Ms. Brice's article on mages to this one. Her argument is entirely based on like or dislike of DA2 being rooted in perspective. I can hardly blame many players feeling shortchanged when the perspective BioWare's marketing and DA2's development offered was quite different from powerlessness. If anything, they were repeatedly encouraging a viewpoint of larger-than-life heroism with heretofore unseen player agency.

But shouldn't players be able to let go of such preconceptions in later play throughs? I find it very hard to have any sympathy for a viewpoint which relies on taking marketing seriously, especially given that Bioware's marketing has been seriously dodgy for a long time, well before DA2.

Modifié par Morroian, 01 novembre 2011 - 10:20 .

[tmp7704]

The article seems to boil down to "You should play DA2 more than one time because then you'll see the characters act slightly different, depending on the route you take."

Which i suppose is fine, as long as one actually cares about/values witnessing these differences. But i'd imagine such people don't need to be encouraged to do multiple playthroughs in the first place.

Modifié par tmp7704, 01 novembre 2011 - 10:15 .

[Morty Smith]

Morroian wrote...

Seagloom wrote...

I preferred Ms. Brice's article on mages to this one. Her argument is entirely based on like or dislike of DA2 being rooted in perspective. I can hardly blame many players feeling shortchanged when the perspective BioWare's marketing and DA2's development offered was quite different from powerlessness. If anything, they were repeatedly encouraging a viewpoint of larger-than-life heroism with heretofore unseen player agency.

But shouldn't players be able to let go of such preconceptions in later play throughs? I find it very hard to have any sympathy for a viewpoint which relies on taking marketing seriously, especially given that Bioware's marketing has been seriously dodgy for a long time, well before DA2 was released.

So not trusting Bioware should be a given to enjoy their games from now on?

[Morroian]

Kroitz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

But shouldn't players be able to let go of such preconceptions in later play throughs? I find it very hard to have any sympathy for a viewpoint which relies on taking marketing seriously, especially given that Bioware's marketing has been seriously dodgy for a long time, well before DA2 was released.

So not trusting Bioware should be a given to enjoy their games from now on?

Since when does referring to Bioware marketing mean the whole company? Are they an Advertising Agency now.

The MARKETING for Bioware should be taken with a grain of salt especially when you listen to what David Silverman has to say.

Modifié par Morroian, 01 novembre 2011 - 10:23 .

[Seagloom]

Morroian wrote...

But shouldn't players be able to let go of such preconceptions in later play throughs? I find it very hard to have any sympathy for a viewpoint which relies on taking marketing seriously, especially given that Bioware's marketing has been seriously dodgy for a long time, well before DA2 was released.

Not only marketing, but commentary straight from the mouths of staff. All I am stating is that if every source beats it into their audiences' heads to expect one thing, it is hardly surprising when they react poorly to getting the other. It is also unrealistic to expect a person to only understand the true subtlety of a narrative on the second or third attempt. We are not talking literature here. This is a game meant to entertain. The plot's intent should be clear the first time through. Not after spending forty+ hours in it and starting over. Learning new insights on characters? Sure. Picking up details that enrich the story? Great. Actually understanding the core of the narrative? That is a failing, and deserves criticism in my opinion.

I have yet to play DA2 so my own opinion of the game is nonexistent. I simply found Ms. Brice's logic biased to the perspective that supports her thesis.

Modifié par Seagloom, 01 novembre 2011 - 10:26 .

[Morty Smith]

Morroian wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

But shouldn't players be able to let go of such preconceptions in later play throughs? I find it very hard to have any sympathy for a viewpoint which relies on taking marketing seriously, especially given that Bioware's marketing has been seriously dodgy for a long time, well before DA2 was released.

So not trusting Bioware should be a given to enjoy their games from now on?

Since when does referring to Bioware marketing mean the whole company? Are they an Advertising Agency now.

The MARKETING for Bioware should be taken with a grain of salt especially when you listen to what David Silverman has to say.

You are right, they are not. But they are responsible for what is communicated to their audience.

I take the second statement as a "yes"  

[Zubie]

Two playthroughs was enough torture for me thanks.

[Morroian]

Kroitz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The MARKETING for Bioware should be taken with a grain of salt especially when you listen to what David Silverman has to say.

You are right, they are not. But they are responsible for what is communicated to their audience.

I take the second statement as a "yes"  

Well you would be wrong then. You appear to be making a blanket statement about the whole company I'm only referring to their marketing department.

Modifié par Morroian, 01 novembre 2011 - 10:59 .

[alex90c]

lol @ the "I hate DA2 so much, my fifty playthroughs of it were just unbearable" comments

[Merilsell]

I could also shoot myself in the foot, I guess this would hold the same amount of fun as to replay DA2.

Probably even more.

[dheer]

alex90c wrote...
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.

You don't need to lower your expectations, just align them correctly.

I read the article and it is basically is a call to point out that not everything in the game was terrible. We already knew that. Sure, there are some interesting characters and situations but it doesn't make up for, in some people's opinion, poor gameplay design, implementation or a mediocre overall story with a terrible ending.

[Morty Smith]

Morroian wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The MARKETING for Bioware should be taken with a grain of salt especially when you listen to what David Silverman has to say.

You are right, they are not. But they are responsible for what is communicated to their audience.

I take the second statement as a "yes"  

Well you would be wrong then. You appear to be making a blanket statement about the whole company I'm only referring to their marketing department.

You may assume so. I don´t view them as independent entities that do their own thing without direction from above.

But you are right, you just spoke of their marketing department. That in mind I wrongly accused you of a statement you did not make. Sorry.

[Uzzy]

If playing Dragon Age 2 again would get me a date with Corinne Kempa, then I'd consider it.. but otherwise, once was torture enough. DA2 feels like the developers didn't care enough about the game to give it the proper respect and treatment it deserved, and finish the damn development. I hate playing games like that.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Oh god.

This guy....This guy has attempted to interpret design flaws as intended originalities?

Oh god, i need to lie down...

[Morroian]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Oh god.

This guy....This guy has attempted to interpret design flaws as intended originalities?

Oh god, i need to lie down...

You know similar arguments have been put forward here. In fact I actually wondered if he'd been reading the BSN.

[KilrB]

Gave it a second chance.

Gave it a third. <_<

That's more than it deserved.

It's still the worst BioWare game I've played, and one of the poorest excuses for an rpg I've ever played.

Time will tell but with Skyrim due out in 9 days, and what we've seen of it so far, the future of DA looks pretty iffy from where I'm standing.

On the heels of DA2, being a good or even great game won't be enough for DA3.

It will have to be spectacular.

It will have to sell those 4.5 million copies they predicted for DA2, and then some.

If it doesn't that'll be the end of the DA franchise, at the very least.

The "improvements" seen and promised thus far, and the commitment to continue with many of the disliked design changes do not lead me to believe that the current DA team have what it takes to produce a title that can go toe-to-toe with AAA competition.

I didn't have to lower my standards for DA:O, FO:NV, TW2, or DE:HR to enjoy them.

I will not lower my standards just because BioWare lowered theirs.

Modifié par KilrB, 02 novembre 2011 - 02:25 .

[TheRealJayDee]

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

I guess I was pretty much through with the game before the relevant patches were released, and couldn't bother to return.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I've given DA2 a second chance, hell I finished it twice fully...my opinion of the game has only gotten worse.

Same here. On my second playthrough I put the difficulty on casual, created a character who had the right motivations and mindset to actually stay in Kirkwall and tried to take a path through the story (often via metagaming) that made it feel natural and that would lead me to an ending that actually made some sense. That resulted in a more satisfying and coherent journey for my Hawke, but definitely not in an overall more satisfying experience for me.

[csfteeeer]

"one of the best games that I’ve ever played"

i promptly closed the window there, and deleted the page from my page record.

never again.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 02 novembre 2011 - 04:39 .