I have completed this game twice, once siding with the mages and the other with the templars. And now no matter how many times I try I just can't bring myself to complete it again. Most of the time I get past act 1, get bored and then give up.
Unlike its predecessor DA2 has little to no variations in its quests and overall story. In Origins sure certain things had to have happen but at least they often had different routes and/or outcomes. But in DA2 this is not the case. No matter what you say and do almost everything has the exact same outcome.
I know DA2 tried to tell a different kind of story from Origins but it just didn't work for me.
While Origins did not have the most originality, it did it well and so was a great game overall. DA2 meanwhile tried to do something new but it just fell flat and so overall it turned out to be a very mediocre game with almost no replay value.
This game has very little replay value.
Débuté par
Magnus_The_Red
, nov. 10 2011 10:33
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 10 novembre 2011 - 05:22
Stanley Woo
-
- BioWare Employees
-
- 8 368 messages
I would say that if you played it twice, the replay value was there. 
Maybe not enough to replay it more than once, but enough that you did replay it.
Maybe not enough to replay it more than once, but enough that you did replay it.
#3
Posté 10 novembre 2011 - 11:24
Jessica Merizan
-
- BioWare Employees
-
- 423 messages
I think this is interesting because I'm hearing a lot of different reasons why people did or did not replay the game from achievement hunting to changing combat styles to story.
We all know the overall "story" of the game is largely unchanging. However, I think it's not changes in story that affect replay value, but rather the level of immersion that goes into the plot. Hawke to me has kind of Harry Potter syndrome, a central character for whom a lot happens and is important to the overall story and theme, but generally is a reactive character. Things happen to Harry/Hawke and the character reacts to this. Whereas the Warden was very proactive and essential to grand changes in Ferelden. Personally I can see the value of both as different types of protagonists and still interesting to experience in their own way.
So I guess for me it becomes a question of story vs plot and how much I want to put into changing the minor plot details that lead to the same eventual ending. Definitely worth at least one play in my opinion as it was still one of the best games that came out in the first half of this year. Replay value however, as we've seen, definitely depends on how you game.
We all know the overall "story" of the game is largely unchanging. However, I think it's not changes in story that affect replay value, but rather the level of immersion that goes into the plot. Hawke to me has kind of Harry Potter syndrome, a central character for whom a lot happens and is important to the overall story and theme, but generally is a reactive character. Things happen to Harry/Hawke and the character reacts to this. Whereas the Warden was very proactive and essential to grand changes in Ferelden. Personally I can see the value of both as different types of protagonists and still interesting to experience in their own way.
So I guess for me it becomes a question of story vs plot and how much I want to put into changing the minor plot details that lead to the same eventual ending. Definitely worth at least one play in my opinion as it was still one of the best games that came out in the first half of this year. Replay value however, as we've seen, definitely depends on how you game.
Modifié par Jessica Merizan, 10 novembre 2011 - 11:46 .
