314 réponses à ce sujet

[alex90c]

What finishing moves did mages get in DA:A?

[Ciryx]

bEVEsthda wrote...

I did NOT LIKE DA2. I disliked it very much, and hope I have poured enough vitriol over it on these forums for that message to get across. However, I have focused on art direction, style and general new direction of the game. I have not participated in 'constructive criticism' because the important part for me is that I don't like it. The game lacks seriousness in every thing. It tries to be "fun" and "kewl". I could probably live with most "flaws" in DA2, just as I lived with the manna system, auto-health and auto-resurrection in DA:O. - If I had liked the game. But I don't, it doesn't give me anything of what I want from a cRPG. The situations are wrong. More than anything else, the atmosphere, the mood, is wrong.

But I sort of agree with Ciryx. I disagree that there's any "improvement" as he suggests. But if one looks at details out of context, it's well enough done. The combat- and skill systems works well and are well done. They are not, IMO, appropriate and I dislike them. They're nothing like what I want for gameplay in a cRPG, but as systems they're pretty well crafted. The rendition is also well done, if you want a 'cartoony' look. I hate the art style, but it's pretty well done. Finally, given how much new the game was, it's also impressive given the time constraints. Just consider the voiced dialogue for instance. Even the reused environments, the choice was to make the game shorter. Much shorter. As absurd as it sounds, I think M.L. made the right decision. Even if it's unforgivable and a pretty huge blemish on the game.
There's probably a huge chasm between me and M.L. when it comes to taste in games. But I do not really know that for sure, since I'm pretty convinced DA2's "new direction" was conceived by a EA/Bioware collective that made all kinds of flawed and failed market speculations.

Thats pretty much what I tried to say, thank you. And yes "improvment" was a bad choice of word from my side.

I didnt like the game either, it didnt feel right. It wasnt that bad though either, it had its perks. Overall I might want to say it needed more cheesewheels, but that is just one symptom. As you said it lacks the athmosphere and believablity I assosiate with cRPGs.
My post up there was an answer though to the statement that M.L. is to blame for everything. I think, considering the whole direction of the game, he did call the right things and even made the right choices. Its just not my type of game.

Gosh, I just repeated what you wrote there. xD

Modifié par Ciryx, 10 décembre 2011 - 09:07 .

[Melca36]

Mr.House wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Actually...Leliana did get the High Dragon in one of my Origins games.  

In DA:2...I would have just enjoyed seeing one of the other companions get the final kill. It got repetitive with Hawke getting them and sort of detracted from the story for me.

If Hawke was supposed to be so oridinary and basic and un-warden like....why did he or she always get the final kills?

Leli only get's one if you give her a blade, which is the problem. Only people with blades got the deathblows, the people that I rely on to protect my mage and archer are now stuck in a slow scene, yay

Also Fenris does do a deathblow on his final quest. So does Merrill.

True but look at the finishing moves the mage got in Awakenings.

I just don't want a game to be all cut scenes. I want a game with it.

They already said DA:3's combat will be different so I have faith it will appeal to all fanbases and not just one.  

The mage finishing move in DAO:A fails in comparison to osme mage Hawke does in DA2, also that was a cutscene in DAO:A, also DA2 was not all cutscenes.

The rock wraith and high dragon were cutscenes. I just don't see why someone other than Hawke could have gotten the finishing move.

And speaking of which...Stealth is so much fun in Skyrim. Those finish moves are awesome. I want a variation of them in DA:3

[Mr.House]

alex90c wrote...

What finishing moves did mages get in DA:A?

With the Mother. The kill the Warden does is not the same for a warrior/rogue.

[jlb524]

Melca36 wrote...
The rock wraith and high dragon were cutscenes. I just don't see why someone other than Hawke could have gotten the finishing move.

Some people would complain that their character didn't get enough finishing moves.

And the circle will be unbroken.

By and by Lord...by and by.

[Melca36]

jlb524 wrote...

Melca36 wrote...
The rock wraith and high dragon were cutscenes. I just don't see why someone other than Hawke could have gotten the finishing move.

Some people would complain that their character didn't get enough finishing moves.

And the circle will be unbroken.

By and by Lord...by and by.

I just want the next game to have more stuff to do and if they can achieve a compromise that appeals to **all fans**, I will be happy.

[hoorayforicecream]

Melca36 wrote...

I just want the next game to have more stuff to do and if they can achieve a compromise that appeals to **all fans**, I will be happy.

Fan A: I love X and want more of it!
Fan B: I hate X and never want to see it again!

Good luck with that.

[Everwarden]

Good sir, if you are going to bash Dragon Age 2, at least be a little creative! The only way to make beating that pile of gore that used to be a dead horse fun again is to throw some jokes and originality in. 

[curlzncrush]

bEVEsthda wrote...

However, on the off chance that you might be one of those EA/Bioware people that were involved in the direction-shift of DA2, and still for some stubborn reason believe in it and still want to push it, like "if they just discover how great it is" - I have to throw in a reality check for you: This won't work!

I'm a sentient being, trust me.  I even bashed DA2 like everyone else back in the day http://social.biowar...index/7444662/1

I don't think a Bioware employee would hate his own game this much.  But I do understand your skepticism...fully.

[Travie]

With all lessons learned, I won't be preordering DA3 or bother picking it up until there are A LOT of user and professional reviews out.

This time around I doubt many large magazines and sites will give it a mandatory high score without really spending the time with it (I'm looking at you PC gamer).

[Birdhive]

I like them both.

I also like chocolate cake and vanilla cake.  When I think, "mmm, moar cake?", I am pleased to have either one.  Sometimes, however, I only want one of them.  I suppose some folks can dislike a particular cake flavor, and only want one type of cake forever and ever, but that's not me; I'm a cake lover! 

Except I won't eat that slobber-drenched cake, not that one, no way.  I mean, Dog just 'did something about that mess' for me, and now he's bringing me cake with the same mouth?  I don't think so.

More seriously, but similarly--some days I honestly prefer DA2 and only want to play it, and other days I would prefer to play DAO, and only want to play that.  It's become difficult for me to determine which I prefer, because I find those states to be fluid.  I've played more DA2 than DAO, however.  [I played DAO before DA2 came out, both on a PC.]

DAO

• I've come to use the skip-the-fade mod, because I really, really can't stand that aspect of the tower quest.
• I used to be terribly bored by the deep roads, but for some reason, now I enjoy it.
• I like the romances, I like camp, and I like conversing anywhere, anytime, but I hate that one can exhaust one's companion dialogs.
• The gifts = approval was absurd at times, but oddly satisfying too (Oh, you liked that lyrium-laced booze?  I'm so glad!  Now how 'bout this ball of yarn?)
• I think I hate the Brecilian Forest, but I might be softening up to it.  Or not.
• Sometimes I grudingly enjoy and admire the slow DAO combat; it looks heavy.  "Duh, armor is heavy", I think to myself, when I see that, "glad I'm wearing pajamas!".
• I like equipping armor sets or this and that doo-dad on my companions.  Except when I don't, which is usually because I have a pack full of a thousand helms and gloves and I'm like "wait--was Alistair wearing red steel, silverite or viridium?  Crap!  Hang on, Bodhan, let me compare with Alistair, wait, no, let me compare with Sten--oh, no, wait again, Maybe Zevran could use this?  Aargh!".  I do like seeing Alistair and Zevran wearing the same miniskirt, however: variable companion armor gets a thumbs up on the objectification scale.
• I really despise not being able to dodge.  Clarification: I really despise being fifty feet away from a two-handed sword wielder on the proving grounds who started his swing a full minute ago and having my warden DIE from the attack.  What the stink!
• I like DAO cross-class combos, perhaps in part because I am still discovering them. 
• I love finishing moves.
• I like the epic.  I like that I still have landsmeet options to attempt.  I like choice making a difference to the story during the game.

DA2

• I don't like the re-used caverns, certainly not by the 8th playthrough, but at least I can do those regions almost blindfolded now.  Plus side!
• I don't like the wheel paraphrasing, but I'm ambivalent about the wheel itself.
• I like voiced Hawke.  [I don't dislike non-voiced Warden, mind you.]
• I like the personality-specific options and dialog.
• I miss non-human PCs
• I like the companions and I love their banter.
• I like that companions came on to Hawke!  Anders obviously isn't as suave as Fenris, since I don't read people complaining about Fenris' unprompted "If I'd known Anso would find me someone so capable" remark.  See also: Isabela's rigging innuendo.
• Having family was good.  A nice (if somewhat temporary) balm to soothe the pain of the origin stories in DAO.
• I like how cool the companions look; I did, however want Hawke to sleep with all of them if only to add a flair of red toward the last half of the game, for variety's sake.  Damnit, Sebastian--a red kerchief, you need one: now!
• I like the DA2 cross-class combos, in part because I already know how to use them and therefore get to do so.
• I like the cinematic aspect of the game, but the cutscenes where passed-out Hawke gets up and steals the show can annoy.
• I dislike the way choice does not affect the outcome of the story (in this game, at least).  Caveat: sometimes it does (siblings, you know), and sometimes, maddeningly, it really, really doesn't--HUON I AM LOOKING AT YOU (or more precisely, at Hawke, harrumph); Angelina (or whatever), how many damn coppers should I give you to stop calling me a Hightown snob before, well, you know?  I'd give you sovereigns, except I CAN'T.  Profane/hunger demon, Meredith, Arishok, you are also on my list.  And Orsino: shame on you, fool!
• I like how choice affects one's relationships with one's companions.  Tra la!
• I like the funny rogues jumping all around!  I also was amused by the exploding cyborgs, but I enjoy absurdity that way.  I'm also fine with the exploding cyborgs having been mostly disappeared.  Further: who doesn't roundhouse kick grenades?  I roundhouse kick my own grenades at home!
• The combat balancing patch did good.
• I actually enjoy the combat.  Enjoy, as in, take pleasure in!
• I both like and appreciate that I was snookered by the story.  I did weep on my first playthrough.  I did feel vengeful on my second.  As opposed to DAO (this time I want to be queen!), I was very strongly invested in a way other than fantasy/lalaland.  It actually made me reflect upon my real life.

Though to-date, I've played more DA2, I am going back to DAO (partly to get new save games to start DA2 with, honestly).  I suppose I prefer DA2, and I think it has to do with my last point--how I emotionally connect to both games.  I think playing DA2 is more functional (for me), in a way, compared to the escapism (for me) of DAO--like I'm not hiding from real-world stuff while immersed in DA2, and because of that, I think I feel that DAO, though great fun, is somehow less relevant for me.

[I know this was a long reply; thanks for reading.  I was trying to be funny, but I promise I am not trying to be snarky!]

[Iakus]

alex90c wrote...

Eh. I'd say the amount of banter was good (and Mass Effect should take pointers from that) but I found most of the characters just one-dimensional and always, always had some kind of extreme trait which defined their entire personality and was just over-the-top. Merrill? ******. Repeat ad nauseam for seven years. Anders? Mage freedom. Hates templars. Sounds like a broken record, doesn't stop going on about it for the entire game. Fenris? Hates mages? Sure, understandable, but the moaning and groaning gets wearisome (inb4 HURRRDURRR DATS WHUT I FEEL ABOUT DUR DA2 H8ERS HURRRDURRR). Carver? Whine, whine whine. Bethany? Well .... there isn't really much character there anyway. Isabela? Yes, thank you for brining up sex for the 50th time, we didn't quite catch it the first 49 times.

And though not a companion, God, Leandra was just a tool. Gamlen had to work his ass off when they were younger because their parents didn't give a toss about him, he loses the estate Leandra didn't give a crap about when she moved to Ferelden, and only when she moves back she goes off on a huge rant to him and acts like a ****** to him. She couldn't die soon enough.

I was afraid I wouldn't like some of the characters either.  Fenris struck me as an emo Final Fantasy refugee and Isabela a human version of Oghren (drunken, foul mouthed hedonist).  But when I actually started interacting with them...Well, Fenris still looked like an emo Final Fantasy refugee, but his story and attitude made a lot more sense.  I really came around to like him.  It may have had somethingt o do with the VA, who I thought was ab****ely fantastic.  but there you go.

Isabela, well, she's still Oghren.  Only human and female.  But once I put some pants on her and started talking to her and moving down the rivalry path, I enjoyed the conversations.  By the end of the game I thought she actually wanted to better herself and think of others

I felt sorry for Leandra.  Clearly the death of the sibling devastated her.  

Yes the companions are painted with broad strokes.  But so are most cRPG characters.  I still thought they were done well.

[jbrand2002uk]

Akka le Vil wrote...

The fighting is still looking stupid, ridiculous and over-the-top, far inferior to the more realistic feel of DAO in practically everything but the responsiveness (which is more about how they "cheated" with near-teleportation when you engage a foe, rather than making it really more responsive) and the talent trees (which are one of the few real progress in DA2).

Oh yes lets go back to the even more unrealistic 20 minutes of zumba exercises followed by hump the darkspawn that was in DAO 



DA2 is still a horribly consolized and dumbed down rushed game that disgrace the serie and show that the "broad market" is dragging down yet another franchise/developper into the morass of mediocrity to make shallow production for the masses.

This Elitist attitude does no favours to the RPG community as a whole oh and learn how to spell 

[TheRogueAmigo]

Birdhive wrote...

I like them both.

I also like chocolate cake and vanilla cake.  When I think, "mmm, moar cake?", I am pleased to have either one.  Sometimes, however, I only want one of them.  I suppose some folks can dislike a particular cake flavor, and only want one type of cake forever and ever, but that's not me; I'm a cake lover! .................




......................[I know this was a long reply; thanks for reading.  I was trying to be funny, but I promise I am not trying to be snarky!]

I wish I had this sort of attitude to the games, I think its very understanding but for me its more like DA is vanilla cake and Mass effect is chocolate cake you know? And while I was REALLY looking forward to getting me some vanilla cake,  DA2 is a mixture.....a vanilolate cake if you will......... And have you ever had vanilolate cake? No? Neither have I. And there is probably a good reason for that.

I guess what I'm trying to say (and badly) is that I'm willing to concede that I no lonegr feel DA2 is "crap" after reading other peoples comments (well to clarify, my rage has abated slightly to the point I'm willing to give it a second chance) and I want to see this "great banter" and how its more "personal" and "relevant" etc etc................ I want to see that myself with fresh eyes. Perhaps I was looking for the wrong things in DA2?

When you cut through the fat, its not with DA2 I have the issue with per se, my big gripe is the HUGE difference. DA:O had more of a dark mood, more of a grand, expansive feel to it. It was more serious you know? Even Bioware admitted DA:O is a "dark heroic fantasy". DA2 might be good but it definitely doesn't have the same feel to it. It was not what I was expecting. It's like if I ordered a ruby ring but got a sapphire one instead. While the sapphire might be beautiful, its not what I wanted ......(ok really stupid metaphor but I'm too lazy to think up another and it still gets my point across quite nicely)..... They changed the enviroment, the creatures, the mechanic's of the game, the way you interact with companion's........... PERHAPS these even are "improvements", but who said I (And I speak as DA:O fans here) WANTED  "improvements"? Ok some fans liked it, but a vast amount did not. Changing aspects of a sequel slightly are fine, keeps the game fresh I feel, HOWEVER changing how creatures look completely (darkspawn), rewriting characters completely to suit the storyline better (Anders anyone?) etc etc...... it feels more like Bioware were just did things to suit they're needs better rather then what the fans wanted and the franchaise could take. Just did what was convenient. And I understand that they have the harsh EA taskmaster on them, and they're working in a time frame. I get that. But that doesn't mean I approve it or have to like it. If me and everyone else gives out about it enough, maybe EA will get the picture and give Bioware a break. If it is indeed EA's fault. If not, maybe Bioware will get the message. Complaining works people :innocent:.

To conclude (long-windedly) is, if DA2 had been a standalone game I think I might have quite enjoyed it. But it wasn't. It was part of a francaise I LOVED, and the franchaise was changed to suit the game, which should never, EVER happen.

P.S Was a great comment tho and if someone understands my point and can properly explain it, that would be great. Oh and people keep in mind this is spoilers free!!!

Modifié par TheRogueAmigo, 11 décembre 2011 - 02:38 .

[TheRogueAmigo]

jbrand2002uk wrote...
This Elitist attitude does no favours to the RPG community as a whole oh and learn how to spell 

Dude your going to hit back with the fail safe grammer jibe? I'm not condoning his comment but please I really don't want this thread locked because under all the rage I think there have been great comments on both sides of the camp

Modifié par TheRogueAmigo, 11 décembre 2011 - 02:07 .

[Glorfindel709]

When Dragon Age 2 first came out, I called the game a disappointment. In a unnecessarily long post in the Constructive Criticisms thread, I laid out just how disappointing the game was in areas such as voiced protagonist with the summarized dialogue wheel options ( "No" actually leading to "Kiss my arse, nananana *blows raspberry and stabs*" etc etc), reused areas (mansions and caves), the lack of choice or feeling of control in anything that happened in the game (don't even try to deny that), never changing environment ("I'm STILL waiting for the Viscount!" ... "Really ma'am? Because he's been dead for 3 years.") and things of that nature. I feel no need to harp on about the falling from the sky legion waves of ninjas, the overly dramatic combat animations, and very jRPG feel to fighting, because lets face it - no one cares anymore.

Looking at it today, I still feel that disappointment. DA2 could have and should have been an amazing game, worthy of bearing the honor of being a sequel to a game as acclaimed and well put together as Origins. It didnt come close

C'est la vie

[eroeru]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Fan A: I love X and want more of it!
Fan B: I hate X and never want to see it again!

Good luck with that.

Just to add my opinion to the bunch - this is exactly what's going on. And there *are* inbetween fans, but I guess this thread is primarily about the more extreme points of view - and these haven't changed much, for either camp. I at least am still on the Fan B side of things...

Modifié par eroeru, 11 décembre 2011 - 02:31 .

[TheRogueAmigo]

Glorfindel709 wrote...


C'est la vie

How very philosophical of you. And I don't care I'm still going to complain :P:P

Modifié par TheRogueAmigo, 11 décembre 2011 - 02:40 .

[Plaintiff]

TheRogueAmigo wrote...
 and have you ever had vanilolate cake? No? Neither have I. And there is probably a good reason for that.

It's called "marble cake" and it is delicious.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Plaintiff wrote...

TheRogueAmigo wrote...
 and have you ever had vanilolate cake? No? Neither have I. And there is probably a good reason for that.

It's called "marble cake" and it is delicious.

I don't like marble cake. Sure it has both the tastes of vanilla and chocolate, but because of this one cannot get the full effect of either. It's just a funny mix that dulls the tastes of both as opposed to enhancing eachother. 

Oh look, my food preference has created an unexpected yet apt metaphor.

[Plaintiff]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

TheRogueAmigo wrote...
 and have you ever had vanilolate cake? No? Neither have I. And there is probably a good reason for that.

It's called "marble cake" and it is delicious.

I don't like marble cake. Sure it has both the tastes of vanilla and chocolate, but because of this one cannot get the full effect of either. It's just a funny mix that dulls the tastes of both as opposed to enhancing eachother. 

Oh look, my food preference has created an unexpected yet apt metaphor.

By that logic, you should use separator plates for all your meals to prevent the mixing of foods.

And sauces are just out of the question.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Plaintiff wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

TheRogueAmigo wrote...
 and have you ever had vanilolate cake? No? Neither have I. And there is probably a good reason for that.

It's called "marble cake" and it is delicious.

I don't like marble cake. Sure it has both the tastes of vanilla and chocolate, but because of this one cannot get the full effect of either. It's just a funny mix that dulls the tastes of both as opposed to enhancing eachother. 

Oh look, my food preference has created an unexpected yet apt metaphor.

By that logic, you should use separator plates for all your meals to prevent the mixing of foods.

And sauces are just out of the question.

You're assuming chocolate and vanilla somehow represent every food mix out there. That's just simply not true.

[silentassassin264]

Months later how do I feel about DA2?

Really angry. When were heard all the "streamlining" stuff on the way to release I reassured myself with in Bioware we trust because they are a pretty good company so I figured they would not disappoint me. Then I heard on one of the reviews that the story was rather templar vs magey and I hoped to God they were just messing around in Act 1 and missed the main story. They did not and that makes me angry.

Not angry because they did Mage vs. Templar, angry because I knew how it would turn out. I attempted to have a debate about the subject with David Gaider in one of the later Mage vs. Templar debate threads. The "debate" pretty much went along the line of Gaider doing the Nanana not listening to you which boded...not very well. Sure enough, DA2 picks a big serious issue and then portrays it as immaturely as it can possibly do. The mages in DA2 are pretty much all childish psychopaths and the game goes out of it way to make them as irredeemable as it can. Even when they are not insane like Merrill, the game still tries to portray her as a big **** up even though she did absolutely nothing wrong. The game even goes for the gut punch with a psycho mage killing someone close to you. If you side with the templars you get to be viscount, whereas siding with the mages leaves you a fugitive having to abandon everything that is not presently on your back as you flee Kirkwall (though given a headstart. Thanks Cullen). In the end the only templar you encounter who is evil to match the psychopathy of the mages is Ser Alrik. Meredith is actually right along considering who "O" was and rightly paranoid (though incorrect about Hawke at the end).

In other words, we have a nice grey and gray morality situation and the game spends the whole time trying to shove "mages are bad" down your throat. Of course the Band of three codex explains that Kirkwall was an anomaly due to some dark magic. Naturally that is the stupidest thing in the world to stage what should be a nice grey morality debate in a black and white world but at least Legacy could remedy that... Except they use that to take another shot a mages confirming the Chantry story of darkspawn and then basically saying that mages are such dangerous tools that they are no better than a blighted ghoul.

The problem with this is I can try to ignore the horribly biased story the first time but it just makes me rage harder when trying replay the game. One of the things I like in my games is replayability. I had like 30 wardens at one time or another and played Origins to death. I played JadeEmpire, Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, my select jRpgs (now Skyrim) with multiple characters and I can still play those games now. I never have to feel done with those games. The story in DA2 is so obnoxious and preachy that I really can't be bothered to finish a bunch of characters up there. I feel done with that game because dealing with that pretentiousness is not fun.

[Akka le Vil]

Mr.House wrote...

DAO did not feel that realistic.

Compared to DA2 ? Sure it did.
And if it's to make one vague, fanboyish and wrong answer, there is no need to quote a wall of text.

Ciryx wrote...

a) Considering the time they had to develop DA 2 he did an amazing job.

Obsidian had even less time to do New Vegas, and THIS was an amazing job.
DA2, not so much.

And anyway, since when does rushing a game and then claiming you lacked time an excuse ? It's another blame to give if anything, they were the ones setting the deadline, it's their own fault if they didn't give themselves enough time.

jbrand2002uk wrote...
This Elitist attitude does no favours to the RPG community as a whole oh and learn how to spell [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/sleeping.png[/smilie]

There is nothing wrong with being an elitist either, despite the tendency to use it as a derogatory expletive. Aiming for "better" is not something someone should be ashamed of.

And you should avoid making comment about spelling when you manage to make a "does favours", nor should you try to give lessons about behaviour when you're just making puerilistic comments.

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 11 décembre 2011 - 10:27 .

[Plaintiff]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Months later how do I feel about DA2?

Really angry. When were heard all the "streamlining" stuff on the way to release I reassured myself with in Bioware we trust because they are a pretty good company so I figured they would not disappoint me. Then I heard on one of the reviews that the story was rather templar vs magey and I hoped to God they were just messing around in Act 1 and missed the main story. They did not and that makes me angry.

Not angry because they did Mage vs. Templar, angry because I knew how it would turn out. I attempted to have a debate about the subject with David Gaider in one of the later Mage vs. Templar debate threads. The "debate" pretty much went along the line of Gaider doing the Nanana not listening to you which boded...not very well. Sure enough, DA2 picks a big serious issue and then portrays it as immaturely as it can possibly do. The mages in DA2 are pretty much all childish psychopaths and the game goes out of it way to make them as irredeemable as it can. Even when they are not insane like Merrill, the game still tries to portray her as a big **** up even though she did absolutely nothing wrong. The game even goes for the gut punch with a psycho mage killing someone close to you. If you side with the templars you get to be viscount, whereas siding with the mages leaves you a fugitive having to abandon everything that is not presently on your back as you flee Kirkwall (though given a headstart. Thanks Cullen). In the end the only templar you encounter who is evil to match the psychopathy of the mages is Ser Alrik. Meredith is actually right along considering who "O" was and rightly paranoid (though incorrect about Hawke at the end).

In other words, we have a nice grey and gray morality situation and the game spends the whole time trying to shove "mages are bad" down your throat. Of course the Band of three codex explains that Kirkwall was an anomaly due to some dark magic. Naturally that is the stupidest thing in the world to stage what should be a nice grey morality debate in a black and white world but at least Legacy could remedy that... Except they use that to take another shot a mages confirming the Chantry story of darkspawn and then basically saying that mages are such dangerous tools that they are no better than a blighted ghoul.

The problem with this is I can try to ignore the horribly biased story the first time but it just makes me rage harder when trying replay the game. One of the things I like in my games is replayability. I had like 30 wardens at one time or another and played Origins to death. I played JadeEmpire, Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, my select jRpgs (now Skyrim) with multiple characters and I can still play those games now. I never have to feel done with those games. The story in DA2 is so obnoxious and preachy that I really can't be bothered to finish a bunch of characters up there. I feel done with that game because dealing with that pretentiousness is not fun.

I disagree entirely. If any bias exists, I found it to be totally in favour of mages.