134 réponses à ce sujet

[tanerb123]

no other game deserved more to be in that list (ok maybe duke nukem). bad news is, it will only get worse. bioware knows most of their fan base buys whatever they come up with. people who complained about game being bad were the same guys who bought the shiny armor dlcs. with most of the resources bioware has moved into star wars i am expecting a similiar quality game from da3. signs are there. for example, no hawke in da3 ? why? because that would require some effort. they need to do more connections, a few more scenarios. fresh hero is way easy. bioware as i know does not exist anymore. they evolved, to good or to bad time will tell.

Modifié par tanerb123, 22 décembre 2011 - 03:14 .

[Lithuasil]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I deny it.

Oh so you're saying the story was perfect? That it couldn't have been better, which was really the crux of my point?

Nothing's perfect. To say that it couldn't have been better is being blind, because everything can be better.

If he denies that something was "incredibly weak", that doesn't mean it was perfect. It wasn't even great. Better then most, by videogame standards - yes. Better then it's prequel - yes. Calling the story weak, is definitely hating the game for the wrong reasons (thus halting the steps of progress that were made in the game - In many ways, including this one, DA2 isn't to be faulted for trying what they did - but for being too rushed to follow it through properly).

[TEWR]

Lithuasil wrote...


No reasonable Hawke fights those that want Kirkwall free from that threat - but that's beside the point.

so apparently my roleplaying is wrong to you? Good to know!

This isn't about the Qunari being hellbent on invading. It's about innocent until proven guilty. It's about them trying to frame a different culture -- however horrific its practices -- for acts they didn't commit.

This is about justice and fairness in the eyes of the law.

 
You're arguing in a circle here.

no I'm not. 

The things Hawke does are risky - but they're reactive.Hawke goes through the calculated if vast risk of venturing to the deep roads, because the alternative is worse.

No, it was their decision to get in on the expedition to earn money because they anticipated a possible threat inherent in remaining commoners.

That's the very definition of proactive. Anticipating a threat and working to prevent said threat from happening.

*Your* point was that she should take additional risk on top of that, despite being in a pretty bad position to do so. The only point where Hawke could *an* should have done more, is act 3 - and that act fell flat due to being rushed to hell, not due to conceptual faults.

Wrong. The game makes a point of saying that after the expedition and the funds he receives, Hawke is untouchable by the Templars. This means that Act II was the ideal time for that to happen.
 

(In fact, even in my fixed version of act 3, Hawke is still largely overrun by the events, rather then controlling them)

what fixed version? I thought people couldn't do any storyline mods to the game because there wasn't a toolset to do so?

[TEWR]

Lithuasil wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I deny it.

Oh so you're saying the story was perfect? That it couldn't have been better, which was really the crux of my point?

Nothing's perfect. To say that it couldn't have been better is being blind, because everything can be better.

If he denies that something was "incredibly weak", that doesn't mean it was perfect. It wasn't even great. Better then most, by videogame standards - yes. Better then it's prequel - yes. Calling the story weak, is definitely hating the game for the wrong reasons (thus halting the steps of progress that were made in the game - In many ways, including this one, DA2 isn't to be faulted for trying what they did - but for being too rushed to follow it through properly).

And if you actually read my posts -- in this thread alone even! -- you'd see that I've said the game had great concepts and horrible execution of those concepts.

That horrible execution of great concepts renders the story weak. I am not judging the concepts, but what we got.

[Uccio]

AngryFrozenWater, The Ethereal Writer Redux, Fast Jimmy, Thanks guys for bringing out the issues which are important. Excellent comments.

[Plaintiff]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
That's hardly anything comparable. That deals with the rights of the human civilization, not a video game. Being enslaved is wrong because it infringes on the inalienable rights of the human being to be free.

Denying same-sex marriage rights is wrong because it infringes on the right of a person to love another person.

These deal with humanity and thus are not comparable to a video game. A video game doesn't infringe on anyone's rights.

If a video game enslaves you and makes you do the household chores then you can start bringing up slavery as being comparable.

I wasn't comparing the situations at all. I'm well aware that the actual issues are irrelevent to video games. I was merely making the point that just because a majority likes something doesn't mean it should be so. My intention was not to say that disliking DA2 is equivalent to suppressing minority rights.

Oh so you're saying the story was perfect? That it couldn't have been better, which was really the crux of my point?

Nothing's perfect. To say that it couldn't have been better is being blind, because everything can be better.

Did I say it was perfect? No. I deny your assertion that DAII's storyline is weaker than Origins, which isnt the same thing at all. I have my problems with DAII, same as anyone. Story is not one of them. Or rather, I do not have the same issues with the story that you do. I think it works very well, I find it to be highly literary, and yes, innovative.

I'm fairly certain Bioware has ways of tracking how many hours were logged into the games. Logically, one would assume this is the case for DAII as well.

If a person only played DAII for 5 hours and didn't pick it up again ever, then that means that they didn't want to play it again. EVER.

Bioware has the technology to gather evidence I believe. We are not privy to that evidence.

So Bioware has the numbers. And it's chosen to largely retain DA2's direction. So it seems to me that the logical conclusion to draw is that, whatever information Bioware has, they at least interpret the overall reaction to DA2 as positive.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 22 décembre 2011 - 03:30 .

[Lithuasil]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


so apparently my roleplaying is wrong to you? Good to know!

This isn't about the Qunari being hellbent on invading. It's about innocent until proven guilty. It's about them trying to frame a different culture -- however horrific its practices -- for acts they didn't commit.

This is about justice and fairness in the eyes of the law.

No you're roleplaying isn't wrong - your Hawke puts honor or ideals before reason, making him "unreasonable".

 

No, it was their decision to get in on the expedition to earn money because they anticipated a possible threat inherent in remaining commoners.

That's the very definition of proactive. Anticipating a threat and working to prevent said threat from happening.

Fair point in case of the expidition - Not so much the Qunari invasion though.

Wrong. The game makes a point of saying that after the expedition and the funds he receives, Hawke is untouchable by the Templars. This means that Act II was the ideal time for that to happen.
 

The money makes hawke hard enough to touch, that she won't be ratted out by some beggar. It doesn't make her templar proof, especially not when actively engaging templars in combat.

what fixed version? I thought people couldn't do any storyline mods to the game because there wasn't a toolset to do so?

See my signature - I can't do a storymod, but I can atleast try and use my own trade to explore how things could or should have gone down, if the quality of the story had been the primary concern. (In my humble opinion that is)

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

I wasn't comparing the situations at all. I'm well aware that the actual issues are irrelevent to video games. I was merely making the point that just because a majority likes something doesn't mean it should be so. My intention was not to say that disliking DA2 is equivalent to suppressing minority rights.

It's not even comparable even on that.

there were roughly 32 million people living in the US at the time of the Civil War. 4 million of those were slaves. The majority, if not all, of those slaves were opposed to slavery.

As for the remaining 28 million, 23 states were opposed to slavery. 21 million of those were living in the Union states. The remaining 7 million were Southern white people.

That's roughly 24-25 million -- depending on the opinions at the time -- people in favor of abolishing slavery. 

So no, the majority were in fact the people who were right. 

Did I say it was perfect? No. I deny your assertion that DAII's storyline is weaker than Origins, which isnt the same thing at all. I have my problems with DAII, same as anyone. Story is not one of them. Or rather, I do not have the same issues with the story that you do. I think it works very well, I find it to be highly literary, and yes, innovative.

The concept of the story was stronger than Origins. The execution however is what makes the story weaker than Origins.

[Plaintiff]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It's not even comparable even on that.

there were roughly 32 million people living in the US at the time of the Civil War. 4 million of those were slaves. The majority, if not all, of those slaves were opposed to slavery.

As for the remaining 28 million, 23 states were opposed to slavery. 21 million of those were living in the Union states. The remaining 7 million were Southern white people.

That's roughly 24-25 million -- depending on the opinions at the time -- people in favor of abolishing slavery. 

So no, the majority were in fact the people who were right. 

I wasn't just referring to the United States; many societies were cool with slavery at differnet time periods. And obviously the majority at the time of the Civil War was not always the majority, or else there wouldn't have been any slavery to fight about.

But this is getting way off track, I didn't make the comment because i wanted to debate about slavery. I really don't want to.

The concept of the story was stronger than Origins. The execution however is what makes the story weaker than Origins.

You can keep saying that, but I'm going to keep disagreeing.

[alex90c]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It's not even comparable even on that.

there were roughly 32 million people living in the US at the time of the Civil War. 4 million of those were slaves. The majority, if not all, of those slaves were opposed to slavery.

As for the remaining 28 million, 23 states were opposed to slavery. 21 million of those were living in the Union states. The remaining 7 million were Southern white people.

That's roughly 24-25 million -- depending on the opinions at the time -- people in favor of abolishing slavery. 

So no, the majority were in fact the people who were right. 

I wasn't just referring to the United States; many societies were cool with slavery at differnet time periods. And obviously the majority at the time of the Civil War was not always the majority, or else there wouldn't have been any slavery to fight about.

But this is getting way off track, I didn't make the comment because i wanted to debate about slavery. I really don't want to.

The concept of the story was stronger than Origins. The execution however is what makes the story weaker than Origins.

You can keep saying that, but I'm going to keep disagreeing.

How the hell was it executed well at all?

[Heimdall]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I wasn't comparing the situations at all. I'm well aware that the actual issues are irrelevent to video games. I was merely making the point that just because a majority likes something doesn't mean it should be so. My intention was not to say that disliking DA2 is equivalent to suppressing minority rights.

It's not even comparable even on that.

there were roughly 32 million people living in the US at the time of the Civil War. 4 million of those were slaves. The majority, if not all, of those slaves were opposed to slavery.

As for the remaining 28 million, 23 states were opposed to slavery. 21 million of those were living in the Union states. The remaining 7 million were Southern white people.

That's roughly 24-25 million -- depending on the opinions at the time -- people in favor of abolishing slavery. 

So no, the majority were in fact the people who were right.

Well, actually the numbers weren't so clear cut.  Of the people that opposed slavery there was big divide over those who wanted total abolishment and those that merely wanted to stop the spread of slavery outside the South (Often for economic reasons, slaves competed with paid laborers and the laborers didn't like it, especially when expanding west).  Hell, before the civil war Abraham Lincoln was in favor of merely isolating slavery to the south (though he believed that if it was isolated it would die out on it's own peacefully).

[TEWR]

Lithuasil wrote...



No you're roleplaying isn't wrong - your Hawke puts honor or ideals before reason, making him "unreasonable".

The law is the law. My Hawke put that above anything else. The Qunari may be a threat in the future, but it isn't Hawke's place to exacerbate the situation and create a war with the people who dominated most of Thedas.

My Hawke was operating under the ideas of truth, justice, law, honor, ideals and the fact that the Arishok is the friggin' general of the Antaam, the military of the Qunari.

It's not wise to provoke the guy who's responsible for military strategies. Some may call that cowardice, but he wasn't saying he wouldn't fight the Qunari if need be. He's just saying he's not going to pin crimes that they didn't commit on them or provoke them into definitely launching an attack. And besides, the Arishok said he didn't come equipped to indoctrinate. It was never his intention to invade Kirkwall, mainly because his numbers were in the hundreds and dwindling due to the deaths and defections.

Add into that the fact that Tevinter wasn't even able to dent the Qunari stationed on Seheron, and it's not wise to create a war with the people who -- as I said earlier -- dominated the majority of Thedas before retreating due to the death toll induced on the Rivaini populus.

My Hawke was acting on reason.

 



Fair point in case of the expidition - Not so much the Qunari invasion though.

That wasn't even supposed to be associated with the Qunari. It's talking about the expedition and the Mage-Templar conflict, where one can see Meredith or the Mages as the threat to Kirkwall.

The money makes hawke hard enough to touch, that she won't be ratted out by some beggar. It doesn't make her templar proof, especially not when actively engaging templars in combat.

Hawke has both plot armor and the support of the City Guard. Sure he's not invincible against the Templars that are either fanatical or rogue -- as in the two cases in Act II -- but there would be nothing to link him to the crimes.

There are no video cameras and wealth trumps everything in this time period.

See my signature - I can't do a storymod, but I can atleast try and use my own trade to explore how things could or should have gone down, if the quality of the story had been the primary concern. (In my humble opinion that is)

The dossier? I'll give it a look-see

My own fanfic is going to have Hawke be a Mage Hawke that goes to Kirkwall with the intent of living a normal life, but quickly sees in his first 4 years that Meredith, her more favored Templars, and her measures are going to be a huge threat to Kirkwall. He's going to work with the Mage Underground to try to get her ousted and become its Champion, their Saviour. He'll fail in succeeding, but more mages will be free.

Templar authority will weaken in the years after the Qunari incident, but Meredith's measures will become stricter -- like the game -- and he'll continue his efforts against her. The war however will not be started by Hawke, though.

That's only a brief summary. I kinda don't want to give too much of it away

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 22 décembre 2011 - 05:43 .

[Heimdall]

@The Ethereal Writer Redux

I agree with you about the Qunari, but I'd just like to make an addition.

The only Hawke that antagonizes the Qunari is one that has no interest in a peaceful solution.  At least, my Hawke was hoping that the situation could be resolved and the Qunari leave without bloodshed.

[TEWR]

EDIT: never mind. I'm not going to discuss something I don't remember very well from my historical studies in school

But this is getting way off track, I didn't make the comment because i wanted to debate about slavery. I really don't want to.

Fair enough.

The concept of the story was stronger than Origins. The execution however is what makes the story weaker than Origins.

You can keep saying that, but I'm going to keep disagreeing.

We were promised a story by both devs and marketing where our choices would shape the story. That means the concept was for choices to have different consequences.

The game didn't do that. Thus it is a flawed execution in giving the player choices, whether illusive or realistic. And in DAII's case, the majority should've been realistic and not illusive.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 22 décembre 2011 - 04:38 .

[TEWR]

Lord Aesir wrote...

@The Ethereal Writer Redux

I agree with you about the Qunari, but I'd just like to make an addition.

The only Hawke that antagonizes the Qunari is one that has no interest in a peaceful solution.  At least, my Hawke was hoping that the situation could be resolved and the Qunari leave without bloodshed.

True. My Hawke figured that Isabela was involved with why they were in Kirkwall -- since Corff told him that the Qunari ship was engaging another when it shipwrecked -- and figured the relic she was seeking was thus a Qunari relic.

When she said she felt the sting of Qunari powder when meeting Javaris, Hawke knew he was right.

Still, he was hoping he could find it and give it to them so they'd leave peacefully.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 22 décembre 2011 - 04:38 .

[lobi]

My Hawk was not antagonistic, simply straight forward. It was impossible to be antagonistic because of the writing locking the story down. Hence the respect achievment was earned on first play through. I was onto Isabella also, but the writers were obviously of the opinion that locking that out until a big reveal later on would force me to be surprised despite myself. When all I really wanted was to be rid of her. I didn't like that.

Modifié par lobi, 22 décembre 2011 - 04:53 .

[MerinTB]

Short of me loving Dead Island, most of that list sounds right to me. *shrug* I don't personally have to agree with a list maker's tastes to understand his or her reasoning.

Sounds like those here complaining about the list really are upset the list isn't "their own" list.

Well, unless you write your own article, it won't be your list.

[Lithuasil]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


The law is the law. My Hawke put that above anything else. The Qunari may be a threat in the future, but it isn't Hawke's place to exacerbate the situation and create a war with the people who dominated most of Thedas.

Qunari Snip

Depending on your personal philosophy, anyone putting a single thing above anything else undisputed, acts unreasonable. Aside from that, we'll have to agree to disagree here, due to our differing views on the Qun - to me, and subsequently my various flavors of Hawke, the Qunari are a universal Threat - and as such, action *needs* to be taken. The templars can be bad, but they have their uses, they have good sides (and they're people). I might not want to be taken by them (and indeed want to avoid their attention), but I don't need to murder each of them I see on the street.
The Qunari on the other hand, are no better (arguably worse) then the Darkspawn during a blight, and subsequently need to be put down. If you'll excuse the comparison - I can live with someone in the neighborhood, that I have to avoid due to his radical views. I can't live with a pack of rabid cannibals in the neighborhood, who's stated goal is to eat everyone.

 


That wasn't even supposed to be associated with the Qunari. It's talking about the expedition and the Mage-Templar conflict, where one can see Meredith or the Mages as the threat to Kirkwall.

I didn't mean to associate it - the point I was getting at, was that most of the dealings with the Qunari are reactive, and happening fairly quickly - I always imagined the excalations (and the entirety of act II, beginning - All that remains) to go down in a matter of days, not weeks - leaving Hawke with her hands full or in grief, but either way not capable of stirring up big things. (May just be me though)

Hawke has both plot armor and the support of the City Guard. Sure he's not invincible against the Templars that are either fanatical or rogue -- as in the two cases in Act II -- but there would be nothing to link him to the crimes.

There are no video cameras and wealth trumps everything in this time period.

Bad things happen when characters become aware of their impenetrable plotarmor (see Tallis). I also really didn't get that "now I can go fling spells at templars in bright daylight, screw the chantry I have money" vibe - But I do also get to that point in most Pnp - campaigns, my characters displaying a rather unheroic sense of self-preservation.

The dossier? I'll give it a look-see

Please do 

[jds1bio]

Everyone, I appreciate the (lengthy) refreshers on what DA2 did and didn't do right, and whether the majority of people who played the game didn't like it, etc.

But the issues, implications, social pressures, and realities involved in a majority opposition to slavery are far different than liking or disliking a videogame.

Also - innovations, like flowers, sometimes take time to germinate and blossom. I've had daffodils that wouldn't flower for years before suddenly blossoming again. Microsoft failed four times to win the public over with Excel before finally overtaking Lotus-123. So what is disappointing now may give rise to something enjoyable in the future, if the conditions are right.

And remember, even the venerated iPhone has managed to disappoint people more than once during its relatively short product lifecycle. And even though a majority may have been disappointed at one time or another, a majority still own, use, and enjoy the phones anyway. I think this will continue to be the case with the Dragon Age series also.

[TEWR]

Lithuasil wrote...



Depending on your personal philosophy, anyone putting a single thing above anything else undisputed, acts unreasonable.

Fair enough. I didn't mean for my Hawke to come off as a fanatic of the law. I just want to say that while he sees the Qunari as a danger to Thedas -- at least in their current philosophy -- he is not going to attack them until they become a danger. They may be dangerous, but he's not going to consider them to be such just for simply being.

Aside from that, we'll have to agree to disagree here, due to our differing views on the Qun - to me, and subsequently my various flavors of Hawke, the Qunari are a universal Threat - and as such, action *needs* to be taken.

I see the Qun as being a philosophy worth turning to, if it were subject to reform of a few key areas:

1) The physical treatment of mages
2) The hunting of Tal-Vashoth simply for being Tal-Vashoth, instead of hunting Tal-Vashoth like Salit
3) The need to forcibly convert everyone simply because they don't believe in the Qun, which incidentally is a problem with the Chantry as well.

Were those areas to change, I would have no problem playing a character that wanted to convert to the Qun, were it my choice.

The templars can be bad, but they have their uses, they have good sides (and they're people). I might not want to be taken by them (and indeed want to avoid their attention), but I don't need to murder each of them I see on the street.

Serial rapists/murderers are people too. But they get punishment for their crimes as well. The same thing applies to Templars like Alrik and Kerras, especially if Bethany is in the Circle with them. I wouldn't want Bethany to be living there with people like that.

I don't want to kill every Templar for being a Templar. But I do want to support the Mage Underground. This doesn't always mean Templars have to die. Were stealth in DAII's base game, you could sneak mages out. And if you get caught then combat does ensue. Or you could stop lyrium supply shipments. Or escorting escaped mages to certain places and facing Darkspawn, or wildlife, or bandits. Or getting caught by Templars in a failed attempt to free some mages and then simply sneaking out to escape.

There wouldn't always have to be Templar deaths in the Mage Underground quests I'm talking about having. Of course sometimes Templars would have to die in some of these quests. But it wouldn't always have to be "Kill the Templars!!"

But the thing about Kirkwall is that whatever good Templars there are in Kirkwall's Circle are very scarce. And they're largely anti-Meredith and anti-Meredith's cronies.

The Qunari on the other hand, are no better (arguably worse) then the Darkspawn during a blight, and subsequently need to be put down. If you'll excuse the comparison - I can live with someone in the neighborhood, that I have to avoid due to his radical views. I can't live with a pack of rabid cannibals in the neighborhood, who's stated goal is to eat everyone.

Eh, it would be better to say you can live in a neighborhood with a person who just has radical views, but you can't live in the neighborhood of that person if he kidnaps you and tries to convert you. 

And while they have a different philosophy, they are still people. Just like Muslims are still people despite the fact that they will stone their women for adultery.

Just like African Americans are still people despite the fact that a couple hundred years ago America considered them to be 3/5 of a person.

 


I didn't mean to associate it - the point I was getting at, was that most of the dealings with the Qunari are reactive, and happening fairly quickly - I always imagined the excalations (and the entirety of act II, beginning - All that remains) to go down in a matter of days, not weeks - leaving Hawke with her hands full or in grief, but either way not capable of stirring up big things. (May just be me though)

I think it's just you. There's too much that happens in Act II -- and possibly Fool's Gold, which involves going a week underground back to the Deep Roads and then another week to get back (source: Bartrand's info) -- for it to happen in a few days.

Also, I don't mind Hawke reacting to being summoned by the Arishok. I don't expect Hawke to be psychic and know the Arishok wants to see him.

Though I have to admit that he should've seen the White Lily Killer as a threat to his mom and launched an investigation into finding said killer. There was certainly enough evidence from The First Sacrifice in Act I to launch one then, especially into the place where the bones were found.

As I said, Hawke should've been largely proactive with a few instances of reactivity.

Bad things happen when characters become aware of their impenetrable plotarmor (see Tallis). I also really didn't get that "now I can go fling spells at templars in bright daylight, screw the chantry I have money" vibe - But I do also get to that point in most Pnp - campaigns, my characters displaying a rather unheroic sense of self-preservation.

Tallis was made plot special in a bad way. You are thinking that Hawke must say "I'm plot protected!" or the quests must be so horribly designed so that he is obviously plot special.

That's not the case and it's not what my point was. Tallis could've still walked away with the scroll in a believable way.

[TheRealJayDee]

Ukki wrote...

AngryFrozenWater, The Ethereal Writer Redux, Fast Jimmy, Thanks guys for bringing out the issues which are important. Excellent comments.

I second this. Great posts, guys!

[jbrand2002uk]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...


Making it known or not - any action taken poses a risk,

you could say this about anything the game did really. Hawke fights against the Chantry elements trying to create a war with the Qunari, and could thus be seen as a Qunari sympathizer by more than just the Faithful. He would then be considered a heretic, persecuted, and possibly hunted.

Or how he goes into the Deep Roads and fights a swarm of Darkspawn in the hopes that he'll find treasure.

There's plenty of instances in the game where Hawke takes action that has risk. That's why there are these sayings:

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Fortune favors the bold

No risk, no reward.

What was he supposed to do, sit on his laurels the entire game? That certainly would make for an interesting game! [/sarcasm]

Sorry, my snarkiness is approaching dangerous levels.

But you could also probably say it about things the Warden did. Maybe. But I know you can definitely say it about DAII.

EDIT: for an even better example, look at the American Revolution where the colonies stood up against the British Empire. Should they not have openly defied the British Empire?

EDIT 2: What I'm saying was said best between two nobles in the game:

Noble 1: Nobles protecting mages? That's a recipe for disaster! Why would anyone want to do that?
Noble 2: Why does anyone take risks? To protect an ideal.

and from the perspective of someone who's been on the run their entire life, the prospect of success of such actions is laughable. The defiance of the templars in Kirkwall is a formerly unknown precedent. 
No one this side of mother Therese would willfully pick up the fight if they can help it.

I would. other people would. That you wouldn't doesn't mean it shouldn't have been in the game.

You forgot the SAS motto "HE WHO DARES WINS"

[Sinuphro]

ultimately; da2 is trash

[DreamwareStudio]

ImoenBaby wrote...

Icinix wrote...

DA2 was this years most disappointing game in my list.

I think its right to be on that list - as the year has gone and seen some awesome releases one after the other - it has cemented itself quite nicely on that list too.

Indeed. It was a sad letdown for this long-time Bioware fan, and it left me wary.

I look forward to the future...with caution.

Like your name...nice kudos to Baldur's Gate series.

[Rann]

I expected to see it on the list, and would have been very surprised if it hadn't been called out.  I probably wouldn't have made it second-only-to-Duke-Nukem bad, but there it is.  DLCs have made it better, but frankly the game deserved to be razzed.  (This was really brought home forme as I worked through DA:O again over the past couple of weeks, with me saying to myself every few minutes, "Oh, yeah, *that's* what it's all about.")
Nice to see the Ars Technica article with Dr. Ray stating that DA3 would take a middle ground and have a bit more world exploring.  Hopefully, Bioware can avoid getting on the list again.