203 réponses à ce sujet

[Gotholhorakh]

Gaiden96 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The phrase goes "throwing good money after bad".

Certainly not. I hated the changes made to gameplay for DA2, which ruined the game. Like others here, I considered it a waste of money.

That said, I did watch to see if the DLC fixed any important issues, I might have bought it then. It didn't, so I didn't.

I guess solid writing, tactical combat, decent item pick-ups and new environments aren't important issues that needed to be fixed. Some people...

Yeah, they all needed to be fixed. They weren't fixed, and that wasn't my whole list.

Even if they were fixed, I'm not sure "1/3rd of the problems fixed" is a compelling reason to fork out more money for any mentally competent person, so "some people" my rather lovely arse.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 12 janvier 2012 - 04:09 .

[TEWR]

Mistakes are made.
I didn't say the DLC's were perfect, I said they fixed issues the main game had. Tallis keeping the scroll no matter what, IS a mistake, but it didn't ruin a decent piece of content,  it was simply a plot-point that could have been worked on a bit more.

Mistakes like those were exactly DAII's problem in the first place for much of the people disappointed with the game.

To continue making those mistakes shows a clear lack of recognition of those complaints. They knew what they were doing. All they needed was a few more weeks at most (probably really only needed 7-11 days to make a decent anti-Qunari ending). They continued with their plan and continued with their mistakes.

That's really not casting Bioware in a good light.

Combat is tactical in the DLC's in the sense that you have to identify more dangerous targets and take them out so you can concentrate on dealing with the rest (apart from the ghasts which were wave-based, but it made sense for the type of enemy they were).

I've just never found any of the combat in the DA games tactical. It doesn't fit my personal definition of what is tactical.

I understand I am only speaking for myself though.

Last point you will have to forgive me but, it is a purely personal opinion and not really valid way to make a statement on something you yourself, consider a mistake, as a lot of people liked Hawke's dialogue, involvement and character development in the DLC (in Legacy anyway).

I liked Legacy. I didn't mind the ending there as it made sense from a "What Hawke knows and what the player knows" perspective. It wasn't required that he be proactive and take action there. It would've been welcome, but it wasn't required.

In MotA it was required because what Hawke knows and what the player knows are the same thing.

I just see MotA as a few steps backwards. New environments are nice, but if the DLC becomes ruined -- which MotA did -- because the only option that makes sense is to play someone that isn't anti-Qunari, then the DLC loses much of its luster because you're basically forced to play that type of person.

Because if you just pick the anti-Qunari option, you'll be disappointed every time with how it turned out.

And in a way, this kinda makes it harder for people that play anti-Qunari people in the main game to continue doing so in subsequent playthroughs, if you catch my drift.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 janvier 2012 - 05:28 .

[Avilia]

I have the SE preorder stuff but otherwise just the armour DLC's and Legacy. I lost interest in DA2 before Legacy, but it seemed like it would be interesting so I tried it. I liked Legacy, I don't wish to imply otherwise, but it wasn't enough to perk my interest in further outings in that world.

[Archmage Silvery]

casa de morte wrote...

No, I don't plan on it either. Dragon Age is dead to me. I spent 60 bucks and ended up with garbage. Then Bioware and EA were nice enough to jack the prices up on their DLC that would "fix" some of the issues. I am not going to pay more for a crappy game just to improve it a little bit. I even passed up the sale on Legacy a week or so ago.

You know what DLC I would buy, because I am so impressed with the game, yep Horse armor (if it were released) for Skyrim.

Hey maybe 8 months after release I will pick up DA3 for 20 bucks like DA2 is currently selling for. If only I had waited.

Skyrim has a good modding scene, so I expect that PC players won't have to buy that many DLC packs...

[Deadmac]

Avilia wrote...
I have the SE preorder stuff but otherwise just the armour DLC's and Legacy. I lost interest in DA2 before Legacy, but it seemed like it would be interesting so I tried it. I liked Legacy, I don't wish to imply otherwise, but it wasn't enough to perk my interest in further outings in that world.

I just bought "Legacy". Since I bought 1600 BioWare points, I will wait to see what happens before I spend the last 800.

While looking up the dlc's details on wiki, I just noticed the gear you get in "Legacy" is horrible.

Modifié par Deadmac, 13 janvier 2012 - 10:44 .

[Wolf]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Mistakes are made.
I didn't say the DLC's were perfect, I said they fixed issues the main game had. Tallis keeping the scroll no matter what, IS a mistake, but it didn't ruin a decent piece of content,  it was simply a plot-point that could have been worked on a bit more.

Mistakes like those were exactly DAII's problem in the first place for much of the people disappointed with the game.

To continue making those mistakes shows a clear lack of recognition of those complaints. They knew what they were doing. All they needed was a few more weeks at most (probably only 7-11 days). They continued with their plan and continued with their mistakes.

That's really not casting Bioware in a good light.

Combat is tactical in the DLC's in the sense that you have to identify more dangerous targets and take them out so you can concentrate on dealing with the rest (apart from the ghasts which were wave-based, but it made sense for the type of enemy they were).

I've just never found any of the combat in the DA games tactical. It doesn't fit my personal definition of what is tactical.

I understand I am only speaking for myself though.

Last point you will have to forgive me but, it is a purely personal opinion and not really valid way to make a statement on something you yourself, consider a mistake, as a lot of people liked Hawke's dialogue, involvement and character development in the DLC (in Legacy anyway).

I liked Legacy. I didn't mind the ending there as it made sense from a "What Hawke knows and what the player knows" perspective. It wasn't required that he be proactive and take action there. It would've been welcome, but it wasn't required.

In MotA it was required because what Hawke knows and what the player knows are the same thing.

I just see MotA as a few steps backwards. New environments are nice, but if the DLC becomes ruined -- which MotA did -- because the only option that makes sense is to play someone that isn't anti-Qunari, then the DLC loses much of its luster because you're basically forced to play that type of person.

Because if you just pick the anti-Qunari option, you'll be disappointed every time with how it turned out.

And in a way, this kinda makes it harder for people that play anti-Qunari people in the main game to continue doing so in subsequent playthroughs, if you catch my drift.

I get it. To be honest, I saw MotA as a more of a "trek through the mountains with friends" than an actual story-driven piece of content.

But getting back to the actual subject...
 
I, myself, am not anti-Qunari, but I do understand how somebody who is vehemntly opposed to their ideology would be upset at the lack of choice reflected in that final moment of the DLC. 

At the time, my initial thought was that they might make that a plot-point in future content (like an expansion or DA III) but when I looked back at what that lack of choice meant I was dissapointed regarding that specific situation. 

Even though it didn't ruin it for me, a lot of others would disagree, and I get that. What I don't get is how people, even if dissapointed in that final choice, would overlook all the things that MotA did right.

Bringing the sense of exploration (or part of it) I felt while playing DA:O was incredible and something I was not expecting, going into the content. Dialogue that felt like a throwback to the same game, only my character was active in said dialogue. 

I understand people's complaints about it, i just hope we can all get what we want eventually.

It's just my opinion though, no need to go spreading it around...

Modifié par Gaiden96, 14 janvier 2012 - 01:35 .

[TEWR]

I get it. To be honest, I saw MotA as a more of a "trek through the mountains with friends" than an actual story-driven piece of content.

But getting back to the actual subject...
 
I, myself, am not anti-Qunari, but I do understand how somebody who is vehemntly opposed to their ideology would be upset at the lack of choice reflected in that final moment of the DLC. 

At the time, my initial thought was that they might make that a plot-point in future content (like an expansion or DA III) but when I looked back at what that lack of choice meant I was dissapointed regarding that specific situation. 

Even though it didn't ruin it for me, a lot of others would disagree, and I get that. What I don't get is how people, even if dissapointed in that final choice, would overlook all the things that MotA did right.

Bringing the sense of exploration (or part of it) I felt while playing DA:O was incredible and something I was not expecting, going into the content. Dialogue that felt like a throwback to the same game, only my character was active in said dialogue. 

I understand people's complaints about it, i just hope we can all get what we want eventually.

I'm not anti-Qunari either. I've only stumbled across it once in all of my MotA playthroughs -- 3 to be precise, partly due to trying to ascertain the cause of the PS3 save corruption bug -- due to my controller malfunctioning slightly.

I don't dismiss what the DLC did do right, but I can't consider the DLC a success because of that horrible instance at the end.

Yes the DLC did do things right, and that's great. But all of those things don't mean as much when there's one glaring mistake that's evident within the DLC.

And until they do fix the issues regarding believable choices and appropriate consequences, Bioware is not looking good imo.

And honestly, there were ways they could've done something appropriate for that choice. Just see what I said on these threads:

http://social.biowar...ndex/8033475/13

http://social.biowar...index/8950836/1

I'm not saying my ideas should've been used, but I've usually been the one to post ideal scenarios for how things could've happened at MotA's ending so that's why I'm linking to my ideas.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 janvier 2012 - 02:16 .

[Jaws_Victim]

To answer the original posters question, I did not purchase ANY DLC with Dragon Age II. And I bought every single one in Origins, and didn't care for the Darkspawn Chronicles or Witch Hunt. I will NEVER purchase another Bioware title without renting it first or buying it secondhand, or even waiting until it hits the bargain bin. I feel the same way about Square Enix games too, after FFXIII. The RPG genre failed me in every way in 2011, and I'll be keeping my money until it decides to change.

[Wolf]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'm not anti-Qunari either. I've only stumbled across it once in all of my MotA playthroughs -- 3 to be precise, partly due to trying to ascertain the cause of the PS3 save corruption bug -- due to my controller malfunctioning slightly.

I don't dismiss what the DLC did do right, but I can't consider the DLC a success because of that horrible instance at the end.

Yes the DLC did do things right, and that's great. But all of those things don't mean as much when there's one glaring mistake that's evident within the DLC.

And until they do fix the issues regarding believable choices and appropriate consequences, Bioware is not looking good imo.

And honestly, there were ways they could've done something appropriate for that choice. Just see what I said on these threads:

http://social.biowar...ndex/8033475/13

http://social.biowar...index/8950836/1

I'm not saying my ideas should've been used, but I've usually been the one to post ideal scenarios for how things could've happened at MotA's ending so that's why I'm linking to my ideas.

Taking the scroll and then being forced to fight would have made things frustrating IMO.

Imagine if you come to like Tallis as a character during the DLC, but later on when you find out she is actually a member of the Ben-Hassrath and you don't want to let that scroll leave with her. That might have influenced your decision as a player and subsequently created a situation where you were still anti-Qunari but you liked Tallis' character and did not wish to see her harmed. 

Not a perfect situation, I agree, or a very common one at that, but it would have been cool to see.

A shame it is a black-and-white case there. 

[Yrkoon]

Plaintiff wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Archmage Silvery wrote...

Excluding the "free" DLC packs that you could get with the Signature Edition/New Game Purchase/Pre-Orders, did you actually buy any DLC packs for Dragon Age II?

I didn't buy any. And I bought everything except the Darkspawn Chronicles and Leliana's Song for Origins. Dragon Age II just wasn't that interesting to me.

Discuss!

Nope. The game was so bad and mediocre, beyond all hope, that it completely killed my interest in acquiring any expansions. I also preordered the Signature edition.

After playing Skyrim, the pain is even worse.

DA2 has ranked in all the "most dissapointing games of 20ll" lists I've read. I don't see this polarization the developers talk of. I see 90% of the fanbase annoyed and 10% are happy. That is not polarization, the overwhelming majority disliked the game -and with good reason-, period.

The overwhelming majority once supported slavery.

Just sayin'.

Hahaha

No,   you can't compare  the once profound support for a socio-political issue that has been practiced  for almost as long as mankind has existed, to.... how well a video game was received.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 14 janvier 2012 - 11:03 .

[Archmage Silvery]

Jaws_Victim wrote...

To answer the original posters question, I did not purchase ANY DLC with Dragon Age II. And I bought every single one in Origins, and didn't care for the Darkspawn Chronicles or Witch Hunt. I will NEVER purchase another Bioware title without renting it first or buying it secondhand, or even waiting until it hits the bargain bin. I feel the same way about Square Enix games too, after FFXIII. The RPG genre failed me in every way in 2011, and I'll be keeping my money until it decides to change.

I thought that Witch Hunt was decent enough... I skipped Leliana's Song though.

[TEWR]

Gaiden96 wrote...

Taking the scroll and then being forced to fight would have made things frustrating IMO.

Imagine if you come to like Tallis as a character during the DLC, but later on when you find out she is actually a member of the Ben-Hassrath and you don't want to let that scroll leave with her. That might have influenced your decision as a player and subsequently created a situation where you were still anti-Qunari but you liked Tallis' character and did not wish to see her harmed. 

As a Qunari though, she'd be required to protect the item whatever the cost since it was her main objective, even if it was her own personal mission and not a sanctioned Qunari one. Remember how the Arishok said that if the recipe for blackpowder were at risk all of the Qunari would defend it to the death? Tallis would do the same thing here.

However, she could say that if Hawke really wants it he'll have to fight her for it, to which the player can either choose "Then we fight" or "Fine. Leave. I don't want you hurt, even if I want that scroll"

And then it goes into the fight scenario I described, but she wouldn't actually be fought to the death. After a while, she'd just retreat with the scroll.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:24 .

[Wolf]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

As a Qunari though, she'd be required to protect the item whatever the cost since it was her main objective, even if it was her own personal mission and not a sanctioned Qunari one. Remember how the Arishok said that if the recipe for blackpowder were at risk all of the Qunari would defend it to the death? Tallis would do the same thing here.

However, she could say that if Hawke really wants it he'll have to fight her for it, to which the player can either choose "Then we fight" or "Fine. Leave. I don't want you hurt, even if I want that scroll"

And then it goes into the fight scenario I described, but she wouldn't actually be fought to the death. After a while, she'd just retreat with the scroll.

Qunari aren't really the "retreating-type", although I suppose if you consider the Ben-Hassrath work diferently it would make sense.

[TEWR]

Gaiden96 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

As a Qunari though, she'd be required to protect the item whatever the cost since it was her main objective, even if it was her own personal mission and not a sanctioned Qunari one. Remember how the Arishok said that if the recipe for blackpowder were at risk all of the Qunari would defend it to the death? Tallis would do the same thing here.

However, she could say that if Hawke really wants it he'll have to fight her for it, to which the player can either choose "Then we fight" or "Fine. Leave. I don't want you hurt, even if I want that scroll"

And then it goes into the fight scenario I described, but she wouldn't actually be fought to the death. After a while, she'd just retreat with the scroll.

Qunari aren't really the "retreating-type", although I suppose if you consider the Ben-Hassrath work diferently it would make sense.

I think Tallis would consider this a point where she should retreat, given that she's not a hardcore Qunari and has trouble finding the certainty within the Qun and went to a lot of trouble to get the scroll. So while it might not be something Qunari would do, Tallis -- the Tallis we know and not all of the Tallis in the Qun -- just might do it.

And I too imagine that the Ben-Hassrath would consider retreat when necessary.

[Deadmac]

Before I played through "Legacy", I thought the gear looked cheesy. I was wrong.

Buy it. "Legacy" is well worth the money.

[Brea]

I actually just finished Legacy and MotA.

Legacy was very insightful. I wish it would have been an original part of DA2, since (for me) it actually made Hawke and his/her family more valuable to the overall plot. I kind of feel cheated that I had to pay more to make my character not seem worthless.

MotA was fun, but not worth $10 in my opinion. :|

[barryl89]

No. Not buying. And I defended the main game vigorously. Thats because DA:O addons were garbage. Not due to my opinion of the game. I'll definitely buy DA3 if it comes out though.

[Wyndham711]

I bought the much hyped Legacy, was disappointed. Hence, I watched the MotA on youtube, and was even more disappointed, though simultaneously glad that I hadn't invested anything but time.

[Silfren]

I'd like to see more games within the DA franchise, so I make it a point to buy all the DLCs.  Games take money, after all. 

That said, I have to admit I like the item packs more for the tidbits of lore they bring to the table, and occasionally the unique weapon and armor graphics that just look so much nicer than most of the base-game items.  As far as the story DLCs, I appreciated Legacy and Mark of the Assassin both for the added depth to Hawke's story and the fun little bits of party banter.  Any DLC that enhances the characters is great as far as I'm concerned. 

I really didn't understand Legacy, however.  I like the deeper look into Hawke's family, but I really didn't understand the kick-off to the quest.  We see Carta personnel attacking Hawke left and right throughout the game, but I wish there had been more of an explanation than some pure dialogue in the intro.  For example, when you trigger the quest, have some cutscenes depicting the inexplicable attacks, and a meeting between Hawke and Varric wherein Hawke determines to get to the bottom of it all, and sets Varric to the task.  Then the actual opening we get.  There just should have been a smoother lead-in to the whole adventure.  Perhaps there could have been a way for those players who, having the quest option active in their game, get some minor cut scenes that players can either ignore or follow-up on by triggering the DLC, in order to make it more organically part of the main game.  

Beyond the choppy, awkward intro, I really didn't understand the point of the quest as it didn't seem to have much relationship to the overall campaign of either Hawke's rise as Champion or the main story's primary conflicts.  My favorite part of the entire DLC was the endscene and the variations available depending on the makeup of Hawke's family when the quest is played.

It's for that reason that I found Mark of the Assassin a more compelling quest.  The party banters, again, add more depth to the characters and their interpersonal relationships between each other, and there's definitely some replay value based on certain choices, as well as when you play the DLC.  But it also adds to the overall conflict within the game's larger story, and so seems to fit better.  Certainly it adds something, albeit not much, but something anyway, to the claim of Hawke's importance as being at the center of all the eventual chaos.

That's the kind of DLC I'd like to see in the future, or an expansion.  Some extra content that actually makes it possible to believe that Hawke was as singularly important to the powderkeg of Kirkwall as Cassandra believed* (and Bioware claimed with that whole Rise to Power shtick).



*Because come on!  Based on what the game depicts, and the events chronicled in Asunder, Hawke isn't the mover and shaker setting events in motion, but a bystander who only participates in events after they are set in motion, and certainly doesn't have any great impact on the outcome of those events.  It's ludicrous for Cassandra to believe that any one person was so integral to the mage/templar conflict that they might actually be capable of stemming the tide well after the fact, and especially to believe that Hawke would be such a person.

[Plaintiff]

Yrkoon wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Archmage Silvery wrote...

Excluding the "free" DLC packs that you could get with the Signature Edition/New Game Purchase/Pre-Orders, did you actually buy any DLC packs for Dragon Age II?

I didn't buy any. And I bought everything except the Darkspawn Chronicles and Leliana's Song for Origins. Dragon Age II just wasn't that interesting to me.

Discuss!

Nope. The game was so bad and mediocre, beyond all hope, that it completely killed my interest in acquiring any expansions. I also preordered the Signature edition.

After playing Skyrim, the pain is even worse.

DA2 has ranked in all the "most dissapointing games of 20ll" lists I've read. I don't see this polarization the developers talk of. I see 90% of the fanbase annoyed and 10% are happy. That is not polarization, the overwhelming majority disliked the game -and with good reason-, period.

The overwhelming majority once supported slavery.

Just sayin'.

Hahaha

No,   you can't compare  the once profound support for a socio-political issue that has been practiced  for almost as long as mankind has existed, to.... how well a video game was received.

That's not what I did. I already explained. Try to keep up. Also, reading comprehension. Get some.

[Curlain]

No, I'm afraid I didn't. I found the core game deeply disappointing and I had not desire or motivation to spend more money on it. No matter how well a later DLC may or may not have improved aspects of the game it would still be based around the original game, which was an unengaging and lacklustre experience for me for reasons I gave at the time. So no, the game was just wasn't good to me, so I would never spend more money on it.

[Yrkoon]

Plaintiff wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Shadowbanner wrote...

Archmage Silvery wrote...

Excluding the "free" DLC packs that you could get with the Signature Edition/New Game Purchase/Pre-Orders, did you actually buy any DLC packs for Dragon Age II?

I didn't buy any. And I bought everything except the Darkspawn Chronicles and Leliana's Song for Origins. Dragon Age II just wasn't that interesting to me.

Discuss!

Nope. The game was so bad and mediocre, beyond all hope, that it completely killed my interest in acquiring any expansions. I also preordered the Signature edition.

After playing Skyrim, the pain is even worse.

DA2 has ranked in all the "most dissapointing games of 20ll" lists I've read. I don't see this polarization the developers talk of. I see 90% of the fanbase annoyed and 10% are happy. That is not polarization, the overwhelming majority disliked the game -and with good reason-, period.

The overwhelming majority once supported slavery.

Just sayin'.

Hahaha

No,   you can't compare  the once profound support for a socio-political issue that has been practiced  for almost as long as mankind has existed, to.... how well a video game was received.

That's not what I did. I already explained. Try to keep up. Also, reading comprehension. Get some.

 It's precisely what you said.  I preserved the entire quote pyramid   so everyone  else can  see your absurd attempt  at a  counter  with their own eyes.


In the future, please try to make comparisons that are  a bit less asinine than the one you just made.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 15 janvier 2012 - 09:03 .

[Sylvianus]

Legacy, was great. They really worked on this dlc. MotA, I didn't like it, disappointed, not worth $10 in my opinion.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 15 janvier 2012 - 10:51 .

[DBZMagus]

The last DLC I will ever buy from Bioware was Witch Hunt. Haven't given them another penny for DLC since and never will again.