366 réponses à ce sujet

[drvaughn1999]

Skyrim the best of 2011, DA2 one of the worst games ever, not just 2011.

[Masako52]

drvaughn1999 wrote...

Skyrim the best of 2011, DA2 one of the worst games ever, not just 2011.

I liked DA2 more than Skyrim. Where's your god now?

[zyntifox]

It was my favourite game of 2011 aswell even though it's nowhere near as good as Dragon age: origins. But it didn't have much competition though since it was the only game i bought in 2011. 

Modifié par Cstaf, 19 février 2012 - 06:49 .

[Cobra5]

I can't say it was my favorite game... no, not by a long shot. What was wrong with it really bothered me.

BUT

What it did right, I really liked. It was a game of extremes. What it did wrong, it did really wrong, and what it improved, it really improved.

[augustburnt]

kingjezza wrote...

It was the worst game I played.

I just wanted to let Bioware know that as well.

this

[augustburnt]

Ericander77 wrote...

I just replayed DA:O and started again on DA2, HUUUUUUUGE difference. DA2 is my favorite between the two by far, but it's mostly due to the enhancements. Story-wise i perfer DA:O, but having played DA2, the fighting is soooooooooooooo much better.

So your saying that a in a genre based on story line and setting you prefer the game with a ****ty storyline?

[PaulSX]

Cobra5 wrote...

What it did wrong, it did really wrong, and what it improved, it really improved.

This is pretty much how I felt about DA2.

[Teddie Sage]

augustburnt wrote...

Ericander77 wrote...

I just replayed DA:O and started again on DA2, HUUUUUUUGE difference. DA2 is my favorite between the two by far, but it's mostly due to the enhancements. Story-wise i perfer DA:O, but having played DA2, the fighting is soooooooooooooo much better.

So your saying that a in a genre based on story line and setting you prefer the game with a ****ty storyline?

Video games. Gameplay above the story. Ever heard of video games?

[Fidget6]

Agreed, Dragon Age 2 was amazing. I often wonder if I played the same game as everyone else, because I absolutely loved it.

[Wivvix]

Bioware set themselves up to fail with DA2.

DAO was supposed to be the spiritual successor to BG. It sort of delivered in that regard, but it compromised towards some RPG elements from more recent times. Fine. Almost 10 years on, some modernisation is probably called for.

What Bioware needed to do with DA2 was polish those RPG elements in DAO which they borrowed from more recent times. They did a brilliant job with DAO, but some things just didn't quite feel right and needed tweaking, like combat animations, combat speed/pacing. Some of the classes felt 2-dimensional next to the mage. Tweaking means just that; a minor adjustment.

What Bioware actually did with DA2, was substitute those RPG elements from more recent times, for different RPG elements which were even more recent still, and frankly didn't work at all with the traditional wRPG elements. I understand some people don't agree. All I have to say to that is, frame of reference. Look it up.

What Bioware does with Dragon Age 3 will be interesting. Mike Laidlaw has said that DA3 will be somewhere between DAO and DA2. Unfortunately, that's not really where they want to be. If anything I'd say they needed to rewind to DAO, and head in the opposite direction to DA2.

Protagonist driven storylines, highly restricted character customization, poor action-consequence character development, gimmicky narratives, superficial if not bordering on cliche character/social archetypes.That's DA2 in a nutshell, and precisely what Bioware should be trying to get as far away from as possible in DA3.

I hope they can deliver on it, because frankly they have big competition. CD Projekt Red and Bethesda are still producing 9/10 games on their RPG IP. Bioware has a lot of ground to make up, and even more confidence to restore in the brand.

Modifié par Wivvix, 22 février 2012 - 02:24 .

[The Executioner]

 I like DA2 it was far from perfect but i liked the characters and the story .

Modifié par The Executioner, 23 février 2012 - 03:41 .

[TRUTHMACHINE]

DA2 was the most disapointing game i ever played. i'm usually good at buying good games. truely an abomination i won't soon forget or forgive

[Knightly_BW]

For me DA 2 good proof of how time element is very important on game development.

I can't say it was bad as there are many good things in it. Story was good and concept of game was interesting. However probably due to time factor it felt like they released half of the game.

I wish DA2's every act were separate. Act 1 DA2, Act 2 and 3 were expansion. That way we will see more of the story and really feel it. Maybe that will allow us to get more familiar with our family (Mother, Carver/Bethany and Uncle). Maybe we will understand better how it's like to rise power in Kirkwall.

For 2011 I can say DA2 and DCUO were the games of years for me (excluding ME2 which I got 2011).

In the end DA 2 helped great deal to build tension between Mages and Templars. I am really curious how this will carry on to DA3.

[Simiancustard]

I don't think you can even compare Skyrim and Dragon Age 2, but what's definitely for certain is that DA2 was the worst RPG/Action/Whateveritwassupposedtobe game of the last 5 years (and that's quite something given that Fable 3 was utter tripe). Fortunately, I'm getting my RPG fix in Amalur and Skyrim.

Where Bioware failed, 38 Studios have succeeded. I just hope EA doesn't pull a Bioware on 38 Studios and actually allow the new guys to build on Amalur, and hopefully make a sequel that's particularly memorable and phenomenal. As for Bioware, I'm sceptical now. The name is tarnished now. I haven't even bothered to buy DLC for DA2, nor have I pre-ordered ME3.

I'll first wait and see what the feeling is amongst my fellow gamers, before these guys ever get my money again.

Modifié par Simiancustard, 23 février 2012 - 06:51 .

[Saintthanksgiving]

I didn't play Witcher 2, and Skyrim's plot was kinda.... eh

It would not have been difficult for DA2 to take the top spot in my eyes, but I really disliked it. I mean REALLY disliked it.

I probably disliked it more for what it should have been than what it was... but hey I'm a fan.

[Jerrybnsn]

DA2 was at the bottom of the 2011 games for me. I was also disappointed with Uncharted 3 (bad game mechanics and a ruined TPS) and Assassin's Creed: Revelation (It was Brotherhood all over again with a city that didn't compare to Rome). Skyrim was the best game of 2011 for me, not because of its storylines which Bioware blows everyone else out of the water, but because it was a gorgeous world that had plenty of immersion for MY character. DA2 was a ridiculous, ugly, small world that already had a predetermined character that was dragged along for the story.

[Elhanan]

I enjoyed DA2 as both a game, and as another tale of Thedas. While I preferred the gameplay freedom of DAO, the full VO, inclusive skills, and new spells and tiers are a welcome addition to the series. Looking forward to DA3, and maybe a peek at what is happening in the Dwarven depths below. Thanks!

[FASherman]

On a scale of 1 to 10, DA2 was a solid 5. Not great, not bad. Certainly not the best of 2011, and not anywhere in the same class as Skyrim. Although to be fair, nothing else is.

Where it was disappointing is that they hype was so overblown that what was delivered was a huge letdown. I think Bioware drank their own Koolaid on this and would have been better served by a beta test and some focus group work. Only a fool keeps their own counsel.

What Bioware does well, better than any other gaming house, is the Player/NPC interaction and romance. Create a larger, more open world and develop a non linear story. Don't create a small core group of companions; instead have dozens of possible companions. And then carry over what you're good at into that world. The borrow a little from Fable and add marriage and even children in tot he mix and you'll have something that can leapfrog over the entire genre.

[Elhanan]

Skyrim is a fantastic game. Have the 800+ hours invested to show as evidence.

But as some may have noticed, it has little NPC interaction, and the romance & marriage options are in name only. And while almost every NPC has a story, few have any depth.

Personally, I not only enjoy the story and writing of DA2, but prefer it over the GOTY award winner. While I do not have the same kind of hours to show (ie; 300+ hrs), it is because I prefer the gameplay freedom and options of DAO (ie; at least 20 full playthroughs, plus DLC; roughly 2000+ hrs).

I look forward to DA3, and seeing how Thedas is evolving, as well as the continuing civil war. And I am hopeful that Bioware will not only look to other GOTY games for inspiration, but will also look within their own portfolios to reflect on how they they achieved it, too.

[scpulley]

DA 2 was an embarrassment compared to other RPG's last year, of which there were tons of quality choices. It almost felt like Bioware just didn't care about making it quality, so they decided to 'experiment' and figured they could get away with it. I still lay a lot of blame on the lead developer, his attitude to the fans, his lack of respect for the first game that actually did do well, and thinking he knew what his customers better than anyone else by adding awesome buttons. Shiny distraction never is going to be enough to cover a crackpot story in an RPG. Hell, Mass Effect isn't a great story but at least they were consistent.

[Elhanan]

Or not. Hyperbolize much?

[Aemony]

While certain elements of the story in Dragon Age 2 had potential (political struggle, discrimination of certain parties) and felt fresh in an otherwise potentially stagnated genre, the final execution of said story failed miserably. Your choices had no real impact and hollow reasons was given to explain the progression of the story.

Ultimately, splitting the story into arcs served against the game as this created a rift between the player and supposedly "his/her" character (I'm not even going to go into how Varric as a narrator creates the biggest rift ever seen regarding immersion in a game), as story and character developments happened offscreen. Each beginning of a new arc was spent trying to catch up to what everyone had been doing to once again be able to immerse yourself in "your" character. The final letdown was that albeit BioWare advertised the game as you were supposed to be able to see Kirkwall evolve during the decade, nothing actually changed. Everyone was still in their same old usual spot and nobody didn't even bothered to restore and possible make use of the Qunari Compound years after the skirmish.

Another element the game failed was with the characters, since almost everyone was an extremist of a certain kind, basically making everyone stereotypes. The only reasonable one I felt was Aveline, whom also happens to be the only one with actual character development (unless you count the riddiculous "Hawke has been good to me once, therefor I return book, yes?!" story progress, or of similar kinds). Characters that fully depends on the main character for almost any kind of development isn't interesting. All they end up being is looking like boring one dimensional characters that nobody cares about.

Then we have the obvious elements everybody knows about: reused areas, zero use of every single Bow you find in the game unless you roll as a Rouge whom fancies Bows or happend to have bought the Sebastian DLC, retarded garbage find-random-item-and-deliver-to-random-character quests, practically every mage you meet turns out to be a Blood Mage, the "epic" Champion fight as a Mage, Hawke's family history being quite the tragedy with everyone dying or being forced to leave for yet more retarded reasons (no, just because everybody dies doesn't mean the game/story/development is any good or even interesting), whole game feeling like merely a prequel to the epic and awesome adventure, weird and retarded cameos from Origins that only felt rushed and horrible (my Hawke != my Warden. If my Hawke is aggressive and evil against Zevran, that means my Hawke hates said character. Give me the choice to kill the sad man off and I'll take it, but don't let me immerse myself in my Hawke's hatred for Zevran only to deny me the kill/execution of said character at the end of the cameo), not to mention that a few quests' writing was just horrible (man can't kill Zevran alone, therefor he hires Hawke to do so yet when Hawke is together with Zevran side by side the man suddenly turns against them both? WHAAAAAT?! Retarded much?!), and A LOT more (i.e. weird enemy spawns from the sky and such).

The two main things that was MUCH better in DA2 was simply the combat (more immersive, quick, interesting and ultimately satisfying) and the main character. Even though Hawke turned out to be quite the tragic character, the character him/herself had not only the best design I've seen in years but also quite the good voice-acting (I'd pick both Hawke over both Shepards any day).

Other than that, most stuff was yet more disappointments and steps backwards.

Well, I'm out.

[Elhanan]

Choice is icing on a cake within a RPG; not a main element required in telling a tale. I also am reminded that there are few storyline arcs within Skyrim that have any such significance either, and one that does is almost immediatly reversed, making the entire event null. Yet, it and others are considered highly in the RPG realms.

I enjoyed the Chapter breaks myself, and could use the CC Mirror to alter the appearance of Hawke to make any desired change. For one PC, this is where the nose slash appeared, as a nod towards a past event. While Kirkwall could have shown more signs of change, there were some as shown in the cut-scenes, I believe.

While some characters were extremists, Bethany, Isabela,Carver, and Varric would also seem to join Aveline as moderates. And the use of Varric as moderator was quite welcome in my game, as well as as his audience.

An opinion to the game may differ than what was intended by the writers and designers, but this hardly makes such implementations failures, retarded, boring, etc; says more of the less than open mindset of the critic to me. IMO.

[Aemony]

Elhanan wrote...

Choice is icing on a cake within a RPG; not a main element required in telling a tale. I also am reminded that there are few storyline arcs within Skyrim that have any such significance either, and one that does is almost immediatly reversed, making the entire event null. Yet, it and others are considered highly in the RPG realms.

 

There's different sub-genres within RPGs, and a typical element of a BioWare RPG have always been the element of a choice given to the player that has an actual effect on the world of the game. The problem with the choices in Dragon Age 2 is that the execution failed which ultimately meant the player quite easily and quickly saw through the illusion of choice. In Dragon Age: Origins, most of the bigger choices you make through the game shows itself in the final battle at the end. The game takes you for a ride and gives you choices that actually seems to matter and which effects are almost immediately felt and seen on the world through the characters you gain in your camp and how various parts of the world changed (all elfs killed -> werewolfs takes over, etc). While most choices in Mass Effect didn't lead anywere in that game, they built up towards the sequel where their result was presented.

The problem in DA2 is that when you are given a choice the choice you make doesn't actually seem to carry any weight. The progress of the world is beyond your influence and everything is really obviously "set in stone". For example: Regardless if you take Carver/Bethany along with you on the trip, the sibling will basically disappear from the game and all communication with them suddenly cut except for weird possible cameos later on when all the missing years isn't even discussed or felt. Regardless of how you position yourself in the political struggle between Templars and Mages, all Mages will turn to Blood Magic. Being caught at the dead end in the prison/slave thingy at the end of the game siding with the Mages (where you fight Orsino) the Templars sent a couple of waves to take us down. I easily killed all of these within mere seconds from them appearing. What does Orsino do? He says we're doomed and resorts to Blood Magic to learn the Templars a lesson, but he obviously turns on my party and I'll have to put him down, then continue up and fight the other boss.

That's just an example where regardless of what you chose, the outcome and even how the events unfold doesn't chance much. In fact, weird and confusing reasons are instead given as to explain why the story unfolds as it does (Orsino turning to Blood Magic is an example). Fact of the matter is; if you can't keep the illusion of choice, don't do choices at all. IMO Dragon Age 2 would've been much better without choices than it was with them, as the existence of them only made me more disappointed in the game..

 could use the CC Mirror to alter the appearance of Hawke to make any desired change.

 

Never used it, thought the mere existence of it in the game as a freely available DLC on release broke the immersion and made my choice at the start of the game non-important. Subjective feelings as I personally hate the possibility to "rewrite history" in games. It makes all choices hollow from a lore/story perspective.

While some characters were extremists, Bethany, Isabela,Carver, and Varric would also seem to join Aveline as moderates. And the use of Varric as moderator was quite welcome in my game, as well as as his audience.

Yeah, my fault, I wasn't as elabore as I could've been. Bethany is defintely one of the more normal ones, but this is the only one from your set of examples. Isabela is the "up on the wall-blablabla" extremist Helper talked about in one of the videos, while Carver is the very stereotypical nature of an extreme negative view of brotherhood. I've two brothers of my own and quite the diversified relationship to both of them. To my younger brother my relationship is extremely bad (far more so than average due to years of problems between us since early childhood) and not even that relationship triumphs how riddiculous BioWare have written Carver in his relationship to Hawke. You basically have zero chance at all to have a working normal sibling relationship with Carver, regardless of your constant efforts.

Varric is the typical "HUH, I AM MAN, YES, BIG, AWESOME" stereotype in his own sense. In this regard, my dislike regarding him stems probably mostly from my view that as the player, I personally should be whom the story is about. But talking with Varric, or seen through his narration, it's apparent that he himself personally deems himself as a bigger character of the story than I as the player put him as. Sure, this was an experiment from BioWare's side but it's one I can't tolerate in an interactive media such as a game. In a movie or book? Sure, possibly. In a game? Not interesting.

Without narrator:The Player --> Main Character
With narrator (normal style):The Player --> Narrator (respectable, doesn't partake in story much, very little breaking the illusion) --> Main Character
With narrator (DA2 stle):The Player --> Narrator (shady, capable of lying, not respectable, occasionally stealing the spotlight) --> Main Character?
Yet again this boils down to my immersion in the game through "my" character.

 An opinion to the game may differ than what was intended by the writers and designers, but this hardly makes such implementations failures, retarded, boring, etc; says more of the less than open mindset of the critic to me. IMO.

It would do you good to seperate subjective feelings and thoughts from objective facts, IMO. In what way would I have a less than open mindset simply because I harbor those thoughts and feelings after a ton of analysis and reflection of said elements?

[Elhanan]

Aemony wrote...

There's different sub-genres within RPGs, and a typical element of a BioWare RPG have always been the element of a choice given to the player that has an actual effect on the world of the game. The problem with the choices in Dragon Age 2 is that the execution failed which ultimately meant the player quite easily and quickly saw through the illusion of choice. In Dragon Age: Origins, most of the bigger choices you make through the game shows itself in the final battle at the end. The game takes you for a ride and gives you choices that actually seems to matter and which effects are almost immediately felt and seen on the world through the characters you gain in your camp and how various parts of the world changed (all elfs killed -> werewolfs takes over, etc). While most choices in Mass Effect didn't lead anywere in that game, they built up towards the sequel where their result was presented.

The problem in DA2 is that when you are given a choice the choice you make doesn't actually seem to carry any weight. The progress of the world is beyond your influence and everything is really obviously "set in stone". For example: Regardless if you take Carver/Bethany along with you on the trip, the sibling will basically disappear from the game and all communication with them suddenly cut except for weird possible cameos later on when all the missing years isn't even discussed or felt. Regardless of how you position yourself in the political struggle between Templars and Mages, all Mages will turn to Blood Magic. Being caught at the dead end in the prison/slave thingy at the end of the game siding with the Mages (where you fight Orsino) the Templars sent a couple of waves to take us down. I easily killed all of these within mere seconds from them appearing. What does Orsino do? He says we're doomed and resorts to Blood Magic to learn the Templars a lesson, but he obviously turns on my party and I'll have to put him down, then continue up and fight the other boss.

That's just an example where regardless of what you chose, the outcome and even how the events unfold doesn't chance much. In fact, weird and confusing reasons are instead given as to explain why the story unfolds as it does (Orsino turning to Blood Magic is an example). Fact of the matter is; if you can't keep the illusion of choice, don't do choices at all. IMO Dragon Age 2 would've been much better without choices than it was with them, as the existence of them only made me more disappointed in the game.

Being told in narrative form does lock in some choices fairly securely; true. But where one seems to believe such execution failed is one I truly enjoyed. The interrogation and use of Varric as a bardic spirit gave great depth to both characters involved, as well as setting up the revealed cameo.

And that Kirkwall had such a thin and shredded curtain to the Veil is a key element of the tale; a decisive reason why so many were falling to Blood magic and failing to perceive magic at all.

IMO, of course; not facts as some suggest.

Never used it, thought the mere existence of it in the game as a freely available DLC on release broke the immersion and made my choice at the start of the game non-important. Subjective feelings as I personally hate the possibility to "rewrite history" in games. It makes all choices hollow from a lore/story perspective.

Have the Collector's Ed myself, so I started with it, and chose to use it to enhance the tale; not fix or re-write anything. Having the facial scar/ marking after my Draconic encounters made having it more believable, for my play. In any event, completely optional.

Yeah, my fault, I wasn't as elabore as I could've been. Bethany is defintely one of the more normal ones, but this is the only one from your set of examples. Isabela is the "up on the wall-blablabla" extremist Helper talked about in one of the videos, while Carver is the very stereotypical nature of an extreme negative view of brotherhood. I've two brothers of my own and quite the diversified relationship to both of them. To my younger brother my relationship is extremely bad (far more so than average due to years of problems between us since early childhood) and not even that relationship triumphs how riddiculous BioWare have written Carver in his relationship to Hawke. You basically have zero chance at all to have a working normal sibling relationship with Carver, regardless of your constant efforts.

Varric is the typical "HUH, I AM MAN, YES, BIG, AWESOME" stereotype in his own sense. In this regard, my dislike regarding him stems probably mostly from my view that as the player, I personally should be whom the story is about. But talking with Varric, or seen through his narration, it's apparent that he himself personally deems himself as a bigger character of the story than I as the player put him as. Sure, this was an experiment from BioWare's side but it's one I can't tolerate in an interactive media such as a game. In a movie or book? Sure, possibly. In a game? Not interesting.

Without narrator:The Player --> Main Character
With narrator (normal style):The Player --> Narrator (respectable, doesn't partake in story much, very little breaking the illusion) --> Main Character
With narrator (DA2 stle):The Player --> Narrator (shady, capable of lying, not respectable, occasionally stealing the spotlight) --> Main Character?
Yet again this boils down to my immersion in the game through "my" character.

It would do you good to seperate subjective feelings and thoughts from objective facts, IMO. In what way would I have a less than open mindset simply because I harbor those thoughts and feelings after a ton of analysis and reflection of said elements?

Having a different opinion does not equate to something being factual; agreed. This is the reason I have been using IMO the entire time, I believe; unlike some.

My opinion is that the writing, story, dialogue, and VO of DA2 is far better than some perceive it to be, and is far superior as to what is seen in the GOTY many use in comparison. The flaws I see within this game are the increased restrictions on building and playing the character, and hope to see this altered for DA3, allowing for more indv choices on how to play the three base classes.

As for other misc stuff such as crafting, eating, resting, CC mirrors; leave it all as optional if included. This is a major selling point to Skyrim, as it may all be skipped entirely, or a character may be quite successful thru Smithing, Alchemy, and Enchanting. While this ain't my cup of tea, it seemingly appeals to many.