366 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

billy the squid wrote...

I'm more inclined to see it as something which makes one wince, rather than it being a classic of any sort. Paticularly when given the quality of the previous products, hence we continue to talk about how it could have gone so wrong.

And yet people talk about what it got right in the end....strange dichotomy, no?

[billy the squid]

LinksOcarina wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

I'm more inclined to see it as something which makes one wince, rather than it being a classic of any sort. Paticularly when given the quality of the previous products, hence we continue to talk about how it could have gone so wrong.

And yet people talk about what it got right in the end....strange dichotomy, no?

Really? For over the first 6 months after release that certainly wasn't the case, when it was heavily criticised. Unless you think that now, at the nadir of the game's life is what constitutes the actual critique.

At the moment the criticism has been expounded upon so many times no one really needs to repeat it at length, all that's left is discussions of what people found to be acceptable, or how it can be improved, and the more detailed over arching direction analysis and comparisons to its peers. Hence the discussion of what went wrong in the direction or  what are the inherent benefits and drawbacks of said direction taken, not something I consider as a discussion based predominantly as to what it got right.

Modifié par billy the squid, 16 janvier 2012 - 07:11 .

[LinksOcarina]

Maybe around here, but I have seen discussions all over the net going through the bad, yes, and all the good too. What it did get right, what resonated with people, and so forth.

It doesn't matter what was said six months ago, nor does it matter now. What matters is people are loving or hating the game and they have a different reasons for both stances. This forum is just another example of it really, probably because it was the epicenter for a lot of the negative feedback when it was first released.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 janvier 2012 - 07:23 .

[billy the squid]

Yet, a discussion less than a year on hardly constitutes a future classic, nor do discussions over what will be the future direction of the IP, as well as so called improvements and failings, constitute a "good game". By making things contravertial, it does not equate to being good or bad it simply causes polarisation. Which doesn't make it any more or less disliked than it was initally.

Modifié par billy the squid, 16 janvier 2012 - 07:44 .

[philippe willaume]

Filament wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

leeboi2 wrote...

It wasn't terrible...It wasn't terrible at all. You only say it's terrible because it's Bioware that made it; if it was some ****ty little Indie company that had never made a game before it would be the best thing ever...You gaiz are tards.

It'd still be a horrible game to me no matter who made it.

First I would have to say, I don't condone the tone or content of what you're responding to there. But I do find it a little strange the lengths you would go to defend a particular character from a game you keep insisting you hate so much...

Granted, while I don't think "they just expected more DAO" or other such condemned descriptions do justice to the diversity of possible reasons for disliking DA2, neither do I suspect it's really true that expectations have nothing to do with anything for anyone who disliked it, as seems to be the trending argument now. I do think expectations certainly have had a role in amplifying the sentiment, "twisting the knife" if you will, for many of the people who dislike DA2, even if they would have disliked it on its own with no expectations about it. The fact that DA2 is making it onto everyone and their grandmother's "most disappointing of 2011" list wouldn't be happening if people didn't have any expectations to disappoint to begin with. Whether that expectation is "more DAO" or "BioWare quality" or "not a rushed mess" or any combination of those or others depends on the individual, but I don't think any of them are lacking for people who actually held those expectations.

You know that type of thread appears so often that we are running out of bat to beat the dead horse.
After a while it is a little bit of a red flag to a bull.
 
Yes a fair amount of us found the game disappointing and yes a fair amount of us recognised the effort made top improve thing from DA:0 if only at the conceptual level.
It is not antonymic to sat that the char in DA:2 or much more developed than in DA:0 even if at the end they don’t end up being as attaching. That being said I can see some of us seeing some of the companions as a sort of redeeming feature if the term is not too strong.
 
I can see why it appeal to the more action orientated part of the audience, though in my opinion DA:2 is not as good as the ME series in that respect.
 
And yes there is a feeling of disappointment but really people voiced their views here before the “most disappointing game of 2011” band wagon was on the track for Redemption, As most of the critics on the said train told us that DA2 was the dog danglers to start with..
 
I am the first to say that DA:2 was not on par with DA:0 but it much better than the latest incarnation of Duke Nukem.
 
 
Phil tarding to be Gaiz

[LinksOcarina]

billy the squid wrote...

Yet, a discussion less than a year on hardly constitutes a future classic, nor do discussions over what will be the future direction of the IP, as well as so called improvements and failings, constitute a "good game". By making things contravertial, it does not equate to being good or bad it simply causes polarisation. Which doesn't make it any more or less disliked than it was initally.

I know, which is why time will tell on things in the end. 

That's me though, I guess I am sort of an idealist that way.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 janvier 2012 - 08:05 .

[TEWR]

Filament wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

leeboi2 wrote...

It wasn't terrible...It wasn't terrible at all. You only say it's terrible because it's Bioware that made it; if it was some ****ty little Indie company that had never made a game before it would be the best thing ever...You gaiz are tards.

It'd still be a horrible game to me no matter who made it.

First I would have to say, I don't condone the tone or content of what you're responding to there. But I do find it a little strange the lengths you would go to defend a particular character from a game you keep insisting you hate so much...

I've often said that the companions and the banter between them are one of the very few bright spots in the game -- though I don't think they got enough screen time to justify the timeline of the game. voiced PC and the new combat animations are others -- but that doesn't change how it'd be a horrible game in my view.

A few good elements aren't enough to make me change my view. It'd still be a horrible game to me if it was made by an indie company and was the same as what we got. The horrific story, reactive/inactive protagonist, and the emphasis on combat and not a mix of combat/stealth/persuasion/other things are some of the flaws that bring the game down for me.

A horrible game with good elements, but a horrible game nevertheless.

Granted, while I don't think "they just expected more DAO" or other such condemned descriptions do justice to the diversity of possible reasons for disliking DA2, neither do I suspect it's really true that expectations have nothing to do with anything for anyone who disliked it, as seems to be the trending argument now. I do think expectations certainly have had a role in amplifying the sentiment, "twisting the knife" if you will, for many of the people who dislike DA2, even if they would have disliked it on its own with no expectations about it. The fact that DA2 is making it onto everyone and their grandmother's "most disappointing of 2011" list wouldn't be happening if people didn't have any expectations to disappoint to begin with. Whether that expectation is "more DAO" or "BioWare quality" or "not a rushed mess" or any combination of those or others depends on the individual, but I don't think any of them are lacking for people who actually held those expectations.

Truthfully, I wouldn't say that I expected Bioware quality. I've only played two Bioware games: DAO and DAII.

Now, perhaps you could say that because of how I thought DAO was a good game -- not awesome or almost perfect. I found that it had flaws as well -- that managed to make me play it over 30 times I did expect a similar quality from DAII.

That's fair I guess, as a person would use my only prior experience with Bioware as a way to try and judge what I deem quality worthy.

What I did definitely expect though is a game that wasn't rushed and held true to the marketing and dev comments used by the team to promote it.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 16 janvier 2012 - 08:51 .

[UndercoverDoctor]

I completely forgot Dragon Age II came out last year. That says a lot about the game.

[Ricvenart]

DAII was my second favourite game of 2011, strangely though I could have sworn I bought it Oct 2010, maybe that's just my brain trying to protect me from remembering I bought Fable III then, now theres a truly rubbish game that is less then it's predecessors, with an unfinished rushed terrible story, characters and "awesome button" gameplay.
Yes I bought Skyrim last year too, it comes last and probally one of the worst games I've played overall higher then Fable II and III but it doesn't fall far behind them. I hold the randomised npcs and relationship system higher then skyrim's though, they had far more personality then most of the major NPC's and marriages had more depth and interest (bigamy, decaying relationships and other features that didn't make it feel like a last minute pointless edition).
Still well done Bioware with less experience, time and titles of the series before you, and having you deal with new owners, you made a fun, engaging game with some nice features that I couldn't put down til I finished. Not the same buggy game devoid of personality and life that they have 6? times before. Good on you for at least trying something different even if it didn't work out perfectly, hey at least you didn't have more bugs then gameplay features and even if it's more prominent in your game it doesn't have more rehashed maps then others, areas still felt unique and interesting, at least passing though them the first time.
Bastion was 1st for me if your wondering, excellent story, narrative, music, discovery, art, gameplay and balance.

Modifié par Ricvenart, 17 janvier 2012 - 08:34 .

[Game_Fan_85]

KLUME777 wrote...

Dragon Age 2 is the worst game i own.

Wow, your game library must be very small....

LinksOcarina wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

I
always find it funny that these posts that talk about how DA2 was their
favorite game of the year tend to go on to say things like: "DA2 was
far from perfect I know. Did it have only 6 battle maps repeated over
and over again through the whole game? Sure. Did the last chapter feel
like a rushed mess with 60% of the intended story missing? Yes it did."

So... in spite of all that- and it strikes me as being pretty significant, DA2 was your favorite game of the year? Power to you.

It's
a matter of prioritizing which parts of the game have the most
relevence to one's opinion.  Some people have different priorities. 
Myself, I thought act 3 was annoyingly incomplete but the rest of the
game's story was enjoyable enough that it didn't bring down my opinion
too badly.  The repeated maps bothered me but clearly not as much as
many players.

Granted, I don't classify DA2 as my favorite game of the year.  It's up there though.

I
honestly think this speaks volumes for the game as a whole. Mainly
because a lot of us see good in it, despite the problems it does have.
Kind of like a flawed movie or novel that is hailed as a classic in
years to come. It is a mark of a good game not because of the changes or
the story or anything like that, but because we continue to talk about
it.

Thank you LinksOcarina and Lord Aesir, I could not have put it better myself.  Sure I see the flaws in the game but the things I LOVE in the game outweigh them.  If a single person can talk about their favourite movie or game or whatever and dismiss flaws that are present in it, they are deluded.  Everything has flaws even if one person's "flaw" is not always anothers.

[LTD]

Disliking DA II with some passion  as well. 

Incredibly rushed shovelware vibe.

Repulsive "This is so cool, modern, mature and hip it could be in MTV!"  type of an overall approach to various game elements. Overall flow of combat and characters' appereance being the most notable examples.

 As a 20+ PC gamer, I just don't want to play games made for 17 year old console gamers.
...Not that I'd have anything against consoles or console gamers as such..it's just that that the hardware inside Xbox  is soon 10 years old or whatnot?

Modifié par LTD, 18 janvier 2012 - 03:11 .

[LinksOcarina]

actually, coming up to seven years old. But considering the machine can run Crysis 2 without much of a graphical change, that is a moot point.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 18 janvier 2012 - 03:13 .

[LTD]

LinksOcarina wrote...

actually, coming up to six years old. But considering the machine can run Crysis 2 without much of a graphical change, that is a moot point.

Xbox having been in shops for six years doesn't mean the hardware in it were as young as that. I'm not sure what exactly you are trying to call a moot point here. You are suggesting remotely modern PC doesn't have more juices available for running games than an Xbox?

Modifié par LTD, 18 janvier 2012 - 03:20 .

[LinksOcarina]

No, i'm saying that the capabilities of a PC versus an Xbox is a pointless debate and irrelevant to the discussion. 

And if it was just a jab to console players, that too is irrelevant.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 18 janvier 2012 - 03:52 .

[kennydahl]

I would agree with those parties who had issues with the recycling of environment in DA2 - that was truly telling as you went through the game, and was not an element I enjoyed.

However, to be honest, my main focus in playing bioware games has always really been the narrative and the characterization. On that basis, i really do feel that DA2 delivered. The shift in narrative emphasis to multi year 'visits' to the same characters and settings really worked for me. [I particularly enjoyed seeing your companion characters develop over time - I think particularly here of Avaleine as a character...]

In general I cared more about the characters in DA2, as I felt they were better written and had better interaction with each other.

Anyway, long story short, I really liked DA2 and the character and narrative 'positives' far outweighed (to me) the genuine complaints about elements of gameplay and environment variety.

[Fast Jimmy]

The recycled environments and the lop-sided, wonky combat didn't even bother me at first. Nor did the complete lack of impact of my choices in the world around me, or the fact that I grew closer, as a player, to the X amount of months I spent with my companions in DAO than I did with the companions Hawke spent seven years with.

None of that REALLY really bothered me. Ticked me off, made me huff seeing the same dungeon for the fifth or sixth time in a few days of playing a game, but it didn't send me into an All-Caps Rage.

The story did. The way it jerked you around, gave you no idea what the over-arching purpose was, the way it progressed not by actually PROGRESSING, but by giving a dozen side quests each Act and then tacked a combat session at the end, as if doing a dozen different errands was somehow "building suspense."

Then when I saw how Act 3 began, and put the pieces together about how the game itself was going to come down to a showdown, I LITERALLY started cussing at my TV. LITERALLY - yelling out "THIS is what the climax is going to be? THIS is what I spent the past three weeks working towards?" Then, when Anders did... well, what Anders does at the end of Act 3... I shook my head and said "you piece of shirt." What little chance I had at NOT making the inevitable stupid ending of Act 3 went up in smoke (or light, as the case may be) when he did that. For that, I (possibly unfairly) blame Anders and had no compunction about gutting him on the spot.

The story, which people are labeling as the highlight of all Bioware games, is the WORST part about DA2.

The writing and the character dialgoue and interaction are great. But the story, in and of itself? It sent me into such a feeling of utter disappointment that I still carry resentment with me.

All the other stuff, the mechanics or gameplay or graphical glitches or environments or art direction... all of that was small stuff, easily overlooked by me. If the story had delivered. And it did not. Not even close, in my opinion.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 19 janvier 2012 - 12:54 .

[philippe willaume]

your not wrong there mate.
Just image how those who thaught anders was their buddy let alone romaced him must feel....

[Ricvenart]

Actually I had no problem with what Anders did (not the act but within his story). Why something bad happening makes the story bad or not being able to prevent it means you have no choice is simply something I don't understand. You seemed to miss some major hints to the ending (admittedly the last boss fight was a surpise) and to the backstory of why it happened.

[LinksOcarina]

I thought it was brilliant because of the progression of Anders as a character, honestly. They handled it well, it came out of nowhere even though I thought he was up to no good, and it made me think about what to do come endgame.

[Chun Hei]

I think the story would have been better if Meredith and Orsino were introduced and feuding during all the chapters (dramatic cut-scenes) and were left out there as the lingering threat that the player knows Hawke must deal with eventually. Similar to how Loghain was handled in DA:O. Also would have been nice if the final battles with BOTH of them (instead of EITHER of them) were something more than, "It is the end of the game and NOW I AM NUTS!"

Even though I was not a Meredith fan I understood where she was coming from and that a confrontation with mage-friendly Hawke was inevitable. There was no need to pull out the EVIL SWORD! The Orsino blood magic ritual MADE NO SENSE in the mage-friendly Hawke storyline but would have worked in the Templar-friendly game. It made sense for Meredith to betray Templar Hawke regardless so the EVIL SWORD was not necessary. In order for the Orsino meltdown to make sense in the mage-friendly storyline I assume it would have to be revealed that he was working with the Resolutionists all along.

Modifié par Chun Hei, 19 janvier 2012 - 03:45 .

[TEWR]

LinksOcarina wrote...

I thought it was brilliant because of the progression of Anders as a character, honestly. They handled it well, it came out of nowhere even though I thought he was up to no good, and it made me think about what to do come endgame.

I feel that the game didn't explore enough of the Anders-Justice relationship to really do it justice. Pun somewhat intended.

This is actually something I feel is the case for all of the companions. I feel that they didn't get enough screen time to justify the timeline of the game. Not banter, but screen time. I think DAII just had the bare minimum, which worked for it but imo more was needed.

It's a fact that DAII has a little bit more dialogue than DAO, since DAO had a crap ton of lore dump dialogue as well as companion dialogue.

But that right there is the problem. DAO is a game that spans about a year, which means that DAII kinda only has about a year's worth of dialogue in it for a game that has the player play a little over three years. So as it stands, I feel that Justice doesn't make as much of an appearance as he should.

Also, I like his voice. 

In regards to what Anders did, I have no problem with it. It's just how he came to that idea that I have a problem with. I wanted him to come to that same idea and still have it be a surprise to the players and Hawke, but with a few added reasons as to why he did it.

[LinksOcarina]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I thought it was brilliant because of the progression of Anders as a character, honestly. They handled it well, it came out of nowhere even though I thought he was up to no good, and it made me think about what to do come endgame.

I feel that the game didn't explore enough of the Anders-Justice relationship to really do it justice. Pun somewhat intended.

This is actually something I feel is the case for all of the companions. I feel that they didn't get enough screen time to justify the timeline of the game. Not banter, but screen time. I think DAII just had the bare minimum, which worked for it but imo more was needed.

It's a fact that DAII has a little bit more dialogue than DAO, since DAO had a crap ton of lore dump dialogue as well as companion dialogue.

But that right there is the problem. DAO is a game that spans about a year, which means that DAII kinda only has about a year's worth of dialogue in it for a game that has the player play a little over three years. So as it stands, I feel that Justice doesn't make as much of an appearance as he should.

Also, I like his voice. 

In regards to what Anders did, I have no problem with it. It's just how he came to that idea that I have a problem with. I wanted him to come to that same idea and still have it be a surprise to the players and Hawke, but with a few added reasons as to why he did it.

I would point to the article I wrote about the character study I did of Anders, but I have to say that the time you do spend with him is interesting because it showcases a gradual shift in mood. Early on he is pretty much the same and is in control, by Act II he is losing control, and in Act III I feel like he just gives in to Vengence/Justice and proceeds with his plan. Event he attempt to reason with him fails here, which I liked because it shows how far he has fallen over those seven years. 

I don't know, my two cents on it.

[TEWR]

I would point to the article I wrote about the character study I did of Anders, but I have to say that the time you do spend with him is interesting because it showcases a gradual shift in mood. Early on he is pretty much the same and is in control, by Act II he is losing control, and in Act III I feel like he just gives in to Vengence/Justice and proceeds with his plan. Event he attempt to reason with him fails here, which I liked because it shows how far he has fallen over those seven years. 

I don't know, my two cents on it.

Oh I enjoy the shift in character as well. But I think Justice should've been more prominent so the player does get a sense that "hey, this guy is losing control. He is trying his best to cage the beast within.".

I mean, it's slightly more apparent on the Rivalry path, but even then that's not enough imo.

We're told he's failing to contain it, but do we really see enough of Justice to believe what he says? Do we really see enough of Justice taking over? Personally, I don't think we do. He loses control once in Act 1, once in Act 2, and once in Act 3. Not counting the Fade takeover as that's not really losing control, since Anders is trying to keep Justice in check in the mortal realm and not the Fade.

Never mind the fact I think it would've been interesting for Hawke to hold a few conversations with Justice about the Spirits and Demons and how Justice views the mortal world given the time he spent in Amaranthine.

I'd like to read your article also, if possible.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 19 janvier 2012 - 04:09 .