294 réponses à ce sujet

[HiroVoid]

Truthfully, I think just giving the option and getting a dialogue slide about how Ferelden was destroyed and Orlais and such was getting prepared to fight the Blight would have been neat.

[Joy Divison]

As much as I am disappointed with DA2 and believe it's defenders too willingly adopt a under siege mentality, the article isn't doing anything more than conveying the opinion of those who liked the game -- which the author makes clear he/she doesn't necessarily share.

"This sort of thing happens sometimes with games that are commonly held to be "bad"—a small group of people fall in love with them and embrace them in spite of their flaws."

The key word there is "small," not "gamers" or "RPG community.

"Yeah, I said that Dragon Age II felt "akin to attending a dinner party and being fed unsatisfying side dish after unsatisfying side dish while awaiting a main course that never arrives." I also may have called it "flat, unfinished and short on soul." I still feel that way about it, for the most part."

I think the author or the article is being quite fair myself.

[Malanu]

Actually Joy your "critique" of the game is what is considered constructive. You voiced a clear complaint, you presented it in a thought provoking way and most important, you were not insulting. Your comparison was "colorful and entertaining" but reinforced your view very well. All that was missing was advice on what may have made the game better.

[LobselVith8]

nedpepper wrote...

Seriously?  You're saying Hawke has no motivations, but the Dragonborn does?  Hawke has a sister in the Circle. 

 
Doesn't that happen to Bethany because of the scene where Hawke stands idly by while his sister is taken into a Circle of Magi where he knows mages are being made tranquil against Chantry law? Where Hawke does nothing to try to stop them despite knowing what happened to Karl, and that the same fate could happen to Bethany? I'm not certain that's much of an argument in Hawke's favor that he does nothing when two templars take her away to a place where she might be made tranquil against the law.

nedpepper wrote...

He is a noble.  He is a part of the city.  He can hate mages or love them and influence the game.

In which Hawke does nothing to help either side for three years until the Champion stumbles upon Orsino giving a speech.

nedpepper wrote...

Same with the Qunari.  It's smaller and more personal, but there are TONS of core character motivations.  And a heck of a lot more complex than, "must kill dragons."  You can dislike DA 2 for many reasons, (and you obviously do), but to blame it on character motivation and then mention SKYRIM?!?  Kills your argument.

Players are invited to create their own motivations for the Dragonborn, such as with the incursion of dragons, while Hawke seems overly passive even in situations where one would think he should care. The player can decide who the Dragonborn is, while Hawke is a pre-made character who is absurdly passive.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 13 janvier 2012 - 05:48 .

[Joy Divison]

Malanu wrote...

Actually Joy your "critique" of the game is what is considered constructive. You voiced a clear complaint, you presented it in a thought provoking way and most important, you were not insulting. Your comparison was "colorful and entertaining" but reinforced your view very well. All that was missing was advice on what may have made the game better.

I'm pretty sure Bioware and the devs have heard all the advice on what could have made the game better.  What I could offer is not something that hsn't been said a thousand times.  Whether or not they are willing to listen to this advice and incorperate it in the Dragon Age series is another matter...

[Maria Caliban]

Icinix wrote...

Good reads - but something I dislike is how people who do like the game, just claim people who don't like it were 'expecting' something else.

That to me is just a cheap dismissal.

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

[Shevy]

I would call it a love-hate relationship. Otherwise, I wouldn't be around here.

Modifié par Shevy_001, 13 janvier 2012 - 06:26 .

[Malanu]

you could be right Joy, I've been on many gaming forums over the last few decades and yes many Devs have heard lots of opinions, but what I heard back is that when a criticism is presented with fire and brimstone they tend to ignore it.But the well thought out critique gets taken more seriously. Mostly because it's not loaded with fire and venom. Now being able to do something about the advice is a different story. One we outside the industry may not understand.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

If they'd called it something other than a roleplaying game, I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

[Morroian]

LobselVith8 wrote...
 
Doesn't that happen to Bethany because of the scene where Hawke stands idly by while his sister is taken into a Circle of Magi where he knows mages are being made tranquil against Chantry law? Where Hawke does nothing to try to stop them despite knowing what happened to Karl, and that the same fate could happen to Bethany? I'm not certain that's much of an argument in Hawke's favor that he does nothing when two templars take her away to a place where she might be made tranquil against the law.

In which Hawke does nothing to help either side for three years until the Champion stumbles upon Orsino giving a speech.

Thats your own personal reaction why can't you acknowledge that others may have a different reaction?

[bEVEsthda]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Good reads - but something I dislike is how people who do like the game, just claim people who don't like it were 'expecting' something else.

That to me is just a cheap dismissal.

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

Maybe I can throw some light on this for all you confused ones :

I disliked DA2 for what it was. There is much in and about DA2 that I just simply despise. Was it all bad? No. I found individual elements of Bioware's usual quality. Dialogue is occasionally really good. I don't care what anyone else thinks or says, some of that is really well written. But that is not even a beginning of being enough, since I don't play RPG to listen to dialogue. Da2 is kinda useless. I dislike DA2. And I would dislike DA2 for whatever, except if it had been some kind of lightweight bonus to DA franchise. Then I could possibly have liked DA2 enough, just because it was DA. And not to be taken seriosly.

However, DA2 destroyed Dragon Age. For that I hate DA2. That's a valid reason for hate. To say that this means I "expected something else" is a pretty far going distortion.

[LinksOcarina]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Good reads - but something I dislike is how people who do like the game, just claim people who don't like it were 'expecting' something else.

That to me is just a cheap dismissal.

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

Maybe I can throw some light on this for all you confused ones :

I disliked DA2 for what it was. There is much in and about DA2 that I just simply despise. Was it all bad? No. I found individual elements of Bioware's usual quality. Dialogue is occasionally really good. I don't care what anyone else thinks or says, some of that is really well written. But that is not even a beginning of being enough, since I don't play RPG to listen to dialogue. Da2 is kinda useless. I dislike DA2. And I would dislike DA2 for whatever, except if it had been some kind of lightweight bonus to DA franchise. Then I could possibly have liked DA2 enough, just because it was DA. And not to be taken seriosly.

However, DA2 destroyed Dragon Age. For that I hate DA2. That's a valid reason for hate. To say that this means I "expected something else" is a pretty far going distortion.

Explain how it destroyed Dragon Age, exactly. So far,i'm not convinced that is a valid reason (or a reason at all, for that matter) to hate the game. 

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

If they'd called it something other than a roleplaying game, I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

But if companies went by your and my definition of roleplaying games very little would qualify.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 13 janvier 2012 - 11:03 .

[TEWR]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Maybe I can throw some light on this for all you confused ones :

I disliked DA2 for what it was. There is much in and about DA2 that I just simply despise. Was it all bad? No. I found individual elements of Bioware's usual quality. Dialogue is occasionally really good. I don't care what anyone else thinks or says, some of that is really well written. But that is not even a beginning of being enough, since I don't play RPG to listen to dialogue. Da2 is kinda useless. I dislike DA2. And I would dislike DA2 for whatever, except if it had been some kind of lightweight bonus to DA franchise. Then I could possibly have liked DA2 enough, just because it was DA. And not to be taken seriosly.

However, DA2 destroyed Dragon Age. For that I hate DA2. That's a valid reason for hate. To say that this means I "expected something else" is a pretty far going distortion.

If I may ask, what are some specific elements within DAII that made you dislike/hate it? I think it's easy for a person that hated the game to say they hated it, but it doesn't really help other people understand why they hated it.

I hate DAII myself and I try to explain certain elements that made me hate it -- in threads where it's pertinent -- so people understand where I'm coming from and don't assume I "wanted Origins 2.0".

For you, was it the atmosphere of the game? Or was it something else? Because what you said is pretty vague.

Just curious, 'tis all.

Also, I wouldn't say DAII destroyed Dragon Age. Severely damaged it would be a more accurate description imo.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 janvier 2012 - 12:54 .

[lobi]

meh, it was ok game called 'Rise to Power', Have I ever mentioned how I disliked some Final Fantasy games for not being what I thought Final Fantasy should be?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

If they'd called it something other than a roleplaying game, I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

But if companies went by your and my definition of roleplaying games very little would qualify.

If they went by our definition of roleplaying games, maybe they would make different games.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

If they'd called it something other than a roleplaying game, I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

But if companies went by your and my definition of roleplaying games very little would qualify.

If they went by our definition of roleplaying games, maybe they would make different games.

If only that was the case, but we can wish, dream and comment when they do not.

[bEVEsthda]

LinksOcarina wrote...
Explain how it destroyed Dragon Age, exactly. So far,i'm not convinced that is a valid reason (or a reason at all, for that matter) to hate the game. 

So you think DA:O and DA2 is much the same game then?

I liked DA:O. I was looking forward to see the franchise continue. And by the way, I have waited for DA for about a decade, ever since Bioware announced this project on the old Bioware forum.

And instead we then get this new childish nonsense, the "new direction" in something that just is a spoonfed story, not a real RPG, japan-style, to add injury.

[bEVEsthda]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

If I may ask, what are some specific elements within DAII that made you dislike/hate it? I think it's easy for a person that hated the game to say they hated it, but it doesn't really help other people understand why they hated it.

I hate DAII myself and I try to explain certain elements that made me hate it -- in threads where it's pertinent -- so people understand where I'm coming from and don't assume I "wanted Origins 2.0".

For you, was it the atmosphere of the game? Or was it something else? Because what you said is pretty vague.

Just curious, 'tis all.

Also, I wouldn't say DAII destroyed Dragon Age. Severely damaged it would be a more accurate description imo.

Well, if it had gone to EA's intentions, this juvenile jprg-format drivel would have replaced "The spiritual successor to BG": That counts as destroying the franchise for me.

I don't hate the game for what it is. I don't like the game for what it is. But I don't hate it for that. I hate it for replacing the original/real DA franchise. That is why I hate it.

I dislike it mainly for its silly art direction (so yes, atmosphere amongst other things, the game doesn't take itself seriously) and the fact that it's just a told story, with very little  responsibility for the player. Just a movie with breaks for meaningless and senseless combat, void of strategic connection with anything else. Nintendo gameplay. Clear the levels, pick up the glowing rewards, wittle down the 'Boss'. And on the side we're told a story that is really nothing special at all.
Just look at the developers obsession with 'iconic looks', the silly name "Hawke" itself, the focus on cinematics, retarded ninja combat,.. We're supposed to think that's cool. Now me, I'm allergic to overdone stuff like that. Once I get the drift I start to really raise hackles. This game was not designed by game designers. It was designed by a shallow, clueless marketing group. And their focus group were their own 14y old nephews and their retarded friends. "- Oh Yes mister, this is an awesome game you have. It rocks. Awesome!"
 -Bah!
 And yes, I react too strongly. But that is due to the cummulative effect. Dislike feeds more dislike. If the sum of the whole was on the right side of the treshold, I probably wouldn't mind a number of details that now annoy me. But such are the way of things...
 

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 14 janvier 2012 - 03:51 .

[LinksOcarina]

bEVEsthda wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
Explain how it destroyed Dragon Age, exactly. So far,i'm not convinced that is a valid reason (or a reason at all, for that matter) to hate the game. 

So you think DA:O and DA2 is much the same game then?

I liked DA:O. I was looking forward to see the franchise continue. And by the way, I have waited for DA for about a decade, ever since Bioware announced this project on the old Bioware forum.

And instead we then get this new childish nonsense, the "new direction" in something that just is a spoonfed story, not a real RPG, japan-style, to add injury.

I'm sorry, but I need to let you know that the stance of Dragon Age II as "japan-style" is very mis-informed. 

For starters, Japan-style is a very specific term since it can only truely refer to the art direction of the game. Now if you are talking about gameplay mechanics, then this is a problem, because the mechanics are pretty much the same as any console RPG that comes out, both in Japan and in the U.S.

And no, I am not just talking about fight mechanics, which are different for every RPG, that doesn't define their country of origin at all mind you.  Mass Effect is an example of this, as is Diablo to name another. One is designed to tell a linear story with typical story progression, character interaction, a battle system that caters to the role playing experience they are emulating, and so forth in a closed story setting. The other is a dungeon crawler more based on action and exploration than story, but with similar mechanics to it that are variants to core gameplay styles that RPGs can have. 

Or to go even more old school, Jagged Alliance and X-Com are both turn-based RTS/RPG games. The combat style is similar to old school RPGs like Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy Tactics, but this doesn't make them any similar or different to any "Japan-style" that is out there. The battle mechanics tend to vary, but the overall experience that is role-played still occurs, a story is told and the choices you make within it dictate the outcome. 


If it is art direction, then I fail to see it. It is more stylized yes, but it is also more distinct than the typical "super-realism" we get a lot in most games today. It was a choice that I can't fault really. The art style in Dragon Age II is more of an amalgum of several art styles we see, mostly seems to be based on Warcraft style, hyper-stylized, larger range of physical between races and in some cases cultues and design motifs, and a richer color pallette. Nothing wrong with not liking it, but just don't call it Japan-style. If it was Japan style then everyone in-game would likely follow manga artstyle closely, more exxagerated features on the humans, lithe frames on the body structures of all races, exagerated hairstyles and so forth. So that statement is totally wrong.

Second, not a real RPG is too objective; mainly because the game is classified as an RPG because of the story progression, the role-playing aspect of building your character and your companions up through the skill trees, the role-playing aspect of talking to people and choosing to do quests or what have you, customizing weapons and Hawkes armor, implementation and resource management and so on. The only thing it lacks is full on exploration. 

So how is it not a real RPG then when it contains a lot of what makes an RPG? Is it the fact that the protagonist is technically not a blank slate? If thats the case than a majority of all RPGs ever made for a computer or console would not be considered one because of this categorization. You might want to clarify exactly.

Third thing, the spoonfed story. Orgins had a spoonfed story, KOTOR had a spoonfed story, Baldurs Gate at times had a spoonfed story. You might want to clarify this point as well. If its a problem with the story thats your opinion, but going back to the original question, how does this ruin Dragon Age exactly? 

ETA: Read your reply to EWR. One thing I wish to add is how the story is told. Just exactly how different is this from most RPGs we see as well? Hell even in Baldurs Gate the story is told to us via exposition early on, and pops up several times to keep the progression of the story going. They did, I admit, do a lot more doing than Dragon Age Origins and II though, but it is still the same conecpt in the end. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 14 janvier 2012 - 06:12 .

[Chun Hei]

bEVEsthda wrote...

 And yes, I react too strongly. But that is due to the cummulative effect. Dislike feeds more dislike. If the sum of the whole was on the right side of the treshold, I probably wouldn't mind a number of details that now annoy me. But such are the way of things...

 

[Icinix]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Good reads - but something I dislike is how people who do like the game, just claim people who don't like it were 'expecting' something else.

That to me is just a cheap dismissal.

In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

For sure, there are some people who are upset because it was so vastly different from DAO.

But I just don't want to see a blanket dismissal of negative opinion under a wave of "You were expecting something different, its your own fault." style arguments.

Like I wrote in repsonse to Eplers post - I knew what I was expecting. I knew what the changes were, and for them most part, I was looking to DA2 with a lot of excitement BECAUSE of those changes and concepts.


And now I am someone who regularly posts my feelings in "Why I am not happy with DA2" threads.

[ElitePinecone]

Icinix wrote...

For sure, there are some people who are upset because it was so vastly different from DAO.

But I just don't want to see a blanket dismissal of negative opinion under a wave of "You were expecting something different, its your own fault." style arguments.

Agreed. It's when I hear Ray Muzayka blame some of the criticism on "a misalignment of expectations" that I'm concerned. It makes it awfully easy to argue that negative opinion is exaggerated and vindictive solely because people were expecting something that they didn't get. 

Certainly some of the criticism is hopelessly over the top, but I'd hope genuine critiques of DA2 on its own merits won't be dismissed as people "just wanting Origins again". 

Or worse, if the message taken from the reaction to DA2 was to desperately shoehorn features and characters from its predecessor into any hypothetical third game, just to satisfy maraudering fans. 

[Vaeliorin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
In general, I don't say that, but there are a number of posters who hated DA II months before it came out because it had changed elements from DA:O. Yes, I think expectation was the problem. People have even said that if they'd named it something other than Dragon Age, they probably wouldn't have been so disappointed.

If they'd called it something other than a roleplaying game, I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

But if companies went by your and my definition of roleplaying games very little would qualify.

If they went by our definition of roleplaying games, maybe they would make different games.

I think it's more likely they just wouldn't call their games roleplaying games.

I'll admit, it would be nice if I could see a game labeled as a roleplaying game, or see it in the roleplaying section of a store, and have some idea what it would actually be like.  Although, I guess nowadays I can still kind of do that...it's more than likely going to be an action game with a leveling and possibly equipment component.

[Marvin_Arnold]

Well, let's be honest: If you compared Skyrim and DA:Origins, you would already call Origins (or any Bioware game I recall, for that matter) an "interactive movie with few streamlined choices." Well, I'm exaggerating. But DA:O was, of course, miles away from a D&D tabletop game.

And while I love to run around the gorgeous landscapes and environments of Skyrim, and gawk at the details, I miss the character-driven tight story of DA:O.

DA:O, for some reason hit the exact spot for me. It combined a "cinematic experience" (strong and involving story, good voice acting, beautiful design) with enough character customization and combat choices to be a challenge for a NWN veteran. The visual style and mechanics were fitting for a game rooted in the WRPG tradition.

And I think that balance was the secret of its success. And the reason people pre-ordered DA2.

DA2, on the other hand, seemed to come from a different franchise altogether. Why the devs had to throw out the perfect balance between storytelling and RPG challenge that had made DA:O successful and reinvent the wheel is beyond my comprehension.

When you have established a successful in-game universe and acclaimed game design and mechanics, you just don't try to take everything into another (NOT: new!) direction. Nothing in DA2 is "unique". It tries to please everybody (at least everybody under 20) by amalgamating old and worn-out elements from different and incompatible sources.

Furthermore, while DA:O was a computer game that ALSO ran on consoles, now we get a console game that KIND OF runs on the PC as well. I'm an elitist. I want the PC version to be better than the console version, dangit!

Short version: If it ain't broken, don't fix it!

I don't hate the game. I feel sorry for it. A few weeks ago, while I was wandering through the streets of Kirkwall, I kept thinking what could have been if DA2 had got the same production values and love as DA:O. I found the idea of an individual's rise to power told over ten years daring and very tempting.

I even warmed to the idea of a "city adventure". But if you do that, you have to actually present a living city (which is claimed to be "full to the brim" with fugitives), not a handful of buildings with a few zombies standing around. (Anybody remember a NWN community campaign called "Almraiven"? That's how you create an atmospheric city with a far simpler engine...)

I feel more sad than hateful towards the game. The idea was grand, but sadly because of rushed development and incompetent design decisions, it will remain a forgotten footnote of the DA franchise, including its unlucky protagonist. (If the DA franchise ever picks itself up again, that is...)

Our children will ask: "Daddy.app, tell us about Hawke!"

Modifié par Marvin_Arnold, 14 janvier 2012 - 10:35 .