63 réponses à ce sujet

[Hubrah]

After replaying DA2 this weekend after picking it up back in februrary almost a year ago, I admit I was wrong on my initial criticism of the game.

There are of course many things that could have been done better. However,I enjoyed the story of Hawke. I believe the character is well designed ( and I got to see a little bit more in DLC ).

I believe my initial criticism of the game came from the simple fact : The story of my Warden was over. I loved the original game so much, it is hard for me to let go of a character that I invested so much time into.
I believe if BioWare had continued the story of the Warden or at least put the Warden in a significant role in DAII, criticism of the game would have been better.

I hope now that they do not get rid of Hawk and the Warden in DA:III for a new main protagonist. Losing two significant characters I put much time into and really liked  would be hard to swallow, especially when I feel neither of their stories are by far complete.

I think a lot of us who bash DAII simply miss our Wardens. What I would give for one more adventure. The Wardens story should not end with DA:O, let it continue ( with Hawkes ) in DA:III

[LinksOcarina]

I think the problem is not that fully Hubrah. While I like the game biggest issue comes from the fact that it is different from Origins, and not just in the sense of who you play.

But I also think Bioware is experimenting with the conventions of narrative a lot in Dragon Age, and I hope it continues because so far I am intrigued by it enough to keep playing the games.

[Hubrah]

I agree, the game itself is almost entirely different from that of Origins. I think that is why it turned so many people off, including myself. Not only the big things, but the smaller things as well are different.

[HiroVoid]

Neither the Warden or Hawke are going to be the protagonist in DA3 to go ahead and soften the blow.

[Ponendus]

I think that DA2 was not a bad game in it's own right. It just was such a shock when we were all expecting the follow up to DAO. I too have replayed it now and have less of an emotional investment in it, and enjoyed it much more. It's a fun game at times.

It's just a really bad sequel is all.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I agree with Ponendus.

I completely understood that the Warden had to go and I didn't mind that at all. I completed DA2 several times. It's not a bad game, but it isn't a great one. The critique I have is based on multiple runs. The more I play it, the more obvious it gets.

[philippe willaume]

welcome to the club

Act III is still way below par though :-)

[Rxdiaz]

I have to disagree. I recently tried to play through DA2 again and had to give up.
I really don't like it at all. I don't like the story, I don't like the game play, I really find
little if anything I do like....

YMMV....

[ElitePinecone]

I'm still critical of the general lack of polish and breadth, but subsequent DLCs have shown the team's response has been in good faith and pretty excellent.

A lot of the things I disliked about DA2, including the disjointed story and narrow scope, can't really be improved by DLC and remain pretty frustrating every time I try to play through it.

I'm disappointed that the decision was made to produce and release the game in such a short timeframe, for whatever reasons. I wholeheartedly believe that given the time and resources, it could have been a much better experience. It was a good game for what it was, but my opinion hasn't changed.

[LinksOcarina]

Ponendus wrote...

I think that DA2 was not a bad game in it's own right. It just was such a shock when we were all expecting the follow up to DAO. I too have replayed it now and have less of an emotional investment in it, and enjoyed it much more. It's a fun game at times.

It's just a really bad sequel is all.

Maybe the problem is we should not look at it as a seqeul, and instead look at it as a series?

[Shevy]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Ponendus wrote...

I think that DA2 was not a bad game in it's own right. It just was such a shock when we were all expecting the follow up to DAO. I too have replayed it now and have less of an emotional investment in it, and enjoyed it much more. It's a fun game at times.

It's just a really bad sequel is all.

Maybe the problem is we should not look at it as a seqeul, and instead look at it as a series?

I tried to think of and judge it on its own, but I always end up comparing it to Origins and then "meh". It's the curse of a series.

[Shevy]

double post

Modifié par Shevy_001, 20 février 2012 - 04:12 .

[JasonPogo]

Even when taken by itself the game disapoints. The fact that the third chapter was not finished. Also no game in any area would be forgivin for the blatent reuse of maps over and over. At least other games try and hide it. I dont hate everything about the game bit these things are just bad. No game would get a pass for it.

[alex90c]

I still think DA2 was a big pile of bollocks, and the worst game I've ever played.

I don't think your initial criticism is fair though, while I loved my Warden(s) to bits, the DAverse has to progress, and after a game, an expansion and a boatload of DLC I think it's only reasonable to move on to another character. It's just that this new character happened to be completely ineffectual, obnoxious, and when using different tones sounded completely bipolar. That's just scraping the surface mind you, my criticisms of the game are many, and they've already been discussed at so much length there's no point beating that poor, dead horse.

[Dragoonlordz]

My view has not changed, maybe because lack of enjoyment gained through playing the core game I was not willing to invest yet more money into the franchise but I shouldn't be required to in order to decide if the retail game is enjoyable or not. My issues with it remain, my review talks about the retail game not the DLC for reason stated above. The content of that review remains exactly how I still feel about the core game. Overall the game is still (imho) average at best and extremely poor sequel, the DLC might be epic for all I know but I have no intention of buying and investing more into them to make up for lack of enjoyment of main product.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 20 février 2012 - 05:47 .

[CJKenley]

philippe willaume wrote...


Act III is still way below par though :-)

QFE

Also, I'm in the "Decent game, but poor follow up to DAO" camp. 


Edit: Expanded initial comment

Modifié par CJKenley, 20 février 2012 - 05:54 .

[OMTING52601]

Like AngryFrozenWater, I've replayed DA 2 so many times my family can quote lines, ROFL! As a stand alone fantasy adventure game, I think it's quite entertaining. The ambient chatter from party members alone is often hilarious and helps me forget that the character I'm playing talks a lot but can't actually do anything proactive or stop anything that the story has planned to happen(i.e. mother's thing, arishok stuff, etc).

That said, I'm pretty sure DA 2 wasn't designed to be a stand alone tale. It's supposed to be the furthering of Thedas' story, and as such, the game when rated on what it's been marketed as, will always be about a 3.5 on a scale of ten. The smaller problems, repeated dungeons, limited mobility, of course affect the score, but much less for me than it may for others. The biggest flaw, IMO, is the absolute failure of story writers/designers to incorporate player choice into determining the flow of the story(and to affect change on not only PC's story, but story of the city and its people) - in short creating an RPG game completely missing the one element inherent in all RPG games - the player telling their own story within the confines of the game. Changing my PC's tone of voice from obtusely nice to bluntly a**hole isn't me telling the story; it's me choosing what attitude the PC has while getting shuffled about through a story s/he can't control and would, likely, not be a part of in the first place - given that option.

Rating it as an fantasy actioner, however, I'd give it a solid 7. I really like the combat and the NPC chatter is par excellence, IMO. The spawning enemies, IMO, is the fun part of hack and slash and I really do have fun on hard/insanity just slashing through the exploding bodies hoping to get a cutscene where I can see the PC covered, head-to-toe, in blood and gore

Modifié par OMTING52601, 20 février 2012 - 06:15 .

[Fireblader70]

This is the way I look at Dragon Age 2 - they had a year to make it, nothing more, and they completely revamped the entire series. Combat changed, graphics changed, narrative changed and nothing was re-used from Dragon Age Origins minus the soundtrack.

For Bioware to create that entire game in just a year shows how damn hard they worked. Yes, environments are re-used, customisation is reduced and the narrative falls flat (depending on your opinion), but in the end it is a finished, in-depth RPG that continues onwards from the first game while setting up events for Dragon Age 3.

Spider-Man: Edge of Time had a year of development, and compare that to Dragon Age 2. Also KotOR 2, where the game was basically unfinished. No, Dragon Age 2 may not be the greatest game available, but the amazing effort that went into its making is what I respect.

[alex90c]

"nothing was reused"?

The setting, the lore, characters, armours, weapons, engine .... none of that was reused?

i think you are quite mistaken.

Even then, saying they did quite good with the time they had is no excuse in my opinion, they simply should have spent more time making the game rather than rushing it out.

[Bestyj669]

Nothing changed really.

As a hack and slash it would get a 6/10. I'd say good ol' Diablo 2 beats it there, not to mention Dark Souls.

As RPG it still gets 0/10. None of the choices I make affects what's happening, no one gives a damn about me using outlawed magic, I cannot customize MY character at all (never mind the companions) ... So yeah ...

[Fireblader70]

alex90c wrote...

"nothing was reused"?

The setting, the lore, characters, armours, weapons, engine .... none of that was reused?

i think you are quite mistaken.

Even then, saying they did quite good with the time they had is no excuse in my opinion, they simply should have spent more time making the game rather than rushing it out.

I was talking in the sense of how the game was made, not the universe itself. Character models and all that, you know? Maybe the odd thing here or there was re-used, but from what I can see, most of the stuff is made specifically for Dragon Age 2.

Spending more time on the game would have required going against the wishes of EA. Not the best of ideas... unfortunately, Dragon Age 2 was a way of getting money to make up for SWTOR and Mass Effect 3.

[TEWR]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Ponendus wrote...

I think that DA2 was not a bad game in it's own right. It just was such a shock when we were all expecting the follow up to DAO. I too have replayed it now and have less of an emotional investment in it, and enjoyed it much more. It's a fun game at times.

It's just a really bad sequel is all.

Maybe the problem is we should not look at it as a seqeul, and instead look at it as a series?

I looked at DAII on its own when I played it. Didn't help. I still thought it was a really bad game.

I only compared it to Origins when I was done playing it, which made DAII worse for me.

[Hubrah]

Not being able to continue the Warden story is not my only complaint. DA:O was a perfect blend of epic story, combat system and environment. DA:II suffered from pretty much everything, the combat vs enemies was repetitive, the environment was re-used, and the story was not fully fleshed out as it should have been.

I enjoyed both games but DA:II is just an entirely different beast from that of Origins. I always thought DA was a back-to-roots RPG style series. I think BioWare wanted to do something different in DA:II and they did ( and they know our response ).

I guess it is better to view DA:II as not a sequel to DA:O.

[ScotGaymer]

ElitePinecone wrote...

I'm still critical of the general lack of polish and breadth, but subsequent DLCs have shown the team's response has been in good faith and pretty excellent.

A lot of the things I disliked about DA2, including the disjointed story and narrow scope, can't really be improved by DLC and remain pretty frustrating every time I try to play through it.

I'm disappointed that the decision was made to produce and release the game in such a short timeframe, for whatever reasons. I wholeheartedly believe that given the time and resources, it could have been a much better experience. It was a good game for what it was, but my opinion hasn't changed.

Two words my friend.

Bioware Marketing.

That's why this game got rushed out.

As near as I can tell from posts by the Devs, by the Marketing Team, and by our community admins is that the BW Marketing dept made a lot of erroneous assumptions about Dragon Age, and its fans. Assumptions about where we as a community wanted the game to go, assumptions about what we liked and what we didn't that had no basis in real factual evidence, and assumptions about what kind of marketing we would respond well to.

They got all of it wrong.

And as a result the information they supplied to their higher ups in Bioware and EA was wrong, which led the bosses to give the DA2 dev team such a painfully short development cycle.

At least thats what i believe happened.

I think that because of how the marketing and how the higher ups all responded to the criticism of the game post release (first with shock, and then completely dismissive). The only people that seemed unsurprised by the backlash were the dev team and writing team. Or rather they seemed surprised at the level of vitriol being levelled at the game at themselves, but not at the fact that they were being criticised.

I still advocate the DA dev team being allowed to create an expansion for DA2 that would repair the patently broken Act 3, and give the game the Act 4 that we were promised (10 year time period promised, and we got 7).
And before anyone complains that it wouldn't be fair or feasible to have an expansion that changes the ending of the game, and fills it out a bit I need only point you at Fallout 3 and its Broken Steel expansion (granted BS sucked as much as F3 did but it sucked less than the F3 MQ).


@Hubrah.
.

I like DA2 but I completely agree with that actually.

Dragon Age "2" isn't really a sequel; but instead another game in the same universe a bit like how Battle for Middle Earth (1 and 2) and The Third Age were both LOTR games but completely different.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 21 février 2012 - 04:56 .

[bluewolv1970]

recycled maps and spawning enemies still get annoying by act 3...Act 3 is also still a mess story wise and the game still provides and unsatisfactory ending...acts 1 and 2 do seem to age pretty well and are enjoyable...the game itself still is bad based on the terrible act 3 and recycled maps and enemies drop out of thin air..