1306 réponses à ce sujet

[jbrand2002uk]

There's nothing disjointed about the plot its just not the "ooooooh gimme MOAARRR player agency" that you enjoy.
Sometimes you just have to accept that you cant always be the all seeing all knowing person of kicks evil butt saves everyone rules the world and gets the girl. Somehow I get the feeling that the word NO does not exist in your world and neither are you accustomed to it, and you know what that saddens me deeply at the hollowness of your existence living on the princple that MOAAAARR= Better

[batlin]

thats1evildude wrote...

batlin wrote...

Yeah, instead of saving the WORLD, you save one city. The only real difference I see here is the scale, and that DA2's plot is disjointed.

That Hawke saves Kirkwall is beside the point. He changes the world in some pretty drastic ways.

Changes the world? Kinda, the Circles just decide to emancipate themselves from the Chantry, but that's hardly as significant as saving everyone from being slaughtered by a demonic force.

And the actions of the Circle are not in repsonse to Hawke's actions; they're in response to ANDERS' actions. The Circle decides to turn on the templars regardless of who you fight for.

Really, ANDERS is more important and influential than Hawke is in DA2. Hawke is a glorified enforcer.

Modifié par batlin, 14 mars 2012 - 12:18 .

[batlin]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

There's nothing disjointed about the plot its just not the "ooooooh gimme MOAARRR player agency" that you enjoy.
Sometimes you just have to accept that you cant always be the all seeing all knowing person of kicks evil butt saves everyone rules the world and gets the girl. Somehow I get the feeling that the word NO does not exist in your world and neither are you accustomed to it, and you know what that saddens me deeply at the hollowness of your existence living on the princple that MOAAAARR= Better

No, the game is unquestionably disjointed. The deeproads plot has nothing to do with the Qunari. The Qunari have nothing to do with the templars vs. mages. There's no buildup to any of the events unless it happens within the act it falls in.

Compare to Loghain. The buildup to the Landsmeet near the end of the game begins soon after you character's origin story, and your interaction with his devices doesn't cease until near the end. Loghain is a better villain because of it. What if instead, soon after Loghain betrays the wardens you bring him to justice only hours afterward? Not only does Loghain nto come off as that big of a threat, that's also a third of the story that could have been building up another villain that would be defeated in the final act.

And you can't always accept that you're a big bad hero? Yeah, I guess not, but then if you had a choice between playing Captain Kirk and Ensign Ricky, who would YOU want to play as? The hero who through skill and guile comes out on top, or the guy who's really not that special and will probably die before the end credits roll?

Modifié par batlin, 14 mars 2012 - 12:17 .

[Elhanan]

Anomaly- wrote...

Well I admit freely that what I say is my own opinion. If that constitutes bias, everyone here is biased. If I had any bias at all, it was in the beginning when I really wanted to like DA2, having spent around $70 pre-ordering it. If I'm biased against DA2 now, how do you suppose that happened? It's because of things that I believed were objectively worse than DA:O. I'd ask you to point out anything I claimed as fact that isn't.

It's still not credible, because your actions make no difference. It doesn't matter what you've said, or your dominant personality type, there is nothing that will make Aveline interested in you, nor make the others uninterested. Those things are decided before you even make your Hawke, and no matter how you develop him/her, nothing changes. You just sit back, hit the heart icon and watch as Hawke either succeeds or fails, neither of which can you influence nor will it ever change. How is that credible? It's completely inorganic.

So it is not credible because your actions possibly have no result in influencing others from their chosen path? Funny that; sounds like my last gf exactly....

One may go for the Romance, or not; that is a choice. Being able to succeed or fail in those choices is then up to the Romantic Interest. Seems reasonable.....

[Elhanan]

batlin wrote...

What makes Aveline's romance more cedible/believable than Morrigan's, Zevran's, Anders', Leliana's, etc? because she's resistent to romance? Are you aware that in Romeo and Juliet the title characters fell in love instantly upon seeing each other? Are you going to make the argument that Aveline's romance in DA2 is more credible and believable than Romeo and Juliet's?

Cannot judge; have actually made it through DA2....

[jbrand2002uk]

I'd rather play as Ensign Ricky as the whole point of a game is to be a break from RL and RL is already too full of this idea that wealth, power, material gain and fame is everything and isnt it funny that the people who have all those things are usually the saddest loneliest people around.

More does not always equate to better Quality is always superior to Quantity I still play both DAO and DA2 and for all of DAO's Quantity sadly its lacking very much in Quality, sure it has a big story with lots of areas but alas those areas are very sparse and the story has been done so many times before its rather dull and tedious and then there's the combat its rather too slow and not challenging at all even on Nightmare difficulty and the AI is just horrendous and dont get me started on the clipping Issues( Your big Greatsword cuts a darkspawn clean in 2 yet passes through your companion who doesnt get so much as a scratch).

Without a doubt I'd trade all the many areas and massive amount of content in for just one Original creative idea for a story that doesnt follow the heard of mindless sheep that is Big Bad Ass Hero Saves the World Again land

For that DA2 is instantly better for Daring to be different even if it failed because its better to be different from the crowd rather than shamelessly imitating it add nauseum

[batlin]

Elhanan wrote...
Cannot judge; have actually made it through DA2.... ../../../images/forum/emoticons/sleeping.png

...What?

jbrand2002uk wrote...

I'd rather play as Ensign Ricky as the whole point of a game is to be a break from RL and RL is already too full of this idea that wealth, power, material gain and fame is everything and isnt it funny that the people who have all those things are usually the saddest loneliest people around.

Lol, Hawke is WAY more wealthy and famous than the Warden was. Ever since the end of Act 1 Hawke was a noble living in the wealthiest part of the city. He/she had friends in high places. He/she was deemed a "champion" and is famous throughout the city. The Warden on the other hand is a fugitive for most of the game. He or she sleeps outside in a tent. The vast majority of people the Warden meets are distrustful of him/her. I entirely disagree with your assumption that it's not realistic to play as a wealthy famous person, but your assertions don't even match up to your own delusions!

More does not always equate to better Quality is always superior to Quantity I still play both DAO and DA2 and for all of DAO's Quantity sadly its lacking very much in Quality, sure it has a big story with lots of areas but alas those areas are very sparse and the story has been done so many times before its rather dull and tedious and then there's the combat its rather too slow and not challenging at all even on Nightmare difficulty and the AI is just horrendous and dont get me started on the clipping Issues( Your big Greatsword cuts a darkspawn clean in 2 yet passes through your companion who doesnt get so much as a scratch).

Yeesh....where to start...Speaking of sparse areas, Kirkwall is one city full of featureless brown buildings. In DA:O there aren't any cities as big, no, but there's diversity so that the setting is never dull. you have Denerim. you have Redcliffe. you have Orzammar. You have the Brecillian Forest. You have the Circle Tower. All of them are fleshed out despite not being as large as Kirkwall.

And the epic journey is done too many times? Guess what? So is the rags-to-riches story. So is political intriigue. GTA. Saint's Row. Harvest Moon. FFXII. All of these do those same themes. If we were to include movies? Forget about it. Slumdog Millionaire. Rocky. Memoirs of a Geisha. Scarface. Goodfellas. The themes in DA2 are no less overdone than the hero's journey is. Give me a break. Clipping? Maybe if you paid attention to the combat in DA2, those 7-foot sowrds pass through your allies all the same.

[katiebour]

batlin wrote...

No, the game is unquestionably disjointed. The deeproads plot has nothing to do with the Qunari. The Qunari have nothing to do with the templars vs. mages. There's no buildup to any of the events unless it happens within the act it falls in.

Compare to Loghain. The buildup to the Landsmeet near the end of the game begins soon after you character's origin story, and your interaction with his devices doesn't cease until near the end. Loghain is a better villain because of it. What if instead, soon after Loghain betrays the wardens you bring him to justice only hours afterward? Not only does Loghain nto come off as that big of a threat, that's also a third of the story that could have been building up another villain that would be defeated in the final act.

And you can't always accept that you're a big bad hero? Yeah, I guess not, but then if you had a choice between playing Captain Kirk and Ensign Ricky, who would YOU want to play as? The hero who through skill and guile comes out on top, or the guy who's really not that special and will probably die before the end credits roll?

Act I:  Hawke is a penniless, powerless refugee who builds a name for him/herself and ends up going on an expedition, making money, and becoming a person of note in Kirkwall.  Becomes acquainted with Arishok.

Act II:  Hawke's wealth and influence put him/her in a position to make a difference in their new city, and because of the fact that they are a person of action, ability and influence are relied upon to intercede with the Qunari.  Hawke is building up political credibility and influence by acting on Dumar's behalf, ending with the defeat of the 'Shok and crowning as Champion.

Act III:  Now having garnered the attention of all powerful parties in Kirkwall, Hawke is poised to settle the biggest question of all- in a city that has gone to the Void over the past seven years, who will he/she support?  When the mage/templar question becomes open warfare Hawke is there to choose a side.  The epilogue states that word spreads across Thedas of the Champion's actions and choice, and presumably will garner support for one side or the other.

Anders proves to the mages that they MUST fight back.  Templars are going to slaughter them all anyway, even though they're innocents and HE is the guilty party, simply because they are a convenient target, Meredith is insane, and the system as it exists is set up to facilitate the abuse of Templar power, up to and including the deaths of hundreds of innocent mage men, women, and children.  His actions and targets are about stirring the mages to action, which he does when they flee to other cities and spread the conflagration across Thedas.

Anyway- the three acts aren't "mages, templars, mages, templars."  It's about a buildup of power and influence that presumably will have a lasting impact on the conflict to come (we hope. XD)

In Origins the whole werewolves/elves plotline had very little to do with defeating the Archdemon.  It was simply a means for the Warden to gain allies in the coming conflict.  The same could be said for the Circle Tower, Andraste's Ashes/Arl Eamon, and the Orzammar succession.  None of them relate directly to killing the Archdemon- it's about gathering allies and power for the coming conflict.  Ditto for the three Acts in DAII.

As far as playing Ensign Ricky, well I guess that depends on what he does, hm?  There's certainly the possibility for an interesting story- maybe he sacrifices his little red-shirt life, leaving behind a grieving family.  Maybe he pilots a shuttle full of refugees to safety before holding off an invasion fleet long enough for them to escape, then tragically dies.  The Everyman can still act in heroic ways and can still be an interesting and moving character (especially if you're a little sick of Captain Kirk. XD)

[katiebour]

batlin wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

batlin wrote...

Yeah, instead of saving the WORLD, you save one city. The only real difference I see here is the scale, and that DA2's plot is disjointed.

That Hawke saves Kirkwall is beside the point. He changes the world in some pretty drastic ways.

Changes the world? Kinda, the Circles just decide to emancipate themselves from the Chantry, but that's hardly as significant as saving everyone from being slaughtered by a demonic force.

And the actions of the Circle are not in repsonse to Hawke's actions; they're in response to ANDERS' actions. The Circle decides to turn on the templars regardless of who you fight for.

Really, ANDERS is more important and influential than Hawke is in DA2. Hawke is a glorified enforcer.

I absolutely agree that Anders' actions are more important than Hawke in DAII.  He really is the central character, IMO (which is why I love the angggsssstt of romancing him. )  That being said, in Asunder there's a one-off line that mentions Anders, writing him off as a madman.  Nobody knows who Anders is.  He's just some crazy mage who did what he did, the spark to tinder.  It is Hawke's name that spreads through Thedas- Hawke's choice that carries.  The mages rebel and throw off the rule of the Templars, and the Templars abandon the Chantry to hunt the mages, and beyond that word spreads that the famous Champion of Kirkwall supported one or the other.  The biggest failing about the endgame is that we don't yet know what effect Hawke's choice will have on the spread of the war and the sides that are chosen by the people of the Free Marches, Ferelden, Orlais, Antiva, etc.  

That's not to say that Hawke's choice won't have repercussions, but rather that we simply don't know what they are, yet.  We need that damn DLC or DAIII to see what happens next (and yes, I agree that needing to buy another game or expac to get a satisfying ending to the original game is unfortunate.  But I'll still shell out my money for it with glee. XD)  We need to see if Hawke sparing Anders brings down the wrath of Prince Vael and his putative Starkhaven army upon Kirkwall, apostates in general, and whether it is a significant factor in the war to come.  We need to see if the Arishok's death brings open holy war from the Qunari, especially considering the affront that a bunch of bas-saarebas running amok is to the Qun.

[batlin]

katiebour wrote...

Act I:  Hawke is a penniless, powerless refugee who builds a name for him/herself and ends up going on an expedition, making money, and becoming a person of note in Kirkwall.  Becomes acquainted with Arishok.

The issues regarding the templars vs. mages are barely touched upon. The Qunari settlement is barely considered a problem.

Act II:  Hawke's wealth and influence put him/her in a position to make a difference in their new city, and because of the fact that they are a person of action, ability and influence are relied upon to intercede with the Qunari.  Hawke is building up political credibility and influence by acting on Dumar's behalf, ending with the defeat of the 'Shok and crowning as Champion.

Hawke's influence does nothing to prevent the situation from turning to violence. Had Hawke not gained any wealth or influence in act 1, he would be in no less a position to defeat the Arishok. Also, mages vs. templars is again barely touched upon save for Anders' sidequest. Neither the previous nor the following acts have real significance in act 2.

Act III:  Now having garnered the attention of all powerful parties in Kirkwall, Hawke is poised to settle the biggest question of all- in a city that has gone to the Void over the past seven years, who will he/she support?  When the mage/templar question becomes open warfare Hawke is there to choose a side.  The epilogue states that word spreads across Thedas of the Champion's actions and choice, and presumably will garner support for one side or the other.

Regardless of who Hawke allies with, the result is the same. The Circles turn on the chantry. Hawke's actions in act 3 are insignificant compared to Anders, who actually does succeed in his aim. Hawke is a glorified bystander who may as well have remained some urchin on the street because his/her actions in both previous acts had little to do with the climax. Hawke's actions didn't change Thedas. Anders' did.

In Origins the whole werewolves/elves plotline had very little to do with defeating the Archdemon.  It was simply a means for the Warden to gain allies in the coming conflict.  The same could be said for the Circle Tower, Andraste's Ashes/Arl Eamon, and the Orzammar succession.  None of them relate directly to killing the Archdemon- it's about gathering allies and power for the coming conflict.  Ditto for the three Acts in DAII.

Yes, they do. The reason you go to each of those places in DA:O is because you're building an army. Each of those questlines are directly related to defeating the archdemon at the end of the game, and solving each group's issues are for the purpose of having that army to begin with. The Urn of Sacred Ashes especially so because it's Arl Eamon's support that brings down Loghain in the Landsmeet.

As far as playing Ensign Ricky, well I guess that depends on what he does, hm?  There's certainly the possibility for an interesting story- maybe he sacrifices his little red-shirt life, leaving behind a grieving family.  Maybe he pilots a shuttle full of refugees to safety before holding off an invasion fleet long enough for them to escape, then tragically dies.  The Everyman can still act in heroic ways and can still be an interesting and moving character (especially if you're a little sick of Captain Kirk. XD)

The Warden was no less an everyman thn Hawke. You're attributing a lack of choice, clearly a matter of the limited development cycle, to an artistic choice. No, that's wrong. In real life, you have INFINITE choice. There's no difference between Captain Kirk and Ensign Ricky besides the fact that Kirk is smarter, more skilled, and has more experience.

Modifié par batlin, 14 mars 2012 - 02:31 .

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Maria Caliban wrote...

batlin wrote...

Is it at least accepted that DA2 went the wrong direction?

Accepted by whom?

BioWare? They've agreed that they made mistakes. Not so much that they went the wrong direction as they misstepped while going the right way.

HiroVoid wrote...

Then, Mr. Crustybot, how come Origins was praised with multiple awards and glowing praise while Dragon Age II became near the top on many site's and reviewer's list of most disappointing games?

Why did Twilight get a multimillion dollar movie series while the Orphan's Tales lingers in obscurity?

Oh yeah, people suck.

Neither the movies nor the books were particularly well-received though. Dragon Age: Origins was a GoTY contender.

[Killjoy Cutter]

batlin wrote...

Yeesh....where to start...Speaking of sparse areas, Kirkwall is one city full of featureless brown buildings. In DA:O there aren't any cities as big, no, but there's diversity so that the setting is never dull. you have Denerim. you have Redcliffe. you have Orzammar. You have the Brecillian Forest. You have the Circle Tower. All of them are fleshed out despite not being as large as Kirkwall.

Denerim alone feels larger than all of Kirkwall, and it's one dinky Ferelden city. 

Kirkwall's alienage appears to have room for about three dozen elves...


How is it that the Templars can't find escaped mages?  I could search all of Kirkwall in a few days by myself... 

[Killjoy Cutter]

batlin wrote...

Regardless of who Hawke allies with, the result is the same. The Circles turn on the chantry. Hawke's actions in act 3 are insignificant compared to Anders, who actually does succeed in his aim. Hawke is a glorified bystander who may as well have remained some urchin on the street because his/her actions in both previous acts had little to do with the climax. Hawke's actions didn't change Thedas. Anders' did.

Hawke is also consitantly railroaded into not doing things and that lack of action repeatedly ends up costing him or her dearly later on. 

[Elhanan]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Denerim alone feels larger than all of Kirkwall, and it's one dinky Ferelden city. 

Kirkwall's alienage appears to have room for about three dozen elves...

How is it that the Templars can't find escaped mages?  I could search all of Kirkwall in a few days by myself... 

Dunno; perhaps someone else 'feels' that The Hanged man is a better place to hang than a campfire. Or they 'feel' that the Arishok is way cooler than Archie. Or they 'feel' that the Alienage is better kept than Denerim's muddy slum, and has fewer second class citizens. Etc..

Feelings are subjective; opinions are not fact.

And the demons just beyond the thin Veil are at least partially responsible for clouding the minds of those hunting Mages.

[Faerloch]

@batlin and everyone engaged in that argument:

Well said. I don't know where to begin.

I was mostly upset I spent Origins hating Leliana and happy that I killed her, only to have her join the hunt for my characters. I liked that Bioware originally intended for there to be no canon but for what we create ourselves, but realize that put major constraints on story development.

[Das Tentakel]

Faerloch wrote...

I was mostly upset I spent Origins hating Leliana and happy that I killed her, only to have her join the hunt for my characters. I liked that Bioware originally intended for there to be no canon but for what we create ourselves, but realize that put major constraints on story development.

Actually it doesn't, unless the writers themselves have fallen in love with the character and wish her to survive, no matter what. Same with Anders, who can die at the end of Awakening.

It is not that difficult to write around a character's death, and that is as follows: You don't let him or her figure in the sequel at all, and continuity is served by simply referring to his/her death, without it having any real implications for the plot. This is in the context of a videogame sequel of course. 

Frankly, I am personally baffled why Bioware stumbles over things like this. Flemeth's return is okay - she's very nearly equivalent to 'the villain you love to hate' - and in stories these are often characters that somehow survive and return to plague the hero. Besides, her return is clearly foreshadowed by Morrigan in DA:O. 

But other characters? For crying out loud, all that is needed is a little note saying 'He can die. Is not going to figure in the sequel, that's going to ****** off players'. It's not exactly quantum mechanics <_<

[seraphymon]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

I'd rather play as Ensign Ricky as the whole point of a game is to be a break from RL and RL is already too full of this idea that wealth, power, material gain and fame is everything and isnt it funny that the people who have all those things are usually the saddest loneliest people around.

More does not always equate to better Quality is always superior to Quantity I still play both DAO and DA2 and for all of DAO's Quantity sadly its lacking very much in Quality, sure it has a big story with lots of areas but alas those areas are very sparse and the story has been done so many times before its rather dull and tedious and then there's the combat its rather too slow and not challenging at all even on Nightmare difficulty and the AI is just horrendous and dont get me started on the clipping Issues( Your big Greatsword cuts a darkspawn clean in 2 yet passes through your companion who doesnt get so much as a scratch).

Without a doubt I'd trade all the many areas and massive amount of content in for just one Original creative idea for a story that doesnt follow the heard of mindless sheep that is Big Bad Ass Hero Saves the World Again land

For that DA2 is instantly better for Daring to be different even if it failed because its better to be different from the crowd rather than shamelessly imitating it add nauseum

Quality is not always better than quantity. it depends on how it all measures up, for instance  if there is only one thing good about a game that is say perfect. Yet another has alot of pretty good stuff, even if not the best, than i would think  more is better in this case. That i guess is YMMV.

I really dont get how you see the areas of DAO as sparse by definition. I mean thats the whole point of areas is to be spread out when give the size of a country. Its not like its open world anyways where you spend time traveling. just cause it isnt as fast traveling from on point on the interface map as in DA2, doesnt equate as being bad IMO.
The combat for dull and tedious well i cant argu against how you feel about it, alot of people see that, personally i feel DA2 is too fast for its own good in this type of game, the only thing i didnt like in DAO was the shuffling and unsmoothness of it, but overall i think it was better. But i will say that i found it more challeneging than DA2 ever could be. DA2 is like a modern day beat em up, with horrible setup for anything strategy based side from certian boss fight or encounters. Which coincides that if there is any bad AI its in DA2, for bot henemies and allies. At least in DAo my guys did what i told them, in DA2 they still at times get unresponsive, and when you seperate yourself far enough, even with the hold button the allies still try to come closer.

and im sry. but  even with an original idea, (which DA2 really isnt) that doesnt mean its instantly better just cause its different. The rags to riches, or rise to power or whatever DA2 story was meant to be has been done alot of times as well, however i would tend to agree that if an idea was as original as it can be, and done well than i would say it might be better for the story aspect anyways. I wouldnt say overall game cause theres other factors such as gameplay etc. But DAO  even being cliched as it was was done well. I dont care if its been done 1000 times,. (by now everything has) it was done good. DA2 disjointed story was just executed poorly IMO. Sying something is better even if it failed just cause its more original is wrong IMO, if that concept was put in  contest and judging i really dont think people would take kindly to it at all. Such food contests. "oh even though this dinner tasted horrible, but it wins 1st prize cause its original." give me a break.

[Anomaly-]

jbrand2002uk wrote...

No it didnt go in the wrong direction it went in a different direction but alas many players have become greedy stuffing their faces silly on lashings of player agency which results in the cries of spoiled children when a game like DA2 comes out.

You can't be serious. How are people spoiled for wanting player agency or silent protagonist? These are things people
have had for a long time, and it's not like either are next-gen tech features. If anyone would be spoiled, it would be those who enjoy a voiced protagonist as that is the design that requires a lot more resources, and the benefits of which are highly disputable.

jbrand2002uk wrote...
More does not always equate to better Quality is always superior to Quantity I still play both DAO and DA2 and for all of DAO's Quantity sadly its lacking very much in Quality, sure it has a big story with lots of areas but alas those areas are very sparse and the story has been done so many times before its rather dull and tedious and then there's the combat its rather too slow and not challenging at all even on Nightmare difficulty and the AI is just horrendous and dont get me started on the clipping Issues( Your big Greatsword cuts a darkspawn clean in 2 yet passes through your companion who doesnt get so much as a scratch).

Contradictions abound there. Origins easily had more varied and detailed areas, while DA2's were repetitive and undetailed. That isn't an opinion, that's just a fact. DA2 kept several of the systems of Origins like crafting, runes, lockpicking and the like, but they were all shadows of their former selves. You are aware that the developers even stated that the reason the repeated environments stuck out so badly was because they decided to go for more content (ie: more fetch quests) of less quality and variance, rather than less content of higher quality and variance? DA2 was all about quantity over quality, not the other way around. Again, that's a fact. You can search for the interview if you like.

As for combat, this is a bit more subjective, but I found the combat in Origins to be much more deep and satisfying. However, there was relatively less of it. Yet again, quality over quantity. In my experience, the AI in Origins was also much more varied and responsive. In DA2 I often found my companions standing around doing nothing after I told them to do something. Enemy AI also works by it's own rules in DA2, using skills separate from the player (and much, much fewer of them).

Elhanan wrote...
So it is not credible because your actions possibly have no result in influencing others from their chosen path?

It's not credible because that path is chosen before they've even met or intereacted with you, and there is nothing you can do to influence it.

One may go for the Romance, or not; that is a choice. Being able to succeed or fail in those choices is then up to the Romantic Interest. Seems reasonable.....

Except that the romantic interest is always interested/disinterested, regardless of what Hawke looks like, how (s)he acts, what (s)he does, etc. It makes no difference. Honestly, I can't tell at this point if you really don't understand what I'm saying or if you're intentionally pretending not to.

Modifié par Anomaly-, 14 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[Elhanan]

Anomaly- wrote... *snip*

It's not credible because that path is chosen before they've even met or intereacted with you, and there is nothing you can do to influence it.

Except that the romantic interest is always interested/disinterested, regardless of what Hawke looks like, how (s)he acts, what (s)he does, etc. It makes no difference. Honestly, I can't tell at this point if you really don't understand what I'm saying or if you're intentionally pretending not to.

And again, as a narrative of what has already occured, if a Romance option is chosen, the path ahead does not require further variations. It either went forward, or Hawke hit a wall.

Honestly, I don't really care, because I do not believe that DA2 went the wrong direction. The Romance Friendship/ Rivalry is an improvement from the Gifts of DAO, IMO. And I hope for further improvements; perhaps like those seen in SWTOR.

[Anomaly-]

Elhanan wrote...
And again, as a narrative of what has already occured, if a Romance option is chosen, the path ahead does not require further variations. It either went forward, or Hawke hit a wall.

And that's why those romances don't interest me in the least. In contrast to DA:O, I am just an observer and not an active participant. This is just another reason why Hawke is not my character, and why I find it exceedingly hard to actually role-play in DA2. Not only do my actions as Hawke have no affect on his/her success or failure, I don't even know what Hawke will say when I click the icon. It was almost always something that made me cringe, delivered with body language and mannerisms that I would have never intended. In fact, the only thing I do know before Hawke does it is the result, which happens to be the only thing I don't want to know ahead of time. It's entirely backwards to me.

I feel much more like I'm watching a moderately interactive movie, rather than playing a game; especially an RPG. That, among numerous other reasons, is why I feel DA2 went the wrong direction.

Modifié par Anomaly-, 14 mars 2012 - 07:11 .

[Elhanan]

Anomaly- wrote...

And that's why those romances don't interest me in the least. In contrast to DA:O, I am just an observer and not an active participant. This is just another reason why Hawke is not my character, and why I find it exceedingly hard to actually role-play in DA2. Not only do my actions as Hawke have no affect on his/her success or failure, I don't even know what Hawke will say when I click the icon. It was almost always something that made me cringe, delivered with body language and mannerisms that I would have never intended. In fact, the only thing I do know before Hawke does it is the result, which happens to be the only thing I don't want to know ahead of time. It's entirely backwards to me.

I feel much more like I'm watching a moderately interactive movie, rather than playing a game; especially an RPG. That, among numerous other reasons, is why I feel DA2 went the wrong direction.

While I am all for more exact prompts in the games, I am able to use the same imagined experience to seperate what is presented by the PC be it silent or Full VO, as long as the the VO is not distractive (eg; profanity, wrong voice, etc).

But if I press the Icon that is supposed to lead to Romance in a game, No; do not need to fight the many paths of conflict to have it fail.

And it feels right to me....

[batlin]

Elhanan wrote...

While I am all for more exact prompts in the games, I am able to use the same imagined experience to seperate what is presented by the PC be it silent or Full VO, as long as the the VO is not distractive (eg; profanity, wrong voice, etc).

But if I press the Icon that is supposed to lead to Romance in a game, No; do not need to fight the many paths of conflict to have it fail.

And it feels right to me....

It sounds like you'd much prefer a JRPG.

[Elhanan]

batlin wrote...

It sounds like you'd much prefer a JRPG.

Do they also have Shakespeare? No thanks; will stick with DA....

[eroeru]

Elhanan wrote...

While I am all for more exact prompts in the games, I am able to use the same imagined experience to seperate what is presented by the PC be it silent or Full VO, as long as the the VO is not distractive (eg; profanity, wrong voice, etc).

But if I press the Icon that is supposed to lead to Romance in a game, No; do not need to fight the many paths of conflict to have it fail.

And it feels right to me....

An interesting position, and one I haven't seen yet.
But for me, a game will always need to go through seven regions of hell to be even slightly interesting - while a game obviously cannot be on par with life's many expectancies, difficulties and varied nature - if it leaves you sweating over moving forward then it at least gives a sense of thriving, and that of achievement. This is thanks to the logically-structuredely forseen goal in games - something I personally feel life lacks. 

But although they never really nail this feeling perfectly, as developers have also needs, this should be a goal to making a great game anyway... variety.

Modifié par eroeru, 14 mars 2012 - 11:29 .

[Valmarn]

Djoxy wrote...

It definitely is, bioware said that DA3 is going to be the best of the both games... I just want DA:O2...

People always say that the newest addition to a franchise is going to be the better than its predecessors. Unless they brought Brent Knowles back, I'm not holding my breath.

Likewise

Modifié par Valmarn, 14 mars 2012 - 11:14 .