1306 réponses à ce sujet

[eroeru]

 Actually, it is rather interesting how many of the posters here are motivated by dislike and how many are fans... Because as much as I loved Origins, I've never even looked under the relevant forum section. 

On the other hand, I know quite the number of people who don't visit the forums, are gamers, and dislike DA2. I know none who like it or think it as an improvement, or interesting even.

[DragonRageGT]

CrustyBot wrote...

They're jumping on the bandwagon of disgruntled fans who were upset that they couldn't shag Morrigan or play the Warden in Dragon Age 2. These fans, mostly trolls from 4chan and RPG Codex, went on a vendetta to poison public opinion of Dragon Age 2.

Dragon Age 2 was one of the most amazing games to come out in 2011, but fans who had a misalignment of expectations ruined things for BioWare by spamming metacritic. It didn't impact the sales much though - that was Origins' fault.

As previously proven, people didn't like Origins and that's why DA 2's sales were so low in comparison to Dragon Age: Origins.

I sincerely hope you're being extremely sarcastic here!

Funny thing is that I started another DA2 run while waiting for ME3 unlock. It is definitely not a bad game but it lacks most of the stuff that made Origins a masterpiece and believe me, Origins is a masterpiece, whether it's been renegated by EA/BW or not.

DA2 has a good gameplay and improvement on some of the combat mechanics. But the art design change and the extremely annoying VA of Hawke, whatever gender, the lack of multiple races to choose, the uncomparably bluntier party selection screen, the grotesque change from a more sophisticated animation to a more cartoonish one, placed the game in an inferior league to DA:O to me and to a great part of the more than 2 million viewers of my DA:O videos. They say so in their comments. One thing I always did was read them all as they were posted. (And there are uploaders with a much larger viewers count, which also has a majority of viewers stating that Origins is a much better game).

This Origins small piece alone is better than anything we can see in DA2.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKvkzMfomoI (Prison Break combos, just a few of them)

If DA2 had the same huge scope as a world, the same dedication on the details as DA:O has, which for me is so visible in the themed UI, Inventory style, quickbar refinement, level design, items design, party banter/interaction (which is not bad in DA2 but it is inferior in quality and possibilities compared to Origins), crafting system, etc, etc, it might deserve the Dragon Age label in the title. As it is, if it had not the DA brand in the name, it might have made a lot more success.

Imagine if you will, Mass Effect 2 changing the appearance/design of all the races we were used seeing ME1? Do you think it would survive? That was one of the most stupid things in the history of video games. While DA2 fans may defend it to the death, the huge majority disliked what has been done in that department. I blame the change in the Leading Design team for that. Besides, DA2 has decapitated one of the most appealing features of Origins. The finishing moves, which were then copied with extreme success in The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

What I feel about DA2 is that at some point, the team responsible were not the same as in Origins and instead of continuity, they resented something in the process and tried to anihilate any similarity with Origins. Envy, jealousy, pride, stupidity, whatever it was, I could bet that if they did had done DA:O 2, it would be a huge success. Heck, they even attacked Origins in DA2's marketing and invented that b/s about it being too complex, that people is too dumb to enjoy complex games and silent protagonists.

I'm so very happy that Skyrim is an absurdly awesome game, with extremely high sales for the RPG market, with all the playable races and possibilities plus a silent protagonist which gives a lot more room for a lot more dialogues. Just like KoA. It's ridiculously big the amount of dialogues in KoA. If only Skyrim and KoA had the same quality in the dialogues that Bioware is capable of producing they would be aclaimed as two of the greatest games in that department as well.

Modifié par DragonRageGT, 04 mars 2012 - 11:53 .

[AnImpossibleGirl]

DragonRageGT wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...

They're jumping on the bandwagon of disgruntled fans who were upset that they couldn't shag Morrigan or play the Warden in Dragon Age 2. These fans, mostly trolls from 4chan and RPG Codex, went on a vendetta to poison public opinion of Dragon Age 2.

Dragon Age 2 was one of the most amazing games to come out in 2011, but fans who had a misalignment of expectations ruined things for BioWare by spamming metacritic. It didn't impact the sales much though - that was Origins' fault.

As previously proven, people didn't like Origins and that's why DA 2's sales were so low in comparison to Dragon Age: Origins.

I sincerely hope you're being extremely sarcastic here!

Funny thing is that I started another DA2 run while waiting for ME3 unlock. It is definitely not a bad game but it lacks most of the stuff that made Origins a masterpiece and believe me, Origins is a masterpiece, whether it's been renegated by EA/BW or not.

DA2 has a good gameplay and improvement on some of the combat mechanics. But the art design change and the extremely annoying VA of Hawke, whatever gender, the lack of multiple races to choose, the uncomparably bluntier party selection screen, the grotesque change from a more sophisticated animation to a more cartoonish one, placed the game in an inferior league to DA:O to me and to a great part of the more than 2 million viewers of my DA:O videos. They say so in their comments. One thing I always did was read them all as they were posted. (And there are uploaders with a much larger viewers count, which also has a majority of viewers stating that Origins is a much better game).

This Origins small piece alone is better than anything we can see in DA2.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKvkzMfomoI (Prison Break combos, just a few of them)

If DA2 had the same huge scope as a world, the same dedication on the details as DA:O has, which for me is so visible in the themed UI, Inventory style, quickbar refinement, level design, items design, party banter/interaction (which is not bad in DA2 but it is inferior in quality and possibilities compared to Origins), crafting system, etc, etc, it might deserve the Dragon Age label in the title. As it is, if it had not the DA brand in the name, it might have made a lot more success.

Imagine if you will, Mass Effect 2 changing the appearance/design of all the races we were used seeing ME1? Do you think it would survive? That was one of the most stupid things in the history of video games. While DA2 fans may defend it to the death, the huge majority disliked what has been done in that department. I blame the change in the Leading Design team for that. Besides, DA2 has decapitated one of the most appealing features of Origins. The finishing moves, which were then copied with extreme success in The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

What I feel about DA2 is that at some point, the team responsible were not the same as in Origins and instead of continuity, they resented something in the process and tried to anihilate any similarity with Origins. Envy, jealousy, pride, stupidity, whatever it was, I could bet that if they did had done DA:O 2, it would be a huge success. Heck, they even attacked Origins in DA2's marketing and invented that b/s about it being too complex, that people is too dumb to enjoy complex games and silent protagonists.

I'm so very happy that Skyrim is an absurdly awesome game, with extremely high sales for the RPG market, with all the playable races and possibilities plus a silent protagonist which gives a lot more room for a lot more dialogues. Just like KoA. It's ridiculously big the amount of dialogues in KoA. If only Skyrim and KoA had the same quality in the dialogues that Bioware is capable of producing they would be aclaimed as two of the greatest games in that department as well.

Well said. 

[bEVEsthda]

schalafi wrote...

After reading many,MANY, discussions on the good and bad aspects of DA:O vs DA2, I can sort of categorize the discussions into several, separate divisions:

1. There are the purists who want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.

2 There are the DA:O lovers, who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game.

3. There are the new players who never played Origins, or Balder's gate, or maybe none of Bioware's games, who don't have all the issues of 1 and 2,and there are players who play games for more than just the continuation of a previous game, but just either love or hate the game on it's own merits, or lack of them.

4: Then there are the trolls who come to these forums for the sole purpose of disrupting an honest discussion, by flaming, and saying outrageous things to look important. I've been a member of these forums for many years, and I don't think I've ever seen such passionate hatred for any game of Bioware's until these DA2 discussions.

I'm not saying that any poster shouldn't have the right to an opinion, but it should be civil, respectful, and the posters should be open to the opinions of others, so if they disagree, they do it in an adult manner, not like a child having a tantrum.

I personally liked DA2 for what it was, parts of it were brilliant, and parts disappointing, but isn't that what life is all about?  You enjoy the good, and deal with the bad. You don't go out and publicly rant on some street corner when things didn't go your way, and doing it in a game forum is ridiculous.

Since I believe the only purpose of this and similar threads is a desperate attempt to save Dragon Age, I have to comment this post.

I don't believe your categorization is particularly correct. Or perhaps, - it's oversimplified, with additions meant to clarify but which are actually false. And is it really useful? At all? For any other purpose than cultivating prejudices?

You see, when you do it like this, you are taking away opinions from people, and cause them to be distorted to fit into boxes. And you made these boxes in a way that was understandable to you , in a personal attempt to better understand. But this is maybe rather a recipi for misunderstanding?

Just a few examples to make you see my point:
1: I'm one of those who have mentioned Baldur's Gate. And yes, I think BG is a far better and more satisfying game! Does that mean that I want "want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style"?

- No. I want a game, a modern game in the same genre!  Because DA2 is definitely not. Not by a long shot. It's a different kind of game, that doesn't give the same experience nor provides similar enjoyment. DA2 is a much simpler game, with isolated and one-dimensional gameplay that has much more in common with console platformers. (and yes there's some dialogue on the side which you also don't get much hand in, but that doesn't have anything to do with all the reset and set 'combat' levels which are the main element of the gameplay, everything else degraded much to just decoration.)

When I say that I want a game like BG, I'm not saying that I want D&D rules or exactly that style of game. I'm saying I want a game that provides a similar gaming experience and same kinds of gaming enjoyment as BG.
Morrowind and Skyrim succeeds at much of this. And they're certainly neither D&D nor BG style. They take a que from simulation rather than *kewl*, provide sense of traveling, and rich, multidimensional gameplay, free choices, the strategic ties and the responsibility in roleplay. But there are also a lot of things which Bethesda's sandbox sofar is unable to give the same degree of *life* to, as Bioware have previously been able to do in their "story-driven" approach. Yes, the dialogue and characters. But what use are those, if it's just a movie playing between platformer levels?

4: "Trolls".  Well, didn't you ever consider that some might see a tad offense when you wrote categories 2 and 3? Particularly 2. Narrowing down people in little boxes, making them representative for opinions and feelings which you entirely phrased and defined?
Nvm, I'm not here to discuss trolls. I just intend to also put in that people who just attack DA2 critics in various ways, aren't contributing to the discussion or mutual respect either. (I'm not saying you are. I'm just mentioning it here, in regard of 4: )

I believe that if Bioware don't make the right sort of changes for DA3, then DA3 will only sell 300k - 500k. And the DA franchise will be effectively dead. And I also believe that the "right" sort of changes, is not the same as the polish and fixed flaws which DA2-fans ask for in a less "rushed" DA3. Sure, such changes will make DA3 a better game, but they might not put back the RPG experience in Dragon Age. And that is what Bioware should strive to do. And can we please also have a game that takes itself seriously?

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 05 mars 2012 - 12:33 .

[bEVEsthda]

Jasmine96 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Jasmine96 wrote...

I'm not sure whether you guys are referring to the wrong direction as in the story not being about the wardens, darkspawn and all that or if you guys are talking about how they wen't in the wrong direction as in gameplay aspects and story telling like smaller map, less companion dialogue, etc.

If you're talking about how you don't think Dragon Age 3 will go back to being about the grey wardens and blights then yes I agree with you it probably won't. (But then again who knows?

No. Of course we are not talking about the story.

You people are so touchy, it's just a game calm down...

Sorry bout the underline. It's a habit I've taken up lately (as can be seen in my posts). It's not a shout. Just wanted you to see it.
I was just providing you with a brief piece of info.

[Morroian]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Dragon Age II's worst crime is that it retroactively made Dragon Age: Origins a great game.

Funny thing is for me DA2 highlighted the flaws of DAO in hindsight.

[crawfs]

Morroian wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Dragon Age II's worst crime is that it retroactively made Dragon Age: Origins a great game.

Funny thing is for me DA2 highlighted the flaws of DAO in hindsight.

Such as?

[Xilizhra]

It is definitely not a bad game but it lacks most of the stuff that made Origins a masterpiece and believe me, Origins is a masterpiece, whether it's been renegated by EA/BW or not.

I have to contest this. Origins is riddled with irritating flaws that make it unplayable for me at the time being.

If DA2 had the same huge scope as a world, the same dedication on the details as DA:O has, which for me is so visible in the themed UI, Inventory style, quickbar refinement, level design, items design, party banter/interaction (which is not bad in DA2 but it is inferior in quality and possibilities compared to Origins), crafting system, etc, etc, it might deserve the Dragon Age label in the title. As it is, if it had not the DA brand in the name, it might have made a lot more success.

Ugh, I hope not. The Origins UI and inventory systems were hellishly dreary to look at.; so much brown, everywhere. The crafting system was simply an inventory-clogging nuisance. And party design and interaction was miles and miles better in 2, in my own opinion.

Imagine if you will, Mass Effect 2 changing the appearance/design of all the races we were used seeing ME1? Do you think it would survive?

Ohh, if only you knew what was coming. Appearance changes will utterly pale in comparison.

While DA2 fans may defend it to the death, the huge majority disliked what has been done in that department.

I support this freedom from the tyranny of the majority. Elves and kossith look more interesting and distinct now, while dwarves didn't change.

What I feel about DA2 is that at some point, the team responsible were not the same as in Origins and instead of continuity, they resented something in the process and tried to anihilate any similarity with Origins. Envy, jealousy, pride, stupidity, whatever it was, I could bet that if they did had done DA:O 2, it would be a huge success. Heck, they even attacked Origins in DA2's marketing and invented that b/s about it being too complex, that people is too dumb to enjoy complex games and silent protagonists.

And I believe this has no basis whatsoever.

I'm so very happy that Skyrim is an absurdly awesome game, with extremely high sales for the RPG market, with all the playable races and possibilities plus a silent protagonist which gives a lot more room for a lot more dialogues. Just like KoA. It's ridiculously big the amount of dialogues in KoA. If only Skyrim and KoA had the same quality in the dialogues that Bioware is capable of producing they would be aclaimed as two of the greatest games in that department as well.

Silent protagonists are hideously annoying to me and I hope they never return in Bioware games or in any other.

[Edhriano]

I said it once I will say it again.

The most common and obvious reason why people pre-ordered DA2 is because they really like and enjoy DA:O.

[schalafi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

schalafi wrote...

After reading many,MANY, discussions on the good and bad aspects of DA:O vs DA2, I can sort of categorize the discussions into several, separate divisions:

1. There are the purists who want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.

2 There are the DA:O lovers, who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game.

3. There are the new players who never played Origins, or Balder's gate, or maybe none of Bioware's games, who don't have all the issues of 1 and 2,and there are players who play games for more than just the continuation of a previous game, but just either love or hate the game on it's own merits, or lack of them.

4: Then there are the trolls who come to these forums for the sole purpose of disrupting an honest discussion, by flaming, and saying outrageous things to look important. I've been a member of these forums for many years, and I don't think I've ever seen such passionate hatred for any game of Bioware's until these DA2 discussions.

I'm not saying that any poster shouldn't have the right to an opinion, but it should be civil, respectful, and the posters should be open to the opinions of others, so if they disagree, they do it in an adult manner, not like a child having a tantrum.

I personally liked DA2 for what it was, parts of it were brilliant, and parts disappointing, but isn't that what life is all about?  You enjoy the good, and deal with the bad. You don't go out and publicly rant on some street corner when things didn't go your way, and doing it in a game forum is ridiculous.

Since I believe the only purpose of this and similar threads is a desperate attempt to save Dragon Age, I have to comment this post.

I don't believe your categorization is particularly correct. Or perhaps, - it's oversimplified, with additions meant to clarify but which are actually false. And is it really useful? At all? For any other purpose than cultivating prejudices?

You see, when you do it like this, you are taking away opinions from people, and cause them to be distorted to fit into boxes. And you made these boxes in a way that was understandable to you , in a personal attempt to better understand. But this is maybe rather a recipi for misunderstanding?

Just a few examples to make you see my point:
1: I'm one of those who have mentioned Baldur's Gate. And yes, I think BG is a far better and more satisfying game! Does that mean that I want "want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style"?

- No. I want a game, a modern game in the same genre!  Because DA2 is definitely not. Not by a long shot. It's a different kind of game, that doesn't give the same experience nor provides similar enjoyment. DA2 is a much simpler game, with isolated and one-dimensional gameplay that has much more in common with console platformers. (and yes there's some dialogue on the side which you also don't get much hand in, but that doesn't have anything to do with all the reset and set 'combat' levels which are the main element of the gameplay, everything else degraded much to just decoration.)

When I say that I want a game like BG, I'm not saying that I want D&D rules or exactly that style of game. I'm saying I want a game that provides a similar gaming experience and same kinds of gaming enjoyment as BG.
Morrowind and Skyrim succeeds at much of this. And they're certainly neither D&D nor BG style. They take a que from simulation rather than *kewl*, provide sense of traveling, and rich, multidimensional gameplay, free choices, the strategic ties and the responsibility in roleplay. But there are also a lot of things which Bethesda's sandbox sofar is unable to give the same degree of *life* to, as Bioware have previously been able to do in their "story-driven" approach. Yes, the dialogue and characters. But what use are those, if it's just a movie playing between platformer levels?

4: "Trolls".  Well, didn't you ever consider that some might see a tad offense when you wrote categories 2 and 3? Particularly 2. Narrowing down people in little boxes, making them representative for opinions and feelings which you entirely phrased and defined?
Nvm, I'm not here to discuss trolls. I just intend to also put in that people who just attack DA2 critics in various ways, aren't contributing to the discussion or mutual respect either. (I'm not saying you are. I'm just mentioning it here, in regard of 4: )

I believe that if Bioware don't make the right sort of changes for DA3, then DA3 will only sell 300k - 500k. And the DA franchise will be effectively dead. And I also believe that the "right" sort of changes, is not the same as the polish and fixed flaws which DA2-fans ask for in a less "rushed" DA3. Sure, such changes will make DA3 a better game, but they might not put back the RPG experience in Dragon Age. And that is what Bioware should strive to do. And can we please also have a game that takes itself seriously?

And when you make a post like this, criticizing my post,  you are negating my right to an opinion... or isn't  expressing opinions what the forums are all about? I didn't realize that I should have put IMO in for your benefit.

Sorry if my ideas offended you, they weren't directed specifically at you, I was just stating some of my own ideas on why DA2 was disliked.

Modifié par schalafi, 05 mars 2012 - 03:54 .

[zyntifox]

schalafi wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

schalafi wrote...

After reading many,MANY, discussions on the good and bad aspects of DA:O vs DA2, I can sort of categorize the discussions into several, separate divisions:

1. There are the purists who want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.

2 There are the DA:O lovers, who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game.

3. There are the new players who never played Origins, or Balder's gate, or maybe none of Bioware's games, who don't have all the issues of 1 and 2,and there are players who play games for more than just the continuation of a previous game, but just either love or hate the game on it's own merits, or lack of them.

4: Then there are the trolls who come to these forums for the sole purpose of disrupting an honest discussion, by flaming, and saying outrageous things to look important. I've been a member of these forums for many years, and I don't think I've ever seen such passionate hatred for any game of Bioware's until these DA2 discussions.

I'm not saying that any poster shouldn't have the right to an opinion, but it should be civil, respectful, and the posters should be open to the opinions of others, so if they disagree, they do it in an adult manner, not like a child having a tantrum.

I personally liked DA2 for what it was, parts of it were brilliant, and parts disappointing, but isn't that what life is all about?  You enjoy the good, and deal with the bad. You don't go out and publicly rant on some street corner when things didn't go your way, and doing it in a game forum is ridiculous.

Since I believe the only purpose of this and similar threads is a desperate attempt to save Dragon Age, I have to comment this post.

I don't believe your categorization is particularly correct. Or perhaps, - it's oversimplified, with additions meant to clarify but which are actually false. And is it really useful? At all? For any other purpose than cultivating prejudices?

You see, when you do it like this, you are taking away opinions from people, and cause them to be distorted to fit into boxes. And you made these boxes in a way that was understandable to you , in a personal attempt to better understand. But this is maybe rather a recipi for misunderstanding?

Just a few examples to make you see my point:
1: I'm one of those who have mentioned Baldur's Gate. And yes, I think BG is a far better and more satisfying game! Does that mean that I want "want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style"?

- No. I want a game, a modern game in the same genre!  Because DA2 is definitely not. Not by a long shot. It's a different kind of game, that doesn't give the same experience nor provides similar enjoyment. DA2 is a much simpler game, with isolated and one-dimensional gameplay that has much more in common with console platformers. (and yes there's some dialogue on the side which you also don't get much hand in, but that doesn't have anything to do with all the reset and set 'combat' levels which are the main element of the gameplay, everything else degraded much to just decoration.)

When I say that I want a game like BG, I'm not saying that I want D&D rules or exactly that style of game. I'm saying I want a game that provides a similar gaming experience and same kinds of gaming enjoyment as BG.
Morrowind and Skyrim succeeds at much of this. And they're certainly neither D&D nor BG style. They take a que from simulation rather than *kewl*, provide sense of traveling, and rich, multidimensional gameplay, free choices, the strategic ties and the responsibility in roleplay. But there are also a lot of things which Bethesda's sandbox sofar is unable to give the same degree of *life* to, as Bioware have previously been able to do in their "story-driven" approach. Yes, the dialogue and characters. But what use are those, if it's just a movie playing between platformer levels?

4: "Trolls".  Well, didn't you ever consider that some might see a tad offense when you wrote categories 2 and 3? Particularly 2. Narrowing down people in little boxes, making them representative for opinions and feelings which you entirely phrased and defined?
Nvm, I'm not here to discuss trolls. I just intend to also put in that people who just attack DA2 critics in various ways, aren't contributing to the discussion or mutual respect either. (I'm not saying you are. I'm just mentioning it here, in regard of 4: )

I believe that if Bioware don't make the right sort of changes for DA3, then DA3 will only sell 300k - 500k. And the DA franchise will be effectively dead. And I also believe that the "right" sort of changes, is not the same as the polish and fixed flaws which DA2-fans ask for in a less "rushed" DA3. Sure, such changes will make DA3 a better game, but they might not put back the RPG experience in Dragon Age. And that is what Bioware should strive to do. And can we please also have a game that takes itself seriously?

And when you make a post like this, criticizing my post,  you are negating my right to an opinion... or isn't  expressing opinions what the forums are all about? I didn't realize that I should have put IMO in for your benefit.

You have a right to an opinion regardless if we agree or disagree... Just because someone points out the flaws in your argument, which may or may not be correct, does not take away your right to that opinion... Forums is all about expressing your opinion, but you do not reserve the right not to get criticized. Only dictators of nations reserve that right.

Modifié par Cstaf, 05 mars 2012 - 04:00 .

[JeeWeeJ]

schalafi wrote...

And when you make a post like this, criticizing my post,  you are negating my right to an opinion... or isn't  expressing opinions what the forums are all about? I didn't realize that I should have put IMO in for your benefit.

Might just be me, but I didn't have the impression that he was trying to "negate your right to a opinion", he just disagrees with you.

The thing is, I think that you are both right. YES you probarbly could divide the DA2 lovers and the critics in the categories you described schalafi, but I think bEVEsthda and others here also make a good point about just how divided the playerbase seems to be on this game. And no, thats not just on these forums, you can see it everywhere when there´s a discussion going on about DA2. As someone else stated on these forums that there are a LOT more things that players dissagree on (even among themselves) than there are things players agree on. And I think that that's a problem of EPIC proportions for DA3.

Because if they take the DA2 approach they'll ****** off the critics, and if they go the DA:O way they'll ****** off the DA2 fans. And if they make a hybrid, they'll possibly just ****** of both. But I hope I'm completely wrong here, for all our sakes.

It just makes me wonder why they thought that it would be a good idea to mix these two different audiences... (I can speculate, but won't)

[schalafi]

Cstaf wrote...

schalafi wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

schalafi wrote...

After reading many,MANY, discussions on the good and bad aspects of DA:O vs DA2, I can sort of categorize the discussions into several, separate divisions:

1. There are the purists who want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.

2 There are the DA:O lovers, who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game.

3. There are the new players who never played Origins, or Balder's gate, or maybe none of Bioware's games, who don't have all the issues of 1 and 2,and there are players who play games for more than just the continuation of a previous game, but just either love or hate the game on it's own merits, or lack of them.

4: Then there are the trolls who come to these forums for the sole purpose of disrupting an honest discussion, by flaming, and saying outrageous things to look important. I've been a member of these forums for many years, and I don't think I've ever seen such passionate hatred for any game of Bioware's until these DA2 discussions.

I'm not saying that any poster shouldn't have the right to an opinion, but it should be civil, respectful, and the posters should be open to the opinions of others, so if they disagree, they do it in an adult manner, not like a child having a tantrum.

I personally liked DA2 for what it was, parts of it were brilliant, and parts disappointing, but isn't that what life is all about?  You enjoy the good, and deal with the bad. You don't go out and publicly rant on some street corner when things didn't go your way, and doing it in a game forum is ridiculous.

Since I believe the only purpose of this and similar threads is a desperate attempt to save Dragon Age, I have to comment this post.

I don't believe your categorization is particularly correct. Or perhaps, - it's oversimplified, with additions meant to clarify but which are actually false. And is it really useful? At all? For any other purpose than cultivating prejudices?

You see, when you do it like this, you are taking away opinions from people, and cause them to be distorted to fit into boxes. And you made these boxes in a way that was understandable to you , in a personal attempt to better understand. But this is maybe rather a recipi for misunderstanding?

Just a few examples to make you see my point:
1: I'm one of those who have mentioned Baldur's Gate. And yes, I think BG is a far better and more satisfying game! Does that mean that I want "want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style"?

- No. I want a game, a modern game in the same genre!  Because DA2 is definitely not. Not by a long shot. It's a different kind of game, that doesn't give the same experience nor provides similar enjoyment. DA2 is a much simpler game, with isolated and one-dimensional gameplay that has much more in common with console platformers. (and yes there's some dialogue on the side which you also don't get much hand in, but that doesn't have anything to do with all the reset and set 'combat' levels which are the main element of the gameplay, everything else degraded much to just decoration.)

When I say that I want a game like BG, I'm not saying that I want D&D rules or exactly that style of game. I'm saying I want a game that provides a similar gaming experience and same kinds of gaming enjoyment as BG.
Morrowind and Skyrim succeeds at much of this. And they're certainly neither D&D nor BG style. They take a que from simulation rather than *kewl*, provide sense of traveling, and rich, multidimensional gameplay, free choices, the strategic ties and the responsibility in roleplay. But there are also a lot of things which Bethesda's sandbox sofar is unable to give the same degree of *life* to, as Bioware have previously been able to do in their "story-driven" approach. Yes, the dialogue and characters. But what use are those, if it's just a movie playing between platformer levels?

4: "Trolls".  Well, didn't you ever consider that some might see a tad offense when you wrote categories 2 and 3? Particularly 2. Narrowing down people in little boxes, making them representative for opinions and feelings which you entirely phrased and defined?
Nvm, I'm not here to discuss trolls. I just intend to also put in that people who just attack DA2 critics in various ways, aren't contributing to the discussion or mutual respect either. (I'm not saying you are. I'm just mentioning it here, in regard of 4: )

I believe that if Bioware don't make the right sort of changes for DA3, then DA3 will only sell 300k - 500k. And the DA franchise will be effectively dead. And I also believe that the "right" sort of changes, is not the same as the polish and fixed flaws which DA2-fans ask for in a less "rushed" DA3. Sure, such changes will make DA3 a better game, but they might not put back the RPG experience in Dragon Age. And that is what Bioware should strive to do. And can we please also have a game that takes itself seriously?

And when you make a post like this, criticizing my post,  you are negating my right to an opinion... or isn't  expressing opinions what the forums are all about? I didn't realize that I should have put IMO in for your benefit.

You have a right to an opinion regardless if we agree or disagree... Just because someone points out the flaws in your argument, which may be correct or not, does not take away your right to that opinion... Forums is all about expressing your opinion, but you do not reserve the right not to get criticized. Only dictators of nations reserve that right.

I would have never even replied to cstaf except for his statement that  I am" taking away opinions from other people", and "cultivating predjudice"
.
If stating my opinions is denying anyone else from having and expressing opinions, then is every opinion, on this or any forum,  cultivating predjudice, and taking other people's right to express their opinions away?
If that is the case, then you, cstaf, and anyone who disagrees with another poster's view, even mine, must be guilty of what I'm accused of for stating my own opinions.

[zyntifox]

Where did i say that you are "taking away opinions from other people"? I don't really understand this at all, what are you being accused of? I WANT you to express your opinion, but don't assume that if we state a different opinion than yours we are taking away your right to your opinion.

Modifié par Cstaf, 05 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[JeeWeeJ]

Cstaf wrote...

Where did i say that you are "taking away opinions from other people"? I don't really understand this at all, what are you being accused of? I WANT you to express your opinion, but don't assume that if we state a different opinion than yours we are taking away your opinion.

I think (s)he's got got you messed up with someone else..

[zyntifox]

JeeWeeJ wrote...

Cstaf wrote...

Where did i say that you are "taking away opinions from other people"? I don't really understand this at all, what are you being accused of? I WANT you to express your opinion, but don't assume that if we state a different opinion than yours we are taking away your opinion.

I think (s)he's got got you messed up with someone else..

I am very confused...

[eroeru]

 

[bEVEsthda]

schalafi wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

schalafi wrote...

After reading many,MANY, discussions on the good and bad aspects of DA:O vs DA2, I can sort of categorize the discussions into several, separate divisions:

1. There are the purists who want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.

2 There are the DA:O lovers, who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game.

3. There are the new players who never played Origins, or Balder's gate, or maybe none of Bioware's games, who don't have all the issues of 1 and 2,and there are players who play games for more than just the continuation of a previous game, but just either love or hate the game on it's own merits, or lack of them.

4: Then there are the trolls who come to these forums for the sole purpose of disrupting an honest discussion, by flaming, and saying outrageous things to look important. I've been a member of these forums for many years, and I don't think I've ever seen such passionate hatred for any game of Bioware's until these DA2 discussions.

I'm not saying that any poster shouldn't have the right to an opinion, but it should be civil, respectful, and the posters should be open to the opinions of others, so if they disagree, they do it in an adult manner, not like a child having a tantrum.

I personally liked DA2 for what it was, parts of it were brilliant, and parts disappointing, but isn't that what life is all about?  You enjoy the good, and deal with the bad. You don't go out and publicly rant on some street corner when things didn't go your way, and doing it in a game forum is ridiculous.

Since I believe the only purpose of this and similar threads is a desperate attempt to save Dragon Age, I have to comment this post.

I don't believe your categorization is particularly correct. Or perhaps, - it's oversimplified, with additions meant to clarify but which are actually false. And is it really useful? At all? For any other purpose than cultivating prejudices?

You see, when you do it like this, you are taking away opinions from people, and cause them to be distorted to fit into boxes. And you made these boxes in a way that was understandable to you , in a personal attempt to better understand. But this is maybe rather a recipi for misunderstanding?

Just a few examples to make you see my point:
1: I'm one of those who have mentioned Baldur's Gate. And yes, I think BG is a far better and more satisfying game! Does that mean that I want "want games as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style"?

- No. I want a game, a modern game in the same genre!  Because DA2 is definitely not. Not by a long shot. It's a different kind of game, that doesn't give the same experience nor provides similar enjoyment. DA2 is a much simpler game, with isolated and one-dimensional gameplay that has much more in common with console platformers. (and yes there's some dialogue on the side which you also don't get much hand in, but that doesn't have anything to do with all the reset and set 'combat' levels which are the main element of the gameplay, everything else degraded much to just decoration.)

When I say that I want a game like BG, I'm not saying that I want D&D rules or exactly that style of game. I'm saying I want a game that provides a similar gaming experience and same kinds of gaming enjoyment as BG.
Morrowind and Skyrim succeeds at much of this. And they're certainly neither D&D nor BG style. They take a que from simulation rather than *kewl*, provide sense of traveling, and rich, multidimensional gameplay, free choices, the strategic ties and the responsibility in roleplay. But there are also a lot of things which Bethesda's sandbox sofar is unable to give the same degree of *life* to, as Bioware have previously been able to do in their "story-driven" approach. Yes, the dialogue and characters. But what use are those, if it's just a movie playing between platformer levels?

4: "Trolls".  Well, didn't you ever consider that some might see a tad offense when you wrote categories 2 and 3? Particularly 2. Narrowing down people in little boxes, making them representative for opinions and feelings which you entirely phrased and defined?
Nvm, I'm not here to discuss trolls. I just intend to also put in that people who just attack DA2 critics in various ways, aren't contributing to the discussion or mutual respect either. (I'm not saying you are. I'm just mentioning it here, in regard of 4: )

I believe that if Bioware don't make the right sort of changes for DA3, then DA3 will only sell 300k - 500k. And the DA franchise will be effectively dead. And I also believe that the "right" sort of changes, is not the same as the polish and fixed flaws which DA2-fans ask for in a less "rushed" DA3. Sure, such changes will make DA3 a better game, but they might not put back the RPG experience in Dragon Age. And that is what Bioware should strive to do. And can we please also have a game that takes itself seriously?

And when you make a post like this, criticizing my post,  you are negating my right to an opinion... or isn't  expressing opinions what the forums are all about? I didn't realize that I should have put IMO in for your benefit.

Sorry if my ideas offended you, they weren't directed specifically at you, I was just stating some of my own ideas on why DA2 was disliked.

Okay, does this mean you didn't get what I tried to say?
First of all, you didn't offend me. But let's try it this way:

You're making up these categories as you see it. Why? Wasn't the idea that the categories would offer a simplified overview? A sort of taking it all in at a glanze? Weren't you also making this for your own convenience at the same?

Now here's the problem: You're putting in a little bit too much of how you see/want to see things. I already gave you the example of cat. 1: Purists who want game like Baldur's Gate.  You then go on to fill in:

"as close to Baldur's gate, in gameplay, D&D rules, scripted dialogue, and no variations from that style.".
 
This happens to not be true. But you now want every mention of BG to be understood from your category 1?  I really hope you now see that this doesn't work. This doesn't help the discussion in any way at all.

cat 2: People who played DA:O and loved it, and dislike DA2.  You then go on to fill in:
 
"who were expecting some kind of continuation of that game, including choosing their own pc, outfitting their npcs, not having a conversation wheel, having a great amount of territory to cover in the game, being able to effect the way the game ends,etc, etc. and since that didn't happen in DA2, they hate the whole game."
 
Again, this is hardly true for many of those who like DA:O and dislike DA2. If you didn't see my point in my example above, I do hope you see it now. It's hardly right, that these people and all their feedback they have striven to give, should be simply perceived as in the way you defined Cat. 2, is it?  I also hope you now better understand what I meant by you taking away peoples opinions from them, because you didn't appear to be clear on that either.

Hope you were helped by this.

[schalafi]

bEVEsthda, Let's just agree to disagree on this subject. I see what you're saying, but don't see why you are applying it to my point of view on this topic. All I was trying to say was why I thought some people disliked DA2. All of my information came from posts by other disgruntled posters, on other threads some who were courteous, and some who were not , who were saying the same things I was repeating in my post.. It was just my opinion, and if you were offended by my wording, or I didn't make my meaning clear, I'm sorry.

Modifié par schalafi, 05 mars 2012 - 10:51 .

[schalafi]

Cstaf wrote...

JeeWeeJ wrote...

Cstaf wrote...

Where did i say that you are "taking away opinions from other people"? I don't really understand this at all, what are you being accused of? I WANT you to express your opinion, but don't assume that if we state a different opinion than yours we are taking away your opinion.

I think (s)he's got got you messed up with someone else..

I am very confused...

I got you mixed up with bEVEsthda, Too many close together quotes. Sorry

Modifié par schalafi, 05 mars 2012 - 10:53 .

[sycophanticchallenger]

mod paraphrase- I didn't like it. End of discussion.

Modifié par casamar, 06 mars 2012 - 08:40 .

[T1l]

I was and still am extremely disappointed by Dragon Age 2. The biggest enjoyment factors in Dragon Age: Origins, for me, was both the depth of the lore and the difficulty of the gameplay.

Both of these things took a huge backseat in Dragon Age 2. Retcons really, really irritate me.

[PinkDiamondstl]

sycophanticchallenger wrote...

:ph34r:I didn't like it:ph34r:End of discussion.

Dragon Age 2 was a great game . Far from being trash.................

Modifié par casamar, 06 mars 2012 - 08:43 .