410 réponses à ce sujet

[MouseNo4]

Why do people hate Dragon Age 2 so much?

My only problems with the game was the fact that game assets were used over and over and the really crappy story ending. EVERYTHING else i really loved. I cannot think of anything besides those 2 problems that i didnt love. 

If they added a bunch of new game art and locations, and hired someone else to do the story ending - it would have been an awesome game in my opinion. 

Those 2 flaws really dont equal the amount of hate people give it. 

[Chiramu]

DA2 has very little re-playablity because it's so linear :<. And if you do choose a different path, that path doesn't lead to any new story, it just leads to a couple of different lines :<.

It's only disappointing to me. I don't hate it. Just when you want to play a certain character a certain way you hit a wall in DA2 that says "no" and that makes me cry T_T.

[alex90c]

I hate it because it's just ... bad ... and I disagree with the motives behind some of the major changes.

[Faerloch]

DA2's graphics and overall gameplay are a vast improvement from Origins. Even so, a game like Origins where you go on an adventure and build an army is always going to outweigh a game where you witness a revolution...oddly. Cutting Loghain's head off still brought me more pleasure than killing Fenris and Merrill, and watching Elthina explode.

[Esbatty]

I dig Dragon Age 2. Its fun. It tells more of Thedas' story. And it has Merrill and Isabela and Anders and Bohdan and Sandal and Flemeth and I had a Dog. And I named the Dog Mac Tir.

[Ferretinabun]

People certainly do go overboard on DA2 hate. On balance it's not awful. Then again, bits of it are.
For my money, in RPGs, immersion is key. The only real issue is whether you can lose yourself in the world and have fun exploring and believing in it (with all its dragons and magic). But when enemies literally drop out of the sky, when you can run around openly casting blood magic without anyone at all saying a word, when NPCs can meander through a pitched battle you're having (which is okay because they're totally invulnerable anyway), when the plot takes deeply silly and illogical twists, when the umpteenth mansion or cave is totally identical to the dozens you've already explored, when you can backflip across a battlefield in full armour, swinging a sword bigger than you are as though it was light as a feather duster and then have a dozen enemies explode around you, then the illusion is constantly being interrupted and the whole experience feels like a fantasy-set to-do-list. Personally I find it extremely difficult to immerse myself in it like I could so easily in DA:O.
The game did make several marked improvements, and even made a few innovations - some which worked better than others. And as a whole the game balanced out as a reasonable one to play. But its flaws are many and severe.

[FedericoV]

People hated it for many different reason. For many, it was just the cool thing to say. For other, it's the perfect rapresentation of what's wrong in modern game design. Etc. etc.

Imho, the vast majority of players had a mixed view on DA2. But as usual only the most vocal groups were heard (being fans or haters). Mind, that's not fault of the community only. DA2 is a divisive game on purpose. The devs (with the exception of Gaider and some of the other writers) have said very divisive things during the development and right after the publication.

Sometimes I feel divided too about DA2. After finishing it, I feared I was turning bipolar .

[MouseNo4]

In every game that gave me the option, ive always chosen the ranged damage dealer. Be it the Sniper class in SWTOR, the Infiltrator in ME1/2/3 or the Mage in Dragon Age 1/2. So therefore, ive not even tried the Rogue or the Warrior classes in either Dragon Age, aside from occasionally assuming direct control over a companion to do something specific.

So the leap from the utterly boring Mage class in the first game - casting 3 spells... sit there using my staff every few seconds... yeah it was pretty boring.

Leap again a week later, and Dragon Age 2's Mage class is 10 times more exciting to be using a staff and casting Mage spells. More special effects, more flair, more excitement. Even simply using the staff does real damage and isnt just ''point stick at enemy''. You actually moving around, twisting your staff and the bolts isnt some boring sprite. A blue ''hand'' leaps from the end of your staff to fire off the energy bolt at your enemy, with a blue ''fist'' on the final attack in the animation coming from the ground beneath the enemy.

Everything about the game - minus the horrid story ending and the re-used areas - was just ten times better than the first.

Which brings me to my point - how can people hate it so much?

Modifié par MouseNo4, 03 mars 2012 - 09:59 .

[Jerrybnsn]

DA2 had a small story line that was played out in a small world. Unlike the Mass Effect series, your decisions from the first game mattered for nothing in the second. The graphics were poorer considering the backgrounds and npcs, and more cutscenes were added that made the game too linear for an rpg. Speaking of RPG, you were given a character to play instead of creating your own, and you couldn't outfit your own party members with different gear because Bioware wanted everyone to look a certian way by their disgression, not yours. A big letdown was the conversation system that got completely reduced to listening to commentary behind you and only have a couple of conversations with your party members during their quest time. Compare all of that with Origins and DA2 disappoints, hence why it was listed by many sites as the biggest disappointment of 2011.

[MouseNo4]

If - and i repeat IF - they changed the story ending, and added a whole lot of new areas to replace the ones constantly re-used....

It would have been one of my favourite games. And to some degree, i actually enjoy a linear game. I dont like the idea of having choices to make in a game where if you choose one of many options - results in SEVERE punishment. For example - if you choose THIS option, Isabela buggers off, never to return. I had no warning that if i chose that option the companion would PERMANENTLY leave me.

I dont like games that have choices with consequences, and therefore i quite often play the game in a ''dummy'' run to find out all the bad choices - then replay it with that knowledge so i know which choices to then avoid.

[Jerrybnsn]

MouseNo4 wrote...

 

I dont like games that have choices with consequences

So, what is your opinion of the Mass Effect series then?

[Ferretinabun]

MouseNo4 wrote...

 

I dont like games that have choices with consequences

And I think we might have pinpointed the discrepancy between your appraisal of DA2 and that of the 'haters'...

[JeeWeeJ]

It's not a bad game. To a lot of people it's just not a PROPER sequel to Origins. Sure, Origins had plenty of flaws but I think (and a lot of people agree with me here) that it's a brilliant game.

Then came DA2 where even Mike Laidlaw admits that they did a 180 degree turn on pretty much EVERYTHING. Combat, story, setting, style, complexity etc etc etc. And that left a lot of fans of Origins with a proper feeling of "What the f*** is this??????". Mainly because it was advertised as a sequel to Origins. Last time I saw a "sequel" pull a stunt like that, it wasnt called a sequel but a spinoff. (like the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance games)

And dont forget, a lot of people, me included, have blindly bought DA2 BECAUSE it was presented to us as a sequel. It's a sequel to Origins right? What can go wrong?? (and yes, the demo should have been proper warning, but still, I think a lot of people got burned after recieving their preorder)

It's also no secret that Bioware wanted to attract a bigger crowd and, just reading these forums, they might indeed have attracted a DIFFERENT crowd. I see a lot of people here on the forums who love the game mainly because its more action oriented, while I see a lot of criticism (I refuse to use the word hate) from the people who dont really care about that and just want a deep, complex and epic story where their choices matter. And I'm not even mentioning the reuse of environments and more complaints like that here. To make it really black and white, its like inviting WWE fans to a golf match and vice-versa. Not saying one is better then the other, just different!

And because a lot of them (me included) are big fans of the Bioware games of old, we try to let the devs know that we do not like these changes.. As hopeless as it sometimes might seem.

Just to be clear though, I do not think that DA2 was a bad game. It's way better then a lot of other games out there. But is it a proper sequel to Origins? I personally don't think so. To me, it has become Mass Effect with swords and dragons, and that's not what I expected (or wanted) from a series which was created initially as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

[Shevy]

MouseNo4 wrote...

Leap again a week later, and Dragon Age 2's Mage class is 10 times more exciting to be using a staff and casting Mage spells. More special effects, more flair, more excitement. Even simply using the staff does real damage and isnt just ''point stick at enemy''. You actually moving around, twisting your staff and the bolts isnt some boring sprite. A blue ''hand'' leaps from the end of your staff to fire off the energy bolt at your enemy, with a blue ''fist'' on the final attack in the animation coming from the ground beneath the enemy.

Malvernis, is that you?

Besides that, there recently is a thread exactly like this one in the "General Discussion" section. So, for opinions to why some of us, including me, don't like this game, jump over there.

[Cyne]

Because dragon age 2 fell far short of the standard set by its predecessor. People were expecting a similar game, which isn't hard to understand given the name dragon age 2! Yet they got something very different and less imaginative.

One thing I love about the game though is the gameplay itself. the controls are smoother and combat more intuitive than in a lot of rpgs. It also loads quicker. So it's not all bad. And the city of kirkwall can be rather beautiful.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ferretinabun wrote...

MouseNo4 wrote...

 

I dont like games that have choices with consequences

And I think we might have pinpointed the discrepancy between your appraisal of DA2 and that of the 'haters'...

Agreed. 90% of the appeal of DA:O was not flashy combat, awesome graphics or any of the things DA2 tried to add. It was the deep story (which you yourself said it lacked) and its wide range of possible choices and branches. The story always wound up leading to the same overall destination, but between the various permutations of the origins and the choices that offer different outcomes, either in game or in the Epilogue Slides, was what made it the Game of the Year, not anything else.

When DA2 came along and gave us flashy combat, but took away the things that made most of the old fans of DAO love it, it was a slap in the face. THAT'S why there is so much hate.

[Uccio]

JeeWeeJ wrote...

It's not a bad game. To a lot of people it's just not a PROPER sequel to Origins. Sure, Origins had plenty of flaws but I think (and a lot of people agree with me here) that it's a brilliant game.

Then came DA2 where even Mike Laidlaw admits that they did a 180 degree turn on pretty much EVERYTHING. Combat, story, setting, style, complexity etc etc etc. And that left a lot of fans of Origins with a proper feeling of "What the f*** is this??????". Mainly because it was advertised as a sequel to Origins. Last time I saw a "sequel" pull a stunt like that, it wasnt called a sequel but a spinoff. (like the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance games)

And dont forget, a lot of people, me included, have blindly bought DA2 BECAUSE it was presented to us as a sequel. It's a sequel to Origins right? What can go wrong?? (and yes, the demo should have been proper warning, but still, I think a lot of people got burned after recieving their preorder)

It's also no secret that Bioware wanted to attract a bigger crowd and, just reading these forums, they might indeed have attracted a DIFFERENT crowd. I see a lot of people here on the forums who love the game mainly because its more action oriented, while I see a lot of criticism (I refuse to use the word hate) from the people who dont really care about that and just want a deep, complex and epic story where their choices matter. And I'm not even mentioning the reuse of environments and more complaints like that here. To make it really black and white, its like inviting WWE fans to a golf match and vice-versa. Not saying one is better then the other, just different!

And because a lot of them (me included) are big fans of the Bioware games of old, we try to let the devs know that we do not like these changes.. As hopeless as it sometimes might seem.

Just to be clear though, I do not think that DA2 was a bad game. It's way better then a lot of other games out there. But is it a proper sequel to Origins? I personally don't think so. To me, it has become Mass Effect with swords and dragons, and that's not what I expected (or wanted) from a series which was created initially as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

Yep, there is no hate, as you said, only massive "WTF?? " after launching the game. This will remain in my memory for a long time. DA2 is a ok game on its own. As a sequal to Origins? Not even close.

[MouseNo4]

What do i think of Mass Effect? Pretty much the same thing. Thankfully the consequences for choices have been pretty lenient in that series - not including 3 of course.

I dont know who Malvernis is. Nor have i played Balders Gate.

Given, i only played the entire series and all of its DLC to kill time waiting for ME3, so im not losing sleep over it.

In my honest opinion, the story in BOTH games was just meh. Pretty average, and i completed everything i could find in both games. If i had to choose which game i liked more - it would be 2, rather than Origins. I finished Origins in almost a week. I then finished 2 in 2 days. Not because one was shorter than the other (not actually sure on that) but because i was far more engaged in 2, and i had to force myself to keep going in Origins.

I never said 2 lacked story. What i did say was the story's end sucked. It is honestly like they ran out of story and whipped up an ending in 5 minutes.

One thing i will totally agree on - 2 is very little like Origins. I have no intention of ever replaying either game, but if i were ever to choose one to replay again - it would always be 2. Ive played tons of games where the gameplay really was awesome - but the story totally sucked and i just lived with that.

[MouseNo4]

No need to reply to this anymore - i have the answer i was looking for. Thanks.

[hoorayforicecream]

There are a lot of reasons why people hated it. DA2 did several things that divided the fanbase. Some of the things it did were intentional. Some of them were not. The aggregation of these factors caused a good number of people to dislike it (some of whom are very passionate about just how much).

Some of the things that I'm fairly sure Bioware did not wish to go into the final game, but ended up happening because of scheduling constraints and such. These are almost universally disliked.

• Badly hidden waves of combat
• Repetitive battle sequences
• Short development cycle
• Recycled map use
• Sufficient recognition of the effects of choices
• Insufficiently hidden rails - DAO was very linear as well, but it hid the rails better.
• Some items did not feel like they were worth looting (trash items specifically)
• Insufficient differentiation of results from critical path plot choices, e.g. final boss fight is the same regardless of choices.

Some of the things that were outside of developer control, but people complain about anyway:

• Overzealous marketing
• Publisher influence

And then there are the things that are genuinely different on purpose, that some people didn't like, but others did. These tend to be much more hotly debated topics.

• Voiced protagonist
• Dialogue Wheel vs Not Dialogue Wheel
• Set character background vs lots of origins
• Faster-paced combat system vs Slower paced combat (Note: this is not the same thing as encounter design)
• Talent trees instead of talent progression
• Cross class Combos and strong class differentiation, instead of freedom to customize a dual wielding warrior, or heavily armored mage
• All love interests are bisexual
• More cinematic conversations (e.g. the ability change camera angles or a character to throw a wine bottle, sit at a table, or move around during the conversation), vs conversation anywhere
• Crafting system simplification
• Rivalry/Friendship system vs Approval/Disapproval system
• DA2 Characters vs DAO Characters
• Iconic looks vs Customized appearances

People who dislike the game tend to look at the first list and try to lump those issues in with their opinions on the third list as justification. People who like the game tend to try to separate the first list from the third. You can tell which the developers think are more important, because most of the issues from the first list are addressed (or better) in the DLC for DA2, but not from the third list.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 03 mars 2012 - 02:55 .

[zyntifox]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There are a lot of reasons why people hated it. DA2 did several things that divided the fanbase. Some of the things it did were intentional. Some of them were not. The aggregation of these factors caused a good number of people to dislike it (some of whom are very passionate about just how much).

Some of the things that I'm fairly sure Bioware did not wish to go into the final game, but ended up happening because of scheduling constraints and such. These are almost universally disliked.

• Badly hidden waves of combat
• Repetitive battle sequences
• Short development cycle
• Recycled map use
• Sufficient recognition of the effects of choices
• Insufficiently hidden rails - DAO was very linear as well, but it hid the rails better.
• Some items did not feel like they were worth looting (trash items specifically)
• Insufficient differentiation of results from critical path plot choices, e.g. final boss fight is the same regardless of choices.

Some of the things that were outside of developer control, but people complain about anyway:

• Overzealous marketing
• Publisher influence

And then there are the things that are genuinely different on purpose, that some people didn't like, but others did. These tend to be much more hotly debated topics.

• Voiced protagonist
• Dialogue Wheel vs Not Dialogue Wheel
• Set character background vs lots of origins
• Faster-paced combat system vs Slower paced combat (Note: this is not the same thing as encounter design)
• Talent trees instead of talent progression
• Cross class Combos and strong class differentiation, instead of freedom to customize a dual wielding warrior, or heavily armored mage
• All love interests are bisexual
• More cinematic conversations (e.g. the ability change camera angles or a character to throw a wine bottle, sit at a table, or move around during the conversation), vs conversation anywhere
• Crafting system simplification
• Rivalry/Friendship system vs Approval/Disapproval system
• DA2 Characters vs DAO Characters
• Iconic looks vs Customized appearances

People who dislike the game tend to look at the first list and try to lump those issues in with their opinions on the third list as justification. People who like the game tend to try to separate the first list from the third. You can tell which the developers think are more important, because most of the issues from the first list are addressed (or better) in the DLC for DA2, but not from the third list.

Good list. Pretty much a list of all my complaints from the second game, except the bisexual romances which i don't really mind. What i fear is the BioWare will do nothing about the third list for the sequel.
I do believe that hate for a game is not a bad thing, apathy is much worse. Atleast hate for a game show that there are fans who are passionate about the series.

Modifié par Cstaf, 03 mars 2012 - 03:26 .

[JeeWeeJ]

Cstaf wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

People who dislike the game tend to look at the first list and try to lump those issues in with their opinions on the third list as justification. People who like the game tend to try to separate the first list from the third. You can tell which the developers think are more important, because most of the issues from the first list are addressed (or better) in the DLC for DA2, but not from the third list.

Good list. Pretty much a list of all my complaints from the second game, except the bisexual romances which i don't really mind. What i fear is the BioWare will do nothing about the third list for the sequel.
I do believe that hate for a game is not a bad thing, apathy is much worse. Atleast hate for a game show that there are fans who are passionate about the series.

Agree on everything. And -playing devils advocate here- it MIGHT be that they can't do anything about the third list because the way the current game is built won't allow it.

But, I can't help but have this nasty feeling in my gut that that isn't the case.. Please prove me wrong Bioware...please???????

[Cathey]

I loved DA2. I liked the new design, the new characters, the new battle system (DA2 is the only game I enjoy playing a mage in) but my favourite part was having all LI's bisexual. It meant I had 2 to choose from each run rather than just having the one in Origins.

I did miss that the areas weren't as big as Origins but DA2 had better DLC.

I'm not sure what they could improve on for DA3 because I will probably love it regardless, unless they turn it into a really small game or something. That would be awful.

However DAO and DA2 had the best CC's out of any BioWare game - don't mess it up too much in the sequels

Modifié par Cathey, 03 mars 2012 - 04:55 .

[Joy Divison]

@ Hoorayforicecream:

Excellent post except for "People who dislike the game tend to look at the first list and try to lump those issues in with their opinions on the third list as justification."

Justification?  Why do critics of the game need to "justify" their opinions of things they don't like in the third part of your list?  Speaking for myself, if I include a list of asepcts of the game I dislike, I don't "lump" in paratroop reinforcements with the fast-paced combat system which lends itself to mindlessly hitting the "attack nearest enemy" button repeatedly not because I wish to undermine the fast-based combat choice with something everyone knows is bad, it is because I dislike both elements.

In effect, you almost answered the OP's question with your third list.  That is *a lot* of INTENTIONAL changes.  That does not include the unitentional changes (i.e. your first list), and the inentional changes that are hotly debated which you did not include in your third list such as skewed combat mechanics (i.e. PCs and NPCs playing by different rules), the removal of gameplay elements like persuasion and trap-making, the artistic changes to the darkspawn and art direction in general, retcons, etc.  That's a lot of changes to a title which had a pretty good fan and critical reception...

Modifié par Joy Divison, 03 mars 2012 - 05:55 .

[alex90c]

DA:O had cross-class combos