410 réponses à ce sujet

[Pelle6666]

Very bad dialogs at times, the story dies half way through the game, the relations you develop with the other characters never takes you anywhere, the combat is toooooo fast and unrealistic, the finishers are gone, the environments are very repetitive and the dialog wheel was a really bad idea.

The only way I managed to enjoy the game was by playing as a mage and always choosing the sarcastic/humorous dialog alternative.
I loved dragon age origins and really looked forward to the sequel, now I only hope that Bioware manage to save this franchise with dragon age III.

[Wulfram]

This may get rotten vegetables thrown at me, but..

I think the hate on the reused locations is a bit overdone. I mean, they went too far in DA2, but if they'd managed to have individual locations for the major quests I wouldn't have minded if the sidequest dungeons were a little repetitive, particularly if they'd been a bit less blatant about it.

I think it'll be a real shame if the reaction to DA2 means that they end up scrapping interesting sidequests rather than open themselves to more criticism on this front.

[Morroian]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I find that these are truly the only real complaints that have been focused on by the devs. Undeniably, choice does matter in Legacy. But choice doesn't matter in MotA, so I feel that Bioware is focusing solely on these complaints and if they have time then do they focus on choice. It seems they haven't really learned from the folly that was focusing on gameplay over story.

 
You've got a good point about MOTA but the devs have made a point on here about the whole choices issue, not just in Legacy, so I guess the proof will be in DA3.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

When the devs make the same comments in regards to what DAII is going to be as the marketing guys did, then it wasn't outside of their control.
 

  
Sure it was, when the devs are making public statements they would be required to toe the party line.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

That depends on who brought the idea of the 2 year dev cycle to EA's table, doesn't it? If it was Bioware that gave the idea to EA, then it is their fault and wasn't outside of their control.

If it was vice versa, then I agree that it wasn't within their control.

I've seen people claim both arguments and I dont' know which is fact. Some say EA told Bioware to make a game in 2 years while others say Bioware told EA.

I've seen people even claim that Bioware is EA, which makes sense. But it wouldn't make sense to say EA told EA to do this, unless EA refers to itself in the 3rd person.

Also, I find that the devs are to blame for the dev cycle. They halted DAO DLC with the reasoning of "DAII coming along great!" and similar statements -- albeit I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of their comments -- and now they're admitting they rushed the game. From the musical composer to the lead writer to some of the other devs themselves.

In the end, they have only themselves to blame.

   
But if the release date was mandated by EA higher ups then the dev cycle is out of their control. We don't know what went on behind the scenes in this regard so apportioning blame is just speculation. 

[Scott Sion]

The ending didn't have as many choices as DAO. The main story was divided into the Quinari plot and the mage VS Templar plot, they should have gone with one or the other and expanded it instead of creating two different plots. No origin stories and I couldn't choose my race. Too many class restrictions that weren't there in DAO.

Don't get me wrong I loved DA2, but a lot of the things that made me go crazy about DAO were removed. There were a lot of things I liked better about DA2 though so if they take the awesome features from origins and 2 then 3 will be a Dragon age of grand epicossity.

[adawg828]

It has no replay ability

[TEWR]

[post containing lots of spoilers removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 05 mars 2012 - 06:51 .

[TEWR]

Morroian wrote...

You've got a good point about MOTA but the devs have made a point on here about the whole choices issue, not just in Legacy, so I guess the proof will be in DA3.

As I said, actions speak louder then words. So yes, the proof will be in either future DAII DLC -- if there is any, which I highly doubt -- or DAIII.

Morroian wrote...

Sure it was, when the devs are making public statements they would be required to toe the party line.

no it wasn't. Bioware marketing is a part of Bioware itself. The marketing needs to be truthful and the Bioware devs of DAII could've -- and should've -- told them to tell us what the game really was about instead of presenting lies.

Morroian wrote...

But if the release date was mandated by EA higher ups then the dev cycle is out of their control. We don't know what went on behind the scenes in this regard so apportioning blame is just speculation.

Maybe it would be more correct to say partial blame until more facts present themselves.

[hoorayforicecream]

TEWR, stop posting spoilers in a non-spoiler forum.

[TEWR]

Technically, I avoided spoilers but then Joy Division posted spoilers in response to me, so I felt no need to continue avoiding those same spoilers. When I quoted you on page 2, I was very adamant about avoiding spoilers and warning people about them in threads I linked to where spoilers were revealed.

But alas, I'll edit it to be as vague as possible, even if it's a futile endeavour. Not that I'm putting any blame on JD or anyone else that reveals spoilers. I've found that the very nature of the forums brings spoilers about, no matter how hard we try to avoid it.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[Joy Divison]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I understand that Bioware wanted that person to have the item , but I wanted the choice to demand the scroll to be believable.

All Hawke does is just go "Welp, I tried". Fact of the matter is, he didn't try. If he had done any of the things I proposed in the two threads I linked to, then that would've been a choice that mattered.

But that's just it.  It's all about perspective.  Believable to who?  To you, maybe.  To me, nope.  [spoilers removed]

As a PC, I personally found it more insulting when a DM said, "sure, go ahead a roll" and would auto-fail it regardless of what the dice came up as.

So what consitutes choice between you and me is very different...even though we share a mutual dislike of something that we both agree is not a choice.

What's a game studio to do?

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 05 mars 2012 - 06:52 .

[TEWR]

But that's just it. It's all about perspective. Believable to who? To you, maybe. To me, nope. Tallis may have been a Mary Sue, but her escape needed to be made while Hawke was distracted at the manor, not in an open field chatting with him being only two feet away. And since Hawke is most adept at killing things, Quanri agents I would see as another plot device.

I don't see her as a Mary Sue. Granted, that ending made her seem more Sue-ish simply because of how bad it was so it didn't help her to not appear as such.

So what consitutes choice between you and me is very different...even though we share a mutual dislike of something that we both agree is not a choice.

Do you agree though that had one of the ideas I proposed been the ones that we actually had, it would've been loads better then what we got, even if you would've still disliked it?

And how would you define what constitutes a choice? I mean, I know how I define a choice. But how do you define it?

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 mars 2012 - 06:18 .

[sangy]

I think a lot of people like DA2. I just think people who dislike will post about it more than those who like it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Although, I do personally think that the Dragon Age team does in fact care. I think DA3 will improve upon DA2 in a way to "try" to appease a broader audience. Of course, pleasing everyone is in fact impossible.

You think DA2 got some hate. Check out Mass Effect 3 forums. I've never seen so much negativity on a forum ever. Then again, these forums allow a lot of garbage to be posted. Nothing wrong with likes and dislikes posted, but ME3 is plastered with negativity before the game is released.

I remember the forums just before DA2 was released everyone was so excited. I think it's why Mike Laidlaw and the DA team gave out so much free stuff, like DLC and clothing, etc... So much bad talking for ME3 and no free goodies for the babies. I don't blame them.

I liked DA:O better than DA2, but I liked DA2 a lot.

[Stanley Woo]

Some spoilers removed.

[elearon1]

plnero wrote...

The ending didn't have as many choices as DAO. The main story was divided into the Quinari plot and the mage VS Templar plot, they should have gone with one or the other and expanded it instead of creating two different plots. 

I actually preferred the two plot approach, as it made the story feel as if it were about the city, rather than about some save the world style metaplot.  

The big development problem was manifested in the fact that the third act was obviously rushed and did not get the kind of quality attention the second act benefited from.  Additionally it felt like there was supposed to be another Epilogue period after act three, more than just Varric's wrappup commentary, but they ran out of time so came up with the coppout statement "the end of the story happens in year 10 even though you only play the game through year 8". 

Had act 3 been on a level with the rest of the game this would be sitting on my "must play" short list right next to Planescape: Torment; as it is, it's still high up there, but won't be that game I rave to people about ten years from now. (as I do with the aforementioned PS:T) 

[TEWR]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Some spoilers removed.

I thought I edited it to remove the spoilers, saying "that person" and whatnot?

In fact, I'm positive that I got rid of the spoilers in my section of the post. Maybe I forgot to change them in JD's post that I quoted, but did my whole post need to get snipped?  

MY POOR POST, LOST TO THE BLACKENED ABYSS FOR ALL ETERNITY.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 mars 2012 - 07:30 .

[TEWR]

I will say that one thing that really annoys me -- sometimes even angers me -- about the DA series is the horrible gameplay.

And no, when I say "the horrible gameplay" I don't mean the new animations

One thing about the gameplay in particular: AI in both games is horrendous. Biggest instance that comes to mind is in Redcliffe, where not only do the Knights charge in to a fire trap that they themselves wanted to use against the corpses but also how Lloyd charges into a group of corpses with only a dagger.

Some may enjoy that, citing it as "tactical" trying to keep them alive without them killing themselves. I call it bad game design -- well, really bad combat design. But combat is part of game design -- and from a story standpoint ludicrous considering Owen is making armor and weapons for the militia (which Lloyd joined against his will).

AI -- and indeed, all gameplay. Not just combat -- needs to be worked on immensely in the future, though obviously not at the expense of the story and choices.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 mars 2012 - 10:46 .

[Jerrybnsn]

simfamSP wrote...

DA2 had a small story line that was played out in a small world

A story which had such a big aftershock that it caused the Mage uprsing around Thedas... now that's not small.

unlike the Mass Effect series, your decisions from the first game mattered for nothing in the second

That's because NONE of your matters should have mattered. You are in Kirkwall, with a different character and a different story. NONE of your choices in Dragon Age: Origins should have mattered, the references and small cameos were enough. How was choosing the Dalish to help you in Origins going to have the slightest effect in Kirkwall other than a small line? The import bugs however are another thing.

The graphics were poorer considering the backgrounds and npcs, and more
cutscenes were added that made the game too linear for an rpg.

Yet you praise Mass Effect?

 

As long as you agree it was a small story in a small world. But the effects of the "Mage/Templer conflict" doesn't  have a feeling of an aftershock in DA2 but only in the new DA book and perhaps the next DA game.  And personally, I feel that the Mage/Templer conflict is only slightly interesting as a sidequest, not as a main storyline.

And my praise for Mass Effect specifically is around your decision making from one game to the next.  No other game out there has done this.  That's why the game gets so much praise, not because it is a weak RPG, or a weak shooter game, but because it allows you to have a feeling of creating the story and progressing that through several games.   ME2 was a step down from ME1, but they didn't do a 180 on the series like they did with Dragon Age which caused DA2 to be several steps down from Origins.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 05 mars 2012 - 12:08 .

[Fast Jimmy]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I will say that one thing that really annoys me -- sometimes even angers me -- about the DA series is the horrible gameplay.

And no, when I say "the horrible gameplay" I don't mean the new animations

One thing about the gameplay in particular: AI in both games is horrendous. Biggest instance that comes to mind is in Redcliffe, where not only do the Knights charge in to a fire trap that they themselves wanted to use against the corpses but also how Lloyd charges into a group of corpses with only a dagger.

Some may enjoy that, citing it as "tactical" trying to keep them alive without them killing themselves. I call it bad game design -- well, really bad combat design. But combat is part of game design -- and from a story standpoint ludicrous considering Owen is making armor and weapons for the militia (which Lloyd joined against his will).

AI -- and indeed, all gameplay. Not just combat -- needs to be worked on immensely in the future, though obviously not at the expense of the story and choices.

You want good gameplay AND good story?


Geez, TEWR, way to be greedy! All BSN forumites are the same... complaining about the impossible!

Who has ever played a video game with good story and good gameplay? Its just not possible. /deactivating sarcasm font

[HiroVoid]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
One thing about the gameplay in particular: AI in both games is horrendous. Biggest instance that comes to mind is in Redcliffe, where not only do the Knights charge in to a fire trap that they themselves wanted to use against the corpses but also how Lloyd charges into a group of corpses with only a dagger.

Okay.  Charging into the fire was horrendous.

[Joy Divison]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


Do you agree though that had one of the ideas I proposed been the ones that we actually had, it would've been loads better then what we got, even if you would've still disliked it?

Not really.  It's kind of like siding with the mages and, well, you know [spoilers].  No matter what I have my character do, the outcome is pre-decided.

And how would you define what constitutes a choice? I mean, I know how I define a choice. But how do you define it?

See above.


That being said, it is possible to design a scenario in which I would find it believable Tallis winds up with the scroll.  The biggest hurdle to overcome in MoTA is that she's presented as *so* awesome it almost seems like she winds up with it because of her awesomeness rather than anything else.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 05 mars 2012 - 02:31 .

[Farbautisonn]

I never bought DA2.

Friends from when I was playing Pen and Paper, told me to stay well clear. Then a couple of days ago I celebrated my sons birthday with a LAN thing in an internet cafe. 12 13year old boys fragging eachother left right and center. I had about an hour of time to myself and they had DA2 so I thought... what the hell. Ive gotta be here anyway?

I only played an hour. Thats not much. Granted its possible I didnt even scrape the surface. But I felt I was playing Diablo on a console. The "soul" of the game wasnt there. The dialogue seemed forced and what ever story there was seemed both a bit illogical and forced too.

When flemeth arrived I was kind of like... "wat?". Longwinded and not as curt but more cruelty. We certainly arent in any doubt that she is "naughty".

And the combat. Seriously. I never played a single Bioware game for the combat. And I felt like I was in a pew pew only with a mage staff. I never really got a "feel" for the caracters, and I never really got to care about them... I found myself mildly interested in them, but I felt I was playing a completely different game in a completely dfferent setting. "DA:O, Return of the pew pew".

Ill likely buy when It gets through as a discount game on Origin, but honestly I didnt like it one bit. I want to see where the characters I came to love in DA;O are up to and whilst I honestly like the Idea of two interwoven stories... the game didnt really get me interested. Not interested enough to buy it at full price... and thats where the profit margin is the greatest.

Problem now is that I know a DA3 will come at some point of time. And honestly if its just as much of a diablo clone as the first (and if ME turns out to be what the critiques are saying it will turn out to be) then Bioware will have to be very... VERY persuasive to get me to buy more games from them.

Im sure the diablo crowd and the pew pew crowd are very profitable and very nice people. Its just not the people who built Bioware. Its not their core clientbase. The core clientbase was used to great stories. The rest (graphics, ragdols AI) might be bollox or at least not really epic, but the story was (usually) stone cold solid. Not so anymore. I really dont like that trend.

I know Im likely a minority, but if you have something youre good at and people are paying you to do it... stick with that. I dont know what happened... I can hypothesize and look to other great gaming studios and their fate.... but I dont like it.

/end rantish.

[Taleera]

Myself, I don't "hate" DA2. I don't even particularly dislike it, as I had fun playing it. But still I was disappointed.
I didn't buy it as it came out, but it has been on sale recently, and for the reduced price it has been a good game. It's just sad that it could have been so much more than that.

It's all a matter of expectations, you see. DA:O has set the bar pretty high, and even though DA2 came with a number of improvements in comparison to its predecessor, the deteriorations were far more glaring and numerous. Much of it can likely be attributed to budget limitations and publisher release pressure, but some things also strike me as a deliberate simplification, or "dumbing down" in the hopes of appealing to a larger target demographic. Sales numbers by now should clearly show that this didn't really work out well ... fortunately for the classic fans, as this means a 3rd title of this franchise will likely fall closer to the roots once more.

My personal list:

Actual Improvements over DA:O
+ voiced protagonist (I know many don't like it, but I do)
+ a "home base" (also present in a DA:O DLC, but not the main game)

Expectations Met
* interesting story (if at times its execution could have been pulled off more elegantly)
* amazing characters
* intrigueing location (Kirkwall may have been very limited in scope, but I've still enjoyed my stay)
* more and consistent insight into how the setting works

Hopes Dashed
- no Origin stories, no different races to pick from
- no party customization (referring both to equipment as well as weapon specializations)
- no party camp
- no option to talk to companions whilst traveling
- drastically reduced playtime
- exaggerated / over the top "anime" combat animations (takes the grimdark realism out of the game)
- too much railroading in the endgame section (a few questions all leading to the same outcome really sucked)
- redesigned elves
- no "aftermath" charts about the effects of all those little decisions
- a few maps were recycled a little too often
- drastically simplified tactical system (-> no queueing of abilities)
- visually didn't look as "dark" anymore (colours and faces seemed much more "cartooney")
- music and interface were far from being as compelling and immersive as in DA:O (compare the main menus!)

Just a personal assessment, of course. DA2 still was a good game, it just wasn't "as" good. And generally I have a feeling it could have been so much more, which only makes it feel worse.
BioWare's "curse" is that they have established quite a reputation, and at times it can be difficult doing something like that justice. If DA2 came from any other company, it would've probably been received with less controversy.
Makes you wonder why they didn't just outsource it to Obsidian Entertainment again. *coughs* 

Modifié par Taleera, 05 mars 2012 - 06:34 .

[Realmzmaster]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I will say that one thing that really annoys me -- sometimes even angers me -- about the DA series is the horrible gameplay.

And no, when I say "the horrible gameplay" I don't mean the new animations

One thing about the gameplay in particular: AI in both games is horrendous. Biggest instance that comes to mind is in Redcliffe, where not only do the Knights charge in to a fire trap that they themselves wanted to use against the corpses but also how Lloyd charges into a group of corpses with only a dagger.

Some may enjoy that, citing it as "tactical" trying to keep them alive without them killing themselves. I call it bad game design -- well, really bad combat design. But combat is part of game design -- and from a story standpoint ludicrous considering Owen is making armor and weapons for the militia (which Lloyd joined against his will).

AI -- and indeed, all gameplay. Not just combat -- needs to be worked on immensely in the future, though obviously not at the expense of the story and choices.

I agree that the AI in both games needs work. AI has always been a problem for game designers. The examples you cite are ones that stood out in my mind also. I asked myself are the knights that dense they rush into the flames rather than let the undead come out from the flames and then attack. The idea is to let the flames do its damage and that if any escape the flames you attack. Somewhere in the program it should have check to see if the oil barrels were lit. If the oil barrels are lit then all allies should hold position.

I would have liked the option to issue commands to the allies at the start of the battle. DA2 at least (if you sided with the mages) you saw Hawke giving commands to those not in the battle. (I would have prefered being allowed to issue those commands).

It is not tactical combat to save a group of allies from stupdity. Bioware games are not the only ones who commit this lack of AI.  I will admit that AI is one of the toughest features to program. Early rpgs games at times cheated when it came to the AI,

I like both DAO and DA2. I know the failings of both games. As far as DA2 being a Diablo clone. IMHO that characterization is not even close. DA2 is nowhere near a Diablo clone. I have played Diablo I & II, Hellfire, Divine Divinity, Dungeon Siege, Titan Quest and other action-crpgs. DA2 's gameplay does not fall in that category (IMHO). The combat is faster but no where on the level of the above games.