55 réponses à ce sujet

[FaWa]

Think about how groundbreaking DAO was. But in DA2, things were only taken away. Nothing was added. I didn't see any improvements. I try to think of something DA2 did right that DAO did wrong, but I literally can not think of anything.

The things DA2 removed:

-Race Selection and Origin stories
-Unique, non-repeating maps
-Romances that made sense. DA2 was basically 3 awkward scenes and then a fade to black at the end of Act 2.
-Realistic looking graphics. (There is an issue when the original game looks better than the sequal 
-Lots of different diaologue options
-Choices that meant something. All I found in DA2 is that no matter what option you picked, the same thing happened...

Things DA2 added:

-Voice Actor
-Ninjas dropping from the ceiling/magically appearing behind you

[AkiKishi]

Me either. The friend/rival thing was semi inovative (seen it done in a similiar way before though) otherwise DA2 appears to be a lesson in how not to do things.

[Sejborg]

DA2 also added female running animations.

[wright1978]

I disagree as i think in particular the voiced protaganist did bring something to the table. Overall i found DA2 to be a fun but very flawed game that clearly needed much more development time.

I certainly hope they don't throw the baby out with the bath water in regards to DA3. Game should take the good elements of DA2 and improve upon them while trying to add back in some of DAO elements back in.

[FKA_Servo]

Preach it, brother.

[thats1evildude]

Wait, was the problem that DA2 was too different from DAO or that it wasn't different enough? I forget which one we're supposed to be complaining about this week.

[The Hierophant]

Sejborg wrote...

DA2 also added female running animations.

The running animations during combat was also improved. In DAO the characters looked like the they have to use the bathroom.

[Zanallen]

Lol, nothing DAO did was groundbreaking. Even the much touted origin stories have been done before. Seiken Densetsu 3 anyone? Or even SaGa Frontier.

[Sejborg]

The Hierophant wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

DA2 also added female running animations.

The running animations during combat was also improved. In DAO the characters looked like the they have to use the bathroom.

Nah. Everything that happened during combat in DA2 looked stupid. So I would say different. Not improved. 

[FKA_Servo]

The Hierophant wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

DA2 also added female running animations.

The running animations during combat was also improved. In DAO the characters looked like the they have to use the bathroom.

You're missing the point. The characters ran like that because the original darkspawn design was so menacing that they actually soiled themselves. It's far more realistic than when the anime mages saw the clownspawn and started spinning.

That's why DAO is objectively better than DA2. The OP proved it with science.

[Sejborg]

Zanallen wrote...

Lol, nothing DAO did was groundbreaking. Even the much touted origin stories have been done before. Seiken Densetsu 3 anyone? Or even SaGa Frontier.

I think groundbreaking is the wrong word to use. I think the point is, that DAO had so many good things going for it. But instead of keeping the good things, DA2 threw alot of them away, and barely added anything instead. 

[Zanallen]

Sejborg wrote...


I think groundbreaking is the wrong word to use. I think the point is, that DAO had so many good things going for it. But instead of keeping the good things, DA2 threw alot of them away, and barely added anything instead. 

I would argue that DAO didn't do any of those things mentioned in the OP particularly well. Sure, they were there. They existed in the game (Minus his assertion that DAO didn't have repeating environments. It did.), but they were handled in various degrees of average to poorly. Granted, DA2 could have improved on these aspects instead of cutting some, but that is a far cry from DA2 taking out a bunch of things that DAO did awesomely and giving us nothing in return.

[Amcope]

FaWa wrote...

Think about how groundbreaking DAO was. But in DA2, things were only taken away. Nothing was added. I didn't see any improvements. I try to think of something DA2 did right that DAO did wrong, but I literally can not think of anything.

It could be argued that the combat is an improvement. Just going to throw that into the melting pot.

[Persephone]

Let's see:

Party banter was improved. BIG time. It actually adapts based on your choices.

Companions no longer forget events that happened 5 minutes ago. Helped the Starkhaven mages? Anders will remember it. (One example)

No more gift spamming, meaningful gifts

Lousy approval system was replaced by Friendship/Rivalry. While that system could do with some improvement, it offers varying scenarios for every companion. Awesome.

Mage combat.

And these are just my top faves.

[ReallyRue]

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

Modifié par ReallyRue, 18 mai 2012 - 09:20 .

[wsandista]

Logan Cloud wrote...

If you HONESTLY believe that DA2 isn't different from Origins, you're a ******.

That's not an opinion. That's a fact.

Agreed.

DAO was a great game that while didn't bring any new innovations to the table, brought back the party-based fantasy RPG. DA2 tried too hard to be innovative and appeal to too many different groups, which it failed at.

[Melca36]

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

Got news for you. I wouldnt expect the rogue to be the same for DA:3 as it was for DA:2

Also they already said they would not being doing the friendship/rivalry  system

[Apathy1989]

ReallyRue wrote...

*Sigh*

How about DA2 also brought (regardless of whether you believe they were good things to implement):

-Companions looking more distinct from other NPCs (instead of just Morrigan and Shale)
-Companions having actual cutscene conversations with each other
-All bi LIs
-Different romance scenes
-Playing as a human commoner (and theme of rising to power)
-Strong family theme/interactions
-The dominant personality system
-Broader skill trees for warriors and rogues
-Distinct class for rogues
-Hair that moves slightly with the wind
-More variety in armour/robes
-New darkspawn/kossith/elf design
-Friendship/rivalry
-Different combat animations
-Events progressing over a long timespan and the story being told through a narrator

I like 90% of that list.

Also I find it laughable that people prefer DAOs graphics. Boy that game looked boring and ugly. DA2 had a much stronger art style.

[sreaction]

@ OP

Thats because it is the Dragon Age Lite version: stripped down, sped up, a sprinkling of the awesome button and tweaked a bit yeah, but still built on the skeleton of DA and its predecessors. In retrospect it was an underwhelming game.

Modifié par sreaction, 19 mai 2012 - 01:03 .

[Kyle Kabanya]

Sejborg wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

DA2 also added female running animations.

The running animations during combat was also improved. In DAO the characters looked like the they have to use the bathroom.

Nah. Everything that happened during combat in DA2 looked stupid. So I would say different. Not improved. 

The reason for the crouching and hunched over look in Origins, is because in medivel times, people would hide behind their shields and crouch to protect their legs. Its actually the most realistic fighting in any game that uses conventional melee weapons of that era.

The only thing DA2 brought to the table was a talking protaginist. Other than that, it has nothing compared to Origins. No warden, no morrigan, no "real" darkspawn, no pauldron armor. NOTHING!

[Realmzmaster]

wsandista wrote...

Logan Cloud wrote...

If you HONESTLY believe that DA2 isn't different from Origins, you're a ******.

That's not an opinion. That's a fact.

Agreed.

DAO was a great game that while didn't bring any new innovations to the table, brought back the party-based fantasy RPG. DA2 tried too hard to be innovative and appeal to too many different groups, which it failed at.

So you agree that gamers who do not believe that DA2 was not that different from Origins are dumbassess. Well sign me up. Because I would be happy to  debate the relative mathematcal formulas used in both), there are certain parallels in each story since Bioware tends to use the same story format, re-used areas are in both games. The actual gameplay is not that much different. IMHO. So if that makes me a ****** so be it. But I would be happy to debate the relative merits of a true tactical crpg anytime, anyplace and anywhere, because it is not DAO. Want true tactical you need to look up TOEE and PORMD which are truly based on the D & D ruleset. 

DAO bought nothing new to the table. It was a good game. DA2 was a flawed but good game. So if I am a ****** I will wear it proudly.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 19 mai 2012 - 01:30 .

[wsandista]

Realmzmaster wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Logan Cloud wrote...

If you HONESTLY believe that DA2 isn't different from Origins, you're a ******.

That's not an opinion. That's a fact.

Agreed.

DAO was a great game that while didn't bring any new innovations to the table, brought back the party-based fantasy RPG. DA2 tried too hard to be innovative and appeal to too many different groups, which it failed at.

So you agree that gamers who do not believe that DA2 was not that different from Origins are dumbassess. Well sign me up. Because I would be happy to  debate the relative mathematcal formulas used in both), there are certain parallels in each story since Bioware tends to use the same story format, re-used areas are in both games. The actual gameplay is not that much different. IMHO. So if that makes me a ****** so be it. But I would be happy to debate the relative merits of a true tactical crpg anytime, anyplace and anywhere, because it is not DAO. Want true tactical you need to look up TOEE and PORMD which are truly based on the D & D ruleset. 

DAO bought nothing new to the table. It was a good game. DA2 was a flawed but good game. So if I am a ****** I will wear it proudly.

Is it different? That is what he said, the degree of difference is debatable, but the fact of the matter is that they were different. I already stated that DAO brought nothing new to the table. DA2 is not a bad game exactly, it just departs too heavily from DAO, especially when it was billed as a sequel.

If you want to debate combat formulas, please start a new thread, I would rather not crowd this one up with a debate. Combat needs more forums anyways.