100 réponses à ce sujet

[Bourne2Play]

I'm a late comer to the DA series. I played DA:O four months ago and thought it was one of the best games I have ever played. Completely epic game from start to finish. And then I picked up DA2. I'm not gonna add to what's been said about this game from different people. All those issues are obvious (terrible story, reused enviornments, etc..)

But what really gets me is the purpose of this game? I spent 50 hours on it and did each and ever quest. What was the point?? DA:O had a very clear purpose from the beginning: Unite everyone (the circle, the elves, the dwarves, etc..) against the blight. It was an epic journey with an epic conclusion.

 Not so much with DA2. This whole game, including its main plot quests, felt like SIDE quests. This game had no reason to exist whatsoever. What a major disapointment.

[Orian Tabris]

You can blame EA for a lack of purpose, I think. They apparently gave BioWare only like a year to make DA2. It is most like, they decided to churn out story, and to leave the true purpose for later on, when they make DLC that continues after the so-called "epilogue" (more like an ending - without an epilgoue).

So, what is the purpose of this game? I'd say the purpose of this game was to set up DA3 for a big war, incited by this non-Warden hero (had they more time, they might have been able to write a better story, that places the new hero known as Hawke, in Kirkwall), and the Warden who steadfastedly halted a Blight, forced a third hero to save Thedas from destruction.

Simply put, Origins hero and DA2 hero have a hand in a huge mage vs. templar war, allowing the DA3 hero to stop it.

Modifié par Orian Tabris, 27 juin 2012 - 01:25 .

[hussey 92]

I think they planned to do more with Hawke and the DA2 story with an expansion pack (exalted march), but since there was little demand for it, Bioware decided to just move forward with DA3 instead.

But yeah, Origins went out with a bang and DA2 went out with a whimper

[wsandista]

To sell copies and make a profit.

[wsandista]

hussey 92 wrote...

But yeah, Origins went out with a bang and DA2 went out with a whimper

That's quite an understatement.
DA2 was a wimper, start to finish.

[DarkDragon777]

It's purpose was to give the back-story behind the Mage-Templar war and give us more information on Dwarven lore and red lyrium, I assume. And it failed at doing that in a meaningful manner.

[Arthur Cousland]

The "purpose" was to see Hawke go from rags to riches over the span of a decade, which was actually 7 years.

It's unfortunate that the Exalted March expansion was cancelled, as DA2 feels like it's missing an Act 4.

It's been mentioned many times, but rather than continue releasing dlc for Origins, EA pushed Bioware to rush out DA2 to capitalize on Origin's success. As a result, we got a rushed, incomplete game that felt more like a spinoff than a sequel. At least Bioware seem to be putting more effort towards DA3, and hopefully it saves the franchise.

[Bourne2Play]

A major entry into the franchise (a numbered sequel) should have more of a purpose than to simply set up a back story for a later game. It should have a level of "epicness" to it, or rather its own story with a satisfactory conclusion. I can't believe EA/BW would release such a watered down generic game.

Whatever backstory DA2 served up could have been done with a DLC or expansion between DA:O and the REAL sequel. Hell, call it DA 1.5 if you want. You could have accomplished that with a game that's a fraction in length as DA2.

DA2 has no reason to exist.

[MagmaSaiyan]

if none of you really get the purpose or think there is no purpose, then theres no point in trying to explain it to you

[Scalett Dragonavicious]

What really bothered me was that they kept telling you that Hawke was the champion and that he/she was so important but I never really felt important. It seemed to me like Hawke just sort of blundered through the plot. I felt like she/he was one of the worst protagonists ever, but that might just be because I was disappointed compared to the awesomeness that was DAO.

[hussey 92]

MagmaSaiyan wrote...

if none of you really get the purpose or think there is no purpose, then theres no point in trying to explain it to you

Explain what to us?  We all played the same game you did.

[CuriousArtemis]

MagmaSaiyan wrote...

if none of you really get the purpose or think there is no purpose, then theres no point in trying to explain it to you

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

[batlin]

motomotogirl wrote...

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Since when was disjointed, aimless, and insular plots "experimental"? There's been plenty of those kinds of plots before in many types of media, and guess what? They almost always suck.

[Fast Jimmy]

batlin wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Since when was disjointed, aimless, and insular plots "experimental"? There's been plenty of those kinds of plots before in many types of media, and guess what? They almost always suck.

Agreed. Many types of media have tried the Unreliable Narrator, along with the flashback, along with the "Every Man" hero, along with every other trope and technique that is used in DA2. Its not experimental.

Now... having a story that can legitimately change, characters that can legitimately act differently and outcomes that can signifcantly vary based on the choice of the person hearing that story... THAT has not been done too many times in history. Mostly because it is not something ANY other medium besides video games and CYOA books have been able to tackle.

And, no offense to CYOA, but the plots in Bioware games tend to run a little deeper.

Origins was one of the first games (and indeed, stories) ever to give you multiple character templates to start from, all of which affected (to some degree) the plot. Then your choices and dialogue could further define the personality of your character, their beliefs, their ideas, outside of their background. In turn, you also had choice on how you treated and intereacted with your companions and how you handled major events during one of the greatest crisis moments of a nation and, indeed, the whole world. And in the end, you determined whether to die as a noble hero, celebrated because your sacrifice, or to attempt to reach out to the divine and preserve the essence of something that is equal parts myth and god.

Now... HOW MANY STORIES HAVE BEEN TOLD LIKE THAT?

The answer - little to none. It may be "the classic fantasy story" as others have said... that's arguably true. But because we are given not just freedom, but CONSEQUENCE with almost every action we choose, it defines both the story and the characters within it. Essentially, choices tell and enrich the story better than any other narrative tool in the history of mankind. They do immediately what writers have been trying to do since the invention of narrative - invest the reader. 

A choice makes a story real, makes the characters real, makes the world REAL. If you have to sit for a second and think hard about the consequences for imaginary, digital characters, then the story has done its job. 

Choices ARE the unique story Bioware tells. Trying to limit our choices by giving us Hawke so we can experience Hawke's family is a limited choice. Having us feel like we, as the player, are being dragged along through nonsense events, insane NPCs and companions who are so nettled with one particular issue that they seem like a broken record is more limited choice. Having all endings be the exact same (and, hence, eliminating the impact of ALL your choices) is more limited choice. And it makes the story weaker. Because its a story only video games can tell.

Movies tell cinematic stories better. Books create worlds and lore better. And action games like Call of Duty or Farcry will do action scenes better, because they are not hindered by any other choice other than how to kill the bad guys.

Bioware games already tell amazing stories... because of choice alone. If Origins was made into a movie, it would probably be a pretty poor movie, on the scale of Bloodrayne. The story isn't all THAT unique or great. But it FELT more important, more gripping than most other movies I've seen in a while because of the choice and the feeling that it was me playing a character I created, as opposed to watching a character Bioware created.

That's the unique story telling tactic Bioware has. To move to a more cinematic game, to make the character more "alive" means making the character more scripted, which narrows choice and diminishes the power of their greatest tool. By trying to make the character feel less wooden in order to tell a better story, they make the character more rigid and the illusion of choice is shattered, creating a weaker performance.

[wsandista]

motomotogirl wrote...

MagmaSaiyan wrote...

if none of you really get the purpose or think there is no purpose, then theres no point in trying to explain it to you

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Yes, because rags to riches plots are completely unheard of. DA2 didn't do anyhing revolutionary. It did do most things poorly though.

[AkiKishi]

Good question.... Beyond being the set-up for the next part it's not like it really had a purpose, or even much of a point.

[LeBurns]

Bourne2Play wrote...

A major entry into the franchise (a numbered sequel) should have more of a purpose than to simply set up a back story for a later game. It should have a level of "epicness" to it, or rather its own story with a satisfactory conclusion. I can't believe EA/BW would release such a watered down generic game.

Whatever backstory DA2 served up could have been done with a DLC or expansion between DA:O and the REAL sequel. Hell, call it DA 1.5 if you want. You could have accomplished that with a game that's a fraction in length as DA2.

DA2 has no reason to exist.

What can really get your goat is if you go back and read all the professional reviews of the game when it first came out.

http://www.metacriti.../critic-reviews 

No one with any real merit could rate this game the way they did ... but they did.  This game alone turned me completely against professional reviews and has made me avoid completely many gaming sites that I used to go to a lot.  It was also a major wake up call to the power of EA and what money can buy.

[Bourne2Play]

batlin wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Since when was disjointed, aimless, and insular plots "experimental"? There's been plenty of those kinds of plots before in many types of media, and guess what? They almost always suck.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. "Aimless" describes it just right. At first I thought it was gonna be the darkspawns. Then I thought it was gonna be about the conflict with the qunari. But then it turned out to be about the mages VS templars (or was it?). Very aimless and disjointed indeed.

EA is good for business, bad for gaming.

[Bourne2Play]

LeBurns wrote...

Bourne2Play wrote...

A major entry into the franchise (a numbered sequel) should have more of a purpose than to simply set up a back story for a later game. It should have a level of "epicness" to it, or rather its own story with a satisfactory conclusion. I can't believe EA/BW would release such a watered down generic game.

Whatever backstory DA2 served up could have been done with a DLC or expansion between DA:O and the REAL sequel. Hell, call it DA 1.5 if you want. You could have accomplished that with a game that's a fraction in length as DA2.

DA2 has no reason to exist.

What can really get your goat is if you go back and read all the professional reviews of the game when it first came out.

http://www.metacriti.../critic-reviews 

No one with any real merit could rate this game the way they did ... but they did.  This game alone turned me completely against professional reviews and has made me avoid completely many gaming sites that I used to go to a lot.  It was also a major wake up call to the power of EA and what money can buy.

Yes specially that PC Gamers 94 score. However, I see why some game critics would see good in this game (combat is good for example, and better production values) but defenitely not enough to warrant a 94. A 60 sounds more fitting.

[AkiKishi]

Bourne2Play wrote...

batlin wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Since when was disjointed, aimless, and insular plots "experimental"? There's been plenty of those kinds of plots before in many types of media, and guess what? They almost always suck.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. "Aimless" describes it just right. At first I thought it was gonna be the darkspawns. Then I thought it was gonna be about the conflict with the qunari. But then it turned out to be about the mages VS templars (or was it?). Very aimless and disjointed indeed.

EA is good for business, bad for gaming.

Don't forget having a nap in a stasis pod for three years at a time to allow everything to get beyond the point where you could do anything about it.

[thats1evildude]

Unless your work carries some veiled political message, stories don't have a point. They're just there for entertainment.

In terms of what was accomplished in DA2, it did show how the Mage-Templar War began. The events in Asunder were merely the culmination of what started in Kirkwall.

Bourne2Play wrote...

EA is good for business, bad for gaming.

I don't quite understand this comment in relation to your early point. If EA can be blamed for any portion of DA2, it's not the story.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 27 juin 2012 - 09:44 .

[Realmzmaster]

wsandista wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

MagmaSaiyan wrote...

if none of you really get the purpose or think there is no purpose, then theres no point in trying to explain it to you

Yeah, I'm starting to see this.  I think a lot of people need traditional plot-oriented narratives.  More experimental narratives are just not well-received.  Though I'm sure there are a few of us who tire of the traditional narrative, especially the traditional sword-and-sorcery narrative, which is what DA:O was.  I mean, I liked the game, but I probably would have loved it more when I was a kid and just discovering books that told similar stories.

Yes, because rags to riches plots are completely unheard of. DA2 didn't do anyhing revolutionary. It did do most things poorly though.

How many crpgs do you know that have rags to riches plots? There are far more with the traditional narrative of kill the Big Bad Evil. Ultima IV continues to be one of my favorite crpgs because it does not use the traditional narrative. DA2 ranks up there with me for the same reason.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 27 juin 2012 - 09:43 .

[bEVEsthda]

Bourne2Play wrote...

I'm a late comer to the DA series. I played DA:O four months ago and thought it was one of the best games I have ever played. Completely epic game from start to finish. And then I picked up DA2. I'm not gonna add to what's been said about this game from different people. All those issues are obvious (terrible story, reused enviornments, etc..)

But what really gets me is the purpose of this game? I spent 50 hours on it and did each and ever quest. What was the point?? DA:O had a very clear purpose from the beginning: Unite everyone (the circle, the elves, the dwarves, etc..) against the blight. It was an epic journey with an epic conclusion.

 Not so much with DA2. This whole game, including its main plot quests, felt like SIDE quests. This game had no reason to exist whatsoever. What a major disapointment.

Stated purposes were:

1: Making combat more appealing to an as of yet undefined group of players. (My tip is that it'll never be defined).

2: Creating a background in Thedas for major conflicts, providing a scene for later games.

3: Giving DA a new, iconic and "recognizable" look, because some marketing dudes insist it's fantastic for the marketing of the franchise. I note that the new look blends well with comic books and anime movies. I also note that this look also destroyed elements of traditional wRPG gameplay. Apparently that was just an insignificant trifle. (In my opinion, the new look achieved the opposite to what was intended. It now looks just like all others.)

To this one can add a guess:
They wanted to arrive at a game model that would need less work and be fit for a better frame rate on consoles.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 27 juin 2012 - 09:52 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Bourne2Play wrote...

I'm a late comer to the DA series. I played DA:O four months ago and thought it was one of the best games I have ever played. Completely epic game from start to finish. And then I picked up DA2. I'm not gonna add to what's been said about this game from different people. All those issues are obvious (terrible story, reused enviornments, etc..)

But what really gets me is the purpose of this game? I spent 50 hours on it and did each and ever quest. What was the point?? DA:O had a very clear purpose from the beginning: Unite everyone (the circle, the elves, the dwarves, etc..) against the blight. It was an epic journey with an epic conclusion.

 Not so much with DA2. This whole game, including its main plot quests, felt like SIDE quests. This game had no reason to exist whatsoever. What a major disapointment.

And another believer is converted.  This will add to our war assets for that perfect ending we are looking for.

[Fast Jimmy]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Bourne2Play wrote...

I'm a late comer to the DA series. I played DA:O four months ago and thought it was one of the best games I have ever played. Completely epic game from start to finish. And then I picked up DA2. I'm not gonna add to what's been said about this game from different people. All those issues are obvious (terrible story, reused enviornments, etc..)

But what really gets me is the purpose of this game? I spent 50 hours on it and did each and ever quest. What was the point?? DA:O had a very clear purpose from the beginning: Unite everyone (the circle, the elves, the dwarves, etc..) against the blight. It was an epic journey with an epic conclusion.

 Not so much with DA2. This whole game, including its main plot quests, felt like SIDE quests. This game had no reason to exist whatsoever. What a major disapointment.

And another believer is converted.  This will add to our war assets for that perfect ending we are looking for.

QUICK! Does someone have the iPad app? Otherwise we won't unlock the secret "Duncan Breathes" scene!