There's a reason things become cliche. Because they're well liked, or universal truths. Having said that, which game is better? Why, (insert name) is better of course! (insert name) had the better story telling, the better dialogue, great playablity! How ANYONE could think (insert name) isn't as good as (insert name) I just can't figure out!
Note: The above is satyr. Liking and disliking games is a PERSONAL decision. No one likes everything, or dislikes everything. Different people will have different opinions. Stop looking for validation from the herd about your likes or dislikes. You don't need it; just enjoy whichever game and you like and move on.
The story here is much superior to the first one
Débuté par
Faust1979
, déc. 26 2012 05:06
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 28 janvier 2013 - 05:28
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
Sweawm wrote...
The people who hate on DA2 are the reason we can't have nice things.
Dragon Age 2 is superior, doing away the cliche save the world RPG plot and totally avoiding the Bioware RPG cliche chart. We got a personal story, but according to some people, that's no story at all!
I recall the story in Dragon Age II having insane and stupid mages on one side, and sadistic templars; one-dimensional factions don't really make me think that it made for a better story.
As for the "personal story", I do recall a character who was basically a complete stranger dying before Act I; if it was a personal story, shouldn't Hawke have actually known this person? And if it's a personal story, why is the player so divorced from the narrative? The bad paraphrasing and inaccurate dialogue wheel don't even make me feel like Hawke is my character, so how is it a personal story?
Sweawm wrote...
In truth, anything that takes away some sense of their importance role in the game-world, for these people, makes them rage. Now, I'm not dismissing every negative critique this way, but most of the time, this is what some people boil down to in the argument of the importance of Hawk's actions.
You mean some players dislike how passive Hawke is in situations where he can clearly do something about the situation (i.e. Petrice in Act I, the note in Quentin's lair in Act II, what Hawke does between Acts II and III) but instead, Hawke does nothing. Am I supposed to be pleased that Hawke comes across as lazy and inept to me?
Sweawm wrote...
While Dragon Age 2 wasn't perfect, it was a step forward in terms of plot for Bioware. It was a leap away the cliche and a step forwards something new. Instead of supporting this, many simply hated on it, and now for Inquisitions, Bioware will probably taking steps in the wrong direction; back towards the bog-standard Fantasy plot, to please these people.
One-dimensional characters are a step forward? Plot railroading, even if it doesn't make any sense (i.e. pro-mage Hawke in "On the Loose" or "Best Served Cold"), is a step forward? I respectfully disagree.
