330 réponses à ce sujet

[Celene II]

I read your entire post and it is totally your right to state your opinion as all opinions are subjective. But it was the first time I have read that someone liked 2 more then 1. It threw me for a bit. Two was vastly inferior to origins in every single way. To find someone who thinks so opposite on that point is disconcerting.


I hope we all enjoy 3 immensely but I hope that that bioware and ea looks at the budgets and total sales and goes back more toward origin then 2

[Fisto The Sexbot]

In Exile wrote...

SweQue wrote...

You can finish DA2 without strategy, thats the diffrence.

I mean, I just kited any enemy when I was hurt and run in circles away from them.
Thats my great "hidden secret" to finish the game?!
Thats hardly much to be impressive over for a WRPG.

In DA:O the hidden secret is fireball. The game is a joke difficulty wise and pretending it had "tactics" is comical.

In DA2 at least you actually have to switch your targets around in an encounter on nightmare like with mages and assassins - in DA:O it was impossible to die in a regular encounter unless you were bad at the game.

Kiting isn't a 'hidden secret' in Dragon Age 2. It's the primary way of dealing with every encounter the game throws at you. It doesn't matter if you're fighting ogres, mabari, or random bandits. They all just follow you until they die, except rogues which can vanish, close in and backstab you.

It's just bad design, because it's the first thing a player thinks about doing to win. The AI will always follow the warrior spamming the generic aggro spell instead of going for weaker targets. Most enemies work the same way. You just can't defend this ****.

[Sutekh]

Celene II wrote...

I read your entire post and it is totally your right to state your opinion as all opinions are subjective. But it was the first time I have read that someone liked 2 more then 1. It threw me for a bit. Two was vastly inferior to origins in every single way. To find someone who thinks so opposite on that point is disconcerting.

Really? There are people around who prefer DA2 to DAO, and some are (were) pretty vocal about it. Some with good sound argumentation too. I see nothing "disconcerting" about people having a different opinion than me.

--

The tactic thing: There were some encounters in DA2 that were well designed and required some / a lot of thinking to stay alive, but honestly, many were just lots of enemies coming from every angles (including right above) and me spamming whatever I had for all of them. Individually, those encounters were fine, but since the process was repeated over and over it becomes boring real quick. That's also why the ones that were thought out and actually staged shone in comparison, and why I remember them so fondly. I didn't kite that much too (except in one specific instance - hello Arishok).

In DAO, not all were perfect examples of tactical staging, but they were different from one another and enemy placement seemed both more logical (contextual) and more defined.

This said, when it comes to game mechanics only (as opposed to encounters) both games were equal, IMO. You could abuse them just the same (albeit with different things), or play honest and go the tactical way.

Modifié par Sutekh, 12 janvier 2013 - 09:57 .

[Dhiro]

Celene II wrote...

I read your entire post and it is totally your right to state your opinion as all opinions are subjective. But it was the first time I have read that someone liked 2 more then 1. It threw me for a bit. Two was vastly inferior to origins in every single way. To find someone who thinks so opposite on that point is disconcerting.


I hope we all enjoy 3 immensely but I hope that that bioware and ea looks at the budgets and total sales and goes back more toward origin then 2

I hope they don't.

Go back more towards Origins, that is.

Modifié par Dhiro, 12 janvier 2013 - 09:58 .

[Pzykozis]

Celene II wrote...

I read your entire post and it is totally your right to state your opinion as all opinions are subjective. But it was the first time I have read that someone liked 2 more then 1. It threw me for a bit. Two was vastly inferior to origins in every single way. To find someone who thinks so opposite on that point is disconcerting.


I hope we all enjoy 3 immensely but I hope that that bioware and ea looks at the budgets and total sales and goes back more toward origin then 2

Given that its at around 50/50 split or something I find your disconcertion, disconcerting

Personally hope they come from leftfield with something completely different but that won't happen so meh.

[The Six Path of Pain]

batlin wrote...

I'm really sorry to break up all the positivity in this thread, but



If you enjoyed Dragon Age 2 more than Dragon Age Origins, that's fine. It's your prerogative. But denying the glaring issues with DA2 has nothing to do with your opinion, it means you aren't being objective at all.

Oh man that made me laugh non stop for about 5 minutes ...anyway we can't stop you from liking DA2 but there is no denying that it is a bad game with all the plotholes,dumbed down gameplay,and horrible characters.

[Pzykozis]

The Six Path of Pain wrote...

batlin wrote...

I'm really sorry to break up all the positivity in this thread, but

If you enjoyed Dragon Age 2 more than Dragon Age Origins, that's fine. It's your prerogative. But denying the glaring issues with DA2 has nothing to do with your opinion, it means you aren't being objective at all.

Oh man that made me laugh non stop for about 5 minutes ...anyway we can't stop you from liking DA2 but there is no denying that it is a bad game with all the plotholes,dumbed down gameplay,and horrible characters.

[insert subjective insulting reply here]

Or you know you can since subjectivity and all that. I doubt anyone seriously suggests DA2 is perfect or close to it, but you can easily prefer it to Origins.

[daft inquisitor]

batlin wrote...

DA2 wasn't a hack and slash. No really it is not.

Yes, it really was.

I feel I need to harp on this a bit.

Hack-And-Slash is a genre. It's a genre where you (almost exclusively) wield a big sword and go around stabbing, slashing, and otherwise hacking your opponents to bits. With direct-input controls, instead of ability bars.

Games of the Hack-And-Slash genre include (but are not limited to):
Champions of Norrath, Devil May Cry, God of War, and Dynasty Warriors.

There is a difference. A colossal difference. Most of those games are splice Action/Adventure RPG, where as Dragon Age is a straight RPG. Not old-school, mind you, but still pure in the genre.

[Fallstar]

In terms of combat, DAO was more varied and had more depth as far as I'm concerned.

For starters, warriors could learn dual wielding and archery talents. In DA2, a warrior - a supposed arms master - is for some reason incapable of using dual weapons or a bow. So the warrior class is less diverse straight away.

Next up, we have class restrictions on gear. This isn't an MMO. There is absolutely nothing to stop a rogue from picking a shield up, it is just an arbitrary restriction. The only restriction that makes sense is not allowing warriors/rogues to use mage's staves.

Next, we have no tactical camera. At times, this made AOE targeting extremely tedious, if you happened to pause to cast your spell in a location where the camera was messed up because of the terrain. So that's a specific flaw from the loss of the tactical camera, but in general it was nice to be able to pause combat and see where all the enemy combatants and your party members were and plan accordingly.

Which leads me to the next point. Spawning. In DAO, the majority of encounters begin with all enemy combatants on screen. When they aren't, there is a good reason for it, such as giant spiders being hidden in webs. This made you consider positioning. In DA2, there is absolutely no point to this, as once you've killed X enemies the next wave will parachute down from the sky in random locations.

There were 'auto win' abilities in both games. Mana clash negated all mages in DAO for example, and Storm of the Century trivialized most encounters. The same is true for DA2 however; hemorrhage cast on a group of stunned enemies wasn't even a dot kill like storm, it was an instant kill AOE. About as OP as you could get. Assassinate on frozen enemies negated all mages and lieutenants. Both games had balance issues.

That's just the tactical side of things. The animations and speed of combat I personally disliked. I am not a fan of anime-esque things. DAO did 'awesome' - see the finishing moves - without it being over the top. When someone detonates because I stab them with a dagger, or when I can swing a greatsword as if it had very little mass without a haste buff, things need to be toned down a little as far as I'm concerned. Obviously that is entirely subjective.

Combat gear and equipment is another problem. In DAO, we know exactly what our enchantments do. +20% fire resistance means I take 20% less damage from fire based attacks. But what does + 1500 fire resistance mean? How much damage does that absorb? As for the star rating system... that is entirely pointless. There were numerous occasions when a supposed 1 or 2 star piece of gear was superior to a 4 or 5.

Another problem: too much of the mechanics was kept secret. For example, stacking elemental damages doesn't work as it says on the tin. If I have a +40% fire damage staff and a +10% fire damage ring, you'd expect my overall fire damage modifier to be 1.54. it wasn't. They had some sort of diminishing returns system with stacking, which I assume was to prevent us from reaching crazily high numbers. But this wasn't documented anywhere, and people had to figure it out. (Which is what lead to optimal mage builds using rogue stats). More documentation; give us a thorough manual, in game or in the box.

There were some improvements to the DA2 combat system: deeper specialization trees I liked, as well as the abilitiy to upgrade talents - although I wish they'd take this further and let us spend 4 or more points on some talents. But for the most part, the DAO combat system was superior.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:02 .

[Shevy]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...
I feel I need to harp on this a bit.

Hack-And-Slash is a genre. It's a genre where you (almost exclusively) wield a big sword and go around stabbing, slashing, and otherwise hacking your opponents to bits. With direct-input controls, instead of ability bars.

Games of the Hack-And-Slash genre include (but are not limited to):
Champions of Norrath, Devil May Cry, God of War, and Dynasty Warriors.

There is a difference. A colossal difference. Most of those games are splice Action/Adventure RPG, where as Dragon Age is a straight RPG. Not old-school, mind you, but still pure in the genre.

Not being offensive, but in DA II you can't even go out to buy some milk without having to fight a group of people and their parachuting mates. At least, that's the feeling I got when I played it.

But my intension was to use this thread to thank BioWare for the Dragon Age universe in general and Origins in particular. Although DA II was a huge let down I have faith that DA III will be a lot better and I'm excited to hear of it.

[Newschmoo]

I would like to thank the OP for posting something positive on this forum (for a change).

The DA games have provided hours of enjoyment for me. No game will ever be perfect (there will always be something wrong for someone), so I try to focus on the good things rather than the negatives.

[daft inquisitor]

Shevy_001 wrote...

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...
I feel I need to harp on this a bit.

Hack-And-Slash is a genre. It's a genre where you (almost exclusively) wield a big sword and go around stabbing, slashing, and otherwise hacking your opponents to bits. With direct-input controls, instead of ability bars.

Games of the Hack-And-Slash genre include (but are not limited to):
Champions of Norrath, Devil May Cry, God of War, and Dynasty Warriors.

There is a difference. A colossal difference. Most of those games are splice Action/Adventure RPG, where as Dragon Age is a straight RPG. Not old-school, mind you, but still pure in the genre.

Not being offensive, but in DA II you can't even go out to buy some milk without having to fight a group of people and their parachuting mates. At least, that's the feeling I got when I played it.

But my intension was to use this thread to thank BioWare for the Dragon Age universe in general and Origins in particular. Although DA II was a huge let down I have faith that DA III will be a lot better and I'm excited to hear of it.

Just because enemies pop up all the time, that doesn't make it a Hack-And-Slash. That denotation of game is reserved for how the gameplay (combat system) functions. DA2 is not a Hack-And-Slash because it's combat system isn't the proper one. Compare combat in DA2 to any of the games I mentioned above, and you should see the disparity. 

By the way, "intention", with a "t".  The more you know~

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 12 janvier 2013 - 12:54 .

[Shevy]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

Shevy_001 wrote...

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...
I feel I need to harp on this a bit.

Hack-And-Slash is a genre. It's a genre where you (almost exclusively) wield a big sword and go around stabbing, slashing, and otherwise hacking your opponents to bits. With direct-input controls, instead of ability bars.

Games of the Hack-And-Slash genre include (but are not limited to):
Champions of Norrath, Devil May Cry, God of War, and Dynasty Warriors.

There is a difference. A colossal difference. Most of those games are splice Action/Adventure RPG, where as Dragon Age is a straight RPG. Not old-school, mind you, but still pure in the genre.

Not being offensive, but in DA II you can't even go out to buy some milk without having to fight a group of people and their parachuting mates. At least, that's the feeling I got when I played it.

But my intension was to use this thread to thank BioWare for the Dragon Age universe in general and Origins in particular. Although DA II was a huge let down I have faith that DA III will be a lot better and I'm excited to hear of it.

Just because enemies pop up all the time, that doesn't make it a Hack-And-Slash. That denotation of game is reserved for how the gameplay (combat system) functions. DA2 is not a Hack-And-Slash because it's combat system isn't the proper one. Compare combat in DA2 to any of the games I mentioned above, and you should see the disparity. 

By the way, "intention", with a "t".  The more you know~

Sure, its not the genre, but its the same feeling. When playing DA II it feels like there is only fighting and the game tries to squeeze a fight in every possible niche.

[Kais Endac]

Every game has flaws.
DAO was not perfect neither was DA2 both have their fair share of problems, with gameplay and technical issues(which for some reason my nvidia card took issue with until recently). However these issues don't diminish the experience (at least for me).
DA2
Recycled interiors are not an issue for me and to be honest Mass Effect was a worse offender trudging through the same prefabbed building again and again, yes it can be slightly irritating but I tend to ignore it.

The new wave style did irritate me enemies appearing from mid air is slightly jarring especially when they appear in the middle of a cave - I mean were they doing spider man impressions and climbing the ceiling - Demons and skeletons (appearing from the ground) I can understand Humans not so much.

Yes DA2 tried to capture a new audience with new concepts some worked others didn't. It seems to me Bioware were experimenting with new concepts and will use the successful features in future games

.I admit though I miss some of the features of older rpg's that are being dropped in favor of more streamlined games. (although having these features back is probably bad in the long run)

But overall DAO and DA2 are both brilliant games in their own right and offer a lot of re-playable value. I favor DAO more due to the origins storylines, better inventory options and the player camp (among other things).

Anyway I'm going to say thank you again to the Dragon Age team and Bioware in general for making some of my favorite games.  Edit: oh and for all the hard work the teams have put into their games, keep up the hard work can't wait for Dragon Age 3 

Modifié par Kais Endac, 12 janvier 2013 - 01:53 .

[AshenShug4r]

I must say I'm a little surprised by your Dragon Age 2 thoughts as I feel that it can't hold a candle to Origins, but I'm glad it was such an emotional experience for you. That's what Bioware games are all about.

[batlin]

To everyone saying "No game is perfect so DA2 isn't that bad,"

Some games are less perfect than others. Just saiyan.

[Kidd]

I love this thread. I love these games. Thanks for putting your thoughts out there! I agree with pretty much all of it, even though I've yet to get myself any tattoos or similar permanent marking

Do wear some awesome shirts though!

EDIT: Ack, the thread wasn't as beautiful anymore once I came back to finish this post. =(

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 12 janvier 2013 - 03:01 .

[Kais Endac]

batlin wrote...

To everyone saying "No game is perfect so DA2 isn't that bad,"

Some games are less perfect than others. Just saiyan.

For me it isn't the fact that "No game is perfect so DA2 isn't that bad"

It's more the fact that while neither game is perfect I still found them both to be immensely enjoyable there are issues that can muddy the water, such as the previously mentioned recycled interiors,enemies,simplification of some aspects to expand the consumer base and a few other minor points and finally some railroading towards the end (i'm more neutral in the whole mage conflict).

The point is that (for me) the storyline remains engaging with characters that can be deep if you take the time to explore their personalities and motives. And to be honest the classes recieved a much needed makeover mostly the mage who I found to be quite boring in DAO (though at the cost of the warrior and rogue who are not as interesting anymore).

(yes the mage was quite tactical in DAO but it's attacks were slow and ugly, there were more spells available though and I miss my arcane warrior)

I still prefer DAO, DA2 was somewhat of a disappointment in some aspects, but it remains a brilliant game to me that stands on it's own strengths, not a masterpeice I would give it 8/10 to dragon age origins 9.5/10.

This is just my own personal opinion though since the success of a game and how good it is, is actually down to each individual to decide for themselves. 

Edit: I should add that I found the story much more enjoyable in DAO, I don't know if I'm alone thinking this but I really like the grey warden aspect, the trailers sent tingles down my spine especailly the whole "In War, Victory. In Peace, Vigilance. In Death, Sacrifice."  The story also seemed more grand than the champion of kirkwall.

Modifié par Kais Endac, 12 janvier 2013 - 03:50 .

[DarthLaxian]

The Six Path of Pain wrote...Oh man that made me laugh non stop for about 5 minutes ...anyway we can't stop you from liking DA2 but there is no denying that it is a bad game with all the plotholes,dumbed down gameplay,and horrible characters.

this i can understand - i mean, yeah one could enjoy DA2 (very much so - i did, till i started comparing it with other games DA:O being the first and it lost so hard against a game that was older then it and was its direct predecessor which is like buying a computer today that has less computing power then a 5 year old computer!) but it clearly has - many - weaknesses that are obvious (even to people who liked it - i had a discussion with friends about it recently and some really like it (the manga crowd mostly, they like the flashy moves and exploding enemies and such) but even they admit that if the compare it with DA:O and are rational about it (leaving most of their bias behind) that the game really sucks in comparison, which does not stop them from enjoying it though)

greetings LAX
ps: if i would have to rate DA:O I would agree with 9.5/10 - but for DA2 I would go with 6/10 (or less!)

Modifié par DarthLaxian, 12 janvier 2013 - 03:54 .

[esper]

DarthLaxian wrote...

The Six Path of Pain wrote...Oh man that made me laugh non stop for about 5 minutes ...anyway we can't stop you from liking DA2 but there is no denying that it is a bad game with all the plotholes,dumbed down gameplay,and horrible characters.

this i can understand - i mean, yeah one could enjoy DA2 (very much so - i did, till i started comparing it with other games DA:O being the first and it lost so hard against a game that was older then it and was its direct predecessor which is like buying a computer today that has less computing power then a 5 year old computer!) but it clearly has - many - weaknesses that are obvious (even to people who liked it - i had a discussion with friends about it recently and some really like it (the manga crowd mostly, they like the flashy moves and exploding enemies and such) but even they admit that if the compare it with DA:O and are rational about it (leaving most of their bias behind) that the game really sucks in comparison, which does not stop them from enjoying it though)

greetings LAX
ps: if i would have to rate DA:O I would agree with 9.5/10 - but for DA2 I would go with 6/10 (or less!)

I enjoyed da2 more than da:o, hence da2 is better. It is really that simple. And da:o's flaws were more glaring for me than da2's. It is all about what takes us out of the game and drag down the whole experience of the game.

For da:o for me: 
- Non-voiced protagonist in a voiced world. This is a big flaw for me, really big, as it makes the characther I am suppossed to indentify with feel fake.
- Boring unstrategic combat that took ages to finish. Unfortunately for me I accidently ran into the acene warrior/spirit healer who could fire ball everything to death without ever self risiking dieing, on nightemare. It was boring.
- Plot that didn't fit together. Each of the areas were interesting, but they never fit with the main story for me. I so wish that something more once done so it felt like there was more of a connection between the areas.
- The deep roads, always. Just urgh... And thee circle on replays because that shapeshifitng puzzle was really only funny the first time. The whole of the Kokari wilds. Urh.
- Boring side quest (off the notice boards kind) and not enough of the interesting side quest. I loathe getting x number of drop from enemies. At least the fetch quest in da2 was over so fast I barely noticed they were there.
- Most of the things dragging the enemies down being in the start/middle of the game, hence heightening in the chance that I lose interest in the character I am playing and drop her.

For da2 the things that brought me out of the game was:
- Hunting for criminal groups in the night, not funny when it is three groups in each freaking arc.
- The handling off Petrices quest.
- Best served cold not fleshed out better. They could still have had the same result, but done it better.
- The way Orsino flips out.

A lot less bullitin points on da2 as you can see, and yes I know that I miss some common complaints such as recylced caves, but I would prefer to have non-recycled caves, the recycling itself never dragged down the experience for me. I am just not that much into exploring.

[killswitch423]

You, sir, have balls. And I agree with you for the most part, though the repeated environments *did* get annoying.

And lol at people with what I call "Subjective Objectivity Syndrome." No game (movie, music, book... okay maybe a book based on grammar errors or spelling but meh) is or can ever be objectively good or bad because there is no objective scale by which to measure them by.

[SweQue]

come on, stop pretending like DA2 combat has just as much depth and strategy.

Next you tell me Baldurs Gate 2 had less strategy then Mass Effect 2.

And before someone says "just use fireball in DAO" yeah, give that advice to someone new to DA and im sure he will never get stuck or die at all.
"right".

Modifié par SweQue, 12 janvier 2013 - 06:56 .

[Aldandil]

SweQue wrote...

come on, stop pretending like DA2 combat has just as much depth and strategy.

Next you tell me Baldurs Gate 2 had less strategy then Mass Effect 2.

And before someone says "just use fireball in DAO" yeah, give that advice to someone new to DA and im sure he will never get stuck or die at all.
"right".

Are you going to say that the only thing you need to do in DA2 is kite, but claim that BG2 is a great strategy game, when you get by fine in that game by only kiting too? DA2 had combat with comparable depth and strategy to DA:O if you compare the amount of skills and the combat mechanics. One could of course claim that DA:O didn't have tactical combat at all, since all one had to do was drink health potions all the time, but since I think dismissing entire combat systems just because one element in them can be exploited, I won't do that.

I prefer DA:O to DA2, but I don't have any problem with the OP having it the other way around. It bothers me a bit to find that there's a bunch of people trying to "prove" the OP wrong. The OP stated subjective reasons as for why he prefered DA2 to DA:O. If you disagree, wouldn't it be better to simply say that this is why I prefered DA:O?  I prefer BG2 to DA:O, but there are no objective reasons for why BG2 would be the better game.

[batlin]

Uh oh...now you've done it. Are you ready, boys and girls? 'Cause here it comes

*RANT MODE ENGAGED*

esper wrote...

I enjoyed da2 more than da:o, hence da2 is better. It is really that simple.

Opinions can be criticized just as anything else can. It's not that simple.

- Non-voiced protagonist in a voiced world. This is a big flaw for me, really big, as it makes the characther I am suppossed to indentify with feel fake.

Meanwhile, Hawke's dialog is stilted and inconsistent unless you always pick one of the three "tones".

- Boring unstrategic combat that took ages to finish. Unfortunately for me I accidently ran into the acene warrior/spirit healer who could fire ball everything to death without ever self risiking dieing, on nightemare. It was boring.

Yeah, I call bs. There's no way you can win every combat by just spamming fireball. It does no significant damage to enemies other than trash mobs; the benefit of the spell is to knock down a large group of enemies and put a DoT on them. That's it.

Meanwhile in DA2, enemies come at you in waves rather than being positioned strategically throughout the battlefield. It's really easy for tanks to get threat, so every fight will play out in the exact same way. Your companions can only ever use one type of weapon, so you can never mix and match your party. You will only ever have one loadout and that's how it will always stay. DA2 is the antithesis of tactical combat.

- Plot that didn't fit together. Each of the areas were interesting, but they never fit with the main story for me. I so wish that something more once done so it felt like there was more of a connection between the areas.

Every time you went to a new area in DA:O it was for the purpose of building an army. The entirety of the game was in fact building up to the climax at the end of the game.

In DA2 the ONLY way the first act is at all related to the third act is through the idol, and act 2 had absolutely nothing to do with the Templar and Mage war. The plot in DA2 is woefully disjointed and meandering, and I cannot comprehend how any professional writer could approve of it. What's the first thing they teach in writing 101? "A story has a beginning, a middle, and an end." What does DA2 have? It has a beginning, an end, a beginning, an end, a beginning, and a cliffhanger. Sorry, but in no way can it be said that DA2's story is more solid than DA:O's.

In fact I would say most stories are more solid than DA2's.

- The deep roads, always. Just urgh... And thee circle on replays because that shapeshifitng puzzle was really only funny the first time. The whole of the Kokari wilds. Urh.

That's interesting, because the Deeproads is often praised. The first part is a bit tedious, but it picks up after you get on Branka's trail.

- Boring side quest (off the notice boards kind) and not enough of the interesting side quest. I loathe getting x number of drop from enemies. At least the fetch quest in da2 was over so fast I barely noticed they were there.

You're looking at a pot and a kettle and only blaming one of them for being black?

- Most of the things dragging the enemies down being in the start/middle of the game, hence heightening in the chance that I lose interest in the character I am playing and drop her.

I have zero idea what you are trying to say here. Can you elaborate?

Modifié par batlin, 12 janvier 2013 - 07:32 .

[Aldandil]

batlin wrote...

Uh oh...now you've done it. Are you ready, boys and girls? 'Cause here it comes

*RANT MODE ENGAGED*

esper wrote...

I enjoyed da2 more than da:o, hence da2 is better. It is really that simple.

Opinions can be criticized just as anything else can. It's not that simple.

Well, that depends on how they express their opinion. Both the OP and esper said that they enjoyed DA2 more than DA:O. What are you going to say for criticism? "No, you didn't!"?

Modifié par Aldandil, 12 janvier 2013 - 07:29 .