4 réponses à ce sujet

[Arthur005]

First I will say I have only played to act 2 and the game is sooooo boring.

Am I missing something how can Dragon Age Origins turn into Dragon Age 2? It is like they look at origins said there is too much stuff in there let’s take a lot out and put nothing back. Don’t get me wrong I like a talking main character so that is not it at all and making human the only choice is annoying but I would be fine with it but read-on.

The design is drab and lifeless and it seems the whole game is in the city only but they made the city feel so small. I read review that the level are repetitive but I thought that meant they use a lot of the same design no they use the exact same levels over and over again. Was this game made on 10,000 dollar budget for art?

A whole set of skills removed no more persuasion or crafting you buy everything now and after you find items for crafting you have them forever and show them to shop keeper and depending on how many you have they will sell to you makes no sense to me either.

The characters are one dimensional and sad they have one point of view and never change it no matter what happens in the story.  This may change as we move to Act 3 but I have not hopeful that it will. There is not good or evil for your character as far as I can tell it chooses one side or the other nothing else there seem to be no middle ground.  Also both sides seem not worth helping they both seem evil and unworthy of any help.  I find myself feeling let them implode and let the maker sort them out.

Where does one start with quest they seem put in to take up time to make the game seem longer ratter then having any interesting story in themselves.  I mean I don’t care if someone lost something why should I go find it for you lazy Bast….

Armor I like that they have armor unique to them but that does not mean there were no ways to give them unique armor and allow them to equip add-ons to their armors.  So far the verity of armor is useless when only your character can equip class specific armor unless you are crazy and put points into attribute you don’t need. Almost all the armor I have found can be out done at stores come on.

Items why why why did they think garbage was the thing to find in almost every place you look? They look at Origins said well they sell items they don’t need so let give them garbage to sell instead who thought this I hate them.

So in short

Less items
Less game play/quests
Less armor
Less character/development
Less story/development/depth
Less Skills
Less world/design
More Junk

Please someone tell me why what where they thinking?

Modifié par Arthur005, 27 mai 2013 - 11:51 .

[Swordfishtrombone]

They were thinking that they had a task of making the sequel in a fraction of the time they'd need to make it to the same standard as it's predecessor. It was a rush job.

I would not say that it's a bad game though - there are redeeming qualities. There's also characted development - I did not find the characters one dimensional at all; if you have various characters in your party throughout the game, you experience a lot of the party banter that shows their development, and developing relationships with each other. Have Aveline and Isabella in the same party, and you'll see an initial hostility gradually turn into something like friendship. I think Isabella, if you have her with you a lot, and gain her friendship, is probably the character that "grows up" the most.

Merrill is always her ditsy self, but events in the game pretty necessarily affect how she views things.

There are some mods that help bring some of what was lost, when compared to DA:O, back - there's a mod that allows you to equip all your characters with armor, like in DA:O. Though notice, that that means that you'll also probably be spending more money on equipping your companions. To balance the need for more money, and to make junk less.... junkish, there's another mod that adjusts the monetary value of the junk, so that it's actually worth collecting and selling.

The DLCs help somewhat with the claustrophobic feel of the game, of being limited to a very small area, and I think they were actually well done.

[Ferretinabun]

I did like the concept of the game - stay in the same city and visit it several times with gpas of several years and see the city change and develop according to your decisions. I realised that artistically it's quite a shortcut and could possibly get repetative, but I was willing to go along with it because the premise sounded great.

Unfortunately they did not pull it off. The city hardly changes at all. Instead of a sandbox-y game that reacts to you over time we got a fairly railroaded narrative. Which was a great shame.

Not being able to equip companions was a common complaint, but frankly I didn't miss it. I like the fact that companions get their own distinct look (even if some of them never change their appearance in 7 years) and I never found micromanaging my teams equipment to be great fun.

A few tips to help you make the best of it though:

- get the DLCs. They aren't flawless (MotA, I'm looking at YOU), but they are quite fun and do break up the repetative, confined feel of the vanilla game.

- Do the missions one at a time. The game is basically just a tonne of sidequests, and it's so easy to just swoop around locations collecting and completing quests and completely lose track of what you're doing and why. But force yourself to do one quest at a time and pay attention to them and you'll find there are quite a few interesting plot threads here. Fair enough there are too many, and they do get quite tangled, but the game rewards a patient player.

Modifié par Ferretinabun, 29 mai 2013 - 01:58 .

[ioannisdenton]

Da2 is more replayable for me than DAO. I loved DAO but i happen to love more Da2. First impression of Da2 is terrible , i know..

[Angrywolves]

Not me. I've played DAO a bunch of times. DA2 only twice.
Gaider wrote DA2 for hawke to fail. Players want their hero to succeed.