195 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

XGrlGamerX wrote...
You're fighting against a blight and gathering people together, which if you hadn't, would have cost you the last fight. In DA2, you are literally running around doing errands, not really able to make a "stand" against something, and becoming Champion of your city.

You're not gathering people. You're running errands for political leaders, who are doing the gathering. And your gathering usually involves a throwaway reference to them having a legal obligation to help you.  

I understand that people might prefer that more or find that cause worthy, but I still will find the epicness of traveling from the Deep Roads to retrieving Andraste's ashes, to be one of the most epic and cause-worthy titles/adventures out there.  

But both quests are actually insane. I get that they're very "traditional RPG", where the ancient artifact of magic power always exists and the heroes can slaughter hundreds without food, water or problems, but the actual gameplay in stopping the blight is nuts. And the worst part is that Sten even calls you out on how stupid your plan is. 

[Paul E Dangerously]

ME2 was irritating as hell given that in hindsight, the entire thing is one giant sidestory. It's filler. 90% of the game is picking up characters to take a long for a grand total of one mission, and none of them are playable in ME3. At least, none of them that weren't ME1 carryovers.

I think ME2 is better as a game, now, but the plot and execution just drives me up a wall.

[Plaintiff]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

ME2 was irritating as hell given that in hindsight, the entire thing is one giant sidestory. It's filler. 90% of the game is picking up characters to take a long for a grand total of one mission, and none of them are playable in ME3. At least, none of them that weren't ME1 carryovers.

I think ME2 is better as a game, now, but the plot and execution just drives me up a wall.

It would've been nice to have at least one or two of the ME2 party members make a return to the team. Grunt and Legion would've been my preference.

[XGrlGamerX]

In Exile wrote...

XGrlGamerX wrote...
You're fighting against a blight and gathering people together, which if you hadn't, would have cost you the last fight. In DA2, you are literally running around doing errands, not really able to make a "stand" against something, and becoming Champion of your city.

You're not gathering people. You're running errands for political leaders, who are doing the gathering. And your gathering usually involves a throwaway reference to them having a legal obligation to help you.  

I understand that people might prefer that more or find that cause worthy, but I still will find the epicness of traveling from the Deep Roads to retrieving Andraste's ashes, to be one of the most epic and cause-worthy titles/adventures out there.  

But both quests are actually insane. I get that they're very "traditional RPG", where the ancient artifact of magic power always exists and the heroes can slaughter hundreds without food, water or problems, but the actual gameplay in stopping the blight is nuts. And the worst part is that Sten even calls you out on how stupid your plan is. 

Whether you are doing something because poltics is coercing you to do it, or if you decide that your Warden was going to do it despite the politics, that doesn't make it any less of a cause. Yes, it's a traditional RPG in the sense that you have mentioned, I'm not aruging that and I think that's what made it an excellent game.

I will argue that it is the only game out there where it isn't just a traditional RPG, but one, and if not only, RPG that has one of the best characters, and development of those characters. The only other game that comes to mind that gives you opitions, greatt RPG storytelling, and character development is Chrono Trigger. 

I think the majority of the fandom would agree with me when I state that DA:O had more of a cause worthy story than DA2, and if it's solely because it has those traditional RPG elements, who cares - it was a great game and if it ain't broke don't fix it. But I think Bioware got that memo because I recall a blog from Aaron stating that the next protagonist would be traveling to different parts of Thedas again.  

[In Exile]

XGrlGamerX wrote...
Whether you are doing something because poltics is coercing you to do it, or if you decide that your Warden was going to do it despite the politics, that doesn't make it any less of a cause.

Fighting for a cause, to me, requires some kind of active agency. In DA:O, you're not a proactive player. You're told the plan with the treaties by Flemeth and Alistair, repeatedly. You're told - in each zone you visit - what errand you have to run if you want any kind of help. You're then forced to make a choic between different factions, with no choice to actually do anything else (other than with the werewolves). 

I will argue that it is the only game out there where it isn't just a traditional RPG, but one, and if not only, RPG that has one of the best characters, and development of those characters.

No objection here, though I would be quite so praiseworthy myself. 

I think the majority of the fandom would agree with me when I state that DA:O had more of a cause worthy story than DA2, and if it's solely because it has those traditional RPG elements, who cares - it was a great game and if it ain't broke don't fix it. But I think Bioware got that memo because I recall a blog from Aaron stating that the next protagonist would be traveling to different parts of Thedas again.  

By every indication, DAI will reash the plot structure of DA:O, I imagine you'll really enjoy that game. 

I personally think DA2 had better causes than DA:O, it just didn't let you do anything with them (which doesn't bother me, becasue as a person I don't do causes). 

[XGrlGamerX]

I personally think DA2 had better causes than DA:O, it just didn't let you do anything with them (which doesn't bother me, becasue as a person I don't do causes). 

Haha, that's the point though! Sure... I'm a teacher and I guess that is cause-worthy, but I rather be saving the world from a blight. :-p 

[L. Han]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

ME2 was irritating as hell given that in hindsight, the entire thing is one giant sidestory. It's filler. 90% of the game is picking up characters to take a long for a grand total of one mission, and none of them are playable in ME3. At least, none of them that weren't ME1 carryovers.

I think ME2 is better as a game, now, but the plot and execution just drives me up a wall.

I'd like to argue against this. Having a nice amount of characters and being able to have a small and rather decently written story arc for each of them is very true to sci-fi.

Imagine if Star Trek never had episodes where some character comes up to Picard complaining about some personal issue which leads to some space station blowing up.

[Twisted Path]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

ME2 was irritating as hell given that in hindsight, the entire thing is one giant sidestory. It's filler. 90% of the game is picking up characters to take a long for a grand total of one mission, and none of them are playable in ME3. At least, none of them that weren't ME1 carryovers.

I think ME2 is better as a game, now, but the plot and execution just drives me up a wall.

Yeah. For me Mass Effect 2 is the most fun game Bioware has ever produced but at the same time I think it took the series in a terrible direction. On it's own it's a fantastic game. As the middle entry in a trillogy it adds nothing to the story.

I also didn't like how they abandoned the 70's pulp sci-fi novel look and feel Mass Effect had for something a lot more conventional and "darker and edgyer." Dragon Age 2 suffered from something similar: Origins had a generic but functional high fantasy look and feel, then that got thrown out for a completly different art direction.

Improvment and inovation is great but why does every Bioware sequel lately have to try and radically reinvent everything?

[Angrywolves]

Because Bioware looks down on their past successes. They certainly seem to turn up their nose at DAO.
Don't know why.

[In Exile]

Twisted Path wrote...
I also didn't like how they abandoned the 70's pulp sci-fi novel look and feel Mass Effect had for something a lot more conventional and "darker and edgyer." Dragon Age 2 suffered from something similar: Origins had a generic but functional high fantasy look and feel, then that got thrown out for a completly different art direction.

ME1s pup sci-fi novel feel really didn't fit the story they were telling. 

I would really contest that DA:O's look and feel came close to functional, but otherwise, yeah, that tends to be Bioware's thng. They very agressively cut what isn't working rather than refine. 

Modifié par In Exile, 03 août 2013 - 07:19 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Angrywolves wrote...

Because Bioware looks down on their past successes. They certainly seem to turn up their nose at DAO.
Don't know why.

I'd say it might have something to do with leadership turnover. Nearly no one who is in charge right now was in charge during DA:O's development. They may have been Bioware employees, but they were not directly in charge. After these former leads were gone, I'd have to assume those new to their positions want to put their own brand on the game and series. 

Just an assumption, but it makes sense to me. If you have a completely different set of people making all the decisions about a game, it is going to be different, even if it does still have "Dragon Age" in the name. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Plaintiff wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

ME2 was irritating as hell given that in hindsight, the entire thing is one giant sidestory. It's filler. 90% of the game is picking up characters to take a long for a grand total of one mission, and none of them are playable in ME3. At least, none of them that weren't ME1 carryovers.

I think ME2 is better as a game, now, but the plot and execution just drives me up a wall.

It would've been nice to have at least one or two of the ME2 party members make a return to the team. Grunt and Legion would've been my preference.

Tali and Garrus...? I know they are carried over from ME1 as well, but I'm splitting hairs because I enjoy doing so. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 03 août 2013 - 09:16 .

[David7204]

Gosh, I guess the countless comments BioWare staffmembers have made about looking to DA:O for DA:I have all been figments of my imagination.

[Fast Jimmy]

David7204 wrote...

Gosh, I guess the countless comments BioWare staffmembers have made about looking to DA:O for DA:I have all been figments of my imagination.

Well, given that your entire DA experience is figments of your imagination because you haven't played it before, that sounds about right. 

[Fredward]

David7204 wrote...

Gosh, I guess the countless comments BioWare staffmembers have made about looking to DA:O for DA:I have all been figments of my imagination.

They've said they're looking at the best of both* DAO and DA2.

* - queue "DA2 DIDN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT AND SUCKED AT EVERYTHING RAWR " comments.

Modifié par Foopydoopydoo, 03 août 2013 - 09:42 .

[Fast Jimmy]

^

They have said that, yes. But for the precious little information we have, there doesn't seem to be one feature that is more DA:O than DA2. At least, in my opinion.

The closest announced to date might be the armor customization, but we don't know how that will work and is still tied very strongly to the iconic looks concept of DA2, just with more equipment that can be used rather than the four or five upgrades you could get for each companion.

[Boycott Bioware]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I'd say it might have something to do with leadership turnover. Nearly no one who is in charge right now was in charge during DA:O's development. They may have been Bioware employees, but they were not directly in charge. After these former leads were gone, I'd have to assume those new to their positions want to put their own brand on the game and series.

Just an assumption, but it makes sense to me. If you have a completely different set of people making all the decisions about a game, it is going to be different, even if it does still have "Dragon Age" in the name.

I agree, it is like politic, when the new Prime Minister/President elected, the government policy changed. The new leader will make new things even altering the former one did. Each new leader want something new for their name sake, not overshadowed by the past leaders achievement.

It is also happened in business, when new leader taken over the company, new boss new look

[PinkysPain]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I'd say it might have something to do with leadership turnover. Nearly no one who is in charge right now was in charge during DA:O's development. They may have been Bioware employees, but they were not directly in charge. After these former leads were gone, I'd have to assume those new to their positions want to put their own brand on the game and series. 

Just an assumption, but it makes sense to me. If you have a completely different set of people making all the decisions about a game, it is going to be different, even if it does still have "Dragon Age" in the name.

An artist with respect for source material not his own is a very rare beast ... for every Robert Rodriguez there are a million JJ Abrams ...

Change for change's sake is to be expected when you hand new leads an ongoing project.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 03 août 2013 - 11:42 .

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
They have said that, yes. But for the precious little information we have, there doesn't seem to be one feature that is more DA:O than DA2. At least, in my opinion. 

The closest announced to date might be the armor customization, but we don't know how that will work and is still tied very strongly to the iconic looks concept of DA2, just with more equipment that can be used rather than the four or five upgrades you could get for each companion.

They've announced that the story structure and tone is going to be DA:O. It's also not fair to say that the companion armour is "like" DA2, since it was visually static for many of them, with only one visual alternation for the LIs if they were romanced. 

The only thing that's been announced otherwise is character creation, and on that point it's closer to DA2 than DA:O. We've heard nothing about anything else in game. 

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I'd say it might have something to do with leadership turnover. Nearly no one who is in charge right now was in charge during DA:O's development. They may have been Bioware employees, but they were not directly in charge. After these former leads were gone, I'd have to assume those new to their positions want to put their own brand on the game and series. 

Just an assumption, but it makes sense to me. If you have a completely different set of people making all the decisions about a game, it is going to be different, even if it does still have "Dragon Age" in the name. 

Given what we know of the people who left and the reasons, it's more likely that there was a change in the direction of the series and the former leads parted ways. There was also movement of some designers to TOR.