23 réponses à ce sujet

[Benastrian]

My uncle gave me his copy of DA2 and I played DA:O (without ever having created a profile on Bioware before) long ago. I felt torn between the game games but DA:O was a much superior game. While I liked the faster combat in DA2, some of it was over the top and while I understand the "suspension of disbelief" meme, it didn't work for me.

 

What didn't work?

 

-Combat, was good, but unrealistic, while I did like it faster, bunny-hop kills got old, as did the parachutring from out of nowhere enemies.

 

-During major street fighst, people and city guards do not react to the fighting. It felt very game breaking when seeing that.

 

-WTH is up with the repeated usages of areas during different quests? That is a huge let-down to be honest. I mean, most maps seem to have been used more than 10 times over for different quests.

 

- While I really do not mind ambient conversations, and the dialogue was great during them and well done, as well as humorous, I could not engage squadies in convos, that's a no-no in an RPG for me.

 

-No ability to customize my squadies with armors, etc, argggh! Major loss just in this aspect of the game.

 

-Comparing it as a sequel to DA:O, I had no impact on the overall storyline, especially the ending. While breaking the game into acts was cool, they didn't make much importance on the story, except for Act 2. Act 3 ending totally took me off the rails of the game story on how it ended, as I felt I made concerted choices regarding the opposing forces in the game that made no difference whatsoever. Unlike DA:O where my choices had a complete impact on the ending.

 

What was good?

 

-The ambient convos had more levity and flare than did in DA:O.

 

-The impact on choices during quests wwere very good and had very certain implications, like they did in DA:O, only they felt a bit deeper. e.g. Being able to choose to watch Petrice (Chantry ) get killed for her role in inciting the Qunari conflict out of her beliefs. Or, I found she could be a possible future ally when I sided with her, after her disbarment from the Chantry (hopefully) in the next release of DA:I.

 

-The abilities set-up in a tree system. that was much better than DA:O where that aspect disppointed me in that game.

 

My hopes? That what I did in DA:O and DA2 have more of an impact of how the game ENDS in DA:I than DA:O did for DA2.

[Benastrian]

Umm... okay. 

Quick response I must say, are you confused with my response? First time I ever psoted to Bioware before. Is there some language I should use that suits the forum participants, or do you actually have a meaningful response to what I posted?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

My hopes? That what I did in DA:O and DA2 have more of an impact of how the game ENDS in DA:I than DA:O did for DA2.

Each game is standalone, and revolve around different things. Your choices will effect things during Inquisition, but not really the end. 

[KaiserShep]

DA:O also had its share of non-reactive NPC's. The most obvious examples can be seen in Orzammar. Once you start showing support for either Bhelen or Harromont, fanatics will attack in full view in both the Commons and the Diamond Quarter, and neither the nobles, guards or random denizens will react. This is something I really hope BioWare rectifies in the upcoming titles, because once you have NPC's run screaming just for brandishing your weapon in GTA, it makes me want them to at least react when a swordfight breaks out.

[Benastrian]

DA:O also had its share of non-reactive NPC's. The most obvious examples can be seen in Orzammar. Once you start showing support for either Bhelen or Harromont, fanatics will attack in full view in both the Commons and the Diamond Quarter, and neither the nobles, guards or random denizens will react. This is something I really hope BioWare rectifies in the upcoming titles, because once you have NPC's run screaming just for brandishing your weapon in GTA, it makes me want them to at least react when a swordfight breaks out.

I won't dispute that, but it was outright blatant in DA2. No way to get around that.

[Benastrian]

Each game is standalone, and revolve around different things. Your choices will effect things during Inquisition, but not really the end. 

How do you know? Do you have some info on the player agency one has in DA:I

[goat_fab]

How do you know? Do you have some info on the player agency one has in DA:I

Well for starters, they're different games with different storylines. The actions of your character in DA:O was never meant to have a massive impact in DA2, and it's pretty safe to assume the same for DA:I. Because of the Dragon Age Keep, and through what we've been told by the developers, we know that our past choices are going to have some effect on differing parts of Inquisition. It will never be anything major like affecting the entire ending you receive. Think about it this way: The Fifth Blight happened during the events of DA:O, which took place in Ferelden. Ten years later, the rumblings of the Mage/Templar War began and the rise of the Champion of Kirkwall happened in DA2. DA:I takes places in Western Ferelden to Western Orlais and maybe a little outside that. There's not a whole lot of room, in the setting or quests, to include much from the previous games. What is there to bring over that would have a major impact on the outcome of DA:I? No matter what happens, the Blight is ended in DA:O. No matter what happens, Anders blows up the Chantry and starts the Mage/Templar War in DA2.



Going back to your main post, your pros/cons are the same pros/cons that have been spoken over many, many times. That may explain the somewhat harsh reaction of the first commenter. However, we appreciate your input and welcome you to the forums! It's pretty much universally agreed that DA:O was the better RPG. The "problem," if you want to call it that, with DA2 was that it wasn't trying to be Dragon Age: Origins 2. It was trying to be it's own game, and I feel it succeeded. I personally love both, and continue to play them now. Some people hold a deep hatred for DA2, which I feel is a bit (read: really) extreme. Judging it as it's own game, and not as a sequel, it's fantastic. As a sequel to DA:O, it doesn't pair up as well in some people's eyes.

Side note: Typically, in forum posts, there needs to be something to lead a discussion. Just posting your review of the game, especially considering the length of time it's been out, doesn't really fit the criteria for a "quality post," as there's nothing for others to really discuss. It has a good potential to just lead to arguments over why your pros and cons are the wrong pros and cons.


Once again, welcome to the forums! 

[Benastrian]

"Well for starters, they're different games with different storylines. The actions of your character in DA:O was never meant to have a massive impact in DA2, and it's pretty safe to assume the same for DA:I"

 

I never stated that DA:O should have had an impact on DA2, only that my actions in DA2 don't have the impact that actions did in DA:O. I was very clear on that. I dismiss your assumptions, that's all they are until the verdict can be read on the gameplay of DA:I. I also knew the how the history of DA:O worked out, but I appreciate your reliving that anyway.

 

"The "problem," if you want to call it that, with DA2 was that it wasn't trying to be Dragon Age: Origins 2."

 

It was advertised as such and why call it DA2? Go read the DA2 homepage, it makes the claim to it being a sequel of DA:O. Unfortunately, it didn't follow the premise of DA:O. If you feel it succeeded, then that's OK, I feel it failed on many levels outside of the graphical repitition, the lack of player agency and squad customization.

 

"Some people hold a deep hatred for DA2, which I feel is a bit (read: really) extreme."

 

People are allowed to hold their opinions outside of your own. Whether or not you feel they are extreme, doesn't make their experiences any different, they must have been real for them in spite of your protestations.

 

"Just posting your review of the game, especially considering the length of time it's been out, doesn't really fit the criteria for a "quality post," as there's nothing for others to really discuss. It has a good potential to just lead to arguments over why your pros and cons are the wrong pros and cons."

 

What? I made it clear that I just played the game recently. I only made a profile here because the game prompted me to do so. Now, your argument agaisnt my mini-review is that the game is old and doesn't deserve this review??? The game didn't change because it got older, and my taste in gameplay didn't change becaue your views make personal demands that it be as such. Get over yourself.

 

"Once again, welcome to the forums!"

 

Welcome to youself :/

[Nightdragon8]

when was it ever advertized as "Dragon Age: Origins 2" ?? Dragon Age 2. Doesn't mean "Dragon age: Origins 2"

 

Dragon age 2 doesn't need to be the same as DA:O

 

different story different people. It was never billed as, "warden adventures continue"

[Makkah876]

-WTH is up with the repeated usages of areas during different quests? That is a huge let-down to be honest. I mean, most maps seem to have been used more than 10 times over for different quests.

 

 

This is why I only played through DA2 once, myself. I got so sick of seeing the EXACT same dungeons over and over again that I just couldn't stomach another run. If they used the same tile set, but with a different layout, that would have been better, but as it is? Hell no. Thankfully DA:I seems to have a rather diverse set of environments. 

[Benastrian]

when was it ever advertized as "Dragon Age: Origins 2" ?? Dragon Age 2. Doesn't mean "Dragon age: Origins 2"

 

Dragon age 2 doesn't need to be the same as DA:O

 

different story different people. It was never billed as, "warden adventures continue"

Did IQs suddenly drop between my first post to now, for those who read what I stated and coming back with a non sequitur counterpoint?

 

Go read the DA2 homepage, it states that it is a sequel to DA:O. And if you had read my previous replies, I never made a statement to the effect that DA2 should have been like DA:O. I only stated that in DA2, my character had very little effect on the outcome of the story of the main plot, unlike how it did in DA:O.

[Benastrian]

This is why I only played through DA2 once, myself. I got so sick of seeing the EXACT same dungeons over and over again that I just couldn't stomach another run. If they used the same tile set, but with a different layout, that would have been better, but as it is? Hell no. Thankfully DA:I seems to have a rather diverse set of environments. 

I am hoping DA:I is as diverse as I have read it is supposed to be, having more open areas to explore. While the repetitive areas in DA2 were not game breaking, it took away from my sense of adventure after discovering them only to see them over and over again. Only the writing made the game decent enough to play through it a few times. I admit, that I think the story ws well thought out, except for the game state plot in the main quest-line which the ending proved I had no effect with my choices, and that it was somewhat disjointed from Act 1 to Act 3. The ending was a total let down. DA:O was my first experience with a Bioware game and it was awesome; DA2, not so much.

[goat_fab]

"Well for starters, they're different games with different storylines. The actions of your character in DA:O was never meant to have a massive impact in DA2, and it's pretty safe to assume the same for DA:I"

 

I never stated that DA:O should have had an impact on DA2, only that my actions in DA2 don't have the impact that actions did in DA:O. I was very clear on that. I dismiss your assumptions, that's all they are until the verdict can be read on the gameplay of DA:I. I also knew the how the history of DA:O worked out, but I appreciate your reliving that anyway.

 

"The "problem," if you want to call it that, with DA2 was that it wasn't trying to be Dragon Age: Origins 2."

 

It was advertised as such and why call it DA2? Go read the DA2 homepage, it makes the claim to it being a sequel of DA:O. Unfortunately, it didn't follow the premise of DA:O. If you feel it succeeded, then that's OK, I feel it failed on many levels outside of the graphical repitition, the lack of player agency and squad customization.

 

"Some people hold a deep hatred for DA2, which I feel is a bit (read: really) extreme."

 

People are allowed to hold their opinions outside of your own. Whether or not you feel they are extreme, doesn't make their experiences any different, they must have been real for them in spite of your protestations.

 

"Just posting your review of the game, especially considering the length of time it's been out, doesn't really fit the criteria for a "quality post," as there's nothing for others to really discuss. It has a good potential to just lead to arguments over why your pros and cons are the wrong pros and cons."

 

What? I made it clear that I just played the game recently. I only made a profile here because the game prompted me to do so. Now, your argument agaisnt my mini-review is that the game is old and doesn't deserve this review??? The game didn't change because it got older, and my taste in gameplay didn't change becaue your views make personal demands that it be as such. Get over yourself.

 

"Once again, welcome to the forums!"

 

Welcome to youself :/

https://dragonage.bioware.com/da2/

No where do I see anything labelled as "The Direct Sequel to Dragon Age: Origins". The word "sequel" doesn't imply Dragon Age: Origins 2, either. The parts where I discussed the potential for our actions to affect DA:I were assumptions. However, I wasn't blindly tossing out an idea. They were safe assumptions based on previous experience with Bioware games and from sloughing through every available interview and gameplay video. I never claimed they were fact. I also never claimed my opinions were the correct ones. Again, I was just stating my view. There was no reason to talk to me like I'm lording my opinion over you.I never demanded that you change your opinion. You act as though I was trying to start a fight and antagonize you. I was simply trying to welcome you to the forums and give my insight.

[themikefest]

I played DA2 15 times. I agree it has its flaws, but it didn't stop me from enjoying the game. I might do another playthrough shortly. I found the dlc better than the main game

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Umm... okay. 

 

Quick response I must say, are you confused with my response? First time I ever psoted to Bioware before. Is there some language I should use that suits the forum participants, or do you actually have a meaningful response to what I posted?

Don't mind him/her/it. I think your analysis is spot on. I guess the reaction is due to it being a bit late.

 

But then how on earth could you play it 3 times?

[DarthGizka]

Each game is standalone, and revolve around different things. Your choices will effect things during Inquisition, but not really the end. 

 

I certainly hope that choices made in earlier games will *not* affect the availability of quests. Especially as not everyone may be happy with Bioware canon. For example, none of my Wardens ever made Alistair king, except for one Landsmeet fork to get the missing 'achievement' (for making Alistair detonate the darkspawn führer). On the whole I'd be less irritated by having to put up with the game ignoring previous choices than with getting penalised by content being withheld.

 

The Keep programme may allow to resolve such things to a certain extent, but I guess we love our characters exactly as they are and how we made them, including their stories and decisions.

[Benastrian]

No where do I see anything labelled as "The Direct Sequel to Dragon Age: Origins". The word "sequel" doesn't imply Dragon Age: Origins 2, either.

 

Semantics I won't play, the DA2 web-page is clear, and you (conveniently for yourself) changed what it stated.

 

The parts where I discussed the potential for our actions to affect DA:I were assumptions. However, I wasn't blindly tossing out an idea.

 

They are assumptions nevertheless. I didn't say anything negative or positive about them. Until official info is released, that's all you have. More importantly, they had nothing to do with my DA2 mini-review :/

 

They were safe assumptions based on previous experience with Bioware games and from sloughing through every available interview and gameplay video. I never claimed they were fact. I also never claimed my opinions were the correct ones. Again, I was just stating my view.

 

Again, you changed what you previously claimed.  And again, all you have are assumptions.. It's fine to make those assumptions and post them as prognostications of what the game may possibly entail, it's entirely another to make it a challenge to my mini-review to then claim them as valid. See how that works?

 

There was no reason to talk to me like I'm lording my opinion over you.I never demanded that you change your opinion. You act as though I was trying to start a fight and antagonize you. I was simply trying to welcome you to the forums and give my insight.

 

You did no such thing and stop petting yourself over it!

[Benastrian]

I played DA2 15 times. I agree it has its flaws, but it didn't stop me from enjoying the game. I might do another playthrough shortly. I found the dlc better than the main game

 

And that's fine, it is about what one likes, really . I liked certain aspects of it as I previously mentioned.  But certain combat aspects and the disjointed storyline took the game down for me. It was very inconsistent aside as well as from allowing the PC to have an impact on the story like DA:O did. Add in the repeated area usage in quests and that took it to a lower scale. I honestly think the writing was great and that kept me involved, though I don't like ambient convos replacing the abiltiy to talk upon request.

[Benastrian]

Don't mind him/her/it. I think your analysis is spot on. I guess the reaction is due to it being a bit late.

 

But then how on earth could you play it 3 times?

And it being a bit late was the excuse this person used (ineptly) to invalidate my mini-review.

 

The writing was great and I am into storytelling. Although the main game plot was terrible inasmuch as the PC could not have an effect on it, the sub-plots were realy good and those were  very much involved in player agency .

[KaiserShep]

One of the things Dragon Age 2 did do well was allow us to have a reasonable amount of player agency despite the fixed plot and resolution. If anything, I think this works a lot better than, say, the Collector Base choice. As cool as it would be to be able to stop the whole thing from happening as it does at the end of the game, it can only go one of two ways after that: either Inquisition does not exist, or the Circles fall apart anyway, thus making the previous game's outcome little more than a minor detail. If anything, I'm glad that the DA series is keeping the major world state changes a fixed point at the end of each game. It makes it much simpler to carry on to the next.

[Benastrian]

One of the things Dragon Age 2 did do well was allow us to have a reasonable amount of player agency despite the fixed plot and resolution. If anything, I think this works a lot better than, say, the Collector Base choice. As cool as it would be to be able to stop the whole thing from happening as it does at the end of the game, it can only go one of two ways after that: either Inquisition does not exist, or the Circles fall apart anyway, thus making the previous game's outcome little more than a minor detail. If anything, I'm glad that the DA series is keeping the major world state changes a fixed point at the end of each game. It makes it much simpler to carry on to the next.

 

I honestly don't know how to compare DA2 to ME at all. I know from  playing ME that my choices had an effect on the end game story and also, what choices I made had an effect on the various plots (mostly with companions). DA2 had no such effect from DA;O to DA2 other than quest plots that had no bering on my choices in the DA2 play, other than getting quest to pop-ups that happen to be relevant to what I did in DA:O. Keep in mind that you play Sheperd (sp?) through each release, whereas in DA:O to DA2, you play the gray warden to the champion respectively, so they didn't follow each other in the storyline.

 

The only player agency I got in DA2 was certain quests in the game and not at all in the main plot. Though I thought they were well done for the quests, not  having that in the mian plot was a huge let down. Still though, I felt the character writing was well done in DA2.

[KaiserShep]

Most of the Warden's decisions, even the major ones throughout the game ended up being details against its main plot anyway. If you sided with the werewolves and killed the Dalish, you simply got the option of having werewolves join in the fray. If you kept the anvil of the void, you got fresh golems to help fight. The other more meaningful decisions, like who to choose for the king of Orzammar, who is made king/queen of Ferelden and so forth are things that would be mainly isolated to Ferelden anyway. The storylines were never going to branch out that much. All that was ever going to realistically be changed were the details in passing references from NPC's in future games and maybe random quests relevant to them. Like, if I side with Bhelen, there's no reason for that to drastically affect what goes on in Kirkwall or anywhere else outside of that country. The most I should ever really expect is something like the last of the Harrowmonts fleeing for his life. In the end, only one major change in the world state can ever carry over and be a meaningful part of the next game's narrative, and that is pretty much a fixed point the PC cannot alter. No matter what the Warden wants to do, he/she becomes a Grey Warden whether or not they object, and no matter what, the archdemon dies and the darkspawn horde disperses.

 

In fairness, DA:O is pretty much a self-contained plot. Outside of Awakening, at which point the Blight is now truly over, there's nothing more that can really be carried out with that story without further milking the darkspawn for all their worth, which would probably doom us to playing yet another Grey Warden.

 

But as for Mass Effect, you have the final decision in the end game, but we don't really have an end game in Dragon Age to decide the fate of all of Thedas, at least not yet, but we do have the Collector Base decision to serve as an example of a major decision that could never realistically be followed through. Take, for example, the Dark Ritual. Sure, it saves the Warden(s), but by its very nature it can never take center stage in the narrative of any future titles, unless the devs decide to make it exist as the default (which I'm pretty sure they won't).

[Aurelet]

The only thing I really didn't like about DA2 was the dialogue wheel.  Yes you got to say it different ways but ultimately (for the most part) you were saying the same thing. 

 

Well, and some of the companions.