226 réponses à ce sujet

[Artona]

 

 

However, even if you didn't like the motifs used, Origin's environments were better constructed. Even if you thought it was cliche, Origin's story was better written. I'd argue the characters are far superior as well.

 

No argument here - Origin's story was more coherent and focused, but I find it hard to give them credit for that, because - as i see it - it came from lack of ambitions. Quests in Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer ("N7 mission went bad, but they left a drone, go and recover it") have similar level of coherency, and also because they are so painfully simple.
As for the characters - we can argue here: I agree that beside Varric every single companion in DA2 is annoying and repulsive, but on the other hand I never really felt any interest in DAO companions. I'm really not sure why, but still.

 

 

 

You're right that you didn't have to save the world in DA2. The problem is that you don't do much of anything. Hawke is too passive a character and is mostly reacting to everything rather than ever taking control of his/her own life.

 

True that. DA2 could be much better, but I still think the concept was more creative and ambitious. 

[Rxdiaz]

If you are really interested, why do we love this game, you read what we wrote here, and / or give the game a second chance, és play again from a different viewpoint. If not, then i dont understand you: you're going to convince us that we should not be such idiots? Or?   (No offense, only a humble question.)

I thought the idea of this forum was to exchange opinions and ideas. I didn't realize only positive posts about DA2 were wanted. My mistake. Resume preaching to the choir...

[obbie31]

Having finally played both, there is no way I can say DA2 is better than Origins. Origins has a better world, more interesting characters, a story with way more going on, better romances, better soundtrack, better enemies to fight, and many more. DAO felt like an epic well put together game where as DA2 felt like a side story.

 

With that said, I think DA2 is good also. I've heard horror stories of how awful it is. Its not DAO, but its a decent game. But its got weaker characters (only characters I truly liked were Varric, Beth, and Aveline), a story that really only focuses on the mage/templar in fighting, and much more simplified mechanics and gameplay. 

[Catilina]

I thought the idea of this forum was to exchange opinions and ideas. I didn't realize only positive posts about DA2 were wanted. My mistake. Resume preaching to the choir...

Why do not you could write down your opinion? And I could wonder the why.

[Natureguy85]

No argument here - Origin's story was more coherent and focused, but I find it hard to give them credit for that, because - as i see it - it came from lack of ambitions. Quests in Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer ("N7 mission went bad, but they left a drone, go and recover it") have similar level of coherency, and also because they are so painfully simple.
As for the characters - we can argue here: I agree that beside Varric every single companion in DA2 is annoying and repulsive, but on the other hand I never really felt any interest in DAO companions. I'm really not sure why, but still.

 

 

True that. DA2 could be much better, but I still think the concept was more creative and ambitious. 

 

Well the DAO quests were better than that at least

 

Annoying and repulsive doesn't mean it's a bad character. The problem for me was how one dimensional they were. They didn't seem to have the depth the Origins companions had. However, I actually really liked their interaction with each other.

DA2 does deserve credit for doing something different but they did it really poorly. It's like in performance Olympic events where you get a higher max score for a harder routine but you can still score lower than another person because of mistakes.

[Catilina]

Well the DAO quests were better than that at least

 

Annoying and repulsive doesn't mean it's a bad character. The problem for me was how one dimensional they were. They didn't seem to have the depth the Origins companions had. However, I actually really liked their interaction with each other.

DA2 does deserve credit for doing something different but they did it really poorly. It's like in performance Olympic events where you get a higher max score for a harder routine but you can still score lower than another person because of mistakes.

I think they were not worse than the Origin companions. But one-dimensional? Absolutely not.

[Artona]

 

 

Annoying and repulsive doesn't mean it's a bad character. The problem for me was how one dimensional they were. They didn't seem to have the depth the Origins companions had. However, I actually really liked their interaction with each other.

 

I wasn't precise in my argument. What I mean is everyone except Varric seemed to be driven by one obsession and by totally defined by it. While game mechanics did ensure about their sympathy and loyalty, plot-wise I never felt that I was important for Fenris, Merrill, Anders or Isabel - way the were presented makes sure that each one would stab me in the back with no hesitation if that would kill some mage slavers/reveal some forgotten elvish ruins/explode some... oh wait/save her ass. None seem to care about Hawke or be their friend. I would go with my sibling and Varric all the time because I find everyone else untrustworthy.

 

 

 

It's like in performance Olympic events where you get a higher max score for a harder routine but you can still score lower than another person because of mistakes.

Well put . 

[Natureguy85]

I think they were not worse than the Origin companions. But one-dimensional? Absolutely not.

 

Aveline: Law and Order

Fenris: Hates Mages

Merrill: Naive

Isabella: Talks about sex

Anders: Hates Templars

 

That's pretty much it. Varric is at least more interesting. However, I must give Bioware credit for making the very interesting and fun interaction between these individually boring characters. The banter was pretty great.

 

 

 

I wasn't precise in my argument. What I mean is everyone except Varric seemed to be driven by one obsession and by totally defined by it. While game mechanics did ensure about their sympathy and loyalty, plot-wise I never felt that I was important for Fenris, Merrill, Anders or Isabel - way the were presented makes sure that each one would stab me in the back with no hesitation if that would kill some mage slavers/reveal some forgotten elvish ruins/explode some... oh wait/save her ass. None seem to care about Hawke or be their friend. I would go with my sibling and Varric all the time because I find everyone else untrustworthy.

 

Yeah, I can see that. They do use it a bit in that they can turn on you at the end, but it would be cool if they'd made use of the way you describe it.

[Seraphim24]

Honestly, I'm not really sure how different they are....

[Catilina]

Aveline: Law and Order

Fenris: Hates Mages

Merrill: Naive

Isabella: Talks about sex

Anders: Hates Templars

 

That's pretty much it. Varric is at least more interesting. However, I must give Bioware credit for making the very interesting and fun interaction between these individually boring characters. The banter was pretty great.

 

You forget:

Sebastian: boring chantry boy

Carver: jealous little brother

Bethany: dear sis

[Natureguy85]

You forget:

Sebastian: boring chantry boy

Carver: jealous little brother

Bethany: dear sis

 

True, thanks. In fairness, Sebastian can be shaped a little bit. The shame about Carver is that if they had you play that first year with the smugglers or mercenaries rather than skipping it, they could have shown Carver in Hawke's shadow or people after Bethany to develop that relationship. Then we'd see why Carver was jealous and whiny rather than hearing stories.

[Catilina]

True, thanks. In fairness, Sebastian can be shaped a little bit. The shame about Carver is that if they had you play that first year with the smugglers or mercenaries rather than skipping it, they could have shown Carver in Hawke's shadow or people after Bethany to develop that relationship. Then we'd see why Carver was jealous and whiny rather than hearing stories.

But it's all not quite true

 

Without being exhaustive:

 

Aveline is able to turn a blind eye not once, although true, she is law abiding (there are such people ...)

Fenris does not hate mages, but also fear from the weak ones. (For example: If you save Ella from the wrath of Anders/Vengeance, you get +5 friendship points.) The fear is not unfounded. Fenris is able to drop off wrath to the end.

Merrill is not naive, Merrill very well know what she wants. Merrill just poor in the social interactions. If I have the appropriate stereotype, the more the absent-minded scientist.

Isabela really promiscuous, but changing her nature when you deal with it (for example, bring back the book, which is not a little thing from her)

Anders hate not exactly the Templars, but the Circle system. Justice / Vengeance and his own spirit perfectly reflected in it: he is healer and vengeful, helpful, while dangerous. The specific nature of his dramatic change from Act to Act.

Sebastian is faitful, but vengeful and power-hunger too.

[Natureguy85]

But it's all not quite true

 

Without being exhaustive:

 

Aveline is able to turn a blind eye not once, although true, she is law abiding (there are such people ...)

Fenris does not hate mages, but also fear from the weak ones. (For example: If you save Ella from the wrath of Anders/Vengeance, you get +5 friendship points.) The fear is not unfounded. Fenris is able to drop off wrath to the end.

Merrill is not naive, Merrill very well know what she wants. Merrill just poor in the social interactions. If I have the appropriate stereotype, the more the absent-minded scientist.

Isabela really promiscuous, but changing her nature when you deal with it (for example, bring back the book, which is not a little thing from her)

Anders hate not exactly the Templars, but the Circle system. Justice / Vengeance and his own spirit perfectly reflected in it: he is healer and vengeful, helpful, while dangerous. The specific nature of his dramatic change from Act to Act.

Sebastian is faitful, but vengeful and power-hunger too.

 

Yes, Aveline turns a blind eye in the sense of her job, but she challenges Hawke about it and wishes he'd cut it out or join the guard.

Fenris, founded or not, is constantly talking about how bad and dangerous mages are.

Merriil is very naive. She is tricked by a demon and knows nothing about the city or human culture. She is constantly needing things explained to her or misunderstanding what people say. That's the definition of naive.

It is good that you can get Isabella to bring back the book. It is against her normal character and it's due to Hawke. But as far as your interaction goes, she doesn't change.

[Catilina]

Yes, Aveline turns a blind eye in the sense of her job, but she challenges Hawke about it and wishes he'd cut it out or join the guard.

Fenris, founded or not, is constantly talking about how bad and dangerous mages are.

Merriil is very naive. She is tricked by a demon and knows nothing about the city or human culture. She is constantly needing things explained to her or misunderstanding what people say. That's the definition of naive.

It is good that you can get Isabella to bring back the book. It is against her normal character and it's due to Hawke. But as far as your interaction goes, she doesn't change.

Yes, Aveline law-abiding. She should change? Then she would be more? Why?

 

In rival nexus, at the end of ALONE quest Fenris do not blame the a mages more, only in friendship. Of course, he does not like them.Do you think Fenris personality is determined  just mage hatred? Interesting viewpoint.

 

Okay, Merrill is naive... also.

 

The book return is not some little thing. But it's okay. Izabela promiscuous.

 

All in all, I do not see them has a one-dimensional, but I think I can't convince you  anyway. Deadlock.

 

Although Anders disappeared from the list…

[Natureguy85]

Yeah, these are all little actions that take place in some quest. But the only reason they are significant is because they interact with the character's one defining characteristic. I'm not saying any of those are bad, I'm saying that's all the characters have.

[straykat]

I love how Aveline is conflicted and has a partnership with rival'ed Hawke. It's one of my favorite things about the game.

[Catilina]

I love how Aveline is conflicted and has a partnership with rival'ed Hawke. It's one of my favorite things about the game.

Rival with Aveline? Never tryed, seems interest... but how? Very easy the  friendship with her ...

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

I've enjoyed DA2 combat system way more than Origins and Inquisition.

[Artona]

I recall one scene with Merrill where Hawke, if chosen humorous answer, is trying to trick some goons by telling "there is a fire!" and Merrill is like "what? What fire?!". I know it's just played for laughs and all, but it's reaaally like something from sitcom, not a "serious roleplay". 

[Jedi Comedian]

The concept of DA2 is original and interesting but was IMHO very poorly executed. My main criticisms are:

- Kirkwall should be a full-blown open world city

- There should be no weapon restrictions and more RP options

- Sebastian and Legacy should have been part of the main game.

There is stuff I liked though, like not been forced to be a conventional hero, the fun fast-paced combat (I HATE Origins' Warrior but like it here, the TH version that is), the Friendship/Rivalry system and having almost all LIs available regardless of your PC (I prefer Origins' system though).

[straykat]

Rival with Aveline? Never tryed, seems interest... but how? Very easy the  friendship with her ...

 

Only makes sense on sarcastic or aggressive imo... but how? You just have to have a shady side.

 

I'd call it a buddy cop movie. Except only Aveline is the cop If you've ever seen 48 hours with Eddie Murphy, maybe it reminds me of that.

[Seraphim24]

Ok so the deal with Dragon Age 2 is frankly that it's very purely bitter and cynical. Moreover, this permeates all the characters, there aren't really any exceptions.

 

Dragon Age: Origins I would characterize as being in the vein of heroism and such, it's just more optimistic in general, even though it does have harsh tones.

 

That's simple reason why I've stated many times and so on about this topic, I'll simply state here Dragon Age Origins was a lot more fun to me than Dragon Age 2.

 

Dragon Age Inquisition was vaguely reminiscent of Origins it seemed to me, but still seemed headed pretty strongly in a 2 direction.

 

All it really takes is a concept of 2 steps forward, 5  steps back to work out the differences. It's possible that it did some things better than Origins, but whatever it did better was massively crippled by what it did much worse.

 

The goal of Inquisition was to hybridize the two, but it ended up really just 2 with some stuff tacked on from other RPGs out there like Skyrim, etc.

 

Mass Effect of course moved in a decidedly different direction, it's kind of divorced from conventional themes of heroism (aside from possibly the first one), and instead is more of a narrow space opera, free to just be a merry joking group of some sort or another, with an emphasis on interpersonal relations and such.

[Catilina]

Ok so the deal with Dragon Age 2 is frankly that it's very purely bitter and cynical. Moreover, this permeates all the characters, there aren't really any exceptions.

And that was one why I really liked it.

[Mike3207]

I'll always be a Origins player first and I've got past the point where I can look at my vow to never the play the game again after it first came out with a smile. It'll never be good as Origins, but it is a decent game once you get past the flaws-those being a bit too cynical and I don't think killing off Hawke's family did a lot for the game, the da2 companions weren't quite as interesting as the Origins companions, and by the end you've had quite enough of Kirkwall.

 

I still found myself enjoying the character a bit in a new mage playthrough. I've heard good things about Legacy and I'm willing enough to put a little into the mage item packs. Not so sure about Mark of the Assassin but I might give that a try in time as well. I haven't looked at a lot of story rpgs other than Dragon Age, but I think after a little time it stands a little better than most.

[Natureguy85]

I'll always be a Origins player first and I've got past the point where I can look at my vow to never the play the game again after it first came out with a smile. It'll never be good as Origins, but it is a decent game once you get past the flaws-those being a bit too cynical and I don't think killing off Hawke's family did a lot for the game, the da2 companions weren't quite as interesting as the Origins companions, and by the end you've had quite enough of Kirkwall.

 

I still found myself enjoying the character a bit in a new mage playthrough. I've heard good things about Legacy and I'm willing enough to put a little into the mage item packs. Not so sure about Mark of the Assassin but I might give that a try in time as well. I haven't looked at a lot of story rpgs other than Dragon Age, but I think after a little time it stands a little better than most.

 

I love both DLCs. Mark of the Assassin does have fun gameplay, and there is a section of similar style to Hock's mansion on Kasumi's mission in ME2. The main narrative benefit is more conversation and exploration of the Qun and "Qunari" as adherent of the philosophy/religion rather than as a race of horned giants.