521 réponses à ce sujet

[Ellerz]

Hmm, comparing DA2 to DA3, may as well plop the 3 games together, since DA:O continues to come up. I've played all 3, and I like all 3, for different reasons.

 

I feel that DA:O was far more indepth when it came to the PC, and the companions, they were all believable characters, and felt like 'people', they came to life, and had personalities. The only thing I didn't care for, was the fact your character didn't have a voice over, but not terribly important to me, it's something I can live without. That being said, if the voice overs are done right, then it can really bring the PC to life, as I found out, in DA2.

 

DA2 also had characters that popped out, and felt like fully fleshed out individuals, the banter between the PC and the various companions was fun to listen to. The combat was a lot different than DA:O, I prefer it's combat, but got used to the combat of DA2, and after awhile it didn't bug me anymore. I enjoyed the story a great deal, and grew attached to the characters and their motives for doing what they do.

 

DA:I on the other hand....the PC is something I could never get attached to, the facial expressions, the voice acting, it was all very bland. Too many times do I see my character with the 'deer in the headlights' look on their face. There's not much emotion there, and there's times you pick something, and expect one response, and instead you're shouting, where it seemed hardly needed. And your party members.....there's so many companions that they're almost falling off of every tree branch you pass as you play the game. And how are most of them introduced? In a very lackluster way. "Hello inquisitor, I'd like to join you, and be one of your trusted companions, because it seems like the thing to do today." There's nothing really compelling about them, they're all rather flat, with no depth to them.

 

Unfortunately, the large expansive, beautiful area's were just as flat and depthless as the characters, with most of the land mass just there to help you reach the next level so you could carry on with the main story. When I first went into the hinterlands, for example, and saw how vast the area was, I was amazed, and was hoping for a lot of depth in the story. I saw how battered and torn the area was, with a good deal of fighting between mages and templars, add ontop of that the bandits....all of which I figured you could stop with quests and the like, especially when I ran across the towers the farmers want you to have towers built so they can better protect themselves. I did that, and ran back past one of those tower positions (after going to the war map and having that completed) and there's nothing there, nothing changed, there's still bandits running around causing problems. As I came to realize that none of the side quests I did were actually doing anything, I stopped doing them all together, and focused only on the main story, which I then finished in about 12 hours, despite the fact that the game was crashing on every cutscene I went into.

 

The combat...I have to say, I don't enjoy it that much, because you spend 80% of the time you fight, holding 1 button, since using an ability/spell forces you to wait for your stamina/mana to regen, and by the time that's done, most fights are over. The AI for your companions during combat is bad, I don't like that they're tethered to you, so as a mage if you sit back and pelt enemies, and say, Cassandra runs too far, she stops fighting and runs back to you and just stands there looking at you.

 

Sorry this got a little long. All in all, out of all the DA's, DA:O had all the depth and size, that are lacking in DA:2 and DA:I, DA:2 had good characters, and a good PC, but the environment was lacking. In DA:I it's the exact opposite, characters and the PC are lacking, but the world is expansive and gorgeous.

 

Just one man's opinion.

[elearon]

The people who prefer DA2 over DA:I are mostly romance fetishists whose opinions you should disregard and ignore if you value your mental health.

 

There are people who get excited about romances in every Bioware game - just take a look at the Mass Effect forums if you *really* want to see some great romance threads - so this argument holds no water.  It is, in fact, much to Bioware's credit that they make games with such a compelling cast that people get excited about the friend and romance opportunities; this is a feature of the game BW puts a lot of time and effort into.

 

 

people just like to complain before dai came out they hated da2 now that dai is out they love da2 they just want too hate the new game for not being like origins clearly dai  is better then 2  anyone who denies that is lying as simple as that.

 

I love it when people come in here and make claims like this; completely ignoring the opinions of others in favor of their made up reality.  I think everything that needs to be said in argument to fantasies like this has already been said, by myself as well as others, so I won't bother to elaborate any futher; other than to say that people who make definitive statements like this are "lying, [it's] as simple as that".

[LinksOcarina]

I guess people tend to forget about taste in the end, and how its always subjective.

[wicked cool]

I prefer the hair and beard
Options in da2

[LinksOcarina]

They were good options, I must say. I love the Burnside-look you can have in 2.

 

[Bekkael]

DA2's character creator was awesome, I loved it.

[Imperator_Valentine]

"Prefer" is probably not the right word since I think both are pretty flawed titles. 
DA 2 had the really cheeky level recycling, whereas DA:I drowns you in boring MMO-Style sidequests

DA 2 doesn't really have a clear and consistent story, things just go to **** around you as you scramble to pick up the pieces. DA:I has a story that's suffers from being very small in relation to all the side-quests and an uninteresting and unthreatening villain.

DA 2 had acarde-style gameplay that felt inappropriate for an non-Action-RPG, DA: I has the same stuff plus a tactical mode that doesn't give you enough overview to be useful.

DA 2 had simplified skill-trees, DA:I has a simplified skill-tree and doesn't even let you manage you stats. 

The one area in which DA2 clearly wins the day is the personality department. Never thought the Inquisitor to be terribly witty or inspiring. Sarcastic Hawke on the other hand was one of the few constant factors of entertainment in the game.

 

So all in all both things really make me scratch my head. Why the hell did they have to mess with the perfectly functional setup they had in DA:O (and KOTOR for that matter)? I have the feeling storytelling and game mechanics are becoming more and more shallow.

[Linkenski]

I think I prefer Inquisition because dem graphix and tighter gameplay IMO, better music too and better romances but DA2 felt much more story-oriented which was hit or miss because the story was so-so but it was a much more memorable story anyway.

 

If DA:I marks the new format of Bioware plot-writing then they can go to hell. JK, but I do wanna exclaim that I really dislike the idea of 30% plot, 20% romance simulator and 50% fetch-quests. Combat and sense of discovery helps it from becoming too stale but still, all the side-content is just so darn forgettable. Let's go back to playing a game that's first and foremost about storytelling, characters plot and interesting side-quests.

 

Here's what I think DA:I got right and what it failed:

The right stuff:

+ Writing is never terrible

+ Plot works

+ Main quests are always great even when they're bad

+ Memorable cast

 

The wrong stuff:

- Corypheus. He's DLC from DA2 and he's seen 2 or three times in the entire game

- Plot lacks drama and tension

- Too few main quests

- Every main quest feels standalone and isolated. Connecting the dots in between by reading conveniently placed letters and books in the wilds is crap story-design

- 70% of all side-quests suck ass. Fetch quests that no one will remember. Cut it down to 30% memorable side-quests with interesting NPCs and dialogue instead.

- Romances are too seperate from the plot. When I romance someone I want her to be there with me when **** goes down, and I want it to feel like a well-written romance as part of the plot, like Handmaiden in KOTOR 2 for example or Drake and Elena in Uncharted. Is that technically impossible with so many different romances? THEN CUT OUT HALF THE ROMANCES AND HAVE BETTER DETAIL!

- What was wrong with ME2's amount of cinedesign dialogues? Why have you devolved so much Bioware? You were just starting to reach greatness with ME1 and ME2, and then you dropped the ball with every new game after those.

[CuriousArtemis]

I did enjoy DA2 more than I've enjoyed my first playthrough of DAI. But everyone is going to enjoy certain aspects of each game for personal reasons. Some are absolutely loving the MMO-style grandeur of DAI; others find it tedious. Some loved the super fast and stylized combat of DA2; others found it silly.

 

*shrugs* I believe I will enjoy DAI more once the mods start rolling out. At present it's just too tedious, too hard (without giving in and doing all the power-building fetch quests), has a bad CC, and unfulfilling romances for the characters I want to play. Modding will fix a lot of these issues, but it will take awhile... a looong while.

 

But I only recently started playing modded Skyrim and having a blast; it's miles away from the snooze fest that was vanilla Skyrim. 

 

DA2 on the other hand I played on xbox and never had to mod to enjoy it.

 

Different strokes, different folks

[keekee53]

This thread is so funny.   I actually feel sorry for Bioware.

 

When they released DA2, people were on the forums with pitchforks asking for poor Mike Laidlaw's head and now...LOL...all the crying about the maps and they give you huge worlds.  Now it is too big...lol.  People complained about the romance being under developed, they fixed that.  People complained about the companions only speaking to you like once at the beginning of the act and they fixed that.

 

Now I am reading how people prefer DA2 over DA:I.  It is just laughable at this point.  

 

I mean give them credit for listening and making changes.

 

Save your "I never complained about DA2 being a bad game" comments.  If you believed that, then you should have been on the forums defending it back then.

[KaiserShep]

I'm kinda glad I wasn't around for whatever hubbub was going on when DA2 was released. All's I can say is that DA:I makes it hard for me to revisit the other two games.

[Heimdall]

I'm kinda glad I wasn't around for whatever hubbub was going on when DA2 was released. All's I can say is that DA:I makes it hard for me to revisit the other two games.

Going by the way people complained about it back then, you'd think DA2 was an abomination summoned from the 8th circle to ruin gamers' fun.

[Sjofn]

DA2 was underrated, imo. And combat-wise, I vastly preferred DA2, especially as a 2h warrior. I HATE how one plays in DA:I (I'm on a PC, using kb/m).

 

I am really rather fond of DA:I. I've enjoyed all three Dragon Age games, in fact, and would be reluctant to pick a favorite OVERALL. But combat-wise, while it wasn't perfect, DA2 is my favorite one. DA:I probably would've beaten it out if the tactical camera worked like DA:O's did. But it doesn't!

[KaiserShep]

DA2's greatest attribute for me was that I was finally able to truly enjoy playing a mage. Of course, it also meant that I had to have Carver, but still, force mage was the knees of the bee.

[CuriousArtemis]

Save your "I never complained about DA2 being a bad game" comments.  If you believed that, then you should have been on the forums defending it back then.

 

I was In fact, DA2 is what brought me to the forums; it is the game that introduced me to BioWare and RPGs. I fell in love with it. I learned there was a discussion forum online and came here (or there). I was shocked at how much others hated it! Still am.

[Oswin]

Wow. I joined these forums when DA2 came out and I swear every thread was a hate thread. The only BSN thread I have ever made was trying to figure out how on earth Anders timeline worked out. Turns out it didn't. Then it just turned into another hate thread.
I enjoyed DA2, but admittedly I always get bored when I reach Act3 and hardly ever finished it. I think I have about 10 games and only 3 completed. It was the characters that made it fun, oh and the people here who mocked it all instead of raging too hard. The memes were glorious.

But better than DAI? Not a chance. The only thing I can say I like better from DA2 is sarcastic Hawke. The only Hawke worthy of walking out the Fade. I'll take DAI instead. Gladly.

[Darkly Tranquil]

I thought DA2 was a decent game, just to many repeated zones and a fairly disjointed plot. What it did have going for it, and where it wins out over DAI easily for me, was in its combat, which was far more fun than DAI's. While DAI has a beautiful world, and a great story and characters, the combat plays like crap and that makes it a pretty unenjoyable experience since the game involves so much fighting.

[taranoire]

 

 

Save your "I never complained about DA2 being a bad game" comments.  If you believed that, then you should have been on the forums defending it back then.

I wasn't even in the Dragon Age fandom when DA2 came out. I just got into DA about two years ago. 

 

As for why people weren't defending it - they probably felt like **** and were intimidated by all of the ******. Tons of people avoid the Bioware forums because they're toxic. 

[Sevitan7]

I prefer DA2 simply for the combat. It was, after a few patches, a well balanced real time tactical squad based RPG with pause. The most tactical and balanced combat Bioware has delivered. I can easily forgive commonly cited shortcomings of DA2 in order to get that.

 

Inquisition has boring grindy MMO cooldown rotation style combat where tactical choices are limited and barely matter, where there is no real character build variety, quasi-action elements are forced and don't work and it's probably the most unbalanced game Bioware has ever put out. You can craft armor that makes you immortal and you can kill dragons in 10 seconds. Balance testing definitely missed the mark.

 

DA2 gave me a neat system where I can try out different tactics and character builds to face well designed (mechanically not visually "another wave Hawke") challenging encounters. And that's fun for me. If I have to go out of my way to poorly equip my party and choose bad abilities on level up just to create a challenge then I'm out.

 

Pls give mod tools so that we can mess with stats.

[FiveThreeTen]

Mmh, I don't know, DAI is a far more polished game, but it falls short in some (important) areas for me.

My thoughts in no coherent order:

 

DAO:

- I replayed it this year and I will certainly replay it in the future. I still enjoy the combat, the roleplay aspect, the storyline.

The mod support gave it additional replay value too.

 

DA2:

Gameplay

- It took me time to appreciate DA2 combat, but it was fun rolling different builds and classes on Nightmare

- Not being able to change your companions gear as much as DAO was such a bad idea

 

Story

- I didn't enjoy the main storyline. I mean, there were some highlights (most of Act 2, Legacy, a DLC, even the Deeproads expedition) and I actually don't mind that Hawke and his/her band of misfits basically stumble into the storyline randomly, but the implementation was really poor.

- I liked the characters overall, except Anders, not because I hate him but because his writing was so different from Awakening.

I'm also not a fan of bringing back characters from previous games (exception to that would be Varric I guess, but he felt more consistent with his DA2 persona)

- Hawke never felt like my character (hence why I never bothered customizing Femhawke, and only tweaked Malehawke with mods a little).

That doesn't mean I think Hawke is a bad character. I had a blast playing as Sarcastic Hawke, like many people.

Joe Wyatt just nails it for me (mainly Sarcastic and Diplomatic personalities).

But it was hard roleplaying something different after the 1st playthrough (DAO gives you far more freedom in that aspect for me).

 

In the end, trying out different class builds was the main reason I replayed DA2 and the only variation I felt I could have storywise in shaping Hawke was changing the gender and class to have another sibling survive.

So not a bad game but very lackluster in many areas (environements, story, roleplay for me).

Most mods I have installed were cosmetic (to add consistency between acts like changing Merrill, Varric and Fenris Armors).

 

 

DAI:

Gameplay

- Combat is ok but far too much streamlined in certain areas I still don't undertand why tactics are so overly simplified, I think it worked well in the previous games

- Good crafting system, (even if I would like more schematics) BUT it makes the game far too easy

- I really liked the WarTable missions, but wished it led to some sidequests you could get involved in

 

Story

- Too many sidequests and lots of them are just area fillers, not enough main quests and the whole thing feels even more disjointed than DA2. The endgame was also too abrupt. It shows that a lot of content was cut.

- The vilains are disappointing:

Cory, except his comical one liners during the last battle is just BORING. I was completely indifferent towards him the entire game. It's such a contrast to when he awoke in Legacy.

Florianne is just "stupidly evil" without any reason.

Samson is really not fleshed out, I heard Calpernia is better, but I have yet to play the Templar side.

- Roleplaying is easier with the Inquisitor for me than with Hawke.

 

The main things that will maybe prompt me to replay DA:I are trying out a Rogue or Warrior build on Nightmare and seeing the Templar recruitment mission... little else really.

 

TLDR: I guess I prefer Inquisition to DA2 without hating the latter but still prefer Origin overall

[Zundar]

- Hawke never felt like my character (hence why I never bothered customizing Femhawke, and only tweaked Malehawke with mods a little).

 

I had this problem as well. I think it was because of them having 3 years pass between Acts. I didn't like the idea that my character had 3 years pass in the middle of the story that I had no control over. I was OK with the 1 year after the intro before Act 1 but not after that. Like you I still liked Hawke, especially sarcastic Hawke, but something was missing over all. 

[Hazegurl]

 

Save your "I never complained about DA2 being a bad game" comments.  If you believed that, then you should have been on the forums defending it back then.

 

Yes, I'm sure you have an accurate head count of everyone from this thread to know who was defending the game years ago and who weren't. 

 

 

I didn't start playing any DA games until a year after DA2's release.

[Nightdragon8]

I'm actually really curious on why they prefer that rushed trainwreck over DA: I.

 

Satisfied? 

1. Gameplay, DA2 had better I think control over teh character, yes it was flashy and unrealistic, but it was one thing "Fun" DA:I combat outside of KE build and Archer. pretty much all non-Melee in general is a pain. As a K+M user it was not done correctly. They tried to bring back the tactical part, but they didn't give us the means to set up 'programs' to control our characters. The sad part is that DA2 had more control with the 'tactics' menu it had more so than DA:I have.

 

2. I think DA2 had a better story... not saying the story was great or what not, I think it was just better, or at least better well done. The last part was a ball of WTF... everyone turning into abomniations of a stupidly large scale was like... wow.. I chose to help the mages... which IMO pretty much ruined the whole "Templars aren't justified" thing. Then Orioso turning out to be helping the guy who killed your mother.. It was very... HBO-ish... Then Marith going all DBZ causing all that stuff happening. Yea it was strange to say the least.... So I will say that at least with DA:I they toned that down.

 

But I think for me, at least for the gameplay, DA2 had it better... (and no just because they had healing,) It was just more fun. They tried to do an action RPG in a game where you NEED to control all 4 people because the AI is crap... Also the openworld part IMO... took more away, than added to the game. Don't get me wrong the open world part was beautiful, and didn't fall into the whole, "Which cave are we entering now... oh its cave type D," And then being able to move around and know where exactly everything is. But just didn't add anything for me to the story.

 

Also after awhile looking at all the red Lyrium sticking out of everywhere, I mean what is this, C&C Tiberium wars?? Because if there is THIS much of the stuff sticking out now? And was at ground zero, there is something very seriously bad happening to the planet, and in reality Cory is probably the least of our worries. And as reviled later in the game, how its accutly the blight causing the red lyrium to grow... then holy ****, the world is in trouble.

 

 

Yes, I'm sure you have an accurate head count of everyone from this thread to know who was defending the game years ago and who weren't. 

 

 

I didn't start playing any DA games until a year after DA2's release.

Personally I didn't think DA2 was that bad of a game, thats because personally, I played DA2 before I played DA:O. ANd i said, that yes DA2 is not DA:O2, DA:O was better in alot of fronts, but saying how DA2 was a "horrible" game i disagreed, because stand alone, it was a decent game, DA:O was better. But just because somthing is better doesn't make the others "crap"

[Aren]

they have spent a lot of resource for DAI, while for DA2 they have created a good game in 1 year (with an inferior budget i belive), imagine if we can substitute DAI with other 3 dragon age game like DA2 at the same price.

'DAI have a lot of dragons of course, but i'm not sure if this game have the atmosphere of the DRAGON AGE.

[New Kid]

People actually have preference!? How dare they!