521 réponses à ce sujet

[NickyBarb]

There were certain things I liked better in DA2 and certain things I liked better in DAI. So, I can not say I like one more then the other.

[ERINII]

I wouldn't say I like one more than the other either. But, I think that those who prefer DA2 over DA:I feel that way because of the scenes. In DA2 every quest had a small scene, like closeups and such, while those are really rare in DA:I. So one could say DA2 is more immersive, in a way.

[Neoideo]

during the DA2 era i did not come to the forums, but in that time i really hated DA2 i thought it was a disaster.

Now that we have DA:O, DA2, and DA:I, we can put things into a better perspective, and now I realize that DA2 was not that bad, and could have been the best game if it had more development time.

[Guha sharan]

I preferred Dragon Age 2.
You know why? Cause Inquisition was not compelling in the slightest. The only quest I thoroughly enjoyed was Wicked Eyes, Wicked Heart.
Big problem was IMO Conflict.
Conflict is what makes a plot. Here the conflict between the Inquisitor and Cory was just boring. The last good scene was when the Inquisitor faced Cory in haven. After that Cory should have got pissed off and done something. It wasn't like he didn't have an army. The problem is it seems like Cory just doesn't do a thing. His armies roam the land haphazardly in small easily disposable groups. The only people who look like they're doing anything are his lieutenants. Cory always seems to really hate you but he doesn't seem to do a thing about it in spite of all his resources. He only ever loses.
There was a short and very brief period of despair between the destruction of Haven and Mother Giselle bursting into song. After that the campaign never changed for the worse in the slightest. The only way the world changed was for the better.

The lack of believable conflict killed the game for me.

[Fireheart]

It's just after witnessing how bad Dai is, it made me view Da2 in a whole new light.

[workforme]

It's just after witnessing how bad Dai is, it made me view Da2 in a whole new light.

You kinda can see this coming after how people made da2 a "bad" game, and how to make next da game a "good" game.

[Darkstarr11]

I should add, I DON'T hate DAI.  I like it.  It's pretty fun.  Some of the companions rub me the wrong way (the un'elfy' elf and the mage politician), it still has more than enough to make it fun.  I just like...DA2, that much more.  Honestly, if Varric wasn't a companion, I probably wouldn't have picked this up at launch.  It's almost like they brought him along to help us transition from DA2 into this new DA style.  My first play through, he was a constant companion.  Kinda the Garrus of Thedas.  I liked Cassandra, a lot.  There were several familiar characters there that helped anchor me to this game.  Without them...it might have been more difficult.  I probably would have like it...but without Leiliana, Cassandra, Morrigan, Varric, Cullen and Stroud/Loghain/Alistair, it would have taken a bit more.

 

What do I like?  New focus abilities.  Crafting armor and weapons.  Fighting dragons.  Haven.  Assaulting Adamant.  Hawke...it needed MORE Hawke.  Those were fun.  If I could change it?  More Hawke.  More Cory.  Make it personal.  Cory attacking your family/clan/merc company?  THAT would have been something.  Going after your love interest?  An attack on Skyhold?  THAT would bump it up.  

 

It's not like they can't do it either.  A DLC along the lines of Extended Cut would be most welcome, ya know?

[Alan Drifter13]

I think it's mostly about the protagonist. It was much easier to empathize with Hawke than it is with the inquisitor. Hawke's story was much more personal. 

 

I still had more fun playing DA:I because it's much bigger, but I prefer a personal protagonist with a personal story than a generic world-saving hero with almost no relevant background.

[Joseph Warrick]

Players write the personal parts of the protagonist. I like that DAI, like Neverwinter Nights, leaves more character motivation to me. In Mass Effect and DA2 I have to try to squeeze bits of headcanon in whereas in Inquisition there is room for player input. It's an old school approach.

[Shadeling]

 

Players write the personal parts of the protagonist. I like that DAI, like Neverwinter Nights, leaves more character motivation to me. In Mass Effect and DA2 I have to try to squeeze bits of headcanon in whereas in Inquisition there is room for player input. It's an old school approach.

 

 

Completely agree.

 

And as far as people preferring DA2 over DA:I, I've always gotten the impression that the opposite was true just from general conversations on other various forums on the internet.

 

[Torgette]

The thing I liked most about DA2 was that the experience was over very quickly.

[canarius]

DA:O >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DA:I >>> DA2

[myahele]

Looking back, DA2 wasn't too bad from a character interaction and story telling perspective.

 

True, it could've done more polishing up, but they really were rush and it shows. I liked the viariety of side quests, choices and character interaction.

 

DA2's biggest flaw was its engine and lack of dungeon variety but that's due to the short and rushed development time

[TheDovah]

Whilst i feel that DA2 failed to live up to it's potential due to Bioware rushing it and cutting corners, i do believe it is a wonderful game, even if my disappointment consumed me and caused me to flat out the game for a few years due to what DA:O means to me. DA:I is a far better game but does have it's own set of flaws. I do wish Bioware reused the personality dialogue from DA2 as i loved that feature. A snarky Hawke is a funny Hawke and brought us one of DA's best scenes, which is Hawke's "I was stung by a bee! Maker, am i dying?"  Sadly, a snarky Inquisitor won't live up to Snarky Hawke.  

 

But if i had to rate both games. I would give DA2 7/10 and DA:I 9/10. For me, a 7 is Good and bordering on the excellent side. A 9 is excellent but there are some flaws.

 

Do wish Bioware didn't ruin the magic by removing every school and replacing it with 4 elements plus specs.

[Felya87]

Hair. Varric. Aveline. Fenris's romance. Those are the only things good in DA2. DAI have many things that can be done better, but is much. much better than DA2-everyone went crazy "because"-

 

I'm really glad to have left Hawke in the Fade.

[Mr Plow]

Preferred DA2 over DA:I....liked the characters more in DA2 which went a long way for me being more invested in the story. 

[Lethaya]

I actually think I like the characters more in DA:I, at least on paper. But DA2 characters had a lot more to their relationships, so they felt more... personal? The friendship/rivalry paths, all of the (cinematic!) discussions and gifts and things... there was more comradery there, I think, which is great for DA2 to be sure, but makes me sad there wasn't more of this in DA:I.

[KotorEffect3]

This happens everytime a new game comes out there are people  that pine for the older game of whatever franchise the game is.   I remember making a thread about this phenomenon after ME 3 came out and how predictable gamers are.  The thread got locked but this is something happens every gaming cycle.  Not surprised there are people that like DA 2 more even with all the crap DA 2 has gotten over the years  The funny thing is in the  past six months there probably has been more praise for DA 2 then there was for it in the previous 3 1/2 years combined.

 

The same thing will happen when ME:Next and DA4 comes out.

 

Personally if I were to rank how I prefer the DA games it would be DAO>DAI>DA2.   Enjoy all three though.

[CipherMandy]

Hey, whatever floats people's boats.  If someone likes DA2 over DA:I, awesome!

 

Personally, DA:I wins hands down over DA:2. 

 

Every time I even attempt to play DA:2 again I never finish it.  I can never get connected to the characters, or Hawke.  I find myself, as I go through the main story (and companion stories) becoming more and more annoyed and bored. I almost feel like I am being forced to play someone else's character, if that makes sense.  I have absolutely no wiggle room, except for a tiny section, to apply headcannon.

 

DA:I, my Inquisitor has a full back story and as I play through I get to fill in gaps.  I am allowed a bit more creative freedom to apply my headcannon to what is going on either with romances, companion stories, or the main story.

 

Which is exactly why DA:I is my absolute favorite of the two, and why it is tied for first with Origins.

[9TailsFox]

This happens everytime a new game comes out there are people  that pine for the older game of whatever franchise the game is.   I remember making a thread about this phenomenon after ME 3 came out and how predictable gamers are.  The thread got locked but this is something happens every gaming cycle.  Not surprised there are people that like DA 2 more even with all the crap DA 2 has gotten over the years  The funny thing is in the  past six months there probably has been more praise for DA 2 then there was for it in the previous 3 1/2 years combined.

 

The same thing will happen when ME:Next and DA4 comes out.

 

Personally if I were to rank how I prefer the DA games it would be DAO>DAI>DA2.   Enjoy all three though.

Somehow witcher each game is much better. And Mass effect yes story gets worse and worse, but gameplay is improved each game, and companions are good in all 3 games.

[ESTAQ99]

For me, DAI was a huge disappointment. I only did one full playthrough and then had another 7 failed tries that didn't go very far. I still think it has the most amazing graphics when compared to the majority of past and present games but it felt so empty and tedious to play.

 

I won't pretend to know much about writing, character development or which style of combat is better or worse. It must be a matter of personal taste, but if it was only about replayability, I sincerely lost count of how many times I played DAO and DA2 and I remember I started to feel a bit sad every time one of those playthroughs were about to reach the end. At the end of my DAI playthrough I was just glad that I reached the end and I couldn't find a way to complete another one.

 

Who knows, maybe I will get so very lucky and, at some point in the future, the devs at EA/Bioware will fill DAI huge maps with more interesting content (if that is possible) and will make the main story longer and more connected throughout such a vast game.

[AWTEW]

Story wise da2 is better. I tried to play dai again on PC the otherday and i never got past the intro.

the biggest turn off for me is that the story is just boring generic hero saves the world, and the companion quests felt like fetch quests for how short they were. I missed the companion quests from DA2.

[b09boy]

DA2 was a horrible game with shoddy  and repetitive action combat and the worst published story I have every seen.  The vast majority of people who legitimately tried would fail to make a better story than DA2.  The characters were, aside from Varric, mediocre at best and, for the most part, horrible and the setting was bland and even more repetitive than the combat.

 

That said, Inquisition suffers numerous notable issues which DA2 manages to trump.  For starters, combat.  DA2 had combat which was snappy enough to help cover up some of its severe flaws.  DAI slows things down and suddenly it's painfully obvious how you can't manually dodge or block really, making the game completely unable to compete with other action games.    Meanwhile the AI is some of the worst in a AAA game you'll see, both for enemies and allies, making the game and even worse tactical game than DA2 somehow.  The big thing that was supposed to help redeem it was that there aren't constant enemy waves anymore.  But there are, they just hide them better.  Bosses call for reinforcements constantly and fade rifts literally teleport demons on top of your head in waves, and both these things are very, very common.

 

The story in Inquisition isn't nearly as technically horrible as that of DA2 (no, seriously, the first thing that happens in the game is we are introduced to three different themes to form the basis of what the game is supposed to be about, only for all of them to be resolved by the middle of the second act and replaced with nothing, all the while avoiding all critical character and setting development and giving nearly all characters every reason not to be present - it's an objectively, factual, horrible story) but it's extremely generic, has rushed and often nonsensical development, contains a weak villain, and what really kills it, it's spread thin.  DA2 at least always felt like it was moving somewhere, like you were contributing some way to the plot.  90% of Inquisition (generally anywhere from 80-180 hours) is not moving anything forward, grinding away while you wait for the next story segment only for that segment in question to rush through major development in a matter of minutes.  Like you literally witness the fall of Haven and it takes eight minutes of unskippable, unavoidable story before you find a replacement in an enormous, abandoned, secluded fortress.  Then it's off to grind again in a story-less world for another 5-10 hours.  At least DA2 was consistent, had something of a rhythm to it.

[Cantina]

Apologies in advance because my response is going to be a bit long.

 

DA2 did have some bad elements but most games do; some games however are just plain bad. DA2 was not the best game ever, nor was it the worst. Want a bad game? Check out Fable 3 <shivers>.

 

DAI does have some good elements. However in my opinion the game is not as good as everyone claims it to be.  The game was rushed (yes I said it) and felt uncompleted. Many zones were devoid of much interest let alone not much going on. The main story became uninteresting after Haven.

 

Skyhold was an awesome idea, as are the Forts you claim, yet there was very little you did to either - making them  pointless.  Arms and Armor were a step backwards making 95% of them just plain ugly. I swear the staff you can purchase in B.E. is Zoidberg's skull on a stick.

 

The War Table was a refreshing idea, but again it was nothing more than a mini-table top game. Which is fine - if you do it right. What went wrong is most of the missions your Advisers can do were far more interesting than those your character could do. I would have loved the option to participate in quite a few of them. Not to mention The Table shows and has missions for your Advisers in Northern Thedas; yet your character is stuck going from Orlais and/or Fereldan. It was nice to see Orlais but you got to see a small portion of V.R and most of the other zones pretty much held little interest. But, the only zone I did fine entertaining was Emprise - to me this felt more like DA and less like an MMO as the rest of the game comes off as.

 

The character creator is better than the two previous games but not as good as other single player character creators I've experienced. Truthfully the character creator is still behind on the times, not to mention those hideous hairstyles for females and the horrible Skyhold pajama outfit most people are forced to wear because they have no access to MODs.

 

The so-called dungeons in this game are a complete joke. If you go into games like Elder of the Scrolls, especially the recent one - Skyrim, those are dungeons. Not these p!ss ant caves that take you less than 5 minutes to go through.

 

If you compare Hawke to The Inquisitor, Hawke showed emotion no matter what the situation was. The Inquisitor had this deer-in the headlights look and sometimes when expression was half-ass shown, it would remain like that for the rest of the conversation.

 

How about the Combat Wheel. In DA2 you could open it up and use extra abilities. In Inquisition you had eight slots on your UI and that was it. You had no combat wheel to use extra abilities. Thus any extra abilities you took were a complete waste.

 

Dividing out your Attributes was something I enjoyed doing from DAO and DA2. It felt like an Fantasy RPG. Inquisition does this for you and it drove me bonkers because it felt like hand-holding.

 

Oh and my all time peeve was not being able to set up my companions tactics like the previous two games. Sure there was a Tactics screen, but it was a complete joke. This led to combat feeling more like babysitting.

 

DA2 you spent a large part of the game running around the same city. Yes, at times it would get under my skin seeing the same crap. However I was willing to put it aside because I enjoyed the story.

Is DA2 better than DAI?

 

Yes.

 

Why?

 

Look you can make zones larger and have everyone go "Oh! Ah!" But for me having large zones is nothing more than a bonus, it should not be the end all be all to what makes a great game.  What makes a great game to me is being able to enjoy the main story. You can have a game be in a single city or small zones like DAO or DA2 and I am fine with it. Why? Because if the main story is good, that is what matters, if the main story is crap having large open landscapes is not going to make me enjoy the game.

 

With Elder of the Scrolls games, it seems like Todd Howard has found a balance. When it comes to DAI it's like they are trying to copy the success of Elder of the Scrolls and falling short. Yes, we all know Bioware you won a game of the year award and I say to that, "Whoopie-freaking-do."  It's not like the competition you were going up against had the best reviews. That is like everyone bringing a squash to a pumpkin contest and you actually showed up with a pumpkin.

 

Along with DA2 having a better story and main character the game did not strip away features I enjoyed replacing or removing with some gawd awful substitute.

 

Some people tend to forget that DA2 took two years to make and DAI was going to take that long as well until they extended it another year.  A game the size of DAI should have taken at minimum four years to create but alas it did not. Just take a moment and think of how good the game might have been if it did take four years. 

 

The problem I see is Bioware is far too concerned with keeping up with Jones instead of just sticking to their own ideas that make the other two games far better.  It's kind of sad to load up DAO or DA2 and see how much luster was polished off DAI.

 

Granted things change, things are removed as each game in the series goes on and I can adapt. But when you take away certain things that were in the two previous games and do something completely different and out of left field it leads me to scratch my head and ask, "WTF were you thinking?"

 

Oh and of course. DAO and DA2 had Sandal. "ENCHANTMENT!"

[BlacJAC74]

So to summarise this thread; It's not the done thing to enjoy one game whilst enjoying another game.  You either have to like one or the other.

 

Gamers are are funny bunch.  There's no middle ground to be had anywhere with many gamers.  I mean, you can't enjoy the Mass Effect series if you enjoy the TES series and vice versa.  You can't enjoy DA:I if you really enjoyed DA:O.  It's just not the done thing. I'm a freak, I accept it.  I like both games on their own merit. Now, that's not to say each game doesn't have their respective issues, they do (Aye, believe it or not  DA:O does have negitives too) .  I still stand my my opinion that DA2 was poor.  DA2 is going through what many presequels do, they're always put on a higher pedestal because they're not the current title and more often than not, it's not cool to say you prefer the current offering.

 

Here's the really freakish part, I love TES games, however, I also enjoy BioWare games and the Witcher series.