521 réponses à ce sujet

[Corto81]

DA2 was a "bad" game. Not "good", but "not what people were expecting".

By any RPG standards, it was just a bad game... And I'll stand by that, and I can make dozens of arguments why I think that.

The only thing I didn't find sub-par was combat.

A 5/10.

 

DA:I is a "good" game. It isn't great, but it's certainly not bad.

It wants to be better than DA2, but it also wants to appeal to your average COD/GTA gamer... And ends up sacrificing the core elements and the formula which made DA:O big, and in the end, which made all their fantasy RPGs big.

A 7.5/10.

 

DA:O, on the other hand, was a genuinely great game, a 9.5/10, despite silly graphics, Warden-shuffle, silly gift-system.

 

...

 

I understand they wanted more sales, they wanted to appeal to a wider audience - and in the process, they ignore the people who made them big in the first place.

Whether EA had anything to do with that, I don't know, probably.

 

But it does make me respect Bethesda, FROM, etc, more...

For sticking to their formula, staying faithful to their fans, and just improving that formula and making a better game. A better RPG.

Instead of doing the same, Bioware re-invented the wheel. Twice.

[Melca36]

Da2 was in Dragon age spirit and had that certain flame, but DAI is to much like a MMO and the spirit of dragon age has diminished

Um...no.  It is NOT an MMO

 

You just want things too easy. Games are NOT meant to be easy.  And I still see Dragon Age in this game.

[katokires]

DA2... I would comment DA2 but each DA seem a completely different game xD

DA2 was funny, I can't play it other than sarcastic with Hawke, I did one pacific and one blunt playthrough but mostly I played the funny type, it fits

Not that it wasn't deep and emotional, you lose (almost) all your family and things are intense, well lovely game

Technical nightmare however... It sucks to enter the same small map thousand times =/

Anyway, great game

[ReadingRambo220]

Indeed, i was one that never hated DA2, but the more hate I read about it, the flaws really started sticking out and I couldn't see past them for a second playthrough.

A year and a half or so later I came back knowing its flaws, downloaded the DLC and a few awesome mods, and played it with incredible earnest and delight for 4+ playthroughs. I enjoyed the replay more than the first time. That happens a lot with Bioware games for me, starting with my 20? Baldurs Gate plays (although I wasn't able to finish them all lol)

[FuzzyThoctar]

I'm not surprised, when you have a 100 hour game, thats story is lackluster, and the characters are just meh.

DA2 and Hawke >DAI and Inquisitor

 

Huzzah! A great example for the point I was trying to make. The DA ragecup has been passed on.

[Starkrei]

Um...no.  It is NOT an MMO

He didn't say that It was an MMO, only that it was too much like one.

 

And honestly, when it comes to 90% of the sidequests, it's absolutely true.

 

As for the actual topic, I'm kind of torn, in a way Inquisition is certainly better, but for me it's waaaay too long of a game compared to what it offers. If it was shorter, then I'd definitely place it above DA2... But as it stands now, DA2 has better combat even if its combat is a worse version of the DA:O combat. And considering how big of a part the combat is in DA:I, that really matters.

[Fishy]

The inquisitor was the weakest protagonist. I can't lie. Hawke was a better protagonist. The problem with DA2 is not the main character or the companion. 

[Tsunami Chef]

I guarantee you if we had cinematic conversations these people calling DA:I a fetch quest nightmare would be talking about the excellent side quests...because seemingly these same people who hate these sidequests have totally wiped from their memory their beloved DA:O's pile of dog feces side quests, many of which had no dialogue what so ever.

[MrTijger]

Hawke, as a character and especially the funny/sarcastic version, was excellent and so were the companions imho but DAI is a way, way better game in every aspect.

The ability to just roam around a large map and finding and discovering vistas and taking out bad guys to help the little people, yeah, I'm enjoying that immensely topped off by suddenly finding a very large and quite tough dragon? Nothing in DA2 came close to that. Come to think of it, nothing in DAO came close either.

[MrTijger]

Ermmm...you do realize that MMO's got fetch quests from RPG's, right? Or are you honestly pretending that Baldurs Gate, Neverwinter and other games of that era didnt have fetch quests?

[berrieh]

I liked DA2. The repetitive environments bummed me out, and the game was very clearly rushed, with the third act barely intact. I think DA:I is the better game, but DA2 is a really interesting RPG for trying to tell a personal story (something RPGs almost never do) instead of a big "Save the Land" type story.

 

I think Hawke was, because it was a more personal story and because you were race-limited, a better character than the Inquisitor, but that the Inquisitor can be more fun to play. 

[Vanth]

I would rate them about the same. They both have strengths and weaknesses. I think the combat in DA2 was much better than in DA:I and since that is a big part of the game for me, I think I enjoyed it more. I liked the challenge of figuring out how to take down a dragon, building and tweaking my AI order lists and all the accompanying strategy and tactics. 

 

Having said that DA2's reuse of areas was dreadful, so in that regard DA:I is much better. It feels like a more complete world.

 

I also don't like how DA:I is so sanitised. Our hands are help the entire time and nothing is allowed to go wrong that isn't already scripted. There are no meaningful decisions and no meaningful way we can alter what happens in the game. In many senses it isn't even a role playing game.

 

In other words, the dreadful, bland beige pyjamas we are forced to wear in Skyhold seems to sum up the game rather well. 

[Moondoggie]

People just start praising things years later from release. At release DA2 was universally panned around here with some people enjoying characters and combat but mostly everyone hated it. They take that feedback and design a much bigger game in scope with beautiful lands and lots to explore and now people are like "They should make a linear game like DA2". People just don't know what they want and when something is new it's kind of cool to join in with the bitching about it. I'm sure in a couple of years people will be comparing the newest games to DAI and outright praising it. DA2 is a heavily flawed game that did decent character development. The combat was more dynamic than Origins but suffered endless spawns of enemies that appear from nowhere and a really poor tactical camera that was tacked on to shut up PC users.

[Icinix]

The three Dragon Age games we have are vastly different experiences, not just in their story, but in their gameplay and player agency.

 

Only natural that different people would prefer one over the other.

[JAZZ_LEG3ND]

Dragon Age II, I think, was a more satisfying story, and Hawke was a great character, but Inquisition is superior in many ways of its own. DAI is probably one of the most comprehensive games I've ever played, the content surrounding the world and the characters is immense, entertaining, and beautiful, respectively.

But ultimately, they can both be good games, it doesn’t have to be a competition. Bioware can look at DA2 for inspiration on future ideas just as easily as Inquisition or Origins. Trying to pick one over the other is not an activity I care for. Inventing a scenario that favours one game's stronger aspects is both pointless and an incubator for nostalgia driven selective sightedness.

[ReadingRambo220]

*snip*

Warden shuffle.

Fair points all around, but what's the warden shuffle?

[Realyn]

Meh, 3 games which all presented a completely different experience. People will prefer different things. Big deal.

 

Personally, I liked all three games for three very different reasons. As such, I'm not even going to start comparing them. As long as I enjoyed 'm, I couldn't care less about other people's opninion's on a single player game.

[Ieldra]

The inquisitor was the weakest protagonist. I can't lie. Hawke was a better protagonist. The problem with DA2 is not the main character or the companion. 

Tell that to the multitude who hates Hawke.

 

I like both for what they are.

[Fishy]

Hawke, as a character and especially the funny/sarcastic version, was excellent and so were the companions imho but DAI is a way, way better game in every aspect.

The ability to just roam around a large map and finding and discovering vistas and taking out bad guys to help the little people, yeah, I'm enjoying that immensely topped off by suddenly finding a very large and quite tough dragon? Nothing in DA2 came close to that. Come to think of it, nothing in DAO came close either.

 

That what we call a preference. I hate it when people speak in absolute and pretend it just an opinion. You enjoy roaming around and planting flag . That fine, but that a preference and some people don't care about this at all. Personally I don't hate or love it. I just don't care. It's just seem to be there for no other reason than reading a bit of lore( each time you plant a flag you have a bit of lore popping). Which is not bad by itself, but I wonder how many people read them... Personally I was hoping it would maybe open trade route or more of your soldier roaming/securing the area. It does not that. It does nothing. Even when bandit attack you inside one of your camp your ''soldier'' do nothing.

 

 The fetch quest people talk about it's closing rift and opening camp site. They only serve the purpose of opening teleporting point or getting power. Origin had side quest, but they were better implemented. I don't have to walk across an entire map to torch some dead bodies so some priest can sleep at night. When you get to a certain place you normally just do them has they are in the way of your main quest. For example you had a quest about conscripting people into the army. I did not go to redcliffes to do that quest, but the npc were in the area of my main quest. It never felt like grinding.

 

That how side questing should be. Unless they are very long and complicated sidequest like guild quest in Skyrim.

[Milan92]

I will never understand why some people prefer DA2 over DA:I.

 

But its their opinion.

[Ieldra]

Fair points all around, but what's the warden shuffle?

The phenomenon that in order to attack someone in melee, you actually had to move into position (what a novelty) and into free space adjacent to the target (hey, logic!). Some people object to the idea that such movement takes time. Which is why we had DA2 where combat movement didn't take any time because everyone could jump anywhere at the press of the awesome-button and everything happened in staccato.

 

DAO's combat is fine, with the exception of the warrior attack animations at default speed (unenhanced by magic). Those are indeed a little slow. I vastly prefer DAO's combat to DA2's but DAI did it mostly right. It actually is more fluid than DAO's in some situations but not as crazily fast as DA2's. Some over-the-top animations notwithstanding, DAI's combat works well for me.

 

And don't get me started on DA2's combat encounters.....

[Thrazesul]

I miss DA2 because I connected a lot more to Hawke and those characters, than I've done any other DA game and DA2 is still my favourite in the trilogy. Never have had any issues with it either.

 

Neither game is /bad/ though, they all have their upsides and downsides and I like them all for their own thing.

[wright1978]

I miss DA2 because I connected a lot more to Hawke and those characters, than I've done any other DA game and DA2 is still my favourite in the trilogy. Never have had any issues with it either.

 

Neither game is /bad/ though, they all have their upsides and downsides and I like them all for their own thing.

 

Indeed i adored Hawke and his band of companions, replaying it often despite its flaws.

I have no objection to them trying new things as they've done with DAI but personally i don't think it quite came off. Still an enjoyable experience.

[siefier25]

DA2 had a generally tighter story and more personal feel, which presumably is making people appreciate it more since one of the commonly-identified flaws with DA:I is that it seems overly large. DA2 was also the only one that tried to do a narrative that wasn't about saving the world, and it would have been nice for BioWare to try and hone that new direction rather than ordering the full-scale retreat they did (even though it was obvious that after the backlash and lower sales they would do so).

 

DA2 was a poor game, without question, but it had some good ideas and some of those good ideas got jettisoned rather than improved.

So after DA2, you didn't expect a big war? Everyone and their mother predicted the game would be larger, due to what went down in DA2.

 

 Never heard anyone in my life say "Geez whiz ma! There is just too much game!"

[KaiserShep]

The inquisitor was the weakest protagonist. I can't lie. Hawke was a better protagonist. The problem with DA2 is not the main character or the companion. 

 

BioWare simply can't win. This forum was/is rife with people who loved to declare their hatred of Hawke and the dominant tone, and decided that Hawke him/herself personified everything there was to dislike about DA2, and when BioWare distances itself from the character by creating a new one, people hate that too. I suspect that this is just the way things are going to be for not-Warden characters for the duration of the series.