328 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

 

Well Dragon Age 2 was far and away the worst Bioware game I have played so far.You along with others in this thread, who liked DA2 very much makes me believe that you like the how the dungeons and house interior were copies of each other.

 

The main problem with DA II is the quite evident lack of new level design. The Wounded Coast and Sundermount had the same freaking caves. lol If the game had one more year of development, It would have been grand. Also, the combat was to damn fast and over the top (Varric's 'little fib' at the start of the game was realy not that far off lol). They should maybe try to spruce it up and re-release it, as a director's cut or something. 

 

I always have a hard time accepting new designs when you have become attached to something good. It was also the case with Dragon Age II.

 

What annoyed me the most was the discount graphics. They obviously made the choice to use their efforts on the RPG dialogues, the battle sequences and the face design. It was supposed to look more modern and action paced.

 

The scenery was generally boring and stereotype, so to speak. The dungeons and house interior were copies of each other. The fighting scenes are a disaster as the interaction of the player is set to a minimum. The player has very little influence of the fights as they are too fast and the companions do all the work for you. Before you even blink the fight is already over.

 

I also got tired of the way they tried to extend the time you play the game. The crappy small quests that didn't give any meaning at all. It was just quests. Nothing else. In the end I became bored and restless, thinking when the meaning of the story showed up? There was no purpose in all these quests.

 

Regarding the romance in the game, I think it was ok. Not good, but fair. The stories were not build up properly. It felt cheap to romance a character in the game because you didn't have any fundament to do so. It was merely just something you did because it was possible. Merril was properly the best character to romance, as she had a bit of a story behind her. She was also the character you were able to feel empathy with. She had, to some point, a personality. But it was not deep enough. In general all the characters seemed fluffy and unfinished comparing to Origins, where you had a lot of characters with a large described background. Try to compare Morrigan, Leliana and Alistair with Merril, Anders and Isabella? The last mentioned are pretty tame.

 

Still Dragon Age II was a fast production, used to test new features and technology.

 

Who remembers the movie 'Out of Africa' based on Karen Blixen's novel? In the beginning of the movie, you fly over Africa's nature wonders, and Merryl Streep says: "Dennis always loved a story told well." I am sorry, but this was missed in Dragon Age II.

 

You have to build a solid story like a movie. An interactive movie in this case. The scene graphics must be made well, with the right details and atmosphere, and most of all exciting. The characters must be well made.

 

All in all I see Dragon Age 2 as a fast experiment ment to fund the next game DA: Inquisition. That is the impression I am left with.

 

 

Instead of all that "makes me believe" b.s. you could make a stab at actually reading what people have had to say.  People have weighed in with their reasons for liking DA2 numerous times in this thread, so you have zero reason for believing what you claim to.  In point of fact, you're using that entire phrase as a deliberate ad hominem:  "oh, you clearly just love all those horrible reused dungeons so clearly yours is a deficient opinion anyway" is very clearly the implication of your first statement.  

 

I don't actually care about reused interiors one way or the other.  Would I prefer more originality? Oh, sure.  But since my primary interest in the game is the story, and not the maps at all, the lack of original interiors doesn't upset me so much.  My chief interest in unique interiors would be more for the aesthetic, but as I said, it wasn't high on my list of priorities.  So you can just cease and desist with that condescending "makes me believe" garbage.  I have told you my reasons, now, as have so many others; it isn't about what you believe but what we state on the matter.  You have no excuse for making claims about what we supposedly lead you to believe.

 

I didn't like the combat so much.  Indeed I found it tedious and boring.  But for all that I did prefer Origins' combat, again, I play these games for the story, so I'm quite willing to slog through the combat any way I can.  What I disliked the most about the combat were the teleporting enemies, but that was mostly because I'd have preferred some degree of realism.  Again, though, not my primary interest in the game, so not really high on my list of complaints.

 

Yes, DA2 suffered from time constraints - which, I note, you write off as an excuse, so it is odd to see you mention it here in the context you do.  Is it the reason that DA2 suffered, or is it just a b.s. excuse?  You could at least make an effort at consistency in your arguments. The story of DA2 was good.  Did it have problems?  Of course it did.  One of the things for which I find little excuse is the fact that Hawke can perform magic under the noses of Templars in a setting which we are told is one of the most mage-oppressive locations in Thedas.  That and other aspects of the story are either internally contradictory, or even nonsensical.  But for all that DA2's story did indeed have problems, it was nonetheless vastly superior to the story told in Origins.  I enjoyed Origins, but all the same I felt that DA2's story was more compelling.  Part of the reason for that is, again, the kind of story that can be told when you have freedom of origin, versus a highly constrained origin.  Even with 3 or 4 years of development time, DA2 could not have provided origins for elves and dwarves in addition to humans, and still have told anything approaching the same story.  It would of necessity been radically different, and it would've been watered down.  In order to allow for both multiple origins and three separate, equally powerful stories, DA2 would've required not just vastly greater time, but also greater resources in general - and there would still have been the necessity of nailing down a single ending rather than three (or more!) discrete endings.  Your expectations are unreasonable even with providing for a development time on par with what was given to Origins.

[Silfren]

I mean that Origin was meant to be the world introduction part of a bigger story, probably the Hawke's story. The way DAO is constructed makes it a perfect setting setter. That's why it's called "Origin". You are getting an introduction to the world of Thedas.

 

I can agree with this.  I always felt that DA2 was intended primarily to be a prequel to Inquisition, more than anything else.  I thought at first that's what you meant and that "DAO" was a typo.  But I definitely see this.  If anything, that's arguably the point of the different origins - it all serves to introduce you to the world and its internal conflicts.

[ThreeF]

 If anything, that's arguably the point of the different origins - it all serves to introduce you to the world and its internal conflicts.

Exactly, it gives the opportunity to explore the different cultures firsthand.

 

And yes DA2 also meant to be a prologue in its own way, only the story got scrapped.

[Andreas Amell]

A controvesial question! I know, but please hear me out.I liked the ideas that went into DA2. It was made to be for a more personal story experiencing a more "day to day" life as opposed to "saving the world" storyarc. I enjoyed that aspect. Dragon Age 2 pretty much delivered what I hoped for as I didn't want to be Grey Warden again, or a story similar to Origins. I hoped to be someone who wasn't a hero in that respect.

 

DA2 did unfortunately suffer from the side effects of short development time, which resulted in reused enviroments, low-textured areas and inconsistent writing in some areas. But still, I regard it as a good game despite the many flaws of it. And for that I would like to see something similar to DA2 but with a longer more productive development time. I adored Hawke's character and story, there was so much pain and responsibilty and things insisted on never going right.

 

I know it may not happen again or for a while as people seem to enjoy the "save the world" theme, but I do hope we get something more mundane like dealing with an country invasion or civil war as opposed to ancient evils from the Fade. (A game concerning the Qunari invasion is my best hope so far).

 

I enjoyed the overall story so yes, Bioware should making games that have a smaller scale conflict. I think they should have a game that allows us to revisit Kirkwall after Inquistion too.

 

From the games I've played, Bioware usually puts our lead character in some martial role, i.e. Grey Wardens, Alliance soldier, Inquisition. Dragon Age 2 put us in the role of a refugee who climbed up in society. With their extensive approach to dialogue and relationships they can make other scenarios for games. Combat will always be the big draw because it the basic behaviour that drives players to progress along the game. But I'd like to be someone else who's not identified as a fighter.

[Silfren]

Fair enough but to say DA2 is better then Origins is ridiculous since i already proved my points on why DA2 wasn't well received. DA2 was meant to be a prologue to DAI only the story got scrapped and Hawke on the other hand got sideline since he/she didn't live up to Bioware's expectation as "DA Shepard"

 

ROFL.  No, you didn't prove anything, because as I said once already, yours is not an objective opinion.  You only demonstrated why you, personally, felt that Origins was a better game.  In no sense have you proven the objective superiority of one game over the other because you can't.  It's not ridiculous to say that DA2 is better than Origins - the difference is that I am able to recognize that my measure of what makes for a good game, and what makes a game better than another one, is purely subjective and not something which is objectively quantifiable.  

[Silfren]

Fair enough but to say DA2 is better then Origins is ridiculous since i already proved my points on why DA2 wasn't well received. DA2 was meant to be a prologue to DAI only the story got scrapped and Hawke on the other hand got sideline since he/she didn't live up to Bioware's expectation as "DA Shepard"

 

 

I will also say that you need to stop peddling the idea that Hawke was definitively meant to be DA's version of Shepard as if you have some kind of insider knowledge to what Bioware intended beyond the things which they have actually said.  

[Silfren]

Exactly, it gives the opportunity to explore the different cultures firsthand.

 

And yes DA2 also meant to be a prologue in its own way, only the story got scrapped.

 

See, I don't think the story got scrapped.  I think the story we are given, as it stands, was intended as a prologue, and stands perfectly well as one.  The Exalted March, had it gone ahead per the original plan for it to have been a DA2 story, probably would've made the connection that much stronger, but I saw DA2 as a clear prologue to the upcoming story from the very beginning.  I think that's one of the core reasons why I don't really have a problem with it.  I think it was intended to be a fairly brief, minor story (at least by comparison).  I definitely think that the claims about Hawke being the most important person in Thedas, and that Rise to Power shtick, were more marketing gimmicks that fell short, more than anything else.  Failing that, you just kind of have to look at "rise to power" in a different light.  

 

(And please, no references to Inquisition story, as I've not played it yet).

[ruggly]

I'd take another game akin to DA2. Despite all of it's flaws, I really enjoyed the characters and story.

[ThreeF]

See, I don't think the story got scrapped.  I think the story we are given, as it stands, was intended as a prologue, and stands perfectly well as one.  The Exalted March, had it gone ahead per the original plan for it to have been a DA2 story, probably would've made the connection that much stronger, but I saw DA2 as a clear prologue to the upcoming story from the very beginning.  I think that's one of the core reasons why I don't really have a problem with it.  I think it was intended to be a fairly brief, minor story (at least by comparison).  I definitely think that the claims about Hawke being the most important person in Thedas, and that Rise to Power shtick, were more marketing gimmicks that fell short, more than anything else.  Failing that, you just kind of have to look at "rise to power" in a different light.  

 

(And please, no references to Inquisition story, as I've not played it yet).

Nah it got scrapped, Hawke was suppose to be much more (maybe even to be the Inquisitor and more), but the game and the character weren't well received, so the story took a different turn. The Inquisition ended up being a very weird  beast because of it.

 

The Rise to Power wasn't  gimmick, Flemeth hints on some important stuff happening to Hawke and while this sort of got wrapped up in Inquisition, I doubt it was the original intention for it to go that way.

 

DA2 was meant to define Hawke as a main character, but things went sideways.

 

You can also say that the fact that DA4 is changing setting is a way to start fresh, it definitely should help to leave the various problems DA2 created behind.

[Silfren]

FYI: Bioware went through this phase where they wanted to turn Dragon Age into Mass Effect and "Hawke" was supposed to be the new Sheperd. I mean Brent Knowles himself (Former Lead designer of DA:O) said that he left Bioware and refused to work on DA2 because it was going to be a Mass Effect clone. They were trying to action up DA like ME and it was a big bust. i sometimes wonder if it was the dialogue Wheel that was in Mass Effect series that was incorperated into Dragon Age 2 that Brent Knowles was talking about.

 

I mean Dragon Age didn't need a voiced protagonist. Going by sales numbers, people just wanted more Origins. If the series would have continued as it was originally stated, "spiritual successor to baldur's gate", it would have sold well. But again, it's this idea spewed by EA that all games need to be action oriented to sell. And they all must have multi-player with micro-transactions. 

 

You've got a bad habit of projecting your assumptions and opinions as objective, irrefutable facts.  

 

How do sales numbers indicate that people just wanted more Origins?  Unless you have some objective data to provide, with defensible analyses of said data, your claims are meaningless.  FYI, Hawke being voiced was one of my favorite aspects of DA2, as it made the PC more immediately relatable than the Warden, and I, for one, would have found it a very hard sell to go back to a voiceless protagonist after DA2 - and I assure you, I'm not rare in that position.  

 

By the way, one sticking point with me I'm still rather annoyed with is the insinuation by you that people actually liking reused dungeons and interiors makes their opinions somehow less worthy.  I can think of various reasons why people would very much appreciate reused maps, or at least simply not care about them, as I don't, and that position is not inferior for being the opposite of your own.

[Silfren]

Nah it got scrapped, Hawke was suppose to be much more (maybe even to be the Inquisitor and more), but the game and the character weren't well received, so the story took a different turn. The Inquisition ended up being a very weird  beast because of it.

 

The Rise to Power wasn't  gimmick, Flemeth hints on some important stuff happening to Hawke and while this sort of got wrapped up in Inquisition, I doubt it was the original intention for it to go that way.

 

DA2 was meant to define Hawke as a main character, but things went sideways.

 

See, I don't agree with that. Bioware Devs have stated numerous times that each installment was meant to have a different protagonist, and nothing I've seen has offered compelling evidence that they intended to scrap that intention with DA2's Hawke.  I definitely agree that DA2 was initially meant to be something more, and a lot of the original directions were axed due to the shortened development time, but I doubt very much that Hawke was ever intended to go on to be a main character beyond DA2's own scope.  

 

Fair enough on the Rise to Power not being a gimmick, that it was part of an original plan that got scuttled due to time constraints.  That said, I think that there were some arguably misleading suggestions as to Hawke's importance.  The story itself plays out more as that of a person who ultimately doesn't have much control, and how the city actually tears itself apart despite her best efforts.  I'm disinclined, generally, to think that that outcome was purely an accident due to DA2's drastically altered schedule.  

[KaiserShep]

I mean Dragon Age didn't need a voiced protagonist. Going by sales numbers, people just wanted more Origins. If the series would have continued as it was originally stated, "spiritual successor to baldur's gate", it would have sold well. But again, it's this idea spewed by EA that all games need to be action oriented to sell. And they all must have multi-player with micro-transactions.

It seemed obvious that the silent protagonist was on borrowed time at BioWare, considering that their flagship game series came out of the gate without one. No way were they going to ignore the success of Mass Effect and stick with the older protag dialogue system. I doubt Origins' sales numbers were going to change that one bit.

[Silfren]

Fine you like voiced protagonist, good for you but not everyone shares your thoughts. So lets agree to disagree cause this is going no where.

 

ROFL.  The one making assumptions that their opinion is universal and superior is you, buddy.   I've made no such claims once about everyone sharing my thoughts.

 

Hilarious that out of my entire post you fixate on my comment about the voiced protagonist and completely disregard what I say about your claims of sales data.  Since you choose to ignore that completely for a non sequitur, I can only assume you want to gloss over the fact you have no rebuttal.

[KaiserShep]

Yet people whine and complain that they want to play as their warden again despite Bioware so called effort to avoid him/her at all cost.

Whining is a spectator sport among fans, so no big news there. People who expected the Warden to be involved in every major plot in the entire series, despite being totally dead in the default world state, were seriously kidding themselves.

[ThreeF]

See, I don't agree with that. Bioware Devs have stated numerous times that each installment was meant to have a different protagonist, and nothing I've seen has offered compelling evidence that they intended to scrap that intention with DA2's Hawke.

Actually if I remember correctly they stated that after the whole Hawke thing as a way to assure people that Hawke was scrapped. After all these years I really have no desire to look this up, so take it as you like.

 

 

The story itself plays out more as a that of a person who ultimately doesn't have much control, and how the city actually tears itself apart despite her best efforts.  I'm disinclined, generally, to think that that outcome was purely an accident due to DA2's drastically altered schedule.  

See? That's the thing, Hawke's rise to power was not meant to end in DA2, actually his rise to power was meant to happen after DA2. DA2 is essentially a tragedy that was meant to show that the road to greatness was paved with difficulties and despair. The journey had just began in DA2.

 

The story itself can stand on its own more or less, but it just mean that the developers are prudent and not that it was suppose to be a one off.

[Silfren]

Actually if I remember correctly they stated that after the whole Hawke thing as a way to assure people that Hawke was scrapped. After all these years I really have no desire to look this up, so take it as you like.

 

 

See? That's the thing, Hawke's rise to power was not meant to end in DA2, actually his rise to power was meant to happen after DA2. DA2 is essentially a tragedy that was meant to show that the road to greatness was paved with difficulties and despair. The journey had just began in DA2.

 

The story itself can stand on its own more or less, but it just mean that the developers are prudent and not that it was suppose to be a one off.

Not really.  I was over on the Bioware wikia a few months after Origins came out, and people were referencing the "different protagonist for every game" statement by Devs even then.  Granted, while I could possibly find references proving that, I admittedly couldn't do it in the next five minutes, so it would take me a while to cite that claim.

 

Interesting to hear this about what DA2 was meant to be had development time been different.  Oh well.  =/  The fact that DA2 was in fact a tragedy is actually one of my favorite things about it.  I actually kind of like the story as it is - with Hawke's life crumbling to bits and her having to flee (obviously this is without any loose ends being tied up in Inquisition, as you allude to).  Which isn't to say I wouldn't have wanted the original story that Bioware had hoped to tell under better conditions, but what we have isn't terrible.

[Silfren]

Yet they refuse to give up since they make their warden out to be some special person in Thedes.

 

But this is a personal problem with fans and has nothing to do with anything on Bioware's part.  

[Hiemoth]

Actually if I remember correctly they stated that after the whole Hawke thing as a way to assure people that Hawke was scrapped. After all these years I really have no desire to look this up, so take it as you like.

 

 

See? That's the thing, Hawke's rise to power was not meant to end in DA2, actually his rise to power was meant to happen after DA2. DA2 is essentially a tragedy that was meant to show that the road to greatness was paved with difficulties and despair. The journey had just began in DA2.

 

The story itself can stand on its own more or less, but it just mean that the developers are prudent and not that it was suppose to be a one off.

 

They actually stated that each DA game would have a different PC before DA2 came out in response to people asking to see the Warden again.

 

As far as I know, there has never been a dev confirmation that Hawke was supposed to be the main character for the trilogy, quite the opposite.

[KaiserShep]

Yet they refuse to give up since they make their warden out to be some special person in Thedes.

Being the special person in X setting is pretty much BioWare's bag. The next Mass Effect will no doubt have that super soldier that's a big deal somehow, just like the next PC of the upcoming DA will probably be known far and wide for something.