Time to try and catch up on some of the epic posts- ranting ahead. But first some Angry Morrigan:
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Yeah, I just prefer the way its handled in DA:O or Fallout, you're restricted to whatever tone the writers intended but it's still a little ambiguous, in that you can put your own spin on it within limits. I found all too often that none of the tones really fit what I wanted to say and it was all a guessing game regardless so you stop caring after a point regardless. [/quote]
Yeah. For whatever reason, I 've been speedrunning through DA2 wth Morrigan Hawke, and its even more painfully clear how crummy some of the paraphrases are and how pointless some of the "choices" are. More often than not, the tones simply give you the illusion of choice, when they mostly amount to 3 different ways to say the same thing. Kind of like, "I politefully decline," "HurrrDurrr, chuckle chuckle No," and "HELL NO, WORM."
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
I agree completely. Look at how Aveline's romance progresses while Hawke's is in apparent stasis during these gap year periods. It felt to me that the framed narrative was a handy device to enable BW to crank out DA2 in record time, ranging from asset reuse to the supposed additional depth it was supposed to bring to the table. On a side note though, at least they didn't overuse the exaggerated narrative component, it was only used well once though - Varric's one man siege. [/quote]
Yes, the entire framed narrative as a means to convey a longer period of time failed for a number of reasons IMO. Out of all the characters, I'd say probably only Aveline had a character arc that even remotely seemed to utilize the passage of time pretty well. Everyone else though may as well have had their stories told in a couple years tops, if not even shorter than that. Hell, I think the Origins characters feel like they change more over the course of that game's 1 year than the 7 years or so of DA2. Like so much else, its a neat idea to have a longer time frame, but it failed in execution.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Events like revisiting the fade look to me like they were scaled back
from what was originally envisioned, I remember Gaider talked about how
the Fade would look different this time, what we got looked pretty damn
generic.[/quote]
My god, the Fade in DA2 is such a disappointment and honestly sort of sums up my problems with DA2 but really DA overall, at least from a style point of view. The Fade is supposed to be this surreal dream world, right? And yet in Origins it sort of got the surreal part half way down- it just needed to be a bit livelier I think and maybe more colorful and dynamic. So what happens in DA2? Its a copy paste layout of the Templar building with washed out colors, a crappy filter to make it look like they smudged vaseline over the screen and to top it off, they screw up the lore by not even including the supposedly ever visible Black City, but just have a blacked out ceiling with some floaty green bits. Its telling when in a damn video game, you can't even make a freakin' dream world visually interesting.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
I think the PC VO likely held back how much companion dialogue was possible to include when you consider the possible tones for each selectable option and also the dialogue Hawke initiates on his/her own. Sacrificing that gives much more freedom for companion interactions. I think I noted about three single events / one-liners where I felt the voiced PC really added to the experience (and they were good moments) but to think of the possible content that was never to be because of this approach I don't think it was worth it. I vastly prefer the approaches of New Vegas and DA:O, allowing you to project yourself into the role; you're the badass and it's "you" interacting with the characters.[/quote]
Agreed- Really, I have nothing against player VO, but the tradeoff in terms of companion interaction and how much resources it likely eats up makes it entirely unappealing in something which should be as player driven and choice dependent as a western RPG. Seriously, I don't know what the deal is but Laidlaw repeatedly said how DA2 was perhaps their most reactive game to date. What a joke. Now I don't know if thats all in part to the player VO and short time frame, but DA2 is pathetic in terms of offering up meaningful choices to the player. It truly is an on rails movie- and not even a good movie at that.
And even in terms of player VO, one of the things Laidlaw always makes mention of in interviews and such is how "Oh, you can have the PC give epic speeches!" Well, congrats, cause they even screwed that up. If you're going to have the PC give epic speeches, do it like ME1 and ME2 where you can actually control what the PC is saying. In DA2, during the one (and unnecessary) speech Hawke gives, its just the game hijacking Hawke as he launches into a corny speech. Ugh...
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
It is a waste and a direct copy and paste from Mass Effect with regards to companion interaction, a game which was notably worse than Origins in that regard. Quite why they decided to further reduce these scenes into "quests" baffles me, you switch off from the whole thing after a while as it becomes Fable 3-esque
follow the golden trail to win. It's taking the "we don't want to make content x% won't see" way too far by taking the player's hand and dragging them to every possible event and then when you reach the event, your reward is to sit and there and watch a cutscene play out that you barely have any involvement in.[/quote]
I almost wonder if the companion "quests" for dialogue was a means to pad their quest count. And truly, the devs say how they didn't want people "making the rounds" at camp in Origins and yet, I bet you could easily trim a couple hours of playtime if you gave the DA2 companions a common place to meet up instead of having to make the rounds across all of damn Kirkwall.
I mean, the whole plot marker hand holding really kills any sense of exploration and genuine discovery in the game. At least in DAO, you had some sense of achievement in going through the dialogues- it wasn't something the game was shoving down your throat. Again, its like the devs thinking the audience is too stupid to grasp the game and needs blinking neon signs over everything to do and "Well, hey! You just turned the map from day to night! Achievement unlocked!" Really? Do they truly think that rubbish is enough incentive to keep somebody playing? In so many ways, DA2 embodies much of what is wrong in game design today, IMO.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Anyway, as you say, those two don't have an agenda like say Anders, who seems intent on convincing you (and every other party member) that templars/Circle etc need to be taken down at every opportunity. Regardless, the two LIs that I saw didn't particularly add a great deal to the game, there was a nice tie in with Isabela/Qunari but I don't feel that was capitalised upon.[/quote]
Yeah, don't get me started on how boring and droll Anders has become. Thats what has me worried about Morrigan ever showing back up- that they'd try to provide Morrigan Version 2.0 by dumping some stupid plot Hammer on her to make her a New Morrigan. I'm not opposed to having a character change, but at least show that change in the game and not off screen- while Anders changes into a more extremist in DA2, the big change has already happened by the start of the game. IMO, it would have been more compelling to show maybe slightly more thoughtful Awakening, funny Anders at the start, then maybe at the end of Act 1 have him join with Justice, then Act 2 you see him evolve more into militant Anders and so on.
As for Isabela, well....playing the game a second time right now, I really do not like her. I am going to gleefully sell her off to the Arishok
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Precisely, the evidence is right in front of us now and they've borrowed heavily from ME, especially in terms of presentation and critically at least, the results are an inferior experience.[/quote]
Thats the thing- I'd be more willing to accept DA2 if it was more ME styled action RPG, if it was a
good ME style Action RPG. At least on the PC, the gameplay sucks and while its clearly trying to do the same thing as ME2, its not up to par.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
ME serves as an entry point to lite-RPG for newcomers to the genre. Over time, the inclusion of rpg elements in that game and even your supposed RPGs like COD condition gamers to become more adept and used to the systems and conventions, ultimately seeking a more complex, deeper experience, at which point they transition to the more traditional titles. Evidently EA's marketing knows better.[/quote]
Hell, its like any kind of product out there- from cars to drugs- you start with something that has mainstream appeal and can get people not interested, interested. But eventually those people might want something more, so it would make sense to make that more advanced product too. Diluting DA down to the level of ME is just diluting the variety of games BioWare makes- I mean, hell, a good number of people won't be interested in DA even if they like ME no matter how much they dumb it down or make it "accessable." Some people don't want to play a game with dragons, wizards and dwarfs no matter how much you cut it down.
Its funny as I distinctly remember interviews around the time of DAO and ME2 coming out where Zeschuk and Muzyka distinctly said how they wanted to maintain a diverse portfolio of games, with DA and ME clearly appealing to different audiences. They're really canibalizing their own products I think in designing DA for people that don't care about DA.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Well there you go. Take a look at what happened with the Wii (which I maintain, the primary focus was to usher in a new stream of gamers, to hook the proverbial masses so they could branch out later) - sadly, the hardcore gamers who chose Nintendo's platform got pretty p***ed off with the stream of casual titles and complete lack of traditional games and they end up going elsewhere for their fix. Likewise, if you annoy a chunk of your audience making changes, expect a backlash especially if the offended segment's predictions turn out to be well-founded.[/quote]
Right, and I'd maintain that while BioWare has a solid fanbase, especially with DA, any initial success of DA2 is likely predicated on people's reaction to Origins and the Signature Edition preorders more than anything. Its clear the changes they made were to bring in new people, assuming that everyone else would stick around. But if you read that Laidlaw interview in Gamespot, its obvious to me that they really don't give a **** about Origins- Laidlaw just cherrypicked what elements he liked and admits as much to having DA2 pull a 180 from Origins, but that from here on out, DA2 is the foundation of what the future of DA will be built on. Good luck with that- so instead of building on a critically and commercially successful RPG, lets build on a focus tested to crap, generic as hell interactive movie.
*sigh* It will be telling to see how DA2 does in the coming months and whether when EA has their quarterly report in May I think, whether they're praising DA2's sales and critical reception. You often see press releases commenting on how great sales are for a given game or how its critically received not too long after release, but DA2 has been silent.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Oh, that one. Yeah, the idea of a sequel is it's meant to be an improvement, in all aspects. DA2 unfortunately stumbles and falls in several key areas. And of course, often it is a sound move to actually make the
sequel everyone expected as opposed to one that scores lower across the board because you know, it enriches and strengthens the franchise rather than permeating an internet wide disapproval of many of the sequel's revisions. It could, and most likely is, PR spin to explain away the restructuring of the franchise to suit rapid iterative sequels laden with DLC, that's my take on it anyway.[/quote]
Again, I'd maintain that one of the core problems with DA2 is that its DA2. It should have been DA: Exodus or whatever. Expectations would have been lower, they could have actually gone in an even more radical action RPG direction without as much backlash and if it bombed, you could fall back on a proper "DA2" coming back to Origins style features. As it is, DA2 is just a shameful reboot by Laidlaw and Darrah to wrangle as many non-RPG gamers as possible and basically totally misses much of what made people like Origins in the first place.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
On a related topic, I've heard mention on the DA2 boards that Laidlaw apparently didn't want an import feature in DA2, apparently to distance it from Origins but I've not been able to source a quote of anything to that effect. Not sure as to the validity of this statement, does it have any grounding/have you seen anything to this effect or has someone been twisting his words?[/quote]
Wow, really? I haven't read that, but I do recall seeing on Brent Knowles' blog in the comments section on one of his DA posts he made mention of how the import feature to sequels was something he really really championed and wanted in the games.
But yeah, if they got rid of the import feature, there is no way I'd have bought DA2. Honestly, considering how littlle they did with it, its a gimmick really.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
In terms of Shepard, ME1 & 2 felt mostly identical to me with the exception of the interrupt system, I didn't notice any great departure in how Shepard interacted with the world around him/her.[/quote]
Yeah...although tangentally, ME2 does a hell of a job in screwing up any possible RPing of Shep, for example a Sole Survivor Shep working with Cerberus.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
It depends on how able/willing you are to project yourself into the role of the silent PC really, you have to be willing and able to give something of yourself to game for want of a better term. If what you're looking for is the game to spell out everything for you visually on screen, ie: a passive experience, then a more defined PC will fit the bill. Both are perfectly acceptable depending on the game in question yet the enduring classics imo require the player to make the effort to immerse themself.[/quote]
It boils down to sort of the same argument you can have with things like "Well, I thought the book was better than the movie." I just personally find having the full text of the dialogues without a bland VO reciting what I just selected far more engaging and interactive. I'm honestly not interested in seeing the PC recite the same thing I just selected, as more often than not, the paraphrase doesn't jive with what I thought it would be, so instead of having confidence in what my PC is saying, I'm trying to unravel just what the heck Hawke just said, but by then the NPC is reacting to the jumbled mess Hawke spewed.
Its a much simpler system with a unvoiced PC that gives you greater choices and confidence in how your PC is going to deliver the line. And its a more immediate choice/reward system in terms of immediately selecting your dialogue and getting the reward, the NPC reaction.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
Yes, you can persuade people. It's just that this time you won't see a "persuade" or "intimidate" being written in from of you sentence. Heck, you can even have someone like Aveline intimidate them for you or have Varric persuade them or lie.
[/quote]
Not really, there's no real measure of Hawke's ability to influence, outside of Hawke being able to influence companions via the friend/rival mechanic, the coercion skills from DA:O are gone and thus Hawke doesn't have the same flexibility to handle situations as we did before. As Brock stated, the coercion mechanic has simply become the "defer to companion" option.[/quote]
Right, my problem is that there is no rhyme or reason as to how successful or unsuccessful a DA2 "persuade" attempt will be. If I've invested X points into some tangible speech skill, that lets me make some somewhat informed decision on how my PC should act. I mean, if I'm a low intelligence character in Fallout there is no way I'd try to go persuade people with speech. But in DA2 you have no idea. Or even the "lie" option is even more worthless since there is seemingly nothing to ground it in some stat.
While its nice to have the option to get a companion's insight, it really makes Hawke seem even more passive and reactionary than he is already in the story. But apparently, based on the Gamespot interview, Laidlaw thinks the future of DA lies in more intense crafting and those archaic non combat skills were "vestigial" remnants of a bygone era.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Maybe you did Shiori, the option sure as hell didn't come up when I played. Could be a bug I suppose (since I definitely had full friendship, gave her both gifts & triggered all conversations that came up). Since they've locked down the dialogues on an act by act basis, there should be more room for variations in the scenes they speak in, using identical dialogue for that scene after she's supposed be undergoing some sort of shift/revaluation from her final romance dialogue is still lazy imo.[/quote]
As Shiori mentioned, I think it must be a bug, as I did have the option to have Isabela turn down Zevran. But yeah, its pretty lazy implementation in terms of how most romances don't really seem to affect the end game or plot moments really. That said, its not too surprising considering the whole Morrigan romance not changing the DR scene that much.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Like Aveline's romance - there was logical consistency there as it actually developed over the years, when standing that up against others like Isabela's they fall flat. It literally seems like the writers decided to write her out for that period and then bring her back. About the only reference I got to some progression there was an offhand comment in the estate referencing some mystery adventure they supposedly went on. The point being, considering Hawke is with these LI's for such an extended period, their relationship should progress and be much deeper than what it is.
Additionally, this also actually kinda contradicts a point you're making later regarding events/development occurring off-screen over a period of time. Morrigan is more successful than Isabela in this regard as (while she's off pursuing her own agenda) we see a reflection of her feelings in DA:O's epilogue, there's scope for possible romantic inference when you tell Ariane that "you feel her sometimes", which ties in with Morrigan's comment regarding the ring when you meet her again.
So again, Morrigan's acceptance of the warden in WH is indicative of development/personal reflection over a period of time whilst still being true to her facade of not betraying her true feelings unless pressed, Isabela didn't seem to have undergone much change during her periods of absence and compared with Morrigan there was a lack of depth when broaching many topics.[/quote]
Yeah, I think the feeling I got from the Origins characters much more than DA2 was that with the Origins characters, they would react more to the Warden in particular. So basically, that Morrigan or Alistair or Leliana would react differently to their friend the Warden and they'd possibly be more open or you'd gain a deeper insight into their character from that personal interaction. So, like with Morrigan, she'll only open up to the romancing Warden and other people she'll sort of be her snarky Korcari Wilds version. With most of the DA2 characters outside of Varric and Aveline, I rarely felt like they were actually reacting to Hawke but often were just talking at generic Hawke, not necessarily the Hawke I was trying to RP.
Basically, in part due to the friendship/rivalry making relationships
seem very black and white, it makes interactions with the companions come across as very generic and one size fits all, IMO.
Add in the lack of interaction with the LI's and how either too much happens off screen in the time jumps or not enough happens on screen, and I feel like I knew my Origins companions far more and they knew my Warden far more than Hawke and his companions.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
I always took that line as Alisatir believing that the Warden will come back. He probably doesn't even know that you found Morrigan and followed her through the Eluvian.[/quote]
I don't think the line reads like that at all tbh, going by the tone it was delivered in it sounds like Alistair knows exactly where the warden is and when he/she will be returning. Act 3 took place some time after the events of WH so I'm sure Alistair should have been made aware of what happened in WH by that time. [/quote]
Isn't it actually Teagan that says the line about the Hero of Ferelden returning to Denrim soon? Sounded like me that it was almost like the Warden phoned ahead to say he'd be stopping by and they were expecting his arrival.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
I honestly fail to see the problem here. She, and every other companion, have their own lives and don't constantly follow you around. Sure, she could have gone on a rant about whatever it was she did during that time, but would that have made it any better?[/quote]
The onus isn't on the player to postulate the best method for handling this, BioWare made a big thing about the story happening over a decade, made lofty claims as to how the romances develop more realistically over a lengthier period yet, as a number of people have pointed out, it could probably have been condensed into a much smaller period. The city doesn't change, the companions don't progress as much as I'd have liked, what function did it really serve apart from to artificially propel the player into the next plot point?[/quote]
Yeah, the lack of reactivity overall given the advance of time was pretty much one of the primary failings of DA2. I can think of many other games that handle time jumps much better. Hell, look at Ocarina of Time- that does a much better job of showing things change over time than DA2. Again, its a nice idea on paper that they really did absolutely nothing of note with. The only thing the 10 year time span accomplished is setting up DA3.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
As Brock touched upon earlier, making "quests" out of companion interactions is destroying any notion of emergent gameplay that the spur of the moment companion interactions in Origins afforded you. No longer can you steal a kiss from your LI in a quiet corner of the city, no longer can you ask Leliana what she knows about the location you're exploring - the freedom to interact freely has been stripped and what little is there in the cutscenes feels incredible scripted due to its presentation. There's no opportunity for even the little details like companion interjection when kissing a LI outside of camp anymore since they're essentially bots until you hit the next scripted event. It's a shadow of its former self. [/quote]
Right- its just makes the whole game feel less interactive and more like the developer is holding your hand telling you the "right" way to play their game. It sucks any sense of player agency out of the equation. And while I like banter, the problem with DA2 is that it seems like so much of the dialogue is now banter instead of one on one conversations, since now every conversation has to be this big production. Problem is, banter is an entirely passive experience. Its like your PC isn't even there and you have no input- you might as well be eavesdropping on the characters and while its a fine supplementary method to fill in the gaps of a character, its not a good way to basically try and totally characterize a given NPC.
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
And it also helps when your companions actualy talk about something interesting, rather than rant about pointless crap, like Oghren would in Origins.[/quote]
Eh, I don't know, Isabela ranting about pointless sex jokes for the 1,000,000th time makes her basically a female Oghren. Think about that one for a second.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
The point being made though was that all the bells and whistles are there to make up for a lack of content/strong dialogue. Having every interaction so deeply entrenched in animation-heavy presentation (Hawke enters, moves to chair, sits, waits to speak, rinse repeat) ends up making me roll my eyes - it becomes like Metal Gear Solid all over again where every few steps initiates an over-long cutscene, which also touches on the question of whether BioWare really wants to make games or movies. As I stated earlier, the sense of freedom is removed from the player at a very basic level as soon as a new companion interaction is marked in the journal and map as a big shiny arrow - it underlines that you're playing a game and you're being railroaded/ushered from event to event. Contrast with say, Morrigan's discussions about leaving the Wilds, all completely optional and can be triggered at your discretion, they feel far less forced on you (and thereby more player-driven) due to lack of a quest market and play to the notion of player discovery.[/quote]
Yeah, I can't help but think that the dictate to have every conversation a scripted sequence is in part responsible for the fewer one on one conversations and thus the increase in banter. So maybe there is the same amount of dialogue from companions, but most of its in the banter or locked away in variations with the friendship/rivarly mechanic.
The thing I loved about Origins was as soon as I recruited Morrigan and got to Lothering, I took some time to talk to her and get some insight into who she was. I didn't burn through all the conversations right away, but being able to talk to her then and there gives you a great sense of agency, which is really what separates Western RPGS from JRPGs and other genre games I think. Having everything turned into a cinematic makes it less engaging to me as a player. I;m not in control, I'm being given the ok by the game that you can talk to companion X, Y or Z. I mean, with a more antisocial character like Morrigan or Sten, having every interaction a companion triggered cutscene would be goofy and hurts their characterization. Those sorts of characters should take some effort from the player to get to know, they wouldn't send out a quest in your journal to come talk to them about their feelings.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Funny, that's exactly how the companions in DA2 feel to me outside of cutscenes, their random comments akin to a
teddy bear squeaker. [/quote]
Hahaha:lol:
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
The city does change. Not visualy ofc, but if you pay attention to the people within you can see how their lives change for better or worse. You can see the recruits in the Gallows rise through the ranks as the years go by, you can see the sisters in the chantry change, you see a monument to your victory over
the Qunari in the Docks, etc. As for companion progress I felt that depends on companion in question. Aveline has a pretty obvious progress through acts 1, 2 and 3. Fenris keeps mostly to himself and is practicaly a "ghost". Therefore his progress isn't as obvious. Merrill works on her mirror. Isabela pulls all sorts of pranks or drags you on small adventures. Varric simply runs the family business.
The point is that most of these changes aren't really relevant to Hawke or his personal story so they aren't as important as say, Morrigan's change from DA:O to WH.[/quote]
Which really just comes back to the problem that Hawke as a protagonist and his/her drive/motivation/end goals are vague at best and consequently the overall story is weaker in areas because of it. It seems Hawke is just some random guy how does odd jobs for people, as an initial way to draw the player into the game a quest for 50 sovereigns in the arguably the longest act in the game is not a good way to hook the player, nor is it a particularly strong argument for why the some of the companions follow him/her around. It's a group of misfits without purpose that randomly finds itself embroiled in larger events (that Hawke actually has limited influence over) by happenstance. [/quote]
Yeah, again, look at Ocarina of Time for how you can change over 7 years of time and keep things fresh. Honestly, for me, exploration is a key part of an RPG and in this respect DA2 fails in epic fashion. I mean, even in the Sebastian DLC dungeon, I thought at first that was a new dungeon. Nope, its literally a copy paste reskin of the other dungeon, just with some bones and stuff. Layout wise, it is exactly the same as everything you've seen before.
I mean, there were so many opportunities to do cool stuff with the time frame. If I recall, in Origins one of the cut features was a sort of Rival feature where somebody from your Origin would come back at varying parts of the story. Now you kind of had this with certain Origins, but DA2 would have been perfect for this: have some person, maybe when you're working with the Mercenaries or Smugglers who Hawke either intentionally or unintentionally screws over, such that once Hawke is all rich, this rival person could come back somehow as a criminal or something. Or maybe how you could give coin to a beggar in act 1 and maybe by act 3 that beggar is now some well off entrepreneur. Or even how the Magistrate from the Act 1 quest never really does anything after that quest. I could go on- but really, the framed narrative and time frame was totally squandered in DA2.
ANd in terms of motivation, it seems they tried to superficially copy BG2's opening with the glut of side quests to earn coin. Problem is, you had a clear motivation in BG2- get enough money to save Imoen, with Irenicus as a clear antagonist. Not only that, but Athkatla and the surrounding areas were amazingly fleshed out and varied. With DA2, you're just sort of doing stuff....to get more stuff? There is no motivation for really doing stuff other than to "Get rich or die trying." I get that they didn' t want a BIg Bad, but they need something to propel the story forward.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
It's wrong to assume that the player might not want to strike up a conversation during parts of the game where that might not be intended/expected. Take the final battle in Denerim - When exactly is the optimal time to speak to Morrigan about the dark ritual considering you supposed to be facing a legion of darkspawn - is the conversation "relevant" considering you're battling for your life or should you concern yourself only with the task at hand? Do you take that opportunity before speaking to Riordan and choosing your final party or do put off that final farewell until the double doors that lead to the archdemon? [/quote]
Exactly- I almost feel like the quest conversations of DA2 is a means to make sure everyone gets every bit of conversation, which is fine, but the way it was handled kills any sense of agency.
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
And dialogue in DA:O was stronger because your Warden was standing still like a dummy most of the time, with his back turned to you? Sorry, but dialogue in DA:O was only "strong" due to animations of companions and their VO's. In most cases you couldn't even see your character's reaction and it was left to you, the player, to roleplay it in your head. Maybe that's what some people preffer to do, but it doesn't make it a "better" experience.[/quote] Which, if you're in a first person narrative is absolutely fine. If I'm chatting with a friend, I know what I'm syaing or doing or emoting, I don't need to see it to validate that. I'm more interested in their reaction since I know what I'm saying/doing. Again though, there is a difference between dialogue and animations. Of course, you're not going to see your Warden if he's not voiced, why would you? Keeping it an over the shoulder view is because you're focusing on whoever you're speaking with, from the POV of the Warden.
[quote]Master Shiori wrote...
I'd rather see Bioware try out something new, learn from it and make neccesary changes then simply copy what others are doing.[/quote]
Thats ultimately my problem with DA2: Its been done before and done better not only by other devs, but even by BioWare. There is nothing terribly ambitious about it like some of Obsidian's games which get panned by critics but at least they try new stuff and aim high. DA2 aims low and still misses its mark. Ultimately, they didn't really address some of the complaints of Origins like crummy encounter design, but instead just sidestepped fixing what didn't work in Origins and made something totally different, a 180 by Laidlaw's admission, and created a slew od new problems that didn't exist before.
[quote]adneate wrote...
Hence the problem with DA2, it's not tolerable. Combat is downright torture in this "sequel" and the story never unfolds any different. It's a double kill of crappy design choices, overused and terrible combat mechanics in a linear as possible story with a conversation system that ensure you don't know jack about anyone in your party until Act 2.
[/quote]
Yup- generally, you have one that drives the other forwards- so if you don't like the combat, well you've got the story to look forward or the other way around. Problem with DA2 is that half of the time you have no insight or rationale as to why you're fighting. Its just random slaver or carta member attacking. Honestly, it reminds me of Far Cry 2's terrible AI where you were supposedly in this vast African landscape, but every single person attacks on sight for no reason. At least in Origins random attacks were generally by darkspawn. BUt the whole "Oh, Kirkwall has crime!" excuse falls pretty damn flat. Thats not even getting into the damn waves that spawn out of thin air.
[quote]Alex Kershaw wrote...
Anyone else annoyed that the DAO codex entries didn't import so you had no idea which entries you'd already read? Just discouraged me from reading any of them
.[/quote]
YES! THe recycled codex entries were very annoying. Considering most seemed lifted directly from Origins, it made finding out what ones were actually "new" a pain. Heck, I think one on the Wardens of the Blight doesn't even refer to the 5th Blight having already happened, but acts like there have only been 4 blights.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
The baffling thing is though, iirc it was Laidlaw that made the intelligent decision to include the Robes of Possession as a late game upgrade for Morrigan that still retains her "iconic" look (I can see the point he's getting at with the customisation working againt the default look of the companions). Why not employ a similar system in the future, allow customisation but have some of the upper tier stuff bring back their default looks but grant stat benefits. Or they could have used a toggle, or do something like say the jrpg Tales series does and adjust companion looks via a title system. So many ways to approach it yet the least flexible option was chosen...In DA2 it ultimately became a problem with game design as you ended up carting about huge numbers of weapons/armour that you couldn't do anything with.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie][/quote]
I have to imagine that more than anything, the armor decision came down to console development and the unique models having a smaller memory footprint than giving unique gloves, armor, and boots. I'd have been fine with a Morrigan approach where you could have one unique look with upgrades in addition to customization, yet again, us dumb gamers need to have the spittle wiped from our chins, as we might get confused which character is which is they don't have their official BioWare approved looks. Cause you know Morrigan turns into a totally different person when she changes her clothes.<_<
Honestly, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if DA3 goes the ME2 route and ditches inventory alltogether.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
This depends entirely on the direction that this series heads in for me, at the moment the course being charted is the opposite of what I'd have liked to see. If it remains as is and we see a second coming of DA2 then no, my interest has been sufficiently diminished through the change in presentation, mechanics and vision for me to opt out and end things with Origins. Brock might have posted something elsewhere about how Laidlaw stated there wouldn't be changes based on fan criticism, which if we take him at his word is quite worrisome.[/quote]
Yeah.
DA2 is definitely the type of game I'd normally buy full price, if at all. The damning thing was that I didn't even find the story that good and thats usually at least something you can bank on with BioWare. SO instead of DA3 being some must buy game, its mostly a Steam Holiday Sale or "watch on youtube" type game now. I'll need to see very specific things happen for me to get interested in DA3 which is a damn shame, as it seems Laidlaw is rather locked in how he wants to transform DA from a more traditional RPG to some diluted mass market non RPG player's "RPG." Good luck with that.
[quote]Terra_Ex wrote...
Taking a break from our displeasure with DA2 - since we mentioned it before I recalled that Arl Foreshadow was referenced in the DA2 demo files so I decided to search for anything relating to him in the talk table: here's what looks like Arl Foreshadow's notes from DA2 )going on the basis that the stringID immediately follows the codex title of the same name). I don't know how to access it in-game or if it's been discussed elsewhere yet though, but
w/e:
The Notes of Arl Foreshadow:Readings for endless days by the coming fire:
Elvehan Diis Falsis: Triew Metod Dracas
Transitional Tevinter. Interesting.
Perforation Theory: Walking the Dream Worrying. Good walls make good neighbors. Also, parapets.
Of Locks and Lineage: If Right was Wrong “Whoops” indeed.
The Qun - Popular. Get one before they're gone.
Timely Talking: The Art of the Reveal-Irrelevant. Some take steps by two, and speak as such.
[/quote]
I think he is in the game somewhere - the above is a codex entry, there's a stringID with his name on it which would be attached to a creature tag but i dunno where he is. Anyway - somewhere else in the game, something/someone also says: "That's last time I take directions from Foreshadow. Doesn't know his ass from this hole in the ground." I can't be bothered searching the conversation files to find who says it though.
Discuss, or not [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]
[/quote]
Nice find! I wonder if this was cut from the game or bugged? You'd think someone would have found it already or it would have been part of a quest in a guide or something, as Foreshadow was part of a quest in Origins.
As for what they mean? Considering how non sensical most of the DAO ones seem I really have no clue.
Elvehan Diis Falsis: Triew Metod Dracas - No clue. I wonder if thats not a word jumble or something.
Transitional Tevinter. Interesting. - Tevinter in DA3 or an expack? Maybe, then again, it could be nothing.
Perforation Theory: Walking the Dream Worrying. Good walls make good neighbors. Also, parapets.- I wonder if this doesn't have something to do with the Dreamer kid in DA2, Feynriel, I think? That seems like it could be a big point or at least laying the groundwork for something in the future.
Now I wonder, wasn't there some dialogue regarding Asha Bellanar thats supposed to happen with respect to Feynriel's quest? Maybe its bugged or something, but I wonder if the OGB will have some sort of dream walking powers? I've got some ideas on the big change I'll get to in a bit...
Of Locks and Lineage: If Right was Wrong “Whoops” indeed.- Np clue. Maybe some sort of "right" choice from DAO or DA2 is actually the "wrong" choice? Like either the DR being bad or good?
The Qun - Popular. Get one before they're gone.- Obviously the Qunari, but maybe its referencing the Qunari leaving or getting wiped out with the whole get one before they're gone bit?
Timely Talking: The Art of the Reveal-Irrelevant. Some take steps by two, and speak as such.- No clue, probably jibberjabber like the last one from Foreshadow in DAO.
Now, as for some speculation on the "change" Morrigan mentioned. How about this:
Sandal says how one day the magic will return and everyone will be as they were. From the Dalish, it would seem they once held powerful magic and going back to Arlathan time had a good deal of magic in their society, blood magic included- plus the bits on the Dreamers.
Now with the Primeval Thaig, thats supposedly from before even the First Blight, with the crazy lyrium idol and all. Plus you've got Sandal and his magic abilities. What if there was at one time magic using dwarfs like Sandal, either a different race or they were just somehow disconnected from their magic not unlike the Elves? Now maybe that separate dwarven race is somehow connected to Kal Sharok?
And then you have the humans, with I think at times in DA2 you can hear people say how more mages are being born than ever before and obviously the mages rebelling.
So maybe the OGB brings magic back into the world somehow, maybe somehow by the whole Dreamer thing and maybe by breaking the barrier between the Fade and Thedas?
Modifié par Brockololly, 27 mars 2011 - 08:55 .
Retour en haut
