EPThere is my opinion.
gj expressing it.
Dragon Age 2 - Page 39
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
unsaid
45 Posts
here is my opinion. gj expressing it. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On March 12 2011 03:34 Fruscainte wrote: Why do people nitpick at a single line of an argument that's paragraphs long and assume they've refuted the entire thing? ;-; I'm going to be the bigger man and step down before someone gets banned from all of this. I'll leave on this statement though, Dragon Age 2 is terrible compared with the first and if you think there is anything wrong with voicing that opinion -- you better hope you have a mental disorder to explain such level of idiocy. Now Bibdy, please know that isn't directed precisely at you before you go into a shit storm about it. I mean, I haven't been following the argument because this thread sort of exploded over the past couple days, but opinions go both ways I could just as easily say: "there's nothing wrong with the statement that Dragon Age 2 isn't terrible compared with the first and if you think there is anything wrong with voicing that opinion -- you better hope you have a mental disorder to explain such a level of idiocracy" aesthetics is a funny subject On March 12 2011 03:36 unsaid wrote: I seriously have to question the state of mind of anyone enjoying this game. Even if you can ignore the repetitive fighting, the lack of freedom, the shallow characters, no free camera movement, the stupid boring quests, the mindnumbing clicking on books which leads to hundreds of popups which you never gonna read, and if you decide to do so you regret it immediately. Even if you don't mind playing the same dungeon for 15 times, walking the same places over and over again, what the hell are you actually enjoying then? The cancerous dialogs? The graphics? I don't believe you. This is the C&C 4 of RPG. Nobodies gonna talk about it in 4 weeks anymore. EA just got one victim more on their list. here is my opinion. gj expressing it. watch, I can do it too: "I seriously have to question the state of mind of anyone who isn't able to enjoy this game. If you can't accept the improved combat system, the variety of choices, the interesting characters, and the free camera movement, the interesting quests, the large amount of lore to the numerous books throughout the game which are always nice to read, and if you can't you would immediately regret it if you did." People seriously should stop treating their opinions as facts and there wouldn't be 10 pages of pointless bickering. Just because you enjoyed or didn't enjoy the game doesn't make it objectively an amazing or terrible game. And more importantly, just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't make their opinion stupid or illogical | ||
|
Bozotclown
United Kingdom60 Posts
| ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
On March 12 2011 03:34 Fruscainte wrote: Why do people nitpick at a single line of an argument that's paragraphs long and assume they've refuted the entire thing? ;-; I'm going to be the bigger man and step down before someone gets banned from all of this. I'll leave on this statement though, Dragon Age 2 is terrible compared with the first and if you think there is anything wrong with voicing that opinion -- you better hope you have a mental disorder to explain such level of idiocy. Now Bibdy, please know that isn't directed precisely at you before you go into a shit storm about it. I wasn't going to respond to the rest because A) a bulk of it wasn't meant for me and B) it boils down to insulting me again, then acting like you didn't insult me originally in the most hypocritical format I've yet seen on these forums. So, I did the mature thing and let it go. The only thing of worth in that was the part where you strawman me yet again under the guise that I've been arguing against SENSIBLE arguments against the game/company, such as the DRM thing. I asked you to find me where I'm fighting against such a thing, because I'm 100% confident I didn't, so I wanted your explanation for this unwarranted attack. Again, voice your opinion wholeheartedly. It's totally okay to be disappointed with it. I'm not denouncing that right of anyone's. Just don't go telling me to sit back when people go around overexaggerating a bunch of baseless lies and fabrications about the game in order to express their disappointment in it. If I see someone can't be specific about what's wrong with it, without making up a bunch of bologne, and someone else comes along and believes it (of course I can't prove that, only assume it), I'm going to jump in and set things straight. Why? Because I'd like to see this discussion shift to talking about the damn game than feeding this knee-jerk reaction to change whinefest. | ||
|
YoonHo
Canada1043 Posts
P.S. I'm not necessary picking a side here, I hate and love the game. | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
| ||
|
TaKemE
Denmark1045 Posts
On March 12 2011 03:54 unkkz wrote: The game was disappointing, but what gets me is that it's getting really good reviews all over the place by PC Gamer for instance, someone mentioned they gave it a 94? I seriously dont understand how "serious" gaming websites and magasines can continue to give crappy games good reviews. I mean if they actually played the damn games there is no way in their right mind they could give them the scores they recieve. CoD games and now DA2 are good examples of this. Dragon age 2 is for sure not a bad game... many are just unhappy that it aint what they wanted it to be. There are many who likes Dragon Age 2/CoD games as well so you dont have to bash the reviewers just because you dont agree with them. Imo Dragon age 2 is awesome compared to many other RPG's out there just not same level as DA:O. | ||
|
antelope591
Canada820 Posts
| ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On March 12 2011 04:07 TaKemE wrote: Dragon age 2 is for sure not a bad game... many are just unhappy that it aint what they wanted it to be. There are many who likes Dragon Age 2/CoD games as well so you dont have to bash the reviewers just because you dont agree with them. Imo Dragon age 2 is awesome compared to many other RPG's out there just not same level as DA:O. DA2 is not a 94. Not in a million years. 80ish(which is still good) i can agree with perhaps, but 94? And then theres Black Ops being praised as the best FPS of all time among other things. They're not OMG TERRIBLE GAMES, they're decent games and i see why some people like them. But they are not 90+ games. It just feels that reviewers buy into hype very easily and hence give games higher ratings than they deserve. Since you have to consider 100, if we're to use the PC Gamer scale, is the best game of all time, it is perfection embodied in a game. Can anyone really say with a straight face that DA2 was 6% away from perfection? | ||
|
Whalecore
Norway1111 Posts
I understand most of your complaints, and agree with many of them. However, do you also think the ability trees are badly designed? I played DA:O, and found most of the abilities horrible. A lot of my points had to go into boring abilities that barely gave me anything new. In DA2 however, all the abilities are interesting. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1220 Posts
I'd expect a product like this from a dev team with no experience, but hell, these guys made BG/BG2/DA:O. And they have a ton of money. There's no real excuse for a sub-par (pars that they themselves set, mind you) product when they're at this level of development. On March 12 2011 04:20 Whalecore wrote: @All the critics slaughtering the game I understand most of your complaints, and agree with many of them. However, do you also think the ability trees are badly designed? I played DA:O, and found most of the abilities horrible. A lot of my points had to go into boring abilities that barely gave me anything new. In DA2 however, all the abilities are interesting. If I could transplant one thing from DA2 to DA:O it would be this. DA:O's abilities did seem rather bland in comparison. | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On March 12 2011 04:20 Whalecore wrote: @All the critics slaughtering the game I understand most of your complaints, and agree with many of them. However, do you also think the ability trees are badly designed? I played DA:O, and found most of the abilities horrible. A lot of my points had to go into boring abilities that barely gave me anything new. In DA2 however, all the abilities are interesting. This i can agree with to some extent. The graphic design of the HUD for DA2 in general blows, its futuristic so it's kinda malplaced imo. But the design of the trees themselves i kinda like, they still offer variety while not including alot of useless crap which the DA:O trees actually had. Varric's specialisation for instance is just... mind bogglingly good. And i like the sublety part of the rogue since it wasnt really all that in DA:O. So yes the talent trees i'd actually say is an improvement since they removed alot of abilities that just wasnt used as often. Probably the most successfull part of DA2 to me, one of the few improvements they actually made so to say. | ||
|
forcestealer
Canada60 Posts
| ||
takingbackoj
United States684 Posts
On March 12 2011 02:31 DJEtterStyle wrote: I can accept that some people won't like Dragon Age II as much as Origins (to me, the sequel has improved upon the original in nearly every way), but what we're seeing is the now-typical PC gamer behavior. The sense of entitlement is just sickening. If you don't like Dragon Age II, don't buy it. You get a vote. It's called your wallet. If sales drop, BioWare will reevaluate the direction they've taken the series. Screaming on the BioWare forums or giving the game a 1/10 makes you look like a petulant child. I don't like the game and ive never played a game on computer before other than SC2 and age of empires, ultima online. Never played a single player on the computer. | ||
|
takingbackoj
United States684 Posts
On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote: No, people who think the game sucks for STUPID REASONS are wrong. It has nothing to do with me thinking its a good (read: just good, not this 'superomgawesomeiwanttosuckbioware'scock persona you've childishly attached me to). If that's the case, then simply state that and discuss it. I wouldn't have anything to respond to if people weren't making up outrageous LIES about what they choose to pick apart about the game. Worse graphics detail than DAO? That the game is too easy because they play on Normal and they refuse to try Hard or Nightmare? How they should have chosen something other than 'wow-like' targetting circles to use AOE spells? How they couldn't figure out how lockpicking works because they can't read a simple tooltip? That the decisions you make in the game have no effect on the outcome of anything? I've seen all of the above multiple times, and they're just flat-out, factually wrong and/or utterly banal things to use as ammunition about why the game might be bad. Get rid of that kind of crap in this thread, and I'll have literally nothing left to waste my time 'being a fanboy' as you've so maturely put it. What are the stupid reasons people have been giving for why the game sucks. I feel a lot of them are spot on. | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote: What are the stupid reasons people have been giving for why the game sucks. I feel a lot of them are spot on. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted? | ||
|
absalom86
Iceland1770 Posts
They removed all armor from companions, Characters get stun locked if they get hit once up against a wall and die without being able to do anything about it, The story is weak, Combat is simplified beyond all measure. Some things are good, including the new combat animations but the developers seem to have been more interested in removing features instead of adding new ones. I'd say the game is worth a play through, but if you liked DA1 and old rpgs you will quickly find it very lacking, A simplified, childrenized, version of a good game. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1220 Posts
On March 12 2011 04:55 absalom86 wrote: Veeery disappointing continuation of the series. They removed all armor from companions, Characters get stun locked if they get hit once up against a wall and die without being able to do anything about it, The story is weak, Combat is simplified beyond all measure. Some things are good, including the new combat animations but the developers seem to have been more interested in removing features instead of adding new ones. I'd say the game is worth a play through, but if you liked DA1 and old rpgs you will quickly find it very lacking, A simplified, childrenized, version of a good game. Stack strength or get items with fortitude, it stops interrupts more often. There's also items out there that make you immune to interrupt and stun. The story is weak, yeah, but the combat is better all around if you're playing on nightmare. More responsive, more elaboration on the class combinations and synergy with abilities. I do agree that if you liked older RPG's like BG, you probably won't enjoy DA2, though. | ||
|
Rashid
191 Posts
On March 12 2011 04:13 unkkz wrote: DA2 is not a 94. Not in a million years. 80ish(which is still good) i can agree with perhaps, but 94? And then theres Black Ops being praised as the best FPS of all time among other things. They're not OMG TERRIBLE GAMES, they're decent games and i see why some people like them. But they are not 90+ games. It just feels that reviewers buy into hype very easily and hence give games higher ratings than they deserve. Since you have to consider 100, if we're to use the PC Gamer scale, is the best game of all time, it is perfection embodied in a game. Can anyone really say with a straight face that DA2 was 6% away from perfection? I dunno about DA2 since i havent played it, but Black Ops is pure awesomeness. Easily the best single-player FPS game so far. Since you don't think games like DA2 and Black Ops dont deserve 90% scores, i would like to know the kind of games that you think deserve those scores. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1220 Posts
On March 12 2011 05:00 Rashid wrote: I dunno about DA2 since i havent played it, but Black Ops is pure awesomeness. Easily the best single-player FPS game so far. Since you don't think games like DA2 and Black Ops dont deserve 90% scores, i would like to know the kind of games that you think deserve those scores. Half life. Baldur's Gate. Games that did new things in their day and age. They were moving forward. Stuff like CoD is stagnating the FPS genre. It never brought anything new or anything intresting to it. DA2 has a pretty sub-par story, which, in an RPG, should automatically put you WAY behind your competition. But somehow, games like this get 90's, even though there were better examples of games released within their genres ten years ago. If someone released an RTS that was the same as brood war, but it got a higher score than brood war, it would make no sense. If it got the same score, it would still make no sense, since brood war set the benchmark. It's all about improving. On March 12 2011 02:31 DJEtterStyle wrote: I can accept that some people won't like Dragon Age II as much as Origins (to me, the sequel has improved upon the original in nearly every way), but what we're seeing is the now-typical PC gamer behavior. The sense of entitlement is just sickening. If you don't like Dragon Age II, don't buy it. You get a vote. It's called your wallet. If sales drop, BioWare will reevaluate the direction they've taken the series. Screaming on the BioWare forums or giving the game a 1/10 makes you look like a petulant child. Imagine that, people getting mad because they bought a game from a company that has shown to make very high-quality RPG's. I wonder why this is happening? Must be a sense of entitlement. Couldn't be the fact that they bought a game based on a previous track record (a good way to see if a game is good or bad!), to find out that the game is a general downgrade of DA:O. Nope. Damn PC gamers, acting like children. | ||
| ||
