|
Loved DA:O. Multiple play through, pretty much overkill.
Had DA:2 money in my hand since they day it got announced. But i'm no sucker, I've watched the reactions from real critics. Not any of em endorsed by a website, but by angered fans. You want to hear the truth about a game ask someone who was disappointed by it. Then it happened, when even the bioware forums flooded with skepticism and anger I knew the DA:2 dream was over.
Instead I purchased a gem, a beacon of awesome from when games were made to be fun(below). Costing me less than DA:2(remainder to be spent on snacks). You shouldn't let hype and a love for the original blind you when spending your money. Your money is the only way to tell companies what you want, it is your only voice. Complaining after you buy it is idiotic (spoilers: they're not listening). In a small exception, when a company tries something crazy new, then by all means embark with them on that journey. But in cases like this, where it's something that has been done, and hell even done CORRECTLY by the same company before hand (MEs, DA:O) blindy giving them your money is what will kill the need for companies to be creative.
Also a suggestion that has helped me a lot when deciding where to invest my gaming funds, is a list of qualities that are giant turn offs, and if a game reaches critical mass before even purchasing it, then there is simply no way I'm going to buy it. (These are personal things, but things like on-disk DLC, planned day-1 dlc, oversimplification, length).
+ Show Spoiler +
Hell yes.
R.I.P Dragon Age, never forget.
End of Rant.
|
On March 12 2011 05:05 goiflin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 05:00 Rashid wrote:On March 12 2011 04:13 unkkz wrote:On March 12 2011 04:07 TaKemE wrote: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. 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. 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. Show nested quote +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.
They can't be children DA2 is rated M for mature :D
|
On March 12 2011 04:49 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 02:23 Souljah wrote:
So everyone that thinks the game sucks is wrong because YOU think its a good game? Sorry but the majority of people agree that the game is nothing but a rush job and is put together poorly.
I think the majority of people are pissed more at the decision to for a quick release just to make a buck. We all expected a good quality game from Bioware, and instead we got a rush job. If its EA's influence, then the blame falls on them. 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. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted?
Most of TL is too stupid/childish to engage in a real discussion, I really think you are wasting your time. You won't change their mind, no matter how many of their factual errors you correct, hypocrisies you point out. They are "mad" and they are venting, with the usual addition of hyperbole and presentation of subjective opinion as fact. Nothing to see here that you can't see in the sc2 balance forums.
Now watch as they strawman me as a fanboi before some my good sense finds its way into their head.
User was warned for this post
|
On March 12 2011 03:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
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
Right.
Opinions are fundamentally horrible things to have. As long as we're mature enough to admit that things we like and enjoy aren't necessarily good or quality things, we can look past opinions (which are worthless to everybody except the one person having that opinion, thus generally worthless) and look at facts instead. Facts are good, because they're right, and because everything else is wrong, and if we try we can establish EXACTLY which is the case.
Or we can all hide behind our "opinions" and drag the thread for 20 pages accomplishing absolutely nothing other than frustrating other people that read it. People CAN enjoy things that are simply bad, it's actually a very common thing in the entertainment industry, I've no problems with that at all.
That Dragon Age 2 is sub-par to previous Bioware titles (pretty much every single one of them) is what I believe to be a fact. I'll concede the point that the combat mechanics are pretty good and something that did indeed improve.
On the other hand, I would love if somebody would put up an argument against the following, no matter how much they personally enjoyed the game:
- Reusing the same zones and trying to pass them off as different places is something I've only seen done in an MMO (WoW), and even they did it scarcely and made an effort to re-texture it and populate it with different creatuers.
- A follow up on the point above, the entire game happens in like 3 different environments and only several zones in each. That's pretty much the entire game world. It's like they took a demo-size content and added hundreds of quests and cutscenes to it, but at the end of the day, it's a ridiculously small amount of unique content. I have no idea how they hoped to get away with that in a 2011 AAA title.
- Most areas in the game are small, constrained and designed with no imagination at all. Some generic dull city, some wilderness area, and the simplified Deep Roads. Just in the first 10 minutes of DA Origins you see scenes and environments that are more spectacular - Ostigar and the battle, the Wilds and do I need to mention how much more spectacular the Deep Roads scenes were in DA1? I won't even mention Awakening expansion, most of the zones in it were leagues ahead of what DA2 has.
- You may claim that liking or disliking the story is entirely subjective, but alas, DA2 did not have anything resembling a story arc. It didn't even have a story for the most part, just some loose context tying up hundreds of sidequests. For a linear game that is a pretty bad idea. Even TES / new Fallout games that are all about freedom and sandbox gameplay had a better developed and involving main story and even many of the side quest chains.
- The game is graphically not only unimpressive, but annoying. Textures are horrible, as are most character models (Aveline's hair model in 2011 high budget game, SERIOUSLY?), as are generic faces and clothing. In DX9 the game just looks like Origins expansion, and dx11 I've heard is quite glitchy and doesn't improve things much.
There you go. I really don't care if forum member A personally liked the game or not, but a game with these issues really isn't that good by modern day standards. It's just a "filler" title until something better comes along, and looking at the overall production value, I'm pretty sure Bioware treated it the same way (unfortunately).
|
I just wrapped up my first play through of DA2 and I don't feel as badly as most of the other posters in this thread. The game is okay, not world shattering but definitely a good game. I think to say otherwise is to have your perspective colored by your expectations and your disappointments. The game is good.
I think that the real problem is that there is not a huge selection in the market for RPGs of this kind. I'm not sure of the reason, perhaps the market is ridiculously difficult to please? Maybe there just isn't that much profitability in a game that lacks tremendous mass appeal? Dunno. Nevertheless, it's obvious that the game has been a disappointment, but where are fans of the genre supposed to turn? Go back to playing Baldur's Gate? Icewind Dale? Oblivion? I guess...I mean I like the genres but I'm not going back to ancient titles.
|
- Reusing the same zones and trying to pass them off as different places is something I've only seen done in an MMO (WoW), and even they did it scarcely and made an effort to re-texture it and populate it with different creatuers.
While this is slightly annoying most other games do the same thing. Also in Origins for example a lot of the areas weren't exact copies of themselves but they were extremely bland. For example the endless miles of just dull grey caves with no detail? Or the green farm areas with almost no detail. They do re-use the same areas a lot in DA2 but they are all very detailed and besides that your fighting around the same city the entire game in different time periods, its likely you will be in the same spots so this didn't really bother me at all since it agrees with the story.
- A follow up on the point above, the entire game happens in like 3 different environments and only several zones in each. That's pretty much the entire game world. It's like they took a demo-size content and added hundreds of quests and cutscenes to it, but at the end of the day, it's a ridiculously small amount of unique content. I have no idea how they hoped to get away with that in a 2011 AAA title.
The game world is much larger than you think, Kirkwall for example is freaking huge compared to say Denerim in the first game. Origins game world may have felt much larger and more open but each of the environments were rather small by themselves. It does get kind of old being in the same climate I suppose through the entire game but there are like 15-20 different "zones" and if you actually take the time to look closely at them the level of detail is very high.
- Most areas in the game are small, constrained and designed with no imagination at all. Some generic dull city, some wilderness area, and the simplified Deep Roads. Just in the first 10 minutes of DA Origins you see scenes and environments that are more spectacular - Ostigar and the battle, the Wilds and do I need to mention how much more spectacular the Deep Roads scenes were in DA1? I won't even mention Awakening expansion, most of the zones in it were leagues ahead of what DA2 has.
I don't really understand this, the zones in Kirkwall seem pretty original to me, all the statues and designs on the wall are well designed, there are even a ton of pretty interesting conversations if you slow down for a sec and listen. The Deep Roads was pretty bland compared to Origins I will agree, I was a bit disappointed on that but the boss fight down there was pretty awesome so that made up for it. You think the Ostagar areas were somehow good? Really? It was a generic forested area and then the tower itself was just .. a basic keep tower I mean .. it really didn't have anything memorable about it I don't understand how that would be an example of "spectacular" area.
- You may claim that liking or disliking the story is entirely subjective, but alas, DA2 did not have anything resembling a story arc. It didn't even have a story for the most part, just some loose context tying up hundreds of sidequests. For a linear game that is a pretty bad idea. Even TES / new Fallout games that are all about freedom and sandbox gameplay had a better developed and involving main story and even many of the side quest chains.
I thought the story was pretty good, its a story of a refugee working their way up from nothing to make a large impact on a troubled city. Also there is a ton of variation in it depending on your choices. Origin's story wasn't that great either, I mean god I was fucking cringing in the ending cut scenes for how cheesy it was. As video game stories go though I would say their both pretty good, DA2 is just a completely different approach.
- The game is graphically not only unimpressive, but annoying. Textures are horrible, as are most character models (Aveline's hair model in 2011 high budget game, SERIOUSLY?), as are generic faces and clothing. In DX9 the game just looks like Origins expansion, and dx11 I've heard is quite glitchy and doesn't improve things much.
Go download the Hi-Res models and play with the graphics turned up, they are very good .. considerably better than DA:O. If your playing in DX9 mode then, yes its going to look like shit of course. Nothing about any of the character's faces or clothing is generic, if you think so your really not looking at all. Infact they spent a ton of time developing both of these and thats the entire reason they didn't want people changing the armor off of the char's.
I really feel like some people are just pre-disposed to just hate this game without even giving it a legitimate chance. Some of the complaints you have here are actually strengths of the game, its like you played it for 5 minutes and then came up with this stuff or maybe you only played the demo by the sounds of it.
|
On March 12 2011 06:00 slyboogie wrote:
Nevertheless, it's obvious that the game has been a disappointment, but where are fans of the genre supposed to turn? Go back to playing Baldur's Gate? Icewind Dale? Oblivion? I guess...I mean I like the genres but I'm not going back to ancient titles.
Same here, what are the titles that are worth playing?
|
Interview
Not sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA.
|
Okay you guys have pointed out all the pros and cons about game; some of you like the game while other hate it. But seriously, you guys sort of missed one very important factor in the game: How detailed are the sex scenes in DA2? Can i go straight, gay and bi like in the first game? Is the leading female character as hot as Morrigan? Since our main character's race is locked to Human, does this mean there's absolutely no chance to see any Dwarf on Dwarf bromance action?
|
My favorite part in the entire game (and it's so hard to choose) is in order to get into the city at the beginning, you must sign for a year with a faction that has the pull to get you in. Your choice is either mercenaries, or smugglers. So for a year your character is working in the exciting field of smuggling, or mercenary work. No doubt traveling to exotic locations, meeting unscrupulous characters, fighting, stealing, being betrayed, betraying others, earning recognition and fame.
But the game lets you do none of that. It flash forwards awkwardly one year with little explanation, you and your sibling commiserate about how poor and shitty your life is, without so much as a montage of all the potentially exciting shit that went on over the past year.
Then the next handful of hours is you making enough money to start your actual adventure. You do with this awful fetch quests, most of which have absolutely no story to them or any such veneer to hide the fact that you are just traveling back and forth from A to B multiple times.
That segment just encapsulates the entire game so well for me, it's like they plainly and obviously had this idea that you would do work for this faction of your choosing, but it got severed on the chopping block for I am assuming time constraints, and instead you are doing a couple hours of horrible fucking side quests in copy pasted zones just to add back the length of the game they hacked off
|
On March 12 2011 06:09 Souljah wrote:InterviewNot sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA.
Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation. It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about things, thank god.
I guess he doesn't frequent the same forums I do *g*.
Regardless this was a major dissapointment, and I love the fact that some people are saying things like "well if you had high expectations before playing the game then you are to blame! It is a good game if you don't compare it to anything!". I just want you all to know that you are slowly killing the PC gaming scene by accepting atrocoties like a badly made multi-platform game with horrendous roleplaying elements. For shame.
|
The main thing that bugged me is that they removed so much from origins. Its just completely anoying when a sequel removes stuff from a game.
Removing the "RTS" view bugged me out like mad since I pretty much used it constantly in the first game.
The game just dosent feel as epic as Origins either, and the major lack of a story is just a letdown. Its just a bunch of sidequest untill you reach the next plotpoint.
One thing I wondered is what they were thinking when they decided to reuse the same dungeon 20times. They could atleast just port over some old ones from origins/awakening if they really didnt have any time to make more. Running through the same thing kinda ruins it the 10th time.
|
On March 12 2011 06:22 HeIios wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:09 Souljah wrote:InterviewNot sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA. Show nested quote +Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation. It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about things, thank god. I guess he doesn't frequent the same forums I do *g*. Regardless this was a major dissapointment, and I love the fact that some people are saying things like "well if you had high expectations before playing the game then you are to blame! It is a good game if you don't compare it to anything!". I just want you all to know that you are slowly killing the PC gaming scene by accepting atrocoties like a badly made multi-platform game with horrendous roleplaying elements. For shame.
What roleplaying elements are horrendous? Be specific. The way I see it, the essence of roleplaying is making choices, living with the consequences and seeing how those consequences affect the story. All of those are present in DA2, and the friend/rival system is a great companion to it. Instead of having characters that swing between the "Pissed off and leave" to "Utterly adore you and get some stat bonuses", you've got characters whose personality and demeanor changes based on the events you're taking them through and how you treat them. The system is like role-playing gold right there. The last companion character I've been able to have that kind of effect on was Anomen in BG2.
|
On March 12 2011 06:33 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:22 HeIios wrote:On March 12 2011 06:09 Souljah wrote:InterviewNot sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA. Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation. It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about things, thank god. I guess he doesn't frequent the same forums I do *g*. Regardless this was a major dissapointment, and I love the fact that some people are saying things like "well if you had high expectations before playing the game then you are to blame! It is a good game if you don't compare it to anything!". I just want you all to know that you are slowly killing the PC gaming scene by accepting atrocoties like a badly made multi-platform game with horrendous roleplaying elements. For shame. What roleplaying elements are horrendous? Be specific. The way I see it, the essence of roleplaying is making choices, living with the consequences and seeing how those consequences affect the story. .
![[image loading]](http://powet.tv/powetblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Dialogue-Paragon-Halo.jpg)
Simply this. It's insulting beyond belief.
[edit]Oh I didn't realize the great Bidby was responding to me, I'm sorry of course dragon age 2 is game of the year all years. You are completely and utterly correct.
|
On March 12 2011 06:38 HeIios wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:33 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 06:22 HeIios wrote:On March 12 2011 06:09 Souljah wrote:InterviewNot sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA. Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation. It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about things, thank god. I guess he doesn't frequent the same forums I do *g*. Regardless this was a major dissapointment, and I love the fact that some people are saying things like "well if you had high expectations before playing the game then you are to blame! It is a good game if you don't compare it to anything!". I just want you all to know that you are slowly killing the PC gaming scene by accepting atrocoties like a badly made multi-platform game with horrendous roleplaying elements. For shame. What roleplaying elements are horrendous? Be specific. The way I see it, the essence of roleplaying is making choices, living with the consequences and seeing how those consequences affect the story. . Simply this. It's insulting beyond belief. [edit]Oh I didn't realize the great Bidby was responding to me, I'm sorry of course dragon age 2 is game of the year all years. You are completely and utterly correct.
What is lost between
Method 1:
1) I'm right beside you
2) Neither can they
3) We can fight
and
Method 2
1) I'm right beside you (blue icon)
2) Neither can they (purple icon)
3) We can fight (red icon)
BG1, BG2, DAO, all three of these 'wonderous' Bioware games often just gave you two options - good or bad. They just didn't slap an icon on it. The icon just insults you, does it?
|
On March 12 2011 04:49 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 02:23 Souljah wrote:
So everyone that thinks the game sucks is wrong because YOU think its a good game? Sorry but the majority of people agree that the game is nothing but a rush job and is put together poorly.
I think the majority of people are pissed more at the decision to for a quick release just to make a buck. We all expected a good quality game from Bioware, and instead we got a rush job. If its EA's influence, then the blame falls on them. 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. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted?
Haha ya I guess, I havent seen anyone in this post complain about lock picking or wow like targeting. You kind of just made up stupid arguments so you can say they are stupid but thats your business.
|
On March 12 2011 06:22 HeIios wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:09 Souljah wrote:InterviewNot sure if anyone has seen this, but its an interview with the dumbass who was in charge of ruining DA. Show nested quote +Mike Laidlaw: We're just very happy to see it out. What we're seeing is something not really a surprise to us: we're seeing a bit of polarisation. It's not radical, it's not like people are bursting into open warfare about things, thank god. I guess he doesn't frequent the same forums I do *g*. Regardless this was a major dissapointment, and I love the fact that some people are saying things like "well if you had high expectations before playing the game then you are to blame! It is a good game if you don't compare it to anything!". I just want you all to know that you are slowly killing the PC gaming scene by accepting atrocoties like a badly made multi-platform game with horrendous roleplaying elements. For shame.
Lol I think he meant that literally as in no one is actually going to war over it. As long as that doesnt happen then he's content with the game.
|
On March 12 2011 06:51 takingbackoj wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 04:49 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 02:23 Souljah wrote:
So everyone that thinks the game sucks is wrong because YOU think its a good game? Sorry but the majority of people agree that the game is nothing but a rush job and is put together poorly.
I think the majority of people are pissed more at the decision to for a quick release just to make a buck. We all expected a good quality game from Bioware, and instead we got a rush job. If its EA's influence, then the blame falls on them. 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. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted? Haha ya I guess, I havent seen anyone in this post complain about lock picking or wow like targeting. You kind of just made up stupid arguments so you can say they are stupid but thats your business.
No. I didn't. Is it really too difficult to comprehend that I'm arguing for a little reason, common sense and SPECIFICITY in the complaining? I guess it is. Every time I post asking someone to be specific about their issues, trying to get to the REAL source of the problems behind a gigantic wall of whiny bullshit, I'm met with "ur jst a fanboi lol".
I'm genuinely interested in what's so horrifically bad about this game that deserves a rating in the 1-2 area. I'd give it an 8 myself. But, nobody seems to be articulate enough to explain the reasoning.
|
On March 12 2011 06:55 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:51 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 04:49 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 02:23 Souljah wrote:
So everyone that thinks the game sucks is wrong because YOU think its a good game? Sorry but the majority of people agree that the game is nothing but a rush job and is put together poorly.
I think the majority of people are pissed more at the decision to for a quick release just to make a buck. We all expected a good quality game from Bioware, and instead we got a rush job. If its EA's influence, then the blame falls on them. 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. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted? Haha ya I guess, I havent seen anyone in this post complain about lock picking or wow like targeting. You kind of just made up stupid arguments so you can say they are stupid but thats your business. No. I didn't. Is it really too difficult to comprehend that I'm arguing for a little reason, common sense and SPECIFICITY in the complaining? I guess it is. Every time I post asking someone to be specific about their issues, trying to get to the REAL source of the problems behind a gigantic wall of whiny bullshit, I'm met with "ur jst a fanboi lol". I'm genuinely interested in what's so horrifically bad about this game that deserves a rating in the 1-2 area. I'd give it an 8 myself. But, nobody seems to be articulate enough to explain the reasoning.
Well that argument convinces me, since people arent "articulate" and they call you a fan boi that means dragon age deserves an 8. I think it deserves a 6.5 for reasons i've already stated. Looking at all your posts the only points you've made is that everyone is dumb and the lockpicking mechanic is good. Many other people have made valid arguments for it deserving an 8 i.e. updated combat, more personal story, etc. but you have not. All you do is call people stupid and whiny. Must have been on the debate team.
My main goal is to maybe help bioware understand that this isn't acceptable by posting my thoughts with other people not go back and forth with you so I understand you think its a good game. I do not.
|
On March 12 2011 06:55 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 06:51 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 04:49 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 04:41 takingbackoj wrote:On March 12 2011 02:50 Bibdy wrote:On March 12 2011 02:23 Souljah wrote:
So everyone that thinks the game sucks is wrong because YOU think its a good game? Sorry but the majority of people agree that the game is nothing but a rush job and is put together poorly.
I think the majority of people are pissed more at the decision to for a quick release just to make a buck. We all expected a good quality game from Bioware, and instead we got a rush job. If its EA's influence, then the blame falls on them. 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. Did I not just list a bunch in the post you quoted? Haha ya I guess, I havent seen anyone in this post complain about lock picking or wow like targeting. You kind of just made up stupid arguments so you can say they are stupid but thats your business. No. I didn't. Is it really too difficult to comprehend that I'm arguing for a little reason, common sense and SPECIFICITY in the complaining? I guess it is. Every time I post asking someone to be specific about their issues, trying to get to the REAL source of the problems behind a gigantic wall of whiny bullshit, I'm met with "ur jst a fanboi lol". I'm genuinely interested in what's so horrifically bad about this game that deserves a rating in the 1-2 area. I'd give it an 8 myself. But, nobody seems to be articulate enough to explain the reasoning.
Go read through the 40 pages of everyoen giving you reasons on why this game is a big fat FAIL. The story, controls, camera angles, Quests are all plain GARBAGE.
Look at the fact that you can't even change your party members armor.. thats just plain PATHETIC. I don't know of one RPG like this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://ogrebattle.weebly.com/uploads/2/9/0/3/2903560/1029187_orig.jpg?334x230)
