Dragon Age 2: RPG Players "don't like change"

[McNinja]

What a surprise another i dislike DA 2 topic ... just like the dozen plus we had all before.
Only the OP wants to feel special he/she started a new one and not joined one of the MANY dislike topics around.

I am starting to hate the "Fans want this fans want that" rant. I enjoy bioware games even dragon age 2. For me some "fans" can just shove it. If they try to innovate the fans cry murder because it isn't the same as the previous game. If they make it the same as the previous the fans will cry that they did not innovate.

This.

Because it happens for every sequel. Ever.

Just look at all of the WoW expansions, especially the first one. Fans screamed bloody murder because their game was being changed. And it turned out ok. Then they screamed again for the next one... and the next one...

Fans of a game will always dislike the changes in its sequel, assuming changes have been made. Its just something they do. The only problem is everyone feeling that they are unique in their hatred and making several thousand threads about it.

 

[Susurrus]

If you'd actually bothered to read my OP, you'd see that I was attempting to illustrate why this is more than a fan-rant, and why the arguments against it "RPG players don't like change" is a misleading and unhelpful comment by someone trying to play down the flaws in the game.

I think the DA 2 complaints go far beyond mere fanboyism as well. There are a number of legitimate complaints aimed at central design choices, which a large number of people have changed the game for the worst.

If you're as jaded and annoyed by it as your post appears, however, why bother commenting on it? Be content with the game that you have, and enjoy it. If you like it, good for you. Do you need to continue re-affirming your love in threads made by people who didn't like it?

Incidentally, happening for every sequel ever is untrue.

I loved BG2, I thought IWD2 was an improvement, I thought that ToB, whilst not as good as BG2, was fine as a successor, I thought NWN1 was awful (because it was) and NWN2 good; MotB brilliant - way better than NWN2, and Storms of Zehir much worse. I enjoyed Mysteries of Westgate, and Dragon Age, whilst not my favorite, was a game I enjoyed.
Then I played the demo for DA2, and couldn't finish it.

 

[McNinja]

If you'd actually bothered to read my OP, you'd see that I was attempting to illustrate why this is more than a fan-rant, and why the arguments against it "RPG players don't like change" is a misleading and unhelpful comment by someone trying to play down the flaws in the game.

I think the DA 2 complaints go far beyond mere fanboyism as well. There are a number of legitimate complaints aimed at central design choices, which a large number of people have changed the game for the worst.

If you're as jaded and annoyed by it as your post appears, however, why bother commenting on it? Be content with the game that you have, and enjoy it. If you like it, good for you. Do you need to continue re-affirming your love in threads made by people who didn't like it?

Incidentally, happening for every sequel ever is untrue.

I loved BG2, I thought IWD2 was an improvement, I thought that ToB, whilst not as good as BG2, was fine as a successor, I thought NWN1 was awful (because it was) and NWN2 good; MotB brilliant - way better than NWN2, and Storms of Zehir much worse. I enjoyed Mysteries of Westgate, and Dragon Age, whilst not my favorite, was a game I enjoyed.
Then I played the demo for DA2, and couldn't finish it.

This wasn't directed at you. It was basically be agreeing. I liked DA2, and finished two playthroughs, but there are legitimate criticisms, which all seem to stem from the fact that this game spent very little time in development.

You confused me for a second there.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Then I played the demo for DA2, and couldn't finish it.

You and I will argue this until we die, but this is why your OP doesn't really hold any water. You keep attaching yourself to this general "anti-DA2 movement"...which thus far has been comprised entirely of completely ordinary internet screeching...and reinforcing the opinions of its members and adopting them as your own. Now everyone is entitled to their opinions, but unlike yourself the people whose opinions you have decided to endorse as gospel have actually played the game.

Now I use this term so often even I'm getting sick of it, but you're essentially demonstrating an enormous confirmation bias. You played a few minutes of a 50 hour game, determined through a series of extrapolations and intuitive leaps that it wasn't for you, and have gone about cheerfully endorsing any and every opinion attacking it, and blithely ignoring every opinion supporting it. You presume that your opinion represents that of the intelligent, thoughtful, strategically minded RPG fan, and you presume that the people who enjoyed the game were console fanatics, button mashers, or just individuals utterly devoid of taste or sophistication.

Why are the complaints "legitimate", but the defenses of those same complaints beneath your notice? Note that you actually have no data to go on here other that what other people are saying, and your own brief experience with a demo that has been roundly condemned even by the game's most ardent supporters. I've not heard you say "I could be wrong" or "Perhaps I judged too quickly" once. Not once. You have clung to your assertion that the game is fundamentally broken and not worth playing like a starving dog on a pork chop.

As always, you are welcome to your opinions, but they are based entirely on presumptions and projections. As such, you may want to assume a less authoritative tone when holding court on the many failings of a game you never actually played.

As to your classic games list...IWD? Really? It was the soulless offspring of Baldur's Gate, with all of the shoddy mechanics and none of the grandeur. MotB was excellent...Obsidian still does story like no one else, but a chore to play...that NWN engine is not aging well. I also couldn't get into Zehir, it felt so flat after Mask.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

For me, NWN was an abject failure of a game

I'll never understand how people can have such opposed views, I mean maybe you're the type of gamer who needs to be satisfied immediately by what he plays, but NWN was a masterpiece...

NWN had one of the most extensive class-mixing systems ever made and if you actually paid attention it could be surprisingly immersive, the spell system was AMAZINGLY extensive to the point that after playing it for years I couldn't tell you what most spells do.

Also, I probably wouldn't make a statement about an entire group of gamers because they happen to have a different opinion on a game(this isn't necessarily addressed to the OP).

 

[Atmos Duality]

So they're seeing roughly equivalent sales with 1/3rd the development time.

Mercy me, they must be shaking in their boots over at EA/Bioware.

They're not, 400.000 of those sales were Pre-Orders, especially since they had the "Signature Edition" with free content like the 7$ NPC if you ordered 1 month before release. At the time of release Reviews and public opinion didn't hit and didn't have an impact and DA2 also lived off of the relative success of Dragon Age: Origins.

Only sales in coming weeks and Dragon Age 3 can tell what impact DA2's quality has had on the franchise.

Given the average shelf-life and media/advertising exposure of such games, I think your best bet would be to wait on the sales numbers to the end of April.
I've seldom seen such a polarized response in reviews like this before; it should make for an interesting study in popularity if nothing else.

Good work dredging up the numbers.

 

[ryai458]

I just finished DA2 and loved it I'm not going to get DA because the combat looks boring, and who wants to be bored while playing a game.

 

[Harry Mason]

Wait, Dragon Age 2 is slicker and flashier, therefore it is "homogenized?" Though I loved it, Dragon Age: Origins was about as homogenized as something can get. It was a textbook copypaste of every traditional Western RPG made in the past 30 years.

Dragon Age 2 might be shorter, have shallower RPG elements, and look more modern, but I had a blast playing it. I'm not saying that the complaints aren't warranted, just that considering how much FUN you had with the GAME is important.

Christ. It's like people complaining about 4th Ed. D&D after the quagmire that was 3rd Ed. "It's not confusing, and interface is clean! I'VE BEEN ABANDONED!"

 

[Susurrus]

SNIP

My apologies: I assumed that it was.

SNIP

I see what you're saying. I'm not stating that every opinion is correct, and I agree, I can't comment on the game. All I can say is that the combat and mechanics that I saw in the demo were so entirely not what I expected/wanted/liked that there was absolutely no way I was going to buy the game.
Arguably, my opinions have more weight than they should, simply because a lot of people are making their judgments from the same position as I am.
You can argue that that makes our judgment less valid - that's fine, as far as it goes. BUT, the failure was by the devs in making a rubbish demo (and indicating that the game was driven by rubbish mechanics). Further, the idea that I'm going to spend £30 to see that the game does/does not validate my opinions at this time is clearly idiotic.

In addition - the IWD2 comment was misleading. I meant to put in, and forgot to, that IWD2 was an improvement on IWD1. I failed. Its nowhere near as good as BG2/PS:T/NWN2.

SNIP

Ahem. There was nothing wrong with the mechanics - from that standpoint, the game was great. What wasn't great was the disjointed storyline. For me, it never once came together. If you experienced it differently, fine, but I really thought it sucked. Also: immediate satisfaction? No. My favorite game, and the one I've played most is PS:T.

 

[Susurrus]

SNIP

Fair enough, yes, it was v. similar to many other Western RPGs.

I just felt that DA2 seemed to be much more similar to ANY NUMBER of action games.

 

[Instant K4rma]

So you didn't like the game? Cool, don't play it.

If you'll excuse me, I'll go finish my third play through.

/opinion

 

[michael87cn]

I tried to like Dragon Age 2. I really did. But I feel cheated by the demo. It displayed a different type of game I believe.

I ended up trading it in half-way through the game for a loss of $40.

Oh well. I've wasted more money than that bef...wait no I haven't.

 

[Harry Mason]

SNIP

Fair enough, yes, it was v. similar to many other Western RPGs.

I just felt that DA2 seemed to be much more similar to ANY NUMBER of action games.

It is very... God of War, yes. Thing is, I enjoyed God of War...

 

[Laxman9292]

http://www.vgchartz.com/

Dragon age 2 700 k
DAO 3.2 Million

Anything else you wana add?

A game that has been out for almost a year has sold more copies then a game that has not even been out for 20 days? Color me shocked! :0 Either you know this was a stupid comparison and did it anyways to see if you could fool anyone, or you are an idiot. Make a better argument next time. As it were my friend called me as soon as he started playing to tell me how much better it was than the first one, and he loved DA:O. Give DA2 some more time before throwing sales numbers around pretending like they mean something.

 

[McNinja]

Ahem. There was nothing wrong with the mechanics - from that standpoint, the game was great. What wasn't great was the disjointed storyline. For me, it never once came together. If you experienced it differently, fine, but I really thought it sucked.

I agree. the game mechanics were fantastic, and far superior to DA: O. The story was fine, actually, except for one thing: there was no closure. Think about it. What was resolved? Sure you make Qunari leave, but it felt so empty, like a hollow victory. This was because it changed nothing. After the Qunari leave, it's still the same Kirkwall, with the same hordes of mercenaries and thugs throwing themselves to the nightly slaughter at Hawkes hands. And at the very end, what is resolved? Nothing. In fact, things get worse. Any story should be self-contained, like ME2. In Mass Effect 2, you blew up the collector base, and the mission was a success. In DA 2, you fight then at the end... nothing comes to a close. The mission you were on keeps going off a cliffhanger. Had anything been resolved, I would have liked it a whole lot more than I did.

 

[lucky_sharm]

The button-mashing point was leading, I suppose - but what I meant was a frenetic, bounce-around style, where everything happens fast, everything is rather jumpy, and its impossible to tactically plan - which is all supported by the wave system of enemies, etc. The art style fits with the game, but its not a type of game I like, and it certainly doesn't come under RPG, in my opinion.

Whoa, you're kidding, right? "impossible to tactically plan"? True if you're on a playthrough that involves never using the Pause button a single time. You're characters will only lunge or jump towards enemies if you manually command them to so there's not much jumping around as you make it out to be. You don't seriously see this game as a button masher, do you? I mean, you could consider it one if you're playing on Casual or Normal, but if not then you probably won't make it very far through the game playing it as a button masher. Enemies appear in waves? Gotta pause and reposition and command your party members in order to stop these baddies. Is that not tactically planning right there?

 

[Togs]

Completely disagree with you on Origins, it was hard not to hear a death rattle when playing it everyting was so outdated.

With DA2 Bioware tried and failed rather badly to mix up the formula with some modern paradigms.

Ultimately it breaks down into is it better to try and fail or just churn out the same old crap?