[firefeng]

Mass Effect 2 is actually one sequel that I thought was better than the first. The gameplay was noticeably more polished and fun, although assuming you choose a particular weapon at a particular point in the game, you'll find yourself continuing the "Assault Rifle Everything To Death With Extreme Prejudice" play-route. The plot was weaker than the first, but the characterization of the protagonists was generally better, especially with their individual missions, save for a glaring few of your party members that just screamed, "HEY, BET YOU CAN'T GUESS WHICH CHARACTER ARCHETYPE I AM!" Unfortunately, it's not so much the final boss that's a joke, but the antagonist in general. You won't find an awesome bad guy like Saren in the second, and it really does detract from the story.

As for Dragon Age 2, I've played through the demo a few more times as different classes, and I'm amending my original opinion: The setting design is bland and awful, the character design and detail is vastly improved over the original. But, since you only see two areas in the demo, maybe the settings get better...the gameplay is not much different than I described it; auto-attack, mixing in skills now and then, just like an MMO. The skills are much more responsive even if the attack animations are...questionable. Overall I'd count it as an improvement, although that's dependent again on later levels to see if it develops more complexity. Battles seem much more visceral and less repetitive than before, even with the aforementioned changes streamlining the combat UI. Using Pinning Shot as an archer and seeing it fling your target several meters across the ground rather than putting little stars above its head as it stares at its supposedly pinned leg is a welcome change. So, too, is making a dual wield Rogue seemingly more lithe.

I'd say the Rogue is a bit overpowered, though. One-on-one, a dual wielding Rogue will drop targets twice as fast as a Warrior, and two Archers dropping a Barrage on a group of enemies kills them all disgustingly quickly.

[treelo]

Keylime, on 28 February 2011 - 01:15 AM, said:

What was it in particular that you did not like about Awakening? I found it to be more of the same in terms of game play and story, but there are a few gems in there. One of which being that you could entirely reset your attribute points, prestige classes, skills, and talents. You could do this for your character as well as for any party member so they could be re-purposed for any role. Some of the new characters were actually very amusing as well, granted a few were highly annoying. It was a bit short for my taste and some of the added talents were completely broken but I felt it was worth the cost on steam.

It was too easy for a start. I played through both on hard and strolled through every encounter in Awakening with ease, while Origins was quite challenging. The ridiculously overpowered extra abilities were... ridiculously overpowered. My biggest gripe is the complete lack of continuity, which extends to being able to reset your skills and talents. This is fine for your new characters who had stupid set-ups to begin with, but you're playing a continuation of an RPG, where you presumably spent hour after hour crafting your character's supposed persona and skill set only for it to be rendered completely inconsequential via a retarded "we don't mind if you don't" attitude. I believe that's a direct quote from the readme. If they had planned on making a follow-up, they should have planned the main game accordingly and made such mind boggling inconsistencies impossible in the first place. I guess most of it is a result of them doing a fairly good job on making Origins such a good game, and then sweeping much of what made it great under the carpet to rush out a cash cow.

The same applies to DA2. They've altered a number of things to "create atmosphere" or whatever it is they claim to be doing. I seem to recall reading that the panning out to an isometric view has been largely done away with allow for sweeping vistas or some such bullshit, I dunno since I've not played the demo and have no intention of doing so. Every choice they made in DA:A was the wrong one as far as I'm concerned and I don't hold much hope of them changing my mind with DA2.

Quote

Mass Effect 2 is actually one sequel that I thought was better than the first. The gameplay was noticeably more polished and fun, although assuming you choose a particular weapon at a particular point in the game, you'll find yourself continuing the "Assault Rifle Everything To Death With Extreme Prejudice" play-route. The plot was weaker than the first, but the characterization of the protagonists was generally better, especially with their individual missions, save for a glaring few of your party members that just screamed, "HEY, BET YOU CAN'T GUESS WHICH CHARACTER ARCHETYPE I AM!" Unfortunately, it's not so much the final boss that's a joke, but the antagonist in general. You won't find an awesome bad guy like Saren in the second, and it really does detract from the story.

I dunno, I think I still prefer the first. While ME2 is undeniably a better game from a genre standpoint, the weak plot and lack of equipment made it feel shallow. Yes, I actually liked trawling through endless upgrades and weapons, though I'll confess the weapon upgrades especially got rather tedious after a while. Yet it gave you the illusion of depth to accompany a nifty scenario that felt like an RPG pretending to be a shooter. I'm with you on the party member missions, they were top notch and a lot more entertaining than the central plot itself, but I didn't buy it for side-quests. I wanted more of the same, only better, and it just felt like they'd cut out huge chunks of the game. Unlike DA2, I will most definitely be buying ME3 because of the improvements they made to ME2, and just have to keep my fingers crossed that it somehow strays back into the realm of ME to combine the two in one huge ball of awesome.

[Keylime]

treelo, on 04 March 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

It was too easy for a start. I played through both on hard and strolled through every encounter in Awakening with ease, while Origins was quite challenging. The ridiculously overpowered extra abilities were... ridiculously overpowered. My biggest gripe is the complete lack of continuity, which extends to being able to reset your skills and talents. This is fine for your new characters who had stupid set-ups to begin with, but you're playing a continuation of an RPG, where you presumably spent hour after hour crafting your character's supposed persona and skill set only for it to be rendered completely inconsequential via a retarded "we don't mind if you don't" attitude. I believe that's a direct quote from the readme. If they had planned on making a follow-up, they should have planned the main game accordingly and made such mind boggling inconsistencies impossible in the first place. I guess most of it is a result of them doing a fairly good job on making Origins such a good game, and then sweeping much of what made it great under the carpet to rush out a cash cow.

The same applies to DA2. They've altered a number of things to "create atmosphere" or whatever it is they claim to be doing. I seem to recall reading that the panning out to an isometric view has been largely done away with allow for sweeping vistas or some such bullshit, I dunno since I've not played the demo and have no intention of doing so. Every choice they made in DA:A was the wrong one as far as I'm concerned and I don't hold much hope of them changing my mind with DA2.



I dunno, I think I still prefer the first. While ME2 is undeniably a better game from a genre standpoint, the weak plot and lack of equipment made it feel shallow. Yes, I actually liked trawling through endless upgrades and weapons, though I'll confess the weapon upgrades especially got rather tedious after a while. Yet it gave you the illusion of depth to accompany a nifty scenario that felt like an RPG pretending to be a shooter. I'm with you on the party member missions, they were top notch and a lot more entertaining than the central plot itself, but I didn't buy it for side-quests. I wanted more of the same, only better, and it just felt like they'd cut out huge chunks of the game. Unlike DA2, I will most definitely be buying ME3 because of the improvements they made to ME2, and just have to keep my fingers crossed that it somehow strays back into the realm of ME to combine the two in one huge ball of awesome.

I certain can see your sentiments on DA:A and while it didn't really bother me all that much, I can see why you didn't like it.

As for ME2, I thought it was okay the ending was a massive fucking let down for me but the build up was decent. The only thing that really bugged me was the damn resource scanning. It's like they swallowed the Mako parts and shit that out instead.

[Velhart]

I am liking Dragon Age 2 so far. I tried the PS3 version and PC version. The game is definitely made for consoles though, and it shows like a sore thumb. But I am loving the story, and the battle system feels a bit more interactive. I just don't like that my party members can't think for themselves, so it stops me time to time having to hold their hand for how more fast paced the combat is. It is more linear than the first, but the story is well executed enough that it doesn't bother me at all.

It does lack variety from the first one, but if you are looking for a BioWare quality story, this one definitely gives one to you. I can 100% understand if people are put off by this game if you were a major fan of the first one.

[renzuko]

blarg, im mildly annoyed, i unlocked all the free shit on my ea account using my gmail, then when i tried linking my gamertag to it, it said it was already taken...i popped da2 into my xbox, and i apparently made an account with my hotmail that i havnt used in 5+ years i emailed ea's tech support to get them to transfer or whatever, and they have another...4 hours till they've hit their supposed deadline to contact me

so i dont get to use any of the free crap i got from the newsletters and facebook game till they do this shit for me -.-;;

[Kay]

Weren't we supposed to be able to import our characters and weren't our decisions supposed to have more consequence then simply being mentioned in conversation? What happened to the strategy (I use this rather loosely here) aspect of combat from the first one? The combat in this game is fast and I while I agree that certainly has helped some gripes I had with the original, it feels too fast in some places. Who has time for strategy (and who needs it?) when cannon fodder spontaneously appears from all directions and dies in two to three hits? The graphics have certainly improved from the first, but at the cost of reusing the same areas over and over and over again. I mean, in some places they don't even try to hide it, it's literally the same table with the same papers/skull/etc. lying on it as the last hidden room/hovel/house. There is some aspect of enjoyment in this game I just can't, in good conscious, appreciate it because these things, while not game breaking, clearly show that the developer either didn't care enough or were rushed to cash in on Dragon Age: Origins. Also, what's with this idea that every game has to be "mainstreamed" (whatever the hell that means)?

Oh and it's the douchebags on Bioware's forums telling the developers that these complaints are from hardcore (fanboy) gamers, who will never be happy, that cause these problems. I mean, there are people saying that the removal of party members armor was good because they didn't want to deal with managing the rest of their team. That only one main city was better, because it was easier to keep track of what merchants had what.

I can't wait for Dragon Age 3, it should take place in only one area, preferably the final battle between the darkspawn (I don't want to read or make decisions) and I'll have just been given the most powerful armor in the game, but won't need it because mashing the A button is all it takes to win (I don't have time for strategy, I just want to kill stuff and win so I can get back to Call of Duty: 2011).

This post has been edited by Kay: 28 March 2011 - 11:53 AM

[renzuko]

yeh, the ONLY things that linked to my old play that i noticed, was merril asking anders if he knew a dalish grey warden (my gw), and apparently if you have the threesome with isabella and lelianna, at the end they recognize eachother

[Vigilous]

Kay, on 28 March 2011 - 11:46 AM, said:

Weren't we supposed to be able to import our characters and weren't our decisions supposed to have more consequence then simply being mentioned in conversation? What happened to the strategy (I use this rather loosely here) aspect of combat from the first one? The combat in this game is fast and I while I agree that certainly has helped some gripes I had with the original, it feels too fast in some places. Who has time for strategy (and who needs it?) when cannon fodder spontaneously appears from all directions and dies in two to three hits? The graphics have certainly improved from the first, but at the cost of reusing the same areas over and over and over again. I mean, in some places they don't even try to hide it, it's literally the same table with the same papers/skull/etc. lying on it as the last hidden room/hovel/house. There is some aspect of enjoyment in this game I just can't, in good conscious, appreciate it because these things, while not game breaking, clearly show that the developer either didn't care enough or were rushed to cash in on Dragon Age: Origins. Also, what's with this idea that every game has to be "mainstreamed" (whatever the hell that means)?

Oh and it's the douchebags on Bioware's forums telling the developers that these complaints are from hardcore (fanboy) gamers, who will never be happy, that cause these problems. I mean, there are people saying that the removal of party members armor was good because they didn't want to deal with managing the rest of their team. That only one main city was better, because it was easier to keep track of what merchants had what.

I can't wait for Dragon Age 3, it should take place in only one area, preferably the final battle between the darkspawn (I don't want to read or make decisions) and I'll have just been given the most powerful armor in the game, but won't need it because mashing the A button is all it takes to win (I don't have time for strategy, I just want to kill stuff and win so I can get back to Call of Duty: 2011).

I honestly don't think DA2 was made for fans of DA:O.

[pathwriter]

Vigilous, on 29 March 2011 - 06:47 AM, said:

I honestly don't think DA2 was made for fans of DA:O.

Which makes about as much sense as having Tolkien's The Two Towers written in anapestic tetrameter with nonsense words for the amusement of small children.

[Boldfinger]

pathwriter, on 29 March 2011 - 10:34 AM, said:

Which makes about as much sense as having Tolkien's The Two Towers written in anapestic tetrameter with nonsense words for the amusement of small children.

Needz moar Unwinese!

J.R.R. Tolkien said:

Are you all sitty comftybold two-square on your botty? Then I'll begin...

Now, like all real life experience stories, this also begins once a polly tito, and Bagginses Frodo, whose life evolved the ephemeral colour dreamy most, and his deep joy in this being the multicolour of the Ring. Oh yes. His home a Shireana charibold, the four-wheel folloped ft-ft-ft out the back. Now, as eve on his deep approach, his eye on the Ring. Alltime sometime deept joy of the one Ring scintyladen dangly on the spindly finger-bode. But now only close! So, gathering all behind him the hintermost, he ploddy-ploddy forward into the deep complicadent fundermold of the forry to sort this one out.