39 replies to this topic

[princesspurpleblob]

I actually agree with tempest on "memorable" NPCs. Whether I loved or hated them, all of NPCs in BG2 stood out. They are still very distinctive in my memory. In comparison, DA2 NPCs were quite bland. I think only memorable NPCS in DA2 for me were Anders, Aveline and Merrill -- only because of certain events. I remember Anders vividly due to the chantry blowing up and Aveline for her match making quest. As for Merrill, for pure annoyance. I know a lot of people like Varric but to me he did not stand out at all. He was just there. Along with many other NPCs in DA2.

And yes, Charname was very interesting indeed in BG2, while I felt Hawke wasn't interesting at all.

Edited by princesspurpleblob, 22 October 2011 - 04:30 AM.

[Lord of Al]

DA2 had potential, but it wasted its possible charm.

Hawke, what can I say? The problem was the developers wanted to leave him quite open to interpretation as a character, like all good RPG's. Sadly, there's no REAL place to take him as a character, so he ends up just a bit of a vague mercenary with no real personality.

Regarding Hawke's voice, it grated on me largely. Throughout the game, his voice has 3 tones regarding on the options you choose, kind, aggressive and humorous. EG. If you chose aggressive options a lot, and then choose a kind option, he would say it in an aggressive, brusque tone of voice.

Once I established him as aggressive and then started talking good and kind, the voice was much more bearable for me at least. "Kind" voice annoyed me.

Varric was interesting, nice character design and personality I guess, but he suffered the same as pretty much all the characters, nothing really made them stand out to me, Anders, with the diff voice actor and personality just didn't work for me, I liked Meryl, Aveline was pretty much a stone for me, Isabela lacked depth, I can say that for a lot of the characters. I liked Fenris a ton though.

If your looking for the same level or type of gameplay to BG, you will be disappointed, you say your living in the past, but I'm sorta jaded to this by now, good way to experience something new and kill time, but its not something you'll probably want to play again.

Edited by Lord of Al, 13 April 2011 - 01:49 AM.

[Jarno Mikkola]

To be honest, the near-complete lack of a villain is one of the things that I dislike most about DA2. I'm one of those people who loves and enjoys a good villain - or at least a good antagonist.

Ah, but you are seeing the game wrong, the actual real antagonist can be viewed to be ... yes, whose "Rise to Power" was this ? Hawkes, not the Blood Mages or the Templars, but Hawkes.
Just like the KotOR was all about Raven.

But I'll say that BG2 was better...

[Lysan Lurraxol]

DA2's probably the closest Bioware have ever come to recreating BG2. ME2 is a better game; but the character interaction (in terms of party members interacting with each other and the pc) and depth is stronger in DA2. Kirkwall's not a patch on Athkatla, but the structure of the game and relative freedom to pursue quests and encounters in whatever order you please is similar to BG2. It's flawed, but enjoyable, and the cast of characters if by far Bioware's strongest. It's just a shame given the hugely negative response Bioware are unlikely to try anything as experimental (read: interesting) for a long time.

[Tempest]

Hardly universal sentiments, Lysan. Originality and creativity have never been Bioware's strongest suits: fun as Mass Effect and DA:O were, they were not very original. Mass Effect was a grand space opera that resurrected a lot of old ideas and setting concepts, gave them slight twists to modernize them, and polished it all to a mirror shine. DA:O was a watered-down version of The Witcher with elements from Warhammer Fantasy. For that matter, the Baldur's Gate saga wasn't very original, either - it just brought a lot of classic story elements and mechanics from fantasy novels and tabletop games to the computer in a prominent and memorable way.

Yes, it's to their credit that they have been trying new things - see the whole suicide mission mechanic in ME2. But part of the risk in trying new things is the possibility that it won't work, and DA2's gimmicks don't work in my opinion. From beginning to end, I had a hard time caring about Hawke, Kirkwall, or most of the NPC's in DA2. They were largely bland and forgettable and I rarely became emotionally invested in any of them.

Remember that BG2 was in fact a pretty linear game. You had a strict sequence of events to go through to beat the game - escape dungeon, get money for help, do jobs for Shadow Thieves/Bodhi, break into Spellhold, break out of Spellhold, escape the Underdark, kill Bodhi, kill Irenicus. Everything else was a sidequest, but most players don't care or don't think about everything else as sidequests because the characters and stories were interesting and engaging and memorable. If you wanted to, Charname was the only mandatory party member in BG2 if you wanted to play it that way. But hardly anyone does play it that way, partially because of the terrific supporting cast (the other reason being that the player doesn't want to lose unless it's a challenge playthrough).

Frankly, I'd call Bioware very similar to Blizzard: they are masters at turning out highly refined, highly polished products. But they aren't very good at innovation and creativity, and results can be very hit-and-miss when they try.

[Gomb]

DA:O was a watered-down version of The Witcher

I really do not see the reason for the constant need to compare The Witcher to DAO as a whole and name The Witcher as the absolute winner. Calling DAO a "watered-down version of The Witcher" is, in my opinion, unreasonabe. Sure, Bioware did stole the idea of racism between elves and humans, and the witchers may have a few things in common with the wardens, but that's where the similarities end. The only things in which TW is clearly superior to DAO is the more natural atmosphere, thanks to such things as the day-night cycle, dynamic weather, (which Bioware unfortunately decided to scrap in their next-gen fantasy games) the more authentic area and architecture designs, and more lively villages/cities. These are done very well in the Witcher and DAO does not come close to it in these aspects.

However, I did not particularly find TW more "sophisticated" than DAO in terms of writing; it does have a few good moments, but most of the dialogue is just rpg small talk. If any game, then the Witcher really does lack memorable npcs, ( I know, I should read the books to know them, but the game itself did not portray any of them as particularly interesting) and while the story seemed pretty good at a few parts (I'm thinking of the investigations in Vizima, and the parts when you "teach" Alvin) it had one of the worst finales and a really dumb "plot-twist". With the different origin stories, more memorable and better developed cast of characters, I still find the clichéd plot of DAO much better written than TW. Not to mention that the better delivery of VAs also add a lot to the dialogues.
My point is: The biggest selling points for single player rpgs are usually atmosphere and writing; TW does one part better while DAO does the other, hence I do not see much point in people always pointing out how TW is more "mature".

And if there is any reason I prefer BW rpgs over others, then it is because of the humor, self-irony and trope satire. Yes, shame on me, I do not like my game to take itself too seriously. Which does not mean I do not appreciate "epicness" or "deep characters", but most games are usually just interactive versions of already established ideas and clichés ,with a few small twists here and there if done well. In my opinion, it was only Planescape: Torment which could pull off a more "original and deep" story among rpgs, and even that game had several common tropes.
On a side note: point-and-click games usually have the best stories among video games, although that genre has been quite dead for some time.

As for DA2, I think it still has the aforementioned BW flavour to it, only to a lesser degree, but I still find it enjoyable for this reason. I would not recommend it to anyone over BG2 or DAO, or even ME2, and would certainly not for anyone who is looking for an outstanding rpg. But it still has it's good points, or gimmicks, as Tempest put it (which do work, since many people seem to enjoy the game), it's just not the exact same quality to which Bioware fans are used to. Which does not surprise me, since the game was thrown together in what, 18 months? I think that all the hate just came from people expecting way too much for such a short deadline.

Edited by Gomb, 13 April 2011 - 12:31 PM.

[Zyraen]

On a side note: point-and-click games usually have the best stories among video games, although that genre has been quite dead for some time.

<== you mean the very old games like Space Quest, Kings Quest (before all the fighting came in), Quest for Glory, etc?

The only other genre of Point'n'Click that I can relate to is the Diablo franchise lol... and yes, that does have an excellent story. Hardly dead, but hardly meaningful either, very linear storylines.

Edited by Zyraen, 13 April 2011 - 11:56 PM.

[Archmage Silver]

I'd say that people tend to have selective memory when it comes to BG2, but in this crowd, most of us still play BG2, at least once in a while.

Obviously we play it, but we're obsessed with the game anyway.

I think more people outside the IE community took the time to replay BG II after it became available at Good Old Games though.

DA2 does have its merits. It is an entertaining game, at least for the first playthrough or two. It just doesn't have the replayability that BG2 had.

I'll finish DA II once more, but I think two playthroughs will be enough for me. I'll probably play through the series again in the distant future, but until then I'd say two playthroughs cover it all.

[berelinde]

Sure, Bioware did stole the idea of racism between elves and humans...

Hate to disagree with you, but BioWare has been harping on the racism humans hold towards elves since BG1. The implementation was clumsy, though, so it's easy to miss.

However, I did not particularly find TW more "sophisticated" than DAO in terms of writing...

It isn't. People have different preferences. It's human nature to claim that everything that suits an individual's tastes is "better" than what does not, but there is no truth in that assumption. Most of the writing in TW makes me roll my eyes and groan, but hey, some people do like it. Tempest, apparently. Is he wrong? Depends on who you ask.

Again, I am not blindly praising DA2. It suffers from many glaring shortcomings in all areas that define an RPG. I'm just saying that DA2 is not all bad, nor is it inferior to TW, at least in my opinion.

[Tempest]

Most of the writing in TW makes me roll my eyes and groan, but hey, some people do like it. Tempest, apparently. Is he wrong? Depends on who you ask.

Actually, I'm not a big fan of The Witcher. I was singling it out because it's the most recent and best-known example of a "dark 'n gritty low fantasy" fantasy game that actually lives up to that hype. DA hyped itself up as such, but simply put, it's not. I suggest The Witcher and Warhammer Fantasy as examples of true dark 'n gritty low fantasy settings - and come to think of it, given how tongue-in-cheek Warhammer tends to be already, I'd love to see Bioware do a Warhammer RPG (and it already has a tabletop RPG system in addition to it's flagship tabletop strategy game) that's faithful to the setting. Although staying faithful to the setting would mean doing away with several staples of Bioware's games, like interspecies romances (both parties would be burned at the stake) and actually defeating some grand evil or other - it's with reason that the Warhammer RPG book lists several enemies with a Difficulty Rating of "Impossible." The PC's just aren't that powerful. Very, VERY few individuals in the history of Warhammer *are* powerful enough to pose a modicum of a threat to, say, a dragon or a greater daemon.

[Archmage Silver]

The PC's just aren't that powerful. Very, VERY few individuals in the history of Warhammer *are* powerful enough to pose a modicum of a threat to, say, a dragon or a greater daemon.

Gotrek and Felix!

Yeah, they're unrealistic, but I like the novels.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Sure, Bioware did stole the idea of racism between elves and humans...

Hate to disagree with you, but BioWare has been harping on the racism humans hold towards elves since BG1. The implementation was clumsy, though, so it's easy to miss.

I think that the hatred between the Elves and Humans have 'always' been there in the current Western fantasy, for example this is in Lord of the Rings, the Two Towers... yes the Elves finally came to help the Humans. The whole book is actually partially because the human lord was selfish... and kept the ring the last time it was to be destroyed.
Racism is also in mentioned plenty between the Dwarves and Elves, among them the age of peace between the two races. And that's why the Legolas and Gimli counted their kills for example, and why Gimli jumped to the to the draw bridge in front of the hoard... he didn't want to get less kills than an Elf.

[Gomb]

On a side note: point-and-click games usually have the best stories among video games, although that genre has been quite dead for some time.

<== you mean the very old games like Space Quest, Kings Quest (before all the fighting came in), Quest for Glory, etc?

The only other genre of Point'n'Click that I can relate to is the Diablo franchise lol... and yes, that does have an excellent story. Hardly dead, but hardly meaningful either, very linear storylines.

Sorry, I thought point-and-click was another term for "adventure puzzle games" such as Grim Fandango, Monkey Island, Syberia etc. I meant those kind of games.


Regarding the "elf racism' topic: Sure, these kind of racial rivalries/differences can be spotted in a great deal of fantasy fiction, (the drow, just to bring up the most obvious example) but I believe it was Sapowkis' novels which popularised this "in-your-face" racism theme in fantasy fiction. Or at least I do not consider it a coincidence that after The Witcher videogame Bioware implemented a rather similar conflict between elves and humans in DAO.

Edited by Gomb, 14 April 2011 - 09:14 AM.

[Yovaneth]

Or at least I do not consider it a coincidence that after The Witcher videogame Bioware implemented a rather similar conflict between elves and humans in DAO.

I think you'll find that DA:O was in preparation before TW - it was horrendously late on the original expected date. In addition, TW is built on a (rebuilt) Aurora Engine which powered the NWN stories which was built by Bioware. So no, CD Projekt did not get there before Bioware in RPGs anyway.

-Y-

[Tempest]

Or at least I do not consider it a coincidence that after The Witcher videogame Bioware implemented a rather similar conflict between elves and humans in DAO.

I think you'll find that DA:O was in preparation before TW - it was horrendously late on the original expected date. In addition, TW is built on a (rebuilt) Aurora Engine which powered the NWN stories which was built by Bioware. So no, CD Projekt did not get there before Bioware in RPGs anyway.

-Y-

Still doesn't mean Bioware was being remotely original. Humans enslaving elves and in-your-face racism weren't new in the fantasy genre ten years ago, much less when DA:O came out. Showing it in an RPG, perhaps, but even then The Witcher beat DA to the punch.

[Gomb]

Or at least I do not consider it a coincidence that after The Witcher videogame Bioware implemented a rather similar conflict between elves and humans in DAO.

I think you'll find that DA:O was in preparation before TW - it was horrendously late on the original expected date. In addition, TW is built on a (rebuilt) Aurora Engine which powered the NWN stories which was built by Bioware. So no, CD Projekt did not get there before Bioware in RPGs anyway.

-Y-

Yes I'm aware of that, but the 2 years that separate the release of the games are not that short of a period to make a few changes here and there. I'm not saying it bothers me, because it doesn't, I just find it odd that after a The Witcher, which was a huge success among rpg fans, came out another rpg which handled the same issue in a very similar way.

Edited by Gomb, 15 April 2011 - 08:35 AM.

[Archmage Silver]

Or at least I do not consider it a coincidence that after The Witcher videogame Bioware implemented a rather similar conflict between elves and humans in DAO.

I think you'll find that DA:O was in preparation before TW - it was horrendously late on the original expected date. In addition, TW is built on a (rebuilt) Aurora Engine which powered the NWN stories which was built by Bioware. So no, CD Projekt did not get there before Bioware in RPGs anyway.

-Y-

Yes I'm aware of that, but the 2 years that separate the release of the games are not that short of a period to make a few changes here and there. I'm not saying it bothers me, because it doesn't, I just find it odd that after a The Witcher, which was a huge success among rpg fans, came out another rpg which handled the same issue in a very similar way.

I wouldn't call The Witcher a huge success among RPG fans - I think it's more of a mainstream audience success story. And yes, there's a difference between those two audiences.

[Cal Jones]

DA2 (and not DAO) reminded me of the Witcher quite a bit. Largely city-based, chapter format, pick your faction but oh look, a templar goes mad with power at the end whichever side you go for... But actually the Witcher had more freedom and your choices had more impact. The main problem for me (other than the tedious wave-style combat) was that certain characters were going to do epically stupid things or attack you even if you actually intended to help them no matter what choices you made.
I like the game, don't get me wrong, but half the time it seemed like an exercise in futility.

[Wayfinder]

I rly wanna write some 50 lines of "text"in this thread but I can't bting myself to repeat the same stuff over and over again.

Sorry EA games, I like the ME series, but blending 2 different games into 1 cheesy mash doesn't work for me. I give you that tho DA2 is the game I'll hate the most.

[Neane]

And to think that Laidaw said that it would be as good as Baldur's Gate 2.