Betrayaaaal, Be-trayal! Betrayed Me!

[TornadoCreator]

I have to agree with FLD here. There's no way DA2 can compare to DA:O. From a storytelling perspective it's boring, trite, and lacks the scope and scale of the first by a massive margin. Gameplay wise it's homogeneous crap, if anything it reminds me of Final Fantasy XIII in the was it keeps you going down featureless hallways allbthe time.

 

Edit:

Here's some good eloquent reviews.

 

And the second game...

Edited July 11, 2014 by TornadoCreator

[Strangelove]

I'm so glad Ive never felt betrayed by a videogame. Im as cynical and bitter as they come, but I tend to just deal with videogames by a game-by-game basis.

I suppose some would say I have bad taste though. After all, I like RE6, DA2, ME3, and the new Tomb Raider. All those games got torn apart because they weren't like their predecessors and I agree that they aren't, but I dont agree that theyre bad because of it.

Maybe you guys shouldn't put so much faith in developers and publishers. If it was just one guy making the product, I can see that. Im way more critical of musicians and directors than I am of 100+ team of game developers. Its easier to gauge what a room of 4 guys with guitars and drums or a director and writer are going to do than a multistory office of nerds.

 

At the very most all you can really gauge a developer on is quality. If it is a well made and/or competent product. Whether the mechanics, themes or story are what you want, thats a whole other thing. Thats a creative thing that will always be subjective. 

Another thing to always keep in mind is that were the minority. The ones who write paragraphs about why we like or hate a videogames on internet forums. Very few care about what we think. The irony is that we like videogames so much that we become so informed that were pretty much worth less than the average gamer. Were the ones gauging how much a game is worth and almost never buying on release date for full price, whether dlc is a ripoff, rejecting free to play, waiting for ridiculous Steam deals, buying used, and sometimes pirating to "demo" it. Don't get me wrong, were right, but at the end of the day, were not really worth it. We care about very minuscule things that other people dont even notice and we scrutinize over it. A lot of hardcore gamers love overly complicated shit. We love rpgs with shitloads of stats and subsystems, we love 120 hit combos, we love 60 frames per second, we love 100 different shooter modes, we want 200 minigames in our open world games not so we can play them, but because "immersion", and shit like that goes unnoticed by the people willing to buy a full priced game.

Seriously, "immersion", "ludonarrative dissonance", and whatever other buzzword can suck my dick. Were just assholes.

 

 

Anyways, I guess I didnt like that Uncharted 3 didnt have cheat codes. Those were a lot of fun in the first 2 games.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Strangelove

[Alex Heat]

I felt betrayed by King of Fighters XII. I'm a big KOF fan and those games are pretty niche so I like to think I'm supporting the franchise when I buy those games. In return for my loyalty I expect a certain degree of effort. But KOF XII was so lazy it was insulting. There were barely any characters, there was no story mode, and arcade mode was five matches long and didn't even have a boss. Are you fucking kidding me? I paid full price for this? The online play didn't even work right and it was bare bones even when it did work. It was years before I bought KOF XIII, and that was only because it was ten bucks on steam.

 

I still don't understand how SNK could afford to put of XII in the condition it was in.

 

Maybe if they weren't so busy spending like a month making a character with their convoluted sprite making process.

[TCP]

Ok you guys are crazy. Final Fantasy XIII, while no means a great game, was a much better game than either Dragon Age. Sorry but both Dragon Age games are just bad, lifeless, soulless, and bland, and nowhere near the upper echelon of fantasy RPGs of last gen like Skyrim and uhhh.... ...man last gen sucked for fantasy RPGs. The only benefit 2 had over the first was the improved combat system. 

 

[Mr. GOH!]

Bungie. The motherfuckers made awesome Mac games in the 90's, and then promised this wonderful game called Halo with a persistent open-world; it was to be an equally single-player and multiplayer shooter with long-term strategy elements, great vehicles, and a mysterious world to explore. Steve Jobs even mentioned it in a keynote in 1999, I believe. 

 

Then Microsoft gave Bungie a dump truck full of money and Bungie compromised their vision to deliver the achingly boring, linear, ugly, and simple Xbox game we all know. Stab in the fucking back.

 

Edit: Cowboy, you're just trolling now. 

Edited July 11, 2014 by Mr. GOH!

[TCP]

Yeah fuck Halo. And fuck PC gaming that's not on Apple. 

[toxicitizen]

Seriously, "immersion", "cognitive dissonance", and whatever other buzzword can suck my dick. Were just assholes.

Immersion isn't a buzzword, what are you on about? Lack of immersion can kill a game pretty quickly, especially exploration-based ones like RPGs. Also, cognitive dissonance is a very real psychological concept. I think you meant ludonarrative dissonance? Also not a buzzword. Not exactly something to brag about. I can already see the bullet points on the back of the box:

 

• Side quests!
• Guns!
• Game mechanics completely at odds with the narrative!

[toxicitizen]

Ok you guys are crazy. Final Fantasy XIII, while no means a great game, was a much better game than either Dragon Age. Sorry but both Dragon Age games are just bad, lifeless, soulless, and bland, and nowhere near the upper echelon of fantasy RPGs of last gen like Skyrim and uhhh.... ...man last gen sucked for fantasy RPGs. The only benefit 2 had over the first was the improved combat system.

I'm not one to needlessly hate on FFXIII, it wasn't the greatest but I enjoyed it for what it was. But you are out of your goddamned mind, son! Dragon Age: Origins was better than FFXIII. It was better than Skyrim (I mean, what game wasn't???). It was better than Uncharted 3!

[TornadoCreator]

Ok you guys are crazy. Final Fantasy XIII, while no means a great game, was a much better game than either Dragon Age. Sorry but both Dragon Age games are just bad, lifeless, soulless, and bland, and nowhere near the upper echelon of fantasy RPGs of last gen like Skyrim and uhhh.... ...man last gen sucked for fantasy RPGs. The only benefit 2 had over the first was the improved combat system. 

 

WHAT!!! There's no way you.... oh, I get it.... It's a joke, you're being humerous.

 

...right? ...riiiiight?! :'/

[Alex Heat]

I enjoyed DA:O, but I'm not going to lie.  Everything about the game ran at glacial pace.

 

And I enjoyed Hawke far more than the Warden, but I also seriously hate silent protagonists with 'fill in the blank' personalities.  Granted, Hawke's tendencies are still decided by the player, but s/he's still got things going for them outside of those 'decide if you're going to be nice/a snarky jerk/violent' moments.

[Strangelove]

 

Seriously, "immersion", "cognitive dissonance", and whatever other buzzword can suck my dick. Were just assholes.

Immersion isn't a buzzword, what are you on about? Lack of immersion can kill a game pretty quickly, especially exploration-based ones like RPGs. Also, cognitive dissonance is a very real psychological concept. I think you meant ludonarrative dissonance? Also not a buzzword. Not exactly something to brag about. I can already see the bullet points on the back of the box:

 

• Side quests!
• Guns!
• Game mechanics completely at odds with the narrative!

 

 

I don't mind those things existing, but I mind that they're a reason to hate on games when they dont meet the requirements of a bunch of obsessive nerds. If a life bar or a menu breaks your immersion(people seem to have this problem with Assassin's Creed, even though it's part of the game at it's core gameplay and storywise), you are a sad pathetic human being. Its still just a fucking videogame.

And as for ludonarrative whatever the fuck, why does that even matter? So few games take themselves seriously that its almost a moot point. Nathan Drake and Mario are serial murderers on about the same scale and I pretty much take their stories just as serious. And so do the people who make the games. It shouldn't be a fucking problem for anyone with even a bit of imagination and creativity.

I just dont understand overthinking about something meant to be fun. Videogames, blockbuster movies, pop songs, waterparks, theyre just supposed to be fun. Theyre not trying to be something else. If you have to overthink about anything, do it over something that matters and deserves it. Theres tons of art films out there to overanalyze. Not to mention artsy pc games. Those WANT you to think harder and dig deeper.

[Strangelove]

Dragon Age Origins is a very good, yet very boring game. Its slow and meandering as fuck. The game itself isnt very "fun" or particularly well written, but it is very (get ready for it) immersive. Its a big world with a large scale with lively towns and creepy dungeons. It pulls off what it wants to do really well.

 

Female Hawk is basically femshep, thats one of the reasons I like that game.

 

 

And FF13 is a game that gets fun about 60-70 hours in. Before that it's as fun as.....Dragon Age Origins.

 

Overall, DA Origins wins...though id never say its a great game. 

Edited July 11, 2014 by Strangelove

[TornadoCreator]

I couldn't disagree with you more Strangelove. Your view of video games is actually rather upsetting. That you fail to see a piece of art and insist games have to be "fun" is such a wild oversimplification that I find it insulting. Spec Ops: The Line isn't fun it's disturbing, Silent Hill 2 isn't fun it's frightening, Journey isn't fun it's relaxing or contemplative. Sure fun is great, it's why I play Mario games; but it's not all games can offer. 

 

You choose to downplay story, character development, and atmosphere. I consider them of paramount importance. Breaking immersion, cognitive or ludonarrative disodence, inconsistant art style etc. these things ruin games for me however it's clear I enjoy games on a far deeper level than you; and that's not meant as personal criticism.

 

It would be like you only wanting Warner Bros. cartoon shorts and wondering why people complain about plot holes or inconsistent characters in film; after all if it makes you laugh it's fine. What we get from video games is entirely different; but I have to question why you purposesly refuse to look at the deeper elements.

[Vecha]

 

ME2 > ME3 > ME1

DA2 > DA1

 

 

I agree with you in ME. ME2 and 3 are vastly better games, from both gameplay and storytelling perspectives than the original. 

 

They sure are.

 

I say we remake Baldur's Gate(or just call a new game BG3?) but with better gameplay. But by better gameplay, I mean hack n slash. 'Cause I mean...they were trying to have them hack and slash at one another right?

 

 

XD

Edited July 11, 2014 by Vecha

[toxicitizen]

I don't mind those things existing, but I mind that they're a reason to hate on games when they dont meet the requirements of a bunch of obsessive nerds.

I don't get people who feel the need to be so defensive about games. I mean, shit, I love games too but that doesn't make them above criticism. You do realize it's fine to criticize something you love, right?

 

I don't mind those things existing, but I mind that they're a reason to hate on games when they dont meet the requirements of a bunch of obsessive nerds. If a life bar or a menu breaks your immersion(people seem to have this problem with Assassin's Creed, even though it's part of the game at it's core gameplay and storywise), you are a sad pathetic human being. Its still just a fucking videogame.

That's a massive oversimplification and you know it. Immersion is about more than just any one element, it's about believing enough in the fake world you're spending time in to "forget" that it's fake. Suspension of disbelief is another way to look at it. It's like watching a movie and the acting is so bad you can't take it seriously anymore.

 

And as for ludonarrative whatever the fuck, why does that even matter? So few games take themselves seriously that its almost a moot point. Nathan Drake and Mario are serial murderers on about the same scale and I pretty much take their stories just as serious. And so do the people who make the games. It shouldn't be a fucking problem for anyone with even a bit of imagination and creativity.

I just dont understand overthinking about something meant to be fun. Videogames, blockbuster movies, pop songs, waterparks, theyre just supposed to be fun. Theyre not trying to be something else. If you have to overthink about anything, do it over something that matters and deserves it. Theres tons of art films out there to overanalyze. Not to mention artsy pc games. Those WANT you to think harder and dig deeper.

Why in the name of fuck would you want to limit what people can think about? If people can look for messages and hidden meanings in Michael Bay movies, of all fucking things, then they can do so in games too. It's fine if you don't care about it but to suggest it shouldn't be done at all? I don't even know what to say to that... It's just intellectually lazy. I don't know where you stand on the whole "games are/aren't art" thing but if we want games to be taken seriously then we need to start thinking about them seriously at some point.

 

Cinema started out in a place much like where games are today. How do you think it made the jump to becoming a respected art form? A great work isn't enough, there needs to be people to think about and analyze that work. The people talking about ludonarrative dissonance are doing just that. And I mean people who actually understand it and do proper analysis of games, not just idiots on reddit who are trying to sound smart.

[Strangelove]

I couldn't disagree with you more Strangelove. Your view of video games is actually rather upsetting. That you fail to see a piece of art and insist games have to be "fun" is such a wild oversimplification that I find it insulting. Spec Ops: The Line isn't fun it's disturbing, Silent Hill 2 isn't fun it's frightening, Journey isn't fun it's relaxing or contemplative. Sure fun is great, it's why I play Mario games; but it's not all games can offer. 

 

You choose to downplay story, character development, and atmosphere. I consider them of paramount importance. Breaking immersion, cognitive or ludonarrative disodence, inconsistant art style etc. these things ruin games for me however it's clear I enjoy games on a far deeper level than you; and that's not meant as personal criticism.

 

It would be like you only wanting Warner Bros. cartoon shorts and wondering why people complain about plot holes or inconsistent characters in film; after all if it makes you laugh it's fine. What we get from video games is entirely different; but I have to question why you purposesly refuse to look at the deeper elements.

 

I dont think I ever said anything like that. if anything, I feel the exact opposite. I love Spec Ops The Line and I am still to this day disturbed how people criticize it for having average gameplay. Its supposed to have average gameplay. Thats the point. Its not supposed to be fun. I also love Silent Hill 2. Horror can be fun in a summer movie kind of way, or it can be disturbing. SH2 is meant to be very unfun and very disturbing and it does it well. And Journey is just amazing. 

And actually, I tend to not play games if they dont have a story.

My point is that not all games are the same, and whats worst, Spec Ops, SH2 and Journey make up less than what, less than 1% of all the games out there? We'll probably never get another Spec Ops, SH got run into the ground and god knows when Thatgamecompany will make another game. These exceptional "unfun" games are almost nonexistent.

Most games just strive to be fun distractions with nothing meaningful to say or make you feel because thats what most people want. Its the same thing most people want from their movies and music. Thats why that stuff is so much more popular.

 

I think everything needs to be judged in it's own way depending on what it's trying to do. I don't compare Super Monkey Ball to Bioshock, Scary Movie to Antichrist, or The Backstreet Boys to Leonard Cohen. They're not trying to do the same thing and I wont overanalyze what doesnt mean to be overanalyzed just so i can tear it down. Im not going to waste my time looking for meaning in an Nsync song. 

But thats not to say that these people will stick to the same thing every time. Some people will switch genres and themes and all I can hope for is that they do that well, if I am at all interested in the direction theyre going. Not everything is made for everyone, even if its from the same source.

[toxicitizen]

I think everything needs to be judged in it's own way depending on what it's trying to do. I don't compare Super Monkey Ball to Bioshock, Scary Movie to Antichrist, or The Backstreet Boys to Leonard Cohen. They're not trying to do the same thing and I wont overanalyze what doesnt mean to be overanalyzed just so i can tear it down. Im not going to waste my time looking for meaning in an Nsync song. 

But thats not to say that these people will stick to the same thing every time. Some people will switch genres and themes and all I can hope for is that they do that well, if I am at all interested in the direction theyre going. Not everything is made for everyone, even if its from the same source.

Analyzing doesn't mean comparing everything together. I'm not sure where you got that from. And it's not just about tearing it down, either. If you go to the trouble of analyzing something then it must be doing some things right otherwise why would you even bother?

 

As for not analyzing things that don't mean to be analyzed, well that's just irrelevant. Creators don't get a say in whether or not their work is placed under scrutiny. And their intended meaning is hardly the only one that has value to it.

[Strangelove]

 

I don't mind those things existing, but I mind that they're a reason to hate on games when they dont meet the requirements of a bunch of obsessive nerds.

I don't get people who feel the need to be so defensive about games. I mean, shit, I love games too but that doesn't make them above criticism. You do realize it's fine to criticize something you love, right?

 

I don't mind those things existing, but I mind that they're a reason to hate on games when they dont meet the requirements of a bunch of obsessive nerds. If a life bar or a menu breaks your immersion(people seem to have this problem with Assassin's Creed, even though it's part of the game at it's core gameplay and storywise), you are a sad pathetic human being. Its still just a fucking videogame.

That's a massive oversimplification and you know it. Immersion is about more than just any one element, it's about believing enough in the fake world you're spending time in to "forget" that it's fake. Suspension of disbelief is another way to look at it. It's like watching a movie and the acting is so bad you can't take it seriously anymore.

 

And as for ludonarrative whatever the fuck, why does that even matter? So few games take themselves seriously that its almost a moot point. Nathan Drake and Mario are serial murderers on about the same scale and I pretty much take their stories just as serious. And so do the people who make the games. It shouldn't be a fucking problem for anyone with even a bit of imagination and creativity.

I just dont understand overthinking about something meant to be fun. Videogames, blockbuster movies, pop songs, waterparks, theyre just supposed to be fun. Theyre not trying to be something else. If you have to overthink about anything, do it over something that matters and deserves it. Theres tons of art films out there to overanalyze. Not to mention artsy pc games. Those WANT you to think harder and dig deeper.

Why in the name of fuck would you want to limit what people can think about? If people can look for messages and hidden meanings in Michael Bay movies, of all fucking things, then they can do so in games too. It's fine if you don't care about it but to suggest it shouldn't be done at all? I don't even know what to say to that... It's just intellectually lazy. I don't know where you stand on the whole "games are/aren't art" thing but if we want games to be taken seriously then we need to start thinking about them seriously at some point.

 

Cinema started out in a place much like where games are today. How do you think it made the jump to becoming a respected art form? A great work isn't enough, there needs to be people to think about and analyze that work. The people talking about ludonarrative dissonance are doing just that. And I mean people who actually understand it and do proper analysis of games, not just idiots on reddit who are trying to sound smart.

 

 

I dont have any agenda to push. At the end of the day I dont lie to myself about it. I am never going to do anything about the things that bug me. Do other people realize that all they do is bitch and bring other people down? Put aside how superior people feel over others, is there a point? How many people see a terrible game, talk shit about it and go home and start coding? Almost none.

The overanalytical are useless.

At the end of the day, its the creative and imaginative that change things, not the critics. Often times those people can be one and the same, but I doubt they got anywhere by just ridiculing everything under the sun.

 

and I really doubt film became a real artform because a bunch of nerds whined to people who didnt give a damn and said "If you shut the fuck up and stop crying, we'll say it's art. Sheesh."

Because thats what hardcore gamers have been doing for years. If its meant to be art, it'll become art. Shit, a lot of things that arent art are now art. Most things are art. It'll just eventually happen. You dont need a neighborhood committee to make it happen.

 

Not to mention that maybe were pushing things to a place they dont want to be yet. We cant have every movie be Schindler's List.

 

Honestly, at the end of the day I suppose it doesn't bother me because things are going to move at their own pace. Those who strive and try really hard to push games toward an artform are pushed back by those who don't care. No matter what, things go as planned. I just let people play their Candy Crush Saga.

[Strangelove]

 

I think everything needs to be judged in it's own way depending on what it's trying to do. I don't compare Super Monkey Ball to Bioshock, Scary Movie to Antichrist, or The Backstreet Boys to Leonard Cohen. They're not trying to do the same thing and I wont overanalyze what doesnt mean to be overanalyzed just so i can tear it down. Im not going to waste my time looking for meaning in an Nsync song. 

But thats not to say that these people will stick to the same thing every time. Some people will switch genres and themes and all I can hope for is that they do that well, if I am at all interested in the direction theyre going. Not everything is made for everyone, even if its from the same source.

Analyzing doesn't mean comparing everything together. I'm not sure where you got that from. And it's not just about tearing it down, either. If you go to the trouble of analyzing something then it must be doing some things right otherwise why would you even bother?

 

As for not analyzing things that don't mean to be analyzed, well that's just irrelevant. Creators don't get a say in whether or not their work is placed under scrutiny. And their intended meaning is hardly the only one that has value to it.

 

 

I dont know how to put it. I guess Id just rather watch Charlie Rose and hear good directors and actors talk about their creation than a show like "The Talking Dead". I just dont get a show like "The Talking Dead." It just seems obsessive over something that doesnt deserve to be obsessed over. That show is a piece of shit.

[TheMightyEthan]

My contribution to the Dragon Age discussion:

 

Dragon Age is slow.  Slow != bad.

 

I also agree with some of the things Strangelove has said.  Some people really do complain that having health bars in Assassin's Creed breaks their immersion, and that's just silly (equally as silly as the original creator who came up with the modern frame specifically because he felt like the HUD elements needed an in-game explanation in order to not ruin the experience).  I do agree that immersion is important, in the sense of suspension of disbelief, but saying really basic things like HUDs or regenerating health break your immersion is just as silly as saying film grain or cigarette burns break your immersion in film, or the fact that Elmer Fudd doesn't die when he gets shot in the face breaks your immersion when watching Looney Toons.

 

Likewise, for me ludonarrative dissonance only becomes an issue if the game presents itself as though you have choices, but then the narrative doesn't react accordingly (which is not to say your choices have to have the "right" consequences, just that the game needs to acknowledge them).  Take for instance Catherine, which I love to rant about:  in gameplay you get to do all kinds of things to indicate whether you want to be with Catherine or Katherine, but no matter what you do as soon as a cutscene starts Vincent flips out about how he wants nothing to do with Catherine and only wants to be with Katherine.  It's jarring.  If a game doesn't want to give me choices that's fine, whatever, but don't design it so that I feel like I have choices but then as soon as my character's in a cutscene he acts in a way that's completely counter to the way I've played him to that point.  But stuff like Drake being a mass murderer?  Who the fuck cares?  It's silly to take a work any more seriously than it takes itself (the one exception to this being if it's doing something harmful to society overall, such as reinforcing negative stereotypes or something).

[Strangelove]

For the record, Im criticizing myself more than criticizing others. I kind of hate how overanalytical I am. I dont feel its healthy to have discussions on videogames to the length I tend to have them. I hate that i feel so strongly about my opinions on the matter. Im part of the group Im talking shit about. Fully. Im not trying to insult anyone, im just trying to put shit into some perspective.

 

I just think we as a community should ease up on our "prickness." For a bit. Maybe.

[toxicitizen]

I dont have any agenda to push. At the end of the day I dont lie to myself about it. I am never going to do anything about the things that bug me. Do other people realize that all they do is bitch and bring other people down? Put aside how superior people feel over others, is there a point? How many people see a terrible game, talk shit about it and go home and start coding? Almost none.

The overanalytical are useless.

At the end of the day, its the creative and imaginative that change things, not the critics. Often times those people can be one and the same, but I doubt they got anywhere by just ridiculing everything under the sun.

Not everyone is a programmer, game designer or musician or filmmaker. What's your point? Just because you're not going to make a work of art yourself hardly means you shouldn't criticize them. Some people study those things and never go on to make them. Their interest in them is purely academic. How is a medium supposed to improve if no one ever voices their problems with it? Again, what you're saying just strikes me as intellectually lazy. Analysis isn't useless, looking at and thinking about things academically isn't useless.

 

And just to be clear, I don't mean the average gamer here. Those guys tend to be idiots who have no idea what they're talking about. You're not going to find thoughtful game analysis on reddit. I mean smart people who are actually thinking critically about games and writing books about it. Dismissing those people as "whiny nerds" says more about you than it does about them...

 

and I really doubt film became a real artform because a bunch of nerds whined to people who didnt give a damn and said "If you shut the fuck up and stop crying, we'll say it's art. Sheesh."

Because thats what hardcore gamers have been doing for years. If its meant to be art, it'll become art. Shit, a lot of things that arent art are now art. Most things are art. It'll just eventually happen. You dont need a neighborhood committee to make it happen.

 

Not to mention that maybe were pushing things to a place they dont want to be yet. We cant have every movie be Schindler's List.

 

Honestly, at the end of the day I suppose it doesn't bother me because things are going to move at their own pace. Those who strive and try really hard to push games toward an artform are pushed back by those who don't care. No matter what, things go as planned. I just let people play their Candy Crush Saga.

It's not about "becoming art". That very concept is absolutely ridiculous. Things don't become art. They are or they aren't. It's about mainstream acceptance, not some kind of binary state. Movies were always art, even before Citizen Kane and Casablanca and what have you. They just became widely accepted as art, no one flipped a switch.

 

I dont know how to put it. I guess Id just rather watch Charlie Rose and hear good directors and actors talk about their creation than a show like "The Talking Dead". I just dont get a show like "The Talking Dead." It just seems obsessive over something that doesnt deserve to be obsessed over. That show is a piece of shit.

I've never watched that. It sounds like more of a talk show. Again, when I talk about real game criticism I don't mean the fucking IGN podcast here. That shit is worthless, no argument there. But creators are hardly the only ones with insightful things to say about their own work.

[TornadoCreator]

The problem is Strangelove, you claim to like games with a good story/atmophere but go on to defend Final Fantasy XIII and Dragon Age 2. Games that took franchises about story, atmosphere, and a deeper narrative driven game; and turned them into linear, watered-down, incomprehensible pap with nothing worthwhile to impart. You claim they're fun? When?! What's fun about these poorly written slogfests with no challenge or thought in the gameplay. These games practically play themselves.

 

Dragon Age: Origins is not perfect, it's unbalanced, relies heavily on Tolkien and Gygax tropes, and has the most unsubtle, "we cut this out of the main game because we're greedy twats and intend to charge you twice" DLC. It is however a great traditional fantasy RPG, with genuine roleplaying, customisation, and consequence in the story. The world is immersive and well realised. The gameplay is challenging and follows reasonable rules, and while lacking balance, this provides more varied challenge depending on class. It's a solid 8/10, maybe even a 9/10, and at the time was the only decent fantasy Western RPG in years.

 

Do you not see why DA2 was so disappointing? And to compare it with Final Fantasy XIII is frankly disgusting... I wish I could go over how disgusting that game was. How dare it hold the name Final Fantasy! 

Edited July 11, 2014 by TornadoCreator

[toxicitizen]

For the record, Im criticizing myself more than criticizing others. I kind of hate how overanalytical I am. I dont feel its healthy to have discussions on videogames to the length I tend to have them. I hate that i feel so strongly about my opinions on the matter. Im part of the group Im talking shit about. Fully. Im not trying to insult anyone, im just trying to put shit into some perspective.

 

I just think we as a community should ease up on our "prickness." For a bit. Maybe.

As opposed to discussions about... what? It's a hobby, discussing it is as healthy as anything else. What might not be healthy is obsessing over it to the point of getting furious about asinine shit. Making thoughtful criticism of games isn't obsessing and neither is discussing them between enthusiasts.

 

I spend more time thinking and talking about games because they're my favorite form of art/entertainment and I know more about them than I do about movies or music. But I like to look at those other two in the same way. A proper film analysis can be pretty damn interesting to read or watch.

[Vecha]

I used to argue a lot about DA:O vs. 2...but I guess I just don't care anymore.

It taught me to never, never, ever get hyped for a game again. 


Seems some learned that from ME3(though...getting a ME3 fan to agree that DA2 is similar in that regard...ha!).

Don't believe some dev telling you that everything is magical. Don't even listen to revieiws.

Listen to that guy on Youtube yelling at the top of his lungs...yeah...he's the one to listen to*



*No. Don't even listen to him. Or her.. I'm not sexist. I married a woman.