DA2 Dragon Age 2 = God of War

JemyM said:

Your line of reasoning begins with a misinterpretion.
Your comment remind me about reviews that reduce the score for a singleplayer game with the comment "do not include multiplayer".

DA:O do not have a multiplayer setting, nor a module maker, so I find it natural that I judge what the two have in common; the singleplayer campaign.

Am I to judge the multiplayer setting, or the modulemaking utility, my conclusion is also very different. I had a blast playing the OC in NWN with my friends. One of the best multiplayer experiences we had. I also led a mod community for a couple of years.

Click to expand...

Listen, Jemy.

You're being obtuse.

However you approach your "judgements" is your business. I don't really care, to be quite honest.

My own personal approach is to evaluate games based on my own preferences, and what they do for me.

Were I to evaluate them objectively, as in a review - I would take into account the whole thing. If a game was released as a singleplayer game, but in a series that traditionally included multiplayer - then that would be a negative. If there was no reason to expect multiplayer, then it wouldn't necessarily be a negative - it would depend on what multiplayer would do for the game.

You can think of my approach just as you like, but you must understand it means very little to me.

Well, no.

A key function in our capacity of social interaction is our ability to not only assume that people are different, you must also give the effort to attempt to grasp someone else's point of view.

Click to expand...

Precisely.

We're not talking about social interaction, though. At least, I'm not.

I'm talking about why some games appeal more to some people, and less to others.

Whatever you tell yourself to make this utterly obvious truth untrue, is your business.

DArtagnan said:

You're being obtuse.

Click to expand...

Yes, we debated when part four of the formula would pop in.

DArtagnan said:

However you approach your "judgements" is your business. I don't really care, to be quite honest.
My own personal approach is to evaluate games based on my own preferences, and what they do for me.
You can think of my approach just as you like, but you must understand it means very little to me.

Click to expand...

To the contrary, you care too much.

You seem to have tied your own identity to games, then you use this to evaluate your identity to other people. Games is just a tool in this process.

Since you still are a social creature you feel compelled to compare this perception of your own preferences with your perception of someone elses preferences, almost like comparing your own clothes with others clothes.

The problem with this is that you keep failing to keep the games and your identity project apart and you seem to have a very low selfesteem. When you feel insecure about your identity, you either pass judgement on someone else, try to distance yourself by reminding yourself (through telling others) that people have different opinions, try to convince yourself you do not care (through telling others) or you try to build strawmans and devalue the other in order to recover your identity. This is pretty much when you have made your identity conflict someone elses business.

JemyM said:

Yes, we debated when part four of the formula would pop in.

Click to expand...

We did?

I must have missed my own participation

To the contrary, you care too much.

Click to expand...

Hmmm!

You seem to have tied your own identity to games, then you use this to evaluate your identity to other people. Games is just a tool in this process.

Since you still are a social creature you feel compelled to compare this perception of your own preferences with your perception of someone elses preferences, almost like comparing your own clothes with others clothes.

Click to expand...

You lost me, man

I'm not comparing anything, really. I'm simply saying that when you start claiming multiplayer isn't relevant for an objective evaluation - in a multiplayer focused game - you're being quite silly.

The problem with this is that you keep failing to keep the games and your identity project apart and you seem to have a very low selfesteem. When you feel insecure about your identity, you either pass judgement on someone else, try to distance yourself by reminding yourself (through telling others) that people have different opinions, try to convince yourself you do not care (through telling others) or you try to build strawmans and devalue the other in order to recover your identity. This is pretty much when you have made your identity conflict someone elses business.

Click to expand...

You have created your own little world quite efficiently

I must admit I really have no patience for personal observations at that level, at this time.

Maybe some other time.

But, if you feel unable to stick to the subject at hand - I think we better end this around here

DArtagnan said:

I must have missed my own participation

Click to expand...

That's ok, I wasn't talking to you.

DArtagnan said:

I'm not comparing anything, really. I'm simply saying that when you start claiming multiplayer isn't relevant for an objective evaluation - in a multiplayer focused game - you're being quite silly.

Click to expand...

Yes of course, because that's all going on up there.

DArtagnan said:

You have created your own little world quite efficiently
I must admit I really have no patience for personal observations at that level, at this time.
Maybe some other time.
But, if you feel unable to stick to the subject at hand - I think we better end this around here

Click to expand...

Yes, I am sure you have urgent business elsewhere and so do I.

JemyM said:

Yes, I am sure you have urgent business elsewhere and so do I.

Click to expand...

I have a guest

Still, I know you must find your own analysis very fascinating - but let's just say I don't think it's very close to who I am, really.

I suppose there's not much I could say to convince you otherwise, and since you've already decided that I care what you think - we're at an impasse, I should say.

It's not that you're not a smart guy Jemy, it's just that you have no idea what you're doing when you're dealing with people and I suspect emotions.

But, even I wouldn't go into that kind of personal analysis at this stage.

So, have fun until we meet again

DArtagnan said:

Still, I know you must find your own analysis very fascinating - but let's just say I don't think it's very close to who I am, really

Click to expand...

Some people wish others would see them for what they think they are. Others just talk about their interests and do not really care what others think about them.

JemyM said:

Some people wish others would see them for what they think they are. Others just talk about their interests and do not really care what others think about them.

Click to expand...

I care about human beings a great deal, as it's my primary interest - even beyond gaming.

I'm fascinated by the human mind.

But that's rarely on an individual level with strangers. Especially not strangers with your kind of defence in place. You have that kind of mind, that's able to block out all inconvenient signs of being wrong - which makes a debate about anything non-factual supremely boring.

If I share details about my person, it's in the hope of being understood - because it makes the message that much clearer.

You can call that "caring" about what others think, and you might be right. But not as some kind of evaluation of my person - because strangers will never have enough material to deem that in-depth, and they have to display something to pique my interest in terms of their insight. You seem more like a robot, with incredibly stolid and impossibly rigid rules for everything - so in terms of psychology, I value your opinion very little. You'd have to know something that's not based on making your world hold together, and have the will to face truths.

But you still seem like a nice enough guy, and you're certainly knowledgable about gaming and what not.

I think it's flattering that you feel inclined to analyse me - but it really IS boring, for the reasons given.

I'd much rather talk about games, and we've concluded that you don't agree that multiplayer is relevant in a multiplayer-focused game, so that's that.

On to the next topic, I'd say

Benedict said:

I'm sure if you picked a gameplay video from say the Gothics it could easily look like simplified action driven stuff (albeit much more basic and less pretty).

Click to expand...

Apples and Oranges. The Gothics are action oriented RPGs, Dragon Age was not.

Don't really understand the "less pretty" comment though...

So, after this somewhat useless discussion how about getting back on topic.

Edit: This was supposed to be before JDR's post

JDR13 said:

Apples and Oranges. The Gothics are action oriented RPGs, Dragon Age was not.

Don't really understand the "less pretty" comment though…

Click to expand...

I realize Gothic is a sacred cow around here, but I don't see where Benedict's thought is that hard to get. A gameplay clip without context doesn't tell you a whole lot, so a random clip taken from Gothic might be very deceiving about the game as a whole, just as this clip might be deceiving about DA2 (or might not be, who knows). As for the "pretty" angle, Gothic is what, 8 years old now? Safe to say 2010 graphics will be better than 2002, one would presume.

dteowner said:

I realize Gothic is a sacred cow around here, but I don't see where Benedict's thought is that hard to get. A gameplay clip without context doesn't tell you a whole lot, so a random clip taken from Gothic might be very deceiving about the game as a whole, just as this clip might be deceiving about DA2 (or might not be, who knows). As for the "pretty" angle, Gothic is what, 8 years old now? Safe to say 2010 graphics will be better than 2002, one would presume.

Click to expand...

It's not hard to get, it's just that he used an example that didn't really make much sense.

As far as the graphics go, Gothic 3 is 3 years older than DA, and looks significantly better.

JemyM said:

Restating someone elses position falsely is called a hayman and is even worse.

Click to expand...

"Strawman," actually. "Hayman" is a friendly greeting.

I retain my enthusiasm for DA2 despite all the nay-sayers. I thought DA:O was lukewarm mush, particularly in the storytelling department (normally their strength, but not here). I'm pleased they're tightening things up and bringing some of their ME2 storytelling savvy to the franchise. Hopefully they will make the combat more enjoyable, too.

As for the gore, I suspect that's just an exaggerated segment for the purposes of that two-tiered narrative structure they're using. Either that, or it's just EA being EA. They love the gore. I wouldn't make too much out of it.

Anderson said:

As for the gore, I suspect that's just an exaggerated segment for the purposes of that two-tiered narrative structure they're using. Either that, or it's just EA being EA. They love the gore. I wouldn't make too much out of it.

Click to expand...

It's funny, because I never had a problem with the gore. I think it's the wrong think to market or focus on, but I don't see it as an issue.

My personal issue with the video, is the combat system - or what we see of it. It looks very different from DA:O - and not in a good way. It looks like something where you just hack away without a good sense of control.

You might say it's hard to guage from a video, and it is - but you do learn a few things through the years, watching videos and reading previews. You pick up what the developers are going for, and the video was a pretty good match for what they seem to be doing.

I don't think it's a bad thing for the mass market, or those who don't enjoy a deeper, more tactical experience. But for me, who wanted DA:O to be on par with BG2/NWN - which it wasn't - it's the opposite direction of what I'd want.

No big thing, but I do love to bitch about prime examples of how the art can be corrupted by the corporate mindset.

I'll give BW the benefit of the doubt for now, as I tend to enjoy their games a lot. It would be a shame if DA2 did not turn out similar to DA1, considering just how good DA1 is.