Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I am playing as a rogue for the first run and LOVE IT! Female two-hander is probably next.

Have you encountered any bugs on your playthrough?

I've had two neverending loads and a repeating cutscene so far (nearing end of Act I).

I'm playing as a knife Rogue the first run through and it's been quite fun. If you want some amusement, look for a weapon with the 'Messy Kills' stat and prepare to see red

The only bugs I've had so far was a single neverending load, but it happened right after an autosave so no big deal

VikingScott wrote:So I'm considering getting this. Played and completed DA:O and DA:O awakening.

Whats sort of thing carries over? Minor details such as who's king/queen and who survived Vigil's keep or what city got burned to the ground?

Because although DA:O wasn't a masterpiece I was happy with it.

Who's king and queen, a few extra quests based on decisions from Awakening, and one small item from the Keep DLC, Blood Dragon Armor, a few misc references in Dialog, if the Warden lives or dies. The Mage boon ending of DA:O got retconned. ALL endings of Awakening got retconned. (the ending that you get is not one that you can get in game).

DA2 is a different game. Some wags on the Bioware boards have started calling the console version 'God of Dragon Age', due to the over the top gore (think Ninja Scroll) and need to constantly hit the attack button in some copies.

Manchu wrote:I am playing as a rogue for the first run and LOVE IT! Female two-hander is probably next.

Have you encountered any bugs on your playthrough?

I've had two neverending loads and a repeating cutscene so far (nearing end of Act I).

There's a couple quests that cannot be completed at times, depending on your actions, and a rather vicious debate on the Lily Killer quest being broken or just sick.

I went through two hander first. I agree with calling it God of Dragon Age from that playthrough, because I'd set up combos to explode dozens of faceless mooks at once.

My neverending loads were both after autosaves as well -- so there's a pattern emerging!

Who are you running with?

I usually take Bethany (although, I think Anders would probably be a better choice but made some bad leveling decisions with him early on), Merril, and Aveline.

I usually use:
Anders, Aveline, and Fenris/Sebastian.

Anders is geared up to be a 'supporter' with awesome heals, freeze capability, etc to help out either Aveline and Sebastian/Fenris/Varric with "Brittle".

I've geared my Rogue up to be able to exploit the hell out of Aveline "Staggering" people and it works great.

Aveline, in turn, synergizes like crazy from my Rogue Disorienting people.

It's absurd how fast some things die

I'm seriously thinking about restarting for Anders's sake.

BaronIveagh wrote:

VikingScott wrote:So I'm considering getting this. Played and completed DA:O and DA:O awakening.

Whats sort of thing carries over? Minor details such as who's king/queen and who survived Vigil's keep or what city got burned to the ground?

Because although DA:O wasn't a masterpiece I was happy with it.

Who's king and queen, a few extra quests based on decisions from Awakening, and one small item from the Keep DLC, Blood Dragon Armor, a few misc references in Dialog, if the Warden lives or dies. The Mage boon ending of DA:O got retconned. ALL endings of Awakening got retconned. (the ending that you get is not one that you can get in game).

DA2 is a different game. Some wags on the Bioware boards have started calling the console version 'God of Dragon Age', due to the over the top gore (think Ninja Scroll) and need to constantly hit the attack button in some copies.

I know it's a different game and that you play as a human called Hawke. ( I think...)

Sucks that my efforts in the previous game like giving the circle independance and burning Amaranthine count for nothing. So is the warden ending just he goes after Morrigan even if he refused her offer? Damn.

You can pick from three separate pre-made scenarios or import your choices from DA:O.

Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:

Bethany dies if you take her in the Deep Roads, and well...I took her

I usually use:
Anders, Aveline, and Fenris/Sebastian.

Anders is geared up to be a 'supporter' with awesome heals, freeze capability, etc to help out either Aveline and Sebastian/Fenris/Varric with "Brittle".

I've geared my Rogue up to be able to exploit the hell out of Aveline "Staggering" people and it works great.

Aveline, in turn, synergizes like crazy from my Rogue Disorienting people.

It's absurd how fast some things die

Actually, Bethany will survive if you take anders with you also.

Lord Harrab, I have to ask, wth is that icon? Is that a battle sister?

Viking Scott, No, I meant it's quite a different game. Combat, inventory, etc have all been changed or tweaked (or removed) to a greater or lesser degree.

Tip: when you get to the giant rock wraith, if you haven't already, if you need to time your heals and attacks to his pattern. Otherwise you get wiped quite easily on most settings. Make sure to use Varric to kill the adds he spawns asap or they will gang bang your whole party.

I hate most of my party. Except for Varric and Daisy, those two are fun together. I also like my sister, but the game doesn't seem to like that all too much.

I also like my sister, but the game doesn't seem to like that all too much.

Somewhere, someplace on the internet, someone is making an incest mod.

Brrr...

ATM there seems to be a variety of scandals in EA/Bioware to pick from....

Mhm, taking my time this time, I realize just how much I skipped in my first playthrough.

Seriously, I felt let down when I "rushed" through it the first time at the end. I was like "No, no, this can't be the end" but I missed so much of the game.

I seriously recommend researching this game and the general story and details about it before playing it. I just felt lost in certain situations, like when I was trying to get Isabella to move in with me (which she never does) and you don't complete her romance until the very, very end.

Things like that I felt like I did something wrong, but I really did everything right.

All of you saying that the game sucks, or its bad because its not like the original, are overly critical, and drama queens. This game is a huge success over the original.

The "professional" reviews were all printed, listen closely hear, the day or the day after the game was made. It is literally impossible to actually complete this game in two days. There is an immense amount of side quests for you to take advantage of, you just have to make sure you find and do all of them in that act before the game "time skips" you.

BaronIveagh wrote:Lord Harrab, I have to ask, wth is that icon? Is that a battle sister?

Viking Scott, No, I meant it's quite a different game. Combat, inventory, etc have all been changed or tweaked (or removed) to a greater or lesser degree.

Tip: when you get to the giant rock wraith, if you haven't already, if you need to time your heals and attacks to his pattern. Otherwise you get wiped quite easily on most settings. Make sure to use Varric to kill the adds he spawns asap or they will gang bang your whole party.

Yes, its an icon bearing sister of battle. a bit of a break from my IG girls, but she's still Imperial so thats all that matters.



On topic: i though that fighting was the final boss, imagine my surprise when the game kept going.

Oh ho ho ho...

http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment/bioware-employee-accused-of-manipulating-dragon-age-2-metacritic-scores/

Avatar 720 wrote:

I also like my sister, but the game doesn't seem to like that all too much.

Somewhere, someplace on the internet, someone is making an incest mod.

Argh, not what I was going at, at all.

BaronIveagh wrote:Oh ho ho ho...

http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment/bioware-employee-accused-of-manipulating-dragon-age-2-metacritic-scores/

I'd do the same thing, personally.

Though, I'd give it 9, I would review it if I was an employee if I really liked the game, even if it was made by my employer.

I don't see the problem here.

yeah I'm doing every single quest I come across. I guess it helps that I got the hint book so I know which quests are for the main plot so I try to do all the side and companion quests first. I just started act 3 last night and now I have a bazillion new quests to do.

One thing I do miss though is darkspawn.. they were all over the first game and there aren't too many in this one.. I dunno, maybe they'll come back toward the end. Seems like the main enemy in DA2 is a bunch of theves and slavers and thugs.

Meh, I don't miss the Herplocks and Derplocks at all. The "Blight" seemed a little too cribbed from PP to me . . .



Archdemon or . . . Toruk? You be the judge.

Karon wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Oh ho ho ho...

http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment/bioware-employee-accused-of-manipulating-dragon-age-2-metacritic-scores/

I'd do the same thing, personally.

Though, I'd give it 9, I would review it if I was an employee if I really liked the game, even if it was made by my employer.

I don't see the problem here.

The point was that, the ethical thing to do is mention that you're an employee. It's also the law.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Karon wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Oh ho ho ho...

http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment/bioware-employee-accused-of-manipulating-dragon-age-2-metacritic-scores/

I'd do the same thing, personally.

Though, I'd give it 9, I would review it if I was an employee if I really liked the game, even if it was made by my employer.

I don't see the problem here.

The point was that, the ethical thing to do is mention that you're an employee. It's also the law.

The "ethical thing"? Hah!
The "ethical thing to do" is not to waste time sleuthing one individual posting high rated scores and find out who the toolbags who just sign up that week and give a 0/10.

But hey. It's far more 'ethical' apparently to eStalk someone like they did.

That's a werid perspective, Kan.

Kanluwen wrote:
The "ethical thing"? Hah!
The "ethical thing to do" is not to waste time sleuthing one individual posting high rated scores and find out who the toolbags who just sign up that week and give a 0/10.

But hey. It's far more 'ethical' apparently to eStalk someone like they did.

Well, first of all, Kan, as one of the people that just signed up this week, though, admittedly, I gave it a 4, they can feel free to find out who I am all they like.

Second, Escapist reports that apparently this wasn't the only Bioware staffer to, possibly, be caught now. Where there's one roach, there are more roaches. Particularly when Bioware had expressed concerns abotu how low thier Metacritic scores were previous to this.

Third, it's a violation of Federal Trade Commission rules. You know, making it technically a crime.

EA's official response, from the head of their PR department, was to the effect that employees slanting reviews was normal and acceptable, according to GameReactor.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
The "ethical thing"? Hah!
The "ethical thing to do" is not to waste time sleuthing one individual posting high rated scores and find out who the toolbags who just sign up that week and give a 0/10.

But hey. It's far more 'ethical' apparently to eStalk someone like they did.

Well, first of all, Kan, as one of the people that just signed up this week, though, admittedly, I gave it a 4, they can feel free to find out who I am all they like.

Go back and reread that article you posted; most specifically the links they give. There's one in particular that I'm going to repost here.


I don't really care who you are--this is stalking. And what's worse, they were enough of a douchebag to post the information publicly. That's unfethingacceptable. And why did they do it? "Because it's the highest rated user review of Dragon Age 2 on Metacritic".

That's stupid. All they should have done was point out that it "might be an impropriety" or that "this user's reviews are suspect because they might have a link to the company".

I do not understand the disrespect the Internet has bred for people's personal information. I don't give a flying feth what they "did to you"--you don't post their fething information publicly.

Second, Escapist reports that apparently this wasn't the only Bioware staffer to, possibly, be caught now. Where there's one roach, there are more roaches. Particularly when Bioware had expressed concerns about how low thier Metacritic scores were previous to this.

"Roaches" is a strong term. I don't understand what the feth the fact that they work for the company has to do with anything.

Do the janitors who work for BioWare have to make that clear when they put up reviews? How about the lunchladies?

Third, it's a violation of Federal Trade Commission rules. You know, making it technically a crime.

EA's official response, from the head of their PR department, was to the effect that employees slanting reviews was normal and acceptable, according to GameReactor.

Find me a Federal Trade Commission ruling saying that individuals who work for a company, with no ties to the product in question, have to report who they are when they're using a personal opinion website like Metacritic. Is it a good thing? Probably not. But quite frankly, even if they'd posted "This is XXXX, I'm an employee of BioWare but this is my personal review"--people would be crying up a fethstorm.

This is much different than where we were seeing things like "professional" reviewers being paid off by the company. This is people who possibly had no connection whatsoever to the project, other than working at BioWare, putting up their review of it.

Manchu wrote:That's a werid perspective, Kan.

No, it's really not. If people are going to piss and moan about 'ethics', then they'd damned well better be in a situation where they're no casting rocks from a glass house.
I don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information on the Internet. I certainly don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information in a venue like Reddit.

If there's a problem,

Objectively speaking, DA2 is pretty bad.

The main story is kind of... non-existant. It's just a mass collection of side quests lines. Characters are weaker than in DAO, combat has been gutted in favor of being fast paced, and there are numerous glitches me and my friend have already come across. The final quests for both Anders and Merril can glitch in awkward ways, and I've found other quests occasionally don't trigger the events their supposed to forcing you to leave and reload the area. I'm also suffering the sound glitch where dialogue is not executing at the appropriate level. Tactics slots also do not execute properly. The default ones work fine. Attempting custom tactics doesn't forcing a player to micromanage every party member in combat to take advantage of the new class combos. Not that you need it. Only two maybe three fights are actually all that hard. Most of them can be breezed through with ease.

I left the game thinking that I'm not buying another Bioware game. I didn't like ME2, and DA2 took out a lot of the soul and character of DAO in favor of "stream lining." Plus the stories were horrible for both (which was a hallmark for Bioware for me, as repetitive as their stories and characters may be). DA2 especially fails to explain how the events of the game are so disasterous to all of Thedas (if you've paid attention to the lore) or why on earth anyone would want Hawk to solve the problem. Hawk isn't much of a hero. He's more of a poor sap stuck in situations he can't control. The only heroic thing he actually managed to do happens in Act 2. I was also greatly annoyed by how Bioware throws around the DAO characters for sport.

It wasn't all bad though. I was very impressed by the side quests. Many of them have interesting outcomes and really do a good job of showing unintended consequences. I also like how the party members interact with each other more on their own without the PC being there. EDIT: A certain event towards the end also wins most epic moment of gaming 2011.

I call one step forward two steps back aka Masseffect2ification. I think people who really, really, loved DAO Aare less likely to like DA2. I'm also willing to bet there will be a platform split between PC and consoles.

Kanluwen wrote:
I don't really care who you are--this is stalking. And what's worse, they were enough of a douchebag to post the information publicly. That's unfethingacceptable. And why did they do it? "Because it's the highest rated user review of Dragon Age 2 on Metacritic".

That's stupid. All they should have done was point out that it "might be an impropriety" or that "this user's reviews are suspect because they might have a link to the company".

Kan, this is the internet. Without evidence, most people would have claimed he was a liar and that there was no proof that anything was taking place. So, the guy did the logical thing, and created a record that could be examined and varified. And, in all honesty, it's good that he did, because this means that there is evidence that can be acted on.

Kanluwen wrote:
"Roaches" is a strong term. I don't understand what the feth the fact that they work for the company has to do with anything.

Do the janitors who work for BioWare have to make that clear when they put up reviews? How about the lunchladies?

Under the law, yes, though they don't have to say what they do there. The reason is that they have a vested financial incentive that the product does well.

Under the FTC Publishing Guidelines governing testimonials and endorsements, "bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service."

Kanluwen wrote:
Find me a Federal Trade Commission ruling saying that individuals who work for a company, with no ties to the product in question, have to report who they are when they're using a personal opinion website like Metacritic. Is it a good thing? Probably not. But quite frankly, even if they'd posted "This is XXXX, I'm an employee of BioWare but this is my personal review"--people would be crying up a fethstorm.

People would bitch, yes, but it would be legal. The reason this is newsworthy is that they tried to conceal this, rather then say 'I'm Bioware Bill and I think it's a good game and here's why'. Further, the head of Development for Dragon Age ii, the other person caught so far, could hardly be said to have no connection to Dragon Age II.

Kanluwen wrote:
No, it's really not. If people are going to piss and moan about 'ethics', then they'd damned well better be in a situation where they're no casting rocks from a glass house.
I don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information on the Internet. I certainly don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information in a venue like Reddit.

If there's a problem,

Kan, I might point out that, in all honesty, all the Redit user did was link three sites together containing stuff the person being looked into had posted themselves. If I put my name on Facebook and a bunch of pictures of me, where I live, and who I work for, and call that account BaronIveagh, and then go on another forum under the same name and talk gak or do soemthing illegal, who's fault is it that someone puts BaronIveagh on one site together with BaronIveagh on another site? Particularly when whatever I might have done casts a shadow on my entire company's credibility.

The Baron took the words out of my mouth.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
I don't really care who you are--this is stalking. And what's worse, they were enough of a douchebag to post the information publicly. That's unfethingacceptable. And why did they do it? "Because it's the highest rated user review of Dragon Age 2 on Metacritic".

That's stupid. All they should have done was point out that it "might be an impropriety" or that "this user's reviews are suspect because they might have a link to the company".

Kan, this is the internet. Without evidence, most people would have claimed he was a liar and that there was no proof that anything was taking place. So, the guy did the logical thing, and created a record that could be examined and varified. And, in all honesty, it's good that he did, because this means that there is evidence that can be acted on.

Bullgak.

Bull, bull, bull, bull, bull.

This was a poorly excused action on the part of a spiteful little twit. He could have been reasonable and mature, alerting Metacritic as to his suspicions and giving them the evidence--which would have led to what we saw, the review being removed.

But no. He wanted drama. He posted it all over the Internet and came out like he's some kind of 'hero' for stalking someone.

But hey, this is the Internet. Apparently it's acceptable to plaster people's personal information all over the place.

Kanluwen wrote:
"Roaches" is a strong term. I don't understand what the feth the fact that they work for the company has to do with anything.

Do the janitors who work for BioWare have to make that clear when they put up reviews? How about the lunchladies?

Under the law, yes, though they don't have to say what they do there. The reason is that they have a vested financial incentive that the product does well.

Under the FTC Publishing Guidelines governing testimonials and endorsements, "bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service."

I'm sorry, since when is Metacritic a "blogger" site?
It's not. It's user reviews.

The "FTC Publishing Guidelines" have no hold over Metacritics, and to assume that they do is ridiculous.

Kanluwen wrote:
Find me a Federal Trade Commission ruling saying that individuals who work for a company, with no ties to the product in question, have to report who they are when they're using a personal opinion website like Metacritic. Is it a good thing? Probably not. But quite frankly, even if they'd posted "This is XXXX, I'm an employee of BioWare but this is my personal review"--people would be crying up a fethstorm.

People would bitch, yes, but it would be legal. The reason this is newsworthy is that they tried to conceal this, rather then say 'I'm Bioware Bill and I think it's a good game and here's why'. Further, the head of Development for Dragon Age ii, the other person caught so far, could hardly be said to have no connection to Dragon Age II.

Who the feth says he was trying to "conceal this"?

I mean, seriously. This is the same thing that happens any bloody time that GW messes something up or they post the wrong information in the "What's New Today" post.
Stop assuming malice when there's likely none there.

Kanluwen wrote:
No, it's really not. If people are going to piss and moan about 'ethics', then they'd damned well better be in a situation where they're no casting rocks from a glass house.
I don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information on the Internet. I certainly don't consider it 'ethical' to post someone's personal information in a venue like Reddit.

If there's a problem,

Kan, I might point out that, in all honesty, all the Redit user did was link three sites together containing stuff the person being looked into had posted themselves. If I put my name on Facebook and a bunch of pictures of me, where I live, and who I work for, and call that account BaronIveagh, and then go on another forum under the same name and talk gak or do something illegal, who's fault is it that someone puts BaronIveagh on one site together with BaronIveagh on another site? Particularly when whatever I might have done casts a shadow on my entire company's credibility.

I don't give a flying feth that he "linked three sites together containing stuff the person being looked into had posted themselves".
He posted information,publicly, that otherwise would not have been tied together.

Your example is flawed and it's a half-assed justification for what I like to call the "4chan syndrome". People who feel they've been 'wronged' on the Internet somehow think it's acceptable that they put their perceived "abuser's" information out there for everyone to see.