I didn't like it the first time I played, but when I did so a second time, I liked it miles more than before. Hell, I liked it enough that I went back and played it again just to see what would happen if I did some things differently. I think because I knew where to go and what to do in what order, I was able to see the narrative without it feeling schizophrenic, and I was able to really get to know the characters and develop proper relationships with them, and they all grew on me. Watching them grow and change was really rewarding. Even characters who annoyed me the first time I played I actually really started to like and grow very attached to.
Ironically, I only started to like some of the characters after deciding to be a dick to them and become their rivals and disagree with them constantly. Those paths actually turned out to be the most rewarding and felt like much more meaningful friendships, and each of the characters (including Sebastian, DLC guy) actually contributed to the story in a huge way and had interesting subplots. That's something that actually doesn't happen a lot. Even in Dragon Age: Origins the only party characters who were necessary to the events of the main plot were Morrigan and Alistair, and even then their involvement was pretty minimal.
Admittedly, another huge part of the reason I was able to enjoy it this time is because I mostly skipped over the tedious gameplay and repetitive dungeons. That area is still heavily flawed, but, yeah, I don't think Dragon Age 2 deserves the levels of ire and hatred it has received. Story wise, I think it adds a lot and fleshes out the world of Thedas in a way that Origins really only hinted at, and, having replayed it, I'm now really interested to see what happens in Dragon Age 3.
So, yeah, I think it's an entirely competent and entertaining story with good writing buried beneath bad design, rushed graphics and shoddy gameplay. Is it worse than Origins? Yes, but lots of games can be worse than Origins and still be good games.
Catie Caraco said:
I've played through it twice, and I've played through Origins 9 times. That should tell you something. Here is my breakdown:
- Spoilery... so skip if you haven't played. All of the mages you help end up betraying you except 4 I can think of, and I spent a LOT of time helping mages. And it seems all the Free Marches mages are batshit crazy and will use the slightest provocation to turn to Blood Magic and demons. Where the hell is their common sense. I know what they were building towards, but it was done so heavy-handedly that it was hard to sympathize with them.
That's kind of the point, though. If you weren't seeing mages around you constantly acting in ways that justify people's fears, and if they were unambiguously good people who are oppressed for the sake of a few bad apples, then there would be no conflict at the end of the game. You would have an unambiguously right answer to the problem, and the choice between the "good answer" and the "evil answer". I like that this game takes your expectations of "Oh, if I want to play a good guy/Paragon I should sympathise with mages," and then shoves those expectations back in your face by proving that the choice is nowhere near that simple.
That is one thing it did better than Origins. Origins never really gave you any reason to see mages as a threat and made the templars seem unambiguously crazy and wrong. By actually showing mages as a huge, uncontrollable threat in DA2, it actually turned it into a real, viable issue where there was no right answer.
I couldn't even finish it... I knew about the game changes, that was fine, but the story and characters stunk... Other reason I quit the game was because of the dam slow bug made it dreadful to play for how far I got. I know the bug is fixed, but it's to late and I am not starting over!
The same thing goes for Fallout: New Vegas and the hours I wasted in playing the game, just to have it corrupted three dam times! I know it's fixed now, but I will not play it... Don't ship a broke game! Rant over...
I realized after I posted that it would probably not make sense. The writing for each individual act was pretty good in itself, but each act felt pretty much independent. The events up until the Deep Roads felt like it was all for it's own sake, and the Qunari uprising had pretty much nothing to do with the events of either of the other acts. If they had perhaps focused on just one of those elements and expanded it into a full game it probably would have made a lot more sense.
Also: Advertisements on the Captcha?!? What the hell is this? I had to enter "All on your existing TV", after watching an ad for google TV. Holy crap this is a new low.
I got so sick of EA's marketing that I cancelled my pre-order. (For that reason, I was especially amused by the EC episode on EA marketing.) I have not played and will not play DA2 regardless of the game's quality or lack thereof.
No. A lot of people stupidly assumed it would be in the same vain as Dragon Age: Origins, and were disappointed.
Yes, there were many flaws, but it wasn't as terrible as everyone said it was.
Why would it NOT be in the same VEIN as Origins? They share a title, for Christ's sake! I can understand if people were complaining that Assassin's Creed wasn't in the same vein as Grand Theft Auto, but COME ON. It was supposed to be a sequel, hence the "2" in the name. And the differences between Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are NOWHERE near as jarring. This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard, and I pray it was sarcasm I missed.
Just because it's the same series doesn't mean it has to be the exact same game with each new instalment, like Call of Duty is. It's a good thing to change it up every now and again otherwise the series will get stale.
The problem is, people will complain about how it's the same game every sequel and then the dev will try something new and then everyone will ***** about how it's changed.
There is a difference between being a carbon copy of gameplay and being in the same vein. In the same vein means many things are carried over, not all. I felt that it was a far different experience playing 2 than Origins, as if made by entirely different studios.
I think there is a video on Youtube that sums up my feelings about Dragon Age 2
...If you have noticed,it is unrelated to Dragon Age 2 indefinatly,this means that I have never played Dragon Age 2 and am not planning on playing it anytime soon.
Dragon Age 2 was phenomenally awesome, the new DLC that came out, Legacy, is fantastic.
First off, I hadn't played Dragon Age Origins, back when I had pre-ordered Dragon Age 2. So a couple months before DA2 came out, I got the DA: Origins Ultimate edition that came with Awakening and all the DLC included, because I of course wanted to play it before DA2. Well I started up a character, Noble human. It was okay for a couple hours as I got use to the way the controls and everything worked, the story was sort of interesting. But as I played on, it just got really boring, especially having to take combat. I just clicked a button and my special attack happened, but I had no real control over it. I had no control over my main/normal attack. I often found myself mashing the A button in the hopes that my guy would attack faster, because he swung his sword like he had been covered in a think tar that reduced his movement by more than half.
When my special abilities were reloading, my guy should have ferociously swinging his sword, hit hit hit, not lazily, hit.......hit.......hit. The whole slow time to swing a sword, may, may, be "realistic" in reality, but it makes a game boring and tedious.
Another messed up and boring factor was the dialogue. It just wasn't smooth. I remember what the silent protagonist dialogue choices were like back when BioWare did KotOR, and they dropped the ball on DA:Origins. There was new easy flow to tell what kind of response I might get out of the choice I make. The response I wanted could show up anywhere on the dialogue list, but many times it wasn't clear if the choice was right. For me RPGs are mostly about story, and it is hard to keep the story flowing when I have to sit for five minutes and decipher a choice on what could be the best thing to say, when I know the best thing but the game doesn't show it.
Next comes the leveling up and ability sets. For a game that people boast as being incredibly open and customizable, it is very limiting on how abilities can be learned which ones can be put together on the same character. Learning them is too dependent on what stats the player has chosen to put stat points in each level. I know KotOR did the same thing, but there were way more stat points given out in that game and the stat cost of each level of an ability was much lower.
Lastly, people talk about the amazing graphics, but I found them adequate but not mind blowing like people hold them up as.
Now, by the time that DA2 came out, I barely had twenty hours in on Origins. I just didn't feel like playing it. But I went ahead and kept my pre-order and started playing DA2 when it came out, because it just looked three times better and much more fun.
My instincts were right, thought it was 10 times better and an enjoyable compared to Origins.
They fixed the combat entirely. When my abilities are recharging, I can get in 10 times the number of normal attacks before they recharge compared to Origins. The attack is as fast as I can press the button, so normal attacks are fast and each one probably only takes a split second to complete, so no noticeable hang time between each normal attack. On top of that, I have much much more control over my special abilities, I decide the area in which my special abilities will damage and they can hit more than the one person I am targeting. The combat is more fluid and enjoyable. In Origins I could tell that behind the scenes there was the virtual dice role on how my moves would damage, because of how slow combat was it felt slow and calculated. In DA2 the battles are ferocious, fast paced, and loud(actually sounding like a battle), it keeps the mind distracted and one doesn't notice the virtual dice rolls.
The dialogue is great. It is clean and to the point. Adding the awesome dialogue wheel was a very good decision on BioWare's part. I loved it when I played the Mass Effect games, it was a much needed change to fix the dialogue problem from Origins. It also didn't hurt that the protagonist finally had a voice of his own, instead of the person I'm playing in Origins being a mute-telepathic that mysteriously doesn't have a voice in conversations but has one when he yells things in battle. I think we can all agree that it would have made Origins ten times better if they had hired voice actors to do the voices of each of the six Grey Warden stories. Having the dialogue wheel makes the story flow because I know what kind of character I want to be playing and what I want to say. I wanted my Mage Hawke to be the grand good hero and being able to quickly separate the questions from the forwarding dialogue, being able to listen to all the questions and easily choosing the good/kind choice at the top right, help me keep the game moving forward and my attention kept on speakers of the story, and not the words of dialogue at the bottom fearing how I will respond next, that I might respond wrong.
On top of that, people comment on how great Origins stories are, but I couldn't get into it and the main reason is how hosed up the dialogue was. So in my book, the story of DA2 was better, the way the dialogue was, it was much more engaging.
Next they changed the leveling for the better. I still get three stat points each level, but they don't effect what I can learn in the ability trees(which are more evolved than the four square trees in Origins). I don't have to worry if my magic stat is high enough to learn the next ability in the tree, I just use the ability point to get the next ability or ability upgrade. The only annoying thing is that if you want to open up all the treasure boxes/chests, you have to select one rogue to sink at least a third or more of the stat points into Cunning, since to open all locked boxes, Cunning has to be at 40. Another thing I love is that me and my party members learn something every level. In Origins, I'm only learning something maybe every other level at the most. In DA2, every level my characters will have a point to learn an ability or ability upgrade.
Lastly the graphics, I don't see how people can look at Origins and then DA2 and say that Origins had better graphics. A very good comparison is Isabella. Find a high quality picture of Isabella in Origins and one of her from DA2. Yes I know they retconned her look, but that is not the point. Look at the eyes and the way the skin looks. Find videos so that you can look at her face in each as she talks. The eyes look so much more real and the way expressions look is more real. The skin in Origins my look smooth, but it is shiny which kills the realistic look, it is really hard to tell between the look of skin and clothes except by color. In DA2, that graphical shine to the skin is gone. I feel more like I'm looking at a person and not a computer generated character.
The only problem with DA2 was that there were repeat dungeons(though for me, rotating between 6 or so dungeon set ups didn't bother me since it wasn't the most important part of the game for me, pretty much bottom of the care list). Though, the problem could easily be rationalized in that the game only deals with Kirkwall and the immediate surrounding area, there can only be so many caves and temple like areas. Since the game takes place over a few years, I don't take offense to clearing bandits out of a cave and then the next year going back to the same cave and clearing out blood mages. Why can't the blood mages have decided to take refuge in the same cave a year after the bandits were gone. It isn't like in a year that caves look would have magically changed.
C117 said:
Gee, I hope not. I plan to pick it up, together with Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening on monday.
They are definitely different. I also can't stand how people trashed DA2 because, boohoo, they could play as there Warden, they had to play as a specific more fleshed out character, and oh no, he is human.
People need to understand that BioWare wanted to tell a new story, or really, another section of story through a new specific character. They wanted to tell to tell story of Hawke and his family and the story of the turmoil surrounding Kirkwall and part of the Free Marches and they did an expertly great job of giving what they wanted people to see and experience.
The probably knew there would be unwarranted backlash from "fans" that wanted to play another game with their Warden, but I applaud them for making a game that dealt with the story they wanted to tell, not what they though the Warden "fans" wanted to see.
LordRoyal said:
I knew it was a bad game when I had to take an aspirine because the combat was that repetitive.
I've played much better hack and slash games that feature less tedious gameplay. I just wish Dragon Age 2 didn't try and make itself feel like an RPG at the same time. I'd say Skitzophrenic is the best word to describe it. Since it could never decide wether or not it was a hack and slash or a hack and slash wanting to be an RPG.
The characters were cliche and one dimensional, the storyline was stupid, the main character's name always annoyed me. (When I first heard the player character's name was "Hawke" I almost went "Are they serious?". It's the most cliche and overly used hero name i've ever seen. Every time I saw his default head I thought. "Wow they put no thought into this"). I missed having characters become developed as the storyline went on. (Like Aistair becoming Hardened and more suited to being King toward the end. Morrigan softening up and thanking you for bringing her along. Leliana becoming either accepting of her past or relishing it. Zevran telling you he joined you hoping to die in battle but found he enjoyed life again). Etc. All of it was all just far better done in Origins, and all they tried was just to make a cash in for console gamers.
Also the Darkspawn looked RETARDED. There were no Genlocks or Shrieks either. They really should have just ported the original models instead of having pale monsters with jarring faces. It lacked all the style the Darkspawn had in Origins. Now they just looked like funny cannon fodder for the player to cut down.
It's definitely a game that people are going to replay less and not remember in a few years. Origins'll likely last a lot longer due to it's modding community.
I don't see how the combat is repetitive if they made it so the player has more control of what happens in combat. They gave the player control of the normal attack(which was a much needed change from the slow as tar auto normal attack in Origins), and they gave people the ability to effect the area in which the special attacks land. In Origins, if I did a shield bashing attack in an area in which two guys were standing, only the one targeted would get hit and fall. Now in DA2, whatever enemy is in the area/range of my shield when my character swings it around, will get knocked down.
It is only repetitive you make it repetitive. It is only hack and slash, if you sit there and all you do is press the normal attack button. But since didn't do that, and I interlaced the well placed normal attacks in between when and where I used my special attacks, it didn't feel like a hack and slash.
The characters were not cliche, the were very deep and complex. I enjoyed the characters far more then the ones from Origins. In Origins, you either have the characters that are closed off and take forever to get interesting and get important stuff out of, or the characters that are very open and willing to say things, but still take forever to get interesting and some how forever to get important info.
In DA2, characters can be both open at times and closed off at times, and you get fun and interesting information right from the start, and they evolve to become even more complex and fun.
I would have to say that out of all the party member characters in the Dragon Age universe, Varric and Merrill two of the best and my favorites.
Varric is the best comic character around, he has the air of the guy you want to have as your best friend, someone to share drinks with and swap hilarious stories.
Merrill is just adorable. Even more awesome, she her adorableness mixes awesomely with her naivety and the dark things in magic. As hot as Isabella is, I went for Merrill as the romance for my first character.
I could go on with other characters but I've already written a whole short story's worth of writing in this post.
Also, to let you know, Genlocks are in the new DLC.
On the replay thing, I haven't even gotten through one play through of Origins, because it is so slow and stale. But I have already beat DA2 and have started up Warrior and a Rogue, and have played a good deal on both.
People are going to remember DA2. I don't give a crap about the modding community of Origins. Seriously, if the game is as great as people claim it to be, people shouldn't have to mod it to be able to play it more. The image of a game stands on the original content, not on what players mess around with it after.
i enjoyed it,the combat was more fun the art style wasn't as brown and the smaller scope of its story bade it better then origins in all those areas,too many games have you save the world,not enough have you destroy a religion.
many of the characters had better writing then origins,the ability progression made leveling up more rewarding,and having a family made the Hawke character seem more realized then the "cousland,amell,and w/e else the various last names were in origins)not being forced to fight only darkspawn was a good change too.
I'm honestly a little sick of polls hey. They're never open enough, I did enjoy the game but not enjoying it doesn't mean you thought it was shit.
Shit is not opposite enjoyment.
Anyway, that's all I have to add. It was fine. Not amazing, it was a solid A/A- Dragon Age: Origins was probably an A. Neither were an A+ as both had slight annoyances.
Again, I don't really care to be asked "How could you possibly say it was an A?? It was a travesty!" I was asked, I answered.
What irks me from the people that would ask you that question, is that they think DA2 is a travesty because it isn't like DA:Origins. The problem is DA2 wasn't meant to be like DA:Origins. If they want DA:Origins, they can go play it again.
so my three options are 'it was shit' or 'i enjoyed it'? Can't I take a midle ground? I thought there were great ideas, but even more bad ones.
I still play the game, but they seriously messed up the character classes, yet combat is fun. THe storyline is...eh. Very boring with my characters giving little to no input in the final outcome.
STill the game has potential and I LOVE playing my rogue
Ive never thought about it like that and you are absolutly right.
It wasn't a bad game , i found it to be quite fun, face paced hack n slash . But it wasnt what i was expecting i really like DA:O and DA2 kinda fell short , plus that ending was so crap . And there was little to no story ( which is why i play rpgs ) like yahtzee said. But in the end i had fun so it gets a 7/10 for me. With a better story and more exploration/dungeons it could have easily been the best game of the year.
Well, it would have been good if they had 2-3 extra years to develop it, and if they had managed to hang on to Brent Knowles. As-is, it's hilariously rushed. The writing isn't final draft quality*, the storytelling isn't what they clearly (according to interviews) wanted it to be, the level design was obviously last-minute, the combat isn't 100%, and so on. They would have made a better game if EA hadn't been breathing down their necks.
*and if these [http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6046067/1] are any indication, the Dragon Age writing team needs good editors and enough time to edit.
I enjoyed it. I didn't really like it much as a Dragon Age game, though. Especially as a sequel. Dragon Age 2 could've been a stand-alone game, as it really didn't have much of anything to do with Origins at all. DA2 merely played in the same universe.
However, I would certainly like to have the way poultices are use in the tactics from DA2, in Origins. In Origins you have to set each specific poultice to a separate tactic, and really it clogged my tactics, making it hard to set them just right. Whereas in DA2 you just set the poultice in a tactic and it uses the most appropriate one for your health/mana/stamina level.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
