Poll: Was I the ONLY one who actually liked Dragon Age II?

[Sicram]

Decent game, crap sequel.

 

[darth gditch]

I mean, seriously. You'd think it was Sonic 2006 from the amount of complaining I've seen about it.

I liked combat a LOT more than the first one. I also liked how the dialogue tree is now similar to Mass Effect (Which is my favourite series ever).

I will admit the plot itself is a bit disjointed, and the three acts have little to do with one another, though.

Also, there's the fact that we stay in Kirkwall for 90% of the game, but really, I didn't mind that at all while I was playing it. I really like city settings in games anyway.

Edit: Since my poll seems to be broken, I'll just tell you that the answer is apparently no.

Meh, I was okay with it, but the story was lackluster. Oh it was told very very well, but shiny shiny garbage is still at it's root, garbage.


Really enjoyed how every quest tied in with each other, though.

 

[inkheart_artist]

It does appear to be a lot like Mass Effect, which is why I wasn't all that interested. I've marginally enjoyed the Mass Effect series but I also felt the story was pretty dry and I wasn't fond of a significant portion of the characters in either game. Combine that with a disjointed, pointless story and paint it into a fantasy game and I don't feel like its worth paying for the experience. I didn't play it but I feel I've done enough research to have a relatively justified opinion on it.

I was really disappointed from what I've heard and seen of it because I loved Origins so much.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

I liked it but it wasn't anywhere near as good as DA:O. It improved on a couple of areas; fighting was more fluid, a voice actor for the main character was nice. It just fell short on so many areas, many of which could've been fixed with time (and likely would have). Repetitive maps, loose fighting, broken rival/friendship system (so if they're somewhere in the middle you get nothing?) broken side quests (oh it's a good thing this piece of stone turned out to be a valuable part of a statue. Glad I picked it up. wtf.) and so on. Some which would not have, the setting is too small, the characters aren't exactly interesting or deep and the whole thing just feels a little unbalanced.

But y'know, if it had been a random game I picked up, I'd have been quite happy about it, it's flaws still apparent but the problem is the inevitable comparison with DA:O. Everything is a little slicker in 2 but at the cost of everything else. They should have taken more time, it shouldn't have been Dragon Age 2, but given a name.

 

[Mechsoap]

Its very good, but I think they could have gotten less hate by not naming it Dragon age, merely placing it in its universe. People expected Dragon age 1 quality, not something that tried something new and didn't make it into a huge epic tale, like dragon age 1 was.

All in all, the game is undeserving of hate of this caliber.

 

[Jodah]

I liked it. It wasn't as good as Origins but it wasn't as bad as many people seem to think

 

[Condiments]

No problem with you guys enjoying the game. Doesn't change my opinion that the game is pretty much mediocre all around and probably bioware's worst game.(Sonic doesn't count. IT DOESN'T!!!) A lot of the elements could have worked if they were executed more properly like the 10 year narrative(better consequence implementation), city hub(focus on faction politics), less epic narrative(more RPGs need to do this),etc.

Except they mucked it up in nearly every regard. The multiple story threads are lazily introduced(CHECK WITH SUBQUESTS), they have difficulty pushing the narrative forward(CHECK MAILBOX LOL), and "your rise to power" is never really the focus. Its more like "things happen in city in different time increments and its your job to kill people dead to solve conflict." I'm not going to get started on the problems with the gameplay itself(ENCOUNTER DESIGGGGGNNNNN).

Meh game, could have been MUCHHH better. Its worse considering bioware's pedigree, but its nothing to rage over.

 

[Wrds]

I thought the game itself was pretty good, but I did find it disappointing relative to Dragon Age: Origins.

I had two major problems with DA2. First, the reused environments (which seems to be a universal complaint). Second, and more importantly...Kirkwall didn't appear to change nearly as much as it should have. The city and the people looked and sounded the same, even though the game took place over a decade.

Pretty much my opinion too. Except I'd also add that the choices felt less important than most bioware games. Even on a quest to quest basis, I often found myself redoing parts over and over different ways just to get the same or an extremely similar outcome.

For any other studio I think it would have been fine, but for a bioware game it was just a bit disappointing.

 

[Strain42]

Yes. Out of all the 1,000,000+ units that sold (I'm assuming) you are the ONLY person who liked it.

Have a cookie.

 

[Lenvoran]

I'd go into my huge thing about how the combat in Dragon Age: Origins wasn't any deeper or more challenging than DA2, but I've beaten that particular dead horse so many times that it's ridiculous.

Short version: A hell of a lot of the abilities and trees are nearly the same as in DA:O with slightly more choice about how you advance as say... a Sword and Board warrior.

Shortest version: Play a tank. Have potions. Ignore party.

Character-wise? I found the Dragon Age 2 characters more interesting. Even Anders with his blatantly unlikableness. The only character I really found interesting in DA:O was Morrigan and that was mostly because it was fun to catch her off guard with her story presents.

Story wise? Yeah. I liked Origins a little better. Though despite what the little loading screen map would try to say, it didn't really feel like all that huge of a world. The original betrayal that made the whole thing necessary didn't make any sense at all.

Overall, both games are enjoyable but neither one really qualifies as amazing.

 

[Tigurus]

No you don't. As there are at least 5 other people who made the exact same post as you.

And I quite liked it. I was disappointed though.

Are there?
Hmm. Perhaps I should learn to use the search bar.

Ah well. I am genuinely surprised that there are so many people who liked it; I guess we're a little less vocal compared to its' detractors.

Well, either it was in my dreams but it was a while ago. Mostly around the launch of the game that people asked the same question.

And I reckon people likes to extravagate all the bad things and just don't look at the good things it did.

 

[Buccura]

I thought on it's own, it was a good game. But when I compared it to Origins, I found it lacking greatly, and I think that is what really held it back for a lot of people. It had big shoes to fill and it just didn't fill them. If they made it it's own thing, it probably would have been better received.

 

[MADrevilution]

i loved it myself the story of origins was better, but the gameplay and RPG aspects of how the affected the story where alot more better in 2. Some people say the gameplay was simplified but the gamplay of origins was atrocious, and was vastly improved in 2. The mage class was improved in 2 aswell, as in origins it was horrible.

 

[Condiments]

I'd go into my huge thing about how the combat in Dragon Age: Origins wasn't any deeper or more challenging than DA2, but I've beaten that particular dead horse so many times that it's ridiculous.

Short version: A hell of a lot of the abilities and trees are nearly the same as in DA:O with slightly more choice about how you advance as say... a Sword and Board warrior.

Shortest version: Play a tank. Have potions. Ignore party.

Character-wise? I found the Dragon Age 2 characters more interesting. Even Anders with his blatantly unlikableness. The only character I really found interesting in DA:O was Morrigan and that was mostly because it was fun to catch her off guard with her story presents.

Story wise? Yeah. I liked Origins a little better. Though despite what the little loading screen map would try to say, it didn't really feel like all that huge of a world. The original betrayal that made the whole thing necessary didn't make any sense at all.

Overall, both games are enjoyable but neither one really qualifies as amazing.

The original's combat was slightly better because its encounter design was less worse. Both suffer from sending mobs of boring enemies at you instead of providing interesting. At least there was a semblance of friendly fire on lower modes in DA:O, whereas it was only in Nightmare in DA2. DA2's nightmare mode is awful, and clearly an afterthought.

 

[Aiden_the-Joker1]

I have stated this before but I will say it again so I am at least contributing. Dragon age 2 is not a bad game. It is an average/slightly above average game which could be fine. However it is being compared to origins so that makes it something worse than a bad game it is a disappointing game. I mean no one cared that much when the general reception to Homefront was that is was not very good because a lot of people had already given up on it due to it's premise. That is why in my opinion it was not as heavily stoned as Dragon age 2.

 

[Laser Priest]

I have to say it was really good, in my opinion. An entirely different game from Origins (which I still prefer), but a good game nonetheless.

 

[llubtoille]

I liked it, it was a fun and (mostly) stress free way to blast through a few hours.
that said, once you''d played all the classes, it lacked any real re-playability.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

You are NEVER, EVER THE ONLY ONE.

That is all.

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

I enjoyed it and am waiting for the the DLC and money to get DLC.