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

[cleric of the order]

i was wondering why poeple said that the characters were 2 dimensional.

personaly i liked the them.

 

[The Lunatic]

Difference between enjoying it and preferring it.

If you preferred it, well done, I guess the change in focus from the dev team was more aimed towards you.

 

[Zeraiya]

I've had this debate with many people, so this is just my humble opinion.

You are not alone, I enjoyed Dragon Age II as well. I saved up for the game, bought it and I was deeply satisfied with my purchase. I played through three times - one for every class - and experimented with different love interests and did all the side quests. I enjoyed all of my play throughs and I do not regret, for a second, spending my time playing the game.

However was it truly Dragon Age II? No. It was not a sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. It did not hold the same emotional depth as Origins - although when Hawke's mother died that was deep - and the plot line was all over the place. It did not have the great stories that BioWare are known for. The only thing they did keep was the good characters and companions. Looking at the original, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age II was a failure. Of epic proportions. I'm still waiting for my sequel to DA:O. Let's hope Dragon Age III can fix that.

However I do think that the combat in Dragon Age II was vastly better than Dragon Age: Origins and I really hope that they keep that in the following sequel.

 

[Snotnarok]

People are idiots had have no middle ground now a days, it's either amazing, or crap. I thought DA 2 from what I played was pretty darn good, not amazing, but it's far from bad.

I didn't finish it because it bored me. I don't think it is a good, or even average game. Am I an Idiot? If I trudged along would my IQ increase proportionally to time played and/or amount I liked the game?

No however I feel like you're not great at reading posts. I said people are idiots and have no middle ground. I said nothing about being an idiot for not liking a game.

To make my point more clear, people praise DA1 endlessly for being a amazing game in many ways, but DA2 is just terrible because it doesn't let you put armor on your allies.

I understand what you said, but I disliked the game enough that I couldn't finish it. For me, that makes a game a bad one and not average. I liked DA:O enough to complete it several times with several characters.

On the armour thing, with how shit the items were in DA:2 I don't care about not upgrading party members. Seriously how can DA:2's items compare to this http://lparchive.org/Baldurs-Gate-2-and-Throne-of-Bhaal/Update%2048/34-BG2SoAch35022.jpg
I know there are codex entries for some weapons but even into act two I hadn't gotten anything that felt 'special', just generic and most probably generated by a script.

Add to that waves of enemies, recycled environments, the whole game taking place in the same 10 or so areas, dialogue wheel, no player initiated party member chats, your character taking actions in cut scenes without consulting you, the linear nature of the game, cliffhanger ending (supposedly, not seen it), giving the player too few options (e.g. when you have to join a criminal gang to enter kirkwall even if playing a good char)... I could go on and on.

If you like the game those all fall away to some degree, but don't act like your opinion that it's an average game is better than my opinion that it's a terrible one.

Again...You're not reading me right. I don't care if you think the game is the worst game ever. I'm saying my problem is most people these days don't seem to have a middle as in Great okay and bad. You can hate DA2 all you want, that's totally fine.

What I am simply saying is, from what I've read, people are being unreasonable and don't at all have a middle ground. So stop being sensitive on that, I don't care what you play, if you enjoy something more then that's awesome, really I'm happy for you.

Thats the other thing I just don't understand "You don't like [game name]!? You're gay!". In other words people becoming upset that someone doesn't enjoy someone elses game and get pissed about it. Very strange.

 

[dancinginfernal]

Usually, threads beginning in "Am I the only one who...."
I would just reply, no, you are never the only one...
But this time, I think you are the only one. That game was worse than Origins.

"Worse than Origins" doesn't make a game bad. I loved the game and have played through it nearly 3 times now.

Origins was great, and being less than it doesn't mean the game isn't good, it just means it isn't great.

 

[socialmenace42]

I agree that it wasn't as good as Origins, but it certainly was a good game. I liked it a lot, the ending made me RAGE though. And no matter how much I liked it, I totally agree with Yahtzee: story filler with no other purpose but to STALL!!!

 

[zHellas]

Short answer: No you aren't.

Longer answer: I enjoyed it. Wasn't quite as in depth as Origins, but I liked the combat a lot more, much like you.

Exactly what this guy said. The combat I think was better, and the repeating environments was a tad bit annoying but not a problem for me or anything.

 

[Woodsey]

The premise was good - I found the story structure fairly refreshing - but the implementation was often poor.

Certainly not better than Origins or Mass Effect, by any stretch of the imagination.

Their dialogue writers were also worse, which is a big beef of mine. And the lack of choice and consequence was fucking abysmal.

 

[Mark Flanagan]

I liked it.

Combat: Better
Much prefrered the new system rather than the attack once and let the auto attack kick in fights of DA:O.


Character interaction: Better
NPCs moved around, Bitched, made jokes and felt a hell of a lot more rounded out for it


Setting: Same
Kirkwall, and DA:2 had an overall style but DA:O had more places to visit. Both however suffered from cloned areas.


Story: Better
Sorry but DA:O was a fetch quest, A good fetch quest but still a fetch quest and while DA2 was filler it was nice to see a character grow over a period of years rather than months.

Both are great games but I prefer DA:2

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Yes. Yes, you were. Clearly everyone on this site hates it, especially judging by the fact that topics like that have totally not appeared on this site every week since the game's release.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

It was an ok game. But just an ok one. Dragon Age:Origins was fucking awesome. Compared to the first game, it is just... meh.

 

[Always_Remain]

I haven't beaten it but I like it well enough. I really like the art style and what not. I think Hawke is a pretty big bad ass.

 

[The Forces of Chaos]

I think alot of ppl don't get the concept of DAO's combat.

DAO is meant to be played tactically. By pausing, issuing orders, and then letting the action play out. Rinse and repeat. Not running up to guys pressing the attack button or whatever. (like an action game)

I think its the result of trying to "mass effect" up the series. It's not a shit game but it is buggy and half-thought out and half-finished. I guess thoese people who called it "Dragon Effect" were right.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

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.

About Kirkwall not changing. I didn't notice until a bit ago, but do any of you know about the kid NPCs in Dark Town? There's one girl and boy NPC in Dark Town that if you walk by them they well speak a line or two for you. My favorite;
""Snore" says the viscount getting out of bed. "Boo!" goes the arishok, and off with his head!"

However, did anyone else notice that they never aged? In the ten years you're in Kirkwall they, at the end, still look and sound the same!

One more thing. did anyone else notice how terrible the "stock" characters looked compared to the other characters standing or walking around in Kirkwall? I know it's a small detail, but these little things do matter. It is very weird looking at the "stock" characters next to normal ones. In Dragon Age Origins they at least had all the characters, even the stock characters(the ones that just stand around doing nothing at all) looking as good as any other, but in DA2 they have them looking worse that in DAO. Sorry about bringing this up. I did like DA2, but it had a lot of big and little things wrong with it and I just would like to know why?

At the very least, they fixed the terrible bugs!

 

[Frenger]

No you're not alone! And many seem to like the game for what it is(flaws and all), and that's fine. I however, think the game was bad by Bioware standards.

Even if Mike Lawidlaw or whatever his name was, doesn't seem to listen to criticism(nor the main writer, Gaider, look at the Leliana retcon), at least EA hinted that they listend. Many Bioware fans were really disappointed and there are a ton of reasons why. But if you or anyone else likes the game for what it is, that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact it's worse than the first in more ways than one.

People have covered pretty much every aspect of how much DA2 was inferior(and superior) to Origins, but I feel like something have been left out.

In Origins, I could choose what outfit I wanted to play, my playstyle, my gear and how my comrades would react and what weapons they would use. For instance, Wynne dies in my playthrough, so does Zevran, and I never bothered with Sten. Here, I lose the games only dedicated healer. But that's no biggie, just make Morrigan (or yourself) a Spirit Healer. In DA2, that is impossible. Never have I been pigeonholed in a roleplaying game, like I was in DA2. I could, if I wanted to, give my rogue platemail, or at the very least, chainmail(medium armour). I could give her two broadswords(or axes, my fav) and have her fight like a warrior, or vice versa. Mages even had a melee counterpart (Arcane Warrior). Limits, limits and limits is all I see when I boot up DA2.

Spoiler: Some stuff that I though was shit.

The story, oh yeah. Even though there are many fine things to say about that one(some clever dialoge here and there and a few likable characters), it all just crumbles to dust at the end. Basically, the whole conflict is stupid and anyone in Hawkes shoes would just walk away and watch the fucking town burn(I had to save and stop playing for a while, thinking "what the hell was that shit?!"). Because in the end, no matter what side you choose, you lose. Which is perhaps the only profound lesson thought through out the game. There is no justice, the world is a cruel place. Everything you do is pointless.

Both sides turns out to be corrupt, and the best way is just to delete them both(which is essentially what you do, no matter what). And Merril, what a stupid fucking call-you-next-thursday that girl is. Nothing redeemable about her at all(not counting the excellent voice actress, kudos to her), and there is no way out of her mess either, no matter what you chose to do about it. There are at least a dozen similar situations that makes no sense, and no matter how you resolve them, you end up at square 1, again! And once that is done, no, wait! There are 25 other quests you *have* to do before the act is over.

If there is one fun quest, there are at least 5- 6 that you just want to get over with. I have to admit, most RPG's have this problem, but it isn't as blatantly obvious as it is in this game, mainly because of the disjointed mainquest.

And then there are technical and gameplay aspects that were infuriatingly inferior to DAO. The menu system was top-notch in Origins. Everything game related is just one menu and it worked great. In DA2 you have to exit to the menu to reach the inventory or the journal. The only good thing DA2 added was the shortcut to potions.

Then we have items themselfs. It's as if they never played any previous game of theirs. It's basically back to Mass Effect item rotation. Just think the stars as the roman numerals after the guns and armours in ME. It's the same and every other level you have to check what needs to be replaced. Stats seem to take the backseat to the quality of the items. If that's the case, you might as well cut out items altogether like they did in ME2 ... as they all lost meaning. In an RPG, finding an awesome item should feel just like that, a reward, instead they just pile up after a while. The constant reuse of enviorments destroyed the exploration aspect too. To be put it mildly, they seem to have forgotten what was great about playing an RPG. For all I care, they should just skip the bullshit and call them action- adventure games from now on. At least then they are honest to us.

Tl;dr

It could have been great, even better, than Dragon Age Origins, but they blew it.

Dragon Age 2 should've been called Dragon Age: Chronicles of Hawke or some shit, not Dragon Age 2, because it wasn't a sequal as such, and then maybe the bad taste in my mouth wouldn't be nearly as bad. Dragon Effect: Kirkwall would be another(Despite Kirkwall being a one horse town, size and all), but I personally feel they pulled off the feel from the first game and there were some minor improvements.

Basically, one step forwards, two steps back in pretty much every way. A mediocre game by Bioware standards. A rush job. I for one won't be returning to DA2 for a looong time, and the DLC is focused on Hawke, so I might aswell skip that one too.

I have a friend who is a massive Fallout fan, this was his response after playing DA2.

"Kirkwall, Kirkwall never changes"

 

[Rule Britannia]

I preferred dragon age 2 over dragon age 1...it was flashier and prettier thus making it more enjoyable, it still had the key components of of dragon age 1 and so I found it thouroughly enjoyable.

 

[ameemo]

the game was good in it's own merit but the overall experience seemed like they slapped on the dragon age name to sucker fans of the original into getting it because they know it would not sell that much if it was left on its own. I'm not saying its a bad game but a sequel is inevitably going to have to be compared to the predecessor and that's where i hate dragon age 2. I assure you it would not get this much hate if it didn't have dragon age as a title. Personally i felt the game was rushed out as a quick cash grab. ohh and the dialogue tree, i didn't like it all, if i wanted paragon/renegade, i'll play mass effect.

 

[TH3_D15HWA5H3R]

ive played both one and two and i agree i personally liked DA:2 more it just seemed to be alot more enjoyable, not to say number one was bad, i loved it but it seemed to be missing something