I played Dragon Age II on the PC, so the actual combat played near identically to Origins. That being the case I never understood the praise the console versions got for having to hammer a button to do basic attacks. For me that simply detracts from the tactical elements of the combat.
For me if they wanted to have a 'hack and slash' combat then they should have gone completely that way, instead of hiding the dice-roll system it still used behind hammering one button.
The characters were the saving grace of the game for me. I loved the interactions between Merril and Varrik/Isabella, some of the funniest stuff I've ever heard was between them.
However the story was just so disjointed. The time jumps especially annoyed as I always got the impression that some of the most exciting stuff that happened to Hawke took place during them.
The repetition of environments was shocking and for what was meant to be a packed city, Kirkwall was surprisingly life-less.
I do have a little faith that Dragon Age 3 will be a great game. I loved Origins and DA2 had brilliant characters. So hopefully the Dragon Age team will produce something brilliant.
The only shame for me really is that I don't think we'll be seeing the Warden, from Origins, again. There would simply be too many variables for them to include and voice.
jprf said:
Ignoring the ending, ME3 was a spectacularly good game; probably one of my favourites of all time. Bioware is still a great developer and I will be watching DA3 with interest.
Now see I disagree, I don't think ME3 was a good game.
It had comedy animations, poor lip-synch, a terrible journal, pointless eaves-dropping side-quests, a face import system that doesn't work correctly even after Bioware's fix, most missions are poorly designed shooting galleries, reduction of player input into dialogue and far too many passive "Zaeed from ME2" style conversations. I could go on but I don't want to take this thread too far off-topic.
Really for me I struggle to see this 99% brilliant game that others do.