This was the main thing that killed any enjoyment of DA2 to me. All tactical options were redundant when waves of enemies would spawn anywhere they chose around your group.
I enjoyed Dragon Age 2 more than Origins...and it wasn't even close
- Thread starter jamsy
- Start date
This was the main thing that killed any enjoyment of DA2 to me. All tactical options were redundant when waves of enemies would spawn anywhere they chose around your group.
Heh, same here. I couldn't remember any of the characters except for Varric.
hooijdonk17
Member
Dragon Origins, IMO, was a bad game. It wasn't terrible, but it was bad. I realize this isn't a popular opinion, bit it was an attempt at stealing every catchy fantasy concept from previous efforts in games and literature, mixing them quite sloppily into a me-too kitchensink fantasy setting with a plot so been-there that even the interesting characters couldn't save it.
That, and it's terribad art style.
And it's half arsed D&D-esque ripoff system that just fell to pieces way too often.
I don't know if DA2 was an improvement or not (but by my understanding of what they went ahead and changed it probably wasn't) but it was almost impossible for DA:I to not be better than DA:O.
That, and it's terribad art style.
And it's half arsed D&D-esque ripoff system that just fell to pieces way too often.
I don't know if DA2 was an improvement or not (but by my understanding of what they went ahead and changed it probably wasn't) but it was almost impossible for DA:I to not be better than DA:O.
SargerusBR
I love Pokken!
This is accurate.
I wish this series would just stick with one game and improve upon it. While Mass Effect gt away with it, because the shooter genre in general, but also those specific games, is/are less impacted by (their) changes, the dragon age series heavily suffers from reinventing itself every time. I can't really decide which one is my favourite, because the list of advantages and disadvantages on all three games is so godamn long.
Can I pay respects in this fantasy GOTY version?
Gipsy Danger
Member
This is exactly right. DA: O is great but can't hold a candle to the classics. But OP is definitely crazy, of that we can be sure.
Never played DA2. Going by what I gathered from DA:I and the Dragon Age Keep the story seems interesting enough (honestly had an urge to buy it for a second). Though it is pretty funny that Varric essentially has a whole dialogue tree dedicated to defending the story in DA2. Hell, you even lose some approval if you ask him about something.
CosmicQueso
Member
QuantumFlux
Neo Member
Origins was poorly paced in both story and combat and had stiff, boring characters. All of which are improved in DA2.
FF Seraphim
Member
This game was a horrible downgrade to DA:O, the dungeons were uninspiring and a lot of the characters' dialog just weren't up to par from the previous game.
Plus that ending decision.... blarg.... yeah
Plus that ending decision.... blarg.... yeah
Do I want to slaughter mages or slaughter templars?
There isn't a single thing you said that I agreed with OP. DA2's flaws are so obvious, so blatant, that I'm shocked that any objective observer could see them and say that its predecessor was the inferior game. I mean seriously, you thought Dragon Age 2 was more colorful than DA:O? I have to legitimately question your vision.
But as others have said, you are entitled to your incredibly wrong opinion.
But as others have said, you are entitled to your incredibly wrong opinion.
I'd rather play poorly paced mediocrity then a well paced train wreck.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
DA2 looks like shit.
Don't know where this is coming from at all.
Don't know where this is coming from at all.
Schweinehund
Member
The combat system is my favorite of the three (positioning became more important than origins, cross class combos, better balance between the group) and the companions + their quests are interesting. Unfortunately it reuses it's assets too much and the story is pretty boring (thought act 2 is awesome). It got a lot of flak for "shit mountain" when it came out, but now that I'm replaying origins, it's textures are pretty underwhelming as well.
I am greatly enjoying Inquisition right now. The story is top is keeping me engrossed. It is infinitely better than DA2. So I would say Bioware is in resurgence.
Deified Data
Banned
I've enjoyed every game in the series, DA2 included. You can enjoy a game while being aware of its flaws. Some of the best written characters and dialogue in gaming, IMO.
KojiKnight
Member
OP, you're not the only one to think this way, we're just drowned out by the people that liked 1 better.
2's biggest failing is simply too much happens in too little of a space. They rushed the game and thus the locations are revisited far far FAR too often for my personal liking... but everything else was a major step up IMO.
2's biggest failing is simply too much happens in too little of a space. They rushed the game and thus the locations are revisited far far FAR too often for my personal liking... but everything else was a major step up IMO.
CosmicQueso
Member
Looks like? Did you not play it?
Oh come on now.
At least one person gets it. Can't agree with you more.
Honestly, DA1 with an Arcane Warrior and any remote amount of party planning isn't even Press X to Win, it's just Sit There and Win.
I've been replaying the games in order to remember choices for the Keep and I'm in the same boat of thought that DA1 is absolute shit compared to 2. I give some wiggle room to Awakening, but fuck the core game so much.
- In both games, combat is trash, and it's also trash in pretty much any Bioware game. But wait, hey! At least it's not Baldur's Gate where most of a fight is spent missing at the enemy.
- I'd like to remind people that some maps in DA1 are also victims of recycling -- it wasn't just a problem in DA2. However, instead of being small partitioned areas creating a segregated zone out of a larger dungeon template it's just a big pile of weaving hallways leading to big rooms, sometimes blocked by rocks. DA2 at least keeps dungeons small so you can move on and nothing feels like it's overstaying its welcome.
- Don't even get me started on DA1's exterior areas. Like the forests, Ostagar, etc. If you're going to set the game up so that I need to go everywhere and touch all the interactive nodes to do everything while forcing me to run around spinning the camera trying to identify routes, I'll spend more time looking than playing. I'd take DA2's hallways any day of the week.
- The Bioware Template is SO BAD in DA1. It's the do four things by going to four places, each one being a city with a hub leading to the main quest for the zone at the end, with the hub being the spot where you get all the other quests to solve on the way to the end of the zone's main quest. DA2 diverts and ends up having a more slice of life kind of scope since most of the time you're working in Kirkwall, and I can appreciate that. DA2 isn't about saving the world or the country, it's about your city and the mark you make.
Awakening gets credit in this department because the scope is cut back and while it uses a portion of the template to force me in three directions, at least the main zones, barring the huge open forest zone are easily navigated. I almost feel like this could benefit from an info graphic similar to the "modern corridor shooter vs. Doom" map thing, because while complexity is nice, a sloppy giant map is detrimental.
- The characterization for your personal character and your party is much better in 2. I feel like most of the thread will be about this, in the end. I can understand why people would bash on DA2 for the opposite reasons I'm bashing on DA1, but defending the characters of DA1 feels impossible.
I've been replaying the games in order to remember choices for the Keep and I'm in the same boat of thought that DA1 is absolute shit compared to 2. I give some wiggle room to Awakening, but fuck the core game so much.
- In both games, combat is trash, and it's also trash in pretty much any Bioware game. But wait, hey! At least it's not Baldur's Gate where most of a fight is spent missing at the enemy.
- I'd like to remind people that some maps in DA1 are also victims of recycling -- it wasn't just a problem in DA2. However, instead of being small partitioned areas creating a segregated zone out of a larger dungeon template it's just a big pile of weaving hallways leading to big rooms, sometimes blocked by rocks. DA2 at least keeps dungeons small so you can move on and nothing feels like it's overstaying its welcome.
- Don't even get me started on DA1's exterior areas. Like the forests, Ostagar, etc. If you're going to set the game up so that I need to go everywhere and touch all the interactive nodes to do everything while forcing me to run around spinning the camera trying to identify routes, I'll spend more time looking than playing. I'd take DA2's hallways any day of the week.
- The Bioware Template is SO BAD in DA1. It's the do four things by going to four places, each one being a city with a hub leading to the main quest for the zone at the end, with the hub being the spot where you get all the other quests to solve on the way to the end of the zone's main quest. DA2 diverts and ends up having a more slice of life kind of scope since most of the time you're working in Kirkwall, and I can appreciate that. DA2 isn't about saving the world or the country, it's about your city and the mark you make.
Awakening gets credit in this department because the scope is cut back and while it uses a portion of the template to force me in three directions, at least the main zones, barring the huge open forest zone are easily navigated. I almost feel like this could benefit from an info graphic similar to the "modern corridor shooter vs. Doom" map thing, because while complexity is nice, a sloppy giant map is detrimental.
- The characterization for your personal character and your party is much better in 2. I feel like most of the thread will be about this, in the end. I can understand why people would bash on DA2 for the opposite reasons I'm bashing on DA1, but defending the characters of DA1 feels impossible.
FrontalMonk
Banned
I didn't really play 2, and I really enjoyed Origins, but I about gave up in the deep roads, and while the story felt nothing like LOTR, it felt EVERYTHING like Game of Thrones. Oh, and while I know this is kind of a staple for the series, I continue to find it comical how everyone is drenched in blood, up to and including their weapons. It makes total sense for a guy up front with a broadsword, but a little less for the dude in the back with a crossbow. So dumb.
Schweinehund
Member
Just in general or relative to DAO?
I thought the character models were well done. Arishok is obviously the best case, but all the party member's models were great. The environments are pretty plain though.
In general, I'd say Awakening >>> DAO > Inquisition = DA2 for me. It's really hard to compare the three, Inquisition is vastly different from the other two. Also having played through Baldur's gate for up until the mines, I don't get the love for the game. Maybe it's revolutionary for the time but its branching dialog and party interaction is incredibly simple, and the story wasn't enough to get me hooked. The combat was also extremely barren after having played through Neverwinter Nights 1/2/MOTB.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
Course i did. 5 separate playthroughs for god knows what reason.
Act 1 is a really poor introduction.
Act 2 is fucking awesome and one of the core reasons why I enjoy the DA series.
Act 3 was a train wreck. Started strong but as soon as fucking Anders ruined shit I knew it was unredeemable.
I love DA2 but Origins is just way way better.
Doesn't have Merrill through. Merrill is a national treasure.
Act 2 is fucking awesome and one of the core reasons why I enjoy the DA series.
Act 3 was a train wreck. Started strong but as soon as fucking Anders ruined shit I knew it was unredeemable.
I love DA2 but Origins is just way way better.
Doesn't have Merrill through. Merrill is a national treasure.
I guess you were going for some bit of poigniant irony here... but i think i might be giving you too much credit.
Icons are way better in DA2.
Skill trees are better too.
DA2 has better graphics as well (they aren't great, but DA:O is a huge eye-sore).
daninthemix
Member
Glad you posted such a detailed OP - because I, for one, can't remember a single thing about DA2. It was literally that memorable.
Duane Cunningham
Member
DA2's characters are definitely better for the most part. DAO has a few great original characters: Morrigan, Loghain and Allistair. The rest are pretty bland archetypes to me: Sten, Oghren, Wynne, Zev, etc. I mean, most of them are likeable enough, but they're very vanilla and tropey (it's the dumb, tough dwarf that burps a lot!)
DA2's characters (for the most part) don't just boil down to a "type" like that. A description of Aveline is WAY more nuanced. You have to describe who she actually is. Same with Varric, Merrill, even lighter characters like Sebastian. Isabela is the most tropey main character in it, but even she's got more depth than most of the DA:O cast. Even the shitty, annoying characters like Fenris and Anders require more explanation than "Sten? He's Worf, basically".
Also, to OP's broader point, DA:2 was a mixed bag and had its flaws for sure. But there are other things about it that are superior to DAO. The art direction is much better in DA2. DAO was a great first game to establish lore in this new franchise, but it had a lot of elements that were bland and derivative. Which I guess is kind of somewhat necessary when establishing a big new universe like that.
ALSO, the "No, DA2 is trash and that's all I have to say" drive by posts are the laziest shit in the world.
DA2's characters (for the most part) don't just boil down to a "type" like that. A description of Aveline is WAY more nuanced. You have to describe who she actually is. Same with Varric, Merrill, even lighter characters like Sebastian. Isabela is the most tropey main character in it, but even she's got more depth than most of the DA:O cast. Even the shitty, annoying characters like Fenris and Anders require more explanation than "Sten? He's Worf, basically".
Also, to OP's broader point, DA:2 was a mixed bag and had its flaws for sure. But there are other things about it that are superior to DAO. The art direction is much better in DA2. DAO was a great first game to establish lore in this new franchise, but it had a lot of elements that were bland and derivative. Which I guess is kind of somewhat necessary when establishing a big new universe like that.
ALSO, the "No, DA2 is trash and that's all I have to say" drive by posts are the laziest shit in the world.
This is the only part we agree with. Hawke beats Warden for having a personality and a fairly likeable one at that. i really enjoy the characters in both games and both games have very memorable banter for me. Possibly DAO more so but I enjoyed both in this aspect of the game. That said, I liked all the characters in DAO, mean while DA2 gave us this asshole:
……forgetit
Member
Didn't play 2, but he's rarely in my party in inquesition. Sera's a much funnier archer.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
Shale alone is better than every DA2 character put together bar Varric and Bethany.
That's also because people like Sebastian and Anders are worth negative.
That's also because people like Sebastian and Anders are worth negative.
Schweinehund
Member
This is the only part we agree with. Hawke beats Warden for having a personality and a fairly likeable one at that. i really enjoy the characters in both games and both games have very memorable banter for me. Possibly DAO more so but I enjoyed both in this aspect of the game. That said, I liked all the characters in DAO, mean while DA2 gave us this asshole:
DAI spoilers
If we're heading to Tevinter next, I definitely want Fenris in my party.
Shai-Tan
Banned
I'm playing DA2 now. Seems ok, nothing special. I personally prefer Baldurs Gate style pause combat so the combat is a downgrade to me compared to DA:O. You can sleepwalk through battles on hard just spamming on your one character (doesn't even matter what you push most of the time). I'm sure people on console would like it better since messing with hotbars is not fun with a controller but the only time I'm pausing is to potion my other party members.
Tempesta di Fuoco
Banned
I liked Dragon Age 2 more than both DA 1 and Inquishittin.
No lie. It is so fucking bad, and I cannot explain it. But it is the only game in the series that I didn't go "GOOD GOD THIS IS BORING, WHEN WILL IT END"
No lie. It is so fucking bad, and I cannot explain it. But it is the only game in the series that I didn't go "GOOD GOD THIS IS BORING, WHEN WILL IT END"
I'm just playing Origins for the first time and although I'm having a good time it does hurt a bit how casual it feels (playing the console version btw) compared to the old Bioware games I was such a fan of. They removed most of the tactical depth from the battle-system and most dialogues are mini-puzzles for which outcomes are extremely predictable and although the characters are alright the story and progression don't really convey the idea that I need to hurry up because the blight is spreading. A fine game but nothing special IMO.
Why arent you playing on PC?
Schweinehund
Member
I think its easier on consoles, but there is a good amount of depth on the pc version. Though you can faceroll with a 3 mage party pretty easy, especially Arcane Warrior. Nightmare on DA2/DAO is extremely hard, inquisition is easy all around.