I played Dragon Age Origins way back in the day, and absolutely loved it. Even with a few performance issues (I played on PS3), it stood out as one of the best RPGs I had played in years. As a result, I was really excited about Dragon Age II, at least initially, but as more and more information came out I got less and less interested. All the screenshots looked dull, and being set inside a single city next to a brown mountain just sounded so boring next to the expansive setting of Origins that I never actually got round to buying it.
Fast forward 13 years and with all the talk of a new Dragon Age game, I thought I'd finally try Dragon Age II, and it's somehow exactly what I expected but also not.
Firstly, the setting is clearly a step down from Origins. Gone are the lush winding forest paths of the Dalish Elves origin story, and instead we get a lot of brown pathways on a mountainside and a whole series of beige underground tunnels. With the success of Origins, it seems an odd choice to restrict the environment so much in its sequel, and even then to make it so monotone. One of my favourite things about the RPG genre is the range of amazing fantasy settings, and I can't help but think that this change in setting must have affected sales of DAII. On the flipside, I did enjoy roaming some of the more traditional 'castle-esque' areas, and in particular the more vibrant setting on the Mark of the Assassin DLC was a really welcome change from the base game's environments.
Secondly, I played this on PS3, and the graphics/performance are not good. There is screen tearing all over the place, the frame rate frequently jumps from single digits to 60PFS and back. That said, there are times when the art style works well, and the PS3 was a bit of a nightmare for multiplatform developers at times, so it's not exactly like DA2 was an anomaly in this regard. I imagine on PC even without mods it stands up a lot better to scrutiny.
Thirdly, and this is what surprised me the most, is how much fun the gameplay is. I played as a Mage, and I actually found the combat to be just as good as I remember from Origins, and possibly actually better than DA: Inquisition. It's not the most in-depth or varied system, but it's fun, and I looked forward to hitting new groups of enemies just so I could roast them all in with my chosen rotation of spells.
Lastly, I found the characters and quests really engaging - much more than I thought I would. I expected to go into this with a minimalist approach, and just whizz through the main questline as quickly as I could, but I found myself actually wanting to get into the side quests and companion plot lines. The characters are well-written and interesting, and the whole political setup of the story feels quite refreshing after so many 'bad ancient evil' stories.
Overall, the whole thing makes me wonder what went on at BioWare with the development of this thing. They made some really odd, major decisions, but equally there is a real glimse of the classic BioWare quality here, and I'm really glad I played it.
Did you play it back in the day or later? What did you think of the changes BioWare made?
Fast forward 13 years and with all the talk of a new Dragon Age game, I thought I'd finally try Dragon Age II, and it's somehow exactly what I expected but also not.
Firstly, the setting is clearly a step down from Origins. Gone are the lush winding forest paths of the Dalish Elves origin story, and instead we get a lot of brown pathways on a mountainside and a whole series of beige underground tunnels. With the success of Origins, it seems an odd choice to restrict the environment so much in its sequel, and even then to make it so monotone. One of my favourite things about the RPG genre is the range of amazing fantasy settings, and I can't help but think that this change in setting must have affected sales of DAII. On the flipside, I did enjoy roaming some of the more traditional 'castle-esque' areas, and in particular the more vibrant setting on the Mark of the Assassin DLC was a really welcome change from the base game's environments.
Secondly, I played this on PS3, and the graphics/performance are not good. There is screen tearing all over the place, the frame rate frequently jumps from single digits to 60PFS and back. That said, there are times when the art style works well, and the PS3 was a bit of a nightmare for multiplatform developers at times, so it's not exactly like DA2 was an anomaly in this regard. I imagine on PC even without mods it stands up a lot better to scrutiny.
Thirdly, and this is what surprised me the most, is how much fun the gameplay is. I played as a Mage, and I actually found the combat to be just as good as I remember from Origins, and possibly actually better than DA: Inquisition. It's not the most in-depth or varied system, but it's fun, and I looked forward to hitting new groups of enemies just so I could roast them all in with my chosen rotation of spells.
Lastly, I found the characters and quests really engaging - much more than I thought I would. I expected to go into this with a minimalist approach, and just whizz through the main questline as quickly as I could, but I found myself actually wanting to get into the side quests and companion plot lines. The characters are well-written and interesting, and the whole political setup of the story feels quite refreshing after so many 'bad ancient evil' stories.
Overall, the whole thing makes me wonder what went on at BioWare with the development of this thing. They made some really odd, major decisions, but equally there is a real glimse of the classic BioWare quality here, and I'm really glad I played it.
Did you play it back in the day or later? What did you think of the changes BioWare made?