It's funny, while I don't think DA2 was anywhere near as good as DA:O, I definitely enjoyed DA:2 more than DA: I.
I enjoyed Dragon Age 2 more than Origins...and it wasn't even close
- Thread starter jamsy
- Start date
It's funny, while I don't think DA2 was anywhere near as good as DA:O, I definitely enjoyed DA:2 more than DA: I.
Rabbit Lord
Member
I don't know if DA2 is bad on its own (It is). It was however such a step down in over all quality from DAO that it deserves all the hate it gets. Also I don't know if DAI redeems Bioware. Its a good game with some really good things going for it. The main quest line was garbage though, the combat needs improvement and it felt like an single player MMO at times. Lets not forget Marauder Shields.
Shining Sunshine
Banned
EA didn't rush DA2. They delayed it for several months.
In my example, you had no choice. Your mission is to get help. Harrowmont isolates Orzammar from the world where Bhelen wants to help. It's like saying help Bhelen or just skip Orzammar altogether because it wastes your time. Straight up good or evil choice. No interpretation.
It's probably most similar to Baldur's Gate 1 with a more fleshed out story and companions.
It was still released less than 1.5 years from when Origins released. I have to give BioWare some credit and assume they know that's not enough for an RPG, which turns the finger-pointing to an external deadline imposed by EA.
shinobi602
Member
Yes. Yes they did.
It this post supposed to be ironic? Or do you not see how that link is a good demonstration of everything wrong with DA:O's combat? I mean, one of the "three key principles" in the intro is "don't use bugged buffs, which hurt you instead of help you." It then goes on to talk about how most of the skills are poorly balanced and shouldn't be used.
I seriously don't understand what people see in DA:O's combat. It's serviceable, nothing more. Maybe the right mods make it decent, but otherwise it's flawed as hell.
sure, if u like pressing A for AWESOME to happen. lol. i sstill cant get out those kung fu air kicks the rogue would do. my god, i never laughed so hard.
also, that graphic design 101 student interface, the infinite horedes of darkspawn that totally took all the tactics out, the recycled locaitons, the bad sex scenes, all female characters with giant boobs and asses...my god i could go on all night.
to each their own i guess.
also, that graphic design 101 student interface, the infinite horedes of darkspawn that totally took all the tactics out, the recycled locaitons, the bad sex scenes, all female characters with giant boobs and asses...my god i could go on all night.
to each their own i guess.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Not compared to Origins, but I definitely enjoyed it more overall than Inquisition. Inquisition's release has made Dragon Age 2 look better in retrospect.
He's banned now, but do a lot of people play these games interacting with only the one character, expecting the other party members to just automatically do everything? That's what this quote seems to suggest:
I love the full party management, I played ~150 hours of DA:O and didn't touch the party AI options. I don't understand the desire to turn off half of the game.
I didn't play enough of DA2 to remember how the combat in that turned out. I think I got about half way, but I couldn't stomach it after that.
I love the full party management, I played ~150 hours of DA:O and didn't touch the party AI options. I don't understand the desire to turn off half of the game.
I didn't play enough of DA2 to remember how the combat in that turned out. I think I got about half way, but I couldn't stomach it after that.
Yabberwocky
Member
I love you, OP. You're cool.
Both games are pretty flawed - as is, sadly, Inquisition. I objectively think that Origins is the best of the three, but my heart says DAII. The art direction, the characters, the concept of the game itself - it's refreshing. The game has a good pace. Even if the areas are repetitive, you're never in them for long. (Lookin' at you, Orzammar. The Fade. Fantastic questlines, horrible to play.)
In Origins and Inquisition your companions are there for the cause - in DAII, your companions are there for Hawke. The character development between all of them is pretty incredible, especially if you listen to all the banter changing from Act 1 to Act 3. They're a divisive bunch, but I think it's more interesting writing than the Origins/Mass Effect characters. I love the Origins/ME companions, but they're all fairly sycophantic in comparison to the DAII gang. (One of the reasons that y'all like Varric and Garrus so much - they're always good with the snark, and they don't argue with you.) Inquisition's companions are on par, but I'll always miss Hawke's little family. Hawke's actual family, too - seeing the changes Bethany and Carver depending on your storyline choices was fascinating. It was also nice to have the legacy of Hawke's father, and the tragedy of Hawke's mother.
Man, I will always yearn for what could have been, though. I would have loved to have seen Kirkwall and your companions aging over ten years. (It will never happen, but I'd love to see both Origins and II remade through Frostbite. Imagine Ostagar! Orzammar! The hellish maze that was Hightown! Climbing to the top of Shit Mountain!)
I know DAII is a hot mess, but it's my precious hot mess. I love it for what it was, but really mourn what it could have been. It was such a shame to see Bioware try to do something different, but not be able to fully realise it. A Greek Tragedy where everyone has good intentions but it all goes to shit anyway? Yes, please!
I was pretty disappointed to see Bioware go back to the You're A Special Snowflake protagonist for Inquisition. I like my special snowflakes well enough - it's fun to play a Shepard and an Inquisitor - but it's not narratively as interesting.
Both games are pretty flawed - as is, sadly, Inquisition. I objectively think that Origins is the best of the three, but my heart says DAII. The art direction, the characters, the concept of the game itself - it's refreshing. The game has a good pace. Even if the areas are repetitive, you're never in them for long. (Lookin' at you, Orzammar. The Fade. Fantastic questlines, horrible to play.)
In Origins and Inquisition your companions are there for the cause - in DAII, your companions are there for Hawke. The character development between all of them is pretty incredible, especially if you listen to all the banter changing from Act 1 to Act 3. They're a divisive bunch, but I think it's more interesting writing than the Origins/Mass Effect characters. I love the Origins/ME companions, but they're all fairly sycophantic in comparison to the DAII gang. (One of the reasons that y'all like Varric and Garrus so much - they're always good with the snark, and they don't argue with you.) Inquisition's companions are on par, but I'll always miss Hawke's little family. Hawke's actual family, too - seeing the changes Bethany and Carver depending on your storyline choices was fascinating. It was also nice to have the legacy of Hawke's father, and the tragedy of Hawke's mother.
Man, I will always yearn for what could have been, though. I would have loved to have seen Kirkwall and your companions aging over ten years. (It will never happen, but I'd love to see both Origins and II remade through Frostbite. Imagine Ostagar! Orzammar! The hellish maze that was Hightown! Climbing to the top of Shit Mountain!)
I know DAII is a hot mess, but it's my precious hot mess. I love it for what it was, but really mourn what it could have been. It was such a shame to see Bioware try to do something different, but not be able to fully realise it. A Greek Tragedy where everyone has good intentions but it all goes to shit anyway? Yes, please!
I was pretty disappointed to see Bioware go back to the You're A Special Snowflake protagonist for Inquisition. I like my special snowflakes well enough - it's fun to play a Shepard and an Inquisitor - but it's not narratively as interesting.
krameriffic
Member
DA2 is one of those games that didn't seem as shitty to me when I was playing it at the time. It was only once I got quite a ways into it and started saying to myself:
- The wave-based, action oriented combat in this game is the worst thing about it.
- The dumbed-down conversations and stupid dialog wheel are the worst things about it.
- The boring, nonsensical story is the worst thing about it.
- The endlessly recycled side areas are the worst thing about it.
- The shit-mountain graphics is the worst thing about it.
Dragon Age 2..... I bought the DLC when it was on sale a couple of months ago because I heard it was pretty good. For all its problems, I do think DA2 had better characters and chapter 2 had a really interesting story. Still the re-use of like the same 2 or 3 maps for every area in the game, the 5 enemies types, the awful graphics, it was a terrible cash grab by EA. And that 3rd chapter... it takes a huge amount for a video game to make me feel insulted, but that 3rd chapter did big time.
DA2 is fine example of why we shouldn't hold ANY game developer up as some shining beacon of excellence.
Because it incomprehensible why no one during development apparently said out loud:
"Well these endless waves of trash mobs are a bit shit, eh?"
Just think what kind of awesome turd it could have been without that extra time for polish.
Sounds more like the OP here doesn't care for RPGS much.
Dragon Age origins is a well done DnD style campaign , clearly biowares attempt to get away from using the DnD license and create something of their own. That doesn't make it bad , it just makes it for hardcore PC RPG fans .
Dragon Age 2 was designed to be almost the opposite of the first game, made moreso for a console audience , one of the design mottos was quite literally "press a button to see something awesome happen". It still had RPG stats and the basic design was very much a role playing game but the combat had more in common with something like dynasty warriors or .. to stay closer to the genre , a zelda game.
An even more apt comparison to the whole package - Dragon Age Origins is Final Fantasy 4 , Dragon Age 2 is Final Fantasy Mystic Quest and Dragon Age Inquisition is Final Fantasy 12.
Tossing all these comments around though, I do find DA:O is a bit slow, it starts off quite well but a couple of the dungeons are indeed a bit lengthy, the game is not easy and rewards smart tactical decisions (that have to be made constantly) but that also means failure happens often. 2 areas in particular are FILLED with a TON of lore and story that many out there will either adore or despise , the biggest offender is the Dwarf city of Orzammar. It can be hard to complete the lengthy dungeons if you find the storyline leading to any particular dungeon to be a tad dull. I've owned the game since 2010 and still haven't finished it yet but I'm almost there, it's just not a game I can play the crap out of for more then a few hours every few months. That's partially due to stability issues (the game crashes constantly on PC) but it's also a bit of the lore overload.
Basically , it's perfectly understandable if you prefer DA2 to DAO, it's basically saying you don't care for the hardcore RPGing present in the first game and prefer a much simpler experience that's heavier on the action. That's fine. Still doesn't mean that DA2 is a better game (it seems this is emphatically not the case in fact).
Sounds like OP might enjoy DAI though, it takes elements of both titles and adds a much more interesting world to explore into the mix.
Dragon Age origins is a well done DnD style campaign , clearly biowares attempt to get away from using the DnD license and create something of their own. That doesn't make it bad , it just makes it for hardcore PC RPG fans .
Dragon Age 2 was designed to be almost the opposite of the first game, made moreso for a console audience , one of the design mottos was quite literally "press a button to see something awesome happen". It still had RPG stats and the basic design was very much a role playing game but the combat had more in common with something like dynasty warriors or .. to stay closer to the genre , a zelda game.
An even more apt comparison to the whole package - Dragon Age Origins is Final Fantasy 4 , Dragon Age 2 is Final Fantasy Mystic Quest and Dragon Age Inquisition is Final Fantasy 12.
Tossing all these comments around though, I do find DA:O is a bit slow, it starts off quite well but a couple of the dungeons are indeed a bit lengthy, the game is not easy and rewards smart tactical decisions (that have to be made constantly) but that also means failure happens often. 2 areas in particular are FILLED with a TON of lore and story that many out there will either adore or despise , the biggest offender is the Dwarf city of Orzammar. It can be hard to complete the lengthy dungeons if you find the storyline leading to any particular dungeon to be a tad dull. I've owned the game since 2010 and still haven't finished it yet but I'm almost there, it's just not a game I can play the crap out of for more then a few hours every few months. That's partially due to stability issues (the game crashes constantly on PC) but it's also a bit of the lore overload.
Basically , it's perfectly understandable if you prefer DA2 to DAO, it's basically saying you don't care for the hardcore RPGing present in the first game and prefer a much simpler experience that's heavier on the action. That's fine. Still doesn't mean that DA2 is a better game (it seems this is emphatically not the case in fact).
Sounds like OP might enjoy DAI though, it takes elements of both titles and adds a much more interesting world to explore into the mix.
Tomeru
Member
How does that work exactly? A most serious question.
Yeah I'm actually at a loss for anyone to prefer 2 to DA:I. I seems like it builds on the things that 2 did well, and reincorporates a lot of what it lost from origins. I get people might not want to do every fetch quest because there are so many, but you could just PLAY the basic game and get very very satisfying 'dungeons' and still get a 40+ hour playthrough while only doing the highest quality content on offer there.
I still disagree dao=da:i>da2
This is the one recurring DA2 sentiment that I'll never, ever, ever understand. The sole, single, one-and-only way in which DA2's combat was mechanically of a different nature than DAO was: In DAO, the animation for a physical attack does not play until after the game has made the relevant dice rolls and calculations and has already resolved the effect of the attack on the target, and in DA2, the dice are rolled, the calculations are made, and the attack is resolved after the animation plays, if the target was still in range to be hit when the animation completed.
Or, more practically: You could 'dodge' an enemy swinging a sword if you had the time to physically move out of the way.
That's seriously it. That's the only way in which DA2 was any more of an 'action' based game than DAO was. And to put it into perspective, enemies never made any special effort to make use of that as a mechanic, you still had four characters in your party at all times, and your party AI was not capable of attempting to make use of it as a mechanic without being controlled directly.
And I guess that does technically make it a little more of an action game, but in exchange for that (all things considered, pretty tiny) concession, you get a game where the class balance isn't so fucked sideways that 2/3 of the game's classes are relegated to auto-attacking for 95% of every fight, with the remaining 5% comprised of active attacks that are only marginally different from auto-attacks, and passive set-and-forget stances, while the remaining class gets to be an overpowered god that gains a spell in the game's first hour or so that trivializes the majority of the entire rest of the game's combat encounters (hello Cone of Cold) - and, for that matter, a game that didn't have single skills that trivialize a significant percentage of the game's combat.
I mean don't get me wrong, DA2's combat as a holistic thing was riddled with flaws, but those were primarily limited to encounter design (almost every fight being a multi-wave encounter against the same couple enemies over and over) and interface (the camera always being stuck to the character you had selected instead of being able to zoom out into a neutral bird's eye view). But if you can separate those aspects out and look at the actual underlying mechanics of each game, DA2 was much more successful at providing stats-driven, tactical core combat, whether or not it was possible to gain a small advantage by micro-managing 1/4th of your party to avoid certain telegraphed physical attacks.
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
Recently finished origins and just about to be done with Dragon age 2 simply because I want the story for Inquisition.
Dragon age 2 is depressing me. Only really started to pick up, but I just finished act 2 and it's boring as fuck again. Combat is flashy and awesome, but the city is bland as shit, story is for the most part boring, Only like 3 of the characters and find the rest bland as hell. Dx11 is also broken on nvidia cards so I can't even run all the nice tessellation shit without bodies refusing to render. Asides from the Qunari stuff, it is quite possibly one of the most dragging games I have ever played. It feels insanely small and low scale and just overall less detailed compared to Origins. Finding new clutter and equipment isn't exciting and none of it was fun to explore. I think this is probably the game's biggest offense, the whole environment feels very low grade and too spaced out. None of the color or sprawl of origins.
Dragon age 2 is depressing me. Only really started to pick up, but I just finished act 2 and it's boring as fuck again. Combat is flashy and awesome, but the city is bland as shit, story is for the most part boring, Only like 3 of the characters and find the rest bland as hell. Dx11 is also broken on nvidia cards so I can't even run all the nice tessellation shit without bodies refusing to render. Asides from the Qunari stuff, it is quite possibly one of the most dragging games I have ever played. It feels insanely small and low scale and just overall less detailed compared to Origins. Finding new clutter and equipment isn't exciting and none of it was fun to explore. I think this is probably the game's biggest offense, the whole environment feels very low grade and too spaced out. None of the color or sprawl of origins.
the repeating dungeons were terrible but not a deal breaker for me. What broke DA2 for me is the wave based combat which mean you can't plan ahead your moves and the shitty dialogue wheel. There were a bunch of times the stuff that came out of my character is the opposite of what I thought it would be.
neotokyo360
Member
I like Dragon Age Origin & Dragon Age Origin Awakening.
I will try Dragon Age2.
I will try Dragon Age2.
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
I honestly wished I had just done the DA keep stuff for 2 and just gone straight to Inquisition. It's that dragging.
Enosh
Member
quite sure both of them send an army to help the grey wardens against the blight
Dragon age 2's combat was dumbed down, and stupidly simplistic, sure, but I had the type of fun with the combat I have with a Musou game. It was mindlessly relaxing, in a way. I liked the characters well enough, and while the sidequests sucked, they were usually just stuff you'd accept and do at the same time you do the main story missions, instead of go off the beaten path. Now, the dungeons were most certainly terrible but if it wasn't for all the other issues the game had, I would be able to overlook it and feel it was a great game, it certainly had a great concept. Unfortunately the game had a slew of other problems, so I can only say that I enjoyed my time with it enough that I did not feel I wasted my money.
The reason why I liked Dragon Age 2 more than inquistion on the other hand is a bit complicated. From a story perspective, inquistion had me grimacing from the very first cutscene and the entire introduction, and I feel like that carries through the entire game.
The intro is basically:
You're sitting with a bunch of people with their blades pointed at you with shackles on your wrists. Then, a few sentences later, you're unshackled. Then they tie your hands with ropes and take you outside. And then, moments later, cassandra cuts the rope that she literally just tied you up with. And then, with barely a complaint, lets you take a weapon. And then a few fights later you're fantasy Jesus, in command of an inquistion.
That was complete nonsense, and going from 0-messiah completely broke any interest I had in the story, at all. And that nonsense carried over to your relationships to the other characters as well.
Now that aside, lets look at the gameplay. It's very similiar to DA2, but not as tactical as DA:O. So it sits in this weird place where you actually have to pay attention to how you fight or you get your ass handed to you, and having very few tactics available. Without the musou mindless charm of Dragon age 2, I found combat in Inquistion incredibly tedious, though I would have much preferred something like Origin's.
Add on top of that that you have to run around the map constantly clicking the bat ping button to find resources if you wanted to make half decent equipment crafting and mission design taken from the ubisoft playbook to fill a needlessly large open world, and I just wasn't enjoying my time with the game.
So yes, I did enjoy Dragon Age 2 more than Dragon age: Inquistion. I am aware that the majority disagrees with me here, but I hope you can at least recognize the reasons behind my opinion.
What? Sera was only borderline funny, mostly she was just reeeaaally goddamn obnoxious, and I honestly think Bioware knew that cause she was in the end the only party member with a whole button dedicated to "Get the fuck out of here!".
I only kept Sera inside the main camp because I am a bit pragmatic and the more people fighting for the cause the merrier, I just never ever brought her along apart from her loyalty mission.
Varric on the other hand is a excellent bro with his heart and mind on the right spot, like, as mentioned, Garrus.
cripterion
Member
You're not alone. In my opinion, the first one was better than the second and the second was better than the third which is the worst of the series by far and took the story and the world they built to nonsense levels.
He was on about DAI. You're comparing a more tactics/strategy oriented game(DAO), with a full on action game that has minimal control/tactics options(DAI).
The AI isn't fantastic in DAO either, but it doesn't matter because you have the time and options to control all characters yourself since it was designed for it.
Parhelion69
Member
Dragon Age 2 is probably the worst sequel ever. A quick cash-in with only one town, and its surroundings to offer, which makes it probably the smallest RPG ever as well. The moral choices of the original are lost (and only briefly appear at the end of the game), the combat is button mashing, and everything was dumbed down so to attract casual gamers.
One of the biggest disappointments of my life.
One of the biggest disappointments of my life.
I'm sure someone must have realized. And I'm also sure it's not fun to work on a game like that after realizing and being unable to do anything about it :/
I agree with everything you say except, perhaps, the "boring" part of the story. It got boring due to shitty execution, but there was perhaps at least an interesting idea there.