196 réponses à ce sujet

[Zjarcal]

sami jo wrote...
I don't think anyone is claiming that Origins was perfect, only that it felt like there was more opportunity to converse with and get to know your companions at your own pace.  Origins covered roughly a year of time in the middle of a crisis that your Warden was trying to resolve.  It would make no sense to stretch a personal quest to get to know a companion out.  The problem is that DA2 is pretty much nothing but companion quests and fed-ex quests.  All I am suppose to do is get to know my friends and wait for the world to blow up.  In that context, with people I am suppose to have been close to for close to a decade, potentially even in a romance with for a number of years.  I would certainly hope that the companion quests were more involved.  The problem is that they aren't nearly involved enough to give the impression of a close relationship spanning a decade.  Codex entries updating me on the last three years of someone's activities does not substitute for a conversation.  Yes, Mr. Gaider, those long expository conversations you seem to dislike so much did serve a purpose.

I'll be honest... I completely ignore the seven year thing because that just feels very poorly implemented in my opinion.

As for whether the companion quests are involved enough, I did feel that they were, enough so to make me enjoy the companions in the same level as I did in Origins.

I don't blame people for wanting to have the "long expository conversations" back, I certainly wouldn't mind them one bit. But speaking stricly from MY point of view, I didn't need them to feel connected to the DA2 companions in the same way as I felt connected to the companions in Origins.

tmp7704 wrote...

I think i've learnt more about ME2 companions from their talks than from these, in retrospect.

Eh, I can safely say I don't feel that way. But you're right, some of the convos in DA2 are pretty meaningless. That's not to say I didn't enjoy them.

[SilentK]

tmp7704 wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

There were tangible changes in how they reacted to you and each other as time went on.  I didn;t get that in DAO.  DAO was great but Morrigan and Alistair were at each other all game, even after adventuring together.

Is there tangible change to how Anders and Fenris react to each other? Or Isabela and Merrill? Or Varric and about anyone?

I'm not sure how there can be serious complaint about DAO characters having one personality and attitude when you put DA2 cast as example of doing this less. Because if anything they seem to be more of one trick ponies with their fixations on some particular subject.

Well Fenris and Anders will never agree because they are on opposite sides of the magedebate. But you can see big changes in how Aveline and Isabella react to oneanother. It is really sweet, they start out  very much as against one another and in the end Aveline is wondering why Isabella didn't come to a family dinner. I love that. Not all of them change, some are firmly in their corner but then that suit their character. Anders changes his banter over time as he becomes more unstable. I have a memory of some banter in the first Act when Avaline tells Fenris that she has seen a number of reports mentioning him now that she has taken over after Jevan. Fenris tells her thanks for getting rid of them and then she says that she did not do that. Later she rotates the roster for him.... I'm not so up to date on when certain banter occur in game but I belive that you can see some of the companions changing their attidtudes towards eachother. But not all of them            ( Fenris and Anders is like oil and water except in fan-fic, maybe there also? )

[highcastle]

sami jo wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

That those were incredibly short and in some cases didn't even involve the companions. You could hunt for Sten's sword without having him along (and if he was he only made small remarks), or kill Flemeth without Morrigan tagging along.

And in the other cases, it was just too little. Say, I loved taking Alistair to see his sister, but it was only a one time short thing. Had it been spread out through the game in multiple parts (or had it been a longer quest), I'd have liked it a LOT more and it would've been an experience I would've valued much more in terms of how much it made me connect with the character.

I don't think anyone is claiming that Origins was perfect, only that it felt like there was more opportunity to converse with and get to know your companions at your own pace.  Origins covered roughly a year of time in the middle of a crisis that your Warden was trying to resolve.  It would make no sense to stretch a personal quest to get to know a companion out.  The problem is that DA2 is pretty much nothing but companion quests and fed-ex quests.  All I am suppose to do is get to know my friends and wait for the world to blow up.  In that context, with people I am suppose to have been close to for close to a decade, potentially even in a romance with for a number of years.  I would certainly hope that the companion quests were more involved.  The problem is that they aren't nearly involved enough to give the impression of a close relationship spanning a decade.  Codex entries updating me on the last three years of someone's activities does not substitute for a conversation.  Yes, Mr. Gaider, those long expository conversations you seem to dislike so much did serve a purpose.

A huge problem with Origins, though, was that "at your own pace" could translate into "speak to them at the beginning a bunch and realize they have nothing to say later on." By staggering conversations in DA2, the devs ensured companions always had something new to say.

Much of the character development was also done during quests. Companions are so much more vocal this time around. Instead of speaking up only on personal quests or when they might approve or disapprove, companions jump in all the time, giving you their opinion or adding a bit of insight into a situation. I loved this, but it does mean you have to bring different folks on different quests to get the full measure of them. Kind of like real life, actually. You're probably closer to the friends you go out with all the time than you are to people you just visit sporadically.

I felt like all my companions had formed a relationship with Hawke. I took them all on quests, I talked to them about their opinions, and by the end of the game I felt like I knew who they were and what their opinion of Hawke was. At the end of Origins, I still didn't get Sten. My romance with Zevran hadn't produced any new dialogue in a while, and things were stagnant. Is DA2 perfect? No. I too would love more dialogue (I don't think anyone would argue for less) because I love the writing and the characters. But I still like this way over Origins.

[_Aine_]

Addai67 wrote...

I suppose the difference is that I didn't find him to be much like Awakening Anders at all, even in Act 1, and he is already out of control in your first quest with him. I honestly don't see much progression between Acts 1 and 3. He's glowing and talking about killing templars from the minute you meet him.

What Mr. Gaider said seems to confirm that Awakening Anders is dead as of the time you meet him.

This.  

He is flat.  Now, the one dimension he exists in, is written REALLY well.  But he is adamently against templars and the chantry from the moment Act 1 starts. Not much changes through three acts.  He simply is 100% new Anders, 100% all the time.  I think when people hear "flat" or one dimensional, yes, it is a criticism but it doesn't mean that the writing itself was flat, but rather the characters purpose was flat.  He wasn't a conflicted young man, wavering between his Awakening self and the new Anders. He was new Anders. Period.   

A couple of my characters stayed loyal to him and loved him to bits. Ran off as fugitives together even.  So, trust me, my observation about the character did not affect my story or my game.  But, he *is* one of the most one dimensional of the companions to me.  Character analysis is absolutely fascinating but what we *interpret* happening to a character ( even when likely ) is not the same as what the character simply DOES and says and is - much of his descent into mental instability occurs before this game starts.....
 
I can totally see they are happy with the character of Anders, as are many fans.  Anders is STILL one of my favorite characters in the DA series, inclusive of his DA2 self.  That doesn't negate the fact that his character could easily have been multi-dimensional.... but the choice was made to have him be changed from the second we meet him in Act 1 instead of being tormented and start a downward spiral into what he becomes.  Which is fine, it is their story, our experience with it though is equally valid - even when we don't agree with each other.    

[Addai]

Zjarcal wrote...
That those were incredibly short and in some cases didn't even involve the companions. You could hunt for Sten's sword without having him along (and if he was he only made small remarks), or kill Flemeth without Morrigan tagging along.

And in the other cases, it was just too little. Say, I loved taking Alistair to see his sister, but it was only a one time short thing. Had it been spread out through the game in multiple parts (or had it been a longer quest), I'd have liked it a LOT more and it would've been an experience I would've valued much more in terms of how much it made me connect with the character.

You had personal content with Alistair in Redcliffe, however, and later on at Eamon's, and there were follow-up conversations in camp with all of them.  I honestly don't see the difference between these and ME2 or DA2.  Though Sten's might have been fleshed out a bit more.

[SilentK]

highcastle wrote...



A huge problem with Origins, though, was that "at your own pace" could translate into "speak to them at the beginning a bunch and realize they have nothing to say later on." By staggering conversations in DA2, the devs ensured companions always had something new to say.

Much of the character development was also done during quests. Companions are so much more vocal this time around. Instead of speaking up only on personal quests or when they might approve or disapprove, companions jump in all the time, giving you their opinion or adding a bit of insight into a situation. I loved this, but it does mean you have to bring different folks on different quests to get the full measure of them. Kind of like real life, actually. You're probably closer to the friends you go out with all the time than you are to people you just visit sporadically.

I felt like all my companions had formed a relationship with Hawke. I took them all on quests, I talked to them about their opinions, and by the end of the game I felt like I knew who they were and what their opinion of Hawke was. At the end of Origins, I still didn't get Sten. My romance with Zevran hadn't produced any new dialogue in a while, and things were stagnant. Is DA2 perfect? No. I too would love more dialogue (I don't think anyone would argue for less) because I love the writing and the characters. But I still like this way over Origins.

It was a nice surprise on my second Hawke to see that it didn't really go the same way on some q's. Simply because I didn't have the companion with me who fixed it last time    =)     Varric and the slavers for example. I really like that.

I currently have a poor male warden stuck in the brecilian forrest where he is likely to stay for quite some time. The problem is that I have used up all my conversations with Leliana, his LI. It's so difficult not to talk to her so I can't help myself from doing that. So now it's all my own fault that the poor warden hasn't even been to Redcliff yet, (lot's of the game left) and there isn't a singel thing left with Leli. Gahh..... don't know if he's ever getting finished. Poor Cous-Cous.

[Addai]

DahliaLynn wrote...

I've created a poll regarding the Anders romance. I would like to know how much of an effect playing Awakenings had on your judgement of the Anders romance in DA2 on the whole. 

social.bioware.com/1770295/polls/18896/

No options for "sort of liked" and "indifferent"?  lol

[Addai]

highcastle wrote...

A huge problem with Origins, though, was that "at your own pace" could translate into "speak to them at the beginning a bunch and realize they have nothing to say later on." By staggering conversations in DA2, the devs ensured companions always had something new to say.

That would be true if they did always have something new to say.  In practice, it's about the same:  Long stretches of silence with your party members.

Still and all, I think the only thing that bothers me is that the game was short, something that is especially noticeable because of the 10 year period.

Much of the character development was also done during quests. Companions are so much more vocal this time around. Instead of speaking up only on personal quests or when they might approve or disapprove, companions jump in all the time, giving you their opinion or adding a bit of insight into a situation.

This happened in Origins, too.  The only difference is that the PC did not initiate it.

I felt like all my companions had formed a relationship with Hawke. I took them all on quests, I talked to them about their opinions, and by the end of the game I felt like I knew who they were and what their opinion of Hawke was. At the end of Origins, I still didn't get Sten. My romance with Zevran hadn't produced any new dialogue in a while, and things were stagnant. Is DA2 perfect? No. I too would love more dialogue (I don't think anyone would argue for less) because I love the writing and the characters. But I still like this way over Origins.

Sten is Sten.  Did you ever expect to "get" him?  I thought his progression to "kadan" was extremely moving.  <3

As for Zevran, his whole romance blooms after the Landsmeet.  Stagnant??  Granted, it's plagued with bugs that don't allow you to see the real gates farewell without a mod.

Modifié par Addai67, 21 avril 2011 - 11:34 .

[rak72]

David Gaider wrote...

If you felt less connected to your followers, that's too bad. There could be many reasons for that, but if the requirement to someone feeling connected is having long, rambling conversations in the party camp... I can safely say that's unlikely to happen again. I could see front-loading the characters a bit more so players are more thoroughly introduced (as it was, a lot of the character interaction ended up in Act 2 quite by accident) but I have absolutely no intention of returning to the reams of expository dialogue as a replacement for character development anytime soon.

It realy makes me sad the way you guys keep dissing origins like that.  It was a wonderful game and I felt much more connected to the characters than DA2's.  I was emotionaly invested in the fates of all my DAO companions.  At the end of DA2, my  hawk rode off into the sunset by herself & didn't give a rat's butt what happened to the rest of her crew.  I wish you would listen to the fans so you can get a better understaning of why we felt DAO was so special & DA2 has already been uninstalled by many of us.

Edit to say, the only conversations I found long and rambling in DAO were with Wynn, and thats because she is an old lady that likes to ramble on.  It added to the character and made her more real.  I know peolpe who go on like her and when I see them, I try to walk the other way and go unnoticed, much like I did with Wynn.  It realy helped making her someone real to me.

Modifié par rak72, 21 avril 2011 - 11:46 .

[Zjarcal]

Addai67 wrote...
You had personal content with Alistair in Redcliffe, however, and later on at Eamon's, and there were follow-up conversations in camp with all of them.  I honestly don't see the difference between these and ME2 or DA2.  Though Sten's might have been fleshed out a bit more.

Well... Alistair... me... do I need to tell you? 

Yes, you had follow up convos in camp but I enjoy the actual interaction during the personal quests/loyalty missions more, and most importantly that they were longer (the personal quests themselves). For example (ME2 spoilers.....) dealing with Tali's trial right there alongside her, or watching Thane reunite with his son, that's the kind of stuff I enjoyed a lot more. Or in DA2 setting up Aveline with Donnic.

Origins had that stuff but in a lesser scale (and with more focus on the conversations back at camp).

But this is more of a personal liking.

[highcastle]

Short? I got 46 hours in DA2 and 41 in Origins. That's doing all the side quests in both (except for the Crow assignments in Origins; I kill the assassin who doles them out every time on account of him potentially being a threat to Zevran).

Yes, companions speak during quests in Origins too. But only when they stand to lose or gain approval (such as Morrigan whenever you help someone, Zevran if you want to destroy the Anvil, etc.) In DA2, companions are much more likely to say something to take an integral role in the conversations without approval coming into it. Fenris can be called upon to kill Kelder for instance without approval gains. He speaks to the Arishok on your behalf, too, and offers insight on the Dalish. And because they speak so much more during quests, it didn't feel like "long stretches of silence" punctuated by scripted conversations at their homes. It felt like I got to know them during our adventures, then strengthened our ties at home.

As for Zev, yes his romance is finalized in the endgame. But if you rush through the romance in the beginning, you can easily finish two of the big plot quests without any new dialogue for him. Now that's a long stretch of silence, especially from a character you're supposedly in love with. At least in DA2 there are more interactions. The LIs come visit you after All That Remains, for instance, a nice touch I appreciated especially after no one seemed to react when my human noble killed Howe or my city elf returned to the Alienage. The LIs seemed more invested in your life this time around.

[Furtled]

Celestina wrote...
I was truly disappointed by Ander's change of face in the sequel. In Awakenings, he was a hilarious and lovable. Sarcastic and witty... a confessed cat-lover.

In the sequel he is a terrorist, armed with clichéd pickup lines.

The Justice/Vengeance story "explained" his ridiculous personality change, but did not excuse his poor writing. Like many fans around the forum I was angry and disappointed by the game, its conclusion, and the changed Anders.

*snip*

If anything had be taken from Origins, I wish it had been camp. Or at least some form of open-ended discussions. I felt so cut off from the rest of my party.

Personally (and it's only my opinion for whatever that's worth ) I did understand the change in Anders personality given the circumstances, he has cheeseball (but charming in his own way) lines aplenty in Awakening and something as traumatic as the merge with Justice was bound to have a dramatic effect on a character(s).

Where I completely agree with you though is the lack of less plot focused dialogue with some of the companions, through various playthroughs my PC always feels a little disconnected from the group and detached from the friendships that develop in the various banters; partly I think because of the more restricted dialogue and partly because nearly every character focused interaction is framed as a quest rather than the more 'natural' feel in Origins.

Like someone else said there's a lot of little things in Origins that didn't make the cut into 2, small touches in conversations, NPCs, world building etc. and maybe I've been spoiled by my introduction to Bioware's work via Origins (it was the first Bioware game I'd played and the first single player RPG I'd played in nearly a decade), but 2 really felt like it had less soul than it's predecessor.

All that said though I (personally) don't think the characters are to blame, to me they're one of the key reasons I stuck with the game despite all the other flaws. I do have issues with the game, but the quality of character writing isn't one of them.

Modifié par Furtled, 21 avril 2011 - 11:50 .

[SilentK]

I would have loved if some of the things in DA2 could have been i DA:O. Don't get me wrong. I love DA:O to bits but there are a number of things that I prefer in DA2. Like voiced protagonist, friendship/rivalry and how the companions are presented. And the combat. I'm a bit miffed at the ending that feels a bit to abrupt for me.

I'm just voicing my opinion on the things that I feel made a positive change. I wish there had been a way for me to rival Morrigan, that would have been so much fun. I didn't bring her to some q's because I know that she would not approve. Had it been possible I would have gotten her to full rival in no time with my goody-goody warden. Aveline punches Hawke on the rival-path. Wonder what Morrigan would have done =)

[Addai]

I did like the little consolation scene. The companions being more active in quests is good, too, though I don't think it added much in the way of characterization. You already know Fenris can glow and kill people with his hand as of the first time you meet him.

As for length- 40 hours is a pretty short Origins game, especially for a first game. I clocked 70-80 in my first game. Later games were 40-50 because I was skipping and knew what I was doing. My DA2 games have been around 30. Maybe you didn't play the DLCs? We had Stone Prisoner and Warden's Keep from day one.

[highcastle]

Nope, I had all DLCs, I never skip cutscenes or dialogue (it's the best part!). But around 40 hours is the longest I can stretch an Origins playthrough. I play on normal or hard, though. I understand in NM some of the fights can take a bit longer (though 30+ hours seems a bit long).

[Zjarcal]

I think it's safe to say that mileage will vary a lot regarding length. My first run of Origins lasted 110 hours, while my shortest one lasted about 60 (and I did most of the stuff in both of them).

My first run of DA2 lasted around 70 hours. I'm on my second run and it's taking a little less time, but still close.

I can see both games taking significantly less time for other people, so let's just say that length is a very wild variable.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

David Gaider wrote...

You misunderstand. I am not saying that those expectations aren't justified... things have changed. But some perspective is required. Some people are expressing that they didn't feel as connected to the characters and then looking for what was different and deciding that must be what's at fault. I'm not convinced it is.

And if it is, and someone's requirement is that they must have everything and more in order to feel connected to a character at all ...then you're not going to be connected to any of our characters in the future. If that's truly what it takes, then I can safely say it's not going to happen.

If someone must have everything to feel connected to a character at all then that is unreasonable. You can't be expected to do everything, and I don't see anyone asking you to. A mix of DA2 conversation techniques and DA:O character techniques is not meant to be everything, and I doubt people felt completely disconnected to the NPCs no matter what they say...even a small connection is a connection. But a small connection isn't much, and in my opinion isn't enough. Perhaps you feel differently, that an acquaintance is as good as a friend, and if so that's disappointing.

This is not to say that some middle ground isn't possible, but that's middle ground and not "why not just do both?" As I said earlier, in an ideal world you'd get to click on your party members everywhere you liked, get lots of options for new dialogue to initiate and get quest dialogue to boot... but until this becomes the Companion Relationship Game, that's probably unrealistic to expect. Even in DAO that didn't happen, and DA2 was probably even more character focused.

DA2 was only more character focussed in the sense that talking to your companions suddenly became quests and appeared in your journal, or rocked up on your doorstep. The game was more active in encouraging interaction, while DA:O in contrast only rarely forced dialogue and you could easily miss larges chunk of it or never realise they existed if you didn't take the initiative yourself, without the prompting of a journal or quest markers. You got approval for your troubles, the unlocking of a personal quest and more dialogue options.

So yes, DA2 was more character focussed and designed that way, but the payoff was less of an understanding of those characters.

I hear Companion Relationship Game and Dating Sim Game thrown around by Bioware devs and admittedly get annoyed, since we are *supposed* to feel connected to these characters and experience some sort of relationship to them--the deeper the better. I'm sure the writers would be happier if we squeed or sobbed rather than went 'bleh' or 'they were ok, I guess'. I don't expect dialogue at every turn, but constantly being shrugged off with 'You just miss DA:O; I'm not convinced that the dialogue changes are what's to blame with you feeling less connection to the NPCs' is frustrating and loaded with personal assumption.

But I suspect we have as much chance of convincing you that dialogue changes WERE a major factor as you have of convincing 'some people' that doing everything to please them is not possible.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 22 avril 2011 - 12:46 .

[noxsachi]

Zjarcal wrote...

I think it's safe to say that mileage will vary a lot regarding length. My first run of Origins lasted 110 hours, while my shortest one lasted about 60 (and I did most of the stuff in both of them).

My first run of DA2 lasted around 70 hours. I'm on my second run and it's taking a little less time, but still close.

I can see both games taking significantly less time for other people, so let's just say that length is a very wild variable.

I really wonder how people get these game lengths, if there is game I've missed please tell me where to find it! My Origins playthroughs average 44 ours while DAII seems to be clocking in at 40ish so they are quite comprable in length gamewise. When people cite those huge numbers I always worry that I missed something major though...

[LadyJaneGrey]

Addressing thread topic: Hepler called dibs before Gaider could?

[Alex Kershaw]

noxsachi wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

I think it's safe to say that mileage will vary a lot regarding length. My first run of Origins lasted 110 hours, while my shortest one lasted about 60 (and I did most of the stuff in both of them).

My first run of DA2 lasted around 70 hours. I'm on my second run and it's taking a little less time, but still close.

I can see both games taking significantly less time for other people, so let's just say that length is a very wild variable.

I really wonder how people get these game lengths, if there is game I've missed please tell me where to find it! My Origins playthroughs average 44 ours while DAII seems to be clocking in at 40ish so they are quite comprable in length gamewise. When people cite those huge numbers I always worry that I missed something major though...

You can play all the quests and go through all the dialogue with everyone in 44 hours? Took me twice that long at a bare minimum, and I never did the assassin or the bartender quests.

[_Aine_]

I think it is obvious that for whatever reason, the writing team isn't terribly fond of the way DA:O was. The worked on it, so they just don't feel that magic. Oh well. Hearing them talk about it as rambling is... sad. SOME of it rambled. But what exactly kind of fan sits pining for the "old rambling ways" ?? Please, give us a bit of credit. We aren't pining for rambling. We aren't all screaming MOAR! there *was* something about DA:O that made it unique and successful in terms of dialog and immersion. Damned if I could put my finger on it though.

[DahliaLynn]

Addai67 wrote...

DahliaLynn wrote...

I've created a poll regarding the Anders romance. I would like to know how much of an effect playing Awakenings had on your judgement of the Anders romance in DA2 on the whole. 

social.bioware.com/1770295/polls/18896/

No options for "sort of liked" and "indifferent"?  lol

Lol, the only reason why I created that poll was because of all those people who were saying how the Anders romance was perfect in DA2, of which I really can't understand how. Then I figured it was most likely due to the fact that most of them played Awakenings, where I hadn't-- making a stand alone DA2 not exactly worthy of wonderful romance build and writing, but rather a product of prior attachment to the character and then being given the gift of more content, possibly clouding peoples judgment regarding the quality of the romance in DA2.  

[DahliaLynn]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

DA2 was only more character focussed in the sense that talking to your companions suddenly became quests and appeared in your journal, or rocked up on your doorstep. The game was more active in encouraging interaction, while DA:O in contrast only rarely forced dialogue and you could easily miss larges chunk of it or never realise they existed if you didn't take the initiative yourself, without the prompting of a journal or quest markers. You got approval for your troubles, the unlocking of a personal quest and more dialogue options.

So yes, DA2 was more character focussed and designed that way, but the payoff was less of an understanding of those characters.

I hear Companion Relationship Game and Dating Sim Game thrown around by Bioware devs and admittedly get annoyed, since we are *supposed* to feel connected to these characters and experience some sort of relationship to them--the deeper the better. I'm sure the writers would be happier if we squeed or sobbed rather than went 'bleh' or 'they were ok, I guess'. I don't expect dialogue at every turn, but constantly being shrugged off with 'You just miss DA:O; I'm not convinced that the dialogue changes are what's to blame with you feeling less connection to the NPCs' is frustrating and loaded with personal assumption.

But I suspect we have as much chance of convincing you that dialogue changes WERE a major factor as you have of convincing 'some people' that doing everything to please them is not possible.

I agree with this entirely.

I wouldn't say do things exactly like DA:O, but as Mike Laidlaw said something along the lines of  taking everything that was awesome about DA:O and making it better, along with getting rid of the flaws (not a quote), I would have expected them to remain true to our character connections  by still allowing us to get to know our party, only in a more restricted environment i e not talk about irrelevant issues in the middle of a quest, but rather leave those for when visiting them at their homes. Instead we are very limited here to the point of almost being lead by a leash on when we can speak to them. *only when a quest is active*.....Hard for me to enjoy it in the way I enjoyed it in Origins. Yes, in Origins they had something good going. Could have improved on it, but instead ...along with other drastic changes I can handle, this went a bit far. 
Then again, if they didnt call it DA *2* i.e. sequel,  perhaps I would have been more forgiving.

[Zjarcal]

DahliaLynn wrote...
Then again, if they didnt call it DA *2* i.e. sequel,  perhaps I would have been more forgiving.

Dragon Age: Exodus was going to be the original name. I would've preferred that name really.

[DahliaLynn]

Zjarcal wrote...

DahliaLynn wrote...
Then again, if they didnt call it DA *2* i.e. sequel,  perhaps I would have been more forgiving.

Dragon Age: Exodus was going to be the original name. I would've preferred that name really.

In that case I would have loved Dragon Age Exodus along with everything about it! I would hardly complain but rather love having more Thedas content and BTW I did enjoy Dragon Age 2, only not as a sequel.