I think I'll soon be on your position. I didn't buy it till now for the very same reasons you didn't, but after talking about it on a topic I've buy it and it is on is way.
You'll probably end up enjoying it if you like BioWare for their stories and charming characters. It's fun up until Act 3 where the faults really start to show.
You'll probably end up enjoying it if you like BioWare for their stories and charming characters. It's fun up until Act 3 where the faults really start to show.
I think I will. There have been other cases where certain games or something in it was said to be "crap" and I totally think it wasn't. Two of the main quoted issues I think are very true since I saw it with my own eyes on a review(City looking to empty and reused scenarios). But I don't think it will kept me from enjoying it.
Time will say!
Da2 its a good game i enjoyed hawke story. I like it more then origins cause the combat is more fast and not slow and boring.
Guest_Guest12345_*
IMO, DA2 is much better after your first playthrough. You have to remember, when DA2 earned its bad reputation, it was in the most unpolished and unfinished state. There were a variety of bugs or glitches that detracted from the game, that would later be patched. One of the most memorable of these, was a bug that caused every enemy to explode with a gory animation. This animation was only supposed to occur like every 10 or 20 enemies, not every single enemy. Surprisingly, this animation bug had a significant impact on the way the gameplay felt. It felt more over-the-top and like hack-n-slash game, rather than a party based rpg.
And that is just one example of a bug that was later fixed. There were other problems with DA2 that were never fixed or patched.
So when you combine the idea that the game launched in a very unpolished state, with the expectations of an obsessed fanbase on the heels of Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect 2, it is easy to see why standards and expectations were so high. When DA2 failed to reach those expectations, and frustrated its fans with bugs or limitations, people raged hard.
DA2 is a solid game, it has some great design elements, but it also has some design flaws that persist through the entire game. If you are willing to overlook the bad, there is definitely a lot of good content in there, you just have to be willing to go in after it.
I think the problem lies in the topics text to be honest. There is not really any comparison to make in my opinion, Origins is a masterpiece in my eyes. Dragon Age 2 is not, but it is still a good game. And i kind of think i understand why it is so different and why Inq will be more what we wanted DA2 to be.
So why do people think DA2 is so bad compared to DA:O?
I really didn't care for the story, the reused maps and some of the companions were annoying or rude. I really didn't understand why Anders made the dirty maid comment to Aveline. Her husband died and there was no cause to be mean. I didn't find some of the bantering funny. I thought the STD joke for Isabela was a real turn off. Merrill, I couldn't understand why she wanted to work with a demons. I thought that was a bad move and not well explained back then. Why roll the dice with your life for a mirror. Now we know.
It seemed like most of the people I had to fight were Bat S*** Crazy. Crazy people got old.
When finish a da:o playthrough, i can only enjoy 60% play hours i spend
When finish a mass effect, i can enjoy 70% play hours i spend.
When finish a da2 , i can enjoy about 80% and me2 90%.
Bioware is right for trying to make a better game.
But between the SWTOR and the ME3.
DA2 just can't get enough resouce to be a game it meant to be.
I think its mostly been covered here but some of the most common complaints are the re-used environments, poor execution of the final story and Hawke's general passivity in the story. The combat is also considered to have over the top animations, far too reliant on waves, and too much hack and slash.
DA2 is by no means a bad game but I agree it lacks the polish of DAO. I think a lot of its techinical problems stem from its rushed schedule. I do not have the direct source handy but I have read several times that DA2 was indeed rushed out the door to cash in on the popularity of DAO. This is why combat relies on waves and why we see that same damn cave over and over.
DLC for DA2 addressed many of these issues and to me at least proved that Bioware knew what it wanted to do, it just never got the chance initially.
People's complaints over the story are much less clear as I think Bioware wanted Hawke to be a protagnoist was reactive rather than proactive. Hawke's story was not meant to be the sweeping epic that the Warden's was and this was upsetting for fans who wanted DA2 to be just Origins: Part 2.
I personally enjoy both of the games immensely and would agree that both of them have their flaws. I might rank DAO slightly higher as it has a more complete feel to it and does not suffer from some of the techinical issues like re-used environments, but both games are absolutely worth playing.
I think DA2's biggest issue for me was that it was starting to suffer a kind of level-up video game syndrome after Act 2. It was clear to me when both Orsino and Meredith turned on Hawke regardless that there simply had to be more excuses to battle something before the game's conclusion. Thankfully, by then I had already been resigned to the fact that Kirkwall was a total insane asylum and I had already been hoping that Hawke would leave that wretched burg along with the LI, so I was glad that siding with the mages made for such an ending.
My second biggest issue would have to be the lack of a proper prologue. Granted, I'm not sure of how the timeline fits, because a rogue or warrior Hawke, if I understand correctly, might have been at Ostagar, while the mage would have been at Lothering. In any case, one of DA:O's notable strengths was that you got a good amount of time getting to know your family/clan/friends before the story pulled you out. The human noble is easily my favorite origin, because I was surprised by how much I actually cared about both parents, Fergus and his wife and son. I'm not really allowed to get to know each sibling in DA2 unless I replay the entire game on a different class.
Everything else, like reused environments and such are obviously an annoyance that DA:O has very little of, but I felt that the story itself was very solid for a more personal view of the protagonist, that and I actually like the companions a great deal.
I don't "hate" or "despise" DA2, I simply lack any desire to replay it after the first time. DAO, on the other hand, has properties that keep me replaying it. It's hard to put my finger on really...
- Re-used areas definitely got old fast; no desire to go through that again.
- Ridiculous spawns out of the ground and sky made me wonder sometimes if the game was still in Alpha.
- The whole "nobody to hero" theme wasn't really emphasized; felt more like I'd gone from living in the poor section to living in the upper class section, and little else.
- Unavoidable loss of certain characters, and a certain building, left me feeling railroaded. I saw the warning signs, but was powerless to affect the outcome, despite being a so-called hero.
Just a lot of meh, really. Even when the game was a new experience, I was forcing myself to finish it by act 3, just so I could complete the game once.
I don't know. Except for the painfully overused environments I found DA 2 to be a more pleasurable experience. And by Clangeddin, they added a dwarf who is actually interesting.
I take it a Gimli rip off is not what you wanted from a Dwarven character. 
Seriously though. Varric is not only my favourite Dwarven character in Dragon Age 2, he's my favourite depiction of a Dwarf period.
He is just a fantastic witty character, who balanced out all of the angst that Anders and Fenris brought to the team.
Ogren is funny, but he is a bit one dimensional. The only time he showed any depth was during a certain mission with the Brood Mother and other spoilery stuff.
Combat wise I find Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age Rise To Power equally challenging. Hard and Nightmare are really, really challenging. I struggle with those difficulties. Compare this to Mass Effect's idea of insanity. Trouble with Rise To Power is that the challenge doesn't come from a couple of difficult foes. It comes from throwing mobs after mobs at you till your health and stamina/mana run out. That is a pretty dull way to do difficulty, even if it does make the game more challenging.
Granted mobs work well for a game like Dynasty Warriors. However that game series is about lightning fast reflexes to beat up waves of enemies with combos. So if you've designed a combo system with over the top acrobatics, you need the mobs to truly show off how powerful your character is. Seeing lots of foes being launched into the air with a flashy move is the incentive to pull of the insanely tricky combos. Dragon Age series isn't really about that. So the endless mobs felt out of place.
I agree fully about Varric. It was a nice change to get a dwarf that wasn't a flagon-draining bearded drunkard.
I agree that a prologue would have helped. Myself I haven't had a playthrough with Carver, mainly because there's no reason I am interested in him based on the 3 minutes of him I saw. If I got to know him a little better before he died and seen more of the family dynamic, I might have had more reason to try for alternate content there.
It was clear to me when both Orsino and Meredith turned on Hawke regardless that there simply had to be more excuses to battle something before the game's conclusion.
Didn't one of the devs say that that was precisely the reason why you must fight Orsino regardless of how you side? They thought it needed another late boss fight. Easy for me to be bothered by this since I don't like the way DA2 handles boss fights in the first place.
Didn't one of the devs say that that was precisely the reason why you must fight Orsino regardless of how you side? They thought it needed another late boss fight. Easy for me to be bothered by this since I don't like the way DA2 handles boss fights in the first place.
I found that out later on, but when I first played DA2, it was just the impression I got from the way the entire thing was designed.
Reused enviroments and lack of tactical view are the main complaints.
I don't think the quality was that different from DA:O overall though. In particular I thought DA2 had more memorable companions and was probably the best BioWare RPG in that regard since Jade Empire. The ME series and DA:O were littered with duds around the good companions.
I also appreciated a different narrative than what we usually get.
Sadly BW seems to be distancing itself as much as possible from DA2, including the good bits.
DA2 was horrible in my opinion, but I'm sure the many reasons why people feel the same way I do have already been expressed, so instead I'll add some extra thought-
To me, The Warden in DAO was an important figure. A truly important figure for many reasons, and I can see my Warden as someone of note in Thedosian history.
Hawke? Not so much. To me, Hawke was one of those characters you hear about in a game that you then find in a side quest somewhere for whatever reason. DA2 being us playing through that side character's journey.
Not a fan of that, to be honest.
The Inquisitor seems to be shaping up to become one of those truly important figures of note, but we'll see when the time comes. For now, I've forced myself into thinking that The Warden is the only true hero in the playable DA games and that The Inquisitor may become the second.
DA2 was horrible in my opinion, but I'm sure the many reasons why people feel the same way I do have already been expressed, so instead I'll add some extra thought-
To me, The Warden in DAO was an important figure. A truly important figure for many reasons, and I can see my Warden as someone of note in Thedosian history.
Hawke? Not so much. To me, Hawke was one of those characters you hear about in a game that you then find in a side quest somewhere for whatever reason. DA2 being us playing through that side character's journey.
Not a fan of that, to be honest.
The Inquisitor seems to be shaping up to become one of those truly important figures of note, but we'll see when the time comes. For now, I've forced myself into thinking that The Warden is the only true hero in the playable DA games and that The Inquisitor may become the second.
Nice post. It was really fun being the Warden. You had a clear goal. Hawk didn't have any control of his environment and it felt like things were just happening around Hawk.
Nice post. It was really fun being the Warden. You had a clear goal. Hawk didn't have any control of his environment and it felt like things were just happening around Hawk.
Everyone want to be the warden again, I want to be the warden again too.
But if u can't let that go then don't play it. The game won't work if i keep thinking how bad i want play warden again.
DA2 was horrible in my opinion, but I'm sure the many reasons why people feel the same way I do have already been expressed, so instead I'll add some extra thought-
To me, The Warden in DAO was an important figure. A truly important figure for many reasons, and I can see my Warden as someone of note in Thedosian history.
Hawke? Not so much. To me, Hawke was one of those characters you hear about in a game that you then find in a side quest somewhere for whatever reason. DA2 being us playing through that side character's journey.
Not a fan of that, to be honest.
The Inquisitor seems to be shaping up to become one of those truly important figures of note, but we'll see when the time comes. For now, I've forced myself into thinking that The Warden is the only true hero in the playable DA games and that The Inquisitor may become the second.
This makes me wonder if BioWare would ever really be willing to try the smaller scale protagonist ever again in their games. It's something I've had on my mind when they decided to do another Mass Effect game. I see people posting suggestions for characters who are not of nearly as much import to the entire galaxy as Commander Shepard, but I can't help but think that many people would outright reject such a character mainly on principle. Personally, I think it's unfortunate if they decide to stick to the center-of-the-universe protagonist for everything.
And i kind of think i understand why it is so different and why Inq will be more what we wanted DA2 to be.
I'd like to think that with the small tidbits I happen upon (i'm trying to avoid info on it to be completely surprised) that it will be... but they are implementing so many new features into it. Will they have enough resources to give us a plotline as long and varied as Origins?
Personally, I think it's unfortunate if they decide to stick to the center-of-the-universe protagonist for everything.
It's their staple.
Everyone want to be the warden again, I want to be the warden again too.
But if u can't let that go then don't play it. The game won't work if i keep thinking how bad i want play warden again.
That is not what I meant. I was replying to LPPrince, on 01 May 2014 - 12:49 AM, . The point is that it is not fun playing a character that has very little control of the environment around them and doesn't seem to have a clear objective. Act 3 wasn't worth my time.
Am I the only one who feels the combat engine was better in DA2 than DAO? The endlessly spawning waves of enemies who don't really use tactics, and the lack of ability to set up ambushes of your own - things like that kind of stink, but are an issue of combat content, not engine - DA:O littered your bars with too many abilities that were hypersituational, and I really didn't feel like my archer was very impressive at all. DA2 preserved bar slots for things that actually needed them, and the combat overall feels much more fluid as a result. I also like the over-the-top animations - I'll take that over "I shot the arrow AGAIN x 1000."
DA2's issues boil down mostly to "content, not concept" for me. Lots of stuff is initially impressive - the art style, the narration, the engine, the rival/friend system, only to turn out not as fun as it seemed because they didn't utilize it right.
Apparently this site http://www.metacriti...ii/user-reviews has information and reviews from users.
For PC the negatives were 61%.
445 positive
191 mixed
1019 negatives
You could read the reasons. Many have already been stated. They also have user score for Xbox 360 and PS3. Both had high % of negative scores. I don't think this is going to be a problem for them in the future. They have already learned from this. It may hurt returning customers. I'm sure their original sales of DA 2 benefited from the fact that DAO was a hit.
It's their staple.
Sure, but sticking to it can limit the types of stories they can tell. It's good fun being the "chosen one", but it can be great fun playing the regular person who is seemingly of little import vs. the world as well.
Nach oben