Dragon Age 2 is superior to the first despite what everyone says

[taiwwa]

Better plot and story

Much better art.

Faster combat while keeping the same abilities as the original.

The first dragon age really bored me to be honest. The dialogue seemed to take forever, the combat was very slow and kind of annoying because you would see your warrior wind up a big blow and then see that he took off like 1/10 of a darkspawn's health. The darkspawn themselves are truly some of the worst fantasy villains I've ever seen. Very boring, no subtlety, about the same thing as an termite colony in your home.

I've almost finished the second, and having the qunari as antagonists, as well as a conflict between mages and templars, is very interesting I find because it's not a boring good vs evil but rather there is subtlety to it.

And for all the complaints about the combat, I don't find it any less deep than DA:O. All of the same abilities are still there.

Lastly the art is fantastic. I'm guessing that DA:O must have been in development a long time because some of the art looks quite dated. But in this game they revamped the game models. Biggest improvement is in the elven models.

Only thing that DA:O has over DA2 is Morrigan and Alistair. I liked them more, Morrigan especially since she was voiced by the great Claudia Black. I honestly think that people who prefer DA:O over DA2 (and by the same token Mass Effect 1 over ME2, ME is far superior but that's a different thread) really are into geeking out over lots of menus and stats but kind of miss the point that is storytelling experience.

 

[Iwata]

The first one bored me to tears, so I never bothered with the second game. I found the whole backlash against it intriguing, though.

 

[Thoric485]

Lastly the art is fantastic. I'm guessing that DA:O must have been in development a long time because some of the art looks quite dated. But in this game they revamped the game models. Biggest improvement is in the elven models.

Sad thing is several people here will take you seriously.

 

[tippy2k2]

I thought that both games were really good, however, I do think DA:O is a better game.

Dragon Age 2 thoughts:
"Level Design: One city to run around in...well that can work I suppose. Huh...haven't I been in this cave before and wasn't it a smugglers den then?"

"Combat: Tap tap tap tap tap tap tap...is it dead yet?...tap tap tap tap tap"

"Story: Here's some choices! Oh, you made that choice? Who cares, same thing is happening!"

"Spawning: Bad guys just appear out of nowhere constantly...like, literally. It's like they popped a hole in the space-time continuum and accidentally fell into the game"

Basically, DA2 was half-assed to me. I still very much enjoyed it but the reusing of so many damn environments, the "keep tapping buttons to swing" combat, and the questionable story stuff (see end of Act II and all of Act III but it sounds like you're not there yet so I won't reveal it. The story is good where you're at, give it a few hours when they take a giant step backwards) keep it from being near Dragon Age Origins.

It's not a bad game (and certain not "WARST GAME EVAR!!! as many here claim), it's just not nearly as good as DA:O.

 

[Kahunaburger]

I've almost finished the second, and having the qunari as antagonists, as well as a conflict between mages and templars, is very interesting I find because it's not a boring good vs evil but rather there is subtlety to it.

This was the part where I was sure the whole post was in massive sarcasm quotes.

 

[DoPo]

I've almost finished the second, and having the qunari as antagonists, as well as a conflict between mages and templars, is very interesting I find because it's not a boring good vs evil but rather there is subtlety to it.

This was the part where I was sure the whole post was in massive sarcasm quotes.

Really? I just read the title and skipped the OP to see the other comments. You seem to be confirming my suspicion.

 

[taiwwa]

How was DA1's combat any better? yeah in DA2 there's a lot of tapping. In DA1 there's a lot of watching auto attack.

Story: if I'm not mistaken, you still end up fighting dragons in DA1. The only difference your choices make is who lives and who dies at the end of certain quests.

Yeah, the city is reused a lot, but I'm willing to bet that if you actually counted the number of zones and stuff, DA2 has an equal number as DA1. It's just that DA1 labels some level "forest" and another "city" or something like that.

Although the GPS on the top right of the screen meant that I wasn't noticing the environment anyways, but rather just going along with the arrow.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

How was DA1's combat any better? yeah in DA2 there's a lot of tapping. In DA1 there's a lot of watching auto attack.

Story: if I'm not mistaken, you still end up fighting dragons in DA1. The only difference your choices make is who lives and who dies at the end of certain quests.

Yeah, the city is reused a lot, but I'm willing to bet that if you actually counted the number of zones and stuff, DA2 has an equal number as DA1. It's just that DA1 labels some level "forest" and another "city" or something like that.

Although the GPS on the top right of the screen meant that I wasn't noticing the environment anyways, but rather just going along with the arrow.

The fact that you some up the plot of Dragon Age: Origins as 'You fight dragons' shows how much you know about it. You can choose who becomes king of the Dwarves, what to do with the golem-forging anvil, how to deal with a posessed child, who becomes king or queen of Ferelden, between Mages and Templars... As far as I can tell the ending of DA2 is that pretty much everybody's dead except for your team mates no matter what you do.

For environments no, apart from the campsite I literally cannot think of one time DA:Origins reused a location (unless it was literally the same place, and then it never respawned enemies just for the hell of it). Oh, and that random encounter with the travelling tradesman who didn't sell anything useful that repeated. That was it. In the grand finale of Origins you run through entire sections of Denerim you'd never been in before and get a unique arena to fight in. It gave a sense of importance to the event, rather than just "Here are the same old places you've been in all through the game, but now they're a little bit on fire".

As for story, yes, the Qunari and Mages Vs Templars could have been very interesting, but instead the Qunari plotline just gets kicked in the head halfway through and the Mages are all blood mages, which makes the whole thing ridiculous.

As for combat, while I don't think Origins is vastly better than 2 there is generally more to it than making your area of effect attacks hit as many people as possible and setting up the really simple combos that give 400% damage bonuses.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Okay, that's your opinion. I'll stick with mine that they wasted so much potential with Dragon Age 2 that it isn't even funny.

 

[Goofguy]

The two biggest things that irked me from DA2:

- The repetitive locations. On top of the same two dungeons being used over and over, in the 6+ years the story spans in Kirkwall, the city and its people never change. Finding: Isabela standing in the exact same spot at the Hanged Man and Fenris staying in the same run-down mansion after all that time? At least with Aveline, she got a promotion and had a job that would compel someone to stay put. The other two are just waiting for something to happen... for 6 years, seriously?

- Your decisions don't really count for anything. You constantly side with the Templars and some mages will claim that you are an honourable man who knows what ought to be done. You constantly help the mages, even through their practice of blood magic, and the Templars will still overlook your 2-3 mage companions. Oh and regardless of who you ultimately side with:

Spoiler

You still fight both Orsino and Meredith at the end. What would have been a lot more 'subtle' would be to have the Champion side with either of them resulting in the death of only the opposite (or their possible escape).

Or have a third option where the Champion refuses to choose sides and will fight either faction in his noble endeavour to prevent the citizens of Kirkwall from being harmed.

Or have a fourth option where the Champion will fight either faction as he/she tries to escape the city because he/she does not wish to be involved in the conflict.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

The two biggest things that irked me from DA2:

- The repetitive locations. On top of the same two dungeons being used over and over, in the 6+ years the story spans in Kirkwall, the city and its people never change. Finding: Isabela standing in the exact same spot at the Hanged Man and Fenris staying in the same run-down mansion after all that time? At least with Aveline, she got a promotion and had a job that would compel someone to stay put. The other two are just waiting for something to happen... for 6 years, seriously?

- Your decisions don't really count for anything. You constantly side with the Templars and some mages will claim that you are an honourable man who knows what ought to be done. You constantly help the mages, even through their practice of blood magic, and the Templars will still overlook your 2-3 mage companions. Oh and regardless of who you ultimately side with:

Spoiler

You still fight both Orsino and Meredith at the end. What would have been a lot more 'subtle' would be to have the Champion side with either of them resulting in the death of only the opposite (or their possible escape).

Or have a third option where the Champion refuses to choose sides and will fight either faction in his noble endeavour to prevent the citizens of Kirkwall from being harmed.

Or have a fourth option where the Champion will fight either faction as he/she tries to escape the city because he/she does wish to be involved in the conflict.

Yes, my main problem was the combination of your choices making no difference and having no consequences, either. In Origins I failed to save the Mages, which meant that I had to sacrifice a woman to exorcise the child in Redcliffe, which meant that Alistair gave me a bollocking for not doing it properly which is fair enough. You had to earn the optimum solution. Let's be honest here, I reckon most people if they took a second to be reasonable were able to solve the Werewolf/Elf problem with minimal bloodshed, but it still gave them a feeling that the player character could accomplish something. In Dragon Age 2 the problem with all the grey-on-grey morality is that you spend ages choosing which side is right... And then everyone gets killed anyway. You cannot save the city, you cannot save anyone.

An example of their being no consequences was if you decided to kill the Qunari in favour of giving them Isabela. Later on, no one calls you out for this for the possible consequences of this, ie. all out war with the Qunari. Now I'm not saying that fighting for her is inherently wrong from any perspective, least of all roleplaying, but I'd like there to be logical consequences for all this stuff.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

The two biggest things that irked me from DA2:

- The repetitive locations. On top of the same two dungeons being used over and over, in the 6+ years the story spans in Kirkwall, the city and its people never change. Finding: Isabela standing in the exact same spot at the Hanged Man and Fenris staying in the same run-down mansion after all that time? At least with Aveline, she got a promotion and had a job that would compel someone to stay put. The other two are just waiting for something to happen... for 6 years, seriously?

- Your decisions don't really count for anything. You constantly side with the Templars and some mages will claim that you are an honourable man who knows what ought to be done. You constantly help the mages, even through their practice of blood magic, and the Templars will still overlook your 2-3 mage companions. Oh and regardless of who you ultimately side with:

Spoiler

You still fight both Orsino and Meredith at the end. What would have been a lot more 'subtle' would be to have the Champion side with either of them resulting in the death of only the opposite (or their possible escape).

Or have a third option where the Champion refuses to choose sides and will fight either faction in his noble endeavour to prevent the citizens of Kirkwall from being harmed.

Or have a fourth option where the Champion will fight either faction as he/she tries to escape the city because he/she does wish to be involved in the conflict.

The sad thing is that there is plenty of room for a fourth option: Side with the City. There are dozens of quests where you help out the City Guardsmen throughout the entire game. Why aren't they considered a faction? Instead of helping homicidal mages or genocidal templars, why not help the City Guard get the innocent people out of harms way?

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

The two biggest things that irked me from DA2:

- The repetitive locations. On top of the same two dungeons being used over and over, in the 6+ years the story spans in Kirkwall, the city and its people never change. Finding: Isabela standing in the exact same spot at the Hanged Man and Fenris staying in the same run-down mansion after all that time? At least with Aveline, she got a promotion and had a job that would compel someone to stay put. The other two are just waiting for something to happen... for 6 years, seriously?

- Your decisions don't really count for anything. You constantly side with the Templars and some mages will claim that you are an honourable man who knows what ought to be done. You constantly help the mages, even through their practice of blood magic, and the Templars will still overlook your 2-3 mage companions. Oh and regardless of who you ultimately side with:

Spoiler

You still fight both Orsino and Meredith at the end. What would have been a lot more 'subtle' would be to have the Champion side with either of them resulting in the death of only the opposite (or their possible escape).

Or have a third option where the Champion refuses to choose sides and will fight either faction in his noble endeavour to prevent the citizens of Kirkwall from being harmed.

Or have a fourth option where the Champion will fight either faction as he/she tries to escape the city because he/she does wish to be involved in the conflict.

The sad thing is that there is plenty of room for a fourth option: Side with the City. There are dozens of quests where you help out the City Guardsmen throughout the entire game. Why aren't they considered a faction? Instead of helping homicidal mages or genocidal templars, why not help the City Guard get the innocent people out of harms way?

this is very true, and i agree, as much as i did like DA2, no one can say that it wasn't rushed/shortcut'd, and that it couldn't have been so much more.

bleh..a good food that leaves something to be desired after you eat it.

 

[Vivace-Vivian]

I also think Dragon Age 2 was better for many of those reasons. Also it was actually fun, unlike DA:O.

 

[Epona]

Depends on what system you played the games on. DAO was better on PC while DA2 was better on console.

 

[GoaThief]

No, da2 was awful on consoles.

I couldn't even finish it thanks to a lack of promised auto-attack.

 

[skywolfblue]

Combat? Hell yes, way better. Except for the wave system.

Art Style? Yes. It wasn't flawless, but it was a pretty neat improvement over DA:O.

Environments? Hell no. Re-using dungeons and the city stays the same the whole game was not OK. TERRIBLE.

Story? Nope. They had the potential to create a good game, but the fact that your final choice doesn't matter and both sides go "hurga blurga" and turn on you ruins it.

Companions? About the same. Even though no Alister or Morrigan, Varric and Merril are cool enough to make up for that.