I just realized, New Vegas kind of ruined DA2 for me. I played them close together and I kept asking "Why isn't there an option to side with the Qunari? Why can't I ignore the mages and templars and side with the city?"
Dragon Age 2 is superior to the first despite what everyone says
- Thread starter taiwwa
- Start date
Really? DA:O ruined Oblivion for me, I wondered why none of the characters acted vaguely like sentient beings.Crono1973 said:
[small]And so on...[/small]
![Fr]anc[is](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/93/93202.jpg?1620797781){kind=avatar}
I might have been able to overlook the repetitive locations and ADHD combat if the story wasn't schizophrenic and retarded or if any of the characters were likeable. Varric, despite being textbook deadpan snarker, was the only character I came close to liking. Aveline was ok too, but when the Carth/Kaiden of your game is one of the better characters, you have a problem. Everyone else was completely insufferable. As for the story, the first act is just a waste of time, the game ends in act 2, then starts a completely new plot for act 3, ending in boss fights so stupid the power rangers would be ashamed of them. I tried really hard to like this game. I really did. But it's awful. Worst $60 I ever spent, and its the last time I'm trusting a review from this site.
I was going to say something but, yeah that's pretty much what I think. The first one was so boring I didn't bother with the second one. I was on a PS3 at the time so maybe that had something to do with it. But unless the PC version had 50% better game play and 60% less boring shit happening then I don't care.Iwata said:
Well goody for you chap. You can have that opinion if you want. Just as you are allowed to think windows are tastier than ice cream. No one will stop you. You are entitled you whatever opinion you please, even if they are wrong. Which yours is.
I honsetly feel a lot better about DA2 after ME3. DAO is one of my new all time favs. 2 was a dissapointment but mostly because it was just a marginally improved cash in. It wasnt as bad as the backlash made it out to be. But to call it superior is to ignore
1- the glaringly bad level design.
2- the numerous glitches
3- the marginally entertaining combat
4- meandering story
DAO has none of these.
1- the glaringly bad level design.
2- the numerous glitches
3- the marginally entertaining combat
4- meandering story
DAO has none of these.
I fucking love DA2. I think DA:O was better overall, but there were more points in DA2 where I thought both the story AND combat was a blast.
And I actually liked the ending...
Also, other than the Elves/Qunari/Darkspawn, I DEFINITELY prefer the art style.
And I actually liked the ending...
Also, other than the Elves/Qunari/Darkspawn, I DEFINITELY prefer the art style.
I was with you (I very much enjoyed DA:2) until you said that. What?! You say that like the dragon slaying (other than the last one) is actually part of the main plot.taiwwa said:
You fight three dragons, max in DA:O. Two optional ones and the final boss.
... unless you're counting drakes, I guess, but they make a pretty big deal of making sure the player knows the difference.
Did you... play DA:O? If you only played DA:2 then you really can't compare them.
Edited to remove spoilers.
I agree about the art stylization is a VAST Improvement
I somewhat agree on the quinari making good antagonists. The mage/templar conflict was just as good as it was in DAO.
The combat however is horrid. Its not even an improvement because its the same as DAO, only every group you face is guaranteed to get reinforcements that fall from the heavens. Honestly the combat of both is bland and tedious as hell. It detracts from any enjoyment one could have from it. You could remove it all together and it wouldnt even make it less enjoyable. Its the biggest flaw of the franchise, if not bioware itself.
Story is a fail for me. most games have you saving the world, rebuilding nations. DA2 pits you as a hero as he climbs the ranks to become..... a city councilman. Seriously, thats it, and its every bit as exciting to experience as that sounds.
I somewhat agree on the quinari making good antagonists. The mage/templar conflict was just as good as it was in DAO.
The combat however is horrid. Its not even an improvement because its the same as DAO, only every group you face is guaranteed to get reinforcements that fall from the heavens. Honestly the combat of both is bland and tedious as hell. It detracts from any enjoyment one could have from it. You could remove it all together and it wouldnt even make it less enjoyable. Its the biggest flaw of the franchise, if not bioware itself.
Story is a fail for me. most games have you saving the world, rebuilding nations. DA2 pits you as a hero as he climbs the ranks to become..... a city councilman. Seriously, thats it, and its every bit as exciting to experience as that sounds.
You should probably change the name to
Dragon Age 2 is superior to the first despite what everyone says in my opinion
Because almost all of your points are opinionated.
Dragon Age 2 is superior to the first despite what everyone says in my opinion
Because almost all of your points are opinionated.
Dammit I miss that Let's Play. It might not have been the one that Something Awful wanted, but it was the one the game deserved. I wish they hadn't gassed it.Kahunaburger said:I'll agree with "memorable."DrVornoff said:
