• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Dragon Age II

WabeWalker said:
I would go with Origins for that.

The first game felt more like a fantasy game to me.

The second game, however, is a better RPG, and its story is vastly superior. The characters, as mentioned above, are much stronger in the sequel as well.
Click to expand...

oh so the sequel is better? what do you mean when you say the first felt more like fantasy?
 
The story in DA2 is laughable. Big deal it takes place over a 10 year period, but nothing changes. The city stays exactly the same it becomes such a borefest that I had to force myself to finish. Increasing a bosses hitpoints to where you just have to keep attacking for 30 minutes is not about tactics its about stupidity. The combat went from extremely easy to hard in a blink of an eye.

Most mobs are so easy no planning is required. The only time you have to plan is when you get to a boss and those fights are not fun on hard. What character progression do you really see over ten years. Aveline becomes captain of the guard and you move to Hightown ooooh EPIC. everyone else stays in the same place for the entire 10 years. Oh wait Hawke's title does change too WOW.

If your decisions had any effect on the outcome of the game that would be something, but you are led down one path and your choices mean nothing. What is epic about any of that?

End Rant
 
mongoosenco said:
The story in DA2 is laughable. Big deal it takes place over a 10 year period, but nothing changes. The city stays exactly the same it becomes such a borefest that I had to force myself to finish. Increasing a bosses hitpoints to where you just have to keep attacking for 30 minutes is not about tactics its about stupidity. The combat went from extremely easy to hard in a blink of an eye.

Most mobs are so easy no planning is required. The only time you have to plan is when you get to a boss and those fights are not fun on hard. What character progression do you really see over ten years. Aveline becomes captain of the guard and you move to Hightown ooooh EPIC. everyone else stays in the same place for the entire 10 years. Oh wait Hawke's title does change too WOW.

If your decisions had any effect on the outcome of the game that would be something, but you are led down one path and your choices mean nothing. What is epic about any of that?

End Rant
Click to expand...

I've been waiting for someone to rant about this! The whole 10 year thing doesn't add anything to the game. Everything in the game could have happened in consecutive days and it would likely have been better than trying to pretend it takes place over 10 years in which *nothing really changes*. They try to force a fairly simple story into an epic one by simply declaring there are long breaks in time.
 
I'd actually play Dragon Age 2 before Dragon Age 1 (and Awakenings).
It's more streamlined, typically easier, and shorter.
If you play #1 afterward it'll suddenly seem like they added a ton of things like pickpocketing, useful stores, a wide variety of maps (and enemies), and you actually have to think about what you're doing instead of just letting the AI annihilate anything short of a boss.
 
I gather Dragon Age 1 has a more predictable storyline because it follows the typical fantasy formula while the second one does something new but not everyone likes?
 
dioxholster said:
I gather Dragon Age 1 has a more predictable storyline because it follows the typical fantasy formula while the second one does something new but not everyone likes?
Click to expand...

That is co-rrect.

You should play the Dragon Age 2 demo, and see how you like the combat, which is what you'll be doing most of the time anyhow.
 
Domingo said:
I'd actually play Dragon Age 2 before Dragon Age 1 (and Awakenings).
It's more streamlined, typically easier, and shorter.
If you play #1 afterward it'll suddenly seem like they added a ton of things like pickpocketing, useful stores, a wide variety of maps (and enemies), and you actually have to think about what you're doing instead of just letting the AI annihilate anything short of a boss.
Click to expand...

If you play Origins after DA2 it's likely you'll fall asleep from the combat, which now feels like it's in slow mo.
 
Dragon Age Origins story is way better and more thought out. Your choices actually change how the game is played and ends. I would not call it more predictable at all. The amount of variety is Origins is way better that DA2 which uses the same areas over and over. I should play through again to see how many caverns I enter are exactly the same. Oh and putting a cart in front of a cave entrance until you get a quest then the cart miraculously disappears. That is great story telling isn't it.

The combat being faster pace is not bad, but let be serious the extra bad guys with the small health bar that you explode with one hit. Is there really a point to that. The same animation when the bad guys die every time they explode into a hundred pieces no matter if you attack with daggers swords or magic. So everything is overly reused in DA2 especially the areas you visit and animations.

A good combat pace would be somewhere between DA:O and DA2.
 
dioxholster said:
I gather Dragon Age 1 has a more predictable storyline because it follows the typical fantasy formula while the second one does something new but not everyone likes?
Click to expand...

The 2nd games feels like its 90% side quests. Its not like the storyline is different, it just doesn't have much of one. Seriously at a lot of points in the game people aren't even sure what they are doing because the main plot line is thin and barely a part of the game.
 
ocellaris said:
The 2nd games feels like its 90% side quests. Its not like the storyline is different, it just doesn't have much of one. Seriously at a lot of point in the game people aren't even sure what they are doing because the main plot line is thin and barely a part of the game.
Click to expand...

And the mages decisions make no damn sense at all. I won't get into what decisoins, but they are just a bunch of whiny babies who seem to throw temper tantrums and make irrational decisions.
 
WabeWalker said:
I would go with Origins for that.

The first game felt more like a fantasy game to me.

The second game, however, is a better RPG, and its story is vastly superior. The characters, as mentioned above, are much stronger in the sequel as well.
Click to expand...

DA2 has a story? ZOMG THIS IS NEWS!

All my friends both in person and on FB are saying the same thing..characters in DA2 felt shallow and annoying, and the story made no sense/was non-existent.

This thread lives because of WabeWan**r and no one else.
 
Just finished my first playthrough, and I have to say there really is no choice towards the ending, and what choice you do have is mainly detrimental to you. Add to that the lame map recycling and needless time skips and you have a game with little replay value. Also annoying was being forced into certain scenarios, like enemies I could have killed but let walk away??? Don't get me started on the isabella bug, ugh.
 
mongoosenco said:
And the mages decisions make no damn sense at all. I won't get into what decisoins, but they are just a bunch of whiny babies who seem to throw temper tantrums and make irrational decisions.
Click to expand...

What Orsino did at the end of the game was one of the biggest facepalm moments I have ever seen :(
 
DA2 characters are hit and miss. Everyone seems to like Varric, since he does most of the talking in the game. Isabella just wants to fuck everything that moves, Fenris just wants to enslave the mages, Anders just whines, Aveline is Allistair with a less introspective personality...
 
ocellaris said:
The 2nd games feels like its 90% side quests. Its not like the storyline is different, it just doesn't have much of one. Seriously at a lot of point in the game people aren't even sure what they are doing because the main plot line is thin and barely a part of the game.
Click to expand...

But the plot in Origins is virtually non existent? Which game did you play?

I've said it a thousand times now - the plot in Origins was clearly aimed at 12-year-olds: Gather an army, and fight the arch demon. Wrap the whole thing up in a generic, standard fantasy setting, and voila, a game that's accessible because of its own stupidity... like a Harry Potter novel.

Origins succeeds for so many people not due to its creativity, but due to its lack of creativity. I want to retract what I said to that guy earlier. Forget about Origins completely. I wouldn't recommend that garbage to anyone. I wouldn't want to undo all the good things that have resulted from DA2.
 
I would recommend Origins whole-heartedly. A wonderful tale from start to finish.
 
WabeWalker said:
combat, which is what you'll be doing most of the time anyhow.
Click to expand...

That right there is what bothers me about this DA2. Its not a Role Playing Game. It's a party combat game with some uninspired dialog in between. And by combat I mean a freakin' circus act with people doing back flips and bodies exploding like bombs and what not. (You know, things 12 year olds would love. :D)

With Dragon Age Origins, some nights when I got home from work, I would start the game up and NEVER LEAVE CAMP. I would spend an hour chatting with the characters, checking over my gear, handing out gifts, crafting, reading the codex, check out my global stats and totals, etc.
 
WabeWalker said:
But the plot in Origins is virtually non existent? Which game did you play?

I've said it a thousand times now - the plot in Origins was clearly aimed at 12-year-olds:
Click to expand...

You're way out of left field on this. There is a VERY well defined plot in Origins. You just happen to not like it. Yet the story is much better thought out and has much more depth.

DA2 you wander around killing stuff. The fighting is fun and the spell effects are great. But there is no point to any of it. You want to help <x group>? You chose that option but end up killing all of them anyway. Want to fight <y group>? Nope, that isn't an option.

There is no central thread that holds the game together, all there are is a bunch of barely related quests you go wandering around to do.

Your companions back stories in Origins were varied and had lots of feeling to them. DA2 companions are completely 1 dimensional and you are unable to move them one way or another.

I just can't see anyone as credible who trys to claim that DA2's random wanderings somehow equal a better story than Origins. We get it, you don't want to save the world. Fine, the Sims sounds like it would be a better fit.

Further, the world of DA2 doesn't feel like a world. It feels like a box that you sometimes teleport out of randomly to the Deep Roads, the mountains and the coast. In Origins the concept of travelling was there and you got to see what the world looked like and varied landscapes.
 
WabeWalker said:
Dragon Age 2 is way more epic, because the story unfolds over time, and because your party members are actually caught up in events this time. It's smarter, it's more mature... it's just not a dumbed down piece of shit that's aimed at The Harry Potter generation who need to have their stories spoon fed to them.
Click to expand...


Um, no. Totally disagree with you Wabe. IMO Origins was a much better game. we'll never agree on that. Who cares.

I liked Origins way more than DA2. I'm not part of "The Harry Potter Generation who needs to have stories spoonfed to them" either. You need to quit generalizing so much and lumping anyone who doesn't agree with you into some fictional group you made up to make you feel better or superior to justify your opinion.

I'm glad for you that you think DA2 is a better game, but remember, that's your opinion, not everyones.
 
TwistedAegis said:
You're way out of left field on this. There is a VERY well defined plot in Origins. You just happen to not like it. Yet the story is much better thought out and has much more depth.
Click to expand...

Depth?

What depth? The entire game could easily be explained in one sentence. Build an army, defeat the dragon. It was clearly 'high concept', aimed at 12-year-olds. I'm willing to bet that the phrase high concept was even spoken aloud when Origins was being developed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_concept

The Dragon Age plot was anything but deep - it was designed so that people could grasp the concept in a millisecond. The so-called plot was so high concept, that Bioware recycled it for Mass Effect 2 - instead of building an army, however, you built a space fleet... same high concept plot exactly. You can leave the theater and spend twenty minutes buying popcorn for your screaming brat kids (whom you can't control, and don't seem to want to) and return to the movie and still know exactly what's happening. "Oh I get it, the small fat dude with axe in his hand wants a favor from the hero guy first... then he'll join his army and go and help him fight the evil dragon up near the castle."

How can you say Origins was deep? Jesus, have you ever read Tolstoy, Conrad, or Joyce? You think that Origins is deep? It couldn't possibly get any shallower. Deep? What is this, some kind of joke?

My god, how in the name of Socrates did Dragon Age Bore-igins, a plastic version of Baldur's Gate, suddenly come to be known as such a masterpiece? Yes, it is a piece. I'll agree with you there. A piece of shit. I've just decided, I'm going to throw out my copy. I don't want it contaminating my home any more.
 
Last edited:
WabeWalker said:
Depth?

What depth? The entire game could easily be explained in one sentence. Build an army, defeat the dragon. It was clearly 'high concept', aimed at 12-year-olds. I'm willing to bet that the phrase high concept was even spoken aloud when Origins was being developed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_concept

The Dragon Age plot was anything but deep - it was designed so that people could grasp the concept in a millisecond. The so-called plot was so high concept, that Bioware recycled it for Mass Effect 2 - instead of building an army, however, you built a space fleet... same high concept plot exactly. You can leave the theater and spend twenty minutes buying popcorn for your screaming brat kids (whom you can't control, and don't seem to want to) and return to the movie and still know exactly what's happening. "Oh I get it, the small fat dude with axe in his hand wants a favor from the hero guy first... then he'll join his army and go and help him fight the evil dragon up near the castle."

How can you say Origins was deep? Jesus, have you ever read Tolstoy, Conrad, or Joyce? You think that Origins is deep? It couldn't possibly be any less shallow. Deep? What is this, some kind of joke?

My god, how in the name of Socrates did Dragon Age Bore-igins, a plastic version of Baldur's Gate, suddenly come to be known as such a masterpiece? Yes, it is a piece. I'll agree with you there. A piece of shit. I've just decided, I'm going to throw out my copy. I don't want it contaminating my home any more.
Click to expand...

At least it had a plot. I'm just running around doing random shit for no real reason in DA2. You keep going on and on about how bad the plot in DA:O was, yet you completely gloss over the fact DA2 doesn't even have one. I think you're a tad bit biased, amigo.
 
WabeWalker said:
Depth?

What depth? The entire game could easily be explained in one sentence. Build an army, defeat the dragon. It was clearly 'high concept', aimed at 12-year-olds. I'm willing to bet that the phrase high concept was even spoken aloud when Origins was being developed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_concept

The Dragon Age plot was anything but deep - it was designed so that people could grasp the concept in a millisecond. The so-called plot was so high concept, that Bioware recycled it for Mass Effect 2 - instead of building an army, however, you built a space fleet... same high concept plot exactly. You can leave the theater and spend twenty minutes buying popcorn for your screaming brat kids (whom you can't control, and don't seem to want to) and return to the movie and still know exactly what's happening. "Oh I get it, the small fat dude with axe in his hand wants a favor from the hero guy first... then he'll join his army and go and help him fight the evil dragon up near the castle."

How can you say Origins was deep? Jesus, have you ever read Tolstoy, Conrad, or Joyce? You think that Origins is deep? It couldn't possibly be any less shallow. Deep? What is this, some kind of joke?

My god, how in the name of Socrates did Dragon Age Bore-igins, a plastic version of Baldur's Gate, suddenly come to be known as such a masterpiece? Yes, it is a piece. I'll agree with you there. A piece of shit. I've just decided, I'm going to throw out my copy. I don't want it contaminating my home any more.
Click to expand...

Awesome post. And I definitely agree.
 
WabeWalker said:
My god, how in the name of Socrates did Dragon Age Bore-igins, a plastic version of Baldur's Gate, suddenly come to be known as such a masterpiece? Yes, it is a piece. I'll agree with you there. A piece of shit. I've just decided, I'm going to throw out my copy. I don't want it contaminating my home any more.
Click to expand...

You crack me up Wabe. I'm curious though, what if this game were called "Baldurs Gate 3" or even what if this was the game for the title "Dragon Age: Origins"? What would have been your reactions on the first week of release?
 
Wabe, you think DA2's plot/writing was good in comparison to DA:O.

If so, you are officially a troll. Quit repeating the same shit over and over in this thread. Your repetition has gone from mildly annoying to spam.
 
Cali3350 said:
Wabe's post are literally just the same thing over and over arent they.
Click to expand...

You should not so besmirch the awesome ability he possesses to regurgiate exactly what he said before, to stain his acknowledged prowess at it.

I think it really boils down to him starting threads and wanting them to go on for as many pages as possible before they inevitably get closed.
 
WabeWalker said:
LOL!

So now it's trolling to like DA2 and hate Orgiins?

No, seriously, the criss crossing of the map in Origins was laughable. I was surprised that more people didn't think of some cheap Saturday Night Live skit when seeing their characters going from point A to point B, then back to point A, then back to point B, and then back to point A before having to go back to point B again.

Seriously, that's epic? No, that's not epic. That's just stupid. A 12-year-old kid might find that to be epic, but anybody else should see right through that nonsense.

The way Dragon Age 2 progresses is a much more mature form of storytelling, because the 'epic' nature comes from character progression, and from change in the city, rather than from fast traveling and bouncing around the map like some class of pinball.

I really wish that you guys would stop calling people trolls for having different opinions than you do.
Click to expand...

Simply disagreeing is not trolling. The method and wording can make it trolling, though. Implying that people are idiots for having a differing viewpoint sure can as well. I can scarcely believe what I have been reading in your most recent posts. It's like the Emperor's New Clothes here.
 
Ryom said:
This is the most unbiased survey I can find on the Bioware forums regarding DA and DA2.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/6949154
Click to expand...

Interesting polls. I just went over and voted my dislike of DA2 and my liking of DA:O. This thread has really come down to Wabe defending this POS from everyone who criticizes it. but all his points don't really prove anything.

Wabe can you defend the rampant reuse of areas and the fact that nothing changes in 10 years.

How is it more tactical when all the fights on hard are easy even with the BS spawns except for boss fights which are super hard because they have huge resistances and hit points. Which is some of those battles you can just run around until you can get healed again. A good example is the fight with the Arishok. It was hit and run until he finally died not exciting at all.

Do your decisions in DA2 mean anything when it doesn't matter what you say the same thing will happen no matter what. In DA:O if I didn't like a companion I got rid of them. Can you do that in DA2? What is compelling about the story exactly when you do not even know what you are really except side quests.

You like having to micro manage your party in combat, but not being able to equip your characters does not bother you because you say it takes away from their identity. How does them wearing different gear change that. It is how a character acts that defines them not how they dress. None of the characters evolve in DA2. You can only talk to your party members in designated locations. Why should I travel to Fenris's mansion to talk to him when he has been in my party the whole time.

There is much more I am dissatisfied with, but I have actually gotten to a point where reading Wabe's posts are really getting under my skin. This will be my last post about this game and end my second rant.
 
You just can't reason with some people, seriously, stop trying to.
 
Last edited:
Ryom said:
This is the most unbiased survey I can find on the Bioware forums regarding DA and DA2.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/315/index/6949154
Click to expand...

Okay, now I know that there are some educated people at this forum. I shouldn't have to explain, therefore, that the poor fellow who posted that absurd post (linked above) has created something that has no statistical worth whatsoever.

Show of hands please: who here took Probability & Statistics 100 at university?

It's common knowledge to anybody who has taken a one-hundred level stats course that ANY poll in which input is solicited like this is tainted, and is therefore absolute junk - why: because the sample isn't random, obviously.

That sample, by its very nature, is actually about as tainted as a sample can be. Off the top of my head I can see at least six things wrong with it. My stats prof, Edgar Avelino, gave us the perfect example of coverage bias by citing the example of a pollster who stood outside the Democratic convention and asked people on their way out which person they were going to elect for president, the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate. Guess which candidate was highly favored to win the election!

Any poll in which a person is invited to respond (especially when it's embedded in a gaming forum) carriers zero worth.

This kid needs to go back to school.

Or, alternatively, he could simply read this, which explains sampling, and sampling error. (But why do I get the feeling he would probably rebel, and actually try to defend his polls?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll

What's funny is that people are actually debating in that thread, which is akin to getting into an argument with somebody about the world being flat. Whatever you might think about Dragon Age, this guy's polls are utterly worthless.
 
Quite frankly there is no way to solve this mismatch of opinions here, the original game was obviously some kind of spiritual successor to the Baldurs Gate era of RPGs which considering the circumstances it did reasonably well.

It's success on the PC was good but console was a flop, and there is a very strong trend in today's games to appeal to the more casual console audience because there is more money in it. In fact DAO being so tailored for the PC was an anomaly within itself.

Clearly DA2 was an attempt to appeal to the console/casual audience and that fundamentally changes this type of game. I'm not saying either game is bad, I personally prefer depth and complexity to my games but the simple fact is some people (casual gamers especially) do not, sometimes it's even a detriment to the game, they want simplicity and ease of use, a story they can enjoy when playing in short 30 minute sessions.

No one will ever convince Wabe the changes were made for the better because he obviously prefers the game this way.

My main issue is that change in game franchises like this really shits on the people who bought and supported the original game, it's really a bit of a betrayal to the fans who made the sequel possible in the first place who pre ordered the game, bought the SE, bought DLC etc.

I have to ask Wabe, if the tables were turned and DA2 was released first and DAO was the sequel which in your eyes would be a big step backwards for you, then you'd probably be bitching about the degradation in quality of the game right? Be honest here.

What makes this pill particularly difficult to swallow for fans of the original Baldurs gate style game is that there are hardly any decent AAA attempts at this genre now so DAO was a really welcomed with open arms on the PC and that's basically been destroyed, that's immensely frustrating for many of us.

I've said this a million times before but honestly if developers want to jackknife in a different direction with their games which is going to upset the original fans, can't you please just start a whole new franchise/Intellectual property instead of fucking with a winning formula.

Honestly there is nothing of value connecting these 2 games, DA2 could have been a completely different fantasy world and not tarnished DAO good name and everyone would have been happy, fans of DAO can ignore DA2, fans of the new game can enjoy, the studio can enjoy more sales, everyone is a winner.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Quite frankly there is no way to solve this mismatch of opinions here, the original game was obviously some kind of spiritual successor to the Baldurs Gate era of RPGs which considering the circumstances it did reasonably well.

It's success on the PC was good but console was a flop, and there is a very strong trend in today's games to appeal to the more casual console audience because there is more money in it. In fact DAO being so tailored for the PC was an anomaly within itself.

Clearly DA2 was an attempt to appeal to the console/casual audience and that fundamentally changes this type of game. I'm not saying either game is bad, I personally prefer depth and complexity to my games but the simple fact is some people (casual gamers especially) do not, sometimes it's even a detriment to the game, they want simplicity and ease of use, a story they can enjoy when playing in short 30 minute sessions.

No one will ever convince Wabe the changes were made for the better because he obviously prefers the game this way.

My main issue is that change in game franchises like this really shits on the people who bought and supported the original game, it's really a bit of a betrayal to the fans who made the sequel possible in the first place who pre ordered the game, bought the SE, bought DLC etc.

I have to ask Wabe, if the tables were turned and DA2 was released first and DAO was the sequel which in your eyes would be a big step backwards for you, then you'd probably be bitching about the degradation in quality of the game right? Be honest here.

What makes this pill particularly difficult to swallow for fans of the original Baldurs gate style game is that there are hardly any decent AAA attempts at this genre now so DAO was a really welcomed with open arms on the PC and that's basically been destroyed, that's immensely frustrating for many of us.

I've said this a million times before but honestly if developers want to jackknife in a different direction with their games which is going to upset the original fans, can't you please just start a whole new franchise/Intellectual property instead of fucking with a winning formula.

Honestly there is nothing of value connecting these 2 games, DA2 could have been a completely different fantasy world and not tarnished DAO good name and everyone would have been happy, fans of DAO can ignore DA2, fans of the new game can enjoy, the studio can enjoy more sales, everyone is a winner.
Click to expand...

Hallelujah!

That's exactly where I stand on it.

I'm glad I didn't buy it. It's clear to me they fundamentally nudged the game in almost all the directions that I don't like. Towards action RPG, JRPG territory (and I like JRPGs....but not in my Baldur's Gate successor!!). No friendly splash damage. No armor changing. Less equipment tweaking. Randomly spawning enemies from nowhere. No overhead view. Far less need to position characters (magic teleporting, no splash damage) - This leads to the bigger problem: Far less need to pause and strategize (since you don't need to position nearly as much or worry about splash damage).

Oh...and something even people that liked the game agree about, mostly...re-treading the same maps over and over (I thought it was bad enough to repeat twice in Devil May Cry 4).

I wish they had done an action-RPG console spinoff instead. Because it seems like that's what they created.

Wabe hated the first game for what seems like totally illogical and nonsensical reasons to me...and thinks DA2 is the best thing since sliced bread. But a lot of us BG2 and DA:O fans are not happy with what they did to it.

Even the review scores make sense to me. Reviewers play a lot of games, and so they like all kinds of games. DA2 isn't BAD...they just made it a different kind of game - which didn't bug reviewers, because they play all sorts of games.

But look at the DA:O fan community reaction. It's not good.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top