Not as a sequel, but a game in itself, is it good?

#1 Posted by NTM (7286 posts) -

I've heard a lot of people being disappointed in this game, is it just because it's the sequel to Dragon Age: Origins and it didn't end up like they wanted it to be, or is it really not that great as a game itself? Maybe worse than the first, but I just want to know if it's worth getting on its own. I had beaten the first Dragon Age just about a week or two before the second came out, and reading all the thoughts on this sequel has put my purchase on hold. Let's say this is another game outside of the Dragon Age series, was (and is) it worth it? By the way, please don't bring up the fact that there are better games to buy, because money doesn't need to be factored into it, just the thought of it being bought or not. Thanks.

#2 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -

I think so, yes.

#3 Posted by NTM (7286 posts) -
@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.
#4 Posted by Enigma777 (6057 posts) -

Yea, I'd say so.

#5 Edited by Animasta (14651 posts) -

@NTM said:

@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.

there's another topic about it's merits as an actual game (in which CL60 argued with halienel for like 3 pages and they were both retarded) and I'd say there was probably more negativity about it than positivity.

what did you like about DA:O and then someone can tell you whether you would like DA 2 or not (I dunno, I haven't played DA2 it looked dumb)

#6 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3749 posts) -

@NTM said:

@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.

It's average when taken on its own, and bad as a sequel, in my opinion.

#7 Edited by ArbitraryWater (11501 posts) -

As a sequel to Dragon Age Origins, it's an unfortunate and frankly unnecessary tonal shift and something that one would be hard pressed not to call a disappointment. However, I'm in the "It's still an alright game" camp, and as long as you're willing to accept that all the dungeons look the exact same and that the plot implodes upon itself spectacularly by the 3rd act you'll still probably have a good time. The combat still is excellent (turn the difficulty up to hard), and some of the characters are really great (others, maybe not so much)

#8 Edited by Arker101 (1474 posts) -
@Wrighteous86 said:

@NTM said:

@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.

It's average when taken on its own, and bad as a sequel, in my opinion.

 
THIS
#9 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5124 posts) -

I really like it on its own, its an ok sequel.

#10 Edited by Marz (5646 posts) -

It's a good game, the only problems I had are a weaker cast of characters, a smaller game world compared to the original, and streamlined party equipment ( hate this part the most).   I enjoyed the combat system alot ( played on nightmare) and character development, story was ok but i felt disconnected when there are those timelapse sections where it skips a few years.  If this game was named something else other than dragon age , yes i would say it's a a good quality product and i place it higher over games like Two Worlds 2 and Divinity 2 Dragon Knight Saga.

#11 Edited by valrog (3671 posts) -

It's not great, but it's not terrible either. It just... is.
 
If they would put some effort into it, and execute it properly, it would be something great. But they didn't, and it's not.

#12 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8698 posts) -

It would be a good game to start a franchise off, as there's so much chance for potential.
 
As a sequel, it fails in many areas, succeeds in others.

#13 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

It's got some good moments, but I quit playing. It is absolutely the buggiest game I've ever played. This is the PS3 version, and I had one ridiculous problem after another until I just couldn't take it any more. One quest was completely unbeatable because a bug would cause any character I was controlling to stick to the floor unable to move.

#14 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5138 posts) -

I liked it more than the first one, it fixed some flaws and created some others. I think that if people would stop comparing it to the first game they would appreciate a lot more.

#15 Posted by TheHT (10933 posts) -

On it's own it's a fine game with a handful of problems (notably the same damn dungeons throughout). As a sequel it's taking the series in a different direction rather than building on DAO, making it more or less disappointing depending on how well liked DAO was for you.
 
In a word, everything just feels faster. Dialogue choices are faster, combat is hella faster, dungeons are faster (just by virtue of 'hey I've been here before so I know to go here, here, and here for shit), and the story moves faster. Story wise it feels more like three separate stories rolled into one collection, with the aspects of earlier events popping up later or just the straight up main conflict being hinted at early.
 
I really like it, save for its obvious problems, but when I compare it to DAO it seems more like a pretty damn wierd game.

#16 Posted by dragonzord (811 posts) -

Definitely not. Full of plot holes, convenient character archetypes, ugly design, and repetition. Dragon Age 2 is one of the worst 'major', if not the worst, games to come out this year.

#17 Posted by Damian (1538 posts) -

It's a good game. But it's not up to the standard of the first, no. 
 
Choice was traded for presentation and being streamlined. So while the presentation is far superior in DAII, for all the reason's it's called an RPG (story, customization and *derp* role-playing), it is worse. 
It is disappointing as a sequel, but a good game in its own right.
 
Crudely put: I paid $40 for DA:O, and $60 for DAII. I feel those prices should be reversed.

#18 Posted by 2HeadedNinja (1554 posts) -

It's an average game at best no matter from what angle you look at it. The problem is not that DA:O was the better game from a gameplay perspective (some people think so, some don't), the problem is the game looks and feels incredebly rushed and unfocused. The art-direction is a matter of taste (I liked it) but the lack of production value and the confused way to tell a story that is not that good to begin with broke that games neck for me.

I think Bioware was a victim of it's own success. We as gamers are used to get high quality games out of them and DA2 cought a lot of people of guard with the clear feeling that it was a fast cash-in game for them that did nothing to expend the world they were building.

#19 Posted by dagas (2753 posts) -

I played it three times so it can't be that bad. I usually don't even finish most games.

#20 Posted by Flaboere (344 posts) -

When it came out, I burned through it on a weekend, took 40-50 hours, so at that point I liked it alot. I was playing on PC, though. By now, I have no desire to ever play it again, and I have to say that the experience depends greatly on which platform you play on. My friend played it on PS3, and he didn't even get through chapter 1 because of the bad controls.

#21 Posted by SmasheControllers (2544 posts) -

It's a good game, a bit short and lacking in a few area's but over all good.

#22 Posted by emem (1962 posts) -

I haven't been able to look at it as its own game yet. Bought it when it came out, played about 3-4 hours of it and had to stop, because I was so disappointed in "everything" they changed.. starting with the conversation wheel up to the hack and slash combat.

It's good to read that people are actually enjoying it for the game it is, but I think it will take me a few more "years" to forget about DA:O to be able to play through DA2. :)

#23 Posted by BawlZINmotion (714 posts) -

Dragon Age II smells of a developer ramming a sequel out as fast a possible. If you can even call Dragon Age II a sequel. It's unpolished, a lot of resources are recycled with no attempt a trickery, and the plot flow makes myself wonder who Bioware hired to craft this crap. Despite that it manages to save itself at the end by opening possibilities for future games. If you like Dragon Age, period, it's worth playing and I'm sure you'll get some level fo kick out of it. It however is not at all worth $60. Maybe $30? I don't know... 
 
What's more troubling is the pattern emerging from Bioware. Mass Effect 2, while a great game IMO, is a paired down ME1. If you break its design down, more than half the game consists of individual self-contained character stories (your team) and average side quests. Similar things can be said about Dragon Age II, except the team that worked on it are not nearly as good at making the player believe otherwise. Both games signal a developer who has over saturated their workforce. 
 
It's worth playing, but if you want to experience a game with tons of developer love, play The Witcher 2.

#24 Posted by FireBurger (1479 posts) -

Bad as a sequel and boring in its own right. I really wanted to like it, but it was repetitive and uninteresting.

#25 Posted by Hailinel (23978 posts) -

@Laketown said:

@NTM said:

@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.

there's another topic about it's merits as an actual game (in which CL60 argued with halienel for like 3 pages and they were both retarded) and I'd say there was probably more negativity about it than positivity.

what did you like about DA:O and then someone can tell you whether you would like DA 2 or not (I dunno, I haven't played DA2 it looked dumb)

Why did it take me four weeks to notice this?

Why does everyone have so much trouble spelling my username?

What is your favorite color?

#26 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -
@NTM
I think it's a fun game no matter what. It's just very linear and pretty closed. You stay in the same city the whole game through and you don't get to see many different environments. Other than that, the cast of the game is pretty good. I enjoyed the teammates more than in the first game.
#27 Posted by DillonWerner (1526 posts) -

No, no, no, and no.

#28 Posted by Bloodlines (172 posts) -

On it's own, a good lengthy action game i guess. As a sequel nope.

#29 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

I liked it a lot.

#30 Posted by SeanTheBomb (34 posts) -

I didnt find it terrible. I definitly wouldnt spend more than 20 dollars on it. The biggest problem is how boring it gets. The same locations are reused throughout the entire game.

#31 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

@Laketown said:

@NTM said:

@CL60: OK, now as a sequel, would you still say so? And this won't have to do with me wanting it any less, or any more, I just want to know your opinion.

there's another topic about it's merits as an actual game (in which CL60 argued with halienel for like 3 pages and they were both retarded) and I'd say there was probably more negativity about it than positivity.

what did you like about DA:O and then someone can tell you whether you would like DA 2 or not (I dunno, I haven't played DA2 it looked dumb)

Why did it take me four weeks to notice this?

Why does everyone have so much trouble spelling my username?

What is your favorite color?

and he left out how I ended the argument.
#32 Posted by ShaggE (6348 posts) -

I loved it as both, despite bizarre design decisions.  
 
I can totally understand the naysayers, though. There are very legitimate reasons to hate it. 

#33 Posted by Cataphract1014 (1313 posts) -

As standalone, or a sequel, I thought it was a fine game.  I've beat it twice, and I am currently about 2/3s through a 3rd playthrough.
 
I thought what they tried to do with the story was more interesting than the cliche "SAVE THE WORLD FROM MONSTERS" story you see in so many games.  It wasn't handled the best, but I still enjoyed it.

#34 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2682 posts) -

People make it sound like it's worse than it really is just because we're used to so much more.

It is absolutely not a bad game, it's just nothing special.

#35 Posted by Vorbis (2749 posts) -

If it had been called Dragon Age: The Adventures of Kirkwall, maybe I wouldn't of been so disappointed with it and might of enjoyed it abit more. But as it stands, I went into it with certain expectations after loving the first game and it was just a below-average sequel at best.

#36 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

Nope it's terribly repetitive. If it wasn't BioWare on the box it would have been received much less favourably. 
 
It starts out alright but once it starts recycling areas over and over again you'll just lose the will to play it. Also the way enemies just magically appear is fucking retarded and makes strategically positioning party members pointless.
 
The combat is fine, the graphics are fine, the overall feel of the game is fine. The recycling of areas is seriously not fine. If they put more effort into areas I would overlook the boring story and say it's definitely worth playing.

#37 Edited by theoldhouse (439 posts) -

7/10 
 
Definitely flawed but still fun at times. 
 
But dear lord the recycled environments almost killed it for me.

#38 Posted by SSully (4130 posts) -

It is good as a game, so I say go for it. It still has problems that no game should have these days, like horribly repetitious dungeouns.I still had fun with it though.

#39 Posted by Badhands (399 posts) -

Honestly I think I would have liked this game a lot more if it wasn't Dragon Age 2, if it was independent of that series I wouldn't have gone in expecting amazing story, game play, scenery and character interaction.

#40 Posted by joshth (501 posts) -

The game IS good.  Its not great and its nothing like the first but I did enjoy my time  while playing it.  Its two big problems is that it recycles dungeons (which I got over after a while, sort of like oblivion) and the story being to short and jumpy to be satisfying.  But it is a game worth your time, if your willing to give it a try.
#41 Posted by Cameron (595 posts) -

I enjoyed it. The game isn't as good as the first one, but it is a fine game on its own. It doesn't really have much competition though, it's not like we are swimming in fantasy RPGs on consoles at the moment.

#42 Posted by jorbear (2517 posts) -

It is not a bad game, but how could somebody not be disappointed after how good the original was?

#43 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3962 posts) -

From the all the negative comments over the past few months, I've 
decided to wait til DA2 makes it way ere closer to the bargain bin 
before I bust a move.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.