Ok, so I've pretty much just ordered the Ultimate Edition of Dragon Age: Origins today from Amazon (I'm not late to the party right?) and was wondering, since seeing Dragon Age 3 in the search bar, if it is worth getting DA2 once I complete DA:O. I do realise DA2 is a rushed game with quite a few flaws (or at least that's what I've seen on GB forums), but I really don't want to miss out any of the story in this (relatively new) franchise. So, is DA2 really important to the story?

And please, no spoilers for either game.

It barely has anything to do with Dragon Age 1.
It sole focus is on the lead character you control and the city you live in.
 
They might tie them together in DA3 somehow, but right now it's very stand alone.

You should give Dragon Age a go anyway, despite what everyone says it's not THAT bad and I had a blast with it.

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

Until we know more about Dragon Age 3, it's tough to say. I'm satisfied with having watched the two key plot points from Dragon Age 2 unfold through a youtube video, because I just don't like the game.

Dragon Age 2 is a more self contained story that sets up more significant events yet to happen in the Dragon Age universe. I would still recommend picking up Dragon Age 2 because if you shop around you can get it for like 20 bucks.

if you can get DA2 for less than 15 I say go for it (I got it for 12 and have felt that it was worth it)

Dragon Age 2 isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. It's not nearly as good as Origins but still enjoyable nonetheless.

@TaliciaDragonsong The events of Origins are really only important to Fereldan; the events of 2 are really only important for Kirkwall and whichever major side Hawke sides with at the end. I don't feel as if any of the Dragon Age games are going to be directly connected to each other, it'll just be deeper fleshing out of Thedas as a whole.

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

@TEHMAXXORZ: it has nothing to do with dragon age one really but i think it will on number 3. Personaly i liked the second one even though it got bad press. to answer ur question yes you should :)

@Arker101 said:

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

I love both.

@themangalist said:

@Arker101 said:

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

I hated DA:O. Does that mean DA2 is for me?

If your idea of fun is otherwise a random number generator spawning enemies right before your eyes, absolutely.

If you like the combat in Origins, you'll probably like it in DA2, as it's pretty much a better version of that... blatant enemy reinforcements popping out of thin air notwithstanding. The rest of the game though? Ehhhh.... depends entirely on your tolerance for extreme repetition and aimless, incoherent stories with the worst kind of endings. If you get it for cheap and don't raise your expectations too high, I think you can actually have fun with it. The supporting cast is filled with (mostly) interesting characters and some of the subplots are fairly interesting. It's a pity the rest of the game clearly betrays the 18 month dev cycle it was made on.

@themangalist said:

@Arker101 said:

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

I hated DA:O. Does that mean DA2 is for me?

If your idea of fun is otherwise a random number generator spawning enemies right before your eyes, absolutely.

I liked Dragon Age 2 quite a bit but its such a decisive game that I'm not really sure if you'd like it or not.

I really liked the characters, story, and combat of the first game, and DA2 seemed extremely weak as a sequel to that. I'm not saying you can't like both, but a majority of the people I've known like one of them, but they dislike the other.

I myself actually found DAII to have much better characters and combat, even if DA: O had a better plot and setting. Origins is better, but it's nice to see that the irrational vitriol against 2 has cooled.

I think it's telling that my favorite parts of DA2 is where they reference or bring in characters from DA1

@Undeadpool said:

I myself actually found DAII to have much better characters and combat, even if DA: O had a better plot and setting. Origins is better, but it's nice to see that the irrational vitriol against 2 has cooled.

It may have cooled, but the wider opinion on the game still seems to be that it's trash next to the original.

Dragon Age 2...is worth playing...sorta? I thought the characters were better than Origins, but that's about it. If some decent characters can get you through a game, go for it. It seems like the major plot point will be pretty important to the series in the future, so yeah.

still a solid 7/10

definitely worth it for 20 bucks. presuming you have the time to spare.

Umm. DA2 is a linear pile of crap. Worst game I ever played next to RDR and Black Ops. Epic failure of a game. DA1 was a great game, loved it.

I would. I think the end events in DA2 are more important to the world then the ending of Origins and it's going to interesting to see what they do in DA3 because of it.

IIRC Bioware stated that unlike the jump from DA:O to DA2 where there was very little connection, DA2 is basically the set-up for the main plot of DA3. Also while the Warden from DA:O will likely only be tangentially mentioned, Hawke from DA2 is likely to factor heavily into the plot of DA3. There is even the possibility that Hawke may become the Shepard of the DA universe with multiple games following his/her story.

Personally I loved the shit out of DA2, despite its flaws. Unlike DA:O which I only managed to finish once, I got so sucked into the characters and systems of DA2 that I played it to completion twice, back-to-back, and made it about 70% through a third playthrough before getting distracted by MK9 and Portal 2. It may not be for everyone, but if you plan on following the DA franchise I'd strongly suggest that you go through DA2 at least once, if only to have a save to transfer into DA3.

@TEHMAXXORZ: I would get DA2. A lot of people like to bitch about it because they don't feel it was up to Bioware quality, but Bioware quality is really fucking high. So in the grand scheme of things it's still a really good game.

Also, I would probably play both of them if you care about the story because at the end of 2 there is some dialogue that infers (to me at least) that they 2 seemingly independent stories are connected somehow. Don't worry, that's not really spoiling anything.

@Undeadpool said:

I myself actually found DAII to have much better characters and combat, even if DA: O had a better plot and setting. Origins is better, but it's nice to see that the irrational vitriol against 2 has cooled.

Agreed on this. I enjoy both games a lot, but for different reasons, even though I don't think DA2 is up the standard of DA:O or Mass Effect. But I found it fun and I'm sure you can pick it up for relatively cheap now, too.

@Brodehouse: Preaching to the choir on that one. I've made the very same observation myself and I'm sure if I were on message boards a decade ago it would've been people grousing about how BG2 is the worst RPG ever and can't even hold a candle to BG1. Ain't nostalgia a bitch?

@Hailinel: I have to disagree with the assertion that it's "trash." It's well made, it just has obvious flaws. It's just that Origin's flaws are more subtle.

@themangalist said:

@Arker101 said:

If you find that you love DA:O, you probably won't like DA 2

I hated DA:O. Does that mean DA2 is for me?

Depends on what parts of DA:O you didn't like.

If you can get DA2 on the cheap, you may find the flaws to be less aggravating. As for plot relevance, I can say with absolute certainty that the events of DA2 will be important to any sequels. Still, as said previously, maybe just youtube the ending.

@Undeadpool said:

@Brodehouse: Preaching to the choir on that one. I've made the very same observation myself and I'm sure if I were on message boards a decade ago it would've been people grousing about how BG2 is the worst RPG ever and can't even hold a candle to BG1. Ain't nostalgia a bitch?

Listen, while I totally agree with your general assertion here, I don't think this is true. Baldur's Gate II is such a dramatic and significant step up from BG in so many ways, I have trouble picturing even irrational message board people from the year 2000 making that claim, considering the near universal praise that game obtained. In contrast, pretty much everyone--even people like you and I who like the game--think Dragon Age II is a step down from Origins. Anyways, carry on.

Do what Rorie did and set it to the easy setting and run through it.  It's entertaining enough but not something your going to be immersed in like DA:O

@ArbitraryWater said:

@Undeadpool said:

@Brodehouse: Preaching to the choir on that one. I've made the very same observation myself and I'm sure if I were on message boards a decade ago it would've been people grousing about how BG2 is the worst RPG ever and can't even hold a candle to BG1. Ain't nostalgia a bitch?

Listen, while I totally agree with your general assertion here, I don't think this is true. Baldur's Gate II is such a dramatic and significant step up from BG in so many ways, I have trouble picturing even irrational message board people from the year 2000 making that claim, considering the near universal praise that game obtained. In contrast, pretty much everyone--even people like you and I who like the game--think Dragon Age II is a step down from Origins. Anyways, carry on.

See, you SAY that, but take this for example: I honestly think ME2 is a massive step up from ME1. I've gone back and played ME1, and I find it hilarious that people call it "dumbed down" considering how much dumber I can be in ME1 with no consequences. Others disagree with me, though and while I absolutely agree that BG2 is a massive step up, it's not about looking at something objectively. A fanboy is, almost by definition, someone who has lost the ability to think about something objectively, and that's all that I'm lampooning.

The combat, skills and crafting systems in Dragon Age II are more refined and better than Origins. I also found most of the characters to be more enjoyable, except Anders, who is better written in Awakening. All other aspects of comparison work heavily in Origins' favor. The story in Dragon Age II plays more like a trilogy of movies rather than a single story. A lot of stuff carries over act to act, but the main plot is different each go-around. I find Act 1 to be kind of pointless, other than introducing all available party members to the player and setting up various NPC's. Act II was cool, but it's Act III were the plot gets interesting. It's also the events of Act III which serve as a prequel to the story of Dragon Age III, civil war in Thedas.

Dragon Age 2 is fantastic. I've noticed all the haters are full of it for the most part.

I hated it when it came out, never finished it on the PC. I'm currently playing trough it in the PS3 and I'm moderately enjoying it, you just need to be in the right mind set, is as fast food RPG as it gets which isn't necessary a bad thing but it doesn't share much with DAO.

I thought Dragon Age 2 was a fine game. The scale and level of freedom for choice weren't nearly as large as that of Origins, and I have to admit that I, too, was bugged by the recycled environments, but I didn't think the main gameplay was all that different (a bunch of time fiddling with the Tactics of each character, then letting them do their own thing until the AI got into trouble and needed me to Assume Direct Control in order to save them). Sure, the combat was more action-oriented, but I personally played the game more-or-less the same way I played Origins and, as someone who kept instictively mashing the A/Cross button in Origins in hopes that it would make my character attack more quickly, I had fun with the combat.

It's certainly not what a lot of people were looking for after Origins, since a lot of what they liked about the game was said scale and level of player freedom, so if that's what you end up really liking about the first game and Awakening (which I haven't played, so I can't speak about those specific qualities of that expansion), then you might want to either hold off or go in with slightly tempered expectations.

Also, while the story does have some genuinely pretty great moments, the ending is... well, the ending's not all that great. It really soured me on some of the characters (if you've played through the game, you'll likely know about whom I am talking) and ended up feeling a bit contrived.

But since you're asking because you don't want to miss out on potentially important story/universe details, the people behind the game who were at the Dragon Age panel at PAX Prime this year (including writer David Gaider) said that one of the reasons they told the story they did in Dragon Age 2 was to set up the large-scale conflict that will be shown in Dragon Age 3, which will have you trekking across the country (possibly countries) again as opposed to being confined to one city for the entire game.

So the game is pretty flawed, but I actually liked it and didn't think it was nearly as bad as a lot of people say it is.

@ahgunsillyo: Well said.

All the hate for DA2 made me doubt my pre-order, but once I actually sat down and played it for myself, I enjoyed it thoroughly. It's a flawed product, and it's really obvious that it had a very short development cycle, but it's still a good game -- and I really enjoyed DA:O and Awakening as well, so I'm not one of those "one or the other" fans. And really, while there are a good number of people in this thread making statements like "Everyone I know thinks DA2 sucks", I can very easily counter that by saying that everyone I know loves DA:O and DA2. So it's really all about where you look and who you ask. Just try the game for yourself and be your own judge, I say.

I'm the most objective video game critic ever and I never get blinded by nostalgia-glasses. I've played through about 4 times and DA:2 deserves all the criticism it gets. Not enough bad things can be said about it. 
 
It's main focus is supposed to be character interaction. That's supposedly what they ditched actual world development for, repeating the same 3 dungeons 30 times. And yet, it's horribly glitched. Say you kill a person you flirted with once or twice -- in the end, the game will say they were the love of your life and you ran off with them after killing the final boss. My wife, my best friend and I all played the game and this happened to all of us and that's not the only way in which the relationship system glitches like crazy. I've even had characters I never recruited be mentioned in my endings. And unlike Skyrim, there's no excuse, nothing else you can point to in the game where they put all the work into and no massive open sandbox world playing havoc on their attempts at QA -- I doubt there was any QA, despite the claims in the credits.
 
They should just have put more damn time into the game, and that's all their fault. It was lazy and greedy to crap this out like a Call of Duty game. At least Call of Duty games are more polished than this. You can actually get an iron sword in Act 2 that's better than a silverite sword in Act 1. Why? Because it's the next act, silly! Really. Less than zero work went into too many aspects of this game.
 
Are there good aspects? Yes. The characters are wonderful, when they're working correctly (I'm actually still glad I played this, as I got to meet characters like Merrill, Varric and Fenris). And... The combat and graphics are slightly improved from the previous game, to the minimum that you'd demand in the next version of software. The Acts are a fun way of moving time forward in the game, very cinematic concept and I love the idea of an adventure that spans time as well as space. The story is only mediocre but serves to get us deeper into the world of Dragon Age, which is great if the next game is better -- political intrigue and dark fantasy abound, giving me great hope for the future of the series. Most of those ideas about mages being oppressed as fearsome weapons were established in DA:O but the Qunari in particular are really fleshed out. 
 
None of that begins to make up for the lack of an actual game surrounding it. It's not because I loved DA:O that I hate DA:2, I've never been like that and I always take even big changes to the games I love in stride, it's because DA:2 fails. It's not a terrible experience despite all that, if you can deal with all the cheapness and laziness shining through, go ahead and play it. You might be able to beat it during a rental period.

I didn't like DA2. Lets just leave it at that. Origins was awesome though.

If you can get DA2 for cheap, there's nothing wrong with just doing a barebones run of the story. It can be entertaining at times, but in the shadow of its predecessor, it's really lackluster.

Yes, get it.

I hope that whenever Dragon Age III is officially announced, they call it anything other than "Dragon Age III". Anything. Even Dragon Age: Reckoning would be better because if they do call it 3, then it will always be directly associated to 2.

@Cwaff said:

You should give Dragon Age a go anyway, despite what everyone says it's not THAT bad and I had a blast with it.

Absolutely. I played on Hard for my first playthrough and it was truly amazing (IF you're into RPGs).

@LordXavierBritish: I had to play it for myself just to confirm the validity of such a statement. I can confirm that yes, for the most part that is indeed true :(

The only part that really sucks in 2 is the linear, confined setting. Other than that I really like a lot of what it had to offer and enjoyed it enough to play through it 3 times.

Like others have said, they are pretty unrelated. At the start of DA2, when you meet an important character from DAO, I was really excited to see what happens, but then you never see that character again, which really blows. I liked everything about DAO, but in DA2, they made most of the game generic side quests that you really don't feel connect much with the story at all. The ENTIRE first act is like this in fact, until you get to the end of the act. I just never felt as connected to the story and characters like I did in DAO. And the fact that certain things happen at the end which you cannot stop or change, no matter what choice you make, is kind of dumb, especially considering the character that is doing it. Seemed very random, like it was just meant to hurry and end the game.

Btw, since you bought the ultimate edition of DA:O, I would suggest playing ALL of it. All great as far as I'm concerned. It's also a good idea to finish the one-off DLC first and the in-game DLC as soon as you can. You get great items from them transferred to the main game, based on which achievements you get within the DLC.