• 109 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by RazielCuts (2711 posts) -

Dragon Age II is £3.99 on the PSN January Sale at the moment and I've always wanted to check it out. I loved Dragon Age: Origins for the main reasons I liked the Mass Effect series, it's dialogue and character interactions. I wasn't really a fan off the combat in the first game and I kind've put up with it just to further the story and progress really. I remember playing the demo for II when it came out and at the time I felt the combat actually felt a bit more actiony, kind've a ME1 to ME2 transition. But then were the dialogue choices more dialled down to an ME style of things, Top Right = Good, Bottom Right = Bad, and then some sarcastic/jokey answer in between. Am I remembering this correctly? That I may not like.

So my question, Dragon Age II, is it all bad? I remember people being really disappointed with it at the time for the cut and paste dungeon design and the monotony that involved but now that the wave of disappointment is long over is it actually worth checking out if I already know to expect that going in? That's the main thing I remember from peoples complaints really, are there any other reasons I shouldn't play it? I'm also wondering if it's going to tie into Dragon Age: Inquisition this year, if the saves will carry over etc but I suspect by then I'll have a next gen console and/or PC to run it so I guess that won't matter in the long run.

#2 Posted by buft (3298 posts) -

Its worth that price, truth be told i really enjoyed it for most of the time i spent with it, it was really only after finishing the game and remembering back to the first that my dissapointment reared its head. Its not a bad game, its a bad Dragon Age game.

#3 Posted by TheHumanDove (2393 posts) -

I enjoyed it for the most part, but you have to turn your brain off for most of it.

#4 Posted by Patman99 (1543 posts) -

It's fine. If you like DAO for it's dialogue and characters, you might find some charm in DAII. It's worth £4 for sure, just don't go into it remembering DAO because you will not get more DAO.

#5 Edited by crusader8463 (14295 posts) -

Everything about it sucks. None of the classes are fun to level up, all the characters are annoying or uninteresting, there is about 3 maps they use over and over, the way they dumbed down the conversation system to the mass effect style ruins any desire to replay, the equipment system sucks, the mission designs are terrible, and if you care about the Dragon Age lore like I did there's nothing in the game worth seeing that you couldn't get from reading a paragraph or two on a wiki.

#6 Posted by crithon (2574 posts) -

It's been mixed, I have 2 close friends with contrasting views on it. One liked it, and another who hated it and would rather be playing Witcher. Personally for me, I think those character designs look good so I'd give it a shot.

#7 Posted by Asky314159 (53 posts) -

I actually really enjoyed DAII. The enemy spawning and the recycled dungeons are kind of a bummer, but like most BioWare games, the characters are good, the dialog is well-written, and the story is plenty compelling to get you through. It does use the ME style of dialog choice instead of the way DA:O did it, but the spectrum of choices are generally well-represented and I never felt constrained by it. I think for the price they're asking, it's probably worth your time to check it out.

As for the save import into Inquisition, they're going to have some sort of web-based way of porting your choices forward. I'm not sure if that means you'll be able to upload your actual saves from the old games or if you'll just have to fill out a web form or something, but there will be a way of importing your choices, no matter what platform you end up playing Inquisition on.

#8 Edited by RazielCuts (2711 posts) -

@thehumandove said:

I enjoyed it for the most part, but you have to turn your brain off for most of it.

Turn your brain off because its ridiculously easy or because if you think about it too much you will begin to pick at it and the game will just frustrate you?

#9 Edited by Hailinel (22666 posts) -

@thehumandove said:

I enjoyed it for the most part, but you have to turn your brain off for most of it.

Turn your brain off because its ridiculously easy or because if you think about it too much you will begin to pick at it and the game will just frustrate you?

The story is really, really dumb. The quality of writing takes a pretty steep drop compared to Origins.

#10 Posted by TheHumanDove (2393 posts) -

@thehumandove said:

I enjoyed it for the most part, but you have to turn your brain off for most of it.

Turn your brain off because its ridiculously easy or because if you think about it too much you will begin to pick at it and the game will just frustrate you?

Both. Mostly the latter though. Some of the story is so contrived you might find yourself scoffing a lot at the twists and turns.

#11 Edited by HatKing (5553 posts) -

The major gripe I hear is that it wasn't expansive enough. Which to me sounds like a really shitty complaint. Fantastic stories can be told in small areas. And I think a fantasy game set in a small area has a lot to offer considering every fucking fantasy thing created since the advent of Tolkienism has to span the god damn globe. Aside from that, it's a bit more action oriented than the first, mechanically. I think I used direct control exclusively, and I played a mage. Which seems a bit odd, but not necessarily bad? I think that comes down to personal taste more than anything. I like direct control, so maybe I just leaned that way. I think the option is still there for those who like to stop and plot the combat out.

The story seemed to rub a lot of people the wrong way because it does kind of pull the carpet out from under you at the end. But I liked it. It's a lot more fantasy political bullshit than typical fantasy bullshit. But there's plenty of typical fantasy bullshit too (in the side quests, but they aren't particularly well done). As with any game with player choice the story beats are going to hit harder depending how you played it. I can't remember specifics, but the whole thing kind of felt right for me. Betrayal was there, but it made sense. Anyway. For a low price it's certainly worth checking out.

Edit: It definitely feels like a fantasy Mass Effect. The way the relationships are built and progressed, even the way you communicate, feels very similar. It has to be running on the same engine because even the characters and environments feel the similar.

#12 Posted by VipeR (100 posts) -

It's not the horrible abbomination that some people make it out to be, I personally enjoyed it. What it does well is the characters and their stories and that's what I look for in Bioware games, so I can overlook the obvious flaws in favor of the story and characters. I think wether or not you enjoy it is up to what you are looking for. If you are looking for RPG mechanics and level design that is up to par with Origins then you probably wont like it, but if you can overlook that then you will find an enjoyable story with good characters. I tend to look at it more as an action adventure game more than the RPG that origin was, you just got to take it for what it is. Also some people did not like the smaller-scale story that the game told, but that's up to taste I guess.

In the end, DA2 is not as good as Origins, but has interesting characters and story.

#13 Posted by mosdl (3223 posts) -

Combat wise it improved over Origins especially when it comes to the animations/effects which make the combat feel more actiony. What destroyed the combat was the area recycling and the waves of enemies that appear out of nowhere during combat.

#14 Posted by TheRealMoot (279 posts) -

Everything about it sucks. None of the classes are fun to level up, all the characters are annoying or uninteresting, there is about 3 maps they use over and over, the way they dumbed down the conversation system to the mass effect style ruins any desire to replay, the equipment system sucks, the mission designs are terrible, and if you care about the Dragon Age lore like I did there's nothing in the game worth seeing that you couldn't get from reading a paragraph or two on a wiki.

^ This

The characters are completely flat, they re-write the lore and character specific events from Origins to suit there terrible new story that goes no where. They make money and live happily ever after then oh no wizards! < That is the extent of the story. No Paragraph's needed. The combat just feels... wrong? Origins got it write in every way that mattered, DA2 just goes for the money. Sadly.

But if it's super cheap on PSN, It won't hurt to give it a shot.

#15 Posted by Hailinel (22666 posts) -

@hatking said:

The major gripe I hear is that it wasn't expansive enough. Which to me sounds like a really shitty complaint. Fantastic stories can be told in small areas. And I think a fantasy game set in a small area has a lot to offer considering every fucking fantasy thing created since the advent of Tolkienism has to span the god damn globe. Aside from that, it's a bit more action oriented than the first, mechanically. I think I used direct control exclusively, and I played a mage. Which seems a bit odd, but not necessarily bad? I think that comes down to personal taste more than anything. I like direct control, so maybe I just leaned that way. I think the option is still there for those who like to stop and plot the combat out.

The story seemed to rub a lot of people the wrong way because it does kind of pull the carpet out from under you at the end. But I liked it. It's a lot more fantasy political bullshit than typical fantasy bullshit. But there's plenty of typical fantasy bullshit too. As with any game with player choice the story beats are going to hit harder depending how you played it. I can't remember specifics, but the whole thing kind of felt right for me. Betrayal was there, but it made sense. Anyway. For a low price it's certainly worth checking out.

It's not that the story wasn't expansive enough. It's that it was a poor story that was also poorly told. Kirkwall could have been a more interesting setting for the game had more effort been put into it, but your party is there for a decade and it never changes. There's no real sense that the world is progressing with time. There's also the fact that the plot revolves around a few key moments that are horribly executed, characters that make nonsensical decisions, and the ever-dreaded ludonarrative dissonance. (i.e.: Why can Mage Hawke become a blood mage when doing so should automatically make her public enemy number one?)

#16 Edited by RazielCuts (2711 posts) -

Yeah I'm mostly into Bioware games, at least their most recent ones, for purely the story and characters so if they're good to go then I think I'll give this a shot. I haven't played a fantasy RPG since the Witcher 2...which I really should get back to.

@mosdl said:

What destroyed the combat was the area recycling and the waves of enemies that appear out of nowhere during combat.

Does this become frustratingly hard or just boring? I think I can handle boring but not cheap, unfair difficulty spikes.

#17 Posted by Darji (5295 posts) -

It is not the price point but the total waste of time. Instead go and play good games.

#18 Posted by Nals (64 posts) -

Sure, it's probably worth it at that price.

Here's the deal.

- The characters are poorly written caricatures. This is a common Bioware problem, but even worse in 2. You'll find yourself hardpressed to agree with or even understand what most of your party members are doing over the course of the game, or why. They try and handwave this a few times as "oh you are supposed to be rivals!", but it just ends up falling fairly flat. If you like well written complex characters ( Sten, Loghain, Alistar ), you'll hate them, if you are the type of person who says gigglesquee omg glomps a bunch, you might enjoy them more. They are fanservice and little else. There are some -ok- characters, but you likely won't leave the game loving any of them.

- The plot is ok until the very end when everything goes to absolute shit. Seriously. Act 1 is neat because it's built under the guise of "you aren't a hero, just a guy trying to get by.", and they pull it off well. Act 2 is interesting since it delves more into the Qun/Qunari, and expands on the universe a bit. Act 3 is terrible from beginning to end. Poorly written analogies to 9/11, a conflict that the game didn't bother setting up, and a magic mcguffin that came out of nowhere are all some of the many issues with the last Act of the game.

- Combat is not as deep as DA:O, or the same style at all. It's basically a hybrid action/RPG game. This isn't a problem, just letting you know.

- They ran out of development time and it shows even outside of the ending. There are only a few zones, and they are reused constantly. You will see the same cave/building/basement about a dozen times, because they didn't have time to make multiple interior areas. Combined with the slightly slow starting story, and the less then interesting characters, and most people never got to the end of the game.

If you want my opinion, buy it, play it, as soon as it tells you you've entered Act 3, turn it off and count is as beaten. You'll find it ok, but enjoyable.

#19 Posted by HatKing (5553 posts) -

@hailinel: I guess I'd have to revisit it to defend my points with any clarity. I'm only going off of what I remember feeling coming out of it. Mostly that the game was getting a lot of flak and I didn't think it was all that bad. Then again, maybe my expectations influenced my feelings having gotten to it late? I do vaguely recall the blood magic thing seeming out of place, but knowing myself I would have avoided using it anyway, so it probably wasn't an issue for my story.

#20 Edited by HH (523 posts) -

it's not bad at all

people made a huge fuss about dungeons and backdrops being repeated.

if you ignore this 'issue', guess what? it doesn't make any difference, just like in all the other games that committed this terrible crime beforehand.

all round DAII is a classic case of counter-hype hysteria.

#21 Posted by TheHumanDove (2393 posts) -

@hh said:

it's not bad at all

people made a huge fuss about dungeons and backdrops being repeated.

if you ignore this 'issue', guess what? it doesn't make any difference, just like in all the other games that committed this terrible crime beforehand.

(this is a big secret by the way, be careful who you tell.)

all round DAII is a classic case of anti-hype hysteria.

That's only one issue of very many.

#22 Edited by ShaggE (5968 posts) -

I liked it better than the first one.

Now, before I get too heavily flamed, know that I hate the fantasy genre, so I wasn't super into DA:O in the first place. The sequel was a dumb, fun little ARPG to put a few hours into. I totally understand why it's so reviled; I just never felt any strong feelings for the franchise in the first place, so my standards weren't nearly as high.

#23 Posted by Hailinel (22666 posts) -

Yeah I'm mostly into Bioware games, at least their most recent ones, for purely the story and characters so if they're good to go then I think I'll give this a shot. I haven't played a fantasy RPG since the Witcher 2...which I really should get back to.

@mosdl said:

What destroyed the combat was the area recycling and the waves of enemies that appear out of nowhere during combat.

Does this become frustratingly hard or just boring? I think I can handle boring but not cheap, unfair difficulty spikes.

It's tedious and draining. You clear one wave only to be presented with another that falls from the sky, you kill them, more fall from the sky, you kill them, oh, look, a fourth wave. It discourages tactical fighting because the game effectively cheats by spawning enemies out of nowhere.

#24 Posted by HH (523 posts) -

@thehumandove: yep one of the many many issues i somehow managed to effortlessly overlook on both playthroughs.

very many my ass. it was a rushed game but the thing plays perfectly fine.

i remember the time I didn't buy Wu-Tang Forever for two whole years because of the many 'issues' that were reported. what an idiot.

don't believe the gripe.

#25 Edited by HH (523 posts) -

@razielcuts said:

Yeah I'm mostly into Bioware games, at least their most recent ones, for purely the story and characters so if they're good to go then I think I'll give this a shot. I haven't played a fantasy RPG since the Witcher 2...which I really should get back to.

@mosdl said:

What destroyed the combat was the area recycling and the waves of enemies that appear out of nowhere during combat.

Does this become frustratingly hard or just boring? I think I can handle boring but not cheap, unfair difficulty spikes.

it's hard the first few times, but once you expect it to happen it you prepare accordingly. it's only an issue until you get used to it, after that it's just more fun combo-ing dudes.

first time through i played on nightmare, one of the more challenging gaming experiences i've had, definitely not unfair, although a couple of the bosses can be a real bitch if you're not stocked on the relevant resistences, and most certainly satisfying. both times i finished DAII i went and started a new game of Origins straight away i was so caught up in the combat system.

#26 Posted by TheHT (10243 posts) -

Sort of, but mostly no, not as bad as it's made out to be. The reused environments is definitely a thing, and it definitely sucks. Enemes also do spawn in during combat like a character action game, which isn't really a big deal. You can't customize your party members beyond their skills and the combat feels a lot less slow and measured and more hack n' slashy.

It's still totally a BioWare story-driven game though, what with the dialogue choices and consequences. It probably strays farthest from the whole world-tour collecting shit and then saving the world formula that most of their prior games seemed to follow. The story's focused more on the political rumblings in Kirkwall, where you've gone to escape the Blight from Origins. The three main acts deal with your acclimation to Kirkwall as a refugee, the Qunari expedition stranded in Kirkwall, and rising Templar/Mage tensions respectively. However the conflicts in each act are not completely isolated. You'll meet the Qunari leader in act 1 for instance, and Templar/Mage tensions are present throughout all acts.

Companions in Dragon Age 2 are more defined characters rather than individuals you can easily convert to your own ideals, and a couple have considerable ties to the main story instead of just being your tag-along adventure buddies. They have their own interests, motives, and beliefs, which can often put your character at odds with them.

It's a good game, great even, but it shouldn't have been called Dragon Age 2.

#27 Posted by Hunter5024 (5160 posts) -

Just thinking about Dragon Age 2 makes me sad, so I find it really hard to recommend. Basically I would say it's a step back from Origins in every way except the music and visuals. I know that there is a contingent of people who believe the story is worth suffering through the gameplay for, but I think the story, characters, and interactions with both were probably my biggest problem with the game.

#28 Posted by MEATBALL (2781 posts) -

I really liked it, more than Origins, honestly, but it is heavily flawed and I understand why it catches so much flack.

#29 Posted by iceman228433 (493 posts) -

That game just makes me sad because with a year or two more they could have made it really amazing. I really enjoyed the combat system in that game, I just think it fell apart with the reused areas they send you back to. Also the enemy's that would just spawn out of no were, where bullshit. I don't hate playing it, it just makes me with they would have had more time.

#30 Posted by Creamypies (4012 posts) -

Simple answer? No. And at the low price you can get it these days, it's more than worth the asking price.

#31 Edited by Quarters (1545 posts) -

I thought it was great, and better than DA:O. At the very least, it gives you a break from the Chosen One saves the world storyline. It's much more political and localized. Its main flaw is the repeating environments. It isn't game breaking, just due to the fact that it takes place in one city so there's a little bit of suspension of disbelief you can have, but it still is kind of lazy. Other than that, it's great. The DLC is actually pretty strong too, definitely worth getting.

#32 Posted by TowerSixteen (538 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@razielcuts said:

@thehumandove said:

I enjoyed it for the most part, but you have to turn your brain off for most of it.

Turn your brain off because its ridiculously easy or because if you think about it too much you will begin to pick at it and the game will just frustrate you?

The story is really, really dumb. The quality of writing takes a pretty steep drop compared to Origins.

I would argue that the character writing is stronger in DA2 on average, even if the plot writing is significantly worse. I never felt like the DAO characters quite hit their mark, while I totally bought every party member in 2 (with the arguable exception of Anders). Liked the inter-barty banter better, as well.

#33 Posted by LawGamer (73 posts) -

@razielcuts: If the reason you liked Origins was the dialogue and characters then I would advise you to stay away from DAII. With the exception of Varric, none of the characters are very entertaining and all suffer from a depressing lack of personality. What makes it even worse is there are several instances of characters from Origins having "cameos" if you will, which only serves as a reminder of how much better those characters were than cardboard cutouts you are forced to deal with in DAII.

And if you thought you hated the dialogue wheel from ME . . . well, they somehow went and made it even worse.

#34 Edited by ThatOneDudeNick (293 posts) -

It's fine. It suffers from the usual "Not as good as the original, so it's magically 'horrible' now." rating system from internet fans. Is it at good at DA:O? Nope. But DA:O is fantastic. Falling short of that still makes for a good game and story. Just my opinion though. I seem to be the minority.

#35 Posted by Beb (222 posts) -

The game suffers the death of a thousand cuts. No one problem was a deal breaker for me, but they sort of pile up and the weight of them all brings the experience down. If you are able to overlook enough of the game's shortcomings then you will enjoy it, like some others in this thread.

It isn't a terrible game, but it was a poor follow-up to DA:Origins. It is more of a Dead Space 3 type sequel, than Mass Effect 2 / Assassin's Creed 2, if that makes sense.

#36 Posted by seveword (118 posts) -

When I bought it for full price out of the gate, I was fairly excited. I played a lot of Origins and liked what they did with the environments and the strategy (as minimal as it really is) in combat. I didn't particularly care about the characters or the story, I thought they were serviceable to what the game was trying to do.

After playing through DA 2 I was superbly disappointed. There is no strategy in combat, it's just mash attack and occasionally heal (if you're fighting one of the game's bosses, which you can count the number of on one hand). The recycling of environments was the biggest sin, in my opinion. The first game had some cool underground areas and tried to do more with environmental storytelling than most RPGs do, and there was absolutely none of that in the second.

Basically, it suffered in the same ways that Mass Effect did from 1 to 2; combat (not necessarily the greatest, but interesting enough to go along with it) was turned into a clone of an action-esque game with no depth whatsoever, all the exploration was removed, and they spent all their budget on writing a story that I didn't give a shit about with characters that made me want to put my head through a wall.

I don't even know that I could recommend you get it for that cheap, to be honest. I didn't like playing it when I got it, and I sure as hell wouldn't like it now.

#37 Posted by JayEH (512 posts) -

It's not horrible. The game takes some cues from mass effect I didn't like. The story is kinda stupid and the environments are repeated ALOT but for that price go ahead, you can still find some enjoyment.

#38 Posted by Clonedzero (3714 posts) -

It's not terrible. The characters are really well written. The first act drags on for SO long and you're not really doing anything important. The 2nd act is actually pretty good. The last act is garbage, hot garbage.

The game itself is pretty fun and with the great characters its not that bad. It's just the first and 3rd acts are pretty rough. The environments are reused constantly. You go to the "same" cave layout like a dozen times even though they're supposed to be different locations.

#39 Posted by mina_mina752 (121 posts) -

its not a bad game but it reminds me of my anxiety panic attacks‎...bad memories

#40 Edited by ArbitraryWater (10979 posts) -

I think Dragon Age 2 is alright, and I probably liked it more than it deserved when it came out. The main plot goes to some really, really, really stupid places by the end, but I think it has one of the more solid supporting casts in a Bioware game, and if you approach it from the angle that it's a deconstruction of the traditional bioware story (i.e. no matter how influential and powerful you are, you still can't fix everything) it becomes a lot more tolerable. The combat is still fine, magically spawning waves of dudes aside and the environments do repeat a lot.

For that price, I'd say it's certainly worth a look. It's an interesting failure, if nothing else.

#41 Posted by Zelyre (976 posts) -

If you played DA:O on the PC and played it as a tactical experience, DA2 is a huge shift in game play. Don't bother trying to be tactical in DA2, as enemies constantly spawn on you from all directions.
It plays like an action-rpg/hack and slash game.

I found the story all right, until it suddenly turned really bad. You'll know when you hit that point.

There are only a handful of dungeons. Recycling areas is one thing. Leaving large, gaping seams in the world that are -obvious- are another. That giant rock protruding from the wall that looks like a door could go there? In the next cave, that rock is missing and there is a door there. Dragon Age 2 level design is Taco Bell. There are just a handful of hallways that connect to a handful of prebuilt rooms. Those are mixed and matched into different combinations to form the "Baja Supreme Fresco X-Treme Gordita", but once you peal off the gordita wrap, you see it's just ground beef, beans, lettuce, salsa, and sour cream.

#42 Posted by BawlZINmotion (704 posts) -

Yes it is worth that. I found it was worth full price when I bought it at launch. It is a lot more simplified than Dragon Age: Origins, which will disappoint a lot of people, but I found the characters to be a lot more enjoyable. I even enjoy the story a bit more. Like someone else said, what really left a bad taste was the recycled environments. You can just tell this game was meant to have a quick turnaround and a lot of corners were cut. It's still a very good game, it will just be disappointing if you really enjoyed 99% of what DAO offered.

Yes, buy it.

#43 Edited by Achaemenid (8 posts) -

At at that price sure, get it, you'll probably be fine. But if you liked the characters and story from DA:O be warned, the quality of writing takes a severe drop. Almost all the characters are really obvious pandering and stink of design-by-committee, not to mention that almost all of them are one-note characters without any real depth. The story on paper seems kind of interesting and I respect Bioware for trying to break the mold and make a more focused, personal story, but the execution if just terrible. None of your decisions matter and very few plot events seem to even be connected with each other.

#44 Edited by kadash299 (249 posts) -

Dragon age 2 is a Good game.

It gets a bad wrap because its not a good Dragon Agegame compared to what we had expected it to be.


Also:

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings exists

#45 Posted by triviaman09 (758 posts) -

This thread again? I really enjoyed Dragon Age 2. It's not the greatest game of all-time, by any means, buy I enjoyed the combat, I liked the characters more than I liked them in Origins on average, and I think the story takes some fun twists, though the ending isn't great. It's certainly better than Origins's blatant LOTR ripoff story.

The worst part about the game is the repetition of environments. If that annoys you, you won't like it. For that price though? Find out for yourself.

#46 Posted by mrfluke (4834 posts) -

2/3s of that game is fine, last third of that game's story is some of the stupidest shit ive ever played.

#47 Posted by mrfluke (4834 posts) -

@zelyre said:

If you played DA:O on the PC and played it as a tactical experience, DA2 is a huge shift in game play. Don't bother trying to be tactical in DA2, as enemies constantly spawn on you from all directions.

It plays like an action-rpg/hack and slash game.

I found the story all right, until it suddenly turned really bad. You'll know when you hit that point.

There are only a handful of dungeons. Recycling areas is one thing. Leaving large, gaping seams in the world that are -obvious- are another. That giant rock protruding from the wall that looks like a door could go there? In the next cave, that rock is missing and there is a door there. Dragon Age 2 level design is Taco Bell. There are just a handful of hallways that connect to a handful of prebuilt rooms. Those are mixed and matched into different combinations to form the "Baja Supreme Fresco X-Treme Gordita", but once you peal off the gordita wrap, you see it's just ground beef, beans, lettuce, salsa, and sour cream.

god, if we're on the same page here, then i do know what ur talking about.

ughh

#48 Edited by RazielCuts (2711 posts) -

@arbitrarywater: Wow, Goddamn, an 'interesting failure', I don't know what to say to that, is this a good or bad thing? Do I look under the microscope whilst I play this or not? I guess I could always rebuke with the 'I bought XCOM: The Bureau without a gun to my head' response and surely imagine by those standards it's worth getting, right?

#49 Posted by casper_ (882 posts) -

i thought it was really underwhelming and it definitely had its heart in the wrongest of wrong places. that said it had a lot to live up to and if it didn't have the dragon age name i think most people would agree that its a fine action rpg thing.

#50 Edited by JadeGL (609 posts) -

I pre-ordered the "signature edition" when it was available. I'm not saying I regret it, but it certainly wasn't what I expected, especially after Dragon Age: Origins and Awakening, and even Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2. I expected a great game and I got an okay one. Again, I don't regret it. I played the hell out of it and found a lot to like in it, I just feel like it was a let down and a harbinger of things to come with Bioware.

That aside, that price is great for the game. With what I know now, I would pay up to 20 dollars for DA2 with no qualms. It's worth spending some money on, just not full price considering the corners they obviously cut to make it. It's not as good as it's predecessor and was disappointing to me as a big Bioware fan.