I didn't fall asleep on multiple different occasions while playing the second one, so I'd certainly say that's a plus in the game's favor.
Traversing the Deep Roads and the Fade were terrible in the first. If they combined certain aspects from both games, they'd have an amazing one. --- I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
#32foodeater4Posted 6/14/2013 9:20:31 AM
I definatly enjoy the improved graphics, combat and voiced main character.
The rest of the game is somewhat disappointing though. I do enjoy the main quest from start to finish. The sidequests are bad though. They remind of bland Mass Effect 1 sidequests.
DA1 had a better story, but the graphics were an abomination on the consoles. DA:O is no graphical powerhourse even on PC, but the console versions are so sloppy. It should have been a two disc game. After seeimg other bioware games like ME2, 3 and even DA2, there was no reason the port of the first game should have been so shoddy.
#33scoobydoobydontPosted 6/14/2013 9:38:53 AM
I much prefer Dragon Age 2 to Dragon Age:Origins. Origins was too derivative of old high fantasy. We don't need anything emulating that hack writer Tolkien ever again. Dragon Age 2 had a great scope and great combat. The only negative was the re-used dungeons, but that's forgivable when the rest of the game is practically perfect.
I agree with this except the practically perfect bit. DA2 could be a lot better (like not pooing on my chosen alliance at the end). But I can't think of anything DAO did better really. It had a ton of reused assets as well and was generic as hell. I would go so far as to say I got bored during Origins on many occasions. Flat out bored. With DA3 I want them to take DA2, give it an extra year or so to flesh out story and environments not just make a new engine (a big problem I had w/Mass Effect was the sequels spent too much time changing things that already worked) and it could be pretty much perfect. --- The writing was on the wall with Bioware the minute you could completely void all of your decisions with one choice in KOTOR.
#34kingwutuguPosted 6/14/2013 10:46:59 PM
...No, it wasn't. They had a lot of similarities but DA2 was much more action-oriented. The combat also looked much better...and they managed to make it a lot less boring by removing auto-attack.
There's no way you actually played both of those games and thought the combat was the same in both. It was probably one of the biggest changes, besides the art style.
you could do auto-attack with the update, hacking and slashing through the game just changes the gameplay not the combat. --- There is no I in team, But there is an I in Win
#35psicat1976Posted 6/15/2013 12:06:53 AM
#36beautifuldreamsPosted 6/15/2013 1:28:30 AM
I thought da:o was all around mediocre, except for the characters, which made it great. da2 I found all around poor except for mediocre characters. I got sick of wave after wave of ninjas spawing at inthe same few areas --- nyuuuuuuuuu~