Forum:Origins type party or DA2 type party?

Forums: Index > Game DiscussionOrigins type party or DA2 type party?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4351 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

I noticed a considerable difference between the companions in DAO and DA2. In Origins many of the people in your group don't get along, simply cooperating with you for either necessity (World ending blight and all that) Or personal gain (Evil baby pumping machine that is Morrigan) While in DA2 it feels much more like a group of buddy's hanging out with their leader type figure Hawke. Sure there are some people who don't get along in the group (Hypocrite elf and hypocrite mage) but overall the group are very close. My question is which do you prefer, personally I kind of prefer the DA2 approach. The Origins one is better for the game that it is, uniting people who would likely be killing each other in a situation where they all have to cooperate. However the DA2 approach had a certain charm to it. I always felt that while companions had clear reasons to bail, they never would because they cared. Whilst in Origins I thought Zevran would slit my throat given a chance or Sten would batter my face in if I make a joke about the Qun.

Which do you guys prefer? The dysfunctional band of heroes, or the Scooby Doo gang?--TheRageMage (talk) 13:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC)TheRageMage

... and which is which? Because for me, DA:O's band was both less melodramatic and hostile than DA2's. In DA:O's party, Morrigan hated everyone and that was it. Everyone else were friendly or at very least civil to each other, as for DA2, I haven't seen so much interparty hostility since KOTOR2, only with moar dramz and - unlike KOTOR2 - with no sensible explanation of why such a hateful bunch would hang out together. Dorquemada (talk) 14:02, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps I wished for a mix of both? I would've loved having Varric around as comic relief, rather than the whiny Man-Child royal bastard that is Alistair. Having Fenris around for Unrest in the Alienage would also have been awesome, considering his hatred for Tevinters, magisters AND slavers. :P From my own viewpoint, I thought the extremely differing views of Origins' Companions made a little more sense, given that if one character were to be a blood mage, the other character wouldn't just brush it off. Whether this is actually enacted in dialogue is another story, but the fact they'd actually react rather than let it lie is simply more like real life. EzzyD (talk) 13:50, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

The crucial difference is Origins had a purpose, so the party was united by that purpose. Even if some of them did not get along, or were just silent, they still had a reason to be together, to help each other, and to drive towards a common goal. DA2 has no purpose. It's just a bunch of people in a city that some guy got together over a period of time for....something....I'm still not sure what really. A lot of them, Anders and Fenris in particular, and Isabela and Merrill also to some extent, have no reason to even stay unless they are with Hawke, and even then it makes little sense. So DAO all the way. At least that one made sense. The Grey Unknown (talk) 14:44, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

True that DAO had purpose, but in DA2 every act had different purpose - act 1 dather enough coins to join deep roads expedition (finding jobs to make some money is similar to Witcher: Side effect); act 2 - trouble with qunari and a mysterious serial killer; act 3 - mage templar tensions. But you're right about companions with no reason to stay with Hawke. The worst of DA2 is a boring plot.

Probably a mixture of both, leaning towards how DA2 handled them. In Origins, the companions you don't take stay at camp just standing around, and according to Alistair, gossiping about the Warden's love life. In DA2 the companions have a life outside of their adventures with Hawke. Half the the time you go visit a DA2 companion, they're already talking with another companion. So while both the Warden and Hawke can get to know their respective companions pretty well, Hawke's companions actually have a life. Gruedragon (talk) 15:48, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

Well that only worked because the companions outside of adventuring with Hawke, didn't have much to do other than continue on with their lives in Kirkwall. In DA:O the companions had to stay together due to necessity, they had to move at a moment's notice in order to battle the blight. In truth, I would prefer the return of the party camp. Unless the game is regulated to a single city (which I will outright condemn if it is) it provides the best option for traveling.

Now on to the conversation at hand. I would no doubt choose the DA:O companion system over DA2. In Origins, you actually had to make an effort to make sure companions wouldn't leave. If you did something they hated, they would actually challenge you or you would be forced to outright kill them. In DA2, they would just voice their opinion then go in a corner to skulk. I was also not a fan of the friendship/rivalry system. People in the real world don't become your rival when they hate you, they just hate you. They're not going to try and one-up you with whatever you do, they're just going to impede your progress whenever they can. It just doesn't seem that plausible in how it works. Aleksandr the Great (talk) 17:21, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

The OGB is not evil -.-

I thought that the companions in DA2 had a few reasons to stick 1) They owe you 2) They are generally safer sticking with you (except aveline) 3) They like you

I think the companions in DA2 had no real reason to stay with you 1) Hawke did nothing for ANY Companion that would be worth owing Hawke 7 freaking years of putting their lives in danger, especially for things that do not involve them (which they usually don't) 2) They can handle themselves without Hawke, save for maybe Anders who may only have been avoided by the Templars because of Hawkes status (which I refuse to believe), otherwise they may have been in LESS danger had they stayed away from the dramafest that is Hawkes daily life. 3) What if they are rivals? then they won't like Hawke and will still be dragged into all of that crap, so they have absolutely no reason to stay and like I conversed with others before in another thread, the way Hawke can treat some companions does not warrant any kind of respect or cooperation as he/she can insult them, clash with thier life philosphies, and even actively work against them! That is not rivalry that is straight up hostility! MrRexfire (talk) 21:45, May 20, 2012 (UTC)