Forum:Requested: Let's have a civilized discussion of Dragon Age II.

Forums: Index > Game DiscussionRequested: Let's have a civilized discussion of Dragon Age II.

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4731 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

Haters and lovers welcome. Let's abide by the forum guidelines. There's been quite a lot of flaming from both sides. Let's discuss the pros and cons of Dragon Age II in a manner befitting this forum and wiki. I, an unabashed hater, will also be civilized in my comments. The goal is not to meet a consensus (we're not geth, people). Let's just have some friendly discussion. Any counter-productive or insulting comments (from anyone) will be removed by me. Comments about DA3 are welcome, just don't get crazy with them (like over-speculation). Enjoy everybody. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 23:32, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I'll get the ball rolling and as a goodwill gesture I'd like to apologise to anyone I may have aggravated with my post originally titled "The Dragon Age II Hate Club" I realise the title was strongly worded, and meant no offence. I feel that this fighting has gotten out of hand and am glad for the opportunity to have a civilised debate. First of all, I feel that the three acts could have linked together better. I think that instead of playing through three short mini-stories, the game should have stretched a single act into one game. I would have been satisfied with a game focusing around the Qunari or Mages vs Templars. Secondly, I think that the choices we made weren't really choices at all, as they had the same outcome, and this immediately makes the game less immersive. I think characters were done pretty well, but could have been developed more, and would like to see conversations at any time brought back in regards to companions. The music and graphics were good, but the map recycling got to me. I also didn't like that we were confined to a single city. I did however think that combat was improved, if a little unrealistic, and that the graphics were a step forward. King Cousland (talk) 23:50, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I'm still freaked out about the "Bride of Frankenstein" thing. Does anyone have a good argument for that as a pro? It just seems bizarre to me. At this point is it assured that DA3 will have vampires (given that #1 had werewolves and #2 had Frankenstein)? Rhautanen (talk) 23:38, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I actually liked that they put this kind of scenario into the game. I remember when I first did this mission my heart beat was racing when I started getting closer and closer to where my mother was, and I loved every minute of it! Four playthroughs later, and I'm still feeling the rush and emotion that mission left on me. It pulled my heart strings when I finally saw what had happened to her, and at the same time it gave me comfort that she was now free, along with all the other women that were lost to Quentin's madness. THAT is what I like to see in a video game, and if you were to ask me which moment in the game truly pulled me into the life of my Hawke, THAT would be it! Sevarian10 (talk) 23:47, April 10, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

DA3 should have several moments like this. Suspense isn't explored much in BioWare games, i don't think. I remember the Revan reveal in KOTOR, though. That was awesome. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:09, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, though they may have to put a "may cause heart to explode" warning on the box XD Sevarian10 (talk) 00:12, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

I loved that moment in the game. It put me through the emotional wringer enough I had to stop playing for a while. Just as I did after I saw the Chantry go boom. It doesn't matter if I don't LIKE the way a plot goes...it's the simple fact that the game was able to inspire that kind of powerful emotional WTF response. Most of my complaints--not all, but most--are to do with the game's mechanics. The story itself is awesome, and what keeps me coming back. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 00:21, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree, I enjoyed that quest. Well, perhaps enjoy isn't the right word but it is still definitely the one quest I wouldn't miss for the world. There are other quests that I enjoy and some that I find a bit tiresome. Jaarlitar (talk) 23:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I think Ketojan would have made an awesome companion. What do you think? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:04, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree. He would have provided a nice perspective into how mages are seen and treated under the Qun, and he would have probably had some AWESOME banter with both Anders and Fenris, with bonus points going to him if he managed to piss them off to the point of spontaneous combustion lol Sevarian10 (talk) 00:10, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

Anders:"Of all the ridiculous, spineless, mind-controlled, senseless piece of shit arguments I've ever heard!"

Ketojan:"What comfort has freedom brought you, mage? You would have more if you submitted to the Qun."

That's priceless. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:09, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Ah yessss.. that comment made me lol, at least until Ketojan decided to flambe himself, then it was all "lol, aww" Sevarian10 (talk) 00:38, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

Aw, with that line Anders bought me wholesale. :-) Pretty much what I think of the Qun, just not as...crude and censorable. Dorquemada (talk) 07:00, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think Ketojan could have been beasty, I love the ability to "investigate" him and get only growls. But we had enough mages I think. Bethany, Merrill, Anders, potentially yourself. And having another Qunari could have seemed like a forced replacement for Sten. Tommyspa (talk) 00:14, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Or a badass Tal-Vashoth mercenary companion like Maraas. I could totally see him snapping people in half. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:21, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree Chomsky despite the fact he is a little bit crispy after burning himself (I worry, after that happend he never seemed to return my calls oh well)but I would really like to see a Tal-Vashoth companion --TheRageMage (talk) 00:15, April 11, 2011 (UTC)TheRageMage

Sarabaas was the crispy critter. Maraas was the Tal Vashoth who warned you that the other Tal Vashoth were lurking on the wounded coast. HereBeDragons (talk) 17:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

How about a romanceable female Qunari (or Tal-Vashoth)? Second DLC companion, perhaps? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:18, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'd definately like to see a female Qunari, and would probably pursue them as an LI. If there's an expansion, I think I'd like to see a Qunari companion, or Tal-Vashoth. King Cousland (talk) 00:22, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

An add on for female dwarves and female qunari? (But aren't female qunari "cooks, farmers, artisans and the like" And the Arishok is the military section so it does kinda give an argument for not having females qunari. But the Tal-Vashoth could have had at least one. Tommyspa (talk) 00:24, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking, so it'd most likely be a Tal-Vashoth female. I'm not too big on female dwarves, but it'd be nice to see some dotted around. If there was a DLC which adds a companion, I'd like it to either be a Tal-Vashoth or either Shale or Sten. King Cousland (talk) 00:34, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

So after reading this the gist of what people want out of DA II is

Story altering Decisions
Dwarven and Qunari chicks
Race Specific Origins
Heartwrenching Missions

hmm sounds like the game Bioware promised us from the get go. I was thinking, would it be so hard to code in that if you side with the Templars, The 1st enchanter buys the idol and gets a badass staff and you fight him crazy, and the opposite if you side with the mages... atleast it would have been different... silly bioware. -Teonlight | Dragon Age Polls!
-- 00:35, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

My feelings are "what was Stroud and the other wardens doing in kirkwall?" What was more pressing matters? Sounds fun, I wanna play that. Tommyspa (talk) 00:46, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

DLC of this mission might be cool. Or maybe it'll be addressed in the sequel. On a side note, why is Stroud the second dark-haired Grey Warden (after Riordan) voiced by Stephane Cornicard? Are they related? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 00:49, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Sequel maybe, the feeling I got was that the game gave me a taste in my mouth that Cassandra/Stroud and other wardens (including bethanny/carver if they became part of them) are too neat to not expand on somehow. Dunno when or how though. I just think Cassandra will find Hawke and Leliana/Morrigan will have something to do with the Warden. It seems like a foregone conclusion. (I thought the voices were the same but never looked it up, maybe they are related, though we know it's just a let's just voice this guy as another orlesian warden) Tommyspa (talk) 00:58, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I so, so hope Cassandra doesn't return in the sequel, or returns only to die in a stupid and ridiculous manner in the intro movie. I'm surprised myself how easily she made into my most hated gaming characters' list, considering what little screentime she had. Dorquemada (talk) 07:07, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I ended up thinking of her as a replacement for Morrigan on the bitchy character. It could also be that whoever she's modeled after is pretty. Not sure which one yet. Tommyspa (talk) 23:02, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

DA2 didn't have a villain! Think about it. The knee-jerk reaction is to say the villain was Meredith, but that's not really true. You don't meet her until Act 3, and until the very end there's only tension between Hawke and Meredith; they're not truly opposing each other. (And if you're pro-templar, there's hardly any tension.) What about Orsino, the other big boss at the end? Nope, he's a pretty sympathetic character. And...that's it. I can't think of anyone or anything else. Without a clear villain, a person, an organization, or something else, a story doesn't have any direction or force pushing it forward. You also can't argue the villain is "the templars" or "the mages" since both are clearly sympathetic parties, and they both have good and bad people. No matter what you do or say throughout the game, neither group ends up being "bad" or "evil" or "the enemy," at least not until the end of Act 3. Both organizations are filled with good and bad people, and some of them have done great things and some of those them have done terrible things.

I think the devs wanted the game to feel more like an experience, more like a life you're living in Kirkwall, rather than just another game with a predictable climactic fight at the end. They may have succeeded pretty well at crafting an experience, but they sacrificed a sense of purpose. You're not stopping an Archdemon or closing Oblivion gates or defeating the Collectors. You're just...doing stuff. Gameplay's great, and mini-stories within acts and quests are great, but the overall plot was aimless. And sadly, I think a couple of years will show that a purposeless plot makes Dragon Age 2 mostly forgettable. Skahaggus7 (talk) 00:51, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I would argue that DA:2 absolutely had villains. For one, Meredith being crazy from the idol does NOT make her less villainous, and anyway there's plenty of in-game evidence that she was a villain earlier in the game. I don't think it really counts whether you've met her or not. She's still very much a part of the game, given how often she's referenced by the other characters, companions and NPCs alike, as the most powerful and influential character in Kirkwall. But quite aside from her, there's the qunari. I'm well aware that the qunari, particularly the Arishok, do not see THEMSELVES as evil, but the reality is that such people rarely ever do. The qunari believe so fanatically in their precious Qun that they are willing to conquer--and slaughter--whole groups of people for it. Villainy in the name of righteousness is still villainy. No one person or group EVER has the right to force their ideology onto another. The actual merits and possible superiority, real or imagined, of that ideology, is irrelevant. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 20:41, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I actually really liked that there was no real defined villain. Everyone was on this grey scale that I thought made them more relatable then your classic heroes/villains. You could understand why they were doing these questionable things, even if you didn’t agree with them. FlyingPigMonkey (talk) 00:02, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

I understand that their were villians in DA2 and they were interesting in their ambigous morality. But my issue is that Meredith, the Arishok etc are not personal villians of Hawke. Meredith is a woman doing her job fighting against mages, the Arishoks rage is aimed at the Chantry fanatics who killed his men. in both these cases Hawke is not the true target of the villians hatred, rather is droped in the middle of a conflict and caught in the crossfire. I find it decided impersonal when Hawke is, rather then being the focus of events, is simply in trouble with these people because of bad luck. How is that in anyway interesting. Hawke has no real stake in the villian's death, rather he is forced to fight them for the sake of others. I would find an enemy much more interesting if they had a personal relationship with Hawke, rather then hating Hawke purely for assosication with their true enemy. In this way i found the Arishok, who respected Hawke and had a true interest, almost friendship, with them, more interesting then Meredith, who clearly could not care less about Hawke, focusing all her energies on the mages.--Ironreaper (talk) 02:01, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

There is a good bit of truth in what you say, but it wasn't something that I really looked for or needed. In a way the entire story is about Hawke just making it for him/herself. But it was pretty much about stepping in, timing and survival. To each their own in what they like in stories. Tommyspa (talk) 02:48, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Throughout my multiple playthroughs I've found that I personally believe Dragon Age 2 to be a sort of commentary on the socio-political structure when people are oppressed for really no other reason than fear of that which is misunderstood. Yes, mages are vulnerable to demons...yes, blood magic is a dangerous path...but one of the tell-tale signs is right in the beginning of the game when Wesley says, "the spawn are clear in their intent, but a mage is always unknown," so, what? That just automatically gives you a reason to lock someone up (or worse)? Think about the whole mutant issue in X-Men, they are generally feared because they are different, and not understood, which causes many to take up arms. Now, let's get one thing straight, I hate Anders in this game, I REALLY do. He is SO whiny and nauseatingly self-righteous (but he's the only real healer, so I'm often forced to bring him along). Anyway, in terms of an actual villain, I think the game is implying that the real enemy is Kirkwall and the seemingly inevitable corruption its citizens seem to fall prey to ("you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy"). Think about it. You get a good glimpse of it almost right away when the former captain of the guard is arrested. Then you of course have the Qunari and the Qun, who find the politics of Kirkwall so unbelievably corrupt they decide to lay it to waste. Then, finally, you have the oppression of mages, which of course ends with the First Enchanter going ape-**** and the Knight-Commander pulling a Tolkien with her "precious" sword. Seems to me basically, that Hawke is just in the wrong place at the wrong time...--Hyskfmn (talk) 06:20, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

All i can say is anytime some little idiot, self-rightous templar go on about how when a mage is pushed into a corner, they will immediatly use blood magic is well DUD!!! Im sorry the mages dont have the good manners to die in a manner that means you dont have to wash your shoes afterward. Maybe thats why the templars wear skirts. they cant be considered practical in a career that involves running after people.--Ironreaper (talk) 11:27, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Lol. Really. Gone for dinner for 4 hours and BAM! We have a war. Well I'm glad it finally came to this. Now back to topic, I want my aerial camera back so badly I would cry if that could bring it back :( Hpa tqn (talk) 01:05, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

What is the aerial camera business, is it a pc necessity? I play on a PS3 and the camera is just as effective on it as DAO. (I really don't know) Tommyspa (talk) 01:10, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think it adds more of a tactical feel to the game. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 01:13, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I enjoyed the combat, if sometimes absurd, mostly for the fact when I got into my first fight in origins I was pushing X the entire time trying to swing my sword faster. I kinda don't want the patch to re-enable it on console whenever it comes out. Tommyspa (talk) 01:32, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Well the camera is not too necessary for tactics, but it makes combat more enjoyable. I can see more enemies, see the formation of my party, I can command them more freely, and I can tell them to go to places that would be impossible to do (a spot behind a door or a wall for example) without the camera. Ohhh I miss that feeling sooo much. Hpa tqn (talk) 01:40, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Skahaggus' post. And did anybody think that the new look for elves makes them look a little fish-like? The new look reminds me a little of the Salarians from Mass Effect. Aren't elves supposed to be fair in appearance? And not possess eyes that are generally over-sized. I did like all the seemingly unconnected side-quests with the idol and the serial killer and all the Qunari pull together by the third act. But the main plot did seem a little...everywhere...and not in a good way. And I liked the Champion mage armor. very cool...drawscomics

I greatly enjoyed the overhauled Elves, some look silly, but as a whole thank god they are not the same. In DAO they looked bland to me and not "beautiful or exotic" as some dialogue said about them. Also the Dalish culture was a unknown change I ended up being ok with, I mean they are apart from humans for so long it makes sense their accents would be different. I liked all the overhauled designs, except ogres now they look like chubby faced horned losers. Tommyspa (talk) 01:32, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I especially liked what they did with Zevran (ahhh, my warden misses him so). And I will be the first to shamelessly admit this, but honestly, I think Orsino is a smexy motherf**ker... at least until the whole Harvester scenario XD Sevarian10 (talk) 02:03, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

The mother of all discussions: DAO darkspawn vs. DA2 darkspawn (hurlocks). ChomskyDisciple (talk) 01:36, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Short time equals lack of genlocks and shrieks. When I first saw anything On DAO and saw my first darkspawn, I thought Orcs, Goblins and Zombies. Now they are like white dudes (like the DS that underwent the joining in DAA) Emissaries should kinda be like a generic Architect. The Architect never wore armor like they did in DAO. So why not make da2 emissaries like humany mages. (weapon design was something I ended up giving hawke when you can buy the darkspawn sword and shield and I also gave him that warden helmet you can buy too, both in lowtown.) Tommyspa (talk) 01:46, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I feel that DAO had a beter grasp of the Darskspawn but then the whole game revolved around the sub-humans. In DA2 Hawke is busy perpetuating the master race of Fereldens.

I don't know about you guys, but a creepy thought just came to my mind. What we're playing now is actually the beta version of DA2. Here's why. At the very first moment I saw the Combat trailer of DA2, I thought the darkspawn look weird, the environment is too bland, the graphics interface is clearly undeveloped (those ugly health bars, AoE markers have no cool texture like it was in DA:O), the fire is too yellowish it doesn't look like fire. At that time, everyone told me I was an idiot, and that all I saw was just the beta version, that they're just showing some combat features.

But now DA2 is published and it is exactly like what I feared. "This is just a demo", "This is just a beta version", now those things people said just creeps me out. What if EA rushed Bioware too hard, that they had to release an unfinished version secretly? I'm not trolling, it's just that they left out so many good features of the previous game: customization, interaction, camera, the simple and ugly interface, etc. Just thinking of this creeps me out. Hpa tqn (talk) 02:47, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

May I respectfully ask what exactly was "creepy" about this? Annoying, irritating, or some similar adjective, I could get, but it strikes me that "creepy" is a bizarre reaction to releasing a beta version of a game. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 23:47, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you ever bother to come back all the way up here and read this or not, but I'm gonna answer anyway. Well, you're right, maybe nothing's creepy about this. It's just that if it's true, this is the biggest lie in the gaming history: Releasing a testing version, lying about how great it is, charging full price for it in the process is not something I would expect. Or maybe I'm too optimistic, fraud is normal is this evil world after all. Hpa tqn (talk) 04:36, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

I did come back to read it, yes. ^_^ I've been thinking about this a lot the last day or so. I don't think Bioware _intentionally_ lied about anything. But it is painfully obvious that the game was rushed, and when you consider things that were advertised about the game--NPC romances, a world that shapes itself around player decisions--I think it's more likely that Bioware was simply rushed by EA to the point where they had no choice but to scrap a lot of their plans for the game. I don't think they released an unfinished game or a beta version, I think they were quite simply so rushed that they had to release a subpar product. A lot of the things people are holding up as examples of the game being rushed, I don't agree with (case in point, making all LIs bi isn't a de facto indicator of rushing, neither was fixing the protagonist's race and background), but I'm also not seeing anything evil or nefarious at work. I also don't think Bioware LIED, necessarily (and calling it the biggest lie in the gaming history is both unfounded and also, well, ridiculously overdramatic), just that they were forced to spit out a game so quickly that they weren't able to live up to their original promises. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 03:06, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Lol, perhaps your right. I'm a bit dramatic after all.Hpa tqn (talk) 15:15, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. I defended the demo to no end (using eerily similar arguments) against naysayers. Now I'm a naysayer, after three playthroughs. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 03:12, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Romance talk: Who was your favorite LI in DAO and in DA2? What would you have changed about romances in both games and what would you like to see in DA3? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 03:20, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

It's a fairly close bet between Fenris and Anders, with Anders in the lead. Getting slightly away from that, I think all of the characters are fully realized, completely human people, whether they were struggling with inner demons or were "chaotic good" types like Isabela: shallow, but aware of Big Rights and Big Wrongs. I've KNOWN Isabelas and Merrills and Sebastians and Fenris' in my own life. One complaint I've heard on occasion is that the characters are hypocritical or inconsistent...to me, that just accentuates how REAL they all are. Anyway, Anders is my favorite of all the characters, and my favorite LI, because of the cause he is so impassioned for and his struggle to maintain dominance over his own mind and body.

What would I change about romances in both games? Well. I liked being able to talk to my companions at any time I wanted in Origins, but I liked the more natural interactions of DA2 (the characters interact with one another, not just Hawke, and are seen doing things that amount to having actual lives). Perhaps a combination of the two? I would like MORE interactionsm as well, not simply a small handful that are strictly plot-driven. Not a great deal, because I know that would put a strain on voice acting and all, but still. The relationships between characters is my favorite part of both games. I'll have to think more about this, because I had some complaints about both systems. A nice merger between the two would be ideal, I think. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 22:28, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with a lot of what you've said. Your companions are more realistic. For example, I have a friend who's so much like Merrill it's creepy. That's probably why I love her character so much. I also have friends that are like Isabela. I also enjoyed being to communicate with my companions at any time AND having the natural conversations and would really like to see some form of a combination of the two. Jessica Sutter (talk) 16:43, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

Fine if we are exchanging feelings on DA2 in a fair way, ill give my two cents worth. You don’t have to agree or even find my option important at all. But here it goes.

I found DA2 was a decent game, im still playing it and probably will a lot more in the future. It is not up to par with DA:O and heres some reason's why:

Story:

It think a big difference between the two games is that in DA:O, the lore of the game world existed to support the main story. Your character has a main goal or enemy and that is the focus. you travel, learn about templars, mages, Dalish and dwarves and it is all fun to learn this, but it is all built around the main character and their quest. In DA2 the main character quest took a backseat to the lore. it feels more like your character isnt having an awesome adventure, that you are in control of and are making your own (an important thing in a game so steeped in choices). Rather yo feel like you have been dropped in the middle of a crisis you have little stack or personal interest in and are being pushed around at the whim of other characters in world who seem to have more authority over what the character does then you do. As interesting as templars/mages are, they are not a personal quest. i would rather have an enemy i have a personal reason to hate. A central villain who appears in the game for more then a few scenes and has a more personal relationship with the main character. it would be interesting and would get Bioware away from the apocalyptic threat storyline they keep using, though i like that too.

Choices: The choices in DA2 are weak and their is only one big one. It is such a same considering the terrifically ambiguous choices in DA:O. Choosing to destroy the Anvil of the Void, which practically secured the end of the underground dwarves and probably resulted in countless deaths, or save it and risk giving the next king a little too much power for the sack of the lives the golems will save. these choices seem morally clear, but have great depth to them that none of DA2's choices did. it seems a lot of this game is very black and white, made more for those who aren’t willing to risk much. The choices are either good mage or bad templars and the icon wheel makes it clear when a remark will result in a fight.

Small World: A bioware guy said in DA2 we would be travelling through time, rather then travelling through the land. then why does nothing change between the three year periods? environments don’t change, the city doesn’t grow, you cant go anywhere else. Why could they open up more Free marches cities like Starkhaven? Even worse, the characters don’t give the initial impression of time passing. At the start of Act 3, Varric talks about Hawke being Champion as if it was yesterday. its been three years. surely he has had enough time to tease Hawke by now.

Now that ive told you what i don’t like, lets see what is good.

Combat: Come on! everyone liked what they did. and those who didn’t are just hard to please.

Characters: The relationship between characters is fun and the fact that romances go on for years adds credibility to them.

Art style: I didnt mind the changes, even the darkspawn. the world does feel more believable and unique now. Qunari are awesome looking and the horns were a great addition. But how do people expect to see a female qunari? they never leave Par Vallon. Are you really angry at Bioware for showing you a cool peace for lore that they did not need to show you?

Dialouge: I liked all lot of the writing and its certainly come a long way for bioware. the voice acting is concurantly exellent

friendship and rivalry: I do get the feeling in games that dispite getting the option to be evil, it is more rewarding in the game mechanics to be good. This evens it out a bit and lets you be rewarded for being a total douch. I even like it how you dont have to be one, but just have differing beliefs.

As for people who deem DA2 unholy and undefendable, who ignore all improvements in favour of pointing out flaws, i recall my favourite line from the game, by Saemus Dumar: "some people try very hard to be offended." Cheer up and be happy for once.--Ironreaper (talk) 04:33, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

You just took everything I felt about DA2 and put it down in words. That's why whenever I am reading a thread that begin with something along the line of "DRAGON AGE 2 IS TEH WORST GAME EVAAAAARRR!!!" I close it out. Some people are just self-entitled and/or hard to please. --Occam's Razor 06:31, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

I feel that the dialogue wheel's icons break immersion. I'd rather that the intention be stated outright or that the action being performed be presented in brackets, like "I will end your life, you unholy abomination" or "I'm going to murder you, bastard" or [Kill Quentin]. What do you guys think? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 04:47, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

That's what I think. And the biggest problem is Hawke never says what I expect him to say.

E.g. (click sarcastic option) ---> (Hawke: angry face) "Why can't anyone solve their own problem?".

Wow really? That's sarcastic? Seems to be more like aggressive to me. Hpa tqn (talk) 05:02, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I got the opposite effect when using the dialouge wheel; although I had a sarcastic Hawke, I still only chose the responses that were the closest to what I wanted to say at the moment, and in truth, about 95% of the time they were spot on. I think the one problem I had with the wheel was that, considering what personality style you chose for your Hawke, it sort of gave you the impression that you HAD to continue using that option, regardless if it was what you wanted to say or not, at least to me it did. But after my second playthrough, I began to realize this wasn't the case, and I just went with whichever comment made the most sense. The wheel worked out better that way for me and made my Hawke feel like an actual person, showing that although he may act one way in one situation, he may still become a completely different person in another, just like me ;). Sevarian10 (talk) 06:33, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

I noticed that a recurring complaint about DA2 is that using the dialogue wheel to choose a 'tone response' breaks immersion. For the life of me, I can't see how this is the case. It doesn't strike me as being in the slightest bit any different from choosing which text response to 'say' in Origins. Both systems involve choosing a tone, even though in Origins it wasn't always clear what tone you were choosing. You might as well argue that any mouse-clicking action you take to determine a character's response either to a conversation or to a plot point is going to break immersion. Frankly, I found the dialogue wheel in DA2 actually added to the game. Having a fully voiced heroine (I play female characters always) with different tonal responses was one of my favorite aspects of the game. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 22:28, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm talking about the icons breaking immersion. When people are angry, they don't know that their responses will convey anger. They don't think about it, emotion occurs without thought. By telling the player how something is going to be said (through a convenient icon), it's like saying that Hawke isn't really conveying a real emotion. He's like a robot being told by the player to say something angry (or diplomatic or sarcastic). If the emotion is conveyed directly in the response (without an icon), then Hawke feels more alive. The voiced protagonist isn't really the issue, it's the dialogue icons. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 23:02, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

As I recall, the emoticon system was put in place because it wasn't always clear in Origins what tone you were going to use with a given response. I can concur on this, as I quickly learned to save a game prior to having a conversation after two cases of choosing what looked to me to be gentle, diplomatic phrases and taking an approval hit with the companion in question because it was apparently a nastily sarcastic phrase instead. But getting back to what you said, well, generally when I'm angry, I DO know that my response will convey anger. When I'm angry, one think I ain't is subtle. But how do you propose to 'fix' the problem, then? I think it's perfectly fine to give a character a list of different emotional ways to respond. Perhaps it would have been better if we'd been given the actual words that Hawke was going to say instead of a summary that didn't always accurately reflect the verbalized dialog. But you still have the problem of not always guessing from the text alone what the emotional quality of the words will be. All in all, though, I guess I just perceived the emoticons not as using Hawke as a robot, but as signaling to the player, "if you want to roleplay your character as aggressive, here's the phrase to use" etc. Probably not a perfect system, but I felt it was definitely an improvement over not being completely sure what the tone would be of your chosen dialogue in Origins. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 23:24, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I never said we should return to Origins dialogue system. Keep the wheel, but let the responses speak for themselves. This can be achieved easily by using certain types of words and punctuation. "I will murder you, you ugly son of a bitch!" - aggressive, "I will avenge my mother." - helpful, "Your blood magic will never stand against my impressive...bow skills." - sarcastic? I don't know. I just feel the icons ruin the experience. Sometimes, the icon doesn't match with the actual emotional conveyed. And companions' reactions are sometimes unpredictable to your responses (requiring reloads). We need a more natural dialogue system. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 23:43, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I enjoy playing a sarcastic Hawke for the most part. I throw in the "good" or bit of friendly concern when dealing with very sensitive matters like Ander's struggle with Justice. I throw in the anger when anyone threatens Bethany or Leandra though. My Hawkes also responds with anger towards slavers and those who threaten tranquility. PurpleNurplex0x (talk) 08:03, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Nice comments, guys. What do you all think of the voice acting for Hawke? I personally think male Hawke should have had a less mature voice. He almost sounds like an old man while FemHawke actually sounds like a young woman. Thoughts? ChomskyDisciple (talk) 14:12, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed totally on this one. I created a male character just yesterday specifically to explore certain aspects of Anders' character differently, and I agree, he sounds too old and experienced for the role he's intended to play.Tabriel Cousland (talk) 23:24, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Also agreed, although I didn't find male Hawke's voice to sound older, necessarily. Male Hawke, to me, just sounded a bit ... flat, no matter which response I chose. Female Hawke's voice conveyed more range of emotion. Sarcastic sounded sarcastic, aggressive sounded aggressive. For example: During the outset of Act One I selected the sarcastic voice to start with for my female Hawke. Over the course of the act, I apparently made enough 'nice' choices to change her from a snarky Hawke to a sweet Hawke. This, in turn, changed not only the intonation of her voice but the wording in some of her dialogue. I thought that was a nice touch. HereBeDragons (talk) 17:02, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

In future games, I'd prefer a choice of voices, or a non-voiced character, as I imagine each Hawke sounding differently (e.g, I think a mage would sound different form a warrior). I preferred the FemHawke voice to the male. King Cousland (talk) 14:26, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I love DA2. I really enjoy the fast-paced brutal fight sequences mixed with the casually-paced story-telling and dialogue. I realize that's "going against the grain" among RPG fans, but as a long-time RPG fan (20+ years) it's refreshing and enjoyable. For the most part, RPG'ing over the last 5-ish years has trended towards bigger-and-bigger fictional realms with ever-growing freedom of exploration. It seems that game designers are under pressure to make EVERYTHING maximally-customizable, fully open-ended, and never predictable in order to soothe the younger gamers out there. I say that's gone way too far, to the point where many recent RPGs have become no longer games, but rather alternate realities. I realize that some (or many?) of you out there are SEEKING alternate reality from your RPGs ... but for me at least, I just want to play a damn game. And Dragon Age 2 fits the bill. That said, I am disappointed in the number of quest/plot bugs. This is 2011, and game developers should be able to iron all that out before game release. Elanabelle.Bismarck (talk) 14:32, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Original poster here. I just wanted to bow to you, madam (you've got 20+ years of gaming experience). I greatly respect the opinions of long-time gamers. Regardless of my personal opinion of the game, I appreciate your comments. Thank you. And welcome to the wiki. Oops, I'm off-topic. lol ChomskyDisciple (talk) 15:43, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I for one prefer the voice of the male Hawke to that of the female one. I don't know why, but the female one just rubs me the wrong way, where as the male one I enjoy listening to. I may try the female Hawke one day, but for now, I'm going to continue swooning over my MHawke's smexy voice... mmmmmm Sevarian10 (talk) 20:56, April 11, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

Ditto. My Hawke No.1 was a goofy ginger in his mid-twenties by his looks, and sarcastic voice never sounded too old for him - on a contrary, juuuuust right. Can't stand the lady's voice, too. Dorquemada (talk) 07:17, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

There's just something about the female Hawke's voice that I think just makes her sound so sexy. Granted, I'm a guy so I would think that, but I think it's the hint of the accent, and the fact that I always try and create really exotic faces for her (thank god btw for the mirror function allowing me to constantly change my character's appearance) ;) --Hyskfmn (talk) 05:59, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Suggestions_to_Fix/Improve_Dragon_Age_II

@Skahaggus7

Yes the uncertainty is why freedom is not a good thing, but a thing to despair, you must have certainty and purpose, and you can find that only in the Qun.

Okay seriously I agree with you, no plot makes the game lose focus, just like our lives have generally no focus, unless we give ourselves to a religion like the Qun. But when I admittedly and blatantly use computergame as a means of escapism I would like to feel purpose, and that have DA2 not been able to give.

@Hpa tqn

I agree, I never played the beta version, but I knew and have said for a long time, that DA2 came out too soon. What we are playing is nothing but the beta, that EA never allowed the Dragon Age teem to finish. I am certain of this in fact.

The hope to this however, is that maybe, just maybe the bad reviews will persuade EA to give the team the necessary founds to finish the game. It could be uploaded as one giant patch, completely changing the game mechanism and redefining the designs. That is what I hope at least, but now I think I am a dreamer.

@Ironreaper

As an extension of my giant patch solution right above, a main villain can be implemented. Meradith is already there, we just have to have a better reason to hate her. It seems unconvincing that she of all people would ignore the fact that the champion or his/her sister is an apostate and possibly maleficar. If she instead of doing that had you hunted, so you had to hide away in darktown, and risk being arrested for merely showing your face doing the day, she would be a much better central villain.

The Hawke estate should still be bought of course, but it would not belong to the champion, but to his/her mother. When she dies, your sister and brother would play a central role.

The choises would be to continue to live underground/shelter your sister at great risk, or accepting to join the circle and practically be leashed by Meredith, with only the influence of the Grand Cleric giving you a measure of freedom.---rphb- (talk) 21:02, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Opinions on companion interactions and quests: (Partly touched by Tabriel Cousland)

Compared to DAO another change I liked was making you have to go visit your companions because in Origins you could burn out an entire person's dialogue pretty quickly in comparison to DA2. They make it stretch out and give you a reason to talk to them later, but taking out the freedom to do it whenever you like. But it makes sense to do it both ways, Origins over a year so no reason to space it out, and DA2 over 7 years, but I prefer 2's way of doing it.

The companion quests seem much better to me in DA2 as well. Or at least more involving/exciting than they were in DAO. Tommyspa (talk) 22:53, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Anders' Act III companion quest Justice really bugs me. If you don't complete it, the result (Chantry destruction) still occurs. This is one of several forced plot advances that killed the plot for me. But whatever, I'm done complaining about the single plot line. Anyway, I did like Aveline's Act II companion quest The Long Road. I had actual control over someone's life, as Aveline and Donnic's getting married was completely dependent upon me doing this quest. As a Merrill-lover, I also liked comforting Merrill after she breaks down during her companion quests. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 23:23, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

I saw Anders being able to do it on his own regardless, because he obviously wouldn't give it up starting the war if Hawke doesn't help him, that would seem to be really weak that way. But yeah, I know exactly what you mean, regardless of what you do he's blowing it up. Tommyspa (talk) 23:34, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

My bit in all of this is basically: I didn't care about the gameplay changes, except that I missed Arcane Warrior (Yes, it was OP, and I LOVE OP THINGS! I want to maul rabbid zombie-dragon-bears while DWing my flaming 2h Vigilance swords and casting Fireball at the same time. Which reminds me of Darksiders for some reason. Loved that game.) Back to the point, I felt like very little of what I liked about DAO changed in DA2 in terms of mechanics, at least on the PC versions of both. CCCs I liked pretty well, but I also did miss the Spell Combos they seemed to have taken the place of. I'm sure this was probably done to balance the mage class back to something similar to the other 2, but again in a single player game I don't care about "Balance", I want large explosions and big colored numbers coming out of my enemies.

The story I had no real problem with, other than the fact that for being the "climax" of the game, Act 3 felt very short compared to Act 1/2. I hear a lot of people complaining about lack of focus, and I won't deny that it suffered from the lack of a good "Primary Antagonist". But I don't feel like the story was bad by any stretch of the imagination to my method of thinking. I was wondering after DAO what they were going to do for a DA sequel because having another Blight while still being in the "Dragon Age" seemed unlikely, at least back-to-back. The Architect is a sinister mofo, but I don't think he has the numbers or the desire anymore to "drill" straight for the Archdemon gold mine, and it's been apparent through the Lore that it takes normal darkspawn centuries to find them by themselves. So, the alternative is basically a political/theological "doom" of some kind looming over our Protagonists' head(s), and that's what we got.

It is slightly inconvenient that we had 2 different "dooms" in one story, but I feel having gone through it now in-game, it was a good way to shake up the DA "universe" for future games. (And I feel like DA is going to be longer than a trilogy, or that's what I'm hoping after this game. IF DA2 is 2/3 in a seriies, that WILL make me think it was a lackluster plot.) Other than Blights, there are 2 "Major International Problems" in Thedas(As I consider them anyway.) One is the Chantry/Templar/Mage paradigm, and the other is the Qunari. We just happened to do things in this game to make both issues explode like an anthill full of Black Cats. So, for the next game(s), they can pick any nation they want (I'd place money on Orlais just cause of Sandal) and have pre-existing "Major Problems" to deal with in the plot, which they didn't have after DAO.

But I will say that I think I probably have a different expectation than most gamers, because DA2 feels to me like a novel in the Wheel of Time series. The Wheel of Time is now what, 12 or 13 novels long? All of them are almost 1k pages, and a novel in the series where we discover just the LOCATION of one of the Forsaken (there was 13 of them to start, we're down to 3-4) is a big plot movement. If one of the Forsaken DIES in one of them, it's like we just sank a continent, Atlantis-style. And these are just the enemy "Generals", they're not even the "Big Bad". Now, where things break down with DA2 in this paradigm is we don't have a "Big Bad" to work towards, and this is certainly a negative. Even ME has the Reapers, we know the end-game of the series is that we need to kill those Space Husks dead. Who are we shooting for in DA universe now? The last two Archdemons? Flemeth? Sandals crazy special-person Prophecy? All we know is we just blew off a bunch of Black Cats in the anthill that is Thedas, we have no idea why this means anything to any of us. Yet. -- Seroster 99.28.99.152 (talk) 00:22, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

I think DA2 is really fun even though it's different from Origins. I like the things they streamlined especially the combat. Can someone explain how DAO is considered more tactical than DA2? I didn't feel like either of them were that strategic about battles and I thought DA2 was the same but faster.

I also don't understand why there are so many complaints about it being linear. I agree that choices feel like they have little impact and the overall game feels like more of a setup but I feel Origins is linear too. You get to decide the order of some events but there are still plenty of converging plot points. Maybe I just have a different idea on what linear gameplay is. Although I guess it doesn't matter because I really don't care if a game is linear or not.

I hate the recycled dungeons as well. My husband and I are calling it the Mass Effect effect because of how ridiculous it is. And what's the point in having awesome new graphics if you're going to use the same ones over and over? As far as glitches and bugs go, the only one I can think of is that unfinished Who Needs Rescuing? quest.

I absolutely love having Varric and Isabela in the game. I laugh so frequently when they are around and sometimes have to pause the game to finish laughing. My favorite romance option is Fenris probably because I like the idea of having a broody elven slave voiced by Balthier in my party. Anders never appealed to me even in Awakening and the fact that he turned out to be a possesed psycho didn't help. I always felt that he tried too hard to be funny. For example, I had him in my party when we went to the foundry to find my mother and he says, "I hope we find more than a sack of bones this time." Really Anders? Sebastian seemed great at first when you meet him and hear that nice accent, but then I put him in my party and it was Maker this and Andraste that and I couldn't put up with it. So yeah, definitely Fenris for me. I agree with Tommyspa about speaking with your companions. It's different and seems disconjointed with the different acts but I think it works in its odd little way.

I thought I wouldn't like the dialogue wheel but I actually do. No more surprises about the way I say something when I meant something else. My wish for DA2 would be to pause cutscenes because I do enjoy watching them but I have real life to attend to and need to be able to pause a game at any given moment. Lady Summoner (talk) 06:22, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

I've, in fact, only started my first playthrough, but as I was peeping at the various vids, what struck me was the lack of facial expressions in dialogues. Not every time and not with everyone, but e.g. killing Hadriana was totally uncovincing, she never really showed any emotions. Even Anders after the, uhm, blow-up job, keeps too straight a face (that kind of emotional response can happen but I don't think it fits with him). Also, is there no way you can see your romance partners without clothes? I must admit I was rather curious about Fenris' tattoos ;-) - Which brings me to the suspicion that someone has already voiced above: we don't get all these nice little details because the game was so rushed, and it's really a pity. Ygrain (talk) 09:42, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

To Tabriel Cousland & ChomskyDisciple: In regards to the male voice of Hawke, I think it sounds fine because if you look at his face, you can see that he looks "old" with a lot of "experience." --Amm879 (talk) 10:57, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

Hawke’s appearance is customizable. As far as we know, he’s only between 19 and 24 years old in the prologue. I don’t think he acquired that much “experience” from living in Lothering all his life. Maybe he’s been smoking something. Stupid Hawke, smoking destroys the vocal cords. FemHawke actually sounds like a young woman. Why doesn’t MaleHawke sound like a young man? Just saying. Hopefully, DA3 will bring back different voice sets. Fully voiced or not, it would be nice to see again. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 15:36, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I've been wondering about this. I didn't mind the lack of different races, though I know a lot of people did. But I wonder just how much trouble it would be to have either several different voice options for a single character as in the case of DA2, OR having a different voice actor for each of a variety of races in another game with a fully voiced protagonist. Obviously it will require more money to pay the actors and time to implement it all. I really have been spoiled on having a voiced heroine, though, so I really don't want to lose that.

Edited the above for clarity's sake. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 20:58, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I didnt mind it and i didnt think the voice was too old, but Hawke is around 21 at the start of the game.--Ironreaper (talk) 11:51, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

@ChomskyDisciple. It is pretty clear Hawke is 21 in the prolouge. We are aware both that Bathany and Carver are 18 and that Hawke was born three years earlier.--Ironreaper (talk) 15:52, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

You're certain? I only recall the "three years earlier" bit referring to Malcolm having been dead for 3 years when the family fled Lothering. Can't recall any instance of lore setting Hawke's birth at three years prior to the twins. Tabriel Cousland (talk) 20:58, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I would like to add my voice to this discussion in the form of a comic. I hope this is allowed...

http://biscuitbrain.deviantart.com/art/This-is-War-204722869 Flemeth's Broomstick (talk) 11:43, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I would like to have seen glowing weapons,more powerful magic items like there were in origins, less exploding bodies, more ways to earn coin-Maxx Cousland

I'd like to get back to realistic fantasy, with more immersive feel. Magic effects should be conspicuous enough for quick visual identification, but subtle enough not to dominate the action or drag down CPU with cheap visual bling. You can make a scene much more powerful and dramatic with good animation instead. And cut down the waist-high fences and velvet ropes -- give the player some damn breathing room! Even if it's not wide-open sandbox, surely some exploration would add substance and verisimilitude to these maps. DokEnkephalin (talk) 16:08, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad we are finally having a regular (not flaming) discussion about this. I agree with many points on both sides, but I do have one topic that I don't believe has been addressed: spells & magic.

Glyphs: the removal/limitation of the glyph system was a negative for me. I didn't really get the glyph system of DA:O until my second playthrough, but once I did was combining & using them all the time. I was hoping DA:2 would have an expanded glyph system with even more glyphs and combos, but that wasn't the case.

Modes: With the exception of Rock armor (which looked sweet) I didn't see much improvement to the magical modes. There were very few auras and many of the modes seemed geared towards damaging enemies (why you're letting your mage get and stay really close to enemies doesn't work all that well) or using health for mana (unnecessary if your crafting game is on par).

Spell Combos: No petrify/stonefist shatter? No grease/fireball inferno? *sigh* Many of the spells that were added seemed pointless, while many of the old ones (like fireball) seemed watered down. I get that the mages were crazy powerful in DA:O. I also didn't see a problem with that.

And I really hated not being able to customize armor. On the flipside, the combat was intense and an improvement, if you don't mind pushing buttons a lot.

I liked the crafting better in DA:O. Liked the movement skills like backstab, dash, and stone's throw better in DA:2.

One other point: the XP gain. I felt like the game just had fixed amounts of XP to be given for any fight - I didn't see how much XP was gained per enemy, just like there was no option to display damage.

But all in all, I really hope they make the magic more like DA:O. Enchantment! (talk) 17:00, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

You know what is one thing I missed from DA:O that wasn't in DA2? The ability to have you or your entire team walk around naked in the light of day and have no one give two sh**s about it lol. I remember that in my city elf origin I had switched to Soris's wedding clothing (since they looked better on my warden then on him) and then had left for Ostagar with Duncan. Well, apparently I wasn't suppose to be wearing my cousins clothing, so when I arrived at Ostagar to meet Cailin, my clothes were gone and for the whole entire cutscene, I was naked in nothing but my boots and my giant greatsword XD. I rofl SO HARD. I missed moments like that in DA2. Sevarian10 (talk) 18:16, April 13, 2011 (UTC)Sevarian10

I enjoy DA:O & DA: II. I think both games have their pro & cons. I'm mainly going to focus on DA: II here. At fist i thought the recycled Manours/dungeons/caves/warehouses would be a majour turn off, & they did kind of annoy me. I am now on my 4th play through, & now getting used the reused maps. I prefer the combat speed of DA: II over Origins, but the never ending reinforcements during some battles is excessive. In some fights it's not that big of a deal, but it really bothers me when I'm in boss battles. I really like the voiced character in DA: II. IMO it gives Hawke more personality than the Warden. I prefer the Female voice over the male. (I typically choose chicks for my Warden & Hawke) I agree that the male voice sounds too old. The redesigned Elves & Qunari was a nice touch. I thought they looked too human in Origins. The Quanri look just bad ass now. I wasn't as excited about the redesigned dwarves, since i never really cared much for them in the first place (Bodahn, Sandal, & Verric are exceptions of course). I have not noticed too many bugs on my copy except in some cut scenes. I never encountered the "Isabela bug". IMO The story in both games were quite good, though Origins had a more engrossing story. My biggest gripe about DA: II is the rushed Act III. I was pretty disappointed about that, though not enough to ruin the game for me. I believe that the devs should have either gone with the Qunari plot OR the Templar/Mage struggle. Or they could have kept the Qunari plot, & have more events in Acts I & II dealing with Merideth & Orsino. More character development for those two would have been nice. Beside some brief appearances & their names mentioned a few times earlier in the game, they seem to appear abruptly. Act III seems tacked on to me. I thought the Qunari plot was well done. If the devs were given another year or 2 the game would have been better. Ser Pouce-a-lot (talk) 18:49, April 13, 2011 (UTC)

Replaying Awakening has really made me appreciate DA2 more. Comparatively it plays for crap, and the writing is horribly hackish. I forced myself through it for a week, and after I hit the inventory bug in the Silverite mine I just got so fed up with it I uninstalled DAO completely. DA2 really is more fun to play, has more likable characters and more compelling villains. But Bioware discarded more than necessary to make it a better game, and alongside the repetitive maps it really looks like a lazy job. I really hope they release an updated toolkit, because every time I play these maps I can't help thinking I could've done better. I'd like to take that challenge.DokEnkephalin (talk) 02:26, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

I agree that Awakenings was poor in lots of ways. Either play in a certain order or you can't do several of the quests -- truly linear. What really got me were the items labeled "hidden clue"; that's the type of thing you see in a game for children; I really couldn't believe it. I did like some of the characters, Anders in particular, (whom BW decided to destroy in DA2). But Awakenings and Origins were entirely different games and I never attributed the problems of Awkenings to Origins. Similarly I don't attribute the problems of DA2 to Origins.

I've already uninstalled DA2; a total waste of time and money IMO. Indeed, I see DA2 as being perilously close to a classic case of "bait and switch". Promise the customer a game like Origins; take their money, then give 'em a completely different type of game with combat essentially devoid of strategy, a bunch of essentially meaningless choices, a series of essentially unconnected 'adventures', companions that can't be customized, a PC with very little customization options. I'm really not surprised that the first DLC consists of weapons. DA2 is basically a combat/shooter type of game. More weapons fits the game category perfectly.

I don't expect to play Awakenings again either. But I might have another go at Origins. Damn! Origins really was a remarkable and memorable game. WarPaint (talk) 03:32, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

I must say I was not disappointed by the Awakening so much. While there were flaws (I was lucky not to have run into any major bug), there were quite a couple of things that contributed to great atmosphere, like the glimpses of the last defence of Kal'Hirol, and the choices the consequences of which would be revealed only much later (the way you handle your arling, not to mention the Keep-Amaranthine dilemma).

However, I think that the potential of the game was not fully developed - Brewing Conspiracy could have been used to build greater tension and provide a couple more quests and choices, to play a more substantial part in the game. Companions were not given they space they deserved, namely Nathaniel if you play as a Cousland - seriously, can you imagine having around a guy whose father you killed because he slaughtered all your family? There was _a lot_ more to say to the topic, for sure. On the other hand, it it quite compelling for imagination :-) Ygrain (talk) 06:01, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

Nathaniel was a great character. I agree. Definitely one of the highlights of Awakenings. The characters were what kept me playing the game in fact. The quest ordering requirements (i.e., play in a certain order of miss various things), the bugs, and the childish "hidden clue" objects, damn near killed the game for me but the characters kept my interest. Kal'Hirol was interesting and Amaranthine was actually larger than most cites in the series -- and certainly was more believable than the "mall-type" cites of DA2 (i.e., cities under roof with perfectly flat and level streets -- no trees -- a totally unbelievable setup IMO). WarPaint (talk) 06:25, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

Good call on Amaranthine: in my opinion, it felt just big enough to be important and just small enough that the nobles were having delusions of grandeur. The placement of barricades in the city made sense defensively, visually, and plot-wise for why the darkspawn tricks were necessary. Pixel hunts should have died in the 90s, though, and the quests didn't have much between the set-up and the payoff.

The storyboard of DA:A was sound, though; with close-enough voice actors, it could be expanded into a full game (merely fluffed-out, rather than have to be rewritten from scratch to have holes small enough to spackle). The problem with Kirkwall, as a mall analogy, is that the senior citizens weren't mixing power walking with having the same overly loud Alzheimer's discussion with themselves, for years on end, and that the Hot Topic customers had some vaguely productive days, hanging out with the Cool Transfer Student.

Come to think of it, DA:A may have had the best dénouement. DA:O's was a little impersonal (and included a nearly unforgivable Portal "joke") and DA2 didn't have any. Futonrevoltion (talk) 17:26, May 4, 2011 (UTC)Futonrevoltion