| Title | Dragon Age II: Why don't you complete me? |
| Author | Adam Sensoy |
| Posted in | Game diaries |
| When | March 24, 2011 |
Try as I might, I can't make myself love Dragon Age II the way I loved Dragon Age: Origins. Dragon Age II does almost everything right, hits almost all of its marketing bullet points, but never grabs you and refuses to let you go..
Read the full articleWhile I do miss the engaging NPCs from DA:O, about 10 hours into DA2 I was finally able to let go of that and enjoy the new game for what it is and not what I thought it would be (or expected). I think my biggest gripe is that there aren't enough NPCs that interest me. Other than Varric and Fenris it's more or less a lineup of Wynne's, which both horrifies and baffles me.
I suppose it's difficult to one up Sten, Shale, Morrigan and Leliana in terms of compelling personalities (yes, I found Sten compelling... so sue me), but they don't seem to have even tried.
I agree with you Joe, and I wish I could have written more just about the companions without going deeply into spoiler territory.
DA:O had some remarkable companions. Shale was an absolute masterpiece; at first an odd homage to HK-47 and then a touching, engrossing story that I loved. Leliana was the Deanna Troi of Ferelden and constantly annoyed me, but she was interesting. Zevran had more character in his pointy ears than most NPCs have in their digital bodies.
So I am with you on the failure to capitalize on that in DA2. I am a big fan of Varric, of Fenris, and even Isabella, who is so foul and against Bioware female NPC stereotypes that she is attractive, but for the most part they missed the mark.
I agree with you Joe, and I wish I could have written more just about the companions without going deeply into spoiler territory.
DA:O had some remarkable companions. Shale was an absolute masterpiece; at first an odd homage to HK-47 and then a touching, engrossing story that I loved. Leliana was the Deanna Troi of Ferelden and constantly annoyed me, but she was interesting. Zevran had more character in his pointy ears than most NPCs have in their digital bodies.
So I am with you on the failure to capitalize on that in DA2. I am a big fan of Varric, of Fenris, and even Isabella, who is so foul and against Bioware female NPC stereotypes that she is attractive, but for the most part they missed the mark.
Orzammar in DA:O never seemed boring or repetitive? Really?
Orzammar, no. The Deep Roads? Fuck yes, that got repetitive and boring (though the big reveals there were some of the most memorable in the game).
Personally, I disliked virtually every one of the gameplay changes and can't think of any improvements in that respect other than possibly to the warrior and rogue class design (I haven't played with a main character in either, so the jury's out on that). The game does make some interesting formula changes in terms of storyline and has some great characters, though, and good lord does it look good on PC with the ultra high res optional texture pack. Albeit brought down somewhat by the lack of variety in environments and enemies. If they'd preserved the gameplay that had been proven to work in DA:O, maybe improved it a bit, and spent more time on creating environments and encounters, I'd consider DA2 a bona fide classic. As it is...well, I hope that's the direction they go with any potential DA3.
What is it with Orzammar and the Fade that everyone dislikes, and how is it even remotely relevant to a DAII game diary? There were problems with DA:O, all of which are exacerbated on repeated playthroughs, Orzammar at least had a couple of great bits.
And to get back on topic: Adam, thank you for doing this. I have the game sitting on my desk and I very much appreciate the honest take on this, I'm thinking that, like with ME2, going in with appropriate levels of anticipation and expectations will definitely improve my experience.
I have a suspicion that the oddest thing playing DAII for me will be the lack of crowds in the populated areas, as other people have been commenting on. This will be exacerbated by the fact that I've been playing with a DA:O mod that adds in crowds and npcs to just about every populated location and I'm betting it is going to be quite barren if I'm judging by the unmodded DA:O.
The point is there was plenty of tedium in DA:O. Don't get me wrong I love that game and I am loving DAII. In many ways they are very different games. With all due respect there is a bit too much of overly critical of the new coupled with rose colored glasses for the old. I will stand by and will articulate my opinion and won't be shouted down.
RSM,
You are very welcome. My goal when I write anything about games, be it a review or a game diary, is to inform the reader or buyer in some way-the fact that you enjoyed this and gave you some perspective on the game in any way makes me happy.
Claybob,
I certainly respect your opinion: Orzammar itself had some back and forth but didn't bother me. Deep Roads was almost painfully long, though the resolution of three quests there with Shale, dwarf whose name I forget, and Dwarf throne was exceedingly well done, interesting, and made the slog worth it.
I don't think I look back at DA:O with rose colored glasses. Even though Tom disagrees, I despised the fade. The four-hub Bioware system was old and tired. Some of the characters grated on me. Combat could be clunky, unresponsive, and frustrating. But the game was exactly as promised, and filled a niche for those of us who put 300 hours into BG2 (and I would do it again in heartbeat if I had time), and for that, will always hold a special place.
I am less critical and much more enthusiastic about what Dragon Age II does RIGHT in today's post, hopefully up in a few hours.