I don't know how, but I found my way onto [snip] thread. Wow. Just. Wow.

Probably because I tried so hard to, I forgot about how bad the graphics and the storylines were ...

DA2 and Skyrim were released in the same year.

It's funny because it's so improbable and ludicrous. And yet it happened. Same. Year.

Bethesda showed everyone else how to make a proper 'modern' (as opposed to 'classic') RPG. They've set the bar with Skyrim.

If you say so.

I like them both. There are a lot of things about the party members, humor, and dialogue in DA2 that Skyrim lacks. It'd be cool to have a little of both in one game.

Not to mention the grunts. lol.. I swear, Hawke's battlecries and grunts were a great addition. It gave warriors more of a visceral feel when playing. Kind of like God of War.

A modern RPG should still retain features such as [censored] loads of dialogue, multiple factions that interlink, fleshed out quests and meaningful decisions.


i.e. Skyrim doesn't have these.

Da:origins+Skyrim=Perfection.

I like Dragon Age: Origins. I sold DA2 back to the shop. I did play it but overall was very let down.

Some of the characters were cool, and the voice acting was well done as always but those things don't stack up to gameplay for me in the long run. I like a good story in a game but I prefer atmosphere and gameplay.

Also Bioware is horrible at level design. DA2 was a travesty of level design so great I am amazed professionals got paid to make those environments. Kirkwall was a giant box with buildings made of boxes all connected at right angles. I felt the recipient of a bad joke.

Quite recently I saw "Bioware TV" or what this show is called. They delivered some info about Mass Effect 3. At the end of the show they asked their loyal fans to vote for Dragon Age 2 at the Spike Awards for game or the year and rpg of the year...and in that moment I didn't know whether to laugh or to rage.

Is it pitiful that they thought DA2 could really win? Was it bold? Or was it purely impudent?

I couldn't quite read the womens face (who was moderating the show), but I thought I glimpsed an expression like "yeah, as if we have a chance...". Or maybe she was a bit embarassed. There is definitely reason for that, but at least the top employes of Bioware always seemed rather immune against any kind of (deserved) critique on the game.

That was probably the most disappointing facet of the whole thing...their ignorance! Their denial! It felt like they were saying "well if you don't like the game than it's because you're an idiot!" -.-

In the end I was even disappointed to see that they made the third place in the awards. It was probably also the last place, so it could've been reached with zero votes in their favor, I'm not sure. But there were some other candidates which should've been in their place. Like The Witcher 2, which wasn't even a candidate in the vote.

Well, maybe that only shows the whole worth of the award...meaning it's worthless. ^^

I think some people are overly dramatic about the svck factor of DA2. And then they mistake this little fantasy world in their head as the real one everyone agrees with.

It's not a great game, but not dogcrap either. It's above average, at worst.

Mass Effect, especially Mass Effect 2, has very good level design (except for the Mako. I'm glad it blew up.) Both Dragon Age games were rather mediocre, the first one in terms of pacing and the second in terms of level design (primarily because Bioware got behind schedule and rushed it). Both had major hiccups in terms of plot flow.

More importantly, none of this has to do with Skyrim, so it should really be discussed on a general gaming site.

Well, actually, it does. There was a time when Bioware set the pace for everyone else with regard to the RPG genre. Bethesda has usurped them with Skyrim.

It's not a perfect game by anyone's count (and anyone who says it is, is flat out lying) but it is the game against which future RPGs will be measured- much like Bioware's Baldur's Gates were once the measure.

No kidding, it's not nearly as bad as the internets would have you beleive

Baldur's Gate... *takes off helmet* that was some game.

Look at what we get now. Games are not all about graphics, I think devs should notice that sometime soon or gaming will go downhill real fast.

I wouldn't give it more than 40%. In other words, if I was using a three-star rating system, I wouldn't even give it one star.


It's not going downhill. It's just focusing on different things. We'll soon reach a point where we can't prudently (i.e. cost-effectively) increase graphic fidelity and we'll instead have to start focusing on other gaming aspects. Like gameplay mechanics, storylines, characters, atmosphere ...
The focus for now is on the casual and the pretty, but as gaming becomes more sophisticated and commonplace, we're going to return to niche titles.
And there's nothing wrong with modern RPGs, per se. They're just a different beast ...

... but Skyrim does modern RPG right, and DA2 does modern RPG very, very wrong.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss DA:II the features it does have are frankly far better then the ones skyrim has, everything from perks to npc interation and followers growth and story are handled better. You take a perk in DA II you feel like you customized yourself rather then wasted a perk to get to something your really wanted that still doesn't make you feel unique. Nothing wrong with the graphics either at least all that was there was crafted for a purpose and a large city feels alive with the right balance of people and houses, not all of which belong to someone relating to a quest.

And to call the story awful? The civil war questline here is infinately more shallow then the mage vs templar story the events of which caused much heated but leveled discussion of and surpisingly a large amount of people falling for the side you wouldn't expect because of the actions that shouldn't be ignored like we do here, and even if they couldn't wrangle thier conscience to follow that side they where left heart broken by the one characters actions yet accepted they couldnt get it both ways. Instead here it's "why isn't so and so speaking to me or why doesn't anyone care about the results" generally comments on the dire lack of impact the story had on the game world or on themselves. That one character had more growth and story then entire cities in this game. Not to mention more personality then them.

By no means is it the best game or even the best, most original story but it's far from bad. Gameplay wise it doesn't live up to DA:O but at least it doesn't get in it's own way for gripping immersion or a smooth experience in general.

Lets not forget most of the long term fans on these forums are leaping to Bethesda defense saying story isn't thier strong suit or that isn't what they're about (but I loathe to see the day of an rpg with no story sandbox or not). So tell me specifically what they do very right that fufills these requirements of modern RPG's that DAII does so very wrong apparently? Id love to know really, if its not being a sandbox then thats the different beast, btw I wouldn't expect when the day pushing graphics anymore then they can (which I doubt is in any of our lifetimes) is no longer profitable I wouldn't expect to see the level of stories we used to get then either because it's be prove profitable to have shorter games or hold out on completely finishing a story in one game. They'll just push games out quicker from time saved on graphics.

Yup same year, I actually liked DA2 but the bugs, voiced protagonist, and lack of good story and real choices hurt the game. Once all the DLC comes out then DA2 should be good but I don't think it tops DAO except in the gameplay development, I thought besides the over the top animations that gameplay was much better in DA2. Now onto Skyrim, I'd say it's night and day in comparasion to DA2.

They have a section called "[censored] Forum for [censored]s"?

Oh come on, they are totally different styles of game.

Just because they are both fantasy themed it's unfair to compare imo.

There is still plenty of room for more 'classic' style rpgs anyway, hell I was playing ff6 only last week.

DA isn't TES, nor does it try to be, nor should it be.
Dragon Age is a good franchise and it's games are solid, old fashioned in some respects (combat) but purposefully so and well executed. (well DA:O had combat issues on console tbh, but that's a minor whine, it was a pc rpg at heart imo).

How boring it would be if every game had the same style and the same delivery.

DA games are purposefully designed with a sort of neo classical style in mind "harking back to the good ol' days... but not too much." Devs have actually mentioned this in many interviews/vids etc..

Old skool feel with modern edge.
If you think the games are "inferior" to TES series, you need to learn a bit more about games. >.>

I personally thought Origins was horribly overhyped. At best it was a mediocre game with an okay story. It tried too hard to be a movie.

Like


or


Admittedly waiting for the DLC I will actually care about in DA II though I love Felica but I want sebastians story or an exspansion past the end, unless theyve sneaked it in with one of the other ones, I hope they don't pull a lionhead and release nothing but the fluff ones over the conituation of the story before the new character in the sequel again, shame too I liked the voiced protagonist, with the choice I could still roleplay, I just had a sixy as hell voice in my RP character, its no worse off then being given limited unvoiced choices that don't even cover the bases.

I wouldn't say DA:O tried any harder to be a movie then skyrim does, and at least does a better job at it including having choices that change the reel. Certainly no harder then oblivion tried with its opening sequence. Hype isn't the games fault either, I missed the hype on Fable 1 cause I didnt have an xbox, when I got the game I fell in love with it for what it was, the story of the archons and finding my family with fun be it simple and easy gameplay, but amazing for the world even though corridorred it still felt like you traversed a fantastic world with unique and beautiful enviroments to look at. Then FII came along and because I waited for it I caught the hype, although the loss of so many features was more dissapointing then broken hype and the same for FIII which had lost so much and gained so little the second half of which feels like watching a movie but theres only stills with 15 minute gaps in the story between them, the ending completely missing while your left boggled on what was that and why was it coming. I missed the hype on DAO too so that probally helped and wanting the sequel may have led to the negative impact it had. I can't say it's not the same for this, the time gap hasnt been kind either I'm sure, but in all 3 you see a simalar trend, shinier graphics the odd new but shallow feature, shallower plots to some extent or just fewer of them and worst of all the loss of loved features.

People complain about lack of "loot" in skyrim, DA2 was far worse as each of your party were locked into specific items they could wear. Another complaint gamers had withDA2 was everything took place within the keep with the same zones used over and over.

What Dragon age series did right was the party mechanics. The AI tactics option was great. You can "instruct" a particular party member to play tank role even if they were a mage class. The character save system which separated each save by character was well done as well

...Bioware is dead. They haven't mattered since Mass Effect 1.

DA2 by itself would be an average game at worst, you are right. Except it was the sequel to DA:O. That changes everything, when a sequel failed to improve upon the previous game and made changes for the worst, it's a bad game. It is that simple. Also the lack of effort to the game was evident which drives fans even more disappointed. If Skyrim was no where near as big and detailed as any previous TES games, and with only a handful of recycle dungeons rather the hundreds of locations we have now, you will be raging too. Oh also there are invisble walls everywhere. Would that still be an average game in your book?

This guy vanished when ME 1 came out.

I'll admit DA2's combat had some good ideas, but it was totally pulled under by trash mobs, trash environments and trash set-ups.
While TES:S is shallow in story and character interaction, it at least makes sense and is consistent. DA2's story didn't have either of these qualities.
And while neither Skyrim nor DA2 handle in-game consequences particularly well, Skyrim goes less out of it's way to completely invalidate the few choices it does give you. DA2 doesn't even give you choices at all.


But people make the comparisons anyway. Just like all RPGs, even if they were 'different styles of game', were compared to the BGs previously, all RPGs will now be compared to Skyrim. I think, anyway.


I didn't say there wasn't. I like 'classic' RPGs, too. I just think RPGs are moving in a different direction, for now.


Not really.


Felicia Day cannot save DA2 for me, no matter how cute she is. Also, I thought she had standards.

No, I vanished when GOW with a dialogue system that was ME2 came out. When the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" was DAO. EA is a hell of a magician. They made lots of the original Bio fans vanish.

I still think their whole ME-series is top-notch. But as far as their rpg section goes they somewhere lost track...to multiple things, like: What their fans like (DA just better, instead we got DA just much worse), what the industry-standard is (on things like level design, graphics, game mechanics), even their sanity maybe. XD