Thanks for that.

This.


DAO will probably still be the best one.

So, because Bioware typically releases "good" games then Dragon Age 2 is "bad." Ok, I guess I get that. While DA2 had a disappointing story and waaaaay to many repeated areas (and not enough places to go overall) I didn't think it was a "bad" game compared to a lot of others out there. Then again, I only spent much time with the PC version, which had almost completely different combat and difficulty than the console versions. I've heard that the console versions had some pretty boring, tedious combat.

Anyway, I wasn't talking about you, specifically, just about people in general that condescend on the internet about things they know little to nothing about.

Mmmno ... DA2 is just bad, on its own merits (or lack thereof) and independent of the pedigree of Bioware's other projects.

*cough cough* Creation kit. *cough cough*

Maybe they'll have two awesome buttons this time.

Interesting. Compared to what, then? Did you play it? If so, which version? I'm not accusing you of this, but a lot of people parrot how bad DA2 was around the intertubes that haven't even played the game.

I played it on the PC, and it wasn't bad. It was a disappointing follow-up to DA:O, but a "bad game?" Not really. Maybe I've played more "bad games" than you have. I'd file it under "nice idea, rushed execution" rather than "just a bad game." I've played a lot worse. More than a few in the past year, even.

Depends on your definition of bad. They changed the artwork; the Qunari look ridiculous. The darkspawn went from menacing to absurd. The combat was button smashing stupidity; just click until the wave stops. The giant statue transformer battle at the end was so pathetically stupid I couldn't stop laughing. The story was boring; the writing ranged from bad to pathetically juvenile. The game felt like a mod done by a bunch of randy college kids.

It ran; it was the dragon age lore...but the rest of it was unrecognizable swill. I've always enjoyed bioware games; have always looked forward to them. I'll never play this turd again. A game that I hated so much I would never run it again, for me, that's a bad game.

hm.....only time will tell


woosh!

Meh

I didn't think the Qunari or the Darkspawn changes were all that bad. The lesser Darkspawn definitely looked better in DA:O, but the ogres make more sense (appearance-wise) in DA2, IMO. I'm kind of indifferent about the changes to the Qunari.

So, you played the console version, then. The PC version combat was very similar to that of DA:O. In both cases the combat on the PC version was very different...much deeper and more challenging. In fact, the tactical combat on Hard difficulty is one of the things that kept me playing.

Worse than Liberty Prime? I actually did lol at that "battle."

I'll give you that...the plot was hard to care about. The writing (as far as dialog) wasn't much worse than a lot of other games...Skyrim included. That said, it wasn't on-par with what I expect from Bioware.

wait id heard of risen...that anygood? and what should be expected of risen 2?

Are you referring to the way, on consoles, that you had to hit a button for every melee swing, or a lack of any need for tactics in general? For the first, you could select autoattack rather than manual in the config options. For the second, try turning the difficulty up. The game's combat (which I ended up really liking) had a lot of layers of complexity that you'd really just end up ignoring until you jacked the difficulty up to nightmare. Either way though the wave mechanic was overused and sloppily implemented (and also completely absent from their DLC, which ended up being pretty good.)

Dragon Age II was a big let down compared to the first one where I cherished every moment playing as my Arcane Warrior....

Risen was quite a good game, though I found Gothic 2 more enjoyable. Will definitely be playing Risen 2 when it comes

It will take a lot to convince me to get another Dragon age game after the fiasco that was DA:2, I enjoyed Origins greatly so went and purchased DA:2 on that basis, huge mistake!, it won't happen again, I'll wait for the user reviews and user videos.

I'd rather the next Dragon Age take it's cue from Origins. The open world thing is great when done right, but that means doing it big... ridiculously big. Considering how "streamlined" DA2 was, the "big" required is likely "too big" for for them at this point. I'd be surprised if Bioware/EA can muster anything bigger than Divinity 2: DKS. Even if they get as big as Sacred 2, it will probably feel more like Sacred 2 than TES:V.

I really don't like the Dragon Age series, for long I've stuck up for it. Because it isn't awful, but I really don't like it at all.

The cameras are dodgy, there's no first person, it's not really 'free roam' and the combat is bland and boring.

Dragon Age 2 is a good example of what's wrong in the industry (and gaming audience) nowadays.

It's so bad it seems a compilation of jokes about videogames clichés

Big weapons being swept fast as in JRPG? Check
Romances taken to the extreme? Check
Waves of enemies à la space invader? Check

I could go on with the list but that's probably the worst...

Bioware has been on a constant decline as it prioritized breadth of audience over quality. People who lament that Skyrim is too much consolized should really look into what Bioware games have become. Dragon age 1 was a pleasant surprise but the last 'relic' of the old Bioware (work on this started in 2002).

If Bioware is taking inspiration from Skyrim for the next DA, it means only one thing:
It will be possible to have same six relationships with dragons!!! Yay!

All they've done is looked at Skyrims sales figures and thought "we want dat money", and now will attempt to immitate some of Skyrim mechanics.

It's sad though because this isn't necessarily what DA needs, in fact Bioware excels where Bethesda doesn't with things like Story, choices with consequences, characters etc. I think they should play to their strengths instead of trying to copy others.

I took the time to read all 6 pages and I don't think anyone nailed the exact difference between Bioware and Bethesda

Bioware is part of EA therefore a public company, Bethesda is private owned.

Public companies are ruled by a boards of investors, people who usually don't get past the billing figures: all they want is money flowing quarter after quarter. They are adverse to risk unless it can be factored with more money (within certain bounds). Also, because the public companies business plans usually cover three years, a project which takes five or more will require special scrutinizing and the type of investor feedback a gaming company can hardly provide.

Bethesda, on the other side, has to answer only its parent owners who probably knows better the type of business they are in. They can afford to invest 5 years in the making of a game undisturbed as long as its performance meets or exceed expectation. This sort of "trust" relationship is impossible to have in a public company which also has to endure the volatility of the stock market.

I am curious, who said all of us where not game developers?

Additionally at the end of the day a devs way to know if he has skills is if the PLAYERS like the game. Without players there is NO NEED for developers.

They just did it with SWTOR, which is an awesome game. And I haven't discovered a single bug yet.

I just hope they redeem the series but it will never be as good as TES.

NWN. Multiplayer capability and modders saved that train wreck. Bioware's pedigree isn't all that great.