I've had DA:O on my backlog for a while now, and I'm excited to eventually get to it. Is Dragon Age II really as bad as they say that it is? I've heard that it is better off skipped, and players should just go from Origins to Inquisition.
I didn't find it too bad, though there are a few characters I disliked and that was only because they couldn't live up to the original cast. I say just play the game and make your own judgements on it.
I played it briefly and it was okay, not too bad. I'd say you just give it a chance yourself and see how you like it, you're better off judging for yourself.
Saying DA2 is bad depends on what perspective you're looking at it from. Many of the fans of DA:O hated DA2 because it was a watered down experience in several areas. The amount of locales was drastically reduced compared to the first Dragon Age, and many of the encounters happened on the same map, with the only difference being certain sections that were closed off. Ally customization was taken out, which also invoked the rage of the fans. And speaking of allies, many of the fans thought that the current party members lacked the substance and depth that previous members had in the first game. And the final defect was the art style, which looked too bright and "cartoony" to people. Personally, I love DA2 and played the game dozens of times. When you get over the differences it had from the first game, you'll find that it is better than DA:O in many ways.
I don't know if I'd say bad. My biggest issue with the game was how far it strayed from the Origins. I really enjoyed the tactical real-time styled combat and I felt DA2 took a big step back from that in favor of mindless button mashing. (Not that there's anything wrong with mindless button mashing. ) I also wasn't a big fan of enemies coming at me in waves or the same maps being reused over and over. Variety is nice, ya' know?
It's a different game from Origins, that's for sure, but I still liked it. My biggest complaint is that you had to play as a human which I don't particularly mind, but I still like to have the option. This extends into a story that's not as varied as it was in the first game and yeah, I can see why people dislike it. I found it enjoyable, although I still haven't gotten my hands on Inquisition.
It's not but it's miles inferior to the first game in my opinion. There are repetitive dungeons and quests, but it's far from bad. And anyways you shouldn't skip it because a good amount of Inquisition's story and characters are connected to Dragon Age 2. Sure there are some summaries during Inquisition that explains what happened in 2, but it's better to play it so you completely understand the situations they're describing.
No, it's not bad, just passable and very underwhelming given that it came out after Origin. The enemies just dropped from the sky, dungeons were massively reused and the game felt very rushed. But it has an interesting premise, a good conflict only cheapened by the ending (final boss battle, I mean I get what they were trying to say that no side is 100% right but it failed on so many levels). The cast however is very good, the events are linked into Inquisition and the story of the 1st and 2nd act is actually very well-written. I'd say that it still guarantees a playthrough if you're a fan of DA.
I think the game was a step behind from Dragon Age Origins as the controls were not that great and also, the graphics were alright sometimes and other times it did not seem right as the environments did not seem exciting and also you could not play as other races in this game which can put off some players as in the first game you could choose your character. The game did feel like nothing you did was going to improve the situation of the mage and templar side as both sides are in the grey area and the templars are hard on the mages in some areas of the game, and some have good ideas but go about it the wrong way. The boss fights can be difficult especially when you go into the deep roads much harder than the first game and you can feel bored at times as the quests can be easy or hard or in the same place and worth a try if on special but not the full price.
Another 'No, it just wasn't as good as Origins'. The dislike for Dragon Age II is kind of a compliment to Origins, and I bet it would have been a better-received game overall if it had come first, not second. (Though the franchise may not have exploded in the same way, so...) My biggest gripe in Dragon Age II was the constant rehashing of dungeons, particularly during side quests. The programmers took one map and rejigged it several different times so it was slightly different, but not enough that I didn't notice. Change a door here, put a chest and an enemy there... nope. Always felt like I was going through the same areas. Got really tiresome after a while.
Compared to the content that Origins and Inquisition has, II felt like an intermission to me. Extremely limited, very short and didn't have much in the way of story. It takes place in such a small place and most of the maps are repeated. In my opinion all it had going for me were the characters but my god everyone of them were messed up. Your main is called simply Hawke. Imagine Hawke being a babysitter and cleaning up everyones messes. Thats Dragon Age II. That said, I still enjoyed it purely for the fact that the stories still lined up. There are small things that happen in it that I got from dialogues in Inquisition as well as things that happened in Origin that I wanted to see what happened to them through dialogue.
