THE CRAVE GAMING CHANNEL
V'lanna
 

Banner

PVP - Dragon Age II

There are a number of interesting and varied opinions about games here at RPGamer. I'm not talking about the editorial staff either — each site contributor from forum moderator to newsie to PR has their own opinions on what makes an RPG truly great. After all, we're all here because we love games. So, with that being said, wouldn't it be nice if we had a written venue for staff and forum-goers to hash out the good, bad, and controversial of some well-known RPGs?

Enter: PVP (or Player VS. Player) — a new, monthly RPGamer feature where we break down what made a game great, horrible, playable, and unplayable. The concept is simple — the participating staff dishes opinions on a game and why they completed it or dropped it like a bag of potatoes and our folks in the forum do the same. Each month we'll feature a different RPG that is polarizing, popular, or pitiable.

This month we'll be discussing Dragon Age II. DAII is the weird tasting filling between the delightful oreo of Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age: Inquisition. What do we really think of it though?

- Trent Seely

Michael A. Cunningham

I loved Dragon Age: Origins. Having not played other BioWare games prior, the decision making and world building was fantastic. I even read a couple of the Dragon Age books because of how much I loved the characters and how my Warden interacted with them. I was equally excited to pick up the Awakening expansion and loved spending more time in that world with a new set of characters. I still remember seeing a teaser inside the case of Awakening that was just a "II" in red letters with a date that was not that far away. I couldn't believe that BioWare was planning Dragon Age II that soon after the release of the original. At the time, I didn't even consider the impact of a rushed development; I just wanted to play the game. In retrospect, I should have been worried.

The most telling point I can make about Dragon Age II is that I can't really remember much about it. I remember parts of Origins clearly, but II is mostly a blur. I remember Anders being back and less interesting than before, Merrill being awkwardly cute, Varric being annoying, and the other characters being dull, uninteresting, or equally as boring. I could go on and on about the level design and such, but I don't even want to waste my time talking about it. I forgot most of the game as soon as I was finished with the main quest and only went back because my Hawke said she wanted to kiss Felicia Day, so I couldn't refuse her that request. While Dragon Age II didn't sour me completely, it definitely lowered my overall love for the series.

Adriaan den Ouden

For me, Dragon Age II did almost everything better than Dragon Age: Origins. I found Dragon Age: Origins to be rather long-winded and too long for its own good, and the gameplay to be bland and tedious. I went through virtually every origin story before I finally settled on playing as a Mage, because that was the only class that actually felt like I was doing anything in combat other than watching. While the world and story were interesting enough to keep me going through it, I've never had any interest in going back to it.

When Dragon Age II came along, it improved on almost every complaint I had about the previous game. It was a brisker game, clocking in at half the length of Origins, the combat was more engaging and fluid, and the characters all felt like they had more personality, especially Hawke, who was a huge step forward from the stoic Grey Warden. While there are definitely criticisms to be levied, particularly toward the recycled level design, almost every aspect of the game felt more interesting to me, if somewhat less polished than its predecessor. I especially liked the narrative that focused entirely on the happenings of a single city rather than the entire world at large. It's the sort of localized plot that you don't see too often in fantasy RPGs, and it felt like a breath of fresh air to me.

Alex Fuller

Dragon Age II is fine. Unfortunately, fine doesn't really cut it for a follow-up to the immensely well-received Dragon Age: Origins. There are parts where the game is superior, the combat is much more entertaining and the conversational wheel borrowed from Mass Effect made conversation flow a bit better than the standard dialogue tree. Some cast members were on par with those in Origins, with their party interactions providing more great enjoyment, but there were some who simply weren't interesting. As a hub, I found Kirkwall to work well. However, it was greatly hampered by the fact that when the game sent players out on quests, they simply got more of very generic parts of Kirkwall for the most part. This made the actual exploration parts very dull, particularly when the game unashamedly reused sections, simply opening previously-inaccessible doors. Sadly, this really crippled the game's atmosphere and any real care I had for this particular part of the Dragon Age world, making it much harder to buy into things in the same way as Origins had gripped me.

Zack Webster

Dragon Age II is a game I like in concept rather than execution. An RPG where the player is surrounded by their family, centralized in one location, and covers a decently long span of time? The fact that the series wasn't about a world-ending calamity is also points in its favor. But the game failed to grab me in any other sense of the word. Dragon Age II: Mass Effect II would be the more accurate title. Hawke is given a voice with which I can dislike him/her, not a single member of the cast grabbed my attention in any meaningful way, and the combat was a huge step backwards from its predecessor. The game also had a horribly rushed feel to it, which makes sense given it only had, at most, two years of development. The game's unique setting isn't enough to cover the game from messing up the basics.

Sam Marchello

Having beaten Dragon Age II twice, you'd think in a lot of ways I would be singing its praises. I admit, I have a very mixed relationship with Dragon Age II. I loved the characters and their banter, but the story comes across too black and white for its own good and the morality and dialogue system lacks the depth of Origins. With the game having such a short development cycle, everything but the battle system suffers. The game has a lack of diverse environments, odd pacing problems (Chapter 2, anyone?), and tons of repetition in quests and areas. I wanted *more* from my experience, and even paying for the DLC didn't really quench my thirst. I think part of me had way too high expectations for this sequel, and yet a part of me wanted to love it the way I did Origins.

However, I won't deny the parts of the game I enjoyed. I adore Aveline's quest for love (and how you could also mess it up for her, but why would you because she's THE BEST), and I enjoyed Varric's various plot points and his constant support for Hawke. I loved Isabella's wild nature, and I loved seeing Alistair drunk off his Moo in one of my save files because I didn't make him King. I thought the implementation of the day and night cycles would have done a bit more for the game than it did, and it just seemed like the game had so many great, but incomplete ideas. It makes me happy in a way, that Inquisition ended up providing the best parts from both previous titles. Judging Dragon Age II on a whole, even with my two full playthroughs, I enjoyed the game as its own entity, even with its flaws, but it didn't feel like a worthy sequel to Origins in any way.

You've heard what the staff has to say about this "classic." What's your take? Hit up the forums. Defend it, destroy it, or express how little interest you might have for it in the first place. We want to know how you feel!

To close, I'd like to thank Alex Fuller for coming up with the layout and Sarah McGarr for the graphics.


© 1998-2017 RPGamer All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy