clint g wrote:
DA2 certainly had much to recommend it and it was hardly the unmitigated disaster some like to pretend it was.
I know I'm probably in the minority with this view, but I thought the companions' story arcs were the "real" story being told and that whole mage/templar thing was just a backdrop. Perhaps that's less a to do with the way the companions were written and more to do with how disinterested I was with the main plot, but it was enough to get me to replay it three more times. Not a big fan of the DLC. Legacy was just one massively dull dungeon crawl topped off by a frustrating boss battle. Never did finish Mark of the Assassin.
The big issue with DA2 was that it was
b)Different from the first one
Now being different isn't necessarily a bad thing. I loved the story and how it was told differently from DA1. What I didn't like was the change to the gameplay. RPGs like DAO and KOTOR don't come around very often. Is it too much to ask that their be a franchise that keeps the elements that make those games fun? In the case of DA2, they felt that they could take a few pages from ME2 and apply them to DA2. While it didn't break the game, it took away some of what made DAO special.
As with ME2, yes I think they went a little too far in stripping away/streamlining some of the classic RPG mechanics. However, Like also ME2 they got a lot right in this department too. I didn't miss having an inventory half full of crafting materials I'm never going to use, nor for that matter did I mind not being able to equip my companions with found armour and actually quite liked that they kept their iconic looks. Having said that, some more variety in the alternate appearances and the ability to pick which one they should wear would have been better.