Yeah, so I started playing DA II the other day and ... Well I kind of couldn't stop. I certainly do get where all the hate comes from, DA II has changed Dragon Age quite a bit. Thing is, I find vast majority of changes to be good. While I could live with a slightly less arcadey combat, I can live with it since I don't really play my RPGs for that (as far as first DA goes, when I want a tactical squad game, I play other games. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the approach, just not something I particulary like in my RPGs.)

And, aside from location recycling, that is all the bad I can say about the game so far. I haven't finished it yet, so don't give me any spoilers, but I really, really like the rest. People tend to compare DA: O and DA II, saying how much has DA II screwed up. I'll do it the other way around:

Setting
While both games are set in the same world, it feels completely different in DA II. First Dragon Age game's had fairly generic locations, your typical medieval stuff. Nothing that could keep my interest for long, really. The only place that could spark my interest at least a bit was Orzammar, but even that didn't last long.

So what did we get in DAII? One city!? Dear god, what a disgrace! However, that single city is one of the most interesting places I have seen in an RPG for a long time. It's masterfully crafted, it's design is fantastic, and it's ... Well, it's something new, something I have not explored five bizilion times. On top of that, by it's atmosphere, the city of chains reminds me of Planesca's Sigil the most. The depressing and yet wonderful atmosphere is all there.

Story and characters
So, we got an evil invasion in DA: O, and we've had to collect a bunch of heroes to stop it. Yyyeah. Nice work Bioware. I've totally not seen that coming!
DA 2? It's a personal story, a story about family, friends and bonds. I don't want to save the world again. Helping my family? I've not done that before in a videogame. I like that, that is good. I won't even go into lengths about supporting characters, but they are all likeable, beleivable, and I really found them far more interesting than those from DA: O.

Choices
Meaningful choices within dialogue and story, that is what marks a good RPG for me. The first Dragon Age ... wasn't exactly lacking in this department, but it has stuck to Bioware's typical black and white approach far too much. DA II, however, has presented me with meaningful choices, of which all seemed viable. Very often, it wasn't an easy decisions, and it was about moral issues that could be tackled from oh so many perspectives. I really do like that.

So basically... Yes. It's got a dumbed-down combat. That's a good thing in my opinion. It's got a limited character creation. No choice there I suppose, given the storyline. But aside from that, DA II quite simply seems superior to DA: O, at least to me. Thank you for reading trough my ramblings. I will no back go back to my pit.

U need to go furthur in the game. Then you'll realize the choices you made don't matter one bit even the most important one in the game which I won't spoil for u. And seeing the same locales and waves of the same monsters (it's always waves of monsters and that's y we complain about it being not tactical) for the 100th time will make u disgusted.

Heard about that one, actually. I like the idea of unfolding events quite simply being much stronger than the main character. It's just a one person - he can't change everything that happens. It seems that you can have a real influence on your close ones and that's all I care about right now, really. But I'll see how it actually is, then make up my mind.

You must have a high Constitution attribute to write something like this here ;) DA II in its own right is a fun game. Its main problem was that it was part of the Dragon Age series rather than being released on its own. I think more people would have liked it if they weren't expecting an even better DA:O.

EDIT: typo

I don't think anyone was, after trailers and gameplay videos. I mean, I'm never the ones to get hints, but these were just thrown in my face. Besides, I really do not care about what a game is called - I can see that DA II doesn't really dumb down DA: O, it's attention is just pointed elsewhere. And in a direction that I like I might add.

I personally love Dragon Age II and I thought the first one was decent.

I love the characters, and I think male Hawke may just be my favorite WRPG protagonist easily.

I'm quite the opposite I guess played the game early last year and I can't remember any of my companions. Heck I remember Mass Effect's one better lol.

I liked the game.

It has a ton of flaws. Mostly the repeated areas and lack of decision's making a difference. Still, I dug the game and played through it twice. The DLC is a lot better as it corrects some of the major flaws.

I especially liked the new art style, 10 million times better. Fuck people who demand realistic brown everywhere.

I love how it's so widely assumed that DA:O is "good". I know I may be in the minority opinion here, but I'm not sure how DA:O gets very far beyond "mediocre" no matter what yardstick you choose... Yeah, it's a tragedy that we finally get HD and suddenly the acceptable color palette gets reduced to almost nothing. That's one of the reasons I like games like Halo and Viva Pinata: Trouble In Paradise so much.

I'm not even sure what happened, the previous gen had tons of color...

I got to the end and found the game crashing down around me at that point also the ninja mobs and same maps over and over got to me. I loved Dragon Age Origins but the sequal i could have throuwn out the window. Ok the first one was generic but i had a lot more fun in it and some of the dlc was good as well.

I love it when a plan comes together Actually, most of the flaws were quite common in the RPGs of old. Reused tile sets? "Ninja mobs"? Yeah, look at all RPGs before '96.

I guess only those who got into RPGs with Baldurs Gate really mind this stuff.

Well new enemies appearing out of nowhere certainly fucks tactics all up. I mean the second time on trying a battle you know, so no big, but the first time it drove me crazy to think I had a battle in-hand and then BOOM.

I started playing RPGs with Fallout though, so what do I know :P

I never bothered with the game after the demo but how exactly is the repeating environments, respawning enemies and I quote Fenixp "it's got a dumbed-down combat. That's a good thing in my opinion" make it so special?

Art design, characters, story line that's all subjective and I will just leave it at that.

Most people seem to assume it is more dumbed-down than it really is because of the animation speed or art style. If you put it on hard it will tactics your balls off.

To this day, I've only played the demo and come away very pleased with it to put it in my list of future games to get. What I really don't enjoy in the combat is that there's just too much of it. Other than that, I had a good time.