| pokoko said: As far as story goes, I thought DA2 was much more immersive and personal than DA:O. I've been reading fantasy novels since I was a child and I found the main story in DA:O to be so generic and derivative that I was a bit shocked at times. I was sure that it would be a major area of complaint. I thought that the underlining story with the Mages and the Church, and with Morigan, were much more interesting. As it turns out, that was on purpose, as BioWare wanted Origins to be kind of an introduction. The problem, unfortunately, is that a lot of people seem to want generic. |
I agree with you in that I felt Dragon Age 2 was more immersive and personal than Dragon Age: Origins. From its much more humbler beginning (i.e., surviving the Blight in the prologue and forging a new life for your family in the first act), to how the companions were involved in the story both in the main narrative (e.g., Varric and the Deep Roads Expedition in Act 1, Isabela and the Qunari conflict in Act 2, and Anders and the Chantry in Act 3) and outside of it (with numerous quests for each companion), DA 2 felt like much more of a personal tale, in comparison to DA:O's much more grandiose story.
I can see how people would prefer DA:O's tale, because it allowed the protagonist to succeed in most of his or her endeavors, whereas Hawke was ultimately swept along with the times, succeeding in some areas, but more of a witness to events. Of course, I think Dragon Age 2 had the unfortunate task of telling a tale of transition in the Dragon Age world, from the Blight in Origins to the Mage Rebellion, which is likely why Hawke was written more as a witness (in essense, the perspective through which the player sees the change in Thedas), but I imagine many players didn't see that, and understandly wanted a more typical, heroic tale where the protagonist succeeds.
