The team who came in disregarded a lot of plans and intentions laid bare in the game's prequel, including the dark fantasy approach, the appearances of the elves and the qunari, and the tactical combat. That's why this sequel is so vastly different, because they didn't expect people to like the original as much as they did. The real reason it's Dragon Age 2? Certain key members of the original team were left out of making the sequel in the quest to make it more "consumer friendly", partly because they didn't expect the game to do as well as Mass Effect (it sold better), and they started working on the sequel a while before the first game came out.
What I mean is that without a Dragon Age 1, there is no core that the series is branching off, it's just an ever-growing series of branches that are somehow (read: magically) attached to each other. These are the things that keep me awake at night! Am I crazy? Is it just semantics? These questions and more will be answered by They used the Origins subtitle because they didn't want to just number the games in the series (also, to signify the importance of your character's origins in the game). You missed all the main characters, the crucial premise of the series, beginning with the heroic men and women that fought the good fight, setting up the world and mythos of Dragon Age, then getting launched straight into Dragon Age 2: The Continuing Adventures of Dragons. You saw where it all began, you are about to see the next (dark) chapter, but where the hell is the original!? It's like going straight from Star Wars episode 1 to episode 5. While that may seem pretty obvious, I would argue that if you (the developer - that's right, you!) give the first game in a series the name fitting of a prequel - Dragon Age: Origins, for example - shouldn't the next game chronologically in the series just be called Dragon Age? I feel like by going straight to DA2, they've actually skipped the part where there was an Age of Dragons.
0 kommentar(er)
