I'm pretty sure I've already had a long rant about Bioshock on here in the past but it still remains to me one of the most disappointing and overrated games I've ever played. But yeah, I won't moan about it any more =P
It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't a masterpiece. The story is essentially a copy of System Shock 2's but in a different setting, and the pacing is atrocious. Every time you're about to leave an area, something blocks the exit and you have to backtrack. If Infinite remedies this, it will be amazing.
Is that a rhetorical question? If not, I dunno. I've heard DA2 is worse than aids.
I would not say so.
Gameplay-wise it is dumbed down compared to DA I, which is, keep in mind, dumbed down compared to its spiritual predecessors, á la Baldur's Gate II and Neverwinter Nights II (and thank god it is, at least DA I feels like a computer game rather than a direct adaptation of p&p RPG, which is something that works pretty badly on PC imo), but I, personally don't play these kind of games for gameplay, but for immersion, so I actually prefer enough depth for me to be able to select ability progression for my character from a wide variety of choices, but not the super serial tactical turn-based combat BS that turned me away from nearly every DnD adaptation except for PS:T.
It is also true, that it was rushed, so most caverns and areas were recycled, which is not good, buuuut, where that game is a massive win is the story department.
DA I was a generic RPG in this regard. You are the mofo hero and you have to save the world from a big-ass dragon, there is political intrigue as well but it is clear who is evil and who is not, there are some interesting characters, but many feel like one-trick ponies to me.
Contrasting to this, you play a character in DA II that is almost an everyman, who is stuck in a world that went completely mad, most of the characters I find to be quite 3-dimensional, interesting and relatable, the game's story is quite deconstructive in its nature, there is no real good and evil here, and as such the socio-political conflict that is at the heart of the game's story is thought-provoking, and hell, I can even defend the lack of effective choice in the game, since it was intended to play out as a tragedy, and that requires an impending doom, and if you could have prevented [SPOILER ALERT]Anders from blowing up the chapel[SPOILER OVER], then that would not have been present.
I'm not saying that it is a perfect game, because the issues outlined above are real but the story itself had me hooked more than DA I's.
Hehe to the each their own but when I do need to rely on someone for their thoughts on a game I haven't played there's a very small bunch of people I go to and they're all more or less offended at the catastrophe that is DA:2 because it essentially changed everything that DA:O did right. It's never a franchise that has properly appealed to me. I've played about 20 hours of Origins and despite it being enjoyable, my motive behind playing it was to please the fantasy RPG crave that I had because of The Witcher 3 (absence). Not exactly the correct mindset you wanna be in when delving into a long RPG hence why I threw it out the airlock and moved on to Stalker instead. Maybe once the torrent drops I'll play it, but nothing from the dozen or so hours I've seen so far has made me yearn it in the slightest.
DA2 has often been recommended to me for its good story and characters, by RPG fans. It is the combat and the linearity that are criticized, whereas those were some of DA:O's strengths. I haven't played DA2, but it seems that the two games have a different appeal, so the outrage among the fanbase was understandable. But if you were never into the top-down, strategic gameplay of the first game I imagine you wouldn't be so upset.
Gamespot conducted a poll with strange results. I honestly felt the Witcher hype had died down a lot after the most recent delay. No one would expect one game to garner over 50% of the votes for the mammoth year that is 2015.