Dragon Age 2: Legacy Review

[Brainst0rm]

5 hours sounds very fair for 10 bucks. DA2 had, what, 40? The original game only gives you an hour more of play for every six dollars you paid. Perhaps the Escapist could use a ratio consultant?

Anyway, the direction BioWare is taking Dragon Age does not interest me at all. That direction being one where EPIC STAFF-TWIRL DRAGON-STAB SWORD-FLOURISH WOO YOU WON overrides every facet and subtlety of storytelling.

 

[DustyDrB]

Five hours? I've heard two. I suppose different people do get different mileage. Both of my DA2 playthroughs have been over 40 hours long. I'm quite thorough when I like a game.

I may take only half your advice, Susan. As I'm hungry for a new BioWare experience and this will do for now (well, it will once I'm done with Catherine).

 

[Pandabearparade]

Give it up, man ...

Why? He's right. Your score was ridiculous, and something you should be ashamed of as a critic. Dragon Age 2 was stuffed full of cut corners and problems that you didn't even mention. Ignoring everything even remotely subjective for a moment, the recycled environments alone should have dinged the game a point.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I enjoyed it a lot. I didn't think it was too short because with some of the DLC for Dragon Age Origins, you were lucky if you got an hour out of it. Shale, Return to Ostagar, Darkspawn Chronicles...everything but Awakening was super short. I beat the DLC in one day, but I was pleased with the length. That could just be because other DLC is so short to me.

Once again, Susan focuses on the thing I love most: the story. She right about reading all the notes and watching the drama unfold in your family. The end part--especially if you have Anders with you--was really interesting, and I hope it's built off of in Dragon Age 3. The story had a grander feel to it, like Hawke and her friends were simply a passing part in it. And that's something I like.

As for the price...meh. If I want something, I'm going to buy it. I'm paying $15 just so I can play a new zombie map every few months. Probably not the best strategy, but hey, I love a good story.

 

[ZeroMachine]

It took you five hours on normal? It took me about three or four on hard... and I died a lot. It was thoroughly difficult. You sure have either an odd sense of time, or... I don't even know.

Also, ten bucks for five hours is damn good. I mean, compare it to Mass Effect 2's Arrival. Three bucks less, but only two hours tops, and that's if you take your damn time.

You also failed to mention how any fan of the lore will find this story more than just interesting- it may be one of the most important discoveries made in the Dragon Age universe by players to date. The fact that Corypheus is, if his claims are true:

Spoiler: MAJOR SPOILER

One of the original Tevinter Magisters that walked in and corrupted the Golden City and is therefore one of the original Darkspawn

is just one huge mindfuck that will make major fans of the lore drop their jaws through the floor.

... Heh... rhymes... *ehem*, anyway...

Also, the actual fight with Corypheus is, at the very least, the most interestingly constructed one. And again, try it on hard... it's a rush.

I would say the biggest issue is, in fact, the weapon you get (at least, for my mage). It is far outshone by the DLC item Malcom's Honor. It should have been the most powerful weapon in the game so far... maybe it's because I did the quest relatively early on in my playthrough (pretty much the beginning of Act II) but it was really just a lame weapon... even with the customization. Cool in concept, bad in execution. Especially since it's bugged- you can never take it out of your inventory.

Now, I'm not saying "YOU'RE WRONG ENJOY IT MORE GLARBLEBLARBLE!" Just saying you kinda left some important details out, or just didn't express certain ones clear enough...

EDIT: To be fair, I only watched the video review. Just realized it. I'll read the full one to see if you covered any of what I said.

EDIT 2: Ok, you covered the story part, and the final boss. My apologies for the rant.

It's just... seriously. After what they said about the "Normal" difficultly. I mean, come on... at least try it on hard before calling "too easy!"

EDIT 3: Also, still totally disagree on the pricing. It's just right for the size and scope of this DLC.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Good review but for the love of god get rid of the constantly streaming El Shaadai video. You know how laggy it is streaming two vids at once?

I don't think I'll pick this up until I can get a pack or something.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Looking at this, it feels like Susan should have reviewed DA2. It's obvious she would have given it a much more sensible score, rather than one based entirely on blinding Bioware fanboyism.

A bit too short and a bit too easy.

Both complaints which could have been levied against the base game as well.

Then again, she's quickly become my favorite reviewer on this site regardless.

Give it up, man ...

Give up what? Loving that sweet sweet Susan?
>_<NEVER!

You know, when I saw that review I didn't know you guys gave scores so I didn't look. However, I agreed more with X-Play's review that said pretty much it had some really great ideas that fell a bit short, and that they could always just improve upon what they tried for next time. With Legacy I think they have showed that they can do better, but I agree with this review that although the dlc is good it's just to short for ten dollars.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I'd actually say it's worth it. It's a lore-heavy DLC for a lore-heavy game. Turns out, that's just what was wanted. Useful armor, useful weapons, some backstory on Malcolm, Bethany gets a bit, and Varric gets some backstory, at the least. As far as these things go, that's quite a lot for the $10 price tag and five hours worth of a jaunt. And that's not even mentioning the whole Corypheus revelation, what that means for the Architect, the Darkspawn, the other Tevinter Magisters. I still want to play it again, bringing along some other members, to see if they have a new discussion. It's the implications from the story that are important here, not just the combat--which was in line with the rest of the series thus far, which is to say new creatures of varying strengths, with new strategies to fighting them. At least it was balanced to a difficulty level, rather than the annoying upscaling found in the GoA DLC from the first game.

 

[fundayz]

It isn't rubbish. A game's faults can be easily overlooked if you're having enough fun to overlook them. A great case in point is the witcher 2, which has severe imbalances in its game design and *still* gets enough right that it justifies a maximum score from me and quite possibly a GOTY. Saying the score is rubbish because you disagree and calling anyone who doesn't give it the score you want "biased" makes you rather... what's the word... biased, as a matter of fact.

No. A maximum score is not to be awarded to games that allow you to overlook it's flaws, it's for awesome, near-perfect games.

Greg Tito is the ONLY Metacritic-worthy reviewer to give DA2 a perfect score. The average is 79/100 or just under 4/5.

DA2 is not a bad game and it really only gets as much flak as it does because it wasn't up to the expected BioWare standard. However, it absolutely does not deserve a perfect score.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Give it up, man ...

Why? He's right. Your score was ridiculous, and something you should be ashamed of as a critic. Dragon Age 2 was stuffed full of cut corners and problems that you didn't even mention. Ignoring everything even remotely subjective for a moment, the recycled environments alone should have dinged the game a point.

He's asking you to give it up because this happened several months ago. At this point, you're only beating a dead horse.

 

[Baresark]

5 hours is a big step up from almost all of Origins DLC. I think each one really only lasted me an hour, besides Awakening that is. But that was an actual game expansion. Too bad DA2 wasn't that good of a game. It was ok, but it got repetitive so fast, though a new area is a fantastic idea. The story was ok, I played every ounce of origins and read the book as well(not sure if there is more than one), though that was the epitome of cliche writing.

 

[Raziel_Likes_Souls]

Looking at this, it feels like Susan should have reviewed DA2. It's obvious she would have given it a much more sensible score, rather than one based entirely on blinding Bioware fanboyism.

A bit too short and a bit too easy.

Both complaints which could have been levied against the base game as well.

Then again, she's quickly become my favorite reviewer on this site regardless.

Give it up, man ...

Why should he? The DA2 review from here gives the game a 5/5 if I recall. Saying it deserves a 5/5 is total and utter rubbish. Whoever reviewed it either chose to ignore the glaring faults with the game or didn't bother playing it any great deal and just ran off a review. No unbiased critic can look at that game's total package and think "Gee there's a game that deserves a PERFECT score". I can see people making an argument for possibly a 4/5 despite the obvious faults but to give it a perfect score and make no mention of almost any of the biggest faults is laughable.

I've paid good money on games based solely off reviews done by The Escapist. I've yet to be terribly let down. However, had I done the same for Dragon Age 2 I would have been properly pissed.

Dude, that's the guy who actually reviewed DA 2. Besides, every reviewer has to have one game they love, regardless of actual objective quality. It just happens that he chose the FF XIII of WRPGs to love, that's all. Now if he claimed that a Suda 51 game, or something hit or miss like that is bad, and he doesn't give us a good opinion on why he thinks that, then I'd be in the same boat as you.

Now, sounding like Greg Tito's puppet aside, the DLC seems cool. Sure, it sounds like a thing that was made with the game, but locked in order to nickel and dime people Capcom style, but it still seems like it might be cool.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Give it up, man ...

Why? He's right. Your score was ridiculous, and something you should be ashamed of as a critic. Dragon Age 2 was stuffed full of cut corners and problems that you didn't even mention. Ignoring everything even remotely subjective for a moment, the recycled environments alone should have dinged the game a point.

He's asking you to give it up because this happened several months ago. At this point, you're only beating a dead horse.

I would say its a matter of lets never forget what happened those few months ago. The pain felt by fans of the Escapist and fans of the original Dragon Age is something that should never be forgotten. Time heals all wounds but for many it will always be etched in their minds. If you dont feel like this thats fine... But why can't he express his feelings just because it happened a few months ago? really?
The dead horse as you state is actually very much alive it is the called The Escapist. People love the Escapist they dont want to see its name tarnished to what THEY BELIEVED was an unjust score, because they are apart of the community and as a gaming community they expect the highest quality coming from the reviewers of the site.
So no he shouldnt give it up he believes it was wrong and he should be vocal about his beliefs until he thinks the situation will never repeat itself again.

A little over dramatic don't ya think?

First off, the scores are based off of the reviewers tastes and are completely subjective. What one person sees as a 2 out of 5, another sees as a 4 out of 5.

Secondly, while I don't mind you guys being upset about the score, what a lot of the posters seem to be doing is questioning Greg's ability to do his job. For example, "Your score was ridiculous, and something you should be ashamed of as a critic." Do you believe that comment is warranted? Do you believe anyone deserves to have their opinion completely ignored and insulted for having that opinion?

Here's another "Looking at this, it feels like Susan should have reviewed DA2. It's obvious she would have given it a much more sensible score, rather than one based entirely on blinding Bioware fanboyism."

This one suggests that the score was given on bias, suggesting Greg has a lack of credibility in regards to Bioware games and is just another post in a sea of others that don't criticize the review, but the reviewer.

Third and final, the Escapist was not the only one to give Dragon Age II a good score. The score was not unjust if the reviewer actually did feel the game deserved a 5 out of 5 and people (Including myself) had completely forgotten that this review even took place until someone reopened the wound for the sake of starting yet ANOTHER flame war about it. Being vocal is one thing, what a lot of people seem to be doing is using it as a reason to insult someone with a different opinion from them.

(Also, the phrase 'beating a dead horse' implies that the situation is futile and a waste of time. In this case, complaining about something that already occurred and has been set in stone, that will not change no matter how vocal you are and has already ran its course in regards to complaints is very much a futile effort.)

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

It isn't rubbish. A game's faults can be easily overlooked if you're having enough fun to overlook them. A great case in point is the witcher 2, which has severe imbalances in its game design and *still* gets enough right that it justifies a maximum score from me and quite possibly a GOTY. Saying the score is rubbish because you disagree and calling anyone who doesn't give it the score you want "biased" makes you rather... what's the word... biased, as a matter of fact.

It's not about the score. The wording in that review was pretty much preposterous. He complimented things that weren't actually improvements, made very silly "objective" claims that just weren't true ("Best looking RPG of our generation", my ass), and completely ignored (or chose not to mention) many of the glaring technical flaws in the game.

OT: I don't think difficulty should really be a complaint, unless the curve is flawed (Witcher 2), or it's the games fault in any way. If it's too easy, bump up the difficulty.

Otherwise, Good review. And YAY, for another femHawke player.

 

[AsurasFinest]

Looking at this, it feels like Susan should have reviewed DA2. It's obvious she would have given it a much more sensible score, rather than one based entirely on blinding Bioware fanboyism.

A bit too short and a bit too easy.

Both complaints which could have been levied against the base game as well.

Then again, she's quickly become my favorite reviewer on this site regardless.

Give it up, man ...

Why would we ever do that, when in that review you ignored all the glaring flaws and said it was essentially one of the best RPGs you ever played.

I'm sorry but when you have combat designed to be fast, but counterintuitively designed to be slow because of horde waves, have areas being recycled 500 times, had absolutely no choice involved ( take away Merills knife, guess what she fixes the mirror anyway somehow!)and a static city that never once changes over 10 years and you still think its a good game in any area of design, then your credibility is up in smoke

 

[Pandabearparade]

First off, the scores are based off of the reviewers tastes and are completely subjective. What one person sees as a 2 out of 5, another sees as a 4 out of 5.

True only to an extent. A game can have objective failures (bugs, -recycled environments-, poor controls), and those should be factored into a review. Dragon Age II had problems, and they weren't mentioned.

Secondly, while I don't mind you guys being upset about the score, what a lot of the posters seem to be doing is questioning Greg's ability to do his job. For example, "Your score was ridiculous, and something you should be ashamed of as a critic." Do you believe that comment is warranted? Do you believe anyone deserves to have their opinion completely ignored and insulted for having that opinion?

I stand by that statement. His score was ridiculous, and something he should be ashamed of. At least in this case, his review was him doing his job badly. People buy games based upon these reviews, and him omitting problems just because he is in love with Bioware just isn't an excuse.

Here's another "Looking at this, it feels like Susan should have reviewed DA2. It's obvious she would have given it a much more sensible score, rather than one based entirely on blinding Bioware fanboyism."

This one suggests that the score was given on bias, suggesting Greg has a lack of credibility in regards to Bioware games and is just another post in a sea of others that don't criticize the review, but the reviewer.

Are you suggesting that the statement is false, or just unreasonably insulting? He displayed a clear lack of ability to look at a Bioware game objectively, which is his job as a reviewer. I think the truth of the statement stands up as a defense, here. The evidence suggests exactly what the individual claimed, that he wore blinders while looking at Dragon Age 2.

Third and final, the Escapist was not the only one to give Dragon Age II a good score.

It's the only one I've seen to not ding -any- points for the recycled environments or wave combat.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I thought it was worth the ten bucks. I played on casual and got 4 hours out of it, but that is just on my first character. I will eventually get to it with my warrior and my rogue.

I look at games on a cost comparison not just on how long it was, but if I enjoyed it. Also, with the story quality of games, especially BioWare games, I look at it as if I had went out to see a movie in the theaters instead.

If I had somehow found a movie in the theaters to go to with as little as 10 dollars(not really possible these days), and I compare that to what I got from the Legacy DLC, then I would chose the DLC over going to the movie. With DLC I got to watch and play the story unfolding, instead of sitting back and being passive with a movie. On top of that, I got 4 hours out of it, much longer than any movie I have seen in theaters.

I would say even if you somewhat liked DA2, get the DLC, unless you're dead broke, the price is worth it.

If you some how didn't like DA2, pass on it because you probably won't appreciate it.

It's not about the score. The wording in that review was pretty much preposterous. He complimented things that weren't actually improvements, made very silly "objective" claims that just weren't true ("Best looking RPG of our generation", my ass), and completely ignored (or chose not to mention) many of the glaring technical flaws in the game.

OT: I don't think difficulty should really be a complaint, unless the curve is flawed (Witcher 2), or it's the games fault in any way. If it's too easy, bump up the difficulty.

Otherwise, Good review. And YAY, for another femHawke player.

Who says he was claiming that he was being objective about the whole "best looking" thing. There is a reason why there are never totally unanimous results from critics. Critics are never going to be totally objective. There will always be bias. I have read, watched, and listened to probably a thousand critics in my time, and I have never encountered a totally unbiased critic.

Who knows, maybe he did think it was the "best looking RPG of our generation." Of the ones I had played up to that time, I thought so too. I certainly believe it looked at least twice better than DA:Origins. The graphics of DA2 were much more polished compared to Origins. I didn't say it in that line, but of course I was being subjective, even if I do have points to back it up. But still, he didn't have to clarify that he was being subjective. Reviews can never be totally taken at face value as if it is absolute truth, because everybody will have some sort of different opinion.

Example: Not everybody is going to agree with me that the only problem DA2 had was the repeat dungeons every once in awhile. I thought that they improved everything else compared to Origins, changing the dialogue to the wheel, having a fully voiced main character, better/faster inventory and equipping, much better and rewarding ability tree/leveling, better characterization of characters(they weren't unnecessarily/unrealistically complex), and the graphics were much improved.

Now I gave it a ten out of ten on Metacritic, but that was because I had to do my part to try and get the game up to a score that it at least deserved even from a totally objective prospective(which is definitely not a 4 out of 10).

Metacritic just causing aside, if I was going to give the real score I was going to give the game, I would have given DA2 a 9.5 out of 10. The only flaw I saw in the game was the repeat dungeons every once in awhile, but as people pointed out that can happen, I was having so much fun with the game I didn't care about the repeat dungeons.

But still, there are other people out there that truly give it a 10 because they see such a thing as not mattering in a game and feel that it didn't effect the game any for them.

Really, the only problems that a reviewer can mention about a game are things of a technical nature that actually effect the games playability, not things that can be go either way on the opinion scale. A person can't say that the dungeons didn't repeat, because they did.

Other things that people can comment on, are subjective: Graphics, dialogue wheel, story, characters, leveling/abilities, inventory(it is subjective whether it is better or not to be able to totally customize all things that your party wears).

Those are areas of artistic and play aesthetics, things that people will always be subjective when they are talking about them.