Dragon Age II - An Honest Review

[Wertbag]

When ever I browse user reviews I automatically ignore any that rate under 5 or a perfect 10 when those scores aren't even close to the professionals opinions. There are haters and there are fanboys, both groups need to be ignored.
I just finished DA2 today and enjoyed the experience. I'd agree its not as good as the first, but its by no means a bad game. I even suffered from a bug that made the game unplayable until the patch came out and still that didn't make me hate it.
People are too quick to hate, in fact now days it seems to be cool to hate. Seems to be tons of negative people out there. Sure mark it down a couple of points for the minor annoyances and map repeatition but no way does it deserve a score of 2.5.

 

[MercurySteam]

Then we obviously have different play styles. From what I've read the average time to complete Origins on the easy difficulty seems to be 35 hours.

You couldn't do much worse than my sister. She hasn't even reached the Landsmeet and she's going on 60 hours.

If she's enjoying her game then good for her.

It's mostly just aimless wondering around, but whatever.

Who cares. As long as she's enjoying it good for her.

Well that is the point of playing games.

 

[MercurySteam]

No surprise at all to see that the Bioware fanboys are all over the place, as per usual. Good god people, the game turned out shit and that's it. We know you love anything made by Bioware, but come the fuck on. There have been several legitimate complaints about the game brought up by now, stop denying the truth. Sure, you can still enjoy the game as much as you like, no one is denying you that right, but stop denying the facts.

How is saying the game was shit any more of a fact than saying that it was a good game. You expect people to believe that your opinions are facts? The reviews say that DA2 is worth at least an 8/10 so I'm inclined to agree with the OP. Some things were better and some things could've been done better. It had bugs and some people though it had been 'simplified'.

These are all valid points but no reason to hate the game and the developer. Something tells me you've just seen what everyone else has been saying and decided to be a sheep. Bravo.

 

[Z3RO180]

dude you are complty right on every thing and you took the words ryt out my mouth.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

I can't believe it's taken people this long to hate the dragon age games.

 

[Zeraki]

No surprise at all to see that the Bioware fanboys are all over the place, as per usual.

You lost me at "Bioware fanboys", insulting people never goes over well and you lost whatever credibility you may have had by choosing to do so.

 

[MercurySteam]

No surprise at all to see that the Bioware fanboys are all over the place, as per usual. Good god people, the game turned out shit and that's it. We know you love anything made by Bioware, but come the fuck on. There have been several legitimate complaints about the game brought up by now, stop denying the truth. Sure, you can still enjoy the game as much as you like, no one is denying you that right, but stop denying the facts.

How is saying the game was shit any more of a fact than saying that it was a good game. You expect people to believe that your opinions are facts? The reviews say that DA2 is worth at least an 8/10 so I'm inclined to agree with the OP. Some things were better and some things could've been done better. It had bugs and some people though it had been 'simplified'.

These are all valid points but no reason to hate the game and the developer. Something tells me you've just seen what everyone else has been saying and decided to be a sheep. Bravo.

Well I'd personally consider flaws to be something negative in a videogame which makes it a worse game, but maybe you disagree? Because all reviews I've checked have pointed out several flaws with the game, that aren't exactly opinion, as people who can't accept fact are so quick to call.

Other than on the official Bioware forum and The Escapist, which could be considered a branch of the Bioware forum, the game has been showered with damn near nothing but people hating it. I'm afraid to break it to you, but when a vast majority considers something bad, it is bad in an objective viewpoint. As I said, I'm in no way denying people the right to like the game, but the lot of you seem to have some severe problems with admitting that it has faults. I mean fuck, in this very thread we've got someone trying to justify grinding.

I'm sorry if you misinterpreted my original post. You seem to have seen it as me saying I personally considered the game to be shit, which isn't quite the case. I haven't played it, but the general consensus which I've seen is that it's somewhere between shit and average, and that's why I said "the game turned out shit".

The way I see it, if there are people willing to defend a game then there is no way it can automatically be declared 'shit'. I personally haven't seen anyone spouting "DA2 is the best game ever, w00t" but I suppose they're probably out there.

To prove my sincerity I'll do a nice summary of what I felt was wrong with DA2: the inventory has been cut down (a bit like the transition from ME1 to ME2) but still offers a degree of customization. The difficulty curve is unreasonably erratic until the third act where virtually no one ever gets knocked out on normal and whilst the AI hasn't gotten any dumber, it hasn't improved much either. The bugs that affect the missions are especially annoying (for an achievement whore like myself), not to mention the fact that all the Exiled Prince achievements are bugged. (again, achievement whore) The characters are more interesting and the skill trees are much more fun to work with, and I thing Bioware is getting to a point where they may have the most realistic dialogue system yet and feels better paced than the last game too.

It's a game not without it's flaws but not without its accomplishments, worth anywhere between 8.0-9.0/10. But you know what they say about opinions:

"Opinions are like testicles. Kick them hard enough, it doesn't matter how many you got." - Varric (Dragon Age II)

 

[maddawg IAJI]

snip

Bullshit. Side quests are nothing more than distractions. In fact, after playing through ACT 1 I had it with side quests. They are ALL exactly the same. Every single side quests involves talking to a person, going to a location, killing everything inside and coming back to that person. The only difference between the quests are the mobs you have to kill since the locales are always and I mean ALWAYS the same. There is literally NO difference between locales. Theres the Cave, the backwards cave and the cellar in darktown.

If the side quests were interesting yeah, they would actually be worth doing but as it stands they're just a way for the developers to claim the game is "massive" when the only reason it's massive is because they copy pasted the same quests over and over again.

The main quest in Origins lasted 40 to 50 hours. The main quest in DA2 lasted 13 hours and 3 minutes.

The quests are not the same. You're judging based on what you have to do to complete the quest, I'm judging it based on the story of the side quest itself. Entering a mage's mind in order to save him from demons is not the same as guiding an enslaved Qunari to freedom. Each quest has a different scenario, what you're complaining about is that they all play out the same, but I don't mind that. I'm enjoying the back story behind each one.

The Locales may be the same, but I hardly see how that matters. Ya, it seems lazy, but I really couldn't care less by this point in the game. I'm loving the story, but the combat could be better, still it doesn't deserve the ratings it gets in the slightest and if I had to, I would give it an 7-8/10.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

snip

Bullshit. Side quests are nothing more than distractions. In fact, after playing through ACT 1 I had it with side quests. They are ALL exactly the same. Every single side quests involves talking to a person, going to a location, killing everything inside and coming back to that person. The only difference between the quests are the mobs you have to kill since the locales are always and I mean ALWAYS the same. There is literally NO difference between locales. Theres the Cave, the backwards cave and the cellar in darktown.

If the side quests were interesting yeah, they would actually be worth doing but as it stands they're just a way for the developers to claim the game is "massive" when the only reason it's massive is because they copy pasted the same quests over and over again.

The main quest in Origins lasted 40 to 50 hours. The main quest in DA2 lasted 13 hours and 3 minutes.

The quests are not the same. You're judging based on what you have to do to complete the quest, I'm judging it based on the story of the side quest itself. Entering a mage's mind in order to save him from demons is not the same as guiding an enslaved Qunari to freedom. Each quest has a different scenario, what you're complaining about is that they all play out the same, but I don't mind that. I'm enjoying the back story behind each one.

The Locales may be the same, but I hardly see how that matters. Ya, it seems lazy, but I really couldn't care less by this point in the game. I'm loving the story, but the combat could be better, still it doesn't deserve the ratings it gets in the slightest and if I had to, I would give it an 7-8/10.

It's true, certain side quests are interesting though I'm fairy sure that guiding the Qunari to safety is part of the main quest. However, these are gems spread far and wide. The majority of quests ARE a grind that involve going to the same locales and you cannot judge a game solely on it's story. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to read a book, I'd read a book. When I buy a game, I expect good gameplay first and foremost. A game cannot be driven by story alone. If it was then it would be just an overglorified movie that you pay 60 dollars for. Gameplay wise, it was a disaster. The locales were the same boring skins over and over again that completely ruin the atmosphere and the immersion. The combat was also lacking strategy wise, focusing more on flashy effects and more akin to a fast paced hack and slash game which does not fit an RPG at all. The story doesn't fare much better either being cheesy at it's best and just plain horrible at its worst. It opened up more questions rather than answers which I bet will be resolved through DLC. DLC is meant to add more to the game, not fill in the gaps that made the story terrible.

It matters because it's immersion breaking. Locales provide the atmosphere of the game. Do it right and you'll have an amazing game. Do it wrong and it will eventually get boring. With a great atmosphere you can get a game like Penumbra. With a horrible atmosphere you get a game like... Dragon Age 2. An obviously rushed game meant to cash in on the success of the previous game.

It does not deserve a 7 nor does it deserve an 8. Lazy programming and designing does not deserve to be rewarded. The game deserves a 5. It's neither bad but not good either. However, when comparing it to the last game I do believe it deserves the 2's and 1's. It doesn't even compare to Origins gameplay wise, story and character wise. The platform of choice was obviously the console. They removed what they could and dumbed down what they couldn't. It could have been a good game. Unfortunately, Bioware rushed it and this is what you get when you attempt to rush a game just to cash in on success.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

snip

Bullshit. Side quests are nothing more than distractions. In fact, after playing through ACT 1 I had it with side quests. They are ALL exactly the same. Every single side quests involves talking to a person, going to a location, killing everything inside and coming back to that person. The only difference between the quests are the mobs you have to kill since the locales are always and I mean ALWAYS the same. There is literally NO difference between locales. Theres the Cave, the backwards cave and the cellar in darktown.

If the side quests were interesting yeah, they would actually be worth doing but as it stands they're just a way for the developers to claim the game is "massive" when the only reason it's massive is because they copy pasted the same quests over and over again.

The main quest in Origins lasted 40 to 50 hours. The main quest in DA2 lasted 13 hours and 3 minutes.

The quests are not the same. You're judging based on what you have to do to complete the quest, I'm judging it based on the story of the side quest itself. Entering a mage's mind in order to save him from demons is not the same as guiding an enslaved Qunari to freedom. Each quest has a different scenario, what you're complaining about is that they all play out the same, but I don't mind that. I'm enjoying the back story behind each one.

The Locales may be the same, but I hardly see how that matters. Ya, it seems lazy, but I really couldn't care less by this point in the game. I'm loving the story, but the combat could be better, still it doesn't deserve the ratings it gets in the slightest and if I had to, I would give it an 7-8/10.

It's true, certain side quests are interesting though I'm fairy sure that guiding the Qunari to safety is part of the main quest. However, these are gems spread far and wide. The majority of quests ARE a grind that involve going to the same locales and you cannot judge a game solely on it's story. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to read a book, I'd read a book. When I buy a game, I expect good gameplay first and foremost. A game cannot be driven by story alone. If it was then it would be just an overglorified movie that you pay 60 dollars for. Gameplay wise, it was a disaster. The locales were the same boring skins over and over again that completely ruin the atmosphere and the immersion. The combat was also lacking strategy wise, focusing more on flashy effects and more akin to a fast paced hack and slash game which does not fit an RPG at all. The story doesn't fare much better either being cheesy at it's best and just plain horrible at its worst. It opened up more questions rather than answers which I bet will be resolved through DLC. DLC is meant to add more to the game, not fill in the gaps that made the story terrible.

It matters because it's immersion breaking. Locales provide the atmosphere of the game. Do it right and you'll have an amazing game. Do it wrong and it will eventually get boring. With a great atmosphere you can get a game like Penumbra. With a horrible atmosphere you get a game like... Dragon Age 2. An obviously rushed game meant to cash in on the success of the previous game.

It does not deserve a 7 nor does it deserve an 8. Lazy programming and designing does not deserve to be rewarded. The game deserves a 5. It's neither bad but not good either. However, when comparing it to the last game I do believe it deserves the 2's and 1's. It doesn't even compare to Origins gameplay wise, story and character wise. The platform of choice was obviously the console. They removed what they could and dumbed down what they couldn't. It could have been a good game. Unfortunately, Bioware rushed it and this is what you get when you attempt to rush a game just to cash in on success.

Nope, the Quanri mission was an optional quest. You do not need to take it.

I hold story above gameplay, especially in an RPG. I've got more enjoyment out of reading the back story for F.E.A.R and Dead Space then I did actually playing the game. My best moments in Bioshock were searching high and low for the audio logs, just so I could learn a bit more about the area and the people who inhabited Rapture. Gameplay is nice, but the difference between a great game and a good game is its story, and Dragon Age II excels in that. You may call the story cheesy, but I loved it. Opinions make the world go round. And who says a game can't be driven by story? What about games like Heavy Rain and Indigo Prophecy, those games are probably some of the best I've ever seen. Your opinion is that gameplay must be good, my opinion is that a good story is a requirement. I hated Mirrors Edge because of its story, and its game-play was considered to be great. I disliked Bulletstorm and Borderlands simply because they tried to skimp out on story or put in a half-assed one and tried to hide it with a lot of bullets and blood.

We're two different people who have polar opposite views, we're never gonna agree on this part.

As for its rating, I've seen MUCH worse games then Dragon Age II (for example, Two Worlds and Alpha Protocol.)get at least a 7/10, I'm not gonna give it a lower rating just because the 'locales are recycled', I really couldn't care less about that seeing as that wasn't really the most important feature of the game.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

I hold story above gameplay, especially in an RPG.

Then why are you playing games?

Gameplay is nice, but the difference between a great game and a good game is its story

I disagree. The story is there to complement the gameplay. The difference between an RPG and a shooter is that in an RPG you take an active role in the story. You cannot have a game rely on story alone. If that was the case then it wouldn't be a game at all, it would be a movie. We do not pay 60 dollars to watch movies, we pay 60 dollars to play a game. If you enjoy the story more than gameplay then maybe gaming is not for you. Games are meant to be played. Stories are meant to be read. A movie combines story and visual images to deliver a visual experience. A game is a piece of entertainment focused on user input with story tackled on as a means to provide a reason and motive to the player. Games can do quite well without stories. Look at minecraft for e.g.

Heavy Rain is neither a game nor a movie. It's a fusion between the two genres so it can't really be provided as an example since it's in a category of it's own.

We're two different people who have polar opposite views, we're never gonna agree on this part.

So what? This debate is more about the discussion itself rather than reaching a mutually agreeable opinion. It's interesting to see how people perceive different mediums of entertainment.

As for its rating, I've seen MUCH worse games then Dragon Age II (for example, Two Worlds and Alpha Protocol.)get at least a 7/10, I'm not gonna give it a lower rating just because the 'locales are recycled', I really couldn't care less about that seeing as that wasn't really the most important feature of the game.

I don't understand at all why reviewers are so afraid of giving scores of 5. 5 is the middle ground so it should be the grade every mediocre game receives. I consider DA2 a mediocre game so I'm giving it a 5.

And in contrast, I believe the atmosphere is what can make or break a game. The locales should have provided that atmosphere. You say you enjoy the story more than the gameplay. Immersion is an important part of storytelling. Unfortunately, DA2 fails at immersing the player into its world. Dragon Age 2 failed to provide any immersion past the first few hours of the game since after the first few hours you pretty much visited every single locale available in the game.

 

[Etra488]

Listen, I'm just going to reiterate my post:

The OP gave the game a score of 8 out of 10.

However, in the text of the review, all the comments except 1 were negative. Some of the game's flaws were so glaring, several times the player wished to quit the game and just stop playing.

Making the player WANT to quit is about as bad as the game can fail. It doesn't get more serious than that.

The game is buggy, both in and out of combat. This is a product from a triple-A studio, and it is the year 2011. The LAST thing products of this pedigree ought to have are mechanical deficiencies.

Recycled environments - this is as bad as Blizzard reskinning previous tier armor sets instead of making up new ones. It's just lazy design. Bioware has built it's reputation on higher principles than this.

*** *** *** ***

You have to ask yourself what a score of 1 or 2 means. If it's "out of 10," then one would presume that for any mystery title, any of the 10 numbers in the continuum are equally valid options. If the scores of 1-4 are strictly removed because of pity or branding, then it's not a very meaningful score.

What does it take for a game to earn a 1, or a 2? I agreed with gamecritics.com rating of a 2.5. The game had graphics, it had features, it had voice-dialogue, it had all of the same things that better games have. But what DA2 has, it's just bad.

I didn't like Mass Effect 2, but I certainly didn't have the desire to quit playing it before I was finished, like what the OP had.

 

[Bullfrog1983]

Exactly how much is that Bioware logo blinding your honest review?

In my case it would seem that I was truly blind, it wasn't until the ending that I realized that the story is so linear that you can't really change any part of it. The one thing I kind of liked about it is how it appeared to be all able to be changed at any second, but none of it was, really.

 

[Nova Helix]

Revised Rating: 4/10 (I had not finished the game yet at the point of writing the above review)

The ending makes absolutely no sense at all, especially in my playthrough of the game. In the end I had the support of everyone, even parts of the templars but it still went down the same way. Despite any of the decisions in "major quests" I'd made with certain characters involved with changing the ending it still did not end differently. I thought at times there were different options to explore in parts of the story, but nothing changed no matter what I said or did.

That was one of my big problems, I felt like nothing I did mattered. In the first game your decisions carried a ton of weight but in DA2 it didn't matter what you decided to do.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Bullshit. I finished Origins, all the side quests and all the DLC that tied in with the main game (The Stone Prisoner, Return to Ostagar and Soldier's Peek) in 46 hours on my first go.

Don't be so dogmatic.

Origins took me 56 hours to finish, with the Stone Prisoner as the only DLC. Just because you rushed it doesn't mean it's bullshit that someone else had a longer playtime.

 

[Mikeyfell]

I love how a game can go from the Dogs Ballocks to just plain Ballocks by doing something as trivial as finishing the game.

And you imported choices from Dragon Age Origins mean nothing.

Spoiler

I killed Leliana. and sent Anders away with the Templars. I even killed Justice. and all of them were still in the game.

Spoiler: The end of DA2 vs. other Bioware games

Remember Mass Effect and how awesome you felt when you said fuck the Council and let those snobby bastards die. no? oh yeah because it was an option that some people might not have picked.
or destroying/keeping the Collector Base
Or sending Alastair/Loghain to his death, Taking the final blow your self or doing Morrigan.
Now you can't even choose whether you side with the Templars or the Mages?
Or what ever the choice at the end of KOTOR was (it's been ages since I played it)

The only excuse I can think of is there's a massive "Awakening" stile DLC on the way that makes up for the end of DA2. and that's where all the choices will come in to play

You didn't mention the absurd difficulty and that some of the encounters are hardly passable even on casual difficulty. Or maybe I just suck at this game.......

 

[MercurySteam]

Bullshit. I finished Origins, all the side quests and all the DLC that tied in with the main game (The Stone Prisoner, Return to Ostagar and Soldier's Peek) in 46 hours on my first go.

Don't be so dogmatic.

Origins took me 56 hours to finish, with the Stone Prisoner as the only DLC. Just because you rushed it doesn't mean it's bullshit that someone else had a longer playtime.

Not exactly. My first playthrough was my most 'laid-back' with plenty of faffing about (though I was playing casual and I didn't read the codexes much). I don't find it hard to believe that the game would take 50+ hours, I just managed to do everything in a systematic way that ensured that I didn't need to keep going back and forth multiple times.

Would you really believe that I had 1000 Sovereigns in my pocket at the end of a 'rushed' game? No? Neither would I.