Poll: Dragon Age 2 was it that bad?

[bootz]

Everyone says if it didn't have the dragon age name eveyone would like it. I feel the opposite If it didnt have the name noone would have played it. Its not evewn cloose to good on its own.


I played as a mage WILLPOWER = useless due to cooldowns. I soloed the last boss on normal
My mage was way OP he one hit anything with a fireball.

The gameplay was crazy easy and boring. There were no enemy healers or priority targets.
just kill same mage or knight over and over.

The same maps were horrbile and small and you had to load every 10-20 feet. ( Why didnt the make the city like rome in Assassins creed brotherhood with no loading I have no idea.)

cross class combos were a good idea expect the mods dead in 2 secs before the other class can touch it.

The only good part of me was the dark roads and it was crazy short. Cutscene 4 rooms Cutscene done.


The story was about some dude to make money. I felt amazed that you company follows you for NO REASON what so ever.

 

[LordRoyal]

I knew it was a bad game when I had to take an aspirine because the combat was that repetitive.

I've played much better hack and slash games that feature less tedious gameplay. I just wish Dragon Age 2 didn't try and make itself feel like an RPG at the same time. I'd say Skitzophrenic is the best word to describe it. Since it could never decide wether or not it was a hack and slash or a hack and slash wanting to be an RPG.

The characters were cliche and one dimensional, the storyline was stupid, the main character's name always annoyed me. (When I first heard the player character's name was "Hawke" I almost went "Are they serious?". It's the most cliche and overly used hero name i've ever seen. Every time I saw his default head I thought. "Wow they put no thought into this"). I missed having characters become developed as the storyline went on. (Like Aistair becoming Hardened and more suited to being King toward the end. Morrigan softening up and thanking you for bringing her along. Leliana becoming either accepting of her past or relishing it. Zevran telling you he joined you hoping to die in battle but found he enjoyed life again). Etc. All of it was all just far better done in Origins, and all they tried was just to make a cash in for console gamers.

Also the Darkspawn looked RETARDED. There were no Genlocks or Shrieks either. They really should have just ported the original models instead of having pale monsters with jarring faces. It lacked all the style the Darkspawn had in Origins. Now they just looked like funny cannon fodder for the player to cut down.

It's definitely a game that people are going to replay less and not remember in a few years. Origins'll likely last a lot longer due to it's modding community.

 

[Slycne]

It's to their lineup what Cars was to Pixar's.

Haha. I love that analogy; it's perfect.

OT: I enjoyed Dragon Age II, but I was bothered by its flaws. So it isn't the kind of game I have returned to replay again and again. It still hasn't wholly turned me off of the series though.

 

[Akihiko]

It was, alright. Wasn't amazing, but wasn't terrible. I didn't care about the changes to combat, or the so called stream-lining. What annoyed me was how rushed it was, and how they tried to make the game seem longer with all those ridiculous waves in combat.

 

[MorsePacific]

I enjoyed it quite a bit. It took a lot of the feature from Origins that I felt were impenetrable to people who a. aren't dedicated enough for an RPG of its scale and b. are easily bored and streamlined them. It was like going from Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2 for me.

Sure, it had lots of problems. Schizophrenic characters, reusing the same three places for everything, the warrior and rogue classes for the player felt useless in comparison to the mage that could do EVERYTHING, copy-pasting of enemies, and lots of graphical problems, but I felt like it was pretty good.

 

[babinro]

Amazing in terms of gameplay and tactics. Good story with some great characters and irritatingly repetitive locations. The overall experience of one playthrough cannot compete with DA1 though.

 

[Dr. wonderful]

I like it but I can't finish it.

Why?

Because I need to get my old info from DA:O and DA:A + DLC the DA:2 + dlc

 

[Markgraf]

As a Dragon Age game, yes it was bad. As an RPG in general, enjoyable.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I personally felt it was a bastardized insult to the original game. The story was bad and the narrative is schizophrenic at best. The combat was dull and repetitive. The only thing i kind of liked was naming the main character Mike but the gag got old rather quickly.

It's mostly due to the fact that the story probably was thought of as they were writing it.
It was an insult to the earlier game in terms of openness, content, writing. I think that the game was rushed and didn't have as much pre-production time as the first one had because they wanted to release another success as fast as possible.

 

[honestdiscussioner]

While they made some big mistakes in design in my opinion (why in the blue hell would they reformat how the darkspawn looked so tremendously, and come on guys . . . you can create more than 4 freakin' dungeons), it was still an immensely fun games with great characters and a great story.

 

[senordesol]

For my money, the game was a BIG disappointment; particularly after DA:O. I didn't mind them recycling the dungeons a few times; but when the same cave is a smuggler's den, an apostate hideout, and lair to a monster creature over several missions; it was REALLY hard to justify the $60 price tag.

Also (and this made me really sad, given that this was a Bioware game) I was pursuing the love interest with Merrill (the elf chick). At one point we have to go on a mission to restore the iluviani (sp?) a demonic artifact that's clearly better left alone. Anyway by the end of the mission we wind up murdering everyone she ever knew or cared about (party excluded)...and we NEVER talk about it. She just shrugs it off like it's nothing (which was really not in keeping with her character). I don't know if I'd call DA2 bad...but I would call it lazy.

 

[Lt. Vinciti]

I personally felt it was a bastardized insult to the original game. The story was bad and the narrative is schizophrenic at best. The combat was dull and repetitive. The only thing i kind of liked was naming the main character Mike but the gag got old rather quickly.

You ever used the search bar?


Never played it....played the demo

was Dynasty Warriors w/ Dragon Age taped on it and a .............



Loading.....


















Oh right I forgot because of the loading

 

[Radeonx]

No. A lot of people stupidly assumed it would be in the same vain as Dragon Age: Origins, and were disappointed.
Yes, there were many flaws, but it wasn't as terrible as everyone said it was.

 

[Berenzen]

It was a good game, not spectacular, particularly for BioWare, but it was still alright. There were some obvious issues (it was more along the lines of 3 storylines rather than an overarching one, the last act was short, and most of the combat was just waves upon waves of enemies, not really challenging). However, if it were a standalone game, I would give it as alright. If Bioware had put another 6 months into the game, it could have been a much, much better game.

All in all, it was really more of an interlude between Origins and the third game than the second installment of the series.

 

[CrashBang]

I thought it was really really poor. I often keep the bad game in a series just so I have a complete series (e.g. God Of War 3) but I knew I'd never return to a world where almost every time you walk into a new room, it's the same as the one 2 rooms ago. I found that game such a grind, with repetitive side quests, dull characters and very little to do besides trudge through the same repetitive environments over and over and over

 

[ultrachicken]

The only issues I took with DA2 were the lack of companion customization, choice of race, and the severely small amount of environments and complete armor sets. That, and trees look terrible. The story ditched the epic world saving adventure of Origins for one more centered around how characters struggle when faced with world changing events that are beyond their control. I thought this was a refreshing change, frankly.

On the combat front, the game still plays almost the same as origins, except that you now can order your companions to certain areas of the map without having to babysit them the entire journey, and when you order an attack, it happens then, not four seconds later. For those who think that it's too easy, there's always the hard/nightmare difficulties.

I think that DA2 made some bold changes in the series, and not all of them were improvements, but the game is still quite enjoyable.

 

[Hristo Tzonkov]

This vote actually proves a lot more people enjoyed the game than those didn't.Personally the story was forgettable which isn't something to wave your hand at for Bioware but the characters were amazingly memorable and the gameplay was tight and fun.

 

[shado_temple]

I overall enjoyed the game; I think the hatred for it was mostly generated by a lack of the game being Dragon Age: Origins again. Oh, and the Legacy DLC is much better about that whole "raining grunts from the sky" thing that people were upset about.

 

[b4k4]

I enjoyed it.

I accept all of your criticisms, but I still enjoyed it.

I just wish they had spent an extra, say, 6 months on it. To make a couple of extra dungeon maps, to make the story flow a little better, to make the combat, especially the CCCs (which were excellent in theory) a little more interesting.

My own thoughts are pretty much exactly in line with this.

 

[Makon]

Was DA2 rushed? Yes. Does it have flaws? Yes. Will I argue about the flaws? Only one: the story.

DA:O and Awakening told their story in a large epic landscape, putting the player at the head of armies and a nation essentially. The focus of their stories are the nations and armies of Ferelden and Amaranthine, where the player is an instrument to tell that story.

DA2, on the other hand, places Hawke (main player) as the focus of the story. If you take a step back, there are large events happening around the player, but it is ultimately about the emotions and attachment surrounding the player that are the drive of the story, not the world events transpiring. It is a drastically different method of story-telling compared to it's predecessors, but I think Bioware ultimately pulled it off and rather well.