Poll: Dragon Age: II's main problem


New member
Jul 21, 2009
Eh, I was a little disappointed that I couldn't play an elf, but I tend to think that the main problem is the boring story. I kind of avoided most of the stuff involving the templars and mages in the first game, so making that the main focus of the second... Granted I haven't beaten it yet and I think I'm still near the beginning, but the story just isn't all that interesting. I'm kind of hoping that it'll eventually get more exciting. It really shouldn't take this long though.
Apr 28, 2008
Wolfram01 said:
I strongly disagree. Did it piss you off in Mass Effect as well?

How about The Witcher?

Simply put, I fail to see how having the game give you a role to play in the role playing game is anything but exactly what to expect. Having an open creation option fits within the RP as well, sure, but there's no way to argue that being given a specific character isn't completely justified. Especially when there's so much voice acting and plot elements that would kind of not work - or at least, would have delayed the game hugely to try and accomodate all the variables.
A role playing game, as in a proper role playing game lets you shape whatever character your controlling's role. In The Witcher, you can influence Geralt and make him any number of things based on your decisions. In Mass Effect, you are Shepard, and no matter how hard you try, Bioware forces you to play as Shepard. There is no way to break out of that or really shape Shepard into your own. Its the same with DA2, but its still better then ME2 in that regard.


New member
Mar 4, 2009
I'd say there's a good reason for forcing players to play as humans, if only because human cultures in fantasy worlds are the ones that are the less extreme ones, meaning a player's choices will more likely match the background of the character in question without railroading them. To show a good example of this, the Dalish Elf origin in first game should be a radically different path than that of a human noble or a dwarf commoner, yet some players will choose to be a radically different Dalish by being more accepting than someone who grew up being taught that their race was completely different than the others and that accepting human culture was to lose one's elven soul should turn out to be.

Interacting with the Qunari in the second game shows that they would be even more extreme than the Dalish, meaning that while players may want to play as them, their values would more than likely clash with most people's gut reactions.

While some races may be more understandable, you'll always run into a stumbling block somewhere along the road. Look at Mass Effect. Sure you know the Krogan are mostly fierce warriors who prefer to use bullets over brains, but when you hit moments like the idea of wiping out the genophage versus sacrificing honor, or the ideas they hold of other races, you'll likely think in a much different way. Or just look over at Legion as a good representation of why the geth would be so hard to understand.

Roleplaying games are all about working within the role of a specific character, and races serve to complicate the idea here when they are radically different than each other.

Do I fully support racelocking? No. But I can see valid reasons for it besides technical limitations.


New member
Jan 20, 2009
Taking out the origins feature did remove the one genuinely ambitious feat in Dragon Age.

While I don't mind playing a predefined human character, it would have been better if another interesting feature were introduced instead, and no, the dialogue wheel isn't a pro.

What's also missing:
- equipment customization reduced and partially scrapped
- skills. I didn't think poisons and herbalism were useless, so no need to remove them, but do more with these and the other skills instead.
- the game is shorter now AND many indoor areas are directly copy pasted
- fewer branching choices than the first one

In short, cuts were made in alot of areas, while little was added back in.
Like somebody mentioned in this thread earlier: the sum of it's parts is smaller.


Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
I'm not too upset over that. It makes the story feel more characterized for the supporting cast. My problems with it are small, really--Why can I no longer examine equipment in the field, but only in a tedious inventory? Why do my partners only have one set of armor that gets more or less arbitrarily upgraded, apart from maintaining their graphics? Why do dragons have cheap-ass stun-locks against even someone with a high fortitude? What happened to the rich background around each item, to instead take the Torchlight/Diablo tune and just spamming the hell out of loot without description? And why the hell do I no longer have an alt set of weapons, on which to change fighting styles for different battles? And they paid attention to Awakening, I see, because now I can only talk to my comrades when it suits them, instead of obliquely passing the time by gradually chatting them up more and more. These are small things, but they wrack up to be nowhere near annoying enough to be game breaking, but enough that they show up on a list of grievances.

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Apr 4, 2020
The main problem with DA2 is just how fucking bland it is.

Everything from the visual design to the characters and the story was just meh. Not that it was really bad, but when I play a fantasy game I expect to be wowed by the settings and the characters. DA2 felt like somekind of spin-off fanfiction, a very good fanfiction, but still...

And the ending, my goodness. Never have I felt so unsatisfied with a game ending then with DA2. Even the ending of God of War 3 felt more rewarding then this.

lovest harding

New member
Dec 6, 2009
I loved the Origins of DA:O.
But I don't think there's any problem with being just a human. Mostly because of what DA2 offers character wise. I like having an entirely free to play character that I can role-play the hell out of (a la DA:O and Elder Scrolls) but I also enjoy clear cut characters with actual personalities.
The combination of the two (Hawke, Shepard a loosely defined character with open personalities) makes me super happy as well. xD


Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
Dragon Age: 2 is basically trying to become Mass effect. The problem is that Mass Effect is already filling the Mass Effect niche. Now nothing will fill Dragon Age's niche.


New member
Mar 16, 2009
I usually play a human warrior anyway...so meh.



PS: ALTHOUGH, my favorite DA:O character I ever had was a Dalish Elf Rogue.


New member
Nov 27, 2010
Playing just as a human didn't bother me, though I would like a couple of different voices to choose from for Hawke (since the face I created doesn't match the voice at all) though I do understand why they don't have the option. A bigger problem for me is not having goddamn alt. weaponry, my rogue needs to switch from archer to dual weapon and back dangnabit. Also yes the copy and pasted dungeons are annoying as hell.
Final note the fallout 3 ending IS terrible since bethesda forced you into becoming a pointless martyr You're immune to radiation. The hell do you mean its my destiny to go in the death trap!?!


New member
Mar 2, 2011
I think it would be totally cool to play as Qunari, but I have no problem with being forced to play a human. At least I don't have to be a bulky, hairy, beer drinking, gold digging dwarf. :p

DA2 does lack an Origins-like introductory level, however. Something that would actually make you feel that you're leaving everything behind... When I completed the human noble origin in DA:O, I was crying for revenge. When my brother died in DA2, I only remembered about it because my mother kept whining.


Cortana's guardian
Oct 22, 2009
I disagree with that being the main problem entirely! Bearing in mind I can't think of what is a problem since I've neither played it or Origins