Why so much hate for Dragon Age 2?

[thejboy88]

Ever since it was released, Dragon Age 2 has received a great deal of criticism, both from fans of the original DA game and from those who were introduced to the franchise via this one. Some say it's a less-than-worthy sequel. Some say the combat is all just button-mashing. And some have their own reasons.

And while I personallyl ike the game (though am more than willing to admit that it has it's fair share of flaws), it's when I start hearing comments like "it's the worst game ever" or "there's nothing good about this game" that I decide to draw the line.

So, I want people to tell me what specifically they dislike about this game.

 

[Username Redacted]

I don't hate Dragon Age 2. Like several other games from recent memory the word I'm most likely to chose when describing it is "disappointed". Disappointed because to me there shouldn't be a reason for a sequel to be that much worse than the original. The most basic way in which it was worse was that it was three shorter games with little real connectivity or stakes mashed up into one single game. In Dragon Age: Origins the world demanded that the player character and only the player character be the one to sort shit out. In Dragon Age 2 the issues (gold farming, kicking out a foreign invading force and stopping some rogue mages) are ones that don't feel epic (especially the fucking gold farming) and in the 2nd and 3rd chapters are stuff that I'd actually kind of expect the city guards to sort out. In short there isn't much in the way of compelling conflict. Combine that with an epic amount of backtracking and companions that are either major revisions to their previous incarnations or 2D cutouts and you've got a very disappointing game. See, there's that word again.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

The characters, my god were they bad. Apart from Varric, and arguably Aveline, they were all horrible people who when they weren't being completely hateful, were one note stereotypes that the game expects us to sympathize with. Merrill is only tied by fucking Anders for being the most insufferable person in the game. I only ever took them out together so that Anders would ***** at her for a change instead of me.

 

[Delerien]

I don't hate Dragon Age 2. Like several other games from recent memory the word I'm most likely to chose when describing it is "disappointed". Disappointed because to me there shouldn't be a reason for a sequel to be that much worse than the original.

I completely agree, even though i actually liked the Story. It had a rather interesting feeling to it, due to the fact that often you were just trying to somehow keep your life in order and everything around you collapses.
Still the combat was not as good, the characters were mostly kinda strange and while i appreciated the entire dialogue being voiced, it was often odd. Sometimes i felt like it had to much of a comedic touch to it.
All in all with DA:O being such a great game, the fact that Dragon Age 2 was somewhat mediocre just felt much worse.

And while I personallyl ike the game (though am more than willing to admit that it has it's fair share of flaws), it's when I start hearing comments like "it's the worst game ever" or "there's nothing good about this game" that I decide to draw the line.

So, I want people to tell me what specifically they dislike about this game.

Having said all that i agree with you. I see no way how someone could honestly say he sees nothing good about that game.

 

[ThriKreen]

Would it have been better if instead of being advertised as *2*, implying a sequel, instead it had a subtitle like the first one, like say "DA: Kirkwall" or "DA:Hawke's Story"? And DA3 being "DA: Inquisition"?

So it might alleviate the thoughts it was a sequel as opposed to another story in the same setting?

 

[5ilver]

I personally dislike the # of potential romance interests for a male heterosexual protagonist (2: a mobile STD library and a mental 12y/o) and the direction they decided to take the game.

DA1 was kind of an RPG with some button mashing and felt semi-open.
DA2 feels like one linear corridor with nothing but button-mashing (think God of War but without the boss fights and not as funny).

 

[Delerien]

Would it have been better if instead of being advertised as *2*, implying a sequel, instead it had a subtitle like the first one, like say "DA: Kirkwall" or "DA:Hawke's Story"? And DA3 being "DA: Inquisition"?

So it might alleviate the thoughts it was a sequel as opposed to another story in the same setting?

Actually yes, that might even be crazy enough to work. For example i did like the combat of the first one more because i'm usually more of a turn based strategy guy. I can see why some would prefer the more action ridden combat of the second part. So if i would've known in advance that Dragon Age 2 would be a different kind of game i might have been less disappointed with not getting what i expected.

It wouldn't have "saved" the game though.

 

[Raikas]

I actually grew to love DA2, but I was very disappointed in it when I first played it - in part because of the obvious flaws like the recycled environments, but mostly because it wasn't the DAO sequel that was marketed. I actually think the non-heroic story of DA2 is more interesting than the traditional hero's quest of DAO, but because I wasn't expecting it I just didn't appreciate it the first time around (and to be fair, I still think it's imperfect, but I appreciate what they were trying to do).


I also think one of the games strengths is that the character interactions change based on the rivalry/friendship rating and their romance status. But the problem with that is that you don't see those changes unless you play the game more than once, and the vast majority of people don't do that, so they came away with the impression that they characters were all one-note and static, which in turn makes them even less likely to replay it.

 

[DoPo]

And while I personallyl ike the game (though am more than willing to admit that it has it's fair share of flaws), it's when I start hearing comments like "it's the worst game ever" or "there's nothing good about this game" that I decide to draw the line.

This would just be mindless hating. OK, here's how I see it and why - I haven't played DA2. I watched a friend of mine play it and decided "meh, doesn't look good enough" - I liked the tactical combat of DA:O. I can't say much about the characters or the story, for I haven't experienced it, but I did do a little research and read a bit about the story - I wasn't impressed. I wasn't impressed with DA:O, either but that's another thing, DA2 looked less impressing. Overall, it was a different game than DA:O and it wasn't for me. It wasn't bad mind, you, but it wasn't for me. However, compared to the first game, I'd say it was worse. Still, that doesn't mean the worse thing in existence, and anybody who claims so hasn't seen a bad game.

 

[shrekfan246]

Still, that doesn't mean the worse thing in existence, and anybody who claims so hasn't seen a bad game.

You mean like Sonic '06? Oho, running joke!

OT: I liked it.

I would've liked it more if the enemies hadn't become damage sponges to provide "difficulty" later on in the game, if they hadn't spawned in waves, and if the dungeons/side quests had had more level variety. And if it were a little shorter... or just paced better. The story could've been executed better, but I liked the thought behind it and I enjoyed Hawke, Varric, Isabela, and Merril.

I liked the faster pace of the combat, despite the aforementioned damage-sponginess of enemies. On the PC it wasn't button-mashing, it had the auto attack that I head they later patched into the console versions. And I vastly preferred the skill trees to the first game. In Origins, the leveling tree was extremely bland and generic, and really didn't allow for the depth of customization that I'd really like to have out of that type of RPG. II added far more ways of building your character, whether warrior, rogue, or mage, and it felt a lot better to level comparatively.

 

[DoPo]

Still, that doesn't mean the worse thing in existence, and anybody who claims so hasn't seen a bad game.

You mean like Sonic '06? Oho, running joke!

Precisely like it. As we covered, it failed on pretty much every level. While I haven't played DA2, I am sure there is something that works - it's just that it doesn't work as before.

 

[Requia]

I don't hate Dragon Age 2. Like several other games from recent memory the word I'm most likely to chose when describing it is "disappointed". Disappointed because to me there shouldn't be a reason for a sequel to be that much worse than the original. The most basic way in which it was worse was that it was three shorter games with little real connectivity or stakes mashed up into one single game. In Dragon Age: Origins the world demanded that the player character and only the player character be the one to sort shit out. In Dragon Age 2 the issues (gold farming, kicking out a foreign invading force and stopping some rogue mages) are ones that don't feel epic (especially the fucking gold farming) and in the 2nd and 3rd chapters are stuff that I'd actually kind of expect the city guards to sort out. In short there isn't much in the way of compelling conflict. Combine that with an epic amount of backtracking and companions that are either major revisions to their previous incarnations or 2D cutouts and you've got a very disappointing game. See, there's that word again.

This sounds refreshing actually. I'm getting sick of saving the world.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Eh, I've been done with hating it for a long time now.

It was a rushed cash-in, and an RPG in name only. It's done, I'm over it.

 

[VoidWanderer]

I didn't hate DA2, but I was severely disappointed in the game.

Instead of making a dwarf/elf/human fighter/thief/mage, you make a human F/T/M, not too bad, but still very weak. The story intro was the strognest part of the game, with occassional hiccups of quality.

But the main complaints I have about the game are twofold.

1) The maps... Oh god the maps. Instead of interesting and varied levels you can only run around in the 'Hub City' in either day or night. I know you can get into the Dark Roads as part of a story quest, but EVERY house and cave have the exact same design. Don't believe me, look at the minimap when you enter one, each one is identical. They don't even bother to grey out the bits you can't access!

2)The story was very weak. The only highlight was Varric's embellishments. From DA:O's saga of two inexperienced Grey Wardens rising an army against a great threat to Ferelden despite the machinations of Loghain. You had to help the various factions with unique problems and you had real choices. But the plot itself was pedestrian, it felt like it was taking it's time. The Lyrium idol was interesting but disappeared almost immediately, and the religious item thing was weak. This plot coming from one of the strongest story-writing developers was disappointing to say the least.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Idiotic characters, no plot, recycled dungeon rooms.

So basically could have been replicated by a finger painting from a kindergarten class.

 

[Images]

The reason why it gets a lot of "ITS THE WORST" isn't that its the worst game ever made but it was one of the worst disappointments in recent years in almost every respect. Even ME3 was great in so many ways up until that ending.

DA2 however? That got the old school gameplay peeps liked from the first one BECAUSE it was old school and binned it. It took away the multiple origins at the beginning, looked pretty ugly, ignored decisions from the first game, presented very little choice and was a rushed mess. Add reused maps and jumping ninja Templars and we're all grumpy.

Don't get me wrong, I think there were good elements buried in there but they were buried deep under layers of crap.