Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed it, but it lives in the same area as colonial marines for me: A game I enjoyed quite a lot, but that had completely wasted potential and a buggerload of faults.T0ad 0f Truth said:
Dragon Age 2 is actually a Brilliant game!... Sorta, kinda, maybe
- Thread starter Euryalus
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You think you enjoyed it, but you didn't.
I am here to free your mind of such thoughts.
With the exception of Sebastian and Anders, I really liked the supporting cast, sarcastic Hawke and Varric are bestest bros, but other than that, the game was just bland and unfinished.
It's the epitome of 'rushed out the door' project.
even worse was that ander's was a baddass bro in awaking and they fucked him upDaystar Clarion said:
You think you enjoyed it, but you didn't.
I am here to free your mind of such thoughts.
With the exception of Sebastian and Anders, I really liked the supporting cast, sarcastic Hawke and Varric are bestest bros, but other than that, the game was just bland and unfinished.
It's the epitome of 'rushed out the door' project.
The positives described in the OP are what the game was supposed to be, but it was poorly executed. The concepts behind the game were solid, but the actual game was poop. Gameplay was crapped up (screw tactical encounters, let's just spam waves of cannon fodder at the player!!!), areas were shamelessly recycled (when the exact same cave is a bandit's hideout, Templar tunnels, a monster lair and a brothel, it kinda gets annoying) and are often poorly designed (plenty of blank bland walls and surfaces, lack of detail, etc.).
If the argument was made for the game on the basis of the story, then we have the difference between what the game wanted to be about, what it wanted its themes to be and what it actually did, how it presented those themes. And in many cases, all that is inseparable from the visuals and gameplay. One of the themes was supposed to be how a single place (Kirkwall) changes over the years and events. However, Kirkwall doesn't change. It's the exact same map with the exact same people standing in the exact same places.
Key characters are underdeveloped, the only really effective villain (the Arishok) is disposed of senselessly, the final villain was out of nowhere, had no proper buildup and the tie-in to the Deep Roads expedition was contrived as all hell. Varric and Avelline were the two bright spots in the whole goddam mess.
Dragon Age 2 had its heart in the right place, it had good intentions and it went into development with high hopes. However, the game obviously had its budget and staff gutted during development (likely towards TOR; and didn't that just work out great...) so corners had to be cut, content had to be recycled, story arcs had to be stunted and so on and so forth. DA2 could have been a great game if its ideas were explored properly, but as it stands it was a rushed out product and one of the surest signs that Bioware is going to shit...
If the argument was made for the game on the basis of the story, then we have the difference between what the game wanted to be about, what it wanted its themes to be and what it actually did, how it presented those themes. And in many cases, all that is inseparable from the visuals and gameplay. One of the themes was supposed to be how a single place (Kirkwall) changes over the years and events. However, Kirkwall doesn't change. It's the exact same map with the exact same people standing in the exact same places.
Key characters are underdeveloped, the only really effective villain (the Arishok) is disposed of senselessly, the final villain was out of nowhere, had no proper buildup and the tie-in to the Deep Roads expedition was contrived as all hell. Varric and Avelline were the two bright spots in the whole goddam mess.
Dragon Age 2 had its heart in the right place, it had good intentions and it went into development with high hopes. However, the game obviously had its budget and staff gutted during development (likely towards TOR; and didn't that just work out great...) so corners had to be cut, content had to be recycled, story arcs had to be stunted and so on and so forth. DA2 could have been a great game if its ideas were explored properly, but as it stands it was a rushed out product and one of the surest signs that Bioware is going to shit...
I seriously prefer the second game, actually. I can see the flaws, but the characters- whilst some, as was mentioned, could use more development- are still awesome; I can really get behind "my" Hawke as an individual; and the combat was FAR improved. I can't replay the first one because, as much as I love the story and characters, I just can't wade through the combat. (I have a few things which really really get to me about the combat in Origins, but not the point.) I can replay the second game and still enjoy it (and actually am doing so now, to show the game to my fiance who is not a gamer.)
I have a strategic save near the end of Act 1, so I don't have to trawl through alllll those side quests; and off I go, play far enough to introduce all the characters and do the side quests I don't find to be a chore and then load that save. I enjoy all the classes now (which I did not before), I love the Friendship/Rivalry mechanic and the fact that you can have a big impact on some characters depending on which way your relationship with them leans. I still heartily enjoy the characters and their story- and that includes Hawke.
The game has serious flaws, yes. And people tend to latch on to those flaws- but personally? It hits most, if not all, of my buttons enough for me to be able to overlook them most of the time.
And I am very much looking forward to seeing what they do with the third game. I just hope the characters continue to be as engaging.
I have a strategic save near the end of Act 1, so I don't have to trawl through alllll those side quests; and off I go, play far enough to introduce all the characters and do the side quests I don't find to be a chore and then load that save. I enjoy all the classes now (which I did not before), I love the Friendship/Rivalry mechanic and the fact that you can have a big impact on some characters depending on which way your relationship with them leans. I still heartily enjoy the characters and their story- and that includes Hawke.
The game has serious flaws, yes. And people tend to latch on to those flaws- but personally? It hits most, if not all, of my buttons enough for me to be able to overlook them most of the time.
And I am very much looking forward to seeing what they do with the third game. I just hope the characters continue to be as engaging.
You're joking right. Everyone tells me "Oh the witcher 2 is sooooooo good! so much better than dragon age 2." So I buy the Xbox edition day 1. It is one of the most boring games I've played and on top of that it was impossible to care about any of the characters because they were all assholes. Roach is a racist thug, the scoi'atel seemed alright in theory but they spend the whole of the first act attacking you but still expecting you to help them. Two major characters in the first two acts are rapists. And the third act is a confusing clusterfuck which presents a clear choice of helping yourself and roach but then expects you to somehow know which marker begins which quest.endtherapture said:
Worst game I bought in 2012.
Still better than the characters with stupid motivations in Dragon Age.lemby117 said:
Blood Mages everywhere. Why? No reason.
Parachuting enemies? Meredith did it "because she's crazy". Anders blew up a church for no reason.
DA2 has no narrative structure and is a clusterfuck of quests and ideas that doesn't work and is completely incoherant and has no overarching narrative or story or theme.
I agree.T0ad 0f Truth said:
The game had a lot of potential, both in the characters, the story and the setting. The only real problem was that it needed another good year of solid development to flesh certain areas out, create more variety in the levels and more effort put into making the world come alive.
I still enjoyed the game, but that doesn't stop it from being a disappointment when you realise how much better it could have easily been with some more time and effort.
It was, as other people pointed out, a classic case of a game being rushed out of the door, and Bioware's reputation suffered for it.
DA:2 is to DA:O what Soap Operas are to HBO. As in replacing a solid plot with lots of sugary conversation and companion drama.
I never played DA2. After the hackneyed effort of Orcs (you heard me) being led by a Dragon (that's right) in an attempt to conquer the world, and hitting every fantasy cliche right on the head along the way, and the god awful dirt filter they used for the game's visuals. I just didn't have the motivation to play DA2. A part of me regrets it sure, but not the part of me that controls my wallet.
Templars powerful =/= blood magic. They're not pushed to it at all. My Hawke was a mage, but he wasn't a blood mage...he wasn't pushed to it.lemby117 said:
Her motivations were stupid because she got turned into a crazy ***** by a magical sword.
It's really not a brilliant game. It's passable and rushed.
-Unlikeable characters (except Varric who is a bro)
-ridiculous level of repeated environments.
-The Plot makes little sense (What's the crack with the mysterious relic)
-Blood mages. How are you supposed to feel sympathetic to mages when they do exactly what everyone expects of them.
-Templars. Am I supposed to like them? Hate them?
-No replay value. The choices are all fake.
-Very little party flexibility. You have to have a healer and a tank which pretty much decides the set up for you.
-Not allowed to romance the only likeable character (fu bioware)
Just look at the trees. They look like they were made by a eight year old for Christmas decorations.
Surprised there isn't glitter stuck on them.
Nah man. Horrible game.
-Unlikeable characters (except Varric who is a bro)
-ridiculous level of repeated environments.
-The Plot makes little sense (What's the crack with the mysterious relic)
-Blood mages. How are you supposed to feel sympathetic to mages when they do exactly what everyone expects of them.
-Templars. Am I supposed to like them? Hate them?
-No replay value. The choices are all fake.
-Very little party flexibility. You have to have a healer and a tank which pretty much decides the set up for you.
-Not allowed to romance the only likeable character (fu bioware)
Just look at the trees. They look like they were made by a eight year old for Christmas decorations.
Surprised there isn't glitter stuck on them.
Nah man. Horrible game.
If you recall at the beginning bethany mentions that there are lots of templars in kirkwall, and even in the beginning we see that templars abuse mages horrifically, add to that that kirkwall has some link to the fade or something the demons are able to tempt people easily. There is no real difficulty in using blood magic anybody who is a mage can do it, and t is known to be more powerful. As Orsino demonstrates at the end if you teat all mages as blood mages then they will begin to use blood magic.endtherapture said:
So now it's the norm to judge games on what they could have been? Or maybe what they should have been? Or if the story was stellar, it doesn't matter that everything else was below par?T0ad 0f Truth said:
First and foremost a game needs to be entertaining and engaging. If it fails here the rest is irrelevant. If it succeeds here, we can forgive it a lot. There are many, many outstanding games that have poor graphics, a poor/lacklustre story, bugs or other shortcomings. DA2 may have had a good premise but that wasn't enough. It may have had promise, but promise isn't enough.
The truth is, it began life as a BioWare game, with all the pedigree and polish the name used to elicit. Then it got "EAd". This is a process whereby instead of making the game great it instead gets chopped up into pieces to be resold as Day 1 DLC. It is made on a shorter release schedule with minimal art assets, the story is an afterthought and all challenge and sophistication is removed so it will (supposedly) appeal to morons (aka "the mass-market). It may or may not get an online pass usually it will), gets removed from Steam and is not available to be purchased by any player as an entire experience with all content. It will also usually copy mechanics from other successful games instead of being remotely innovative.
The net effect was Dragon Age 2. A money grab with minimal effort made and the first time we who used to love BioWare saw what it was to become. The first time BioWare ever made a mediocre game, but not the last. No toolset meant almost no player content or community either. I wonder (but seriously doubt) if we'll ever see another toolset for any game BioWare makes....I don't think it can fit into any EA product.
If it turned out the way the fans had hoped...a living, breathing Athkatla all over again it would have been something to behold. As it is, I'm significantly more excited by the BG2 Redux in the DAO game engine than by DA3.
I'm currently playing it now, and don't really know why, mostly because there's nothing left of interest on the xbox. I haven't even looked at the achievement list, I'm just playing for the sake of playing.
I've been spoiled in the fantasy department by Skyrim, so i gave up games like DA1 and dark souls, haven't bothed with KoA or dragons dogma, but it's decent I guess.
It's really like a lesser version of the mass effect series, in terms of story, content, map, combat, customization, choices, everything. Really just mass effect's neglected little sibling. Bioware favored the one game I guess, fed the scraps to the other lol.
I've been spoiled in the fantasy department by Skyrim, so i gave up games like DA1 and dark souls, haven't bothed with KoA or dragons dogma, but it's decent I guess.
It's really like a lesser version of the mass effect series, in terms of story, content, map, combat, customization, choices, everything. Really just mass effect's neglected little sibling. Bioware favored the one game I guess, fed the scraps to the other lol.