Dragon Age 2

[meomao]

Yes.

 

In Mass Effect 2 if you removed all the RPG dialogue and turned it into a Gears of War cover shooter, it would still be a decent experience. Remove the dialogue and RPG elements of DA 2 and turn it into a God of War action game, which seems to be the route they were taking, and you have gaming hell.

 

No. I must repeat myself then . The game played like a (bad) button masher before the patch on the consolle. Yes, it was foolish and delusional to think that it could work and the idiotic "button/awesome" marketing campaign has not helped at all.

 

But it's nothing like God of War: I'm playing GoW right now thanks to the nice PS2 simulator and the difference is auto-evident (btw, I GoW is really fun and well made if you take it for what it is). You can't understand the amount of rules and mechanic hidden behind that animation's orge that is DA2 combat. I read all the post of Peter Thomas (the mechanic developer) and it's not a dumbed down RPG. It's a very smart, elegant, deep and well thought RPG system that mixes accessibility and depth. It has some flaws but nothing that could not be solved or tweaked. For example, you don't know how many rules govern the Fortitude check that the game makes each time you receive a blow and how everything you see is correlated to numeric values running underground. That's a classic RPG as you can get, not a GoW clone.

 

Problem is: it seems like the game is afraid to show that system to the player and on consolle the devs tried to support a button mashing gameplay style that hides the depth of the mechanics while not having the simplicity/fluidity of GoW/Diablo2 gameplay.

[GreasyDogMeat]

I'll have to give it another try with the recent patch. If I can stand the repeating areas.

 

How can anyone compare it to God of War and be serious? That's simply detached from reality.

I rejected it and substituted my own. It is what it felt like to me, particularly in the later sections of the game. Mash a button, throw in a special here and there, except draw it out to excess and make the bodies 'splode from time to time. Didn't actually mind the body 'splodings. Nothing quite makes you feel powerful like whacking a guy with your sword and having him pop like a pimple. Reminded me of Doom 3 where you could smack a scientist with your flashlight and he would dissolve into a skeleton.

[Spider]

I do not agree. I suppose we played two different games. I've played DA2 on PC and it's nothing like a button musher. It's mostly DA:O on steroid with more responsivity, more singergies between classes and more stretegic elements (since the wave mechanich, while abused and not refined, introduces a strategic element that DA:O completely missed). I assume that you have played it on consolle and I think that the consolle version of the game suffered badly because of the lack of autoattack.

 

DA:O used waves in some fights. It was nowhere as common, but it was there. Personally I rather think DA2 removed strategic elements because it fell back to wave all the time, making fights fairly predictable after a while.

 

Also, I don't agree that the game is more responsive. The horrible camera puts a stop to that (from a PC players perspective). Positioning is a nightmare and AoE spells is a lot clunkier to use.

 

I do think the combat is fun and the splashier effects when you activate abilities do make it feel more visceral, but as a whole I think the combat is distinctively worse. I still think the game is decent, but it is much worse than DA:O.

[meomao]

DA:O used waves in some fights. It was nowhere as common, but it was there. Personally I rather think DA2 removed strategic elements because it fell back to wave all the time, making fights fairly predictable after a while.

 

Personally, I believe that the only strategic element of DA:O's combat (at least on paper) were mana/stamina and health management but with the amount of potions avaible in the game, the short cooldowns and the effectiveness of spell combos routines, it was really trivial and boring. Everything was tactical in DA:O's combat and once you understood the most usefull tactical combos, you could repeat them ad nauseam.

 

In DA2 you know that there will be from 2 to 4 waves in each fight (3 waves most time). But you do not know how those waves will be composed, so you have to think carefully before you use a certain skill or CCC. You cannot spam them because colldowns are longer and heals and potions are less effective. Since enemies attacks you from many sides and are generally smarter than their DA:O's counterpart, you have to position carefully and to make full use of threat management skills. The situation could vary a lot from fights to fights. Problem is: with the recycle of areas, fights happens allways in the same 20 places, so after a while you can anticipate how it's going to play out and it becomes a little bit boring too.

 

For me the most problematic elements of DA2 combat system were boring boss fights (that used different rules than the normal fights of the game), the importance of positioning/kiting (allways a problem of boss fights) and the stupidity of level scaling (a problem of DA:O too, at leat in DA2 it's handled better since scaling it's not asymmetrical).

 

Also, I don't agree that the game is more responsive. The horrible camera puts a stop to that (from a PC players perspective). Positioning is a nightmare and AoE spells is a lot clunkier to use.

 

I do agree with your criticism: the lack of iso camera was really a weakness in the controll department. But when I talk about responsivity, I mean that charachters now do things when needed and not an hour after when it's not needed anymore and the situation has changed.

 

I do think the combat is fun and the splashier effects when you activate abilities do make it feel more visceral, but as a whole I think the combat is distinctively worse. I still think the game is decent, but it is much worse than DA:O.

 

I respect your view and think that we'll agree to disagree. Imho, DA2 combat is way better on mostly any level if not controll for the beloved iso view.

 

At least, in DA2 (PC) all skills/powers work as intended. You don't know the amount of bugs/unresolved issues in DA:O's skill/item system.

Edited May 2, 2011 by meomao

[Spider]

I had more problems with bugs in DA2 than in DA:O (Awakening not included). Perhaps things weren't working right in the first game, but they weren't as glaringly obvious as loosing permanent hit points when being downed (as in not regainable through a injury kit).

 

Personally, I believe that the only strategic element of DA:O's combat (at least on paper) were mana/stamina and health management but with the amount of potions avaible in the game, the short cooldowns and the effectiveness of spell combos routines, it was really trivial and boring. Everything was tactical in DA:O's combat and once you understood the most usefull tactical combos, you could repeat them ad nauseam.

 

In DA2 you know that there will be from 2 to 4 waves in each fight (3 waves most time). But you do not know how those waves will be composed, so you have to think carefully before you use a certain skill or CCC. You cannot spam them because colldowns are longer and heals and potions are less effective. Since enemies attacks you from many sides and are generally smarter than their DA:O's counterpart, you have to position carefully and to make full use of threat management skills.

 

This is where I disagree. I think it's fairly predictable how the waves will be composed, since most of the time they are identical to the first battle you had with the same enemy type. Positioning is a bit more important, but since the camera is so bad, assigning good positions is more difficult than it should be. I don't particularly think the mooks are smarter than in DA:O either. About the same. I've only ever used Taunt for threat management (perhaps the rogue ability that takes aggro once or twice, but most of the time I want aggro AWAY from my rogue, so not that much).

 

I think DA2's combat has the ability to be better 8in spite of the camera) but the wrecked it with the extremely dull repetition.

[Zoraptor]

DA2 is underrated. It's equal to DA1.

I'd always wondered what score you would have given DAO and now I know.

 

5/10, just like you gave DA2.

[Humodour]

"So I just noticed this game got like 82% from reviewers on Metacritic and 43% from users (over 2000 users reviewed it).

 

What the ****? I've never ever seen such a huge disparity on metacritic.

 

Is it really that bad? And if so, how did Bioware **** up so badly? Can we find some way to blame this on EA? "

 

You base your opinion on what others think?

 

When I don't have the time or money to waste playing every game out there to see if it is any good or not? Yes. Obviously Dragon Age 2 is one of those lower-quality games I'll be avoiding.

[WDeranged]

Uh oh, I just lost my DA2 saves after reinstalling Windows, I'm actually dreading the thought of grinding my way back to where I was (about half way through)...grumble.

[Hell Kitty]

Also agree with Virumor, the demo is anything but an accurate representation of the game, and the 2-3 people I persuaded to try the game, after being turned off by the demo, have been thanking me.

 

Yeah, it was a bad demo. Reminded me of Hitman: Blood Money, a game with non-linear levels and multiple ways to complete objectives, but for the demo they used the linear, hand-holding tutorial. I bought both games anyway, convinced the demos weren't a good representation of the final game, and in both cases I wasn't disappointed.

 

Is it really that bad?

 

No. DA2 got as many user reviews in 2 weeks as it took ME2 to get in 2 years. Why? Butthurt fanboys. That's not to say there weren't any legit negative reviews, just that they get drowned out by the crybabies.

Edited May 3, 2011 by Hell Kitty

[Volourn]

"5/10, just like you gave DA2."

 

R00flerz!

[John Lemon]

Uh oh, I just lost my DA2 saves after reinstalling Windows, I'm actually dreading the thought of grinding my way back to where I was (about half way through)...grumble.

Use mods like this one. You'll thank me later.

Is it really that bad? And if so, how did Bioware **** up so badly? Can we find some way to blame this on EA?

Almost. I have no idea. Probably.

[Humodour]

Hmm. Well, I'll take a look at things again once I finish Dragon Age 1. Which, to be fair, is not any time soon, since uni work keeps getting in the way.

[Meshugger]

Ok, time for my review (or mostly a rant). *SPOILERS, AND A LOT OF THEM*

 

Before playing

 

I didn't bother with the demo, but i peeked at the artwork and the general ideas that Bioware tried to convey with DA2. Since the influence was clear, the optimist in me hope for something like this

Think about it, a personal story with main character trying to find his place in the world. You get to define your ethics and morals carefully over the span of several years, bonds and friendship are formed and your actions carefully determine who you are, who you wish to be and what consequences your choices will have. Intrigues, political philosophy about ruling and serving will be the norm. Is there a divine destiny for every one of us? Or do we even have a free will, or atleast some sort of control? Yes, yes, and yes. I like the sound of that. While the premise was great, the execution fell completely apart.

 

Changes made compared to DA1

 

As earlier stated, the story is more character-focused that saving the world focused. Good. The design has changed as well. Some notes about this:

 

- The color palette has been more varied, but only slightly. Brown, red and gray are still the most used colors. Yuck.

- The Qunari has changed their appearance completely and they actually look much better. Good work there Bioware.

- Elves now look like a bad rip-off Avatar and mashed it with some korean/japanese mmorpg. Aesthetically they look really, really ugly. As an example:

 

When some other company seem to have a more sound idea on how they should look:

 

 

- Combat is way faster and has gone trough a complete overhaul. I'll talk more about that in a separate paragraph.

 

All in all, a lot of changes were made, but does that make it better game than its predecessor? Lets find out, shall we?

 

The Combat

 

I will not go into the details about the mechanics since that is not my area of expertise, but i will tell you this. Why the hell can't warriors dual wield, or mages for that matter? For the naked eye, it seems like for a completely arbitrary reason no other than to piss players off. The only motivation that i can come up with on top of my head is that combat would be too imbalanced. But guess what, that is your problem Bioware and not the player's. If the gameplay doesn't take to account that some people like to dual wield no matter class they choose then you do not simply just remove that ability. There are demons in the game that can summon hundreds of minions, take control of NPCs and turn a whole neighborhoods into a wall of flames. And oh, there also a woman who can turn into a dragon. But you can not dual wield, nope. For some, this might be nitpicking, but all i want is some consistency. Is that too much to ask?

 

The combat itself is faster, which would make sense if you're a rogue. The animations are also better aesthetically, but they fall apart when you are playing as warrior. Because when you see NPCs use two-handed swords like they defy any form of gravity it simply looks silly, and the fights loses some of their credibility when melee weapons are used without any sense of weight in them. This wouldn't have mattered as much if the enemy encounters were often pretty much stupid. Enemies sometimes, and that's already too often, literally drop out of the sky. And often there are artificially placed blocks in the way that makes sure that you fights enemies in just that particular spot. This constricts the player, again. It is simply not fun to play when you have no use of your environment.

 

Locations

 

I wouldn't normally reserve a separate paragraph for this, but it has to be mentioned this time. Why? Because you are stuck to one single town and its surroundings, which often happen to be barren. The levels do not look the same, they are the same. Sometimes you can walk through a particular door and sometimes it is locked with no option to open it. At other times, a big rock blocks the way for a passage. It is a lazy and infuriating design. DO.NOT.DO.THIS.****.AGAIN.

 

Kirkwall in itself has some good things though, like the design of the gallows. However, there is little art and architecture that would give some sense of a place with its own culture. Better than Denerim, but still lacking. Do people in Thedas hate music and poetry that much that it is non-existant?

 

I also understand why people say that it feels more like DA1: The Addon. Too little locations, too little places to go.

 

Partymembers and other NPCs

 

While some of them simply look silly, they do have their own lives and agendas. They even have their own places where they stay throughout the game, which was a great improvement. I also found that the complaints about male party members hitting on you being overplayed. If you show no romantic interest, then neither will they. A quick roundup left the following impressions:

 

- Anders was loopy at best and completely bonkers at worst. While incredibly stupid, he was atleast consistent. And i also like that you question his bull**** without going "shepard collargrab" on him. Also, letting the player be able to kill him was a nice addition.

- Merril was incredibly annoying and even Anders thought of her as a lost cause. The only reason that i helped her to rebuilt the mirror was a hope that she would've learned her lesson. She didn't. I think that i ended up with 90% rivalry with her in the end.

- Fenris looked too goofy to even be taken seriously in the beginning. But he was surprisingly well written and much less broody than i originally though. No problems there.

- Varric was my favourite. Constantly harassing moody and broody and pretty much everyone else. Very level-headed. Easily my favorite.

- Sebastian was included from the package for me but was otherwise a DLC and it showed. A goody-two-shoes and nothing really interesting to add. It felt like he was included as an afterthought since you were never able to visit Starkhaven.

- Isabella had probably the most stupid outfit. So out of place and the body-proportions looked like a parody of the women in The Witcher. Almost like she had a "THIS IS A LOVE INTEREST"-sticker on her forehead. The character itself was pretty ok and it seemed like she actually developed mentally through her time in Kirkwall.

- Aveline was pretty good as well. Predictable, but consistent. No bull****. Like Varric, she seemed to have her feet at the ground at all times. It was actually quite cute to help her to find a new boyfriend.

- Bethany was ok. It is pretty difficult to write in family for the main character in a RPG and sadly Bioware didn't succeed there. She simply knew too much that the player could not possibly know and that hindered conversations greatly.

 

- An interesting note though: All the characters in the game that you could romance were Bi-sexuals. The only heterosexuals where where nono-zone. Quite odd if you think about it.

- Another thing. Why couldn't we change clothes on party characters? They simply had the same crap on all those years? yuck.

 

Story

 

It started interesting with a great premise, but fell great in the execution. DA1 was a typical hero-adventure, save the world and all that, but this time it was more about one character surviving and become stronger because of it. The problem was that he or she still had to be the champion of Kirkwall, you could never let the damn place burn to the ground. The second one was that it was forced tragedy on hawke's family. Your mother will die, and either your sister or brother will also die, become a grey warden or taken to the circle/templars. You will lose you family no matter what you do. So much for C&C, *sigh*. Third, if the game is about the character, then why remove skills from dialogue with other characters? If you define your character by being nice, witty or aggressive you will lack the most important part of a character driven story: dept. No matter how you spin it around choices, they are still superficial if you spend 7-8 years in one town by being either nice, witty or aggressive. Where was the talks and situations that challenged different philosophies, different ethics and ideas? They were simply far and few between and mostly they were about saving or not saving some mage or two. Meh, talk about wasted opportunity. Lets now break down the story into parts:

 

Part 1: Get rich or die trying. That was pretty much it. Didn't motivate me the slightest except for i hoped that something more happened down the line. Also, suddenly Hawke knows people that the player has never met. What is the point of showing the player that Hawke has a lot of friends if the experience is taken away from the player? Weak, weak design.

Part 2: Qunari vs the Chantry. NOW we're talking, freedom vs destiny, ruler vs servant. YES.........Oh crap, you still have to fight the Qunari no matter what. Another wasted opportunity.

Part 3: Mages vs Templars. YES, same things again. Maybe now things will open up. Finally.....no wait, Anders blows up the Chantry tower no matter what? You can not stop him no matter what you do? You have to choose sides? You cannot tell both factions to go **** themselves silly? Gnnnn, well atleast i get to choose which endboss that i fight, right? No, you still have to fight them both. You have the choice though to pick which order though, yay.

 

That's the main problem with DA2 in almost in every way. So many ideas and opportunities but failing in execution.

 

RPG, C&C

 

It is strongly tied to what i said in the story paragraph, but it still deserves one of its own. You have several choices to make, but the outcome has little of impact of Hawke. He or she is still the champion of Kirkwall no matter what you do, which goes against the premise of a personal story. Your family is still stricken by tragedy. Add all other complaints from before into the mix and it just feels pointless. And if the consequences feel pointless, then why bother try to play it again? Infuriating game, if anything.

 

Last words

 

The game ends like KotOR 2, but without Hawke non the wiser. Talk about double letdown. Some characters were well written and showed some dept...and that's about it. I will not rate it in numbers, but instead in terms of actual worth in monetary units. About 4,95.

 

Thank you for your time.

Edited May 8, 2011 by Meshugger

[Volourn]

"Merril was incredibly annoying and even Anders thought of her as a lost cause. The only reason that i helped her to rebuilt the mirror was a hope that she would've learned her lesson. She didn't. I think that i ended up with 90% rivalry with her in the end."

 

If you refuse to help her there is a chance she'll admit she was in the wrong.

 

 

"All the characters in the game that you could romance were Bi-sexuals. The only heterosexuals where where nono-zone. Quite odd if you think about it. "

 

Sebastien is heterosexual. Funny thing is he won't sleep with you even in a romance.

[Meshugger]

Oh, and i forgot:

 

1) Why do have to play as a human? Why not a dwarf or elf? That was one of the good things with DA1.

2) Voiced Hawke and dialogue wheel before anyone asks: Little opinion as long as it doesn't affect the roleplaying.

[Meshugger]

"Merril was incredibly annoying and even Anders thought of her as a lost cause. The only reason that i helped her to rebuilt the mirror was a hope that she would've learned her lesson. She didn't. I think that i ended up with 90% rivalry with her in the end."

 

If you refuse to help her there is a chance she'll admit she was in the wrong.

 

 

"All the characters in the game that you could romance were Bi-sexuals. The only heterosexuals where where nono-zone. Quite odd if you think about it. "

 

Sebastien is heterosexual. Funny thing is he won't sleep with you even in a romance.

 

Oh, i stand corrected then. Thanks.

[Nepenthe]

I think the main reason dual wield and archery were removed from warriors was to force some difference between the two classes. It's not an elegant solution, but hardly a logic failure.

 

OK, I admit, I can't remember if warriors even got specialised archery in DAO.

 

You also have to remember that you are playing a story told by someone else - I think it's a pretty good justification for the speedy 2h warriors and exploding bodies - especially as Varric is definitely on the pulpier end of narration.

 

The issue with people staying in the same clothes throughout the years is kind of exacerbated by the fact that a lot of outfit changes are bugged - so even when they are supposed to change gear, it's not happening at the moment.

[Monte Carlo]

Oh, and i forgot:

 

1) Why do have to play as a human? Why not a dwarf or elf?

 

Bio found out that most players in DA1, via their data-mining app, played the human noble origin. Once you understand that Bio is seeking the perfect game that works for everybody, you'll see that obviously (duh) you want to play a human character like the majority who did in DA1.

 

Makes sense now, right?

[Sannom]

Makes sense now, right?

 

That origin is ****ing boring, it's more of a chore you go through because you want to become Queen or King, or play a human Warrior or Thief.

[MrBrown]

"Merril was incredibly annoying and even Anders thought of her as a lost cause. The only reason that i helped her to rebuilt the mirror was a hope that she would've learned her lesson. She didn't. I think that i ended up with 90% rivalry with her in the end."

 

If you refuse to help her there is a chance she'll admit she was in the wrong.

 

 

She admits being wrong and destroys the mirror herself in the rivalry path. You were being too nice to her.

[Monte Carlo]

Makes sense now, right?

 

That origin is ****ing boring, it's more of a chore you go through because you want to become Queen or King, or play a human Warrior or Thief.

 

You dig that I was being sarcastic, right?

[HoonDing]

You also have to remember that you are playing a story told by someone else - I think it's a pretty good justification for the speedy 2h warriors and exploding bodies - especially as Varric is definitely on the pulpier end of narration.

Varric must a very lazy narrator as well - considering every house & cave looks the same.

[Nepenthe]

You also have to remember that you are playing a story told by someone else - I think it's a pretty good justification for the speedy 2h warriors and exploding bodies - especially as Varric is definitely on the pulpier end of narration.

Varric must a very lazy narrator as well - considering every house & cave looks the same.

Well, his main oeuvre is "hard in hightown", so it could be true.

[GreasyDogMeat]

You also have to remember that you are playing a story told by someone else - I think it's a pretty good justification for the speedy 2h warriors and exploding bodies - especially as Varric is definitely on the pulpier end of narration.

Varric must a very lazy narrator as well - considering every house & cave looks the same.

First time I've heard a reason for the repeating interiors that makes sense. Because the dev's excuses sure don't.

[Ice9]

So, apparently Desslock would fit in well here.

 

So, why is Anders voiced by a different voice actor when the the guy from Awakening is still in Dragon Age 2?