Dragon Age 2 - Why Some Fans Did Not Like It

Myrthos · February 8, 2016

Couch spotted an article on Gamasutra where the author tries to investigate why Dragon Age 2 left some fans so cold.

Gamers are notoriously whiny about even small faults, but the utterly enflamed tower of hatred the game inspired in some quarters is something that could only come from a more primal revulsion, and I suggest that it emerges from Hawke being an NPC come to life.

It’s disempowering to stand in the shoes of someone who can’t bend the world to their whim in a videogame. It disrupts the power fantasy if you find yourself cast adrift in a relentless storm instead of causing it

It’s a less common path taken in RPGs and one that the fan base built up by Origins was unprepared for. But it is not without a certain measure of precedent. Another controversial second entry in an RPG series, Knights of the Old Republic II, does something similar with your character’s relationship to her mentor Kreia. One of the most common complaints I heard, regardless of one’s status as a “hardcore” or “casual” gamer, one’s political affiliation, or age, was that Kreia’s manipulations throughout the story mean your character’s choices don’t matter.

A similar charge is often leveled at Dragon Age II, though it’s complicated there. There are places in Dragon Age II where, narratively, choice should’ve mattered--like choosing the Mages or Templars at the end of the game; that was reduced to something that was functionally cosmetic. You get the same boss fights with basically the same ending. But the complaints go beyond that. Hawke, some seem to think, should’ve had the power to dispel all the plagues of Kirkwall, fix and heal everything that was broken, and conjure perfect endings for everyone.

More information.

joxer · February 8, 2016

Gamespot…

Fans saw on Gamespot and co., so called gaming sites, reviews of Dragon Age 2 where reviewers were showering the game with praise.
Those same fans who came from Dragon Age Origins and not Candy Crush Saga expected an epic story, epic RPGness, enormous world with diverse locations and things fans' vivid imagination was thinking abourt during DA:O playthrough but those weren't in the game.

And then fans bought a game and got a good combat system packed into repetitive three waves of mobs appearing from a thin air, basic graphics, just a few locations, no spectacle, uninteresting story to retell, and less RPG than in Diablo.

It was clear that either gaming sites have shit taste or were paid to put good scores on the game. Or perhaps both.

While nothing changed for EA, they earned crapload of $ and remained one and only devil in games industry, things changed for Gamespot and likes.
Whoever bought DA2 based on their praise, does not trust their reviews any more. No readers = no $.

Good luck Gamespot, I hope Candy Crush Saga audience still visits your site.

Myrthos · February 8, 2016

Sorry Joxer, but that should have stated Gamasutra and not Gamespot

Farflame · February 8, 2016

I think it applies to both.

Joxer is very sensitive to scams and this article look like one. It trivializes some facts why DA2 was hated and focuses on powerless and refugee theme.. that is not bad, but it looks like it was probably written purposedly to promote some real life ideology in real life crisis. Do we need ideological articles masked as gaming articles?

Felipe pepe has written good comment there.

So Id say… Joxer knows his stuff.

wolfsrain · February 8, 2016

Am i the only idiot that noticed how the author of this particular article keeps reffering to Hawke as her, totally excluding his?! Basically says that Hawke could be only a woman over and over again. Yes, i did play Hawke as a woman, but i also played it as a man. TBH, the female Hawke had the better voice-acting. But seriously, how hard is to put a his/her or her/his (your choice)?! When you keep doing this kind of referencing, you basically are saying that there was no male Hawke in the game, despite the game offering the gender choice. But hey, that's the modern world, right?!

And sorry, but most of the complaints were due to the gameplay and the lack of actual, meaningful choices and consequences. Plus, no neutral side...You are forced to pick sides, instead of having the choice to stay on the bench and let the events to unfold.

Falksi · February 8, 2016

joxer said:
Gamespot…

Fans saw on Gamespot and co., so called gaming sites, reviews of Dragon Age 2 where reviewers were showering the game with praise.

Those same fans who came from Dragon Age Origins and not Candy Crush Saga expected an epic story, epic RPGness, enormous world with diverse locations and things fans' vivid imagination was thinking abourt during DA:O playthrough but those weren't in the game.

And then fans bought a game and got a good combat system packed into repetitive three waves of mobs appearing from a thin air, basic graphics, just a few locations, no spectacle, uninteresting story to retell, and less RPG than in Diablo.

It was clear that either gaming sites have shit taste or were paid to put good scores on the game. Or perhaps both.

While nothing changed for EA, they earned crapload of $ and remained one and only devil in games industry, things changed for Gamespot and likes.

Whoever bought DA2 based on their praise, does not trust their reviews any more. No readers = no $.

Good luck Gamespot, I hope Candy Crush Saga audience still visits your site.

Bang on.

DA:2 is shit IMO. Had it nothing to do with Origins it would still be a game with poor RPG aspects, and 10 chore like moments for every enjoyable one.

But in comparison to Origins it's flaws stick out even more.

Would love Bioware to have the balls to make Dragon Age Origins 2

JuliusMagnus · February 8, 2016

I still feel like DA2 was an expansion reworked into a stand-alone game. Everything seemed undercooked.

Arkadia7 · February 8, 2016

Gamasutra is known as a site which pushed a certain agenda, so, take anything they write with that in mind...not with a pinch of salt, but a gallon...

To me, most of the gaming "journalism" I see is absolute crap. It's rare to see a good article. Most of it is paid for or influenced by gaming companies, and that is why virtually no major gaming sites reviews can be trusted, because they all give 90% or higher to even the games which are hated by most gamers, (such as DA2) just because they are put out by major gaming studios.

The only way to get honest reviews is to go to places like metacritic, and click on the player reviews, and ignore the "professional" reviews. Or, in the case of rpgs, just read the posts by the players here at RPG watch, they give awesome, honest opinions and reviews about the games...

Morrandir · February 8, 2016

Arkadia7 said:
The only way to get honest reviews is to go to places like metacritic, and click on the player reviews, and ignore the "professional" reviews.

And you have to ignore the 10- and 1-reviews as well as they're most likely written by fanboys or haters.

Farflame · February 8, 2016

Morrandir said:
And you have to ignore the 10- and 1-reviews as well as they're most likely written by fanboys or haters.

Or by developers.

Bioware developer was caught while giving high rating to his game. And this game was DA2.

http://kotaku.com/5782097/dragon-ag...etacritic-ea-bets-obama-voted-for-himself-too

BrianOConnell · February 8, 2016

This is a classic "Conclusion first, article second" situation. This author decided gamers disliked the story and the fact you were a powerless refugee which allows the author to take a look at the current refugee crisis as a comparison. All this without any proof whatsoever that this is why gamers disliked the game simply because if it isn't why they disliked it then her article fails straight away.

See her response to Jeff Vogel's comment:-

I *really* didn't say that. Also, I never said other viewpoints were illegitimate; I just argued for my own.

The truth here was that it was her own viewpoint wrapped in language saying it was everyone's viewpoint.

Carnifex · February 8, 2016

I like how they said "some", as opposed to the majority. It was such a sad effort after a prior excellent game. The franchise got off to a great start, then simply blew up.

rjshae · February 8, 2016

She's right about the game generating an excess of umbrage over trivial little details. Lots of noise seemed to come in the form of excessively whiny commentaries, which is why I didn't take those complaints as seriously as I might have. It wasn't an excellent game, but neither was it horrible. I enjoyed it enough to play through a couple of times. Most of the characters and the story seemed fine to me, plus there were some interesting tactical situations. My main beef was with the "skills" system.

Hyperion · February 8, 2016

This is a very underrated game. My take on why a lot of people didn't like it is that it's not DAO.

Hyperion · February 8, 2016

rjshae said:
She's right about the game generating an excess of umbrage over trivial little details. Lots of noise seemed to come in the form of excessively whiny commentaries, which is why I didn't take those complaints as seriously as I might have.

Otherwise known as fanboyism. It's the same every time a new Fallout game is released. Incessant whining because it's not FO1, it's not FO2, it's not FO3. This is every single day on Steam since FO4 was released.

The same can be said about DAI, nothing but constant comparing it to DAO and how it's not exactly the same game, which is bad of course.

forgottenlor · February 8, 2016

I played this game for the first time last year, got it for about 6$ and was expecting nothing. I think if I'd payed 60$ bucks for it and was expecting a second Dragon Age:Origins, I'd be pissed too. I actually enjoyed it for what it is. Sure the end is full of false choices and is a real letdown. Sure the areas get repetitive and they clearly reused maps. Sure the waves and air spawns are so silly that they're humorous. And yes it's much more streamlined, and the character building is like in a hack and slay game, and not like in a crpg. I still liked the story concept a lot, and I had a lot more fun with the game than I expected. I suspect its an above average game, but it all comes from what one is expecting. I think the very high reviews from the press were completely undeserved, and that's where a lot of hate comes in. People feel cheated.

BrianOConnell · February 8, 2016

I was the same. I came to the game late knowing about the problems fans had with it (call it whining, moaning or criticism) but enjoyed it for the most part. Not as much as Origins but in a vacuum not that bad imo. The point though for me is that this article is incorrect about what people disliked about the game. It was everything forgottenlor says not so much the story that caused the ire.

BoboTheMighty · February 8, 2016

Poor, rushed and at times hilariously dumb game all around, but it did have a few redeeming features.
Hawke's relationships with his/her companions were more interesting, plus they played a larger role in the story. Number of good side quests and they did a pretty decent job with Arishok/Qunari and second chapter's ending.
And Hawke was hilarious at times. (' What's a Mekel?')
Wasted potential, but come on, the game was not nearly as terrible as some make it out to be.

Falksi · February 8, 2016

Afraid I genuinely hated it. I even bought it again last year at £5 to see if I'd been too hard on it, but no, it was just a dull, chore-like, flat, weak and all round rubbish experience.

Alrik Fassbauer · February 8, 2016

It disrupts the power fantasy if you find yourself cast adrift in a relentless storm instead of causing it

Could be a reason why both Drakensang games were so un-popular : They just didn't deliver manly stories of rising into power.

Dragon Age 2 - Why Some Fans Did Not Like It

Cave Canem

The Smoker

Cave Canem

SasqWatch

Sentinel

Sentinel

Indulgent Wastrel

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

Sentinel

SasqWatch

Periapt vs Paronomasia

Sentinel

Sentinel

Font of Useless Knowledge

Sentinel

SasqWatch

Sentinel

TL;DR