Metacritic Users Bomb Dragon Age II 3/10!

Nytegard said:
It's pretty much why I don't pay attention to reviews.

Professional reviewers tend to be bought off, and fan based reviews tend to be fanboys (in one direction or another).

I find a demo, and if one doesn't exist, my friends know which styles of games I like, and which ones I dislike.
Click to expand...

Tend to be bought off? Hardly. Sure a few have had issues. By your logic all congressman "tend" to be bought off, all priest "tend" to rape little boys, and all LA cops "tend" to be racist.
 
DA2 isn't much more than a money grab, anyone who seriously attempts to deny that is simply out of touch with reality. Yeah, the 3/10 is artificial as were all the 9/10 or 10/10 previews and reviews. If you played DA:O then DA2 is a 5/10 at best, if you never played any PC game in your life then DA2 may get up to a 7/10. The 3/10 rage wouldn't have happened if the game had been truthfully reviewed by the media rather than hyping it up to something it is not.
 
anonmoniker said:
Pretty much. Equipping your party members is one of the most important elements of an RPG. Taking that out is the equivalent of taking leveling and experience points out...it totally changes the genre. When it comes down to it, you play an RPG to find phat lootz and turn your party into a group of badasses. Taking that away removes a layer of strategic depth and also kills the exploratory aspect of the game. It's also an overt statement that the party characters aren't the equal of the player character, and are more of Guild Wars style henchmen instead of fellow adventurers in the game world.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of loot. You can still fill 5 slots with all the loot you can eat.
 
Adam Sessler, a mainstream reviewer, put 70h+ into it and gave it a 3/5. It was also the topic of the last Feedback, of course (around halfway in).

I've seen some comments putting their faith into the PC version (even someone who thought the PC-version would have a better combat system!). However, they play (and look) much the same. I watched the GB:QL which ran the PC and XBox360 versions side by side, and while the PC was downsampled to 720p, the graphical differences were minor. The real standout was loading time, but that's to be expected.
 
anonmoniker said:
Pretty much. Equipping your party members is one of the most important elements of an RPG. Taking that out is the equivalent of taking leveling and experience points out...it totally changes the genre. When it comes down to it, you play an RPG to find phat lootz and turn your party into a group of badasses. Taking that away removes a layer of strategic depth and also kills the exploratory aspect of the game. It's also an overt statement that the party characters aren't the equal of the player character, and are more of Guild Wars style henchmen instead of fellow adventurers in the game world.
Click to expand...

Their armor still scales with level and you still equip their weapons and accessories. Also, you periodically find/purchase armor upgrades for them to improve their armors further. In my eyes, it cuts out one of the aspects of Origins I found distasteful, and that was when you didn't use a particular party member very often and then they were forced into your party by a quest, or that lovely part at the very end where you had to use your party to defend the gates of Denerim.

With the current system, some of the depth is cut out, but not all of it. The biggest thing that irritates me is when I find a really good piece of armor on my WARRIOR and it is for a mage or a rogue. It becomes utterly worthless because I can't use it in any way on the rest of my party.

They still scale very well and each one feels like they fill a better niche role than in Origins. The key to Origins was filling your party up with mages because mages were fucking retardedly overpowered. In this one, they still have much of the utility they used to bring, but they don't simultaneously bring absurd amounts of damage. Rogues rip single targets to shreds (whether they be archers or DW) and 2h warriors are PBAoE juggernauts. The cleave ability with claymore from the Vanguard tree is fucking overpowered as hell in that regard.

Believe me when I say that the party, items, and skills are not the problem in DA2. There is considerable depth to it all. The problem is the copy-paste sidequests, the unengaging main story that you spend maybe 25% of the gameplay time on and the fights that are just enemy spam sandwiches.
 
I think a number of these reviews are warranted. DA2 doesn't live up to the depth and immersion of DA:O. I know they were trying to streamline the game, like they did for ME2, but they went too far and removed a lot of what I was expecting this game to have.

What I can't stand the most are the arbitrarily locked doors in different maps- where you can tell there's a room on the other side but the game won't let you go in there. It also irks me how some maps will not allow you to explore the dungeon after the quest is complete, like the one in the ruins outside of town. Once I finished that quest the only door in the room became an automatic exit. Good thing I explored the whole area first, otherwise I'd be pissed.

The story feels very rushed as well. Like with the Magistrate's quest- *SPOILER ALERT FOR REST OF POST*



I killed the criminal and went back actually looking forward to having an argument with the magistrate, but no- when I clicked to interact with the jerk he just walked away- I felt cheated by this.

I'm also having some issues with the conversation system- specifically with Anders. I turn down his advances and get a -20 hit to Frienship? WTH!? It felt so contrived and confining that it really pissed me off. I don't mind taking rivalry hits in convo when it's warranted- like with Fenris- I'm playing a mage and patently disagree with him, but with Anders it was a pigeonholed conversation that basically boils down to 'be gay' or 'GTFO'. Not cool.

Now, all this being said I am enjoying the game and will probably do a couple of play throughs, but this does not feel like a Bioware game at all, which is disappointing.
 
I despise EA, mass bomb all their releasis and piss on just about everything they own,
but let me tell you...

This game is actually fun. My biggest gripe is not piss poor performance(went from 6 to 30 fps at Very High with newest beta drivers), but those *^& #*&#$% menus.
Main interface is actually very good, but not having a decent character sheet and inventory... give me a break.

Oh and tunnels, I mean "maps" /sigh
 
eloj said:
Adam Sessler, a mainstream reviewer, put 70h+ into it and gave it a 3/5. It was also the topic of the last Feedback, of course (around halfway in).

I've seen some comments putting their faith into the PC version (even someone who thought the PC-version would have a better combat system!). However, they play (and look) much the same. I watched the GB:QL which ran the PC and XBox360 versions side by side, and while the PC was downsampled to 720p, the graphical differences were minor. The real standout was loading time, but that's to be expected.
Click to expand...

I caught his interview about DA2 on Attack of the Show last night. He was pretty brutal and I tend to agree. His main gripes were that it was over-simplified where it didn't need to be, the story is uninspiring, and that it was, for the most part, too easy with very inconsistant bumps in difficulty.
 
That's funny, I can remember somebody here saying something like," ...mark my words. Dragon Age 2 is going to be just another "sell-out" game which seems to be the trend more and more with sequels and games these days."

Everybody wants to make money now, and this is what you get.
 
Meta Score is now 84/100, that is way lower than the first game...(considering more reviews site will be going after this game, the score will definitely get lower)
User Score is now 4/10, which it starting to balance out a bit, maybe end up around 5 ish.

I have played the demo and watch couple retail copy of game play online, read about some changes they made about the game throughout every other forums..

I very confident to say I am very glad that I cancel my pre-order.....
 
I'm just hoping that all these bad reactions to DAO2 will get Bioware to not dumb down ME3 quite so much. If we can at least get a better ME3, than at least something good will come out of this.
 
syd2o2 said:
I'm just hoping that all these bad reactions to DAO2 will get Bioware to not dumb down ME3 quite so much. If we can at least get a better ME3, than at least something good will come out of this.
Click to expand...

Mass Effect 2 relatively was "dumbed down" from Mass Effect 1, it was better received by fans of the series, gamers in general, and critics than ME 1.

And yes as a fan of the series I hope they "dumb it down" more by removing the pointless RPG grinding elements (driving all over the place with the Mako in 1, planet scanning with 2).
 
anonmoniker said:
Pretty much. Equipping your party members is one of the most important elements of an RPG. Taking that out is the equivalent of taking leveling and experience points out...it totally changes the genre. When it comes down to it, you play an RPG to find phat lootz and turn your party into a group of badasses. Taking that away removes a layer of strategic depth and also kills the exploratory aspect of the game. It's also an overt statement that the party characters aren't the equal of the player character, and are more of Guild Wars style henchmen instead of fellow adventurers in the game world.
Click to expand...


Maybe you should then stick to SIms, if all that counts for you is equipment :p

I prefer good story, meaningful quests, and well presented NPCs, and DA2 gives me more of those then DA:O did. And I play RPG to immerse in the world, not think if +3 sword is better then +3 axe. That's like saying that one book is better then the other, because it has pictures, and the other has not ;P
 
I'd say the mode (the most frequent score) would be more useful in judging the general user feedback than the average in this case, in that the average is prone to the extreme values on either end.
 
Actually I think the user reviews are fair. This isn't a bombing over DRM like was done for spore at Amazon. Read the reviews. They are individual and mention actual problems with the game.

As a huge fan of the Pre-EA Bioware, I have a hard time watching how low they have sunk.

DA:2 has nothing in common with their great RPGs of the past. It is dumbed down into an action RPG. It is essentially Diablo where you control multiple characters.

Heck the characters are almost as limited as Diablo 1 now. Rogues that can shoot Arrows, Warriors that only attack close up, mages that only use staffs.

I said RIP Bioware the day EA acquired them and their fall has been even faster than I imagined.
 
rampantandroid said:
Who cares about baseball; Reach was pretty good, ME2 was def good...GTA IV blows...yeah.
Click to expand...

Still makes no sense. GTA 4 was a great game that was very well received and the reviews mirror that. ME2 got 8.8 from the users which is pretty much spot on.

I dont get the point Deathprincess was making at all. The black ops reviews where definitely bombed but the rest all seem like they are where they should be.
 
Gta IV is lots of fun, I still chuckle every time a car blows up and takes a few people with it and turns into a chain explosion. Really sucks to hear all the negativity about dragon age 2 when the original is amazing. I'm currently playing origins right now and will finally beat it soon I hope, it's super long. Seems like ea put more effort into marketing and teaser videos than the game itself...
 
Snowdog said:
Actually I think the user reviews are fair. This isn't a bombing over DRM like was done for spore at Amazon. Read the reviews. They are individual and mention actual problems with the game.

As a huge fan of the Pre-EA Bioware, I have a hard time watching how low they have sunk.

DA:2 has nothing in common with their great RPGs of the past. It is dumbed down into an action RPG. It is essentially Diablo where you control multiple characters.

Heck the characters are almost as limited as Diablo 1 now. Rogues that can shoot Arrows, Warriors that only attack close up, mages that only use staffs.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Exactly my thoughts.
 
Snowdog said:
Actually I think the user reviews are fair. This isn't a bombing over DRM like was done for spore at Amazon. Read the reviews. They are individual and mention actual problems with the game.

As a huge fan of the Pre-EA Bioware, I have a hard time watching how low they have sunk.

DA:2 has nothing in common with their great RPGs of the past. It is dumbed down into an action RPG. It is essentially Diablo where you control multiple characters.

Heck the characters are almost as limited as Diablo 1 now. Rogues that can shoot Arrows, Warriors that only attack close up, mages that only use staffs.

I said RIP Bioware the day EA acquired them and their fall has been even faster than I imagined.
Click to expand...

Good job showing you haven't played the game.
 
You are most likely trolling but I'll oblige.
Snowdog said:
Rogues that can shoot Arrows
Click to expand...
Rogues shot arrows in the first one as well.

Warriors that only attack close up
Click to expand...
So you want an Awakening type warrior with a ridiculously OP shout ability that crits and insta gibs every normal type mob in range? If you want ranged attacks, roll a rogue or mage.

mages that only use staffs.
Click to expand...
Staves. They could only use staves in the first one as well unless you specced into arcane warrior which gave you the option to use a sword but that spec was mostly useless due to being so limited.
 
Lorien said:
You are most likely trolling but I'll oblige.

Rogues shot arrows in the first one as well.


So you want an Awakening type warrior with a ridiculously OP shout ability that crits and insta gibs every normal type mob in range? If you want ranged attacks, roll a rogue or mage.

Staves. They could only use staves in the first one as well unless you specced into arcane warrior which gave you the option to use a sword but that spec was mostly useless due to being so limited.
Click to expand...

Rogues could do more than shoot arrows in the first one, they could use any weapon they pleased including mauls.

Warriors could use bows or daggers if they chose. A trained warrior that can't fire a bow or use a short sword (straight from Bioware, daggers are actually shortswords) is kind of weird.

Mages could use anything they wanted, with or without arcane warrior. If you have the strength or dexterity to equip something, you could. AW only allowed a mage to substitute magic for strength checks.
 
Snowdog said:
Actually I think the user reviews are fair. This isn't a bombing over DRM like was done for spore at Amazon. Read the reviews. They are individual and mention actual problems with the game.

As a huge fan of the Pre-EA Bioware, I have a hard time watching how low they have sunk.

DA:2 has nothing in common with their great RPGs of the past. It is dumbed down into an action RPG. It is essentially Diablo where you control multiple characters.

Heck the characters are almost as limited as Diablo 1 now. Rogues that can shoot Arrows, Warriors that only attack close up, mages that only use staffs.

I said RIP Bioware the day EA acquired them and their fall has been even faster than I imagined.
Click to expand...

Did you even play the game? Of all of the many things that were dumbed down into oblivion, the combat and skill trees were not among them. What can be blamed on dumbing down is the fact that there are like 10 small zones in the entire game that you visit over and over again. The story flails about for most of the game and the decisions and relationships with your companions are nowhere near as deep as they could be. The entire thing feels like an incomplete and incohesive mess.

The combat comes out as the game's only saving grace.
 
Derangel said:
Good job showing you haven't played the game.
Click to expand...
krameriffic said:
Did you even play the game? Of all of the many things that were dumbed down into oblivion, the combat and skill trees were not among them.
Click to expand...

I tried the extended "RELOADED" demo as long as I could tolerate it. It was long enough to verify what I said. Weapons choice is more limited, you are simple archetype just like in Diablo. Maybe high level trees offer something interesting, but I doubt it. I hate everything about the combat. It is much more Console/Video game like now with all your fighters/rogues practically flying/teleporting all over the place. If anything it looks like higher level trees just make it even more silly.

Lorien said:
You are most likely trolling but I'll oblige.
Rogues shot arrows in the first one as well.
So you want an Awakening type warrior with a ridiculously OP shout ability that crits and insta gibs every normal type mob in range? If you want ranged attacks, roll a rogue or mage.
Staves. They could only use staves in the first one as well unless you specced into arcane warrior which gave you the option to use a sword but that spec was mostly useless due to being so limited.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, an opinion different form yours is trolling. :rolleyes:

It is really an extremely dumbed down game, removing choices from the character. In the first one my fighters could pull out bows when things were at long range and that made perfect sense. IIRC even regular Wizards could use other weapons if they met the ability requirements. Now it is all predefined and limited.

I am just struck now how characters are dumbed down into simple one trick pony action RPG stereotypes like in Diablo.

This is more like Diablo with extensive cut scenes than old school Baldurs Gate RPG.

It isn't just that I hate everything about combat. The camera is annoying as hell, so I despise navigating around, the conversation wheel with the good guy/bad guy and in between response is again dumbed down. The way they enforce party balance by killing your sibling that is in your profession. Hey I am mage, so my mage sister gets insta killed. But if I play a Warrior or Rogue, my Warrior brother gets insta-killed instead.

Choice is something that seems to have been crushed everywhere. So no they stop people from choosing party composition, weapons. Instead, just force everything on them. I really think they should just make movies.
 
Last edited:
I cant imagine a more token "choice" system than always getting 3 onesided dialog options with big icons attached to them, so even a kid cant go wrong :(
 
Lorien said:
Hey look a 1 day old noob account with 4 posts bashing the game. Welcome!
Click to expand...

You may have been with the site for years, but that doesn't mean your opinion is worth anything, espescially when you back it up with such poorly thought out posts.
 
Almost completed this game.

I don't like it nearly as much as the first game, which I loved.

They tried to take some of the tedium out in terms of managing things.

The conversation options and the choices you make do change things.

I found the game pretty depressing, since a lot of people die (and not just the ones I killed :) ).

Not sure I am going to finish it...

Doc
 
Disposed said:
Still makes no sense. GTA 4 was a great game that was very well received and the reviews mirror that. ME2 got 8.8 from the users which is pretty much spot on.

I dont get the point Deathprincess was making at all. The black ops reviews where definitely bombed but the rest all seem like they are where they should be.
Click to expand...

ME2 is waay overhyped for what it is, a pretty average corridoor shooter. It's an ok game but not as amazing as the scores paint it to be. Love it or don't care about it, but I don't think you'd list it as one of the most amazing games ever as these inflated rate it as, being better than system shock 2, diablo, grim fandango or quake II ever were. Clearly it's a title that all others should be measured against...:p

All reviews now seem mostly over hyped nonsense or "this sucked because you can't lean" or "the producers didn't pay me this time", then after the initial few come out most of the sheep like "journalists" go along with the popular opinion of gamers. As metacritic scores are made up of this kind of, material, it makes the end product kind of unrepresentitive of anything you can base the question of "is the game good" on.

Then we come to the user reviews, which is full of fanboys of opposing sides, and is largely made up of the balance of 10/10s to 0/10s. The people who will take time and go and vote on the game will be the people who feel strongly about it, rarely people viewing it objectively. mainly those polarized users that loved or hated it. There will be a few good reviews from people who are viewing the material properly, but they will be buried by the typical users. Making the whole thing some giant joke that if it gets it right is more down to luck.
 
arcane warrior was one of the best spec. I remember my AW solo nightmare in all of awakening. Each hit did like 150+ or something and then you got your cold aoe spells + all those buffs/shields
 
Snowdog said:
I tried the extended "RELOADED" demo as long as I could tolerate it. It was long enough to verify what I said. Weapons choice is more limited, you are simple archetype just like in Diablo. Maybe high level trees offer something interesting, but I doubt it. I hate everything about the combat. It is much more Console/Video game like now with all your fighters/rogues practically flying/teleporting all over the place. If anything it looks like higher level trees just make it even more silly.
Click to expand...

Combat works exactly the same as it did in DAO. You're complaining about aesthetics. Weapon choices weren't huge in DAO either and they're not in most RPGs of this type. Classes have defined roles to play and they are meant to be unique and have their specific uses. With only three classes its rather pointless to have much overlap.
 
Snowdog said:
I tried the extended "RELOADED" demo as long as I could tolerate it. It was long enough to verify what I said. Weapons choice is more limited, you are simple archetype just like in Diablo. Maybe high level trees offer something interesting, but I doubt it. I hate everything about the combat. It is much more Console/Video game like now with all your fighters/rogues practically flying/teleporting all over the place. If anything it looks like higher level trees just make it even more silly.



Ah yes, an opinion different form yours is trolling. :rolleyes:

It is really an extremely dumbed down game, removing choices from the character. In the first one my fighters could pull out bows when things were at long range and that made perfect sense. IIRC even regular Wizards could use other weapons if they met the ability requirements. Now it is all predefined and limited.

I am just struck now how characters are dumbed down into simple one trick pony action RPG stereotypes like in Diablo.

This is more like Diablo with extensive cut scenes than old school Baldurs Gate RPG.

It isn't just that I hate everything about combat. The camera is annoying as hell, so I despise navigating around, the conversation wheel with the good guy/bad guy and in between response is again dumbed down. The way they enforce party balance by killing your sibling that is in your profession. Hey I am mage, so my mage sister gets insta killed. But if I play a Warrior or Rogue, my Warrior brother gets insta-killed instead.

Choice is something that seems to have been crushed everywhere. So no they stop people from choosing party composition, weapons. Instead, just force everything on them. I really think they should just make movies.
Click to expand...

I think that most of us that liked Western style RPGs like Baldur's Gate have this kind of reaction. I *liked* being able to switch warriors between different weapon sets, from bow to sword, depending on the kind of fight. I *liked* being able to have 12 pieces of equipment to combine, and 3 weapon sets for different circomstances. I *liked* giving someone just enough DEX to use a certain bow or just enough strength to wear a certain piece of armor. Makes for fun combinations.

Don't get me wrong. I like games without this stuff. I love Dragon Quest for example.

But - I don't appreciate turning my Baldur's Gate successor in the direction of, I dunno, Final Fantasy 13. You tend to get bad reaction from your fanbase when you f*** with a series like this.

It's like how they talked about turning Dragon Quest 9 into a team-playable action-RPG of sorts (luckily they felt out the market beforehand). Fan outrage commenced. Suddenly it went back to being a turn based RPG again. Wisely. Bioware wasn't so wise here.
 
Well, well. If it isn't the pot calling the kettle black. Bioware russian community encouraging the same thing in reverse.

10i9che.jpg
 
DeathPrincess said:
ME2 is waay overhyped for what it is, a pretty average corridoor shooter. It's an ok game but not as amazing as the scores paint it to be. Love it or don't care about it, but I don't think you'd list it as one of the most amazing games ever as these inflated rate it as, being better than system shock 2, diablo, grim fandango or quake II ever were. Clearly it's a title that all others should be measured against...:p
Click to expand...

Thats your opinion. ME2 was very well received by people and considered to be one of the best games of the year.

DeathPrincess said:
All reviews now seem mostly over hyped nonsense or "this sucked because you can't lean" or "the producers didn't pay me this time", then after the initial few come out most of the sheep like "journalists" go along with the popular opinion of gamers. As metacritic scores are made up of this kind of, material, it makes the end product kind of unrepresentitive of anything you can base the question of "is the game good" on.
Click to expand...

Not all reviewers are bought. By taking ALL critic reviews and averaging them it certainly gives a better picture of a game than any other single site out there.

DeathPrincess said:
Then we come to the user reviews, which is full of fanboys of opposing sides, and is largely made up of the balance of 10/10s to 0/10s. The people who will take time and go and vote on the game will be the people who feel strongly about it, rarely people viewing it objectively. mainly those polarized users that loved or hated it. There will be a few good reviews from people who are viewing the material properly, but they will be buried by the typical users. Making the whole thing some giant joke that if it gets it right is more down to luck.
Click to expand...

There are a LOT of people that review everything they play. Go look at any site that breaks down user reviews like gamespot and that its all 0's and 10's theory of yours will drop like a rock. Most reviews are not knee jerk ZOMG IT SUCKS or FANBOY votes. They still exist but they are not the majority.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top