"That concise and well laid out statement is not my argument, it is a strawman. Here is my argument: *couple pages of regurgitated talking points with no real substance*".
That is a good summation of every argument against me in this thread, yes.
Romance has been a tiny fraction of bioware games since Baldur's Gate. But since EA took over, it has become a much larger and more important piece. The whole emphasis on so called story over gameplay has been. 200 million dollars in development costs for an MMO that was 90% relationship style bullshit.
Arguments that its okay because other games had it and it wasn't overdone in them so it can't be overdone in DA2 ME3 and SWTOR is simply wrong. You can have romance in two games and one it be done tastefully and handled well and in another it be done shittily. Even in the same series.
Dragon's Dogma is mediocre at best. It has great combat and the expansion probably improves it dramatically, but the game I played was pretty mediocre over all, the story wasn't engaging, the quests were dull and lifeless, the world was pretty crappy, the world map is outright trash. I guess if all you want out of your fantasy games is smashing shit with swords while your "companions" do 90% of the work for you without even having to be ordered around, and pretending that's an RPG, then Dragon's Dogma and DA2 are right up your alley. Some of us want something with a bit more thought. Something a bit closer to chess with character progression. And Dragons Age was supposed to be that. Was marketed to us as that.
If someone told this community that they were making a new everquest, open world dungeons, competitive bosses, all that jazz, and then delivered a turd, this community would be outraged. How do I know? Because they were. It happened. It was called Vanguard. What Bioware did with Dragon Age 2 was Vanguard the Dragon Age Origins fans.