240 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I just see no point at all in any discussion, if the only objective refference point we have, which is the writers, is dismissed as "empty words".

Some people will not accept something is canon unless it is actually in the game, even if it was written by the game's writers.

The fact that certain things weren't explicitly stated in the game doesn't mean they couldn't have been possible. Heck, even if things *are* stated people can choose not to believe they're true. (Loghain defending his decision to retreat at Ostagar, for instance. Even if the decision was logical, some will shrug it off as a convenient excuse).

[KnightofPhoenix]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...
Some people will not accept something is canon unless it is actually in the game, even if it was written by the game's writers.

And once again, we come back to the difference between out-game and in-game. In-game, the characters can only accept what is infront of them in the game. Out-game however, it's the writers that are the objective referrence point, as only they can validate something that is unknown to us already, as fact or not.

When people reject what the writers are saying, then there is no point in discussing Loghain from an out-game / objective perspective. All we can do is talk about how our characters feel, and since all feelings are valid in-game, then there is no point. Yes, it could be fun, but I've done it way too many times to bother again.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

And once again, we come back to the difference between out-game and in-game...

Yes, I know. I'm just trying to explain that you're wasting your time trying to convince people of a certain mindset.



Like conspiracy theorists!

[KnightofPhoenix]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Give up, KtP I think you've convinced the people who are willing to entertain the fact that Loghain might not be *directly* responsible for everything, even if the game never point-blank tells you so.

Oh I'm laughing hard.  This is like saying, "Water, stop being wet."

KtP and Costin never give up, never surrender!

They don't.  They are who they are.

Ha, thankfully Costin and I seldom go against one another (and we end up agreeing anyhow).

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Give up, KtP I think you've convinced the people who are willing to entertain the fact that Loghain might not be *directly* responsible for everything, even if the game never point-blank tells you so.

Oh I'm laughing hard.  This is like saying, "Water, stop being wet."

KtP and Costin never give up, never surrender!

They don't.  They are who they are.

Considering the argument seems to have moved to another thread, I will concede your point.

[Astranagant]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...
Some people will not accept something is canon unless it is actually in the game, even if it was written by the game's writers.

And once again, we come back to the difference between out-game and in-game. In-game, the characters can only accept what is infront of them in the game. Out-game however, it's the writers that are the objective referrence point, as only they can validate something that is unknown to us already, as fact or not.

When people reject what the writers are saying, then there is no point in discussing Loghain from an out-game / objective perspective. All we can do is talk about how our characters feel, and since all feelings are valid in-game, then there is no point. Yes, it could be fun, but I've done it way too many times to bother again.

Well, there would be no problem if certain writers had made the game's content reflect their supposed intent from the beginning (I'm not dismissing the possibility that they could have just arbitrarily changed the story in their mind without regard to the fact that the game already shipped with a contradictory plot element in place.)

Modifié par Astranagant, 06 juin 2010 - 05:30 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Astranagant wrote...
Well, there would be no problem if certain writers had made the game's content reflect their supposed intent from the beginning (I'm not dismissing the possibility that they could have just arbitrarily changed the story in their mind without regard to the fact that the game already shipped with a contradictory plot element in place.)

Go complain to them, not me. The fact remains what they say is canon, regardless of whether we like it or not (unless it just contradicts everything, which in this case it does not, or is just extraordinarely ridiculous. Like saying that the Archdemon is actually a rabbit that was pulled out of the Architect's hat).

[Costin_Razvan]

If there was something that I was not expecting, is people dismissing an writer's words.. 

Ash: Somehow. I get the idea that your suggesting that the majority of players can find Loghain nothing more then a criminal. To use your own argument against you,  only very few people that play Dragon Age, actually visit this forum. Now I won't claim to know what the majority of players do, but I am certain that more then 20% ( as it happens to be based on those who visit this forum ) spare Loghain. 

It is certain that people can find arguments to spare Loghain, given what we KNOW in the game itself. I certainly did, as did others here.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 06 juin 2010 - 05:54 .

[Kryyptehk]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

If there was something that I was not expecting, is people dismissing an writer's words.. 

Ash: Somehow. I get the idea that your suggesting that the majority of players can find Loghain nothing more then a criminal. To use your own argument against you,  only very few people that play Dragon Age, actually visit this forum. Now I won't claim to know what the majority of players do, but I am certain that more then 20% ( as it happens to be based on those who visit this forum ) spare Loghain. 

It is certain that people can find arguments to spare Loghain, given what we KNOW in the game itself. I certainly did, as did others here.

You can't really dismiss someone's arguments because they based it on assumption and then use the very same tactic in your own argument. And how many people vote to execute Loghain does not absolve him of any crime that he was accused of. I'm not taking any sides, just pointing that out.

[Costin_Razvan]

The pretension that sparring Loghain = to absolving him of any crime is a false one. I certainly did not claim that sparring him = forgiving his crimes, not that I find his actions criminal, but there are people who spare Loghain even though they think he has done heinous crimes.

I was merely pointing out that people can indeed find reasons to spare Loghain ( not related getting rid of Alistair, if that is what you are thinking ), with all the knowledge we know in game, contrary to what Ash Wind has been suggesting ( and what other Loghain haters have claimed to be a matter of fact )

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 06 juin 2010 - 06:12 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sparing Loghain is still accompanied by punishment. He is stripped from all of his ranks, all his titles and he is basically a nobody except a Grey Warden. So he is not absolved of his seeming crimes. He is just not executed for them.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 06 juin 2010 - 06:09 .

[Kryyptehk]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sparing Loghain is still accompanied by punishment. He is stripped from all of his ranks, all his titles and he is basically a nobody except a Grey Warden. So he is not absolved of his percieved crimes. He is just not executed for them.

Wasn't saying that, pointing out flaw in argument. Still not taking sides.

[Xandurpein]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sparing Loghain is still accompanied by punishment. He is stripped from all of his ranks, all his titles and he is basically a nobody except a Grey Warden. So he is not absolved of his seeming crimes. He is just not executed for them.

This is question is actually at the heart of the whole problem. A character's choice of the treatment of Loghain will be tied to his/her view of what it is to be a Grey Warden.

For some people, like Alistair, being a Grey Warden, is a great honour. It is an ideal that only a few deserve. The idea that a man who have been planning treason and sold innocents into slavery can be a Grey Warden, is naturally offensive to them.

Other people, may feel that being a Grey Warden is a punishment and a curse. A Cousland noble can have many reasons to think so. It is hinted in the orgin story that the PC is considered most likely to succede Bryce as Teyrn of Highever, but that is taken away, when he/she becomes a Grey Warden. The PC will also have to deal with the fact that he/she may never have heirs because of the taint (very important for a noble), not to mention having to go to the deep roads to avoid becoming a ghoul eventually.

No one can say that those who feel that being a Grey Warden is a great honour are wrong. Neither can anyone say that those who think it's a curse and a punishment are wrong. It's a matter of opinion.

Thus, what some people may think is a fitting punishment for Loghain, is seen by others, like Alistair, as giving the man a medal.

There where political and tactical considerations involved too, but ultimately my human noble let Loghain live, not becuase he thought Loghain desereved a medal, but because he preferred to mete out a less severe punishment than death.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 06 juin 2010 - 08:05 .

[Xandurpein]

Astranagant wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...
Some people will not accept something is canon unless it is actually in the game, even if it was written by the game's writers.

And once again, we come back to the difference between out-game and in-game. In-game, the characters can only accept what is infront of them in the game. Out-game however, it's the writers that are the objective referrence point, as only they can validate something that is unknown to us already, as fact or not.

When people reject what the writers are saying, then there is no point in discussing Loghain from an out-game / objective perspective. All we can do is talk about how our characters feel, and since all feelings are valid in-game, then there is no point. Yes, it could be fun, but I've done it way too many times to bother again.

Well, there would be no problem if certain writers had made the game's content reflect their supposed intent from the beginning (I'm not dismissing the possibility that they could have just arbitrarily changed the story in their mind without regard to the fact that the game already shipped with a contradictory plot element in place.)

I don't belive that there is any mistake in the game or the plot at all in this regards. I believe that the game was intentionally written so that it would be possible to interpret events in different ways. The fact we are still debating it is a tribute to the writers' skill in my opinion.